[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 1, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21625-21629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-10778]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Ozark-St. 
Francis National Forests in Arkansas

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service intends to prepare an environmental 
impact statement (EIS) for revising the Ozark-St. Francis National 
Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (hereinafter referred to as 
the Forest Plan) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5) and USDA Forest 
Service National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning 
regulations. The revised Forest Plan will supersede the current Forest 
Plan, which the Regional Forester approved July 29, 1986, and has been 
amended 11 times.
    The agency invites written comments and suggestions within the 
scope of the analysis described below. In addition, the agency gives 
notice that a full environmental analysis and decision-making process 
will occur on the proposal so that interested and affected people are 
aware of how they may participate and contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments on this Notice of Intent (NOI) and, specifically, on 
the scope of the analysis to be included in the EIS, should be received 
in writing by August 2, 2002. The agency expects to file the draft EIS 
(DEIS) with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and make it 
available for public comment in 2004. The Agency expects to file the 
final EIS (FEIS) in September of 2005.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: Ozark-St. Francis National 
Forests, Planning, 605 West Main Street, Russellville, Arkansas 72801. 
Electronic mail should be sent to: [email protected]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deryl Jevons, Forest Planning Tam 
Leader, at 479-968-2354. Information will also be posted on the forest 
web page at http: //www.fs.fed.us/oonf/ozark/planning/planning. The 
Regional Forester for the Southern Region located at 1720 Peachtree 
Street, NW., Atlanta, GA 30309, is the Responsible Official.
    Affected Counties: This NOI affects Baxter, Benton, Conway, 
Crawford, Franklin, Johnson, Lee, Logan, Madison, Marion, Newton, 
Phillips, Pope, Searcy, Stone, Van Burden, Washington, and Yell 
counties in Arkansas.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background Information

1. The Role of Forest Plans

    National Forest System resource allocation and management decisions 
are made in two stages. The first stage is the Forest Plan, which 
involves the establishment of management direction by allocating lands 
and resources within the plan area to various uses or conditions 
through management areas and management prescriptions. The second stage 
is plan implementation through approval of project decisions. forest 
Plans do not compel the agency to undertake any site-specific projects; 
rather, they establish overall goals and objectives (or desired 
resource conditions) that the individual national forest will strive to 
meet. Forest Plans also establish limitations on what actions may be 
authorized and what conditions must be met during project decision-
making.
    Agency decisions in Forest Plans do the following:
    a. Establish forest-wide multiple-use goals and objectives (36 CFR 
219.11(b)).
    b. Establish management areas and management area direction through 
the application of management prescriptions and multiple-use 
prescriptions (36 CFR 219.11(c)).
    c. Establish monitoring and evaluation requirements (36 CFR 
219.11(d)).
    d. Establish forest-wide management requirements (standards and 
guidelines) (36 CFR 219.13 to 219.27).
    e. Determine the suitability and potential capability of lands for 
resource production. This includes identifying lands not suited for 
timber production and establishment of allowable sale quantity (36 CFR 
219.14).
    f. Where applicable, recommend official designation of special 
areas such as wilderness (36 CFR 219.17) and wild and scenic rivers to 
Congress.
    g. Where applicable, designate those lands administratively 
available for oil and gas leasing and, when appropriate, authorize the 
Bureau of Land Management to offer specific lands for leasing. (36 CFR 
228.102(d) and (e)).

    Note: The above citations are from the 1982 36 CFR 219 planning 
regulations. See also section G.


[[Page 21626]]



2. The Beginning of the Forest Plan Revision Effort for the Ozark-St. 
Francis National Forests

    For the Forest Plan revision, an effort was made to first define 
the current situation and estimate the ``need for change.'' A key part 
of defining the current situation was the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands 
Assessment. On October 16, 1996, a notice was published in the Federal 
Register (Vol. 61, No. 201) that identified the relationships between 
the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment and Forest Plan revisions for 
the National Forests in Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. In addition 
to reviewing the results of this broad-scale assessment and the draft 
conclusions of a more recent assessment (described below), the Forests 
evaluated the ``initial need for change'' using the experience of 
employees responsible for implementing the Forest Plan as well as the 
results of the mid-plan review, monitoring, research, and public 
comments received from 1990 through early 2002. These evaluations are 
the basis for the preliminary issues and proposed actions identified in 
this notice. Additional issues or topics will be developed as needed to 
respond to public comments received in response to this NOI and 
subsequent scoping efforts.

