[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 147 (Monday, August 2, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41912-41913]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-19676]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


South Pyramid Timber Sales, Willamette National Forest, Linn 
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 proposal to harvest timber, regenerate harvested 
lands, construct or reconstruct forest roads, and associated mitigation 
projects in the South Pyramid subwatershed. The legal description for 
the planning area is T12S, R5E, sections 19, 28-34. The planning area 
is approximately 4,637 acres in the Middle Santiam Watershed.
    The planning area is primarily designated Matrix-General Forest by 
the Northwest Forest Plan, with Riparian Reserves, Late Successional 
Reserve, and Matrix-Special Habitat Areas composing the rest of the 
landbase. The planning area includes many acres of overstocked 90-150 
year forest, where growth rates have slowed. Information and analyses 
created during the Middle Santiam Watershed Analysis will also be 
considered when designing this project. This proposal is tentatively 
scheduled for implementation in fiscal year 2000-2003. The Willamette 
National Forest invites written comments and suggestions on the scope 
of this analysis, in addition to those comments received as a result of 
local public participation activities. The agency will also give notice 
of the full environmental analysis and decision making process so that 
interested and affected people are informed as to how they may 
participate and contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope and implementation of the analysis 
should be received in writing by August 16, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments and suggestions concerning the 
South Pyramid Timber Sales to Mike Rassbach, District Ranger, Sweet 
Home Ranger District, Willamette National Forest, 3225 Hwy 20, Sweet 
Home, Oregon 97386.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions about the Proposed Action 
and scope of analysis should be directed to Brian McGinley, Resource 
Planner, Sweet Home Ranger District, Willamette National Forest, 3225 
Highway 22, Sweet Home, Oregon 97386, phone 541-367-5168.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Northwest Forest Plan has designed most 
of the forest's timber production capability to come from Matrix-
General Forest lands. The purpose and need for this proposal is to 
improve tree growth rates and/or quality of overstocked matrix forests, 
and harvest timber in a landbase that is Matrix Land-General Forest, 
where timber management is a dominant resource objective. The Forest 
Service proposal will comply with the 1990 Willamette National Forest 
Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended by the 1994 Northwest 
Forest Plan.
    This Proposed Action will consider regeneration harvest and/or 
commercial thinnings to meet project goals, and will compare 
conventional logging systems with helicopter logging. This project is 
expected to yield a volume of 4.0 to 4.4 million board feet, part of 
which will be achieved by thinning at least 40 acres of forest stands 
to improve growth rates reduced by overstocking. Other activities being 
considered are likely to involve: reforestation, managed standard 
improvements, road closures and obliteration, wildlife habitat 
enhancement, and noxious weed control.
    Preliminary resources issues identified that will influence 
alternatives developed for this project are: old growth habitat 
retention; maintenance of large, unroaded landscape blocks; economic 
and biologic effects of logging systems; and northern spotted owl 
dispersal habitat. Other issues that will be addressed through project 
design are: edge effects of management on a neighboring Late 
Successional Reserve, big game habitat conditions, and habitat 
connectivity with adjacent watersheds.
    Alternative have been developed around the Proposed Action 
addressing the dominant issues and will be compared to the ``No 
Action'' Alternative. One action alternative focuses on harvesting the 
least number of acres and staying out of the unroaded landscape blocks. 
To achieve project goals, this alternative proposes to regeneration 
harvest 77 acres (47 acres of which are old growth habitat) and thin 48 
acres. Conventional skyline and tractor logging systems will be used. 
This alternative will require 1.1 miles of new road construction and 
the obliteration of 0.6 miles of road.
    A second action alternative focuses on preserving old growth 
habitat and avoiding regeneration harvesting or road construction 
within large unroaded landscape blocks. Because only thinning is 
proposed, this alternative requires 287 acres (209 acres of which lies 
within the Pyramids unroaded landscape block) to meet project 
objectives. Helicopter logging will be used for most units, with only 
0.8 miles of new road needed and the obliteration of 0.8 miles of road.
    A third action alternative tries to balance the desires of 
preserving old growth and maintaining large, unroaded landscape blocks 
by regeneration harvesting 39 acres (23 acres of which is old growth 
habitat) and thinning 161 acres outside or around the edge of the 
Pyramids landscape block. This alternative proposes to construct 1.2 
miles of new road and the obliteration of 0.6 miles of road.
    The decisions to be made from the information and analysis include: 
number and location of harvest units; silvicultural prescriptions for 
each harvest unit; logging and transportation systems to access units; 
priorities of mitigation projects; selection of monitoring needs around 
this project.
    Initial scoping began in November 1997. The forest Service will be 
seeking additional input and comments from other agencies, 
organizations and individuals who may be interested or affected by the 
proposed project. Additional input will be helpful in identifying 
resource issues not currently identified, and in developing 
alternatives for a draft EIS.
    Comments received in response to this notice, including names and 
addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public 
record on this Proposed Action and will be available for public 
inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and 
considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments will not have 
standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR Parts 215 or 
217. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d) any person may request the 
agency to withhold a

[[Page 41913]]

submission from the public record by showing how the Freedom of 
Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality. Persons requesting 
such confidentiality should be aware that, under the FOIA, 
confidentiality may be granted in only very limited circumstances, such 
as to protect trade secrets. The Forest Service will inform the 
requester of the agency's decision regarding the request for 
confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the agency will 
return the submission and notify the requester that the comments may be 
resubmitted with or without name and address within a specified number 
of days.
    The scoping process included; identification of potential issues; 
identification of key issues to be analyzed in depth; exploration of 
additional alternatives based on identified issues from the scoping 
process; and identification of potential environmental effects from 
analyzed alternatives.
    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and will be available for public review by 
September 1999. The comment period for the draft EIS will be 45 days 
from the date the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the 
Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers 
notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the 
environmental review process. First, a reviewer of a draft EIS 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 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 45-day comment period so that substantive comments and objections 
are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can 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 in 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).
    The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by January 2000. In the 
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to substantive 
comments and responses received during the comment period that pertains 
to the environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and 
applicable laws, regulations, and policies considered in making the 
decision regarding this proposal. The Forest Service is the lead agency 
for this EIS. The responsible official is Mike Rassbach, District 
Ranger. As a responsible official, he will document the South Pyramid 
Timber Sales decision and rationale in the Record of Decision. That 
decision will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR 
Part 215).

    Dated: July 22, 1999.
Mike Rassbach,
Sweet Home District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 99-19676 Filed 7-30-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M