UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT BURNS DISTRICT OFFICE

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL

CX Number: DOI-BLM-OR-B070-2012-0046-CX Date: August 3, 2012 File Code (Project/Serial Number): Preparer: Joe Toelle, Civil Engineering Tech. Applicant: Title of Proposed Action: Riddle Brothers Ranch Wastewater Disposal

Description of Proposed Action and Project Design Elements (if applicable):

The purpose of the proposed action is to provide a wastewater disposal system at Riddle Brothers Ranch National Historic District. This would allow the site hosts and the public to properly dispose ofgrey water created from hand washing, dishwashing, etc. An existing vault toilet is currently installed at the site for disposal of black water and sewage.

The August 2005 Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area Record of Decision (ROD) and Resource Management Plan {RMP) states "Management of existing recreation sites, areas, and associated improvements will continue and site expansion is allowed. If demand warrants, new recreation sites and areas will be developed to protect cultural and natural values·and provide for public health and safety" (RMP-68).

The project would require excavation of two test pits prior to system installation. Test pits would be located approximately 80 feet southeast of the host cabin and would be dug 2 feet wide by 4 feet wide by 5 feet deep as per DEQ specifications. Additionally, each test pit would have a 45 degree sloping edge along one side to permit access by DEQ personnel. The test pits would allow the Oregon Department ofEnvironmental Quality (DEQ) to examine soil layers present at the site and approve a system design based on their analysis. Pending the DEQ soil analysis, one of the two following systems could be implemented:

A grey water sump would be installed for disposal of wastewater if soil conditions permit. The sump would be located at or very near the test pit that displays the most beneficial soil characteristics. No more than 10 gallons of grey water would be allowed to enter the sump in a 24-hour period. Per DEQ specifications, the grey water sump would be located no less than 100 feet from Little Blitzen River.

A holding tank would be installed near the host cabin if soil conditions are not suitable for sump installation. The holding tank would be a 1,000 gallon poly tank buried at least 3 feet deep. The holding tank access hole would be covered by a removable lid. The holding tank would be pumped annually to prevent overflowing. If a holding tank is required, further appropriate NEPA analysis will occur.

A backhoe or similar type of excavation device would be used for excavation of test pits and for excavation required for system installation. All construction equipment would be cleaned prior to beginning work on the road to minimize the potential of spreading noxious weeds.

Legal Description (attach Location Map):

Township 33 South, Range 32.75 East, Section 30

B. Conformance with Land Use Plan (LUP) (name): Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan

Date Approved/Amended: August 2005

The proposed action is in conformance with the applicable LUP, even though it is not specifically provided for, because it is clearly consistent with the following LUP decision(s): Appendix P, page 19, "To manage and maintain existing recreation facilities in a manner that provides for vis itor safety and natural resource protection."

Appendix P, page 45, "To provide adequate facilities to meet public health and safety needs, provide for resource protection, and for administrative needs. All facilities should be in character with the ranch setting."

BLM Categorical Exclusion Reference (516 DM, Chapter 11): F(9): Digging of exploratory trenches . . .

DOl Categorical Exclusion Reference (516 DM 2, Appendix 1):

OR020-179 1-0 I (Revised January 20 I 0)

Screening for Exceptions: The following extraordinary circumstances (5 16 OM 2, Appendix 2) may apply to individual actions within the categorical exceptions. The indicated specialist recommends the proposed action does not:

CATEGORICAL EXCLU ION EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE DOCUMENTATION 2.1 Have significant impacts on public health or safety.

Specialist (Print Name a Si nature and Date: Rationale: Control p

2.2 Have significant impacts on such natural resources and unique geographic characteristics as historic or cultural resources; park, recreation or refuge lands; wilderness areas; wild or scenic rivers; national natural landmarks; sole or principal drinking water aquifers; prime farmlands; wetlands (Executive Order 11990); flood plains (Executive Order 11988); national monuments; mi rato birds; and other ecolo icall si nificant or critical areas. Migratory Birds Specialist (Print Name and Title · Si nature and Date: · Rationale: The project area s already in a human disturbed area, any migratory birds that use this area have already adapted to the human disturbance; this improvement for public health is not expected to increase the amount of use and thus would have no effect on mi ato birds, or their habitat. Historic and Cultural Resources Specialist (Print Name a Title): Scott Thomas, District Arc eologist Si nature and Date: r I ~

Specialist (Print Name and Title): C Si ature and Date: Rationale: There are no ACEC

Water Resources/Flood Plains Specialist (Print Name and · le · B~am, Natural Resource Specialist (Riparian and Fisheries) Si ature and Date: 0 At// :;2 ot Z.. Rationale: Water resources and floodplains would not be affected by the Proposed Action

owever impacts will be negligible once the test pits have been refilled or utilized lands within the ro·ect area.

