[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 107 (Friday, June 4, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29989-29991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-14223]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Rocky Mountain Front Minerals Withdrawal EIS--Lewis and Clark and 
Helena National Forests

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement on a proposal to withdraw from locatable mineral entry, 
429,000 acres of National Forest System lands along Montana's Rocky 
Mountain Front in Glacier, Pondera, Teton and Lewis and Clark Counties, 
Montana. Specific land descriptions were provided in the Federal 
Register (64 FR 5311-5312, Feb. 3, 1999) under the Bureau of Land 
Management Notice of Proposed withdrawal. The purpose of the proposal 
is to preserve the area for traditional cultural purposes by Native 
Americans, protect threatened and endangered species, and preserve the 
outstanding scenic values and roadless character. If approved, the 
withdrawal would remove National Forest System lands along the Rocky 
Mountain Front from new mining claims for up to 20 years. The EIS will 
be designed to satisfy the requirements of the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act of 1976 and implementing regulations (43 CFR 2310.1).

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received 
on or before July 6, 1999. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 
public meeting dates.

ADDRESSES. Send written comments to Rick Prausa, Forest Supervisor, 
Lewis and Clark National Forest, 1101 15th Street North, Box 869, Great 
Falls, MT 59403. Electronic mail may be sent to comment/rl_
[email protected]. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 
additional information about electronic filing and public meeting 
addresses.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Whittekiend, EIS Team Leader, 
(406) 466-5341 or (406) 791-7700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Service proposes to withdraw from 
locatable mineral entry, National Forest System lands along the Rocky 
Mountain Front. The proposed mineral withdrawal is 429,000 acres of 
federal lands, subject to valid existing rights associated with the 
existing unpatented mining claims in the study area. The withdrawal 
would have an immediate effect on 426,800 acres of currently unclaimed 
federal land, which would be withdrawn for up to 20 years. The mineral 
withdrawal may or may not affect the remaining acreage (approximately 
2,200 acres of unpatented mining claims), depending upon whether the 
104 unpatented mining claims constitute valid existing rights. If these 
unpatented mining claims were abandoned or determined to be invalid, 
the mineral withdrawal would prohibit the relocation of new mining 
claims. The mineral withdrawal would be subject to review at the end of 
20 years according to federal regulations. The primary purpose of the 
proposed mineral withdrawal is to preserve the area for tradition 
cultural uses by Native Americans, to protect threatened and endangered 
species and protect outstanding scenic values and roadless character. 
Many individuals and groups have expressed concern

[[Page 29990]]

about the potential of minerals development along the Rocky Mountain 
Front after the staking of 104 claims in the Blackleaf/Muddy Creek 
area.
    The study area includes areas considered sacred to several Indian 
tribes. Traditional cultural uses that take place in the study area 
include religious ceremonies and gathering of traditional herbs. The 
study area provides habitat for several threatened and endangered 
species including grizzly bear, gray wolf, peregrine falcon, and bald 
eagle. The risks of mining development to these species include 
increased roading, habitat destruction and increased human presence. 
The scenic qualities of the study area are believed by many to be among 
the best in the nation. These qualities could be degraded by the 
development of mineral resources. Withdrawal of these lands would 
ensure that the cultural, biological and scenic resources of these 
lands would be maintained and the impacts of mining related activities 
would be reduced.

Decisions To Be Made

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, has filed an 
application with the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 
Management to withdraw 429,000 acres of National Forest System lands 
from locatable mineral entry under the United States mining laws. The 
Forest Service will prepare an EIS. The Chief of the Forest Service 
will have two decisions to make: he will decide whether or not to 
recommend that the Secretary of the Interior withdraw this area. If the 
Secretary of The Interior withdraws the area, the Chief of the Forest 
Service will also amend the Lewis and Clark and Helena National Forest 
Plans to reflect the change in management of locatable hardrock 
minerals. The Chief's Forest Plan amendments decisions will be 
contingent on the Secretary of the Interior's withdrawal decision.
    The Chief of the Forest Service will submit his decision and the 
EIS to the Montana State Director, Bureau of Land Management who will 
submit a recommendation to the Director of the Bureau of Land 
Management. The recommendation and supporting documentation will then 
be forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior for a decision. The 
authority to withdraw lands from mineral entry lies with the Secretary 
of the Interior. The Secretary will decide which lands, if any, to 
withdraw, and for how long. The Secretary is limited to a maximum 
withdrawal period of 20 years. If a withdrawal of over 5,000 acres is 
approved, the Secretary of the Interior would advise Congress of the 
withdrawal action being taken. No action is required by Congress to 
implement a mineral withdrawal. Congress can terminate a withdrawal 
with a concurrent resolution from the House and Senate within 90 days 
of the approval of the Public Land Order. At the end of the 20 year 
period, the withdrawal decision would be reviewed to determine if it is 
appropriate to extend it. If the Secretary chooses to implement a 
withdrawal, the withdrawal would become effective on the date the 
Public Land Order is published in the Federal Register.

Responsible Official

    Mike Dombeck, Chief, USDA Forest Service, Auditors Building, 201 
14th Street, SW at Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250 is the 
Responsible Official for making the withdrawal recommendation to the 
Secretary of the Interior. The Chief of the Forest Service is also 
responsible for any decision to amend the Forest Plans to reflect any 
change in management of locatable hardrock minerals. He will document 
his decisions and rationale in a Record of Decision.

Preliminary Issues

    Two preliminary issues have been identified: Approval of the 
withdrawal would result in the loss of opportunity to extract minerals 
from the area and withdrawal would limit the economic base of rural 
communities along the Rocky Mountain Front.

Public Involvement, Rationale, and Public Meetings

    In February, 1999, a notice of proposed withdrawal was published in 
the Federal Register (64 FR 5311-5312, Feb. 3, 1999). This notice 
invited public comment for a period of 90 days. Comments received will 
be included in the documentation for the EIS. The public is encouraged 
to take part in the process and is encouraged to visit with 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 proposed 
action.
    While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time, 
comments received within 30 days of the publication of this notice will 
be especially useful in the preparation of the Draft EIS. Public 
meetings associated with the project will be held to gain a better 
understanding of public issues and concerns. These meetings will be 
held in Choteau, Montana at the Stagestop Inn on June 22, 1999 from 3-8 
p.m. and in Lincoln, Montana at the Lincoln Community Hall on June 24, 
1999 from 3-7 p.m.
    Information from the meetings will be used in preparation of the 
draft and final EIS. The scoping process will include identifying: 
potential issues, significant issues to be analyzed in depth, 
alternatives to the proposed action, and potential environmental 
effects of the proposal and alternatives.

Electronic Access and Filing Addresses

    Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to comment/
[email protected]. Please reference the Rocky Mountain Front 
Minerals Withdrawal on the subject line. Also, include your name and 
mailing address with your comments so documents pertaining to this 
project may be mailed to you.

Estimated Dates for Filing

    The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by 
January, 2000. At the time 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 EIS publishes the Notice of 
Availability in the Federal Register. It is very important that those 
interested in the management of this area participate at that time.
    The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by August, 2000. 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 Reviewers Obligation To Comment

    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 environmental impact statements must structure their 
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is 
meaningful and alters 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 environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may 
be waived or dismissed by the courts.

[[Page 29991]]

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 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 environmental impact 
statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft 
environmental impact statement 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 
environmental impact statement 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.

    Dated: June 1, 1999.
Paul Brouha,
Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
[FR Doc. 99-14223 Filed 6-3-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M