U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land ... -...

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management

Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment and

Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S030-2018-0004-EA

October 2018

Modified Competitive Land Sales N-95802

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management

Pahrump Field Office Phone: (702) 515-5000 Fax: (702) 515-5010

Table of Contents Chapter 1 ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction and Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Proposed Project Information ............................................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action ............................................................................................................................................. 3 1.4 Conformance Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

1.4.1 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, Plans or Other Environmental Analyses......................................................... 4 1.5 Scoping, Public Involvement, and Issues ........................................................................................................................... 5

1.5.1 Internal scoping........................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.5.2 External scoping ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.5.3 Consultation with Cooperating Agencies/Organizations ............................................................................................ 9 1.5.4 Issues......................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.1 Description of the No Action Alternative ........................................................................................................................ 11 2.2 Description of the Proposed Action Alternative .............................................................................................................. 11 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis .................................................................................... 12

Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Effects ................................................................................................... 15 3.1 Air Quality - PM10 ........................................................................................................................................................... 17

3.1.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope .......................................................................................................... 17 3.1.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative ................................................................................................ 18 3.1.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative ...................................................................................... 18

3.2 Endangered Species: Desert Tortoise .............................................................................................................................. 19 3.2.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope .......................................................................................................... 19 3.2.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative ................................................................................................ 19 3.2.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative ...................................................................................... 21

3.3 Socioeconomic and Demographic Conditions ................................................................................................................. 22 3.3.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope .......................................................................................................... 22 3.3.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative ................................................................................................ 23 3.3.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative ...................................................................................... 23

3.4 Travel Management ......................................................................................................................................................... 24 3.4.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope .......................................................................................................... 24 3.4.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative ................................................................................................ 26 3.4.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative ...................................................................................... 26

3.5 Water Resources .............................................................................................................................................................. 26 3.5.1. Affected Environment and Geographic Scope ......................................................................................................... 26 3.5.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative ................................................................................................ 27 3.5.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative ...................................................................................... 27

Chapter 4 References ................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................................................ 29 Appendix B ................................................................................................................................................................................ 33

EA Number: DOI-BLM-NV-S030-2018-0004-EA BLM Case File Number: N-95802

Chapter 1 1.1 Introduction and Background This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to analyze and disclose the environmental effects of: (1) amending the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan (RMP) to identify two parcels of public land for disposal; and (2) two Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) modified competitive land sales of approximately 620 acres adjacent to the Spring Mountain Raceway within the Town of Pahrump, Nye County, Nevada. Spring Mountain Raceway, LLC (herein identified as the Proponent) has been identified as the designated bidder, however as this is a competitive land sale bidding is open to anyone. The proposal was filed with the Pahrump Field Office on July 17, 2017. The proposed lands are shown in Figure 1 (Annotated Master Title Plat) and legally described in Table 1 (Proposed Project Legal Description). The Las Vegas RMP allows for the transfer of land within the disposal areas for various uses. FLPMA requires that land offered for sale must be identified in the land use plan. The Las Vegas RMP does not specifically identify these parcels for disposal; therefore, an amendment of the RMP is required prior to holding a land sale. The requested public land is located in the Town of Pahrump in Nye County, Nevada. Once disposed to the successful bidder, the Town of Pahrump will annex the land. The Nye County Board of Commissioners and the Governor’s Office of Economic Development have offered support for this land sale because they believe it supports community expansion, economic development, and diversification objectives. The requested land meets the disposal criteria because it will serve important public objectives. The Proponent is an adjacent landowner. The adjacent private land continues to be developed for industrial, commercial, and residential use by the Proponent in support of the facility’s expansion. In 2012 the Proponent acquired the remaining adjacent disposal land from BLM in a modified competitive sale; this land is currently under construction by the Proponent in furtherance of a number of mixed use developments. Public land managed by BLM borders the existing facility to the north and east; a patchwork of developed and vacant private lots border to the south and west. None of the private lots are of adequate size to accommodate the proposed track expansion. The requested sale meets the criteria for a modified competitive bidding because there are existing equitable interests that must be considered. This EA and RMP Amendment will assist the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Pahrump Field Office (PFO) in project planning and ensuring compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and in making a determination as to whether any significant effects could result from the analyzed actions. Following the requirements of NEPA (40 CFR 1508.9 (a)), this EA describes the potential impacts of a No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action for the land classification and subsequent realty actions. If the BLM determines that the Proposed Action for the land classification and disposal is not expected to have major effects, a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) will be issued and a Decision Record will be prepared. If significant effects are anticipated, the BLM will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

Figure 1. Annotated Master Title Plat

1.2 Proposed Project Information The proponent requested that the BLM dispose of public lands adjacent to the existing Spring Mountain Raceway and Motor Resort to extend the existing track. These approximate 620 acres of public lands are proposed to be disposed by a modified competitive sale within the Town of Pahrump, Nye County, Nevada. The proposed land sales would be conducted in two phases; the first phase includes the proposed sale of approximately 553 acres, the second phase includes the remaining 68 acres.

Table 1. Proposed Project Legal Description

Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada T. 20 S., R. 54 E., sec. 27, SW1/4, that part lying outside of the utility corridor; sec. 28, E1/2NE1/4NE1/4SW1/4, NE1/4SE1/4NE1/4SW1/4, S1/2SE1/4NE1/4SW1/4, NE1/4SE1/4SW1/4, E1/2SW1/4SE1/4SW1/4, SE1/4SE1/4SW1/4, and SE1/4; sec. 34, lots 2, 3, and 4, those parts lying outside of the utility corridor, lots 5 through 8, NE1/4NW1/4, that part lying outside the utility corridor, SE1/4NW1/4, and E1/2SW1/4.

The area described contains approximately 620 acres according to the official plats of surveys of said land, on file with the BLM and areas determined utilizing GIS maps. The land disposal designation would occur upon approval of the RMP Amendment Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. Once the Decision Record is filed, the modified competitive sale would occur in two phases. The first sale phase of 553 acres would dispose of public lands for which the existing cadastral survey is adequate. The second sale phase of 68 acres would dispose of the remaining public lands after the cadastral survey for that area has been completed. Following the land sales, the Proponent, if the successful bidder, plans to construct an extension to the existing track, two classrooms, and a vehicle paddock. Adequate drainage controls would be constructed in accordance with the Pahrump Regional Flood Control District Service Plan (2008). The site will be surveyed, cleared, and fenced in accordance with US Fish and Wildlife Service Desert Tortoise stipulations, terms and conditions of the Incidental Take Permit that would be obtained following the sales. No other development is contemplated. At completion, the planned track expansion would be the longest in the world. If the land is acquired by another bidder, future development would be restricted to that allowed by the approved zoning (Industrial – Special Overlay with Restrictions).

1.3 Purpose and Need for Action The purpose of the Proposed Action is to amend the 1998 Las Vegas RMP to allow for two modified competitive sales of public land totaling approximately 620 acres in the Town of Pahrump. The need for the Proposed Action is to respond to a FLPMA request for a modified competitive land sale submitted by the Proponent to expand the existing facility. The BLM decisions to be made are first, whether or not to amend the Las Vegas RMP disposal boundary to include the parcels described above, and secondly, whether to conduct two modified competitive sales to dispose of the land under the sale authority of Section 203 of FLPMA, as outlined in 43 CFR 2711.3-2. In the decision process, the BLM must consider how the BLM’s resource

management goals, objectives, opportunities, and/or conflicts relate to this non-federal use of public lands.

1.4 Conformance Summary The Proposed Action is subject to the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan/Record of Decision (RMP/ROD), as approved on October 5, 1998. The plan has been reviewed to determine if the Proposed Action conforms to the Land Use Plans terms and conditions, as required by 43 CFR 1610.5-3. The 1998 Las Vegas Resource Management Plan Lands Management Objective Land Disposal Areas: LD-1 allows for the transfer of land within the disposal areas for various uses. The Las Vegas RMP states, “Approximately 175,314 acres of public lands within the disposal areas identified on Map 2-3 are potentially available for disposal through sale, exchange, or Recreation and Public Purpose patent to provide for the orderly expansion of southern Nevada” (BLM 1998). FLPMA requires that land offered for sale must be identified for disposal in the land use plan. The requested parcels are not currently identified in the 1998 Las Vegas RMP, and therefore an amendment of the RMP is required. Chapter 6 of the 1998 RMP describes the circumstances and process for consideration of a plan amendment. The plan amendment, if approved, would slightly modify the disposal boundary allowing for the proposed sales to proceed.

1.4.1 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, Plans or Other Environmental Analyses This EA is prepared pursuant to NEPA and subsequent regulations adopted by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1500). This EA is intended to be a concise public document that analyzes the probable and known environmental impacts of the Proposed Action and the alternatives on the components of the human and natural environment and reaches a conclusion as to its significance. The ultimate decision of this EA must ensure that the actions are not only in the best interest of the public, but would not result in a significant impact to the human environment (40 CFR 1508.13). The following laws and their implementing regulations were considered in the development of this EA:

• Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976

• Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, as amended

• Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971

• Energy Policy Act of 2005

• National Environmental Policy Act

• Migratory Bird Treaty Act

• The Endangered Species Act

• National Historic Preservation Act of 1966

• Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended The following state laws, regulations, county codes, and approved plans were considered in the development of this EA:

• NRS 533 Adjudication of Vested Water rights; Appropriation of Public Waters

• NRS 534 Underground Water and Wells

• Nevada State Engineer’s Orders 1252 and 1293

• Nye County Code Chapter 16.28.170 (h) Division of Lands in the Pahrump Regional Planning District, Parcel Map Procedure

• Nye County Code Chapter 16.32 Development Agreements

• Nye County Water District 2017 Water Resources Plan Update

• Pahrump Regional Planning District Master Plan Updates

• Nye County Board of County Commissioners – Zoning Decision For BLM Disposal Land Industrial Use – Special Overlay

The proposal will be processed in accordance with 43 CFR 2710.

