[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