[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 116 (Friday, June 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-14716]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: June 17, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of the Secretary
Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Plan
AGENCY: Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, and the Office of
the Secretary, Department of the Interior. National Marine Fisheries
Service, Department of Commerce is a cooperating agency.
ACTION: Notice of availability of the draft environmental impact
statement for the Exxon Valdez restoration plan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On behalf of the Exxon Valdez Trustee Council, the Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service announces the availability of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
Restoration Plan. This notice announces the locations and dates of
public meetings to solicit comments on the DEIS. The responsible
official for the preparation of the DEIS is the Regional Forester, Phil
Janik. The Restoration Plan will establish management direction and
guide all natural resource restoration activities covered by the civil
settlement to the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
DATES: Comments concerning the DEIS should be received within 45 days
of the publication of the Notice of Availability by the Environmental
Protection Agency in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to or for copies of a Summary of the
DEIS or for copies of the DEIS itself, contact the Oil Spill Public
Information Office, 645 G. Street, Anchorage, Alaska, 99501. Phone
number 907 278-8008 or within Alaska 800 478-7745, outside Alaska 800
283-7745. Copies also will be sent to public libraries in Anchorage,
Juneau, Fairbanks, Valdez, Cordova, Kodiak, Homer, and Seward, Alaska
for review.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Introduction
On October 8, 1991, a federal court approved settlement between the
State and Federal governments and Exxon under which Exxon will pay $1
billion in criminal restitution and civil damages to the governments.
The State and Federal Trustees will receive $900 million in civil
damages from Exxon over the 10 years. The funds are to be used to
restore to their pre-spill condition the natural resources and the
services they provide, that were injured by the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
This includes the restoration of any natural resource injured, lost or
destroyed and the services provided by that resource or which replaces
or substitutes for the injured, lost or destroyed resource and affected
services. Restoration includes all phases of injury assessment,
restoration, replacement, and enhancement of natural resources, and
acquisition of equivalent resources and services.
All decisions about restoration and uses of restoration funds are
determined by six natural resources Trustees, three Federal and three
State. The three Federal Trustees are: The Administrator for the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, and the Secretaries of the Department of Agriculture and of
the Interior. The three State Trustees are: The Commissioners of Fish
and Game and Environmental Conservation, and the Attorney General. A
Trustee Council, located in Alaska, which is made up of the three State
Trustees and designees of the three Federal Trustees, is responsible
for decisions relating to the assessment of injuries, uses of the
restoration funds, and all restoration activities including the
preparation of a Restoration Plan.
On April 10, 1992 (57 FR 12473-12475) on behalf of the Exxon Valdez
Trustee Council, the Forest Service published a Notice of Intent to
prepare an EIS on the Restoration Plan. This was later revised on
January 14, 1994 (59 FR 2352-2353). Since then the Trustee Council
developed a draft Restoration Plan which has become the proposed action
for the analysis conducted in the DEIS.
B. Draft Restoration Plan
The proposed action (Draft Restoration Plan) consists of nine
policy statements, a discussion of categories of restoration actions
and broad objectives for injured resources. The policies for
identifying and conducting restoration actions are:
1. The restoration program will take an ecosystem approach.
2. Restoration activities may be considered for any injured
resource or service.
3. Most restoration activities will occur within the spill area.
However, restoration activities outside the spill are, but within
Alaska, may be considered when the most effective restoration actions
for an injured migratory population are in a part of its range outside
the spill area or when the information acquired from research and
monitoring activities outside the spill area will be important for
restoration or understanding injuries within the spill area.
4. Restoration activities will emphasize resources and services
that have not recovered. Resources and services will be enhanced, as
appropriate, to promote restoration. Restoration projects should not
adversely affect the ecosystem.
5. Projects designed to restore or enhance an injured service must
have a sufficient relationship to an injured resource; must benefit the
same user group that was injured; and, should be compatible with the
character and public uses of the area.
6. Competitive proposals for restoration projects will be
encouraged.
7. Restoration projects will be subject to independent scientific
review before Trustee Council approval.
8. Meaningful public participation in restoration decisions will be
actively solicited.
9. Government agencies will be funded only for restoration work
that they do not normally conduct.