1.5 Scoping, Public Involvement, and Issues Scoping is an important part of the NEPA process and determines the scope of the key issues related to a Proposed Action (40 CFR 1500.7). Scoping for this EA includes consultation and/or coordination with the public, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Nye County staff, the Nevada State Clearinghouse, Nevada state agencies, and BLM resource specialists. A Notice of Intent (NOI) announcing the initiation of public scoping for this EA was published in the Federal Register on July 30, 2018. Comments were received from local interest groups and members of the public. Public scoping comments and concerns were considered in preparation of this EA. The Nevada Division of Wildlife provided information regarding authorizations required for translocation of desert tortoise, handling protocol for Gila Monsters, and special measures for land disturbing activities when migratory birds are present. Two commenters noted concern about potential impacts to desert tortoise and its habitat and local wildlife. An OHV group noted the potential for visual impacts to Carpenter Canyon recreationists. One group requested analysis of air quality impacts, water resources in the basin, and suggested that an EIS was the appropriate level of analysis for the Proposed Action. A wildlife group and two residents raised concerns regarding the potential increase in noise-related impacts to wildlife and nearby homes. Six residents submitted comments in support of the Proposed Action while four residents submitted comments in opposition. See Scoping Comment Response in Appendix B.

1.5.1 Internal scoping The following table is a list of all resources considered in the evaluation of the Proposed Action and alternative(s). The BLM Southern Nevada District Office resource specialists reviewed the Proposed Action and found the resources to be present with potential for impact (PI), present with no potential for impact (NI), or not present (NP). Table 2: Resources Considered in the Evaluation of the Proposed Action and Alternatives

Resource List Impact Impact Analysis

Resource NP, NI, PI Rationale

Air Quality NI

The Pahrump Valley is in attainment for all NAAQS. Measures implemented through the CAAP were found to be effective, and remain effective in reducing PM10 to levels below regulatory concern. The calculated incremental increase in PM10 emissions would not result in a measureable degradation of air quality and would not result in exceedance of any NAAQS. See Section 3.1 for further discussion.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)

NP There are no designated ACECs present in or affected by the Project Area.

BLM Natural Areas/Conservation Lands

NP There are no designated Natural Areas/Conservations Lands in or affected by the Project Area.

Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Emissions

NI

The incremental increase in greenhouse gas emissions during construction and over the life of facility operation estimated to be 2.3 tons/year would be insignificant compared with other sources. https://www.nextgreencar.com/emissions-calculator

Cultural Resources NP The Cultural Resources Survey of the Project Area identified two recent scatters; there are no NRHP-eligible properties on the parcel.

Environmental Justice NP No significant impacts are projected therefore, there will

be no Environmental Justice effects.

Farmlands (Prime or Unique) NP There are no designated prime or unique farmlands

present in or affected by the Project Area.

Fish and Wildlife Excluding Federally Listed Species

NI

Land disposal would not result in any impacts to fish and wildlife. However, NDOW prescribed mitigation measures and protocol for Desert Tortoise relocation and Gila Monsters will be implemented during any future surface disturbing activities.

Floodplains NP The Project Area is located in Floodplain Zone X, which is outside the 500-year floodplain and outside the 1% and 2% annual chance floodplains.

Fuels/Fire Management NI

The land sale/conveyance means that the BLM will no longer have jurisdictional responsibility. Any fire or weeds issues will transfer with the property to the new landowner and the receiving jurisdiction (Town of Pahrump, Nye County, Nevada Department of Agriculture, and Nevada Division Forestry, etc.).

Geology/Mineral Resources/Energy Production

NP

The Project Area is located in a low/moderate potential boundary area prospectively valuable for oil and gas. Sand and gravel sale has moderate potential in the Project Area. There is low potential for locatable minerals in the Project Area, and there are several sand and gravel operations nearby the area which would be unaffected by the project.

https://www.nextgreencar.com/

Based on mineral geological assessment, there are no known locatable minerals of value in the Project Area.

Human Health and Safety NP No human health and safety impacts are expected as a

result of the project.

Hydrologic Conditions NI

None expected. The requested public land is located in the Town of Pahrump in Nye County, Nevada. Once disposed to the successful bidder the land will be annexed by the Town of Pahrump. Minimal increase in water demand of 15 AFY can be provided by an existing water utility that serves the existing property. The local utility will require dedication of adequate water rights in accordance with NRS and County requirements. See Section 3.5 for further discussion.

Invasive Species/Noxious Weeds

NI

Once disposed to the successful bidder the land will be annexed by the Town of Pahrump. Nye County Noxious Weed Management Practices and Control Plan will be implemented.

Lands/Access NP At the time of conveyance, the patentee/grantee shall be subject to applicable state and local government laws, statutes, and ordinances.

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics

NP There are no lands with wilderness characteristics in the Project Area.

Livestock Grazing NI

Disposal of the Project Area would result in a loss of approximately 620 acres from the Wheeler Wash Grazing Allotment (64,701 acres, Class I, Ephemeral Production, Cattle). From 1984 to 1993, the allotment had a licensed use of 670 AUMs. The allotment was leased to an operator from 1998 to 2008 with a production of 0 AUMs. The Wheeler Wash Allotment remains open but unpermitted, and available only from May through November.

Migratory Birds NI Preliminary biological survey did not identify any active nesting sites.

Native American Concerns NP No Native American concerns were identified.

Noise NP

There will be no noise impacts as a result of the Proposed Action to dispose of approximately 620 acres. Noise impacts that occur subsequent to land disposal would be regulated by Nye County Ordinance.

Old Spanish Trail NP The Old Spanish Trail and other trails of historic significance are not present at or near the Project Area.

Paleontology NP The Project Area is located on an alluvial fan. No paleontological resources are present.

Recreation/WSR/ NI

The Project Area is located in the Southern Nevada Extensive Recreation Management Area, however no designated roads or trails would be impacted. There are no Wild and Scenic Rivers in or near the Project Area.

Renewable Energy/ Transmission NI

The Project Area abuts the designated 368 Energy/Utility Corridor. The Proponent must sponsor a federal public land survey to ensure there is no encroachment on the corridor. There are no geothermal, wind, or solar designations in the Project Area.

Socioeconomics NI

Future development projects may provide jobs, enhance tourism, increase local government revenues, and have beneficial economic effects. See Section 3.3 for further discussion.

Soils NI

Project Area soils are generalized as very shallow, gravelly, coarse textured. Soils are predominantly NRCS classification of Commski-Lastchance Association with bordered by Yermo, hot-Arizo Association on the south end of the Project Area. Soils will not be impacted by the proposed land sale.

Threatened, Endangered or Candidate Plant Species

NP There are no Special Status Plant Species located at the project site. The soils and topography of the site do not provide suitable habitat for Pahrump Buckwheat.

Threatened, Endangered or Candidate Animal Species

NI

Desert tortoises will not be directly affected by the land sale. However, if the lands is developed after the sale, direct effects to desert tortoises on the 620 acres will fall under the purview of the Nye County Habitat Conservation Plan and incidental take permit for the project. The 620 acres of desert tortoise habitat would be transferred from Federal to private ownership. See Section 3.2 for further discussion.

Travel Management PI

Off-highway travel in the area is limited to designated roads and trails (RC-11-C). Disposal of land in the Project Area is expected to eliminate travel on several segments of unauthorized road, currently used by recreationists. See Section 3.4 for analysis.

Wastes (hazardous or solid) NI No hazardous or solid waste was identified on the sale

property.

Water Resources/Quality (drinking/ surface/ground)

NI

No surface waters are present in the Project Area. The land sale would not affect ground water quality; wastewaters are managed onsite by the local utility in accordance with the State-issued permit. See Section 3.5 for further discussion.

Wetlands/Riparian Zones NP No wetlands or riparian zones are located on or near the

Project Area.

Wilderness/WSA NP The project is not located in, adjacent to, or near a designated WSA.

Woodland/Forestry NP No woodland or forest is located on or will be affected by the project.

Vegetation Excluding Federally Listed Species

NI The vegetation is characterized as Southern Desert Shrub and is not unique to the area.

Visual Resources NI

The project is located in a VRM Class III area. The objective of this class is to partially retain the existing character of the landscape. BLM cannot control post-disposal land use so visual impact assessment is outside the scope of this EA.

Wild Horses and Burros NI

The Proposed Action would reduce the Johnnie and Wheeler Pass Herd Management Areas, which have a combined acreage of 451,135, by 620 acres. The loss represents about 0.13% reduction of the HMA. No corrals or water structures are located in the Project Area.

1.5.2 External scoping Publication of the combined Notice of Intent/Notice of Realty Action in the Federal Register on July 30, 2018, provided notice of scoping for public input to the Draft EA. The Draft EA was available for public comment on the ePlanning website from September 6 – October 5, 2018. No comments were received.

