[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 28, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40812-40813]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-19294]


 ========================================================================
 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. 144 / Wednesday, July 28, 1999 / 
Notices  

[[Page 40812]]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


The 64-Acre Tract Intermodal Transit Center, Lake Tahoe Basin 
Management Unit (LTBMU), Placer County, CA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice, intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) to address issuing a permit to authorize construction 
and operation of an Intermodal Transit Center on a portion of the tract 
known as the ``64-Acres''. This site is located to the west of 
California State Route 89 just south of Fanny Bridge over the Truckee 
River, in Tahoe City, California.

ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning the Draft EIS should be sent to 
the responsible official, Forest Supervisor, attention: 64-Acre Tract 
Intermodal Transit Center, LTBMU, 870 Emerald Bay Road, Suite 1, South 
Lake Tahoe, California 96150.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct questions concerning the 
proposed action to Joe Oden, Forest Planner, at (530) 573-2653 or at 
the above address.

DECISION TO BE MADE: The decision to be made for this EIS is whether to 
issue a Special Use Permit authorizing the construction and operation 
of an Intermodal Transit Center on the 64-Acres Tract. If a permit is 
issued, what conditions, requirements and mitigations should be 
included to protect the environment?

PURPOSE AND NEED: The proposal's purpose is to provide an Intermodal 
Transit Center in the Tahoe City area to support existing and future 
transit operations. Traffic congestion has long been considered a 
problem in the Tahoe Basin and numerous planning efforts have been 
undertaken to reduce dependence on automobile travel and to enhance 
transit as an effective alternative. One of the constraints to 
effective transit in the Tahoe Basin is that there have been limited 
facilities to support their operation and to provide safe transfer 
points for transit riders, especially during periods of inclement 
weather. This facility will transport visitors to the Lake of the Sky 
Interpretive Center, also to be built on the 64-Acres tract.

PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES: The proposed action includes issuing 
a permit authorizing the construction and operation of a transit center 
and associated parking facilities to be located on the northwest 
portion of the tract. Associated with the transit center would be 
roadway system improvements and recreation trail alterations necessary 
to accommodate the new facility. The proposed transit center would 
provide parking for six buses at a time. The facility would also 
provide an enclosed structure with a heated waiting area to serve 40 
patrons. A parking area is to be provided with 130 spaces to support 
the Intermodal Transit Center. Intermodal transportation includes 
bicycling, roller blading and walking as well as bus, shuttle and taxi 
transportation. The transit center and parking will support all of 
these uses. This proposal is consistent with Forest Service multiple 
use plans and it does not violate the section 4(f) of the Department of 
Transportation Act. In addition to the proposed action and no action, 
various parking and traffic circulation alternatives may be evaluated 
in the EIS.

ISSUES: Traffic impacts, parking, and the need for a transit center on 
this site are likely to be the main issues. Air quality, water quality, 
visual, noise, recreation, and biological resources will also be 
addressed.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Tahoe City Community Plan and the TRPA 
Regional Transportation Plan/Air Quality Plan both recognize the need 
for a transit facility in the Tahoe City area to support existing and 
potential transit operations. The tract has been identified in adopted 
plans and policies as the location for the facility because of the 
proximity of the site to Tahoe City and because the location provides 
an effective transfer point for transit serving the north shore, west 
shore and the Truckee River area including the town of Truckee.
    An Environmental Assessment (EA) for this proposal was distributed 
for public review and comment February 11, 1999. The EA was tiered to 
the Lake of the Sky environmental Impact Statement. Other documents 
that contributed to the preparation of the EA include the Tahoe City 
Community Plan, the Sixty-four Acres Tract Multimodal Transportation 
Center Study Final Report May, 1994, and the LTBMU Forest Plan. A 
scoping meeting for the EA was held on May 1, 1998, in Tahoe City. 
There were two noticed public hearings on the EA: Tahoe City on 
February 24, 1999 and San Francisco on April 8, 1999. The project was 
discussed at the North Tahoe Advisory Council meeting August 13, 1998. 
Scoping meetings for the EIR/TRPA EIS were held July 14 (Tahoe City) 
and July 15, 1999 (Incline Village Nevada). Scoping letters inviting 
input on the EIS/EIS are being sent to all those who expressed an 
interest in this project. Scoping input and public comments that were 
received on the EA, as well as additional written comments and 
suggestions postmarked by August 31, 1999 will be addressed in the EIS/
EIR. No additional scoping meetings are planned at this time.
    Implementation of the management proposal would require several 
permits or licenses from other agencies including the Tahoe Regional 
Planning Agency, Placer County, and Caltrans. Compliance with the 
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) is 
required. Placer County is the lead for the EIR and TRPA will also take 
action on the EIR/EIS in conformance with the Agency's Code of 
Ordinances.
    The decision will be made by Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit 
Forest Supervisor, as the Forest Service is the lead agency under NEPA. 
Placer County is the lead state agency under the California 
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
    The draft EIS is anticipated to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency and made available to the public for comment in 
November 1999. The final EIS and Record of Decision is expected in 
April 2000. The decision will be appealable under Forest Service 
regulations found at 36 CFR part 217.
    The comment period for the draft EIS will be at least 45 days from 
the date the Environmental Protection Agency

[[Page 40813]]

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 
draft EIS's 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 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 Circut, 
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 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 EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on 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 statement. Comments may also 
address the adequacy of the draft EIS 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.
Linda Massey,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 99-19294 Filed 7-27-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M