Four types of restoration actions are identified and discussed in
the Draft Restoration Plan: General restoration, habitat protection and
acquisition, monitoring and research, and public information and
administration. Alternatives to the proposed action place different
emphases on each of these categories of restoration actions.
General Restoration consists of activities that fall within
manipulation of the environment, management of human use for reduction
of marine pollution. Decisions about conducting general restoration
projects would look at the following factors: Extent of natural
recovery, the value of an injured resource to the ecosystem and to the
public, the duration of benefits, the technical feasibility of the
project, the likelihood of success, the relationship of costs to
expected benefits, potential for harmful side effects, benefits to more
than one resource, effects on health and human safety, consistency with
applicable laws, and policies, and duplication with other actions.
Habitat Protection and Acquisition is a category that includes
purchase of private land or interests in land such as conservation
easements, mineral rights, or timber rights. It also includes
recommendations for changing public agency management practices.
Specific policies that relate to habitat protection and acquisition are
proposed. These policies deal with ranking potential lands to determine
potential benefits, the need for a willing seller, purchasing at fair
market value, post acquisition management of the acquired lands and
involving the public in the prioritization process.
Monitoring and Research consists of recovery monitoring,
restoration monitoring and ecological monitoring and research. Specific
policies governing the selecting and performance of monitoring
activities are discussed in the Draft Restoration Plan.
Public Information and Administration is the last category of
restoration actions. It consists of all necessary administrative
actions that are not attributable to a particular project. The Draft
Restoration Plan goal for this category is for administrative costs to
average no more than 5% of overall restoration expenditures for the
remainder of the settlement period.
General restoration objectives have been developed for resources
that are recovering, resources not recovering, resources where the
recovery is unknown, resources such as archaeological resources and
wilderness, and services. These broad objectives will guide in the
development of annual work plans.
Further information regarding the proposed action and possible
restoration alternatives is included in the Draft Exxon Valdez Oil
Spill Restoration Plan, Summary of Alternatives for Public Comment,
April 1993; the Supplement to Draft Exxon Valdez Oil spill Restoration
Plan, Summary of Alternatives for Public Comment, June 1993; the
Summary of Public Comment on Alternatives of the Draft Exxon Valdez Oil
Spill Restoration Plan, September 1993; and the Draft Exxon Valdez Oil
Spill Restoration Plan, November 1993. Copies of these documents may be
requested from the Oil Spill Public Information Office, 645 G. Street,
Anchorage, Alaska, 99501. Phone number 907 278-8008 or within Alaska
800 478-7745, outside Alaska 800 283-7745.
C. Public Meetings
During the comment period for the DEIS public meetings will be held
on the following dates at the locations shown:
June 27, 1994--EVOS Trustee Council Restoration Office, 645 G. Street,
suite 100, Anchorage, AK
June 29, 1994--Kenai Fjords National Park Visitor's Center, 1212 4th
Avenue, Small Boat Harbor, Seward, AK
July 1, 1994--City Council Chambers, 491 E Pioneer Avenue, Homer, AK
July 5, 1994--Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game Conference Room, 211
Mission Road, Kodiak, AK
July 7, 1994--U.S. Forest Service Third Floor Conference Room, 612
Second Street, Cordova, AK
July 19, 1994--City Council Chambers, 212 Chenega Avenue, Valdez, AK
D. Comments
The comment period on the DEIS will be 45 days from the date the
Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in the
Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in this
proposed action participate at this time. To be most helpful, comments
on the DEIS statement should be as specific as possible, and may
address the adequacy of the statement or the merits of the alternatives
discussed. (See the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3).
In addition, Federal court decisions have established that
reviewers of DEIS statements must structure their participation in the
environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and
alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and concerns. Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC. 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978).
Environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage
may be waived if not raised until after completion of the final EIS.
Wisconsin Heritage, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis.
1980). The reason for this is to ensure that substantive comments and
objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it
can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final.
Dated: June 9, 1994.
Phil Janik,
Regional Forester, Alaska Region Forest Service, Department of
Agriculture.
Dated: June 13, 1994.
Robert P. Davison,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Department
of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 94-14716 Filed 6-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M