1.5.3 Consultation with Cooperating Agencies/Organizations BLM staff conducted informal Section 7 Consultation on the Proposed Action. If the land is sold, the owner will engage in formal consultation on the Desert Tortoise prior to conducting any land disturbing activities under Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act. Mitigation measures and stipulations will be documented in a USFWS approved Habitat Conservation Plan for the Mojave Desert Tortoise. Nye County, Nevada is coordinating with BLM as a Cooperating Agency in the preparation of the SNDO RMP and has provided information on planning requirements, zoning, fugitive dust ordinances, and State and County water use restrictions and mitigation requirements.

1.5.4 Issues Issues identified during scoping are discussed further in the EA are:

Air Quality; Desert Tortoise; Socioeconomics; Travel Management; Water Resources.

Additional analysis is presented in Chapter 3 to support the findings for the above resources that are present but not impacted. Chapter 3 also includes additional information for which scoping comments identified public concern.

Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.1 Description of the No Action Alternative In the No Action Alternative, the Las Vegas RMP would not be amended to identify two new disposal parcels adjacent to the Spring Mountain Raceway in Pahrump, Nye County, Nevada. No additional disposal land would be made available. The two modified competitive land sales would not be conducted, and no additional land disposal would occur adjacent to the existing facility. Existing conditions would continue into the future. The Spring Mountain Motor Resorts would continue to operate its racetrack on the existing private land, without any land to accommodate track and related facility expansion. In 2012, the proponent – Spring Mountain Raceway, LLC - acquired the adjacent available public land through a modified competitive sale to expand what was then the existing facility. The facility expansion created jobs and tourism opportunities in the economically distressed Town of Pahrump. The proponent wishes to again expand adjacent to its facility, which is BLM managed public land not currently within the disposal boundary. If unable to extend track and facility operations onto adjacent land, the proponent will not be able to accommodate an expansion that is expected to result in additional jobs in the community and increased revenues of $30 million per year to the Gross Regional Product, and contributing to the improvement of local economic conditions.

2.2 Description of the Proposed Action Alternative It is proposed to amend the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan to identify two additional parcels for disposal adjacent to the existing Spring Mountain Raceway, LLC facilities in Pahrump, Nye County, Nevada. Once amended, the land would be sold in two competitive modified sales. The action is needed because the only undeveloped land adjacent to the existing facility that could be feasibly developed to meet the need for expansion is BLM public land (Figure 2). The 620 ± acres of public land proposed for disposal and subsequent modified competitive sales are located in Pahrump, Nye County, Nevada (Figure 3). The lands are located adjacent to the existing Spring Mountain Raceway facilities along the facility’s north and east property boundaries. The Spring Mountain Raceway facility is located on the north side of Nevada State Highway 160 near its intersection with Gamebird Road. The approved Section 368 Energy Corridor bound the 620 ± acres on the northeast. BLM Public Land Survey will establish the boundaries of the Section 368 Energy Corridor prior to any disposal. If acquired by Spring Mountain Raceway, the land would be developed in two phases. Phase 1 construction would commence upon completion of the first land sale, and would begin with expansion of the existing Go-Kart track from the eastern property boundary, two classrooms, vehicle paddock, drainage structures, and desert tortoise fencing (Appendix A). Phase 1 construction is expected to continue for two years. Construction on Phase 2 would start after the second land sale, which is dependent upon the Public Land Survey of the 368 Energy Corridor. Construction would include the main track expansion of approximately 6.5 miles of new asphalt. Total duration of construction (Phases 1 and 2) is expected to be five years. Development of the land is dependent upon acquisition of USFWS approval of a Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit (HCP/ITP). Prior to any ground disturbing activities, under the current HCP/ITP, the entire Project Area will be surveyed for desert tortoise. Any desert tortoises encountered would be relocated in consultation with the USFWS and in accordance with the HCP/ITP. The parcel will be fenced with desert tortoise fencing in accordance with US Fish and Wildlife Service Incidental Take Permit requirements. Storm water control features with adequate capacity to address Pahrump Regional Flood Control District Service Area Plan requirements will also be constructed.

Earth-moving equipment will be used to blade and contour the track, pads for the two classrooms and vehicle paddock, and flood control features. Land disturbing activities will be kept to a minimum to prevent disturbance of undeveloped areas in order to retain the desert character. Fugitive dust emissions will be mitigated during construction using Best Management Practices identified in the Nye County-required Dust Control Plan, and NDEP required Surface Area Disturbance permit. About 7.5 acre-feet per year of water will be required during construction. Weed free gravels will be used in construction. Potentially impacted yucca and cacti will be mitigated in accordance with State NDOW requirements. Track and classroom landscape design will be xeric to eliminate the need for irrigation. All other vegetation removed during construction will be disposed of in accordance with Nye County ordinances. Spoils from construction of retention basins and track will be managed onsite and will be sloped to minimize drainage and water quality impacts. Solid waste from construction and operations will continue to be collected as it is generated and properly contained for disposal in an approved landfill operation. The construction site would be kept free from accumulation of waste materials and rubbish resulting from construction activities as required for safety, appearance, and avoidance of fire hazards. Infrastructure for utilities and services to support the proposed expansion track facilities is largely already in place. The facility is currently receiving power from Valley Electric Association, and water and sewer are provided through onsite facilities operated by the Great Basin Water Company. Solid waste collection services are provided by C&S Waste Solution’s Pahrump Valley Disposal. Projected maximum water use in support of classrooms, vehicle paddock skid pads, track maintenance, up to 75 additional full time employees, and additional clientele is maximum of 15 acre-feet per year. The specific water rights dedication requirement in support of the proposed development will be determined by the utility in accordance with established Orders of the State Engineer and Nye County Code.

2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis No other alternatives to the Proposed Action were considered. As can be seen in Figure 2, the only developable land adjacent to the Applicant’s existing facility is BLM-managed public land. Thus, no other alternative would be technically feasible.

Figure 2. Adjacent Land Uses Map

Figure 3. Spring Mountain Raceway General Location and Land Sale Phases Map

Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Effects This chapter presents the baseline of the physical, biological, social and economic resources of the areas affected. The baseline is used for comparison of impacts/consequences that would be expected to occur upon implementation of the Proposed Action, which are also described in this chapter. The Pahrump Valley is located in southern Nevada in the Basin and Range physiographic province, at an average elevation of about 2,800 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The Spring Mountains, with maximum elevation of nearly 12,000 feet AMSL, lie to the north and east of the Project Area. The Pahrump Valley is an internal drainage basin, and runoff flows from the surrounding mountains to the west and east of Pahrump down to the valley floor, where dry lake beds have formed and salt desert scrub is the dominant plant community. No rivers or streams occur within the Project Area. There is no perennial surface water - only dry washes that flow following rain storms. The Project Area is located mid-valley on the distal portion of an alluvial fan where drainage transitions from distributary to tributary. Soils are sandy, silty and clayey gravels characteristic of distal fan depositional environment. Local and regional springs provide both wildlife habitat and water supplies for agriculture and human consumption in various areas of the valley. The climate in the Pahrump Valley is typical for the Mojave Desert, with very hot summers, cool winters, and arid conditions. The southernmost part of Nye County receives an average annual precipitation of 5 inches or less. Precipitation occurs sporadically from either winter rains or summer thundershowers. During the winter months, high-pressure conditions predominate resulting in west-to-east tending winds and precipitation patterns. During the summer months, low-pressure conditions predominate, resulting in southwest-to-northeast trending precipitation patterns. Pahrump experienced relatively rapid population growth from 1987 to 2007, reflecting growth in the neighboring Las Vegas Valley. The influx of new residents in the late 1980’s spurred islands of urbanization of this agricultural community. From 1987 to 2007 Pahrump’s population increased from around 6,000 to 35,000 residents, as growth continued to be fueled by the economy and explosive growth in Las Vegas. Although still largely rural in character, Pahrump’s patchwork urbanization has all but eliminated commercial-scale agriculture in the valley. From 2008 through 2009, Pahrump was hard hit by the recession, and the population declined, construction and development stopped, and unemployment levels rose. Recovery has been slow as reflected by the number of new building permits and nearly flat population growth, which has only recently achieved pre-recession level of 35,000. Permits for new construction and development are beginning to increase after nearly a decade of stagnation. The Project Area is located within the Town of Pahrump boundary adjacent to the existing Spring Mountain Motor Sports Facility. The Project Site falls within the General Commercial Zoning District and is zoned Industrial Special Overlay and restricts the development that can occur on the parcels. Specifically, the Master Plan Amendment and Zone Change Special Conditions approved by the Nye County Board of County Commissioners in May 15, 2018, included the following restrictions:

1. There shall be no additional single-family residential development on the subject land. 2. Development must be compatible with a motorsports racetrack, adjacent single family

residential development and potential development of the community college. 3. To assure compatibility of development of the racetrack, the Developer shall be required to

provide buffers between adjacent disparate uses. 4. Maximum allowed water use on the entire 604 acres shall be restricted to 50 acre-feet annual.

Compliance with the Groundwater Management Plan dedication of water rights or mitigation of all water use shall be required at the Site Development Plan Review stage.

5. Development shall require a Development Agreement, Amending the existing Development Agreement or a Conditional Use Permit, (no permissive uses).

