[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 144 (Thursday, July 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-18319]


[Federal Register: July 28, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service


Sensitive Plant Program; Eldorado National Forest, CA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Eldorado National Forest proposes to refine existing 
sensitive plant direction in order to provide greater specificity, 
promote program effectiveness, and improve the efficiency in which 
Eldorado National Forest programs and activities are reviewed through 
the biological evaluation process as required under FSM Sec. 2670.32.
    The Forest Service will prepare an environment impact statement 
(EIS) to consider the ramifications of implementing species-specific 
standards and guidelines for the sensitive plant species found on the 
Eldorado National Forest. The decision may include the following: an 
amendment to the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management 
Plan and/or the delisting of one or more species as sensitive. 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 ad 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 September 1, 1994. The public is invited to provide information 
concerning the scope of the analysis at a meeting to be held on August 
24, 1994, beginning at 1 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope 
of the analysis to John Phipps, Forest Supervisor, 100 Forni Road, 
Placerville, CA 95667. The meeting will be held at the Eldorado 
National Forest Supervisor's Office located at 100 Forni Road, 
Placerville, CA 95667.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Questions about the proposed action and EIS should be directed to Mike 
Foster, Forest Botanist, 100 Forni Road, Placerville, CA 95667.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USDA regulations (9500-4), Forest Service 
policy, and the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management 
Plan (1989) require that the Eldorado National Forest maintain the 
viability of sensitive plant species. Direction is provided (FSM 
2670.22) to ``develop and implement management practices to ensure that 
species do not become threatened or endangered because of Forest 
Service actions.'' Additional policy includes (FSM 2670.32):

    Establish management objectives in cooperation with the States 
when projects on National Forest System lands may have significant 
effect on sensitive species population numbers or distributions. 
Establish objectives for Federal Candidate species, in cooperation 
with FWS or NMFS and the States.

    When the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 
was approved, little was known about the habitat requirements of the 
ten sensitive plant species thought to occur on the Forest. General 
Direction in the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management 
Plan was limited to the following (p.4-91):

    Provide for protection and habitat needs of sensitive plants so 
that Forest activities will not jeopardize the continued existence 
of such species.

One Standard/Guideline applies:

    Participate in the implementation of approved species recovery 
plans and Species Management Guides as specified for the Eldorado.

    Since that time, a considerable amount of information has been 
gathered about the habitat requirements of the eight species documented 
to occur on the Forest. The Forest now has sufficient information on 
the range, distribution, and status of six of these species to enable 
the development of species-specific conservation strategies. The 
species to be considered are: Calochortus clavatus var. avius (Pleasant 
Valley mariposa lily), Draba asterophora var. macrocarpa (Cup Lake 
draba), Lewisia longipetala (long-petaled lewisia), Lewisia serrata 
(saw-toothed lewisia), Navarretia prolifera ssp. lutea (yellow-bur 
navarretia), Phacelia stebbinsii (Stebbins' phacelia), Silene invisa 
(short-petaled campion), and Arctostaphylos nissenana (Nissenan 
manzanita).
    There are no known permits or licenses required to implement the 
proposed action.
    Preliminary issues identified during internal scoping include:
    1. How will current and future habitat options for sensitive plant 
species be managed to address Forest Service requirements (CFR 219.19) 
to maintain viability?
    2. What will be the economic consequences of implementing 
mitigation measures for sensitive plant species?
    3. Should plants species that are managed under the provisions of 
conservation agreements and/or standards and guidelines still be listed 
as sensitive?
    4. How will fuel conditions that have a high probability of 
contributing to catastrophic fire behavior be affected by sensitive 
plant management practices?
    5. Will other land uses be constrained or altered?
    6. Will species-specific standards and guidelines improve the 
efficiency of Forest project planning and implementation?
    7. Will the efficiency and effectiveness of the Forest sensitive 
plant program improve?
    Based on the preliminary issues listed above and other issues that 
may be developed, the Forest Service will identify and consider a range 
of alternatives for managing sensitive plant species. These 
alternatives will include a no action alternative (continuing with 
existing Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 
direction). Other alternatives to consider may include implementation 
of species-specific standards and guidelines and/or delisting one or 
more of the species under consideration. These preliminary alternatives 
may be revised before the draft EIS is issued as new information is 
developed or new comments are received:
    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 EIS 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 in 
September 1994. 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 that 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 environmental impact statement stage, but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement 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 environmental impact 
statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft 
environmental impact statement 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 
environmental impact statement 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 January 1994. 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. If a decision is 
made to amend the Land and Resource Management Plan, the responsible 
official will document the decision and reasons for the decision in the 
Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to appeal pursuant to 
36 CFR part 215.

    Dated: July 21, 1994.
Rex Baumback,
Acting Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National Forest.
[FR Doc. 94-18319 Filed 7-27-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M