[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2875-2876]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1072]
[[Page 2875]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Plentybob Ecosystem Restoration Projects, Umatilla National
Forest, Umatilla County, Oregon
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) on a proposed action to implement ecosystem restoration
projects, designed to promote healthy watershed conditions within the
Upper Umatilla River watershed. The project area is located on the
Walla Walla Ranger District approximately 30 air miles southeast of
Walla Walla, Washington.
Proposed project activities consist of hardwood planting in
Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas, hydrologic stability projects
(road obliteration, road re-alignment and/or reconstruction), noxious
weed treatments, wildlife enhancement projects, landscape prescribed
fire and restoration of forest stand structure and composition using a
variety of silvicultural treatments including commercial timber
harvest. The proposed action is designed to reduce risk to ecosystem
sustainability, prevent further degradation of forest health, reduce
risks of catastrophic wildfire and provide some economic return to
local economies.
The EIS will tier to the 1990 Land and Resource Management Plan
FEIS for the Umatilla National Forest, which provides overall guidance
for forest management of the area.
DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be
received on or before February 26, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions to the Responsible
Official, Thomas K. Reilly, District Ranger, Walla Walla Ranger
District, 1415 West Rose Street, Walla Walla, Washington, 99362.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Sedam, Project Team Leader,
Walla Walla Ranger District, Phone: (509) 522-6050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The decision area contains approximately
73,156 acres within the Umatilla National Forest in Umatilla County,
Oregon. It is within the Meacham Creek and South Fork Umatilla River
watersheds. Approximately 53,250 acres of the planning area is located
in the Hellhole Roadless Area. The legal description of the decision
area if as follows: All or part of Sections 1-3 Township 1 South, Range
37 East; Section 6 Township 1 South, Range 38 East; Sections 1-5, 8-12,
22-27 Township 1 North, Range 36 East; Sections 1-27, 30 and 34-36
Township 1 North, Range 37 East; Sections 1-5, 8-18, 19-36 Township 2
North, Range 36 East; Sections 4-10, 15-22, 26-35 Township 2 North,
Range 37 East; Sections 22-28 and 32-36 Township 3 North, Range 36 East
and Sections 16-22 and 28-33 Township 3 North, Range 37 East, W.M.
surveyed.
Water quality improvement projects include stabilization of stream
banks with planting of hardwoods on 192 acres. Proposed hydrologic
stability projects include approximately 44.5 miles of road
obliteration, 23.6 miles or road reconstruction and revegetation of cut
and fill slopes. Road construction would include bank stabilization,
surfacing and construction of drainage structures. 14,473 acres of
prescribed burning for elk habitat are proposed to enhance wildlife
habitat. A variety of silvicultural methods would treat approximately
4,103 acres within the area. This proposal also includes prescribed
burning of approximately 3,000 acres within harvest units and
approximately 15,500 acres outside of harvest units to reduce the
potential for future wildfires, prepare sites for regeneration, enhance
wildlife habitat, modify stand structure and composition and maintain
forest health by bring fuel levels closer to their historic levels.
An estimated 38.0 million board feet of green and 10.0 million
broad feet of dead timber would be commercially harvested in four
timber sales over a period of three to five years. Proposed
silvicultural treatments would include shelterwood, group selection and
salvage harvest. None of the proposed timber harvest would take place
within the Hellhole Roadless Area.
For all treatments, existing snags and large down wood would be
left on site. Ponderosa pine and western larch would be the preferred
species for leave trees. All trees greater than 21 inches DBH would be
left in the ponderosa pine and subalphine fir biophysical groups (both
are below their historic range of variability).
Several streams within the analysis area are not Oregon's 303(d)
List of Water Quality Limited Waterbodies. The proposed action will
include Best Management Practices and include components of a Water
Quality Management Plan.
The proposed action will tier to the FEIS and Umatilla Forest
Plans, as amended, which provides goals, objectives, standards and
guidelines for activities and land allocations on the Forest. There are
six designated Management Areas (MAs) found within the analysis area:
A4 Viewshed 2, A9 Special Interest Area, C1 Dedicated Old Growth, C4
Wildlife Habitat, C5 Riparian (Fish and Wildlife) and C8 Grass-Tree
Mosaic.
The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of
these will be the ``no action'' alternative in which none of the
proposed activities would be implemented. Additional alternatives will
examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to
achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the issues
and other resource values.
Preliminary Issues: Tentatively, the preliminary issues identified
are briefly described below:
1. Wildlife Habitat--What effects would timber harvest and
prescribed burning have on big game and non-game habitat?
2. Ecosystem Sustatinability--How would the proposed activities
affect ecosystem sustainability and forest health?
3. Air Quality--What effects would landscape prescribed burning
have on air quality?
4. Water Quality/Riparian Habitat--How would water quality, flow,
temperature, timing and riparian habitat conditions be affected by the
proposed activities?
5. Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) Species--What effect
would the proposed activities have on TES species and what
opportunities exist to improve habitat?
6. Noxious Weeds--What effects would the proposed activities have
on noxious weed populations?
This list will be verified, expanded or modified based on public
scoping and interdisciplinary review of this proposal.
Public participation will be especially important at several points
during the analysis, beginning with the scoping process (40 CFR
1501.7). Initial scoping began with the project listing in the 1998
Winter Edition of the Umatilla national Forest's Schedule of Proposed
Actions. This environmental analysis and decision making process will
enable additional interested and affected people to participate and
contribute to the final decision. The public is encouraged to take part
of the process and is encouraged to visit the Forest Service officials
at any time during the analysis and prior to the decision. 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 proposal.
This input will be used in
[[Page 2876]]
preparation of the Draft EIS. The scoping process includes:
1. Identifying potential issues.
2. Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Considering additional alternatives based on themes which will
be derived from issues recognized during scoping activities.
4. Identifying potential environmental effects of this project and
alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect and cumulative effects and
connected actions).
The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available to the public for review by
April 1999. At that time, the 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 the EPA publishes the Notice of
Availability in the Federal Register. It is important that those
interested in the management of the Umatilla National Forest
participate at that time.
The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed by June, 1999. In the
Final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and
responses received during the comment period that pertain to the
environmental consequences discussed in the Draft EIS and applicable
laws, regulations and policies considered in making a decision
regarding the proposal.
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice, at this early stage, of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
Draft EIS's must structure their participation in the environmental
review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts the 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 EIS 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.
1335, 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 and respond to them in the final EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns or 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 EIS. Comments may also address
the adequacy of the Draft EIS or 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).
The Forest Service is the lead agency. Thomas Reilly, District
Ranger, is the Responsible Official. As the Responsible Official, he
will decide which, if any, of the proposed projects will be
implemented. He will document the decision and reasons for the decision
in the Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest
Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR part 215).
Dated: December 30, 1998.
Thomas K. Reilly,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 99-1072 Filed 1-15-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M