Table 3 identifies the resources that were considered but eliminated from further analysis. Through the review described in Chapter 1, it was determined that these elements will not be affected by the Proposed Action, alternatives(s), or the element is not present in the Project Area, which precludes the resources from further required analysis. Table 3. Resources Considered but Eliminated from Further Analysis

BLM Natural Areas/Conservation Lands Areas of Environmental Concern (ACEC)

Cultural Resources Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Historical Archaeology

Environmental Justice Architectural

Non-listed Fish and Wildlife Species Farmlands (Prime or Unique)

Fuels and Fire Floodplains

Hydrologic Conditions Human Health and Safety

Insects and Disease Infrastructure Improvements

Lands Access and Tenure Invasive, non-native species/Noxious Weeds

Livestock Grazing Legal Considerations

Migratory Birds Minerals and Energy Resources

Noise Native American Concerns

Paleontology Old Spanish Trail

Transmission Corridors Renewable Energy (geothermal, solar, wind)

Vegetation Riparian and Wetlands

Waste, Hazardous Materials, or Solids Soils

Wetlands/Riparian Zones Wild and Scenic Rivers

Wild Horse and Burro Wilderness and Wilderness Study Area

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics Wildlife Including Migratory Birds

The resource area that will be carried forward for analysis is:

Travel Management – There are 7.46 miles of primitive roads and trails in the Project Area that will be closed as a result of the Proposed Action. (Section 3.4)

The following resources were included in Chapter 3 to provide further information on resources that would not be impacted but were identified during scoping.

Air Quality – The Project Area is located in the Pahrump Valley, Basin 162. (Section 3.1) Endangered Species: Desert Tortoise - The Project Area is located in desert tortoise habitat near a recognized Desert Tortoise Gene Flow Corridor. (Section 3.2) Socioeconomics - The Project Area is located in a community that was hard hit by the recession, and recovery has been slow. Any development following the Proposed Action is expected to provide jobs, and add to the local economy. (Section 3.3) Water Resources – The Project Area is located in the Pahrump Artesian Basin 162. (Section 3.5)

3.1 Air Quality - PM10 Although land disposal is considered an administrative action that has no direct effects, there could be potential long term indirect cumulative and residual impacts resulting from any development of the approximately 620 acres of native desert land.

3.1.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope The affected environment and geographic scope for analysis of the Proposed Action includes the air resources in Pahrump Valley, referred to as Basin 162.

3.1.1.1 Existing Conditions The Pahrump Valley is currently in attainment for priority pollutants identified by EPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); the only pollutant parameter monitored is PM10. In 2003, Nye County, the Town of Pahrump, NDEP Air Quality Bureau, and EPA Region 9 Office of Air Program signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to prepare and adopt a Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP) that would implement programs and measures necessary to reduce PM10 emissions to levels below regulatory concern. The 2006 CAAP presents a baseline emissions inventory for contributing PM10 sources. Mobile Sources including Non-Fugitive Emissions (Vehicle Exhaust, Brake and Tire Wear), Total Non-Road Exhaust Emissions (Fuel RVP, Gas Sulfur %, Diesel Sulfur %), and Fugitive Emissions for Paved Highways and Local Roads combined were found to account for less than 1% of the total emissions in the inventory, while Fugitive Emissions from Arterial Paved Roads accounted for approximately 1% of the total. In total, all mobile-related sources were found to represent less than 2% of the Pahrump Valley PM10 emissions inventory for both pre- and post-CAAP measures and estimates. NDEP’s 10-yr update report, Pahrump Valley, Nevada PM10 Ten Years of Success is the culmination of the 2003 MOU and the CAAP efforts and describes the analyses and results obtained in reducing the emissions and the ambient concentration of PM10 in Pahrump during the period 2003 to 2010. The NDEP found that PM10 emissions were reduced to levels below regulatory concern by the mandated compliance date as a result of Nye County’s Dust Control Program and prioritized Pave and Chip Seal Programs. Specifically from 2001 to 2013 emissions from paved roads increased slightly over pre-CAAP levels due to increases in population, number of vehicles, and the miles of paved road. The number of miles arterial dirt roads that were paved during that time frame also increased. All other sources, especially Unpaved Roads and Disturbed Vacant Land (including construction) declined dramatically bringing the pre-CAAP Total Emissions Inventory from about 116,000 tons/year to 28,000 tons/year. Data from four (4) continuous real-time monitoring stations in Pahrump is used to demonstrate compliance with relevant NAAQS.

3.1.1.2 Data Collection and Methodology Air quality in the Pahrump Valley has been continuously monitored for PM10 by NDEP since 2001. Four stations at strategic locations (background and high-emission locations) continue to record and report near-real time data to the NDEP Monitoring Website. Total annual mobile-related emissions were calculated using available web based tools. Factors selected were specific to high-performance General Motors and similar production vehicles (Corvette, Camaro, Cadillac, etc.) driven under Highway Conditions using Test/Aggressive Driving Styles for the number of vehicles miles traveled per day. The calculated emissions value was compared to estimates prepared using factors from the 2015 NDEP 10-yr Update Report. These values were compared to the baseline emission inventory to establish the increase over baseline levels that would be attributable to the Proposed Action. Construction-related dust emissions would be short-term and mitigated through best management practices.

3.1.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative Implementation of the no action alternative would result in no changes to the status quo. No disturbance or development of the 620 acres at the Project Site would occur.

3.1.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative Project emissions of fugitive dust from any future development is expected and would be temporary in nature, and would be mitigated through the use of Best Management Practices required by NDEP Surface Area Disturbance Permit and Nye County Dust Control Plan. If acquired by Spring Mountain Raceway, the cars, trucks, and motorcycles driven at the Spring Mountain Raceway are production vehicles that burn unleaded fuels. There is no permanent fuel dispensary at the Raceway, nor are any such facilities planned. The track expansion would be paved and dust would be removed weekly using PM10 compliant street sweepers, as is the practice at the existing track. The maximum projected daily average Vehicle Miles Traveled by vehicles on the track was calculated to be 1,500 v-m/d (Highway) versus a 2017 compared to a baseline value of 286,118 v-m/d. The calculated total annual increase in PM10 emissions (contribution) from the Proposed Action Mobile Sources including Vehicle Exhaust Emissions (On-Road and Non-Road) and associated Fugitive Dust from Paved Roads (Highway) is 4.13 tons/year compared to the estimated 2017 baseline 9,113.74 tons/year.

3.1.3.1 Analysis of Direct and Indirect Effects As noted, the amendment of the RMP and subsequent land disposal are administrative actions and would have no direct on air quality. Any potential development of the disposed land would have an indirect effect on air quality potentially increasing PM10 emissions by less than 0.1% over the baseline air quality conditions. Based on the estimated 2017 emissions inventory for the Pahrump Valley, and emissions from any future development of this land, the direct and indirect contribution to cumulative air quality impacts from PM10 and other facility-related emissions are insignificant when compared to baseline emissions and the estimated increase in emissions associated with projected local growth.

3.1.3.2 Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Action The possible development could result in a small, incremental increase that will contribute to air quality cumulative impacts associated with growth in the Pahrump Valley. The cumulative incremental contribution of fugitive dust and PM10 emissions to the existing baseline conditions would not result in exceedance of any NAAQS.

3.1.3.3 Mitigation Measures Nye County Planning Department and the NDEP have permitting programs that require Best Management Practices to mitigate PM10 emissions.

3.1.3.4 Residual Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative The residual impacts of implementing the possible future development could be a small, incremental increase in PM10 that would not be expected to result in any exceedances of the NAAQS.

3.2 Endangered Species: Desert Tortoise The Proposed Land sale will transfer approximately 620 acres of Moderate Quality Desert Tortoise Habitat out of federal ownership. Impacts to federally listed endangered species, Gopherus Agassizii, will be addressed prior to any land disturbing activities through Section 10 Consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the preparation and implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), and the issuance of an Incidental Take Permit to the land owner.

3.2.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope The affected environment includes 620 acres of habitat for the federally listed endangered species, the Mojave Desert Tortoise, Gopherus Agassizii). The geographic scope is the 620-acre Project Area.

3.2.1.1 Existing Conditions The Project Area is located on the alluvial fan on the east side of Pahrump Valley, in an area characterized as desert pavement, interspersed with somewhat silty-soiled playa. The area is dominated by a creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) community type. Other plants include four-wing saltbush (Afripiex canescens), shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia), white bursage (Ambrosia dumosa), spiny menodora (Menodora spinescens), Nevada ephedra (Ephedra nevadensis), little leaf ratany (Krameria parvifolia), common matchweed (Gutierreza sarothrae), and cottontop cactus (Echinocactus polycephalus). The area is characterized as moderate to good desert tortoise habitat. There is no critical habitat present in the Project Area. Figure 4 is a photograph looking north to south across the Project Area that illustrates the typical vegetation. Most of the land in the Project Area is undisturbed desert with some minor disturbance (one- and two-track trails) near the Wheeler Pass Road, the community gravel pits, and to the southeast near the terminus of Gamebird Road. Table 4 is the species list for Nye County, obtained from the USFWS website in April 2018.

3.2.1.2 Surveys All except the federally listed desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) were eliminated from further study and field surveys due to the Project Area being outside the species’ range or requiring a type of habitat not found within the Project Area. Eight desert tortoises and many possible tortoise burrows were observed, and their locations recorded using GPS during the field survey. These data will be used to guide Section 10 Consultation with the USFWS to prepare the Habitat Conservation Plan for the Incidental Take Permit prior to conducting any ground disturbing activities.

3.2.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative Implementation of the no action alternative would result in no changes to the status quo. No disturbance or development of the 620 acres at the Project Site would occur. Existing habitat and ecosystem conditions would remain the same. No incidental take permit for Desert Tortoise would be required.

