Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0008 <br /> <br />IV. DECISIONS <br /> <br />I have reviewed the Cities' Homestake Phase II Water Diversion Proposal, <br />the alternatives to that proposal, environmental consequences, and public <br />comments. Based on this information, my decision is as follows: <br /> <br />A. Issue a granting document for phased construction over a five to <br />ten year period for Alternative 6, as described in Sections 2.2.6 <br />(page 2-32) and 2.3 (page 2-34) of the FEIS (also see Exhibit 3, <br />attached). The grant is for a 50-year period with a re-entry <br />period of 30 years (as provided in 36 CFR 251.56[b]) and includes <br />stipulations to assure fulfillment of the mitigation measures on <br />National Forest System lands (FEIS Section 2.4.1, pages 2-35 to <br />2-38 and Exhibits 4 and 5, attached). The grant period of 50 <br />years is based upon the cost recovery period of the facilities <br />and the economic analysis of the project (FEIS Section 4.1.16, <br />page 4-52 and Appendix D). <br /> <br />B. The power distribution line will be buried in the Homestake Road <br />(FOR 703). A permit will be issued to the appropriate power <br />distributor. This is discussed in FEIS Section 2.2.6, page 2-32 <br />and 4.1.9, page 4-40. <br /> <br />C~ All activities on National Forest System lands will be conducted <br />in accordance with stipulated mitigation measures (Exhibits 4 and <br />5, attached). These are identical to those disclosed in Section <br />2.4.1 (pages 2-35 to 2-38) of the FEIS as applicable on NFS lands, <br />and are incorporated into all authorizing documents. Mitigation <br />measures will be enforced through the grant document and Forest <br />Service regulations (36 CFR 251). The mitigation measures are <br />the key to the decision to grant the land use. As discussed in <br />the Reasons for the Decision (Section V), the proposed land use <br />would be denied if the mitigation measures (Exhibit 5) were not <br />included. Mitigation measures for non-Federal lands will be <br />specified by the appropriate State or local agencies. A list of <br />potential measures is provided in Section 2.4.2 (page 2-38 and <br />2-39) of the FEIS. <br /> <br />V. REASONS FOR THE DECISIONS <br /> <br />The bases for my decisions are as follows: <br /> <br />A. The decision is consistent with the Organic Act of 1897, the <br />Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960, and Title V of the <br />Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). <br /> <br />1. The White River National Forest was established under the <br />authority of the Organic Administration Act of 1897 (30 <br />Stat. 34, supplemented and amended; 16 USC 473-478, 479-482, <br />551), which states, ". . . No national forest shall be <br />established, except to improve and protect the forest within <br />the boundaries, or for the purpose of securing favorable <br /> <br />7 <br />