3. The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment and the Southern Forest 
Resource Assessment

    The U.S. Forest Service and many other agencies participated in the 
preparation of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment, which 
culminated in a final summary and four technical reports that were made 
available to the public in early 2000 (available at the Forest Plan web 
page address provided near the beginning of this document). This 
Assessment included national forest system lands and private lands 
within the highlands of Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma.
    The Assessment facilitated ecologically based approaches to public 
land management in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands by collecting and 
analyzing broadscale biological, physical, social, and economic data. 
The Assessment supports the revision of the Forest Plan by describing 
how the lands, resources, people, and management of the national 
forests interrelate within the larger context of the Ozark-Ouachita 
Highlands area. This Assessment, however, is not a ``decision 
document'' and it did not involve the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) process.
    The Southern Forest Resource Assessment was initiated in May 1999 
to examine the status, trends, and potential future of southern 
forests. The USDA Forest Service led the effort in cooperation with the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, EPA, Tennessee Valley Authority, and 
southern States represented by their forestry and fish and wildlife 
agencies. This Assessment addresses the sustainability of southern 
forests in light of increasing urbanization and timber harvests, 
changing technologies (including chip mills), forest pests, climatic 
changes, and other factors that influence the region's forests. In late 
2001, draft reports from the Southern Forest Resource Assessment were 
made available to the public. Some of these findings will be 
incorporated into the revised Forest Plan.

4. Relationship of the Forest Plan Revision for the Ozark-St. Francis 
National Forests to Revision Efforts for the Mark Twain and the 
Ouachita National Forests

    Forest Plan revision will be conducted simultaneously on these 
national forests. The Forests anticipate that a separate EIS and 
revised Forest Plan will be produced for each administrative unit. The 
respective Forest Supervisors have agreed to coordinate the revisions 
when feasible and practical. The respective planning teams will work 
together to address common issues.

5. The Role of Scoping in Revising the Land and Resource Management 
Plan

    This NOI includes a description of ``Preliminary Issues'' and 
``Proposed Actions'' for the revision of the Forest Plan of the Ozark-
St. Francis National Forests. The Proposed Actions concern one or more 
of the plan decisions identified in the purpose and need. Scoping to 
receive public comments on the preliminary issues and proposed actions 
will begin following the publication of this NOI. Public comments 
received during this period will be used to further define the 
preliminary issues that should be addressed, the Forest Plan decisions 
that need to be analyzed (the ``proposed actions'' and ``need for 
change''), and the range of alternatives that will be developed. For 
more information on how the public can become involved during the 
scoping period, see Section F of this NOI.

B. Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose for revising the Forest Plan comes from the 
requirements for land and resource management planning in the National 
Forest Management Act (NFMA) and the implementing regulations contained 
in 36 CFR 219. According to 36 CFR 219.10(g), Forest Plans are 
ordinarily revised on a 10-15 year cycle. The need to revise this 
Forest Plan is also driven by the changing conditions identified in the 
Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment, the Southern Forest Resource 
Assessment, and ongoing monitoring and evaluation results.

C. Preliminary Issues

    Preliminary issues for the Ozark-St. Francis National Forests plan 
revision focus on parts of the current Forest Plan where change may be 
needed. The preliminary issues were derived from: the Ozark-Highlands 
Assessment, the Southern Forest Resource Assessment, internal comments 
from forest managers, results of monitoring, the mid-plan review, and a 
series of public meetings. The proposed actions in section D give a 
detailed description of why the issues were developed.

1. Mix of Developed Recreation Opportunities

    The Forest needs to determine the type of development, settings, 
and services to provide in the next 15 years.

2. Public Access and Dispersed Recreation Opportunities

    The Forest needs to determine the combination of land allocation 
for motorized and non-motorized trail and road access to minimize 
conflict among users, provide recreation opportunities, and protect the 
resources.

3. Special Areas

    The Forest needs to determine what special areas are needed. Some 
examples are: wild and scenic rivers, special interest areas, 
wilderness, scenic byways, research natural areas (RNAs), and 
experimental forests.

4. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability

    The Forest needs to determine what actions and land allocations are 
needed to insure the health of ecosystems while considering plant, 
animal, and human interaction.

5. Relationship of NFMA to Communities and Economies

    The issue is how to balance the economic and social needs of the 
public while managing for forest health and sustainability.

D. Proposed Actions

    The following proposed actions are being considered for revision in 
the Forest Plan. Each was placed into one

[[Page 21627]]

of two categories: (1) Actions appropriate for inclusion in the 
revision because of laws or regulation. (2) Actions identified based on 
information found in monitoring reports, insight from Forest Service 
employees regarding the effectiveness of the current Plan, and public 
demand.