Figure 4. Typical Project Area Vegetation

Table 4. USFWS Species List for Nye County, Nevada.

Species/Status Name Latin Name Habitat

Amphibian

C Columbia spotted frog Rana luteiventris Aquatic

(Great Basin Distinct

Population Segment)

Birds

C Greater sage-grouse Centrocercus Sagebrush steppe

urophasianus

C Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Riparian

(Western U.S. Distinct

Population Segment)

E Southwestern willow fly- Empidonax traillii extimus Riparian

catcher

Fishes

E Ash Meadows Cyprinodon nevadensis Aquatic

Amargosa pupfish mionectes

E Ash Meadows Rhinichthys osculus Aquatic

speckled dace Nevadensis

E Devils Hole pupfish Cyprinodon diabolis Aquatic

T Lahontan cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarkii Aquatic

trout henshawi

T Railroad Valley springfish Crenichthys nevadae Aquatic

E Warm Springs pupfish Cyprinodon nevadensis Aquatic

Pectoralis

E White River spinedace Lepidomeda albivallis Aquatic

Invertebrates

T Ash Meadows naucorid Ambrysus amargosus Aquatic

Plants

E Amargosa niterwort Nitrophila mohavensis Ash Meadows

T Ash Meadows blazing star Mentzelia leucophylla Ash Meadows

T Ash Meadows gumplant Grindelia fraxinopratensis Ash Meadows

T Ash Meadows ivesia Ivesia eremica Ash Meadows

(mousetail) (= I. kingii var. eremica)

T Ash Meadows milkvetch Astragalus phoenix Ash Meadows

T Ash Meadows sunray Enceliopsis nudicaulis Ash Meadows

var. corrugata

T Spring-loving centaury Centaurium namophilum Ash Meadows

Reptile

T Desert tortoise Gopherus agassizii Desert

(Mojave population)

Legend: C = Candidate, T = Threatened, E = Endangered 3.2.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative The Proposed Action could result in destruction of about 620 acres of moderate quality desert tortoise habitat. To mitigate this expected loss of habitat and potential impacts to the desert tortoise, the developer will need to seek a Section 10 Incidental Take Permit (ITP) from the USFWS pursuant to the

Endangered Species Act. The ITP includes terms and conditions to protect and relocate any desert tortoises that are encountered on the site. It is expected that the ITP will include the minimum requirements:

1. Project Review and Pre-Construction Surveys 2. Employee Education 3. On-call Trained Responder 4. Tortoise Fencing and Tortoise Gate 5. Tortoise Relocation Plan 6. Project Reporting 7. Habitat Reclamation 8. Payment of Section 10 Remuneration Fees

The USFWS will assess and evaluate full range of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the Proposed Action on the desert tortoise and its environment during Section 10 Consultation prior to ground disturbance. In issuing an ITP, the USFWS may impose additional requirements as may be necessary to protect the desert tortoise and mitigate the effects on its habitat.

3.2.3.1 Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative and Mitigation The spatial area considered is the range of desert tortoise habitat in Nye County. The area is characterized as moderate to good desert tortoise habitat. There is no critical habitat present in Nye County. The timeframe considered for cumulative effects is from the time of federal listing of the Mojave population of the desert tortoise in 1992, to present, and into the reasonably foreseeable future. The purchaser will be required to mitigate the direct impacts to desert tortoises in the Project Area prior to and during any ground disturbing activities, and to mitigate the direct loss of habitat through the ITP and the payment of remuneration fees to the USFWS. The Proposed Action will result in the permanent loss of about 620 acres of moderate quality habitat in Nye County. Impacts to the desert tortoise and its habitat will be addressed through formal Section 10 Consultation with the USFWS. Nevada Division of Wildlife authorization requirements for desert tortoise relocation, as well as protocol for protection of the Gila Monster and migratory birds will be observed prior to and during surface disturbing activities.

3.3 Socioeconomic and Demographic Conditions This section describes the existing socioeconomic and demographic conditions and the expected effects of the proposed Action Alternative and the No Action Alternative.

3.3.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope The Socioeconomics and Demographics Affected Environment is described by demographic data and statistics on the population, employment, economic sectors, median household income, poverty levels, education, home ownership rates, and median home values. The Geographic Region of Influence is the Town of Pahrump and Nye County, Nevada.

3.3.1.1 Existing Conditions The unincorporated Town of Pahrump is the largest community in Nye County, Nevada. Considered to be a bedroom community to Las Vegas as well as a retirement community, Pahrump’s US Census-reported estimated 2015 population was 34,902 people, with a median age of 53 and a median household income of $41,229. Between 2014 and 2015 the population of Pahrump, declined from 35,009 to

34,902, a 0.31% decrease and its median household income declined from $41,277 to $41,229, a 0.12% decrease. The economy of Pahrump employs 10,612 people. The primary employment sectors are Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Utilities, and Public Administration. The largest industries in Pahrump are retail trade, accommodation & food service, and healthcare & social assistance. The highest paying industries are utilities, mining, quarrying, oil, gas extraction, administrative support, and waste management services. The unemployment rate in December 2017 was 5.9 percent. Median household income in Pahrump in 2015 was $41,229. The only college in Pahrump, NV is Great Basin College with 769 graduates as of 2015. The median property value in Pahrump is $112,700, and the homeownership rate is 72.9%. Most people in Pahrump, NV commute by personal vehicle, and the average commute time is 27.3 minutes. The average car ownership in Pahrump is two cars per household. The population of Pahrump is 79.3% White, 13.1% Hispanic, and 2.85% Black. Nearly 10% of the people in Pahrump speak a non-English language.

3.3.1.2 Data Collection and Methodology Several federal, state, and local government agencies’ websites were used to compile historical and recent socioeconomic and demographic reports and data for Pahrump, Nevada. These reports were used to establish the baseline socioeconomic conditions and demographic character of the Project Area. Forecasts of future employment were provided by the project proponent. These numbers were used to calculate the indirect employment and induced population resulting from the 75 permanent full time jobs expected if they are successful in obtaining the land. The effects of the induced population on public finance and local economic conditions were identified and compared to the baseline conditions, and the No Action Alternative.

3.3.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative Implementation of the No Action Alternative would result in no changes to the status quo. Baseline employment conditions would remain the same. New direct jobs and indirect employment opportunities associated with the Raceway expansion would not be added to the local economy. There would be no induced population effects to affect public finances and tax revenues.

3.3.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative This section describes the socioeconomic and demographic effects that would be expected to occur upon implementation of the Proposed Action.

3.3.3.1 Analysis of Direct and Indirect Effects Future development could result in the temporary employment (three to five years) of up to 200 workers during construction. Once constructed, operation of the expanded facilities are expected to result in 75 direct full time employees, which would produce 55 indirect employees, and an overall predicted induced population effect of 337 over the baseline of 10,600 jobs and a population of nearly 35,000 persons. The facility expansion would be constructed on land previously managed by the BLM. The future contribution of state and county tax revenues derived from the expansion on BLM disposed lands will be significantly higher than payments in lieu of taxes received when land was under federal control. The predicted induced population growth would be expected to contribute to an overall increase in the ad valorem tax revenues, which would beneficially affect Nye County economy and public finances. The expansion will enable the facility to host more events, which will contribute to an overall increase in room and fuel tax revenues. While quantification of all the direct and indirect fiscal effects is not

possible, all of the predicted fiscal effects would be beneficial to the local economy and public finance over the baseline conditions, and in comparison to the No Action Alternative.

3.3.3.2 Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative The spatial areas considered are the Town of Pahrump and Nye County. The timeframe considered for cumulative socioeconomic effects was the period of record for which historic demographic data (1980s to current) was available, and a 20-year planning horizon. Future growth and development in the Pahrump Area, including private sector and government projects were with data provided by the Nye County Planning Department and the BLM’s LR2000 database. Existing socioeconomic conditions in Pahrump reflect the slow steady rate of recovery from the economic recession in 2007. This is due in part to Pahrump’s character being a bedroom community to Las Vegas, and having a large retirement population. Although the State demographer population reports indicate that the population in the Town of Pahrump and Nye County as a whole has continued to decline since 2008, Nye County data primarily from building permits suggests that the population is increasing albeit slowly. Commercial and residential construction has resumed on previously stalled projects, and many projects have been completed as economic conditions have improved. New residential and commercial development on existing private land is expected to occur into the future. Potential future development could be industrial scale development with Special Use Overlay that severely limits the type of construction and development that can occur while creating new jobs and stimulating growth in existing support sectors. The incremental contribution of future development socioeconomic and demographic impacts, both direct and indirect, to the ongoing and future cumulative impacts are expected to be consistent with the projected growth. Table 5 identifies the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects and actions in the Project Area that were considered in the cumulative impact analysis. Because all of the expected socioeconomic demographic impacts are predicted to be beneficial, mitigation measures are not be required.

3.3.3.3 Residual Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative The residual impacts of implementing the Proposed Action which may result in future development could include: the addition of 75 full time jobs, and the indirect and induced population effects. These socioeconomic and population effects are expected to remain into the foreseeable future.

3.4 Travel Management The 1998 RMP and ROD did not include a Travel Management Section or Program. Instead, Travel on public lands was addressed in the Recreation Program through off-highway vehicle use designations.

3.4.1 Affected Environment and Geographic Scope The affected environment includes the 620 acre Project Area and the adjacent and adjoining designated roads and trails in the vicinity of the Project Area.

