[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 12 (Friday, January 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2641-2643]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-1186]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service


Clearwater National Forest, Idaho County, Idaho Spruce Moose and 
Moose Lake Right-of-way

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: On October 30, 1995, the Powell Ranger District, Clearwater 
National Forest, began public scoping for the Spruce Moose project, a 
proposed salvage timber sale and private land access request. During 
1996, the environmental effects of the proposed action were analyzed. 
During the course of this analysis, it was determined that potential 
effects on steelhead trout (proposed for listing under the Endangered 
Species Act), Bull

[[Page 2642]]

Trout (listing under ESA is warranted, but precluded), spring chinook 
and westslope cutthroat trout (both Sensitive Species) may be 
significant enough to require an Environmental Impact Statement.
    During the summer of 1996, additional field information was 
gathered and used to update the proposed action as follows.
    The Clearwater National Forest is planning to prepare an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental 
effects of a proposal to harvest 2.4 million board feet of timber, 
construct 4.1 miles of new forest roads, and reconstruct 0.4 miles of 
existing forest road. Included in the proposed road construction is a 
request from Plum Creek Timber Company for easements across one mile of 
National Forest System Land to access privately owned timberland. A 
joint sediment reduction plan to repair existing sediment sources on 
existing roads is also included in the proposal.
    The Spruce Moose Planning Area is located northeast of the Powell 
Ranger Station, Powell Ranger District, Clearwater National Forest, 
Idaho County, Idaho. Proposed activities are located in the Spruce 
Creek drainage. The proposal's actions are being considered together 
because they represent either connected or cumulative actions as 
defined by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.25).
    The purposes of the project are (1) to design and implement 
vegetation treatments using ecosystem management principles within the 
forest stands that are at high risk of change in the next decade, (2) 
to design and implement a cost share road system with Plum Creek Timber 
Company to provide a single road system that serves both landowners, 
and (3) to restore and maintain aquatic ecosystem structure and 
function to provide historic habitat conditions for aquatic species.
    This project level EIS will tier to the Clearwater National Forest 
Land and Resources Management Plan (Forest Plan) and Final EIS 
(September, 1987), which provides overall guidance of all land 
management activities on the Clearwater National Forest.
    Analysis will be conducted in compliance with the Clearwater Forest 
Plan lawsuit settlement agreement between the Forest Service and the 
Sierra Club, et al (signed September 13, 1993).

DATES: Comments in response to this Notice of Intent concerning the 
scope of the analysis should be received in writing on or before March 
3, 1997 to receive timely consideration in the preparation of the Draft 
EIS. The Draft EIS will be filed with the Environmental Protection 
Agency in March, 1997. The Final EIS and the Record of Decision are 
expected to be issued in December, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions on the proposed action 
or requests for a map of the proposed action or to be placed on the 
project mailing list to Margaret Gorski, District Ranger, Powell Ranger 
District, Clearwater National Forest, Lolo, Montana 59847.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The Forest Supervisor, Clearwater National 
Forest, will be the responsible official and decide on the harvest and 
road construction alternatives and whether to issue access easements to 
Plum Creek Timber Company.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
District Ranger, Powell Ranger District, Clearwater National Forest, 
(208) 942-3113.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Plum Creek Timber Company (PCTC) requested 
right-of-way access across National Forest System land in Sections 20 
and 30, T38N, R17E, Boise Meridian. The purpose of this request was for 
Plum Creek Timber Company to access the private land in Sections 19 and 
29 for their use and enjoyment.
    Access to non-Federal inholdings in governed by Section 1323(a) of 
the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). 
Implementing direction for this authority is found in regulation at 36 
CFR 251.110.
    The Forest Service and Plum Creek Timber Company are cooperators in 
a jointly constructed and maintained road system on the Powell Ranger 
District. The purpose of this joint road system is to serve the access 
needs of both cooperators with a single network of permanent roads 
within the checkerboard land ownership portion of the Powell Ranger 
District.
    In 1995, the Powell District conducted an Integrated Resource 
Analysis for a portion of the Spruce Creek watershed and proposed 
management actions which were linked to Plum Creek Timber Company's 
proposed road and request for access. This was documented in an 
Integrated Resource Assessment and Position Statement.
    On October 10, 1995, Plum Creek Timber Company updated its request 
for access to include an easement across 200 feet of section 26, T38N, 
R16E to access private land in Section 25. This new request was 
included in the proposed action to properly assess the cumulative 
effects of road construction and timber harvest on National Forest 
resources.
    Preliminary issues include the effects on timber growth and yield, 
effects on old growth and snag habitat, effects on elk habitat 
security, and effects on water quality and fish habitat. These issues 
will be refined and developed in detail as scoping proceeds. Comments 
on the issues and suggestions for additional issues are welcome in 
response to this Notice of Intent.
    Preliminary scoping and public involvement began on October 30, 
1995, when an Integrated Resource Analysis and Position Statement was 
mailed to about 100 individuals asking for comment. The 
interdisciplinary team worked with the comments from this early scoping 
effort to identify preliminary issues and to refine the proposed 
action.
    The interdisciplinary team will be working to develop a range of 
alternatives to the proposed action and to assess the environmental 
effects of the alternatives. One of the alternatives will be the ``No 
Action'' alternative. Other alternatives will examine varying levels 
and locations for the proposed activities to achieve the proposal's 
purposes, as well as to respond to the environmental issues and other 
resource values. Comments concerning the range of alternatives or 
possible environmental effects would be useful to the team in 
completing their analysis.
    It is anticipated that the environmental analysis and preparation 
of the draft and final environmental impact statements will take about 
one year. The draft environmental impact statement can be expected in 
March, 1997 and a final environmental impact statement can be expected 
in December, 1997.
    A 45 day comment period will be provided for the public to make 
comments on the draft environmental impact statement. This comment 
period will be in addition to scoping and will begin when the 
Environmental Protection Agency's Notice of Availability of the Draft 
EIS appears in the Federal Register. A Record of Decision will be 
prepared and filed with the final environmental impact statement. A 
forty-five day appeal period will be applicable.
    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. To be most helpful, 
comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be as 
specific as possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or

[[Page 2643]]

the merits of the alternatives discussed (see Council on Environmental 
Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the 
National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3).
    In addition, Federal court decisions have established that 
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' position and 
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC 435 US 519, 553 
(1978). Environmental objections that could have been raised at the 
draft stage may be waived if not raised until after completion of the 
final environmental impact statement. City of Angoon v. Hodel, (9th 
Circuit, 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 
1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). The reason for this is to ensure 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.

    I am the responsible official for this environmental impact 
statement. My address is Clearwater National Forest, 12730 Highway 
12, Orofino, ID 83544.

    Dated: December 31, 1997.
James L. Caswell,
Forest Supervisor, Clearwater National Forest.
[FR Doc. 97-1186 Filed 1-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M