1. Actions Appropriate for Inclusion in the Forest Plan Revision

    The following topics will be included in the Forest Plan revision 
because law and/or regulation require them to be considered in all 
Forest Plan revisions:
a. Wild and Scenic Rivers
    The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 was enacted to protect and 
preserve, in their free-flowing condition, certain selected rivers of 
the nation and their immediate environments. The Act established the 
National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, designated rivers to be 
included in the system, established policy for managing designated 
rivers, and prescribed a process for designating additional rivers to 
the system. The Act, in Section 5(d)(1), requires consideration of 
potential additions to the National System as part of the ongoing 
planning process.
    The 1986 Forest Plan determined the rivers identified by the 
Department of the Interior through the Nationwide Rivers Inventory 
(1982) were eligible for further study. In April 1987, the Forest 
completed Amendment 2 to the Forest Plan, which classified each 
eligible river and established direction to protect those rivers until 
a suitability study could be completed. The Forest completed the 
sustainability study in 1991. The FEIS and Study Report evaluated 13 
rivers, and recommended six. On April 23, 1992, Congress amended the 
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, adding the six recommended rivers into the 
Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The Forests will review other rivers to 
see if they may be eligible for further study.
b. Wilderness Recommendation
    Forest Service policy and regulations in 36 CFR 219.17, require 
that roadless areas be evaluated and considered for recommendation as 
potential wilderness during the forest planning process. The Ozark-St. 
Francis National Forests currently have five wilderness areas. 
Management Area 1 of the 1986 Forest Plan provides direction for these 
areas. These wildernesses were originally identified in the Roadless 
Area Review and Evaluation, known as RARE II. There are approximately 
73,000 acres left from RARE II not designated as wilderness. This land 
was identified in a set of inventoried roadless area maps contained in 
the Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation, FEIS, Volume 2, dated 
November 2000. Forest Service interim direction 1920-2001-1, dated 
December 14, 2001, stated lands remaining from the RARE II inventory 
would be re-evaluated for roadless area characteristics during the 
Forest Plan revision process. The proposed action is for the Forest to 
evaluate these lands as well as any other lands that meet the criteria 
for inventoried roadless areas for potential wilderness area 
consideration.
c. Reevaluation of Lands Not Suited for Timber
    NFMA and its implementing regulations require identification of 
lands suitable for timber management. The revision process provides an 
opportunity to reassess and better define lands suitable for timber 
management and to account for changes in land status and uses. The 
revision will also use technology (such as GIS data) that was not 
available during development of the original Forest Plan. The proposed 
action is to better define which lands are suited for timber production 
and make appropriate adjustments.

2. Need for Change--Proposed Actions

    The following proposed actions will be included in the revision 
based on the following: information found in monitoring reports, 
insight from Forest Service employees and their experience with the 
current Plan, new direction and policy, the results from the Ozark-
Highlands Assessment, and a series of public meetings.
Ecosystem Sustainability
    a. Oak Decline and Oak Mortality: Oak Decline is occurring 
throughout the oak component of the forest due to advanced age, low 
site index, and three years of drought. These factors have led to an 
unprecedented insect epidemic of red oak borer, which has caused 
significant mortality on approximately 300,000 acres.
    At present the primary areas of mortality are located on the 
Pleasant Hill, Bayou, and Boston Mountain Ranger Districts. Trees are 
being killed on all sites and in all age classes due to the epidemic 
proportions of the insect population. The Forest has approximately 
700,000 acres of mature hardwood forest. Red oaks occur in about 95% of 
the hardwood forest. The Forest Plan does not address oak decline or 
mortality. The proposed action is to develop management plan direction 
to improve forest health and restore the oak ecosystem.
    b. Silvicultural Practices: During plan development for the 1986 
Forest Plan and during the appeal to the Plan in 1991, the public 
raised many questions concerning the types of silvicultural systems 
being proposed. At that time, there was little in the way of published 
research to support the effectiveness of silvicultural practices on the 
Ozark-St. Francis National Forests. Since that time, much has been 
learned. Monitoring has provided valuable insight for determining what 
does and does not work regarding reforestation practices. Research 
conducted through the Southern Research Station and the Ouachita/Ozark 
NFs has improved our understanding of shade tolerance, species 
composition, and stand dynamics. In addition, an increased emphasis on 
prescribed fire and the development of new herbicides with better 
effectiveness require evaluation for inclusion in this plan revision. 
The proposed action is to revise and update silvicultural practices 
available to forest managers.
    c. Management Area Boundaries: The current Forest Plan divided the 
Forest into eight management areas based on similar management 
direction. The proposed action is to re-evaluate the effectiveness of 
these designations.
    d. Ecological Monitoring: Since the 1986 Forest Plan, knowledge of 
ecological interactions has grown. Strategies for monitoring and 
evaluating effects of forest management on ecosystems need to be re-
evaluated in light of increased knowledge. Revisions of these 
strategies would include revising the list of Management Indicator 
Species (MIS). The proposed action is to revise the monitoring 
requirements.
    e. Wildlife Management Practices: The knowledge about managing 
wildlife from an ecological perspective has increased since the 1986 
Forest Plan. Restoration of certain ecosystems through timber 
management and prescribed fire could supplement or replace the current 
food plot concept. Forest age class distribution is heavily weighted 
toward the older age classes, which in turn has negatively affected 
wildlife species dependent upon early and mid-seral habitat. Loss of 
the red oak on much of the Forest will negatively affect species 
dependent upon mast. Silvicultural prescriptions designed to balance 
age classes, re-established the red oak, and create early seral habitat 
need to be considered. The proposed action is to develop wildlife 
management practices incorporating ecological concepts.

[[Page 21628]]

    f. Prescribed Burning: The 1986 Plan did not recognize fire 
dependent ecosystems. It is now recognized that fire played a 
significant role in the development of the vegetation on the Ozark-St. 
Francis National