Table 5. Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects/Actions

Approved Type No. of units/ width or size Status

Mountain Falls residential/ commercial

3,200 residential lots, golf course, and mixed commercial including

gaming

Golf course completed. 1,276 lots sold to developers. 670 homes

completed. 1,924 lots available.

Artesia at Hafen Ranch residential 898 lots sporadic activity

Nye County Fairgrounds recreation 427 acres/ball fields started

Snowden Commercial Bldg (Phase II) commercial 10,000 sf building started

Kellogg Park recreation development of a park started

Ares industrial Power generation approved

Great Basin College commercial Pahrump Valley Center campus on 285 acres proposed

Belarus Solar Projects industrial power generation, 3 units proposed

BLM industrial Community Gravel Pits / variable ongoing

BLM industrial Fire Station PLO-7636 / 15 acres completed

NDOT industrial Highway 160 / 400 feet ongoing

Multiple Federal Agencies industrial Proposed Section 368 multi-modal Energy Corridor / 3,500 feet proposed

3.4.1.1 Existing Conditions The Project Area is designated as “Limited to designated roads and trails and for all motorized and mechanized vehicles.” The area includes 7.46 miles of primitive roads and trials. There are no designated roads or trails for motorized or mechanized vehicle travel, with the exception of a power transmission line/access road (BLM N-57100) and an electrical switch station (Nev-059100) with access via private property. Several undesignated trails terminate at the existing Spring Mountain Raceway facility; other undesignated trails occur near Highway 160, originating at the terminus of the Gamebird Road easement and extending northeast and northwest into the Project Area. Several of these trails show signs of disuse since being interrupted by the development and expansion of the raceway facility. The nearby Wheeler Pass Road is a well-traveled BLM backcountry road located west of the Project Site. The other surrounding land is vacant, with the exception of the existing racetrack to the south and west. There are also north-south and east-west trending fence-line roads that bound the BLM community Gravel Pits. A Google Earth image showing the existing highways, roads and trails and on and in the vicinity of the Project Area is located in Appendix A.

3.4.1.2 Surveys Field reconnaissance conducted in December of 2017 and Google Earth images were used to identify roads and trails in the Project Area.

3.4.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative Implementation of the no action alternative would result in no changes to the status quo. Baseline road and trail conditions would remain the same. Off-highway travel on undesignated roads and trails in the Project Area would continue.

3.4.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative Implementation of the Proposed Action would result in the elimination of approximately 7.46 miles of undesignated roads and trails on the sale lands. The sale land would be sold subject to the existing 0.82 miles of valid rights-of-way.

3.4.3.1 Analysis of Direct and Indirect Effects Implementation of the Proposed Action is expected to result in the direct loss of 7.46 miles of undesignated road and trials. An indirect effect will be a minor reduction in off-road vehicle use in the area.

3.4.3.2 Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative and Mitigation Measures The loss of undesignated roads and trails has an insignificant but beneficial cumulative environmental effect of reducing unauthorized off-highway access.

3.4.3.3 Residual Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative The residual impacts of implementing the Proposed Action is the loss of undesignated roads and trails.

3.5 Water Resources Water resources in the Pahrump Artesian Basin are subject to Nevada Water law and regulated by the State Engineer. County ordinances and Tariffs of local water utilities impose limitations on the use of water. 3.5.1. Affected Environment and Geographic Scope The affected environment includes the 620-acre Project Area and the water resources of the Pahrump Artesian Basin 162. Pahrump Valley is a basin located in southern Nevada that straddles the Nevada and California state line. The valley is approximately 45 miles west of Las Vegas, and is within the Central Hydrographic Region. The Town of Pahrump is the principal community. The Nevada portion of the basin (approximately 789 square miles) lies within Clark and Nye Counties, and the California portion of the basin (approximately 145 square miles) lies within Inyo County. The Basin Perennial Yield is 20,000 acre-feet per year. 3.5.1.1 Existing Conditions The Pahrump Artesian Basin has been under Special Management by the Nevada State Engineer since 1973. Recent Orders include a prohibition on issuance new water rights, and requirements for all future new domestic wells to purchase and dedicate 2 acre-feet of valid existing rights unless a domestic well credit from prior subdivision and dedication of water rights has been established. For calendar year 2017, the committed groundwater resource totaled 73,686 acre-feet, with estimated pumpage of approximately 16,416 acre-feet. This number, which is below the perennial yield, includes an estimated 5,582 acre-feet pumped from exempt domestic wells. 3.5.1.2 Data and Methodology The files of the Nevada Division of Water Resources and the State Engineer, and the Nye County Water District Water Resources Plan 2017 Update were reviewed to determine the current water use and allocation in the Pahrump Artesian Basin.

3.5.2 Environmental Effects of the No Action Alternative Implementation of the no action alternative would result in no changes to the status quo. Baseline water use and resources in the Project Area would be unchanged. 3.5.3 Environmental Effects of the Proposed Action Alternative Implementation of the Proposed Action could result in future development which would result in the use of an estimated 15 acre-feet of water per year from an existing Great Basin Water Company well and distribution system. Valid existing water rights in an amount to be determined by the Nevada State Engineer will be purchased by the proponent, deeded to the water utility, and dedicated to the basin. No new utility water infrastructure would be required. 3.5.3.1 Analysis of Direct and Indirect Effects Implementation of the Proposed Action could result in future development which is expected to result in the direct use of up to 50 acre-feet of water per year, and a reduction of up to 100 acre-feet per year of allocated water rights. 3.5.3.2 Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative and Mitigation Measures The maximum incremental increase in water use that could occur would be an additional 50 acre-feet per year, or an increase of less than 0.5 percent. Current basin pumpage and the additional proposed pumpage would still remain below the basin perennial yield. Groundwater model studies conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey have found that the effects of pumpage in the Pahrump Basin are not felt beyond the basin boundaries, and therefore will not have any effect on the water levels at Devils Hole. The Nevada Revised Statue and County Ordinance require mitigation to reduce the quantity of water allocated in the Pahrump Basin when meeting new water demand. To reduce the basin over allocation, all new water demand must be met through the acquisition and dedication of valid existing water rights. Water rights dedication to offset beneficial use will be required at a ratio of 3:1. 3.5.3.3 Residual Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative The residual impacts of implementing the Proposed Action include the beneficial use of a maximum of up to 50 acre-feet per year from valid existing water rights dedicated to use on the sale parcels. The use of the additional water would be offset by dedication of up to 100 acre-feet of additional valid existing water rights that would no longer be available for beneficial use in the basin. The residual impact is a decrease of 100 acre-feet per year in allocated basin water rights, and a maximum increase of 50 acre-feet per year in water use.

Chapter 4 References BLM Manual H-8410-1 Visual Resource Inventory, January 17, 1986. Rel. 8-28. Bureau of Land Management, 1998. Las Vegas Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental

Impact Statement Darling, Mary, Report of Desert Tortoise Presence/Absence Survey Conducted May 7 - 11, 2018;

Darling Geomatics. DATA USA, 2018. Pahrump, Nevada: Website accessed February 28, 2018. https://datausa.io Giampaoli, M. J. Walker, E. Ezra, and D Brickey, 2017. Nye County Water District Water Resources

Plan 2017 Update, Nye County, Nevada. GoogleEarth April 3, 2018 - Roads and Public Land Survey System Layers, Pahrump, Nevada Proposed

Public Sale Lands. Next GreenCar Emissions Calculator Website Accessed August 27, 2018.

https://www.nextgreencar.com/ Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Website accessed August 30, 2018.

https://ndep.nv.gov/uploads/air-aqm-docs/caap.pdf https://www.nyecounty.net/324/Air-Quality https://ndep.nv.gov/uploads/air-aqm-docs/2015-pahrump-success-report.pdf http://nvair.ndep.nv.gov/ https://ndep.nv.gov/air/air-quality-monitoring/pahrump-monitoring

Nevada Division of Water Resources website accessed May 25, 2018. http://water.nv.gov/waterrights.aspx http://water.nv.gov/mapping.aspx?mapping=Water%20Use%20And%20Availability

Nye County Water District Governing Board, 2017. Water Resources Plan Update: Preparers: MaryEllen C. Giampaoli, Environmental Compliance Specialist, Terra Spectra Geomatics, Inc., and Jamieson Geological, Inc. http://www.nyecountywaterdistrict.net/attachments/ File/ documents/Nye_WRP_Update_2017.pdf

US Census Bureau, Department of Commerce, 2018. QuickFacts Pahrump CDP, Nevada. Website accessed February 28, 2018. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/pahrumpcdp nevada/PST045216

US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017. Local Area Unemployment Map - Nye County, Nevada Website accessed March 13, 2018 https://data.bls.gov/map/MapToolServlet

USFWS Website for Species List Date accessed June 14, 2018. Wichman, 2017. Basin 162 Pahrump Valley Groundwater Management Plan. Nye County Water

District. http://www.nyecountywaterdistrict.net/page8.php

https://datausa.io/

https://ndep.nv.gov/uploads/air-aqm-docs/caap.pdf

https://www.nyecounty.net/324/Air-Quality

https://ndep.nv.gov/uploads/air-aqm-docs/2015-pahrump-success-report.pdf

https://ndep.nv.gov/air/air-quality-monitoring/pahrump-monitoring

http://water.nv.gov/waterrights.aspx

http://water.nv.gov/mapping.aspx?mapping=Water%20Use%20And%20Availability

http://www.nyecountywaterdistrict.net/attachments/%20File/%20documents/Nye_WRP_Update_2017.pdf

http://www.nyecountywaterdistrict.net/attachments/%20File/%20documents/Nye_WRP_Update_2017.pdf

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/pahrumpcdp%20nevada/PST045216

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/pahrumpcdp%20nevada/PST045216

https://data.bls.gov/map/MapToolServlet

http://www.nyecountywaterdistrict.net/page8.php

Appendix A Appendix A-1 - Layout of planned 6.5 mile racetrack expansion Appendix A-2 - Travel Management - State Highway, authorized roads, and existing trails in the vicinity of the Project Area. Appendix A-3 - Nye County Assessor's Parcel Map showing private land and easements surrounding the requested public land.

