SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES
| Supplemental Authority | Not Present | Present/Not Affected | Present/May be Affected | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Air Quality | X | Ensure DAQEM dust permit is obtained during construction activity and is in compliance for the duration of the project(s). Air quality Impacts addressed in EA. | ||
| Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) | X | The proposed project area is not within an ACEC or any critical desert tortoise habitat. | ||
| Cultural/Historical | X | To comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the BLM Archaeologist conducted an existing data review of the area of potential effect (APE) according to 36 CFR 800.4. The APE was previously evaluated for cultural resources and the results are detailed in BLM Cultural Resource reports 5–1006, 5–1970, 5–2212, 5–2467. There are no historic properties within the APE; no further evaluation is required unless the scope of the undertaking changes. As proposed, the undertaking will have no effect to historic properties. | ||
| Paleontological Resources | X | No fossil-bearing geological strata will be adversely affected by the undertaking as proposed | ||
| Environmental Justice | X | No minority or low-income communities are present in project area. | ||
| Farmlands Prime or Unique | X | Proposed project area is not within any prime or unique farmlands. | ||
| Noxious Weeds/Invasive Non-native Species | X | Weed plan is necessary to minimize weed establishment and population expansion due to disturbance and travel vectors, both during construction and as perpetual maintenance. Depending on desert tortoise habitat designation, herbicide treatments must be included in EA for biological assessment. | ||
| Native American Religious Concerns | X | An ethnographic assessment was conducted in support of the Valley Disposal Boundary EIS by the Chambers Group. The Nevada State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurred on the adequacy of the report and consultation efforts. No Native American concerns were identified for this portion of the Las Vegas Valley; no further analysis is required. | ||
| Floodplains | X | Not present. | ||
| Riparian/Wetlands | X | Not present. | ||
| Threatened, Endangered or Candidate Plant Species | X | Not present. | ||
| Threatened, Endangered or Candidate Animal Species. | X | X | The proposed action requires formal consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the biological opinion for the Las Vegas Valley must be appended. The appended programmatic biological opinion is completed and the number is File No. 1-5-96-F-23R.3.APD22. See comments in EA below and see attached copy of the appended biological opinion. Proponent must adhere to terms and conditions of the appended biological opinion. Prior to construction, tortoise mitigation fees must be paid, and an authorized desert tortoise biologist must be notified of construction activities. | |
| Migratory Birds | X | Addressed in EA. | ||
| Waste - Hazardous/Solid | X | No hazmat issues. Include standard Hazmat stipulations. | ||
| Water Quality | X | May need a section 401 permit from NDEP. | ||
| Wild & Scenic Rivers | X | Not present. | ||
| Wilderness (Study Area) | X | The proposed action has not been inventoried nor is expected to meet the elements of wilderness characteristics. | ||
| Forests and Rangelands (HFRA only) | X | The proposed project is in an area that contains high densities of cactus and yucca. Cactus and yucca are considered government property and are regulated under the Nevada BLM forestry program. To minimize potential impacts, all cactus and yucca within permanent and temporary impact areas should be salvaged, replanted, and maintained as landscaping within undeveloped portions of the project area. | ||
| Human Health and Safety | X | Need to follow safety precautions during construction of park. |
Other resources of the human environment that have been considered for this environmental assessment (EA) are listed in the table below. Elements that may be affected are further described in the EA. Rationale for those elements that would not be affected by the proposed action and alternative is listed in the table below.
| Other Resources | Not Present | Present/Not Affected | Present/May be Affected | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grazing Management | X | Proposed action is not within any authorized grazing allotments. | ||
| Green House Gas Emissions (Climate Change) | X | Currently there are no emission limits for potential Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, and no technically defensible methodology for predicting potential climate changes from GHG emissions. However, there are, and will continue to be, several efforts to address GHG emissions from federal activities, including BLM authorized uses. | ||
| Minerals | X | Any necessary excavation that produces mineral materials within the ROW must be used within the lease or stockpiled on site for sale by the BLM. | ||
| Paleontological Resources | X | No fossil-bearing geological strat will be adversely affected by the undertaking as proposed. | ||
| Socio-Economic Values | X | Proposed action may create temporary disruption in traffic during construction and may potentially create economic impacts to local businesses. However, once proposed project is completed, the improvements may be beneficial to the economy and social aspects of the community. | ||
| Soils/Hydrology | X | May need a section 404 Permit from Army Corp. The proponent should utilize Best Management Practices (BMP’s) to minimize erosion. | ||
| Vegetation | X | Based on rare plant surveys for adjacent parcels. There is a low potential for the project to impact yellow two toned penstemon (Penstemon bicolor bicolor), a BLM special status plant. The development of approximately 120 acres of potential habitat would not be considered significant or require mitigation. | ||
| Visual Resources | X | The proposed action is located in Visual Resource Management Class III, which allows for moderate levels of contrast with the existing landscape. Clearing of 120 acres and installation of new facilities will create a visual contrast with the surrounding landscape. However, due to the proximity of the beltway and other surrounding developments, this action is not anticipated to dominate the view of the casual observer. Applicant should mitigate visual impacts by incorporating elements of form, line, color, and texture found in the surrounding area. | ||
| Recreation | X | Not present. | ||
| Fuels/Fire Management | X | This project should not impact fuels or fire manangement. | ||
| Wildlife | X | Addressed in EA |