81 FR 76960 - Notice of Availability of the Draft Archeological Resources Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site, North Dakota
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 214 (November 4, 2016)
National Park Service
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 214 (November 4, 2016)
| Page Range | 76960-76961 | |
| FR Document | 2016-26690 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 214 (Friday, November 4, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 76960-76961] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-26690] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-MWR-KNRI-21917; 16XP103905-PPWODESCP1-PMP00UP05.YP0000- PX.PD171326E.00.1] Notice of Availability of the Draft Archeological Resources Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site, North Dakota AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) announces the availability of the Draft Archeological Resources Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Knife River Indian Village National Historic Site (Park), North Dakota. DATES: All comments must be postmarked or transmitted not later than January 3, 2017. ADDRESSES: A limited number of hard-copies of the Draft EIS may be picked up in-person or may be obtained by making a request in writing to Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site, P.O. Box 9, Stanton, North Dakota 58571. The document is also available on the internet at the NPS Planning, Environment, and Public Comment Web site at: https://Parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=34314 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent Craig Hansen can be reached at the address above, by telephone at (701) 745-3741 (ext. 209), or via email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This process has been conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the regulations of the Department of the Interior (43 CFR part 46). The purpose of the plan is to provide a management framework for proactive, sustainable archeological resource protection at the Park for the next 30 years. The NPS has identified four major threats to archeological resources. While riverbank erosion is the most visible and documented threat to archeological resources, additional impacts occur from pocket gopher activity, vegetation encroachment, and location of Park infrastructure. Riverbank erosion has been an ongoing problem since the Park was created and this ongoing impact has the greatest adverse effect to archeological resources. Over the past few decades village remnants and archeological sites adjacent to the Knife River have experienced measurable erosion. In addition, Northern pocket gophers affect archeological sites by displacing soil and artifacts from chronologically stratified deposits. Also, the encroachment of woody and overgrown vegetation into archeological sites causes multiple issues for archeological sites. Root growth results in displacement of chronological layers, similar to that of pocket gophers. The maintenance facility for the Park is a visual intrusion in the cultural landscape, particularly for the Big Hidatsa site, a designated National Historic Landmark. The North Dakota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation (MHA Nation) Tribal Historic Preservation Office have recommended that the facility be relocated to remove this visual impact from the site. In addition, the maintenance facility is located near burial sites and areas considered sacred by the tribes traditionally associated with the resources present in the Park. Finally, the location of the Museum Collection Storage Facility, in the basement of the Visitor's Center, has had water infiltration issues. A final goal of this plan is to develop a remedy for this problem, or the storage facility will need to be replaced. Range of Alternatives Considered: The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS are summarized below. Alternative 1: No-Action Alternative: Under the no-action alternative, management of archeological resources at the Park would continue as currently implemented. Management would respond to archeological resource threats but without the benefit of site prioritization and a proactive adaptive management framework. Under the no-action alternative, existing Park infrastructure would remain in place. Repairs to the existing visitor center to address water infiltration issues would occur. Ongoing riverbank erosion, pocket gopher control, and vegetation encroachment management activities would continue. Elements Common to All Action Alternatives: Under both action alternatives, archeological resources management at the Park would be executed within an adaptive management framework. This framework would be used to address riverbank erosion, gopher control, and woody vegetation encroachment. The project team developed a process to prioritize archeological sites based on the importance of the resource and the level of risk of loss of the resource to inform management decisions. The NPS has developed indicators and standards for managing the archeological resources based on the Park's purpose, significance, objectives, and desired conditions. These indicators and standards will serve as a tool to monitor and evaluate the adaptive management actions. Alternative 2: Relocate Facilities in the Park: Under alternative 2, archeological resources would be managed under the adaptive management framework described above. Under this alternative, the maintenance facility would be moved to another location in the Park and the existing maintenance buildings would be removed. [[Page 76961]] Additionally, the museum collection would be moved if the project to