[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 241 (Thursday, December 16, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70210-70212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32606]


 ========================================================================
 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. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 1999 / 
Notices  

[[Page 70210]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Pipestone Forest Health Project, Kootenai National Forest, 
Lincoln County, MT

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) to disclose the environmental effects of vegetation 
management through timber harvest and prescribed burning; road 
maintenance, reconstruction and construction; and habitat improvement 
projects such as instream fisheries habitat enhancement in that portion 
of the Pipestone landscape assessment area which encompasses the Pipe 
and Bobtail Creek drainages. The southern and northernmost extent of 
the landscape assessment area are located approximately 1 and 20 air 
miles, respectively, from Libby, Montana.
    The proposed activities are being considered together because they 
represent either connected or cumulative actions as defined by the 
Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.25). The purposes of the 
project are to improve forest health, improve watershed and fisheries 
habitat, and contribute to a sustained yield of timber.
    The EIS will tier to the Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource 
Management Plan as amended by the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFS), 
Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), and Record of Decision 
(ROD) of September, 1987, which provides overall guidance for forest 
management of the area.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before 
January 18, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Bob Castaneda, the Kootenai 
National Forest Supervisor, 1101 U.S. Hwy 2 West, Libby, Montana 59923. 
Written comments and suggestions concerning this analysis may be sent 
to Malcom Edwards, Libby District Ranger, 12557 U.S. Hwy 37, Libby, 
Montana 59923.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kirsten Kaiser, Project Coordinator, Libby Ranger District. Phone: 
(406) 293-7773.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The portion of the landscape assessment area 
being analyzed is approximately 81,300 acres; approximately 68,000 
acres are under Forest Service ownership and approximately 13,200 acres 
are under private ownership. All proposed activities would occur on 
National Forest lands within the assessment area that includes all or 
parts of T34N, R32W, Section 36; T34N, R31W, Sections 11, 14, 15, 21-
36; T34N, R30W, Section 1; T33N R32W, Sections 1, 12, 23-25, 36; T33N, 
R31W, Sections 1-36; T33N, R30W, Sections 18-20, 29-33; T32N, R32W, 
Sections 1, 12-13, 24, 25, 36; T32N, R31W, Sections 1-36; T32N, R30W, 
Sections 5-10, 15-21, 29-32; T31N, R31W, Sections 1-22, 29, 30; T31N, 
R30W, Sections 4-9, 17, 18; Principal Montana Meridian.
    The assessment area includes the Gold Hill West Roadless Area. 
Prescribed burning is proposed in this roadless area. All remaining 
proposed activities are outside the boundaries of any inventoried 
roadless area or any areas considered for inclusion to the National 
Wilderness System as recommended by the Kootenai National Forest Plan 
or by any past or present legislative wilderness proposals.
    The Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 
provides overall management objectives in individual delineated 
management areas (MAs). Most of the proposed timber harvest activities 
encompass five predominant MAs: 11, 12, 15, 16, 17. Briefly described, 
MA 11 is managed to maintain or enhance the winter range habitat 
effectiveness for big game species and produce a programmed yield of 
timber. MA 12 is managed to maintain or enhance the summer range 
habitat effectiveness for big game species and produce a programmed 
yield of timber. MA 15 focuses upon timber production using various 
silvicultural practices while providing for other resource values. MA 
16 is managed to produce timber while providing for a pleasing view. MA 
17 is managed to maintain or enhance a natural appearing landscape and 
produce a programmed yield of timber. Minor amounts of timber harvest 
and/or other proposed activities such as prescribed burning are found 
in other MAs, including 6, 13, 14, 18, 19.

Purpose and Need

    The primary purpose and need for the project is to: (1) Improve 
forest health by reducing tree densities, changing species composition, 
stimulating natural processes, reducing insect and disease, and 
improving visual condition; (2) improve watershed health and fisheries 
habitat by improving habitat conditions, stabilizing stream segments, 
and reducing road effects; (3) contribute to a sustained yield of 
timber through improvement of forest health.

Proposed Activities

    The Forest Service proposes to harvest approximately 18,000 CCF 
(hundred cubic feet), equivalent to 7.5 MMBF (million board feet) of 
timber through the application of a variety of harvest methods on 
approximately 1738 acres of forestland. Silvicultural systems include 
378 acres of regeneration harvest, 1103 acres of commercial thinning 
type applications, 206 acres of salvage, and 51 acres of removal of 
small diameter material. Some treatments would feather or thin stands 
adjacent to existing units with abrupt edges to improve the visual 
setting for outdoor recreation.
    The proposal also includes approximately 325 acres of prescribed 
burning in association with commercial timber harvest and approximately 
3695 acres of prescribed burning without commercial timber harvest. 
Prescribed burning without timber harvest is proposed within management 
area 13 (designated old growth) and the Gold Hill West Roadless Area.
    The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) and District Ranger will consider 
firewood gathering opportunities for the public on roads to be opened 
for logging activities and/or on roads to be decommissioned will be 
considered by the IDT and District Ranger.
    The proposal includes constructing an estimated 0.68 miles of 
specified permanent road to access vegetation treatment areas. A 
temporary increase in

[[Page 70211]]

open road densities (ORDs) associated with proposed management 
activities may result in the need for a site-specific Forest Plan ORD 
amendment in MA 12 (big game summer range).
    The proposal includes expansion of the Upper Pipe Creek Gravel Pit 
to provide for mineral material necessary to maintain, reconstruct, 
construct and/or improve roads in the assessment area.
    The proposal includes creation of cavity habitat through tree 
inoculation (inoculation kills the tree) resulting in habitat for 
cavity nesting species where cavity habitat is limited by past 
management activities.
    In addition to the above activities, the following watershed and 
fisheries improvement activities are proposed which would include: (1) 
Placement of large woody debris in Deception Creek; (2) instream 
habitat enhancement work (placement of structures) in Pipe Creek; (3) 
habitat and stream stability improvement projects in Bobtail Creek; (4) 
approximately 30 miles of road reconstruction and maintenance; (5) 
maintenance and improvement of the East Fork Pipe Creek Road; (6) 
decommissioning approximately 56 miles of road.

Range of Alternatives

    The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. A ``no 
action'' alternative in which none of the proposed activities would be 
implemented would be considered. Additional alternatives may be 
considered to achieve the project's purpose and need and to respond to 
specific resource issues and public concerns.

Preliminary Issues

    Tentatively, several issues have been identified during the initial 
and informal communication phase with the public and internal 
communication with Forest Service personnel. These issues are briefly 
described below:
    Cumulative Effects. What are the effects to various resource value 
of past and foreseeable activities on public and private lands within 
the project area?
    Road Access and Decommissioning. What effect would decommissioning 
efforts have on public access?
    Grizzly Bear. What effect would proposed activities have on the 
threatened grizzly bear?
    Water Quality and Fisheries Habitat. What effects would the 
proposed actions have on water quality and bull trout habitat?
    Noxious/invasive weeds. What effect will the proposed activities 
have on the control or spread of noxious weeds?
    Timber Supply and Economics. How will the proposed activities 
affect timber supplies and produce economic benefits to local 
communities?

Public Involvement and Scoping

    Beginning in March of 1997, preliminary efforts were made to 
involve the public in looking at opportunities for restoration and 
management of the Pipestone landscape assessment area. Public 
participation has consisted of a series of informational mailings, 
notices in local and regional newspapers, field trips, local television 
advertisements, a radio address, and an open house. Taking into account 
the comments received and information gathered during the preliminary 
analysis, it was decided to prepare an EIS for the Pipestone landscape 
assessment area. Comments received prior to this notice will be 
included in the documentation for the EIS.
    This environmental analysis and decisionmaking process will enable 
interested and affected people to participate and contribute to the 
final decision. 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, 
Tribes, local agencies and other individuals or organizations who may 
be interested in or affected by the proposed action. This input will be 
used in preparation of the draft and final EIS. The scoping process 
will assist in identifying potential issues, identifying issues to be 
analyzed in depth, identifying alternatives to the proposed action, and 
considering additional alternatives which will be derived from issues 
identified during scoping activities.

Estimated Dates for Filing

    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. The Draft EIS 
is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
and to be available for public review by July, 2000. At that 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 a minimum of 45 
days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of Availability in the 
Federal Register.
    The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed by October of 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.

Reviewers Obligations

    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 environmental impact statements 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 environmental impact statement stage 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 meaningfully consider 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 
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 
discussed. 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.

Responsible Official

    The Responsible Official, Kootenai Forest Supervisor Bob Castaneda, 
will decide which, if any, of the proposed projects will be 
implemented. This decision will document reasons for the decision in 
the Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest Service 
Appeal Regulations.


[[Page 70212]]


    Dated: December 6, 1999.
Bob Castaneda,
Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 99-32606 Filed 12-15-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M