xs7hy9e06w?redirect_to=http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/blm_library/tech_notes.Par.29872.File.dat/TN_444

Recommendations

Info

Resource/ Issue Unavoidable Impacts? 2 How certain is it that the unavoidable impacts will occur? How significant are the unavoidable impacts onsite? How significant are the unavoidable impacts of developing the Dry Lake SEZ in the region (Mojave Desert)? 3 Role in the ecosystem? 4 Other considerations Are potential unavoidable impacts likely to warrant regional mitigation? Hydrology (Water/ Watershed/ Water Quality) Groundwater—maybe Surface Hydrology— maybe. Reconfiguration of topography can alter surface hydrology. Groundwater— unlikely. The BLM will review all applications to validate net neutral water use (i.e., groundwater purchased from holders of currently used existing senior water rights). Surface hydrology— likely. Surface hydrology: Not especially significant. Area of very low rainfall ( approximately 4 inches/year). Closed hydrologic basin. Not particularly significant, but there is a regional decline in unaltered ephemeral stream channels. Basic component. Groundwater—no. Surface Hydrology— yes (indirectly as a component of the ecosystem). Riparian Surface Hydrology— Maybe. Reconfiguration of topography can alter surface hydrology. Somewhat— while major riparian areas within the SEZ are designated nondevelopment areas, run-off patterns and sediment load will be altered by reconfiguration of the topography on the rest of the SEZ. Onsite mitigation measures are expected to minimize impacts. Not especially significant; PEIS analyses show about five intermittent ephemeral stream reaches with moderate sensitivity to disturbance within the SEZ. Not particularly significant. The occurrence of intact riparian systems is declining in the Mojave Basin and Range ecoregion. Basic component. No, not directly. While there may be impacts to riparian systems, preservation and/or restoration of intact ecosystems in the region that include riparian areas will slow the regional decline in intact riparian ecosystems. Cultural Maybe. Low—previous Class III cultural inventories in the SEZ and vicinity indicated risk of resource loss is low. Depends on results of Class III inventory of SEZ and if significant (eligible) sites are discovered. Human element. Onsite mitigation measures were determined to be adequate for addressing known cultural resources. Not at this time. However, if significant resource values are discovered during the predevelopment survey, implementing the required protection measures as established in the memorandum of agreement may result in regional mitigation measures. Resources/issues with no unavoidable impacts: Acoustics Air Quality Environmental Justice Fire Hazardous Waste Lands and Realty Livestock Grazing Minerals Paleontological Recreation (includes Travel Management Areas) Socioeconomics Transportation Wild Horses and Burros Wilderness and Lands with Wilderness Characteristics 56 • REGIONAL MITIGATION STRATEGY FOR THE DRY LAKE SOLAR ENERGY ZONE • TECHNICAL NOTE 444
Appendix D: BLM Screening of Candidate Regional Mitigation Sites for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone The BLM interdisciplinary team used this screening tool for evaluating and recommending candidate sites to the BLM authorized officer (see definitions for criteria categories at the end of this appendix). # Criteria SEZ Candidate Sites Notes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Contiguous area of site (acres) For ACECs, reason for designation Visual Resource Management Class Consistent with resource management plan? Same HUC 4 watershed? Mitigation tool (restoration/ enhancement, acquisition, banking, withdrawal, special designation, etc.) Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone 3,471 Gold Butte ACEC, Las Vegas Field Office Part A: 186,909 Part B: 119,097 Part C: 38,431 Mormon Mesa ACEC, Ely District and Las Vegas Field Office Site Characteristics Coyote Springs ACEC, Las Vegas Field Office Piute-El Dorado ACEC, Las Vegas Field Office 149,000 75,500 328,242 Coyote Springs Enhanced 149,278 acres (mix of BLM, BLM-ACEC, and FWS Desert National Wildlife Refuge) n/a see note 1 see note 6 Class III Class I, II (70%), and III areas present Class III Class III Class III Class III n/a √ √ √ √ Lower Colorado- Lake Mead (1501) n/a √ √ √ Restoration/ enhancement Restoration/ enhancement Restoration/ enhancement X Central Nevada Desert Basins (1606) Restoration/ enhancement √ Restoration/ enhancement, restriction of activities The size, in acres, of the candidate site. If the candidate site encompasses land in an ACEC, this field represents the value(s) present that the ACEC was established to protect. If the VRM class of a candidate site is of higher value than that of the SEZ, improvements provided by regional mitigation would result in improvements to the higher VRM class - no points are assigned to this characteristic. The HUC 4 watershed is used to evaluate the sites; sites not in the same HUC 4 watershed would have a fairly strong hydrologic disconnect from Dry Lake SEZ. The type(s) of mitigation tool that would be implemented at the site. REGIONAL MITIGATION STRATEGY FOR THE DRY LAKE SOLAR ENERGY ZONE • TECHNICAL NOTE 444 • 57
Page 1 and 2:
Regional Mitigation Strategy for th
Page 3 and 4:
Regional Mitigation Strategy for th
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT_________
Page 7 and 8:
The “Regional Mitigation Strategy
Page 9 and 10:
1.2 Background I n 2012, the BLM an
Page 11 and 12: 1.4 Stakeholder Involvement in the
Page 13 and 14: Range. A full description of the la
Page 15 and 16: plant communities of regional impor
Page 17 and 18: Figure 2-4. Dry Lake Solar Energy Z
Page 19 and 20: Figure 2-6. Land cover types in the
Page 21 and 22: Geospatial Data 1. Landscape Condit
Page 23 and 24: Table 2-3 (continued). Solar Energy
Page 25 and 26: 2.3 Summary of Solar Development Im
Page 27 and 28: 2.4.2 Minimization 2.4.2.1 Summary
Page 29 and 30: documented (see Appendix A, Impact
Page 31 and 32: • Manage desert tortoise habitat
Page 33 and 34: Step 1: Select Mitigation Action(s)
Page 35 and 36: 2.8 Evaluation of Mitigation Locati
Page 37 and 38: Figure 2-10. Gold Butte Area of Cri
Page 39 and 40: Mitigation Goals and Tasks Reason W
Page 41 and 42: 2.9 Mitigation Effectiveness Monito
Page 43 and 44: (MacKinnon et al. 2011) and supplem
Page 45 and 46: are evaluated. These data are also
Page 47 and 48: Remote sensing technologies provide
Page 49 and 50: 2.10 Implementation Strategy This p
Page 51 and 52: References BLM (Bureau of Land Mana
Page 53 and 54: Resource/ Issue Are impacts compreh
Page 55 and 56: Resource/ Issue Are impacts compreh
Page 57 and 58: Appendix B: Regional and Dry Lake S
Page 59 and 60: Tier 3 Conceptual Model, Dry Lake S
Page 61: Resource/ Issue Unavoidable Impacts
Page 65 and 66: # Criteria SEZ Candidate Sites Note
Page 67 and 68: # Criteria SEZ Candidate Sites Note
Page 69 and 70: Appendix E: Mitigation of Visual Re
Page 71 and 72: The Dry Lake SEZ is located within
Page 73 and 74: This distribution indicates that Sc
Page 75 and 76: for determining VRM Class objective
Page 77 and 78: Figure 7. BLM Southern Nevada Distr
Page 79 and 80: Sensitivity. Distribution of sensit
Page 81 and 82: VRM Class Objectives: The majority
Page 83: Desert National Wildlife Refuge, th
show all

xs7hy9e06w?redirect_to=http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/blm_library/tech_notes.Par.29872.File.dat/TN_444

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?