[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 28, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52274-52276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-25027]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Wasatch-Cache National 
Forest, UT

AGENCY: Forest Service.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement 
in conjunction with revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan 
for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest located in Box Elder, Cache, 
Davis, Duchesne, Morgan, Rich, Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, Wasatch, and 
Weber counties, Utah; and Uinta County, Wyoming.

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

SUMMARY: the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement in conjunction with a revision of the 
Land and Resource Management Plan (hereinafter referred to as Forest 
Plan) for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest.
    This notice describes the needs for change identified to this point 
in the current Forest Plan to be revised, estimated dates for filing 
the Environmental Impact Statement, information concerning public 
participation, and the names and addresses of the agency officials who 
can provide additional information. The purpose of the notice is to 
begin the scoping phase of public involvement in the revision process.

DATES: Comments concerning the intent to prepare a revised Forest Plan 
should be received in writing by November 1, 1999. The agency expects 
to file a Draft Environmental Impact Statement in June of 2000 and a 
Final Environmental Impact Statement in the December of 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Bernie Weingardt, Forest 
Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache National Forest, 8236 Federal Building, 125 
South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84138.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Blackwell, Planning Team 
Leader, Wasatch-Cache National Forest (801) 524-3907.
    Responsible official: Jack Blackwell, Intermountain Regional 
Forester, at 324 25th Street, Ogden, UT 84401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to part 36 Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) 219.10 (f) and (g), the Regional Forester for the 
Intermountain Region gives notice of the agency's intent to prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement for the revision of the Wasatch-Cache 
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. According to 36 CFR 
219.10(g), Land and Resource Management Plans shall ordinarily be 
revised on a 10- to 15-year cycle. The existing Forest Plan for the 
Wasatch-Cache National Forest was approved on September 4, 1985.
    The Regional Forester gives notice that the Wasatch-Cache National 
Forest is beginning an environmental analysis and decision-making 
process for the proposed programmatic action to revise the Wasatch-
Cache Forest Plan. Opportunities will be provided to discuss the Forest 
Plan revision with the public. The public is invited to help identify 
issues that will be considered in defining the range of alternatives in 
the Environmental Impact Statement.
    Forest plans describe the long-term direction for managing National 
Forests. Agency decisions in these plans do the following:
     Establish multiple-use goals and objectives (36 CFR 
219.11);
     Establish forest-wide management requirements (standards 
and guidelines);
     Establish management areas and management area direction 
through the application of management prescriptions;
     Identify lands not suited for timber production (36 CFR 
219.3);
     Establish monitoring and evaluation requirements; and
     Recommend areas for official designation of wilderness.
    The authorization of project-level activities on the Forest occurs 
through project, or site-specific, decision-making. Project level 
decisions must comply with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
procedures and must include a determination that the project is 
consistent with the Forest Plan.

Need for Change in the Current Forest Plan

    The Forest completed a monitoring report in 1992. The results of 
the monitoring report, in addition to public input and Forest Plan 
implementation experience, indicated that there is a need for change in 
some management direction in the Forest Plan. Several sources were used 
in determining the needed changes in the current Forest Plan. These 
sources include:
     Comments received from employees who have been 
implementing the Plan.
     Findings from the Forest Plan monitoring report;
     Comparison of regulatory, manual, and handbook 
requirements with current Plan direction;
     National direction, policy and initiatives;
     New information from research, and
     Public comments received regarding the findings in the

[[Page 52275]]

Preliminary Analysis of the Management Situation.

Preliminary Analysis of the Management Situation

    In April, 1999, the Wasatch-Cache National Forest published 
Preliminary Analysis of the Management Situation (PAMS). The PAMS 
summarized the current management and resource conditions of the 
Forest, outlined a new ecosystem management framework for the Forest 
Plan, and disclosed eight significant ``needs for change'' forest 
managers and resource specialists identified. The PAMS was mailed and 
distributed to nearly 500 interested individuals, non-government 
organizations, city, county, state and other federal agencies. A series 
of 11 information forums were held that over 200 people attended. 
Public comments were encouraged regarding the findings disclosed in the 
PAMS. The Forest Supervisor has identified two additional ``needs for 
change'' that will be included in the revision of the Forest Plan. The 
``needs for change'' topics include:

1. Watershed Health

     Need to set objectives and direction for using a watershed 
approach to land management planning and watershed restoration.
     Need to develop watershed health goals for management 
areas.
     Need to set direction for establishing priority watersheds 
for restoration and for setting individual project priorities within 
watersheds.
     Need to set direction for protection of forest wetland.

2. Biodiversity and Viability

     Need to use the broader approach as identified in the 
ecosystem management framework based on research and new best science.
     Need to develop direction for habitat connectivity, links 
between landscapes, corridors, habitat edge, and horizontal and 
vertical diversity (structural stages).
     Need to develop forest management direction that address 
appropriate stocking levels, stand structure, and species composition 
that incorporates the extent and frequency of all types of 
disturbances.
     Need for guidance on the use of native plant species 
(including the collection of seed) in revegetation and/or 
rehabilitation activities on the forest.
     Need to consider and recognize the frequency, size, 
intensity and severity of disturbance processes in determining 
vegetative conditions and how management practices have altered them. 
The positive effects of prescribed fire and wildland fire use also 
needs to be recognized.
     Need for management direction that addresses important 
soil processes (erosion rates, mass stability, infiltration, nutrient 
cycling, etc.) as they relate biological diversity.
     Need for snag and coarse woody debris guidance that help 
maintain ecosystem structure and function. Guidance needs to develop 
and refine information to ensure an adequate diversity of size and 
decay class of snags and coarse woody debris.
     Need to develop management direction that describes 
desired structure and density for each structural stage, from opening 
to mature and old growth.
     Need to provide integrated management guidance and 
direction for species and communities in which they occur (the whole 
instead of pieces). This includes TES, Fish and Wildlife Service 
candidate species, species (and habitats) at risk, MIS, and other rare 
and unique plant, fish and animal species.

