Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility
Coalition To Protect America’s National Parks
Western Watersheds Project
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance
and John W. Hiscock
April 18, 2024
Jeremy Bluma
208-789-6014
jb****@bl*.gov
Re: EIS Comments, #DOI-BLM-HQ-3000-2023-0001-RMP-EIS – Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Utility-Scale Solar Energy Development
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility and John W. Hiscock submit these comments in regard to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Project/NEPA # DOI-BLM-HQ-3000-2023-0001-RMP-EIS – Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Utility-Scale Solar Energy Development (PEIS).
There are several issues related to this project proposal that BLM must consider in its overall assessment of potential impacts to the Old Spanish National Historic Trail (OSNHT) and other national historic and national scenic trails.1These comments focus on potential adverse effects to the Old Spanish National Historic Trail, however, it should be noted that general comments concerning the protection of national trail resources, values, qualities, and opportunities also apply to all other national scenic and national historic trails established by statute and subject to the provisions of the National Trails System Act. This especially holds true in regard to BLM’s responsibility to provide national trail protection and management through NT inventories and corridor determinations in its unit by unit RMPs, and/or amendments to said RMPs. As the proposed project is summarily described in the EA invitation for comments the project will potentially adversely affect:
- Cultural resources associated with the OSNHT;
- Natural resources associated with the OSNHT;
- Landscape values associated with the OSNHT; and,
- Recreational opportunities associated with the OSNHT.
It is commendable that the PEIS identifies all national historic trails (NHTs) and national scenic trails (NSTs) as “exclusion areas,” not open to solar development application on BLM lands in states covered by the proposal. The PEIS excludes these NHTs and NSTs as part of the BLM “National Conservation Lands” (see PEIS, p. ES-18) or National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) (see Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-11, Subtitle A (codified in 16 U.S.C. §7202(b)).
Regardless of the inclusion of NHTs and NSTs in the NLCS, those congressionally established Trails (NTs) should qualify as exclusion areas based on the creation of the National Trails System (NTS) by the National Trails System Act (NTSA). Pub. L. No. 90-543 (codified as amended in 16 U.S.C. §§1241- 1251). To our knowledge this is the first BLM programmatic plan to at least partially exclude the NTs from adverse multiple use development. However, by comparison to other PEIS exclusion areas – such as congressionally enacted National Conservation Areas and wilderness areas, BLM national monuments established under the Antiquities Act, and even administratively established Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, all of which have boundary to boundary acreages identified, the NTs are essentially and inappropriately under-addressed, under-excluded, and under-protected only as linear features with no identified protected/excluded width or acreage. (See PEIS, Appendix F, §F.16 Specially Designated Areas and Lands with Wilderness Characteristics, Table F.16.2-5. National Historic and Scenic Trails (NHTs and NSTs), p. F-191).