stop water infiltration in the visitor center building is unsuccessful or if the Park identifies funding or partnership opportunities to relocate the museum collection out of the basement of the Visitor's Center to a more suitable location. Alternative 3: Locate Facilities Off-Site: Under alternative 3, archeological resources would be managed under the adaptive management framework described above. Under this alternative, the Park would relocate the maintenance facility outside the Park boundary and remove the existing maintenance buildings from the Park landscape. Similar to alternative 2, the museum collection would be moved if the project to stop water infiltration in the visitor center building is unsuccessful or if the Park identifies funding or partnership opportunities to relocate the museum collection out of the basement to a more suitable location. NPS Preferred Alternative: The preferred alternative is likely to be a combination of alternatives 2 and 3. The NPS would prefer to remove the maintenance facility from Park property, and stop water infiltration at the visitor center so the museum collection can remain in place. While moving the maintenance facility off-site is preferred to best protect Park resources, the ability to relocate is dependent on the availability of suitable property at a reasonable price. If suitable sites are not available when the Park is ready to relocate, the Park will construct the facilities within the Park. In order to comment on this plan, comments may be transmitted electronically through the project Web site (address above). If preferred, you may mail written comments directly to the Superintendent at the address above. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: September 9, 2016. Patricia S. Trap, Deputy Regional Director, Midwest Region. [FR Doc. 2016-26690 Filed 11-3-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
![76960 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2016 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SUMMARY: The National Park Service (SHPO) and the Mandan, Hidatsa, and
(NPS) announces the availability of the Arikara Nation (MHA Nation) Tribal
Bureau of Indian Affairs Draft Archeological Resources Historic Preservation Office have
[178A2100DD/AAKC001030/ Management Plan/Environmental recommended that the facility be
A0A501010.999900 253G] Impact Statement (EIS), Knife River relocated to remove this visual impact
Indian Village National Historic Site from the site. In addition, the
Indian Gaming; Tribal-State Class III (Park), North Dakota. maintenance facility is located near
Gaming Compact Taking Effect in the DATES: All comments must be burial sites and areas considered sacred
State of California postmarked or transmitted not later than by the tribes traditionally associated
January 3, 2017. with the resources present in the Park.
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Finally, the location of the Museum
Interior. ADDRESSES: A limited number of hard-
copies of the Draft EIS may be picked up Collection Storage Facility, in the
ACTION: Notice. basement of the Visitor’s Center, has
in-person or may be obtained by making
a request in writing to Knife River had water infiltration issues. A final
SUMMARY: The State of California and
Indian Villages National Historic Site, goal of this plan is to develop a remedy
the Pala Band of Mission Indians
P.O. Box 9, Stanton, North Dakota for this problem, or the storage facility
entered into a Tribal-State compact
58571. The document is also available will need to be replaced.
governing Class III gaming. This notice Range of Alternatives Considered: The
announces that the compact is taking on the internet at the NPS Planning,
Environment, and Public Comment Web alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS
effect. are summarized below.
site at: https://Parkplanning.nps.gov/
DATES: The effective date of the compact Alternative 1: No-Action Alternative:
projectHome.cfm?projectID=34314
is November 4, 2016. Under the no-action alternative,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: management of archeological resources
Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of Indian Superintendent Craig Hansen can be at the Park would continue as currently
Gaming, Office of the Assistant reached at the address above, by implemented.
Secretary—Indian Affairs, Washington, telephone at (701) 745–3741 (ext. 209), Management would respond to
DC 20240, (202) 219–4066. or via email at craig_hansen@nps.gov. archeological resource threats but
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This without the benefit of site prioritization
of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act process has been conducted pursuant to and a proactive adaptive management
(IGRA) requires the Secretary of the the National Environmental Policy Act framework. Under the no-action
Interior to publish in the Federal of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the alternative, existing Park infrastructure
Register notice of approved Tribal-State regulations of the Department of the would remain in place. Repairs to the
compacts that are for the purpose of Interior (43 CFR part 46). The purpose existing visitor center to address water
engaging in Class III gaming activities of the plan is to provide a management infiltration issues would occur. Ongoing
framework for proactive, sustainable riverbank erosion, pocket gopher
on Indian lands. See Public Law 100–
archeological resource protection at the control, and vegetation encroachment
497, 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq. All Tribal-
Park for the next 30 years. The NPS has management activities would continue.
