Jump to main content.

Environmental Impact Statement; Merced Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan; Yosemite National Park, Madera and Mariposa Counties, California; Revision to Record of Decision

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 [Federal Register: November 20, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 224)]
[Notices]
[Page 69785-69786]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20no00-90]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Environmental Impact Statement; Merced Wild and Scenic River
Comprehensive Management Plan; Yosemite National Park, Madera and
Mariposa Counties, California; Revision to Record of Decision

SUMMARY: The Department of the Interior, National Park Service has
revised the original Record of Decision for the Final Environmental
Impact Statement, Merced Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management
Plan, Yosemite National Park. The Record of Decision was originally
signed on August 9, 2000 and published in the Federal Register on
August 18, 2000. The Revised Record of Decision is designed to clarify
statements regarding the process to be used by the National Park
Service in complying with Sec. 7 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and
to clarify the measurement of the river corridor boundaries and the
river protection overlay. The Record of Decision was issued after
completion of Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements for the
Merced Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (P.L. 91-190, as amended) and the regulations promulgated by
the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR Part 1500), and in accord
with a ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
California, the National Park Service (NPS) prepared and circulated a
Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Merced Wild and
Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan (``Plan''). The Plan was
designed to satisfy the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act's requirements for a
Comprehensive Management Plan. To achieve this goal, the Plan presented
five alternatives for NPS stewardship of an 81-mile segment of the 122
miles of the Merced River designated as ``Wild and Scenic'' by Congress
in 1987. Each of the alternatives presented a different combination of
seven management elements to prescribe desired future conditions,
typical visitor activities and experiences, and allowed park facilities
and management activities. The seven management elements are:
boundaries, classifications, Outstandingly Remarkable Values, a
determination process to comply with Sec. 7 of the Act, the River
Protection Overlay, management zoning, and the Visitor Experience and
Resource Protection framework.
    The Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements assessed the
full range of foreseeable environmental consequences and identified all
practicable measures to avoid or minimize environmental impacts. More
than 2,500 comments were received on the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement and approximately 30 comments were received following the
release of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). All public
comments received were carefully reviewed and considered prior to
making a decision on the Plan.
    A Record of Decision on the Plan was approved on August 9, 2000 and
the Notice of Approval of the Record of Decision appeared in the
Federal Register on August 18, 2000 (65 FR 50565). In that Record of
Decision, the NPS adopted the Proposed Action (Alternative 2), as
described in the FEIS. As explained in the original Record of Decision,
the primary feature that distinguished Alternative 2 from the other
alternatives is the interplay of four of its management elements:
boundaries, classifications, River Protection Overlay and management
zoning. The NPS determined that Alternative 2 would protect and enhance
the river's ORVs while allowing for appropriate levels and types of
visitor use and development.

II. Reason for Revision

    The Record of Decision is being revised to clarify that all
statements in the FEIS and Record of Decision regarding the Army Corps
of Engineers' definition of the ``ordinary high water mark'' shall
reflect the regulatory definition of that term as found in 33 CFR
Section 328.3. This clarification will eliminate text that inaccurately
summarized the definition of ordinary high water mark as the 2.33 year
floodplain. The regulatory definition of ordinary high water mark as
published in the Code of Federal Regulations does not include any
reference to the 2.33 year floodplain. Instead, the regulatory
definition states: ``The term ``ordinary high water mark'' means that
line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and
indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line

[[Page 69786]]

impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil,
destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and
debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of
the surrounding areas.''
    This regulatory definition will be used by the NPS for measuring
the extent of the River Protection Overlay and the river corridor
boundaries. The river corridor boundaries established by this Plan
begin at the ordinary high water mark (as defined by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers in 33 CFR Section 328.3) and extend one-quarter mile
on each side of the river, except in the El Portal Administrative Site
where the boundary extends out to the 100-year floodplain or the extent
of the River Protection Overlay, whichever is greater. Similarly, the
River Protection Overlay will be measured beginning from the ordinary
high water mark.
    The Record of Decision is also being revised to clarify statements
in the FEIS regarding the process to be used for fulfilling the
requirements of Sec. 7 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Merced
River Plan/FEIS includes statements that ``Water resources projects
that have a direct and adverse effect on the values for a designated
river must either be redesigned and resubmitted for a subsequent Sec. 7
determination, abandoned, or may proceed following written notification
of the Secretary of the Interior and the United States Congress.'' This
statement inaccurately summarized the intent of the NPS. The following
process will be used by the NPS for projects requiring Sec. 7 review.
Water resources projects found to have a direct and adverse effect on
the values of this designated river will be redesigned and resubmitted
for a subsequent Sec. 7 determination or abandoned. In the event that a
project can not be redesigned to avoid direct and adverse effects on
the values for which the river was designated, the NPS will either
abandon the project or will advise the Secretary of the Interior in
writing and report to Congress in writing in accordance with Sec. 7(a)
of the Act .
    The NPS has reviewed these revisions to determine whether there are
any new or different impacts associated with these clarifications. The
clarification with regard to the Sec. 7 process does not diminish or
change the NPS's obligations to comply with Sec. 7 of the Act, nor does
it modify the steps to be followed by the NPS in evaluating whether a
project would have a direct and adverse affect on river values. The
clarification with regard to the definition of ordinary high water is
intended to more accurately reflect the regulatory definition of that
term. This clarification does not alter the extent of the river
corridor boundaries, and it does not change the use of the River
Protection Overlay as a tool to protect areas immediately adjacent to
the river. Because these revisions are minor clarifications and do not
result in changes to the management elements contained in Alternative
2, they do not result in substantial changes relevant to environmental
concerns. These modifications are also not in response to significant
new information.
    Copies: Interested parties desiring to obtain a copy of the Revised
Record of Decision may contact the Superintendent, Yosemite National
Park, P.O. Box 577, Yosemite, California 95389 (or via telephone
request at (209) 372-0201). The complete document will also be posted
on the Yosemite National Park Webpage (http://www.nps.gov/yose/
planning).

    Dated: November 3, 2000.
John J. Reynolds,
Regional Director, Pacific West.
[FR Doc. 00-29550 Filed 11-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.