[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 134 (Thursday, July 14, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-17093]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: July 14, 1994]


  
                                                   VOL. 59, NO. 134

                                            Thursday, July 14, 1994

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

 

Bosworth Forest Health Multi-resource Project Pacific Ranger 
District, Eldorado National Forest

lead agency: Forest Service, USDA.

action: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

summary: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) for resource management activities, including biomass 
removal, timber harvest, fuelbreak construction, and wildlife habitat 
improvement work on the Bosworth Forest Health Multi-resource Project, 
involving a total planning area size of about 3,500 acres on the 
Pacific Ranger District of the Eldorado National Forest. The agency 
invites written comments and suggestions on the scope of the analysis. 
The agency also gives notice of the full environmental analysis and 
decision-making process that will occur on the proposal so that 
interested and affected people are aware of how they may participate 
and contribute to the final decision.

dates: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by August 1, 1994.

addresses: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope 
of the analysis to Don Errington, District Timber Officer Pacific 
Ranger Station, Pollock Pines, California, 95726.

for further information contact: Questions about the proposed action 
and EIS should be directed to Don Errington, District Timber Officer, 
Pacific Ranger Station, Pollock Pines, California, 95726, phone 916-
644-2349.

supplementary information: The Eldorado National Forest Land and 
Resource Management Plan was completed in January 1989. The Bosworth 
Forest Health Multi-resource Project EIS will tier to the Eldorado 
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Most of the land in 
the analysis area is identified in the Plan as having a general 
management direction of timber management.
    There are no known permits or licenses required to implement the 
proposed action.
    In preparing the EIS, the Forest Service will identify and consider 
a range of alternatives for this project. The following tentative 
alternative themes have been identified thus far:

1. No action
2. Forest Health--Timber product, including biomass, management 
emphasis
3. Forest Health--Wildlife management emphasis
4. Forest Health--Fuels management emphasis
5. Forest Health--Multiple use management emphasis

    These alternatives will include varying levels and distribution of 
vegetation manipulation, timber harvest, and fuels management. Minor 
new specified road construction is anticipated. Road reconstruction 
needs will include drainage work, clearing, and minor realignment. The 
amount of road reconstruction necessary for this project will vary 
between alternatives. Harvest prescriptions will include understory 
removal of both merchantable and sub-merchantable trees, commercial 
thinning, and fuelbreak construction guidelines. All harvest 
prescriptions will conform with the California Spotted Owl Sierran 
Province Guidelines. Adaptive Management strategies for the California 
Spotted Owl may be included under certain alternatives where benefits 
to the spotted owl will be realized, that is, wildlife habitat 
activities or fuels management activities that are designed to better 
maintain future management options for the spotted owl by improving or 
retaining stand components most at risk.
    Volume estimates of timber to be harvested range from 0 to 10 mmbf 
of commercial sawtimber. Biomass estimates range from 0 to 30,000 tons. 
These estimates vary, depending on the alternative.
    Preliminary issues that have been identified during the internal 
scoping process include:

1. The potential for cumulative watershed effects within the project 
area
2. The selection and application of adaptive management strategies to 
best achieve the habitat needs of the spotted owl

    Public participation will be especially important at several points 
during the analysis. The first point is during the scoping process (40 
CFR 1501.7).
    The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and 
assistance from federal, state, and local agencies and other 
individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected by 
the proposed project. This input will be used in preparation of the 
draft EIS. The scoping process includes:

1. Defining the scope of the analysis and nature of the decision to be 
made.
2. Identifying the issues and determining the significant issues for 
consideration and analysis within the EIS.
3. Defining the proper interdisciplinary team make-up.
4. Determining the effective use of time and money in conducting the 
analysis.
5. Identifying potential environmental, technical, and social impacts 
of the proposed action and alternatives.
6. Determining potential cooperating agencies.
7. Identifying groups or individuals interested or affected by the 
decision.

    John Phipps, Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National Forest, is the 
responsible official.
    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by 
January, 1995. At that time, EPA will publish a notice of availability 
of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the 
draft EIS will be 45 days from the date EPA's notice of availability 
appears in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
draft environmental impact statements must structure their 
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is 
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewers's position and 
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the 
draft EIS stage, but that are not raised until after completion of the 
final EIS may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. 
Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, 
Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980).
    Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those 
interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 45-
day comment period so 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 EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft EIS should 
be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to 
specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also 
address the adequacy of the draft EIS or the merits of the alternatives 
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer 
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing 
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
    After the comment period ends on the draft EIS, the comments will 
be analyzed and considered by the Forest Service in preparing the final 
EIS. The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by April 1995. In the 
final EIS the Forest Service is required to respond to the comments and 
responses received (40 CFR 1503.4). The responsible official will 
consider the comments, responses, and environmental consequences 
discussed in the draft EIS, and applicable laws, regulations, and 
policies in making a decision regarding this project. The responsible 
official will document the decision and reasons for the decision in the 
Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to appeal under 36 
CFR 215.

    Dated: July 7, 1994.
John Phipps,
Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National Forest.
[FR Doc. 94-17093 Filed 7-13-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M