[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 238 (Monday, December 13, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69473-69474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32214]


 ========================================================================
 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. 238 / Monday, December 13, 1999 / 
Notices  

[[Page 69473]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Starbucky Restoration Project; Nez Perce National Forest, Idaho 
County, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The project area is located in the Buckhorn, Santiam, Rabbit, 
and Center Star watersheds, along with South Fork Clearwater River face 
drainages, T28N, R6E, Sections 1 and 12; T28N, R7E, Sections 3-10; 
T29N, R6E, Section 36; T29N, R7E, Sections 23 and 25-35, Boise 
Meridian.
    The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact statement 
(EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental effects of the project.
    The primary purpose of this project is to maintain the project 
area's forest ecosystems ecological structure and function within a 
natural and sustainable condition. The projected ecological succession 
within these watersheds will not maintain desired conditions, because 
of the limited role natural fire has been allowed to perform, and could 
pose a risk to watershed condition, fish, wildlife, and sensitive plant 
habitat.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before 
January 12, 2000 to receive timely consideration in the preparation of 
the draft EIS.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions on the proposed action 
or requests for a map of the proposed action or to be placed on the 
project mailing list to Kevin Martin, District Ranger, Red River 
District, P.O. Box 416, Elk City, Idaho 83525.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kara Chadwick, District 
Silviculturist, Red River Ranger District, P.O. Box 416, Elk City, 
Idaho 83525, phone (208) 842-2245.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action includes the following 
possible actions: (1) Maintaining the desired vegetation condition 
through timber harvest and/or prescribed burning; priority will be 
given to treat those vegetative ecosystems most at risk of moving 
outside the natural range of variability; this includes western larch, 
lodgepole pine, and ponderosa pine forest types, and candystick 
habitat; these actions may or may not provide timber products; (2) 
reducing the risk of adverse effects from wildfire to the aquatic 
resources and firefighter safety, again through timber harvest and/or 
prescribed burning; (3) improving fish habitat and stream morphology 
and function by reducing sediment production through road obliteration 
and other watershed improvement activities; (4) rehabilitating 
abandoned mine sites that pose a threat to the public or the 
environment; and (5) providing dispersed and roaded recreation 
opportunities compatible with other resources.
    The scope of this analysis is limited to activities related to the 
purpose and need and measures necessary to mitigate the effects these 
activities may have on the environment. The decision will include if, 
when, how, and where to schedule: timber harvest, watershed improvement 
activities, road obliteration, prescribed burning, recreation site 
improvement and access management, resource protection measures, 
monitoring, and other K-V activities.
    This project was originally scoped beginning in February of 1998 
prior to undertaking preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA). 
The EA was sent out for a 30-day comment period in May 1998. Due to the 
issues raised during the comment period, both internally and 
externally, the decision has been made to prepare an Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS). This Notice of Intent serves as notice of the 
intent to prepare an EIS for the Starbucky Restoration Project. The 
issues raised and the alternatives developed as a result of the public 
participation for the EA will be brought forward for the EIS. The 
general categories of issues already identified, and the alternatives 
developed from the public participation are as follows:

Issues

     Current vegetative patterns, structures, and species 
composition, and effects of activities on these components.
     Effects on Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) 
wildlife species and their habitat.
     Effects on TES plant species, especially candystick, due 
to the presence of a Priority One Conservation Unit for candystick.
     Effects on big game summer and winter range, security 
areas, and big game summer forage.
     Effects on water yield and peak flows, and effects of 
sedimentation to streams, all of which affect water quality and fish 
habitat.
     Concern for road densities.
     Concern over limited number of recreation sites/
opportunities, and resulting impacts of these limitations to resources.
     Economics of proposal.
     Effect from cumulative effects.
     Current old growth allocation and effects of project on.
     Effects on not only visuals of area, but also in respect 
to the South Fork Clearwater River corridor.
     Access to active mining claims.
     Safety of public in regards to old, abandoned mine sites.
     Relationship of this proposal to the Interim Roads Rule.

Alternatives

    In addition to the ``No Action'' alternative, five action 
alternatives have been identified for analysis:
    (a) No action.
    (b) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed 
burning of approximately 1338 acres; verification and allocation of 
Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 5.0 miles of 
temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing 
road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine 
reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.
    (c) Vegetative treatment through prescribed burning only of 
approximately 330 acres of winter range; no road construction; 
verification and allocation of Forest Plan old growth; obliteration of 
approximately 4.1 miles of existing road, along with other watershed 
improvement activities; mine reclamation; recreation site improvement; 
and access management.

[[Page 69474]]

    (d) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed 
burning of approximately 675 acres; verification and allocation of 
Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 0.7 miles of 
temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing 
road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine 
reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.
    (e) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed 
burning of approximately 1338 acres; verification and allocation of 
Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 6.1 miles of 
temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing 
road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine 
reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.
    (f) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed 
burning of approximately 1338 acres; verification and allocation of 
Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 8.6 miles of 
temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing 
road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine 
reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.
    Note that the acreages, the miles of temporary road construction 
and miles of road obliteration are approximate only and may change 
during the analysis.
    Public participation will continue to be an important part of the 
project, commencing with the EIS initial scoping process (40 CFR 
1501.7), which starts with publication of this notice and continues for 
the next 30 days. In addition, the public 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, the Nez Perce 
Tribe, and other individuals or organizations who may be interested in 
or affected by the proposed action.
    Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in 
preparation of the draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to:
    1. Identify additional potential issues;
    2. Identify additional major issues to be analyzed in depth;
    3. Eliminate minor issues or those which have been covered by a 
relevant previous environmental analysis, such as the Nez Perce 
National Forest Plan EIS;
    4. Identify additional alternatives to the proposed action;
    5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action 
and alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects).
    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, which is 
expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency and 
available for public review in March 2000. A 45-day comment period will 
follow publication of a Notice of Availability of the draft EIS in the 
Federal Register. The comments received will be analyzed and considered 
in preparation of a final EIS, which is expected to be filed in July 
2000. A Record of Decision will be issued not less than 30 days after 
publication of a Notice of Availability of the final EIS in the Federal 
Register.
    The Forest Service believes it is important at this early stage to 
give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
draft EISs must structure their participation in the environmental 
review of the proposal in such a way 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, 513 (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 in order that 
substantive comments and objections are 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 should 
be as specific as possible. 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.
    Bruce Bernhardt is the responsible official for this environmental 
impact statement.

    Dated: November 29, 1999.
Bruce Bernhardt,
Forest Supervisor, Nez Perce National Forest.
[FR Doc. 99-32214 Filed 12-10-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M