In accordance with the foregoing discussion, the PEIS attests to “exclude” the OSNHT, as a “Resource Based Exclusion Area,” and more specifically as a unit of the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), from solar development projects. However, the exclusion area shown for the OSNHT, by best estimates from rough measurements on BLM’s ARCGIS maps (BLM Eplanning Website/BLM National NEPA Register Website, DOI-BLM-HQ-3000-2023-0001-RMP-EIS, Map Data, Draft-Solar-PEIS- Composite-Exclusion-Layer.gdb.zip), appears to be approximately 1/2 mile in total width, or 1/4 mile on either side of the congressionally enacted centerline of the Trail.2Again, although the focus of these comments is on the affect of the proposal on the OSNHT, other NTs are handled similarly, and arguably insufficiently. Utilizing ARCGIS, an abbreviated look at the Pony Express NHT, the Oregon NHT, the El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro NHT, all indicate that the BLM PEIS has only identified a width of ½ mile, or ¼ mile each side of the Trail centerline, as the excluded area for such NHTs. Similarly, the Continental Divide NST has only been identified with a width of ½ mile, or ¼ mile each side of the Trail centerline, as the excluded area for this NST. BLM does not appear to have based this decision on any sort of analysis of the existing or impacted resources and values along the trail. Thus, the exclusionary zone is arbitrary and at odds with the National Trail System Act (NTSA)(see, Pub. L. No. 90-543 (codified as amended in 16 U.S.C. §§1241-1251) stated statutory responsibilities for establishment of a Trail right-of-way (id. at §1246(a)(2)), and BLM policy guidance (see, BLM Policy Manual 6280 – Management of National Scenic and Historic Trails and Trails Under Study or Recommended as Suitable for Congressional Designation (2012)) for establishment of a Trail protection and management corridor (id. at p. 1-2, 7). The exclusionary zone even falls short of a possible national historic trail management and protective corridor of five miles either side of the Trail centerline3It should be noted that although the OSNHT CAS discusses and suggests a possible preliminary protective corridor boundary of 5 miles either side of the centerline of the OSNHT, such a protective corridor could ultimately be determined to be set at even a greater width (or lesser) as determined by proper BLM land management planning in accordance with BLM Manual 6280 (Management of National Scenic and Historic Trails and Trails Under Study or Recommended as Suitable for Congressional Designation (Public) (9/14/2012). See additional Manual 6280 discussion later in these comments. discussed in the OSNHT Comprehensive Administrative Strategy (CAS) as a preliminary protective corridor boundary. See, Comprehensive Administrative Strategy for the Old Spanish National Historic
Trail, NPS & BLM, p. 5 (December, 2017).
Despite BLM’s cursory attention to NTs as exclusion areas, at least in regard to the OSNHT, various shortfalls exist in Department of the Interior and BLM OSNHT planning and proper management and protection of its resources, values, and opportunities. As explained, due to these shortfalls the proposed project should be significantly modified, in order to avoid potential prohibited adverse effects to the OSNHT. Without such modification, the programmatic plan should be withdrawn as legally insufficient.
If executed as proposed, this project will likely detrimentally affect the cultural and natural resources, landscape qualities (including historic landscape qualities), and values of the Trail corridor. BLM’s proposed action may, as a result, adversely affect our, and our members’, ability to continue to use and enjoy the OSNHT corridor as intended by the National Trails System Act (NTSA) — including adverse modification of the landscape and the viewshed, drastically changing the natural resources (vegetation and wildlife) and cultural resources associated with that landscape, and eliminating opportunities for vicarious experience of the historic landscape most similar to the time period 1829 – 1848. DOI and BLM have failed to effectuate statutory and policy requirements for planning, management, and protection of the OSNHT.
Scope of BLM PEIS and RMP Amendments
As explained in the PEIS the project, or decision area covered by the proposed action are all BLM lands in California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. The proposal does not affect the Mojave Desert area of California, where the previous Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (2016), and its land use plan amendments to the California Desert Conservation Plan (as amended, 1980) continue to apply. The PEIS replaces the BLM’s Western Solar Plan (2012). The PEIS also excludes some small tracts of BLM land, where solar development has recently been authorized and is proceeding (such as the Dry Lake East Solar Development Zone, and others in the Las Vegas Field Office area). The ensuing comments, specifically regarding the OSNHT, are relevant to BLM plans and actions in states crossed by the OSNHT, those being New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, and California. However, as previously mentioned many of the comments included herein, may be relevant to BLM planning related to numerous other NSTs and NHTs crossing BLM lands in the larger eleven state geographic area.4National Scenic Trails in the eleven state area include: the Arizona NST, the Continental Divide NST, the Pacific Crest NST, and the Pacific Northwest NST. National Historic Trails in the eleven state area include: the OSNHT, the Butterfield Overland NHT, the California NHT, the El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro NHT, Juan Bautista de Anza NHT, Lewis and Clark NHT, Mormon Pioneer NHT, Nez Perce (Nee-Me-Poo) NHT, Oregon NHT, Pony Express NHT, and Santa Fe NHT.
Click here to read the full submission.