3. Road/Trail/Access Management

     Need to incorporate goals and direction of the new 
transportation policy as appropriate.
     Need for the appropriate forest road system to be a 
primary component of the desired future for a management area.
     Need goals to achieve an integrated transportation system 
with multiple functions not serving a single resource need.
     Need adaptive standards for road construction rather than 
a static, outdated list.
     Need to delete road density standards as a stand-alone 
requirement, rather use them as a component of desired future.
     Need to delete specific travel management guidelines and 
establish criteria (standards) for making future site-specific travel 
management decisions.

4. Recreation Niche

     Need to address the trends in population growth and how 
the Wasatch-Cache can best meet growing demands for outdoor recreation 
opportunities.
     Need to provide guidance for resource use preference 
within a management area or prescription area.
     Need to determine the Wasatch-Cache niche as a outdoor 
recreation provider.
     Need to address management of dispersed recreation in 
order to sustain healthy eco-systems.

5. Wild and Scenic Rivers

     Need to provide for interim protection of eligible segment 
values until suitability studies are completed. Suitability will not be 
addressed in the Forest plan revision.

6. Roadless Areas/Wilderness Recommendations

     Need to make wilderness recommendation for roadless areas 
thought to be appropriate addition.
     Need to develop management direction to protect roadless 
values where appropriate.

7. Appropriate Timberlands

     Need to reassess tentatively suited/unsuited lands for 
timber production.
     Need to incorporate new standards and guidelines added for 
sensitive species habitat (e.g. northern goshawk).
     Need to address correction of growth and yield errors 
identified in the 5 year monitoring report.

8. Rangeland Capability and Suitability

     Need to reassess rangeland capability.
     Need to reassess rangeland suitability.

9. Research Natural Areas

     Need to identify potential areas in the Forest that could 
contribute to diversity within the RNA system in Utah.

10. Oil and Gas Leasing

     Need to make leasing decisions for the portion of the 
north slope of the Uinta Mountains which was not decided in the 1994 
Forest Plan amendment.
    More detailed information on the ``need for change'' topics is 
available upon request.

Programmatic Proposed Action

    At this early stage in the revision process, the proposed action 
consists of these elements: (1) Proposed forestwide goals and 
monitoring; and (2) management prescription maps and highlights of 36 
management areas. Details of the proposed action are available upon 
request. The proposed action is also available on the forest website at 
www.fs.fed.us/wcnf.

Framework for Alternatives To Be Considered

    Through a range of alternatives economic and social community 
stability will be considered in revising the Forest Plan. The 
alternatives will address different options to resolve the issues 
identified in the revision topics listed above. Alternatives must meet 
the

[[Page 52276]]

purpose and need for revision to be considered valid. One of the 
alternatives to be examined is the ``no-action alternative.'' This is a 
required alternative that represents continuation of management under 
the 1985 Forest Plan, as amended. Alternatives are developed in 
response to public issues, management concerns, and resource 
opportunities identified during the scoping process. In describing 
alternatives, desired vegetation and resource conditions will be 
defined.

Involving the Public

    The Forest Service is seeking information and comments from 
individuals, organizations and federal, state, and local agencies who 
may be interested in or affected by the proposed action (36 CFR 219.6).
    Public participation will be solicited by notifying in person and/
or by mail, known interested and affected publics. News releases will 
be used to give the public general notice, and public involvement 
opportunities will be offered at various locations. Public 
participation activities may include written comments, open houses, 
focus groups and collaborative forums.
    Public participation will be sought throughout the revision process 
and will be especially important at several points along the way. The 
first formal opportunity to comment is during the scoping process (40 
CFR 1501.7). Public open houses are scheduled in four communities at 
the following locations and dates.

October 12--Weber County Library, 131 South 7400 East, Huntsville, 
Utah, 4:00-7:00 p.m.
October 13--Salt Lake City-County Building, 451 South State Street, 
Salt Lake City, 4:00-7:00 p.m.
October 14--Logan Ranger District Office, 1500 East Highway 89, Logan, 
Utah, 4:00-7:00 p.m.
October 19--School Board Room, 129 2nd Street, Mountain View, Wyoming, 
5:00-8:00 p.m.

Release and Review of the EIS

    The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is expected to be 
filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be 
available for public comment in June of 2000. At that time, the EPA 
will publish a notice of availability in the Federal Register. The 
comment period on the Draft EIS will be at least 90 days from the date 
the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register, 
as required by the planning regulations.
    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 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 DEIS stage but are not raised until after 
completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (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 comment period so that 
substantive comments and objectives 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 programmatic actions, 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 statements. 
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.
    After the comment period ends on the Draft EIS, comments will be 
analyzed, considered, and responded to by the Forest Service in 
preparing the Final EIS. The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed in 
December of 2000. The responsible official will consider the comments, 
responses, and environmental consequences discussed in the Final EIS, 
and applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making decisions 
regarding the revision. The responsible official will document the 
decisions and reasons for the decisions in a Record of Decision for the 
revised plan. The decisions will be subject to appeal in accordance 
with 36 CFR part 217. Jack A. Blackwell, Intermountain Regional 
Forester, is the responsible official for this EIS.

    Dated: September 21, 1999.
Pam Gardiner,
Deputy Wasatch-Cache Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 99-25027 Filed 9-27-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M