[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 47 (Friday, March 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13110-13111]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5840]



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


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service


Pilot Creek Environmental Impact Statement, Six Rivers National 
Forest, Humboldt County, CA; Revised Notice of Intent

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Revised Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS).

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to 
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in the Federal Register 
(56 FR 3068) on January 15, 1991 for the proposed timber management 
project in the Pilot and Torrey Compartments of the Mad River Ranger 
District. The draft EIS was delayed due to a change in project 
objectives. A revised NOI was published in the Federal Register (57 FR 
30715) on June 19, 1992. The objectives of the project were modified to 
implement a strategy that would accelerate the development of late 
seral habitat characteristics and result in timber production. The 
draft EIS was expected to be available for public review in June 1993. 
The draft EIS was delayed due to anticipated changes resulting from 
President Clinton's Forest Conference held in April of 1993.

    As a result of the Forest Conference, The Record of Decision for 
Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning 
Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl (ROD) was signed 
on April 13, 1994. Subsequently, as required by the ROD, a Watershed 
Analysis for the Pilot Creek watershed was developed. Survey protocol 
requirements were also completed for marbled murrelet within the Pilot 
Creek project area.
    The objectives of the Pilot Creek project have been modified to 
bring the project in line with ecosystem management concepts and to be 
consistent with direction contained within the ROD and the Six Rivers 
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP), scheduled for 
implementation April 1995.
    The revised project objectives are to:
    1. Maintain existing late seral conifer stands.
    2. Accelerate the development of late seral characteristics within 
conifer stands.
    3. Restore currently degraded conditions which pose risks to 
riparian and aquatic ecosystems.
    4. Maintain or enhance oak woodland habitat.
    5. Reduce the risk of catastrophic loss due to wildfire.
    6. Contribute to the short-term demand for timber and the socio-
economic well-being of local communities.
    Substantial scoping has been conducted on this project and includes 
public meetings, written correspondence, field trips and one-on-one 
discussions. The driving issues that were used to develop project 
alternatives focused on water quality and the released roadless area. 
Five alternatives were developed that will be redesigned to incorporate 
the expanded objectives and brought into consistency with the ROD and 
LRMP.
    The project area has been expanded to encompass the entire Pilot 
Creek watershed and now covers 25,442 acres. The project area is within 
the Hayfork Adaptive Management Area which, as described in the ROD, is 
designed for the development, testing, and application of forest 
management practices.
    The draft EIS is now expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in June 1995. 
At that time the EPA will publish a notice of availability of the draft 
EIS in the Federal Register. The final EIS is now scheduled to be 
completed in November 1995.
    The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will 
be 45 days from the date the 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 
a Draft EIS 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 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 
[[Page 13111]] 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia Andre, District Ranger, Mad 
River Ranger District, Star Route Box 300, Bridgeville, California 
95526 or telephone Janice Stevenson, Project Planner (707) 574-6233.

    Dated: February 22, 1995.
Harold J. Slate,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 95-5840 Filed 3-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M