Appendix A-1 - Layout of planned 6.5 mile racetrack expansion

Appendix A-2 – Travel Management vicinity of the Project Area.

Appendix A-3 - Nye County Assessor's Parcel Map requested public land.

Appendix B Appendix B – Scoping Comment Response Table

Spring Mountain Raceway Scoping Comment Response

Page 1 of 6 Rev 2

Commenter Comment ResponseWater Resources Scoping Comments

WildEarth Guardians C. Krupp

The EIS must analyze the impacts the proposed action would have on the Pahrump Valley basin’s groundwater. The potential effect on the Pahrump Valley basin's groundwater will be addressed in the EA.

Pahrump Resident G. Michalsky

I believe the track is big enough as it stands allowing it to expand will only add more noise to our neighborhood and use more water.

Noise impacts from post-disposal land uses are outside the scope of the EA.

The potential effect on the Pahrump Valley basin's groundwater will be addressed in the EA. Pahrump Resident J. Markley

It's questionable there is a valid 50 acre feet of water for transfer to the above site, and then if they exceed that amount, then what? The potential effect on the Pahrump Valley basin's groundwater will be addressed in the EA.

Other Scoping CommentsNevada Dept of Wildlife B. Hardenbrook

Obtaining authorization for moving desert tortoises out of harm’s way under NDOW’s jurisdiction is in compliance with NRS 503.597 and NAC 503.0935. Such authorization would not take the place of permits or authorizations required by other levels of government for conducting such activities. Please contact NDOW’s Joe Barnes by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 702-486-5127 x3700 for additional information regarding authorization requirements.

The EA will include language regarding the NDOW tortoise relocation authorization requirement and planned compliance.

Gila monster protocols should be incorporated into the site plan of development and/or forwarded to the principal contractor for awareness during construction. A copy is enclosed. They are also available online at http://www.ndow.org/Nevada_Wildlife/Conservation/.

The EA will include language in the EA that notes the Gila Monster protocols would be incorporated during site pre-construction clearance.

Ground disturbing activities should avoid the migratory bird breeding and nesting season which roughly occurs for most species between March 1 and July 31. If this seasonal avoidance is not practicable, then the Department recommends a qualified biologist survey the project site prior to any ground disturbing activities to determine if nesting by migrants is underway. In the event an active nest (containing eggs or young) is discovered or frequently attended by adult birds, a buffer area around the nest appropriate for the involved species must be identified and avoided until young birds fledge. This measure would be consistent with preventive measures advocated by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service concerning migratory species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

The EA will state that the site will be surveyed by a qualified biologist prior to site disturbance, and avoidance measures will be implemented if nesting activity is observed.

Standard, raptor-friendly designs as outlined in Suggested Practice for Raptor Protection on Power Lines (Avian Power Line Interaction Committee [APLIC] 2006, 1996; APLIC and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2005) should be incorporated into the design of new electrical distribution lines.

The project does not include construction of any new power lines.

The proposed action warrants preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS), rather than an environmental assessment (EA).A federal agency must prepare an EIS when a proposed action is likely to significantly impact the human environment. According to media reports, the designated bidder for the proposed land sale intends to construct and operate an automobile racing facility involving more than 15 miles of track. Although the proposed action (a public lands sale) is simply a real estate transaction and has no direct impacts, the construction and operation of a motorsports racing facility are indirect effects that are likely to result from the proposed action and must be analyzed.

The EA will state that internal scoping found that the expected impacts will not be significant and can be mitigated. If the BLM determines through the EA that there are significant impacts that cannot be mitigated, BLM will require the preparation of an EIS.

These indirect effects are likely to create significant noise and air quality impacts for Pahrump residents. The proposed action therefore warrants the preparation of an EIS.

The EA will explain that post-disposal land uses are outside of BLM purview. Disposal lands are currently designated for industrial use.

The EA will evaluate Air Quality PM10 impacts.



Page 2 of 6 Rev 2

Commenter Comment Response

The affected area for this proposal likely includes critical habitat for the Mojave Desert tortoise, a species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

The EA will discuss the quality of desert habitat present based on the biological survey results, explains impacts to desert tortoise will be addressed in Section 10 consultation with USFWS through an Incidental Take Permit (ITP), and generically describes the range of mitigation measures that USFWS can require.

The EIS must be clear that attempts to translocate desert tortoises from lands slated for development are not wholly successful. A significant percentage of tortoises are not recovered during these attempts and are subsequently crushed and killed when the land is graded. Another significant percentage die after being released at the translocation site. In short, the proposal will result in desert tortoise mortality and the EIS must analyze the extent of the mortality and its impacts on the species as a whole. To help the public understand the impacts to Mojave Desert tortoise, the EIS should estimate the species’ population density within the project area and the historical success rates for finding tortoises for translocation and for tortoises surviving at translocation sites.

See response to previous comment. The EA will state that USFWS will dictate the requirements and discussion for the ITP/EA.

The proposed action would also have indirect effects on desert kit foxes and burrowing owls, as all habitat for these two species within the affected area would be obliterated during racetrack construction.

The EA will describe the habitat observed in the project area during survey.

The EIS must consider cumulative impacts from this proposal in conjunction with theproposed Yellow Pine Solar Project.

There is currently no analysis available for the subject project to include in this EA. More appropriately, the Yellow Pine Solar Project must consider cumulative impacts from the Spring Mountain Raceway project, which will be noted in the EA.

Pahrump ResidentJ. Brown

Where can I find a map of the two parcels being considered for sale to Spring Mountain Raceway? I live close by there. Maps of the project area are available in the EA.

Pahrump ResidentL. McKenna

I would suggest that care be taken during the actual construction phase to relocate any desert tortoise in the area, and mitigate any potential harm. Desert Tortoise presence/absence and biological surveys have been completed and will be briefly described in the EA. EA will note that

relocation of the tortoises will occur as required by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and in accordance with their requirements.

Jimmy Lewis Off Road Riding SchoolJ. Lewis

Though I believe the sale of the land to the Spring Mountain Raceway is for the public good, I also know that these lands have some OHV routes and trails that cross them and allow access to the North areas and onto the BLM lands and further to the Spring Mountain NRA as well as Wheeler Pass Rd. If these lands are sold it is the responsibility of the BLM to mitigate the loss of these trails with alternates that continue to allow OHV access to the areas North (specifically the single track motorcycle trail that now crosses the NE corner of the property in question.)

The EA will address the potential impacts to recreation and off road vehicle travel.

Out of Scope Comments

I understand that the BLM is soliciting public comments on the proposed expansion of Spring Mountain racetrack through a possible acquisition of BLM land. As a Pahrump resident, I would like to express my total support for this project including the acquisition of “public” land. I feel that this expansion will be great for the local economy in many aspects including: job creation, increased commerce and spending from race fans, drivers, and tourists (food, lodging, touring, etc.). It has the potential to increase property values and fuel expansion in other areas of the local economy.

Out of scope (support).

Pahrump ResidentL. McKenna


Page 3 of 6 Rev 2


I am not at all concerned about increased noise because in reality they won’t be racing 24x7, and the track is situated far enough from any major housing developments to even begin to be a nuisance, let alone even heard. Nevada reportedly has more “public” land than any other state - surely, no one will miss the 600 acres — there’s still plenty of public land in Nevada set aside for the benefit and enjoyment of all.


Pahrump ResidentT. Mazzola

Just wanted to let you know that I APPROVE of the above stated expansion without reservation. I am an eight year resident of Pahrump in the Mountain Falls community which is in close proximity to the track. Yes, there is noise from the track, but my opinion is if one is bothered by the noise why would one consider purchasing a home within earshot of the track. The people that run Spring Mountain are one of just a few positive visionaries in this town. It is their plan to bring businesses to this town that will employ local residents and attract visitors, other than those that use it as a gateway to Death Valley. Some narrow minded people that have lived here or been in charge here FOREVER make every attempt to stop positive growth. It is my belief that this town will grow in spite of their efforts, they just have not realized it yet. So bring it on lets get the sale going, approved and bring on the businesses. WE SURELY NEED THEM !!!!


Please accept this comment in connection with the sale of BLM land to Spring Mountain Raceway, LLC.

I am a resident of Pahrump and live on Zuni Avenue. My home borders on BLM land to the north and west of Spring Mountain Raceway. As a result, I would be directly impacted by the sale of the land and expansion of the race track.

I unequivocally and wholeheartedly SUPPORT the sale of the land to Spring Mountain, LLC. The sale and subsequent development will benefit the City of Pahrump and NYE County. It will add to the world renown reputation the track has and the development of the 160 corridor will bring visitors and tax dollars to the area.


