[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8625-8626]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3806]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Secesh River Subdivision Access Roads
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Payette National Forest proposes to issue a special use
permit to allow the Secesh River Property Owners Association to
construct/reconstruct, maintain, and use four roads in the Secesh
Meadows area to access private land. The total length of the roads is
approximately 2,100 feet and would enable development on nine lots in
the Secesh River Subdivision #1 and one lot in Secesh River Subdivision
#2. The private land lies approximately 25 miles northeast of McCall,
Idaho, in T22N, R5E, Sections 9 and 10, and covers 74 acres; it is part
of the former Spokane Group #7 patented mining claim, Minerals Survey
3387.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Linda Fitch, McCall District Ranger (208) 634-0400.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1994, the Payette National Forest
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) which analyzed six
alternatives for accomplishing the project. The EA was released for 30-
days predecisional review and comment on November 21, 1994. In
reviewing the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for
significance (40 CFR 1508.27), it was determined this project would be
a major Federal action with significant effects, because the Forest
Service's biological assessment for endangered chinook salmon made a
finding of ``Likely to Adversely Affect.''
PURPOSE AND NEED: The need connected with this project is to respond to
the special use application for road construction, use, and
maintenance.
PROPOSED ACTION: The Proposed Action is a modification of Alternative D
from the EA. Alternative D presented in the EA would have allowed
Secesh Meadows Property Owners Association to construct/reconstruct,
use, and maintain roads #1 (1,200 feet), #2 (300 feet), and #5 (300
feet) to a standard including construction to a grade above ground
level (or road side ditch) for good drainage, gravel surfacing, and
installation of structures to accommodate overland flow (culverts).
Road #3 (300 feet) would be built to a standard of construction of
approximately 12 feet in width, native surfacing, and no drainage
structures or maintenance. Existing road #4 would be closed, and the
owner of lot 10 would have to work out alternative access. In addition,
the Proposed Action includes a modification to Alternative D which will
require that road #3 also be constructed to a grade similar to other
approved roads.
FOREST PLAN AMENDMENT: The Proposed Action may require site-specific
Forest Plan amendments in standards and guidelines for: anadromous fish
habitat, big game calving areas, meadows [[Page 8626]] fragmentation,
and open road densities; and for wild and scenic study river interim
management.
PRELIMINARY ISSUES: The Forest Service has identified five issues which
were addressed in the EA:
1. Effect of each alternative on land ownership status.
2. Effect of the project on soil and water resources.
3. Effect of the project on the habitat of the Snake River spring/
summer chinook salmon and other, sensitive fish species.
4. Effect of the roads on the eligibility and suitability of the
Secesh River for designation as a wild and scenic river.
5. Effect of the project on wildlife species that depend on meadow
ecosystems, and how the project affects the habitat of the endangered
gray wolf and other sensitive wildlife species.
POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES: The Forest Service has identified five possible
alternatives to the Proposed Action: No Action alternative, Denial of
Permit and Closure of Unauthorized Roads, Proponent Request, Roads #1
and #2 only, and Minimum Access Alternative.
DECISIONS TO BE MADE: The Payette National Forest Supervisor will
decide:
Whether a permit should be issued to allow construction and/or
reconstruction, use, and maintenance of roads to access Secesh River
Subdivisions #1 and #2.
If a permit is issued, then how many and which proposed roads will
be constructed and/or reconstructed.
If a permit is issued, then what standard of roads will be
constructed and/or reconstructed.
If a permit is issued, then what mitigation measures, management
requirement, and monitoring will be implemented. And, What Forest Plan
amendment(s) are required.
AGENCY/PUBLIC CONTACTS: As part of the EA process, the Forest Service
conducted two scoping processes in 1993 and 1994, contacting 31 groups,
agencies, and individuals; 13 scoping responses were received. The EA
was sent out for predecisional review November 21, 1994 to 69
individuals and agencies; six responses were received. To initiate the
EIS, the Forest Service is mailing a letter to those who have expressed
interest in this project in the past.
SCHEDULE: Draft Environmental Impact Statement, March 1995. Final EIS
May 1995. Implementation, June 1995. Project decision and
implementation are contingent on completion of consultation with the
National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
COMMENTS: Comments on the Proposed Action and the analysis should be
received in writing on or before March 2, 1995. Send comments to:
Forest Supervisor, Payette National Forest, P.O. Box 1026, 106 W. Park
Street, McCall, ID 83638; telephone (208) 634-0700; FAX (208) 634-0281.
The comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement will
be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency 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. 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 reviewer'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, 1002 (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 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 and respond to them
in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
raised by 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.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: David F. Alexander, Forest Supervisor, Payette
National Forest, P.O. Box 1026, 106 West Park, McCall, ID 83638.
Dated: February 8, 1995.
David F. Alexander,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 95-3806 Filed 2-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M