[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 17, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-20209]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: August 17, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Suitability Study of the North Fork, South Fork and Mills Rivers
for Inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System; Pisgah
National Forest (National Forests in North Carolina), Henderson and
Transylvania Counties, NC
AGENCY: USDA, Forest Service.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) to evaluate the environmental impacts of including
suitable segments of North Fork, South Fork and Mills Rivers classified
as wild, scenic, or recreational rivers in the National Wild and Scenic
Rivers System. The decision to recommend the nomination of suitable
river segments to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System rests with
the Secretary of Agriculture. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (PL 90-
542) reserves to Congress the authority to include rivers in the
National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
The agency invites written comments on the suitability of these
rivers and recommendations related to classifying and including them in
the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. In addition, the agency
gives notice of the full environmental analysis and decision making
process that has been occurring on the proposal so that interested and
affected people are aware of how they may participate and contribute to
the final decision. The Supervisor of the National Forests in North
Carolina is responsible for the preparation of the EIS.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Mills River System Wild and Scenic
River Study, c/o Randle Phillips, Forest Supervisor, P.O. Box 2750,
Asheville, NC 28802.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melinda McWilliams, Wild and Scenic Rivers Study Team Leader, U.S.
Forest Service, P.O. Box 2750, Asheville, NC 28802, 704/257-4253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1982, the Nationwide River Inventory
developed by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior,
identified South Fork and Mills River as potential wild and scenic
study rivers. The 1987 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for
the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah
National Forests determined South Fork and Mills River to be eligible
for designation with potential wild and recreational classifications
for different segments of South Fork and recreational for Mills River.
(That information and additional findings will be documented in this
environmental impact statement.) The rivers were determined to be
potentially suitable for designation pending further study. A follow-up
study to the Forest Plan FEIS was begun in 1989. At the request of
local citizens, through a North Carolina Congressional Delegate, North
Fork was added to the study area. In November 1990, Public Law 101-538
was passed by Congress which designated 34.8 miles of the Mills River
System (North Fork, South Fork and Mills Rivers) as a Wild and Scenic
Study River. This Act excluded the segment of the Mills River from the
confluence of the French Broad River to a point 750 feet upstream from
the centerline of N.C. Highway 191/280.
The Environmental Impact Statement will consider the following
river segments:
North Fork, Bottom of Hendersonville reservoir spillway to South Fork
5.9 miles
South Fork, Pigeon Branch in headwaters to North Fork
25.4 miles
Mills River, Confluence North and South Forks to point 750 feet
upstream from centerline of N.C. Highway 191/280
3.5 miles
The area of consideration for each stream is a corridor a minimum
of \1/4\ mile from each stream bank for the entire length of the study
segment. These corridors include both public and private lands.
Significant issues identified during initial scoping include the
potential for future dams along these rivers based on past proposals
for impoundments, the effects of designation on private lands, and
protection of the free-flowing condition and resource values of these
rivers.
A range of alternatives will be developed based on issues and
concerns raised during the study process. As a minimum, one alternative
will maintain current management with a recommendation of
nondesignation for the three rivers (the no action alternative). Other
potential alternatives include: 1. Recommend designation for all
eligible segments. 2. Recommend designation or nondesignation for
specific segments of each river based on identified issues and 3.
Recommend designation of eligible segments with different
classifications (wild, scenic, recreational) based on identified
issues. The environmental impact statement will disclose the direct,
indirect, and cumulative effects of implementing each alternative.
Public participation is important at several points during the
analysis process. The first point was the scoping process (40 CFR
1501.7). The scoping process includes, but is not limited to: (1)
Identifying potential issues, (2) identifying issues to be analyzed in
depth, (3) eliminating insignificant issues or those that have been
covered by a relevant previous environmental analysis, (4) exploring
additional alternatives, and (5) identifying potential (direct,
indirect, and cumulative) environmental effects of the alternatives.
During the scoping process, the Forest Service sought information,
comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies and
individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected by
the proposal. News releases were published in local newspapers;
individual letters were distributed to government agencies,
organizations, landowners along the rivers and individuals assumed to
be interested in this action; and several meetings were held in the
local community along the rivers. Informal contacts through phone calls
and visits have also occurred throughout the study. Additional mailings
and media releases will occur when the Draft EIS and Final EIS are
completed and available for public review.
The responsible official is Mike Espy, Secretary of Agriculture,
Administration Bldg., 12th Street and Jefferson Drive, SW., Washington,
DC 20250.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is expected to be filed
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public
review by August 1994. The comment period on the draft environmental
impact statement will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the
Notice of Availability 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. Upon release of the
draft environmental impact statement, projected for August 1994,
reviewers 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 contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Corp. vs. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental
objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact
statement stage, but are not raised until after the completion of the
final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the
courts. City of Angoon vs. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986)
and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. vs. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D.
Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important that
those interested in this proposal 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 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 and 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 at the National Environmental Policy Act at
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
After the comment period ends on the draft environmental impact
statement, the comments will be analyzed and considered by the Forest
Service in preparing the Final Environmental Impact Statement. The
final statement is scheduled to be completed by March 1995.
The Secretary of Agriculture will consider comments, responses, and
environmental consequences discussed in the final environmental impact
statement and applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making his
recommendation to the President regarding the suitability of these
rivers for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The
decision on the inclusion of a river in the National Wild and Scenic
Rivers System rests with the United States Congress.
Dated: July 29, 1994.
Bertha C. Gillam,
Acting Director of Environmental Coordination.
[FR Doc. 94-20209 Filed 8-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M