I can speak personally about any potential argument about noise. I live on the border of the land and can barely hear the cars when they are racing from my backyard. I cannot hear the cars from inside my home. The track will create no more pollution than the quarries located on the BLM land and this too is minimal. I am perfectly willing to continue living here and gladly enjoy the growth the track brings to the community.

If you would like my address/contact information, please reply to this email. I ask that you not publish my contact information.

Thank you for your consideration.


Pahrump ResidentJ. Tupper

Let me start off by saying that I'm a resident of Pahrump NV, and my house is about 2 miles from the race track as the crow flies. I fully support this deal being made with Spring Mountain Raceway. The raceway is a huge benefit to the community. Further, the raceway is far enough away from residences that it doesn't interfere with day to day living. An expansion of the raceway facility is a win for the community, a win for the users of the raceway, and a win for tourists, giving them a quality place to visit in the greater Las Vegas area. This land is basically unused, and has no high priority for environmental protections. Also, it appears the critical rights are going to be retained by the Federal Government, which is ultimately the US citizens. So I see no reason this sale shouldn't go through.


Pahrump ResidentA. Weiss


Page 4 of 6 Rev 2

Commenter Comment ResponsePahrump ResidentC. Baumgarten

Hi, I support BLM selling the land to Spring Mountain.Since the track is paved, air quality will not be a concern. They have brought badly needed jobs to Pahrump and the expansion should bring even more. The people who race there leave money here in Pahrump! Money Pahrump desperately needs.Thanks!


Pahrump Resident G. Loftsgard

I want to voice my opinion of the proposed sale BLM sale to Spring Mountain Raceway, LLC.

I (and my family) am ALL IN. It would be an awesome display of engineering, creativity and style right here in Pahrump.

I would love to see any such upgrades to this area. This will only help raise the standard of living for this area besides providing a great venue for locals and others to visit (and spend money).


Pahrump ResidentC. Kostelaz

This email is in response to the request for public comment concerning SMMP.

I am in favor of the proposed expansion of the facility. SMMP has been and continues to be an asset to the Pahrump area.



The EIS must consider the impacts of the proposed action to Carpenter Canyon on the western side of the nearby Spring Mountains.Carpenter Canyon, on the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, is a popular recreation area for residents of greater Las Vegas. The proposed action may negatively impact the experience of Carpenter Canyon recreationists, as the proposed racetrack and its operation may result in significant visual and auditory effects. The highly-tuned engines of race cars are typically quite loud, producing sound that carries great distances across landscapes. The racetrack, buildings and even moving cars may be seen from points within Carpenter Canyon and may detract from the experiences of visitors seeking quiet and solitude.

Visual impacts from the post-disposal land uses on recreation are outside the scope of the EA.


I live on the South side of Pahrump. We can already hear the engines revving loudly on these race cars early in the morning. It disturbs our peace as well as that of all of the domestic animals around us. I imagine the wild animals aren't too thrilled, either. The people on the North side don't care; apparently they can't hear the noise so not their problem. I am afraid that any expansion to this racetrack will cause even more noise pollution in my area.


Also, I understand that you are doing an environmental impact study, but are you aware that we already have a fairly severe problem with coyotes and other wild animals that are coming into the populated areas of the Pahrump Valley, because their habitat is being destroyed? Selling this private organization 621 acres more of land is going to make the situation worse. The coyotes are already coming into people's yards and killing their pets and their small livestock.

Out of scope (oppose).

Even though many argue that this sale will be good for Pahrump because of the potential of increased employment, I don't think the number of jobs that it will create will be worth the destruction of the land and the peace and quiet. If it were put to a vote today, my husband and I would vote NO. The BLM lands are the lands that belong to ALL of the people, and we would like them to stay that way.

Out of scope (oppose). [Note: Socioeconomic impacts of the proposed action will be addressed in the EA.]

Pahrump ResidentC. O. Harrell


Page 5 of 6 Rev 2


We live aprox 3 miles from the track, On race days the noise (especially from motorcycles) makes using our patio difficult . We have had friends over for BBQ and they all say how do you put up with the noise?


About 2 years ago the track put in a large man made lake! at a time when we the residence of Pahrump are being ask to cut back on water use. This lake really only serves the race track membership, for the folks that live in Pahrump must pay a entrance fee $15 ea. Cant we find a use for this land that serves the whole public.


Pahrump ResidentT. LeFevre

I live here in Mountain Falls near the race track here in Pahrump. My concern is that if expansion heads east towards Las Vegas and the track is also ran out towards the east, looking at the map this will increase the sound decibels in my neighborhood. It’s pretty loud already where it is and if it’s closer, it could be extremely loud. Not really sure if you guys have considered that.


I am opposed to the sale of BLM land to Spring Mountain Raceway for track expansion.

I'd like to know why they are the only candidate to buy the land.

Out of scope (oppose).[Note: The Notice of Intent is to inform the public of a requested lands sale. The EA will explain that the proponent requested the lands for the expansion of the abutting raceway facility, which is consistent with BLM regulations concerning use of the surrounding lands, however, other interested parties may bid on the land as described in the Notice of Realty Action.]

I do not want a larger race track out here. I find the whole prospect undesirable because of noise, smell, traffic, etc. Noise impacts from post-disposal land uses are outside the scope of the EA.

I think the expansion of the racetrack should NOT be allowed! I think owner of Spring Mountain has created a complete façade about what will occur.

First of all - nobody at Silverton has ever confirmed they will build anything in Pahrump -I don't think it's going to happen - just a lie made up to further the expansion cause. When I first heard about it - I actually contacted Silverton to try and confirm it and got nowhere. I think the gentleman who owns Spring Mountain "knows somebody" in management (a NON-decision maker!) at the Silverton and they have "discussed the possibility" and that is as far as that goes.

REVISED August 12th - First Msg sent August 4th was returned due to a typo in the email address

Since I first wrote this the newspaper DID print something about a parcel being sold to the company that "owns" Silverton - or something like that. Still nobody at the actual Las Vegas Silverton property will confirm anything. I personally would love to see more employment opportunities on my end of town - but I still don't believe any of this will actually happen the way it was first presented. I'm sure whatever transpires will have little fanfare and only benefit the rich patrons of Spring Mountain. Before the expansion transpired, local rumor had it that the owner of Spring Mountain wanted to have a restaurant or something of that nature on the property - but if he could not be in total charge of it - it would never happen. I would love to know how many staff are employed there and what qualifications they had to get those positions.

Pahrump ResidentS. Parmenter

Out of scope (oppose).[Note: Silverton Hotel and Casino is not affiliated with the sale of the proposed parcels or the subsequent expansion of the raceway track. The proposed building of a mixed use district that includes restaurants, casinos, and other commercial establishments noted in the comment are a different project being undertaken on the adjacent private property by a private developer.]

Pahrump Resident G. Michalsky

Pahrump ResidentS. Chapman


Page 6 of 6 Rev 2

Commenter Comment ResponseSecondly - I have lived here in Pahrump for 3 years - in that time I have NEVER seen a SINGLE job at the racetrack -I have actually tried hard to find them! It's on my end of town - I would LOVE to have a part time job there -but I can't seem to even find out how they hire people. When I've asked long-time residents - they have just laughed. But it's a big facility - I personally have managed a smaller but somewhat similar facility and it takes staff to run a place like that.


Furthermore, when they built their lake it was only approved with the understanding that the public would be allowed to use it. Long-time residents have told me when they filled the lake - it really depleted the water table levels - and yet it seems the only time the public is actually ever let in is when they do an event like the water ski competition - once or twice per year. What a huge waste of a precious natural resource when it seems the weather patterns are changing and Pahrump is no longer subject to monsoon rains!


The facility contributes absolutely no benefits to the town here that I am aware of - it's all very exclusive and private! Yes - it would be NICE to have a movie theatre and a real casino, a restaurant or two and more options for employment - but I'm pretty certain none of that will actually happen. They will probably just build an exclusive and expensive hotel that will be so high priced only Spring Mountain guests will be able to afford it and that is probably ALL that will EVER occur - and then the owner will come out and say everything else "fell thru."


This project CANNOT AND SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD until the Silverton comes out with a press release with the PLANS to actually build something. So far to my knowledge that hasn't happened and the Silverton has even denied that they have plans.

The owner of Spring Mountain is a greedy person self-centered person who will do anything to further his project. And by the way - that isn't MY opinion - that's what people in town say about him. All I know are the facts - Silverton won't confirm and hasn't announced anything, there is hardly ANY public access to the lake at the facility and in three years Spring Mountain has never posted any jobs anywhere that I can find.

NO NO NO! If this project goes forward and then all the plans to build all the additional amenities at the facility somehow "fall thru" I will send a copy of this letter to every paper I can think of! I'm just saying - we need MORE commitment from the other parties that will supposedly be involved before ANYTHING should be approved!!! Wait for some press releases from the actual companies that will build locations there - then proceed. Otherwise I'm pretty sure once the track is done - the rest will be forgotten.


The disposal of 50 acre feet of human sewage is questionable as to the disposal based on the purchaser past record. They assume RIBs is a good way to dispose of this amount of water with just a treatment of chlorine. Due to the amount of drugs and other type of pills which bacteria cannot breakdown.

Out of scope (oppose).[Note: No additional sewage capacity will be required for the expansion; existing facilities are adequate.]

Future use of the land based on the proposal of 3200 homes, racetrack, people and environmental impact.

Out of scope (oppose).[Note: The proposal does not include residential development.]

Pahrump Resident J. Markley

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land ... -...

Documents

Transcript of U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land ... -...