[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 72 (Thursday, April 15, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18598-18599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9385]


 ========================================================================
 Notices
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
 or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
 and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
 delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
 statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
 appearing in this section.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 72 / Thursday, April 15, 1999 / 
Notices  

[[Page 18598]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Long Prong Project, Boise National Forest, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare Environmental Impact Statement

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

SUMMARY: The Cascade Ranger District of the Boise National Forest will 
prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for an integrated 
resource management project in the headwaters of Clear Creek, a 
tributary of the North Fork Payette River below Cascade Reservoir. The 
project area is located 10 miles east of Cascade, Idaho, and about 100 
miles north of Boise, Idaho.
    The agency invites written comments and suggestions on the scope of 
the analysis. The agency also hereby gives notice of the environmental 
analysis and decision-making process that will occur on the proposal so 
interested and affected people are aware of how they may participate 
and contribute to the final decision. At this time, no public meetings 
to discuss the project are planned.
    Proposed Action: Five primary objectives have been identified for 
the project: (1) Improve timber stand health so that stands are more 
resilient to damaging forest insects and diseases, and uncharacteristic 
wildfires; (2) improve long-term stand growth to or near levels 
indicative of sustainable forest; (3) provide wood products to support 
local economies and stumpage receipts sufficient to yield a significant 
positive return to the U.S. Treasury and trust funds; (4) reduce 
management-induced sediment by closing and/or rehabilitating roads that 
are not needed for long-term resource management, and: (5) where 
consistent with other project objectives, pursue opportunities to 
enhance aspen stands.
    The Proposed Action would treat a total of 2,203 acres in the 
67.637-acre Gold Fork/Clear Creek Management Area (MA 53). An estimated 
13.0 MMBF of timber would be harvested using ground-based (857 acres), 
skyline (495 acres), and helicopter (851 acres) yarding systems. The 
Proposed Action would employ a variety of silvicultural prescriptions 
including clearcut with reserve trees (389 acres), commercial thin/
sanitation (833 acres), final removal shelterwood (90 acres), 
sanitation/improvement (490 acres), seed cut shelterwood (110 acres), 
and commercial thin/final removal (291 acres). The existing 
transportation system would be improved to facilitate log haul and 
reduce sedimentation with individual sections of 2.6 miles of road 
being reconstructed. An estimated 1.4 miles of specified road and 0.4 
mile of temporary road would be constructed to facilitate harvest. In 
addition, 1.6 miles of road not needed for the long-term management of 
the area would be decommissioned and 1.5 miles closed year-round to 
motorized use with the exception of snowmobiles.
    Three 30-acre units would be treated to enhance aspen regeneration. 
All competing coniferous trees less than 20 inches in diameter would be 
cut down and the areas burned with a helitorch. Mature aspen may also 
need to be felled to create sufficient fuels to sustain the burn. No 
construction of fireline would be necessary on these sites.
    Prescribed fire would be used on an area roughly 750 acres in size 
to reduce natural fuels, with a secondary objective of enhancing aspen 
rejuvenation. No construction of fireline would be necessary on this 
site.
    Preliminary Issues: Preliminary concerns with the proposed action 
include: (1) potential loss of pileated woodpecker and boreal owl 
nesting habitat; (2) possible degradation of fisheries habitat, 
particularly in the East Fork of Clear Creek; (3) adverse impacts on 
recreational access, and; (4) impacts on the visual quality of the 
area.
    Possible Alternatives to the Proposed Action: Three alternatives to 
the proposed action have been discussed thus far: (1) a no action 
alternative; (2) an alternative to mitigate potential impacts on 
pileated woodpecker and boreal owl nesting habitat, and; (3) an 
alternative that would mitigate increases in sediment delivery to the 
East Fork of Clear Creek. Other alternatives may be developed as issues 
are identified and information received.
    Decisions to be Made: The Boise National Forest Supervisor will 
decide the following: Should roads be built and timber harvested within 
the Long Prong Project Area at this time, and if so; where within the 
project area, and how many miles of road should be built; and which 
stands should be treated and what silvicultural systems should be used? 
What mitigation/watershed enhancement measures should be applied to the 
project? Should the decommissioning of portions of roads 405B and 405B2 
and/or other existing roads be implemented at this time? Should 
prescribed fire be used in the project area at this time, and if so; 
where within the project area? Should aspen rejuvenation treatments be 
implemented in the project area at this time, and if so; where within 
the project area?

DATES: Written comments concerning the proposed project and analysis 
are encouraged and should be postmarked on or before May 17, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Steve Patterson, Cascade 
Ranger District, P.O. Box 696, Cascade, ID 83611. Comments received in 
response to this request will be available for public inspection and 
will be released in their entirety if requested pursuant to the Freedom 
of Information Act.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Further information can be obtained 
from Steve Patterson at the address mentioned above or by calling 208-
382-7430.
    Schedule: Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), June 1999, 
Final Environmental Impact Statement, August 1999.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A similar proposed action was scoped in 
November 1998 with the intention of preparing an environmental 
assessment (EA). In addition to public announcements in the ``The Idaho 
Statesman'' (November 21, 1998) and the ``The Long Valley Advocate'' 
(November 25, 1998), a scoping package describing the proposed action 
was mailed to 34 individuals and/or groups. In response to those 
scoping efforts, written comments were received from 10 interested 
parties. Comments received from those efforts will be incorporated into 
this analysis.

[[Page 18599]]

    The comment period on the DEIS 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 
the DEIS 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 DEIS stage but are not raised until after 
completion of the FEIS 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 very important that those 
interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the DEIS 
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 FEIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the DEIS should be as 
specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific 
pages or chapters of the draft 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 D. Rittenhouse, Forest Supervisor, Boise National Forest, 
1249 South Vinnel Way, Boise, ID 83709.

    Dated: April 7, 1999.
David D. Rittenhouse,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 99-9385 Filed 4-14-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M