State Class III compacts are subject to
identified four major threats to Elements Common to All Action
review and approval by the Secretary
archeological resources. While Alternatives: Under both action
under 25 CFR 293.4. The Secretary took
riverbank erosion is the most visible and alternatives, archeological resources
no action on the compact within 45
documented threat to archeological management at the Park would be
days of its submission. Therefore, the
resources, additional impacts occur executed within an adaptive
compact is considered to have been
from pocket gopher activity, vegetation management framework. This
approved, but only to the extent the
encroachment, and location of Park framework would be used to address
compact is consistent with IGRA. See 25
infrastructure. riverbank erosion, gopher control, and
U.S.C. 2710(d)(8)(C). Riverbank erosion has been an woody vegetation encroachment. The
Dated: October 28, 2016. ongoing problem since the Park was project team developed a process to
Lawrence S. Roberts, created and this ongoing impact has the prioritize archeological sites based on
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian greatest adverse effect to archeological the importance of the resource and the
Affairs. resources. Over the past few decades level of risk of loss of the resource to
[FR Doc. 2016–26670 Filed 11–3–16; 8:45 am] village remnants and archeological sites inform management decisions.
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P adjacent to the Knife River have The NPS has developed indicators
experienced measurable erosion. In and standards for managing the
addition, Northern pocket gophers affect archeological resources based on the
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR archeological sites by displacing soil Park’s purpose, significance, objectives,
and artifacts from chronologically and desired conditions. These
National Park Service stratified deposits. Also, the indicators and standards will serve as a
[NPS–MWR–KNRI–21917; 16XP103905– encroachment of woody and overgrown tool to monitor and evaluate the
PPWODESCP1–PMP00UP05.YP0000– vegetation into archeological sites adaptive management actions.
PX.PD171326E.00.1] causes multiple issues for archeological Alternative 2: Relocate Facilities in
sites. Root growth results in the Park: Under alternative 2,
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Notice of Availability of the Draft displacement of chronological layers, archeological resources would be
Archeological Resources Management similar to that of pocket gophers. managed under the adaptive
Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, The maintenance facility for the Park management framework described
Knife River Indian Villages National is a visual intrusion in the cultural above. Under this alternative, the
Historic Site, North Dakota landscape, particularly for the Big maintenance facility would be moved to
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. Hidatsa site, a designated National another location in the Park and the
Historic Landmark. The North Dakota existing maintenance buildings would
ACTION: Notice of availability.
State Historic Preservation Office be removed.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Nov 03, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM 04NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_77174/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2016 / Notices 76961
Additionally, the museum collection DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR October 30, 2015 (80 FR 66898). On
would be moved if the project to stop September 2, 2016, the Environmental
water infiltration in the visitor center National Park Service Protection Agency issued a Notice of
building is unsuccessful or if the Park Availability for the plan/Final
identifies funding or partnership Record of Decision for Non-Federal Oil Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
opportunities to relocate the museum and Gas Regulation Revision that was published in the Federal
collection out of the basement of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Register (81 FR 60697); NPS also
Visitor’s Center to a more suitable AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. released the FEIS for public review on
location. ACTION: Notice of availability; record of September 2, 2016, and published its
Alternative 3: Locate Facilities Off- decision. own NPS Notice of Availability in the
Site: Under alternative 3, archeological Federal Register on September 7, 2016
resources would be managed under the SUMMARY: The National Park Service (81 FR 61715).
adaptive management framework (NPS) has prepared and approved a The FEIS evaluated the environmental
described above. Under this alternative, Record of Decision (ROD) for the consequences of three alternatives,
the Park would relocate the Nonfederal Oil and Gas Regulations (36 Alternative A (no action), Alternative B
maintenance facility outside the Park CFR part 9, subpart B) Revisions. (preferred and environmentally
boundary and remove the existing Approval of this Record of Decision preferable alternative), and Alternative
maintenance buildings from the Park completes the National Environmental C.