Wilderness/Wild and Scenic River Resources Specialist (Print Name and Title): E ·c Haakenson, Outdoor Recreation Specialist Si nature and Date: Rationale: The proposed action is not within a wilderness, WSA or Lands with Wilderness Characteristics. The proposed action is within the Little Blitzen Wild and Scenic R.jver; however, the proposed project does not affect the free-flowing condition of the WSR.

controversial environmental effects or involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses ofavailable ct n 102 2

ly uncertam or pote a ly significant enviro ental effects or unique or unknown ro·ect would occur w1 in a historicall disturbed area alon the R.jddle Brothers Ranch road.

OR020-1 791-0 I (Revised January 20 I 0)

2.3

The project requires DEQ permitting.

2.5 Establish a edent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with potentially signifiqmt environmental effe Specialist (Print Nam an ental Coordinator Si nature and Date: \~ Rationale: Implementation would not set a precedent for e actions or repr sent a decision in principle about future actions with potentially significant environmental effects. The propose roject would occur within a historically disturbed area along the Riddle Brothers Ranch road. The project requires DEQ permitting.

2.6 Have a direct relationship to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant environmental effects. Specialist (Print N Si nature and Date: Rationale: Implementation would have no known direct I ionship to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant environmental effects. The prop (I project would occur within a historically disturbed area along the Riddle Brothers Ranch road. The project requires DEQ permitting.

2.7 Have significant impacts on properties listed, or eligible for listing, on the National Register of Historic Places as determined b either the bureau or office. Specialist (Print Name an tie): Scott Thomas, District Archeolog· t Si nature and Date: ~ I -z-­Rationale: The project is located within Riddle Brothers Ranch N tiona! Historic District. The project would not affect any contributing structures included in the National Register nomination nor would it affect any prehistoric sites in the vicinity.

2.8 Have significant impacts on species listed, or proposed to be listed, on the List of Endangered or Threatened Species, or ificant im acts on desi nated Critical Habitat for these s ecies.

~~ Rationale: There are no Federally I ted species within the project area, nor any designated critical habitat; therefore there is no . impacts on Endangered or Threatened terrestrial species, or their habitat.

Endangered or Threatened Species-Aquatic Specialist (Print Name and Title): Daryl · Natural Resource Specialist (Riparian and Fisheries) Si nature and Date: , ,4-v/ a/ "2... Rationale: There are no known T&E aquatic spe s in the project area. Redband trout, a BLM Special Status Species, would not be affected by the Proposed Action.

Specialist (Print Name a Si nature and Date: Rationale: There are no

2.9 Violate a

Specialist (Print N Si nature and Oat · Rationale: Implementation would not violate any law or require ent imposed for the protection of the environment as proposed project would occur within a historically 1sturbed area along the Riddle Brothers Ranch road and requires DEQ permitting.

xecutive Order 12898 .

OR020-1791-0 I (Revised January 20 I 0)

2.12

Rationale: Noxious resent in sufficient

Additional review (As determined by the Authorized Officer):

RMP conformance and CX review confirmation:

Date:

Management Determination: Based upon rev1ew of this proposal, I have determined the Proposed Action is in conformance with the LUP, qualifies as a categorical exclusion and does not require further NEPA analysis.

Authorized Officer (Print Name and Title): 1Y\.\d-vtl Lt.. f!:>~ A-oh~J~\.dJL~j~

Signature:~~ Date: cgjl-1/\Z.. Title and Signature ofAuthorized Officer Date

Decision: It is my decision to implement the Proposed Action with Project Design Elements as described above.

This decision may be appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), Office of the Secretary, in accordance with regulations contained in 43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 4 and Form 1842-1. If an appeal is filed, your notice of appeal should be mailed to the Burns District Office, 2891 0 Highway 20 West, Hines, Oregon 97738, within 30 days of receipt of the decision but no later than September 30, 2012. The appellant has the burden of showing the decision appealed is in error.

A copy of the appeal, statement of reasons, and all other supporting documents should also be sent to the Regional Solicitor, Pacific Northwest Region, U.S. Department of the Interior, 805 SW Broadway, Suite 600, Portland, OR 97205. If the notice of appeal did not include a statement of reasons for the appeal, it must be sent to the Interior Board of Land Appeals, Office of Hearings and Appeals, 801 North Quincy Street, Arlington, Virginia 22203. It is suggested appeals be sent certified mail, return receipt requested.

Requestfor Stay

Should you wish to file a motion for stay pending the outcome of an appeal of this decision, you must show sufficient justification based on the following standards under 43 CFR 4.21 :

• The relative harm to the parties if the stay is granted or denied. • The likelihood of the appellant's success on the merits. • The likelihood of immediate and irreparable harm if the stay is not granted. • Whether or not the public interest favors granting the stay.

As noted above, the motion for stay must be filed in the office of the authorized officer.

<&{za/1<-­Title and Signature of Authorized Officer Date

OR020-1791-0 I (Revised January 20 I 0)

• •

• UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT- BURNS DISTRICT

RIDDLE BROTHERS RANCH

CONCEPT GREY WATER FACILITIES