[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 13, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10007-10008]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3592]


 ========================================================================
 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. 66, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 13, 2001 / 
Notices  

[[Page 10007]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Bitterroot Fires 2000: Post-Fire Recovery Environmental Impact 
Statement

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Bitterroot National Forest experienced a fire season of 
historic proportions in 2000. Wildfires burned 307,000 acres on the 
Bitterroot National Forest and 49,000 acres on private and State lands 
in Ravalli County, Montana during the summer of 2000. The fires 
destroyed 70 homes, 2 commercial properties, and 167 outbuildings. Much 
of the burn occurred in the low elevation warm, dry ponderosa pine/
Douglas-fir forest type which occurs along much of the wildland urban 
interface. Due to high fuel loads prior to the fires, these warm, dry 
forest types burned at severities well outside their historic range. As 
a result of the fires, fuel loads are expected to increase dramatically 
over the next several decades as thousands of fire-killed trees fall 
over and accumulate on the forest floor. Much of this fuel build-up 
will occur in the wildland urban interface, setting the stage for 
future fires that could threaten life, homes, improvements, and 
property. The Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, will prepare 
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to reduce fuels, improve 
watershed and aquatic conditions, revegetate burned landscapes, and 
improve forest health on the Montana portion of the Bitterroot National 
Forest. The Record of Decision will disclose how the forest Service 
plans to treat fuels on an estimated 60,000 burned acres (about 20% of 
the burned acres on the Montana portion of the forest, excluding 
wilderness) using a variety of methods, including commercial timber 
sales, non-commercial thinning, piling, and burning, prescribed fire, 
and stewardship contracts. The priority areas for fuel reduction work 
would be the burned portion of the wildland urban interface, in warm 
dry forest communities, and selected areas where reforestation is 
proposed. The Record of Decision will also disclose how watershed and 
aquatic health will be improved by implementing drainage improvement 
measures on approximately 400 roads in the burned area. Treatments 
would include reconstructing existing open roads to meet Best 
Management Practices (BMP) standards, and decompacting, recontouring, 
and restoring the natural drainage pattern on certain closed roads 
which are not needed for future public or management access. Fisheries 
would be improved in the burned drainages by removing man-made barriers 
that currently fragment native fish populations, and adding woody 
debris to streams which lacked woody material prior to the fires. Tree 
seedlings would be planted on approximately 24,000 acres where natural 
regeneration is not expected to meet desired species composition and 
tree stocking levels. The Bitterroot National Forest Land and Resource 
Management Plan (Forest Plan) has a Forest-wide standard that states 
``All snags that do not present an unacceptable safety risk will be 
retained''. The Forest Plan is proposed to be amended specifically for 
this project to allow cutting snags that do not represent an 
unacceptable safety risk. This project may require additional site-
specific amendments to the Bitterroot Forest Plan. A range of 
alternative responsive to significant issues will be developed, 
including a no-action alternative.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of this project should be received 
by the Sula Ranger District, Bitterroot National Forest by March 15, 
2001.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to: Sula Ranger District, 
Bitterroot National Forest; Attn: Post-Fire Recovery EIS; 7338 Highway 
93 South; Sula, MT 59871.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Bobzien, Darby/Sula District 
Ranger, telephone: (406) 821-3201, or Stuart Lovejoy, Post-Fire 
Recovery EIS Team Leader, Sula Ranger District, 7338 Highway 93 South, 
Sula, MT 59871, telephone (406) 821-3201, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public participation will be an integral 
component of the study process, and will be especially important at 
several points during the analysis. The first is during the scoping 
process. The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments and 
assistance from federal, State, County, and local agencies, individuals 
and organizations that may be interested in or affected by the proposed 
activities. The scoping process will include: (1) Identification of 
potential issues, (2) identification of issues to be analyzed in depth, 
and (3) elimination of insignificant issues or those which have been 
covered by a previous environmental review. Written scoping comments 
will be solicited through a scoping package that will be sent to the 
project mailing list and local newspapers. For the Forest Service to 
best use the scoping input, comments should be received by March 15, 
2001. Preliminary issues identified for analysis in the EIS include the 
potential effects and relationship of the project to fire hazard 
reduction, water quality, fisheries and reparian areas, wildlife 
habitat, soil productivity, recreation, motorized access, scenery, 
heritage resources, sensitive plants, and benefits/costs of the 
proposed activities.
    Based on the results of scoping and the resource conditions within 
the project area, alternatives (including a no-action alternative) will 
be developed for the draft EIS. The draft EIS is projected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in May 2001. The final 
EIS is anticipated in September 2001.
    The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date 
that the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the Federal 
Register.
    At this early stage, the Forest Service believes it is important to 
give reviewers notice of several court ruling related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
draft EIS's 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 have been raised at the draft EIS stage,

[[Page 10008]]

but that are not raised until the completion of the final EIS, may be 
waived or dismissed by the court. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2nd 
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 on the draft EIS, 
so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the 
Forest Service at a time when they can be meaningfully considered and 
respond to them in the final EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns of 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 of the draft statement. Comments may 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 in 
40 CFR 1503.3, in addressing these points.
    Permits/Authorizations: The proposed action will require one or 
more site-specific amendments to the Bitterroot Forest Plan. Rodd 
Richardson, Forest Supervisor, Bitterroot National Forest, is the 
responsible official for the Plan amendments.
    Responsible Official: Rodd Richdardson, Forest Supervisor, 
Bitterroot National Forest, is the responsible official. In making the 
decision, the responsible official will consider the comments; 
responses; disclosure of environmental consequences; and applicable 
law, regulations, and policies. The responsible official will state the 
rationale for the chosen alternative in the Record of Decision.

    Dated: February 2, 2001.
Rodd Richardson,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 01-3592 Filed 2-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M