landscape. Similar to alternative 2, the Policy Act process. Alternative B includes the following
museum collection would be moved if DATES: November 4, 2016. alternative elements:
the project to stop water infiltration in ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD are • Elimination of two regulatory
the visitor center building is available for public review at http:// provisions that exempt 60% of the oil
unsuccessful or if the Park identifies parkplanning.nps.gov/ROD_9B. and gas operations in System units. All
funding or partnership opportunities to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
operators in System units would be
relocate the museum collection out of David Steensen, Chief, Geologic required to comply with the 9B
the basement to a more suitable Resources Division, National Park regulations.
location. • Elimination of the financial
Service, PO Box 25287, Denver, CO
80225; phone (303) 969–2014. The assurance (bonding) cap. Financial
NPS Preferred Alternative: The assurance would be equal to the
preferred alternative is likely to be a responsible official for this ROD is
Jonathan Jarvis, Director, National Park reasonable estimated cost of site
combination of alternatives 2 and 3. The reclamation.
NPS would prefer to remove the Service, 1849 C Street NW.,
• Improving enforcement authority by
maintenance facility from Park property, Washington, DC 20240.
incorporating existing NPS penalty
and stop water infiltration at the visitor SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
provisions. Law enforcement staff
center so the museum collection can process was conducted in accordance would have authority to write citations
remain in place. While moving the with the requirements of the National for noncompliance with the regulations.
maintenance facility off-site is preferred Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as • Authorizing compensation to the
to best protect Park resources, the ability amended (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et federal government for new access on
to relocate is dependent on the seq.), its implementing regulations (40 federal lands and waters outside the
availability of suitable property at a CFR parts 1500–1508), the Department boundary of an operator’s mineral right.
reasonable price. If suitable sites are not of the Interior NEPA regulations (43 • Reformatting the regulations to
available when the Park is ready to CFR part 46), and NPS Director’s Order make it easier to identify an operator’s
relocate, the Park will construct the 12, Conservation Planning, information requirements and operating
facilities within the Park. Environmental Impact Analysis and standards that apply to each type of
In order to comment on this plan, Decision-Making and accompanying operation.
comments may be transmitted handbook. The original Notice of Intent Alternative C includes all the
electronically through the project Web (NOI) initiating the NEPA process was proposed changes in Alternative B,
site (address above). If preferred, you published in the Federal Register on except:
may mail written comments directly to December 30, 2010 (75 FR 82362). The • Directional drilling operations:
the Superintendent at the address NOI specifically solicited public Alternative C would expand the scope
above. comment on draft purpose and need of the regulations to encompass surface
Before including your address, phone statements, objectives, and issues and and subsurface directional drilling
number, email address, or other concerns related to revisions of the NPS operations outside the boundary of a
personal identifying information in your regulations governing non-federal oil System unit.
comment, you should be aware that and gas development on units of the • Proposed Operations Located
your entire comment—including your national park system. The NOI also Wholly on Non-Federally Owned Land
personal identifying information—may requested public comment on possible Within the Boundary of a System Unit:
be made publicly available at any time. alternatives the NPS should consider in This provision would allow for an
While you can ask us in your comment revising the regulations. On October 23, exemption to the operations permit
to withhold your personal identifying 2015, the NPS released for public requirement for those operations located
review the draft EIS for the Proposed wholly on non-federally owned land
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to Revision of 9B Regulations Governing within a System unit, if the operator
do so. Nonfederal Oil and Gas Activities could demonstrate that the proposed
through the publication of a Notice of operation would have no effect to NPS
Dated: September 9, 2016. Availability in the Federal Register (80 administered resources or values.
Patricia S. Trap, FR 64445). The Environmental • Joint and Several Liability: This
Deputy Regional Director, Midwest Region. Protection Agency also issued a Notice provision would hold mineral owners
[FR Doc. 2016–26690 Filed 11–3–16; 8:45 am] of Availability for the draft EIS that was and their lessees jointly and severally
BILLING CODE 4312–52–P published in the Federal Register on liable for all obligations to comply with
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Nov 03, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM 04NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_77174/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-14 08:26:18
Document Modified: 2018-02-14 08:26:18
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice of availability. | |
| Dates | All comments must be postmarked or transmitted not later than January 3, 2017. | |
| Contact | Superintendent Craig Hansen can be | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 76960 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR