[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 21, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15122-15123]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-6903]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the 
Huckleberry Land Exchange, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, 
Skagit, Snohomish, King, Pierce, Lewis, Kittitas, and Cowlitz Counties, 
Washington

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a supplemental environmental impact 
statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare a supplement to the final 
environmental impact statement for the Huckleberry Land Exchange. The 
supplemental EIS is intended to meet the May 19, 1999 order of the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, as remanded back 
to the Forest Service by United States District Court on October 12, 
1999 (No. C97-786WD and C97-803WD, 9th Cir. No. 98-35043). Further 
analysis will be done to address specific issues raised by the Court of 
Appeals.

DATES: Any comments concerning the analysis should be received, in 
writing, by April 17, 2000 to be most useful. See below for information 
on estimated dates for release of the supplemental draft environmental 
impact statement and public comment period.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to John Phipps, Forest Supervisor, 
21905--64th Avenue West, Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Everett White, Washington Lands 
Adjustment Team Leader, Forest Supervisor's Office. Phone: (425) 744-
3442. Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In July 1991, the USDA Forest Service and 
Weyerhaeuser Company signed a Statement of Intent to enter into a land 
exchange involving lands in the Huckleberry Mountain area and other 
areas within the boundaries of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National 
Forest. Scoping and public involvement was initiated in June 1994; a 
draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) was released in July 1996. 
After a public comment period, a final EIS and concurrent Record of 
Decision (ROD) was issued in November 1996. The ROD called for 
implementation of the exchange through a modification of Alternative 3, 
as analyzed in the FEIS.
    The decision was appealed (pursuant to 36 CFR part 215) in early 
1997. The three appeals were denied in early March 1997.
    In late March 1997, pursuant to the ROD, the Forest Service and 
Weyerhaeuser Company executed an exchange agreement: Weyerhaeuser 
conveyed to the United States 30,253 acres of land in and around the 
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest in return for 4,362 acres of land 
in the Huckleberry Mountain area. In addition, Weyerhaeuser donated to 
the United States 962 acres for addition to the Alpine Lakes Wilderness 
and 1,034 acres for addition to the National Forest System outside the 
Wilderness.
    In the spring of 1997, two complaints were filed in the federal 
district court, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to halt the 
Huckleberry Land Exchange. The district court consolidated the two 
actions and granted Weyerhaeuser's motion to intervene. In December, 
1997, the district court concluded the agency had met all applicable 
laws and denied the plaintiff's motion.
    Plaintiffs did not seek a stay of the district court's order 
pending appeal, but appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the 
district court's decision regarding their claims under the National 
Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and the National Historic 
Preservation Act (NHPA).
    Because there was no stay, the exchange was finalized on March 12, 
1998. Weyerhaeuser initiated timber harvest on the lands the company 
acquired.
    On May 19, 1999, the Ninth Circuit Court reversed the decision of 
the district court in several areas and remanded the case back to the 
district court with directions that it remand to the Forest Service for 
further proceedings under NEPA and NHPA consistent with the opinion. 
The Ninth Circuit Court also enjoined any further management activities 
on the land until the Forest Service satisfies the NEPA and NHPA 
obligations it identified. In response, the Forest Service has decided 
to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement.
    The SEIS will display the original alternatives (including no 
action); the modified Alternative 3, selected in the 1996 ROD; and 
three new alternatives: the two alternatives ordered by the

[[Page 15123]]

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal (purchase and deed restrictions) and an 
alternative that would include fewer acres exchanged. The SEIS will not 
address any exchange parcels that were not analyzed in the 1996 EIS. 
The SEIS will disclose the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of 
the alternatives. Past, present, and projected activities on both 
private and National Forest system lands will be considered.
    The original issues will guide the analysis, along with the issues 
raised by the Court of Appeals.
    No scoping meetings are planned (40 CFR 1502.9(c)(4)). Comments 
received in response to this solicitation, 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 part 215. 
Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request the 
agency to withhold a 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 30 
days.
    The draft SEIS is expected to be filed in July 2000. Following 
release of the Draft SEIS, there will be a 45-day public comment period 
from the date the Environmental Protection Agency published the notice 
of availability in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers 
notice at this early stage 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 but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement 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 them and respond to 
them in the final environmental impact statement.
    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 
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 SEIS is scheduled to be completed in December 2000. In 
the final SEIS, the Forest Service will respond to comments received 
(during the comment period) that pertain to the environmental 
consequences discussed in the draft SEIS, and applicable laws, 
regulations, and policies considered for this proposal. The lead agency 
is the Forest Service; the Forest Supervisor of the Mt. Baker-
Snoqualmie National Forest is the responsible official. The responsible 
official will document the decision and the rationale for the decision 
in the Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest 
Service appeal regulations 36 CFR part 215.

    Dated: March 7, 2000.
Mary E. Wells,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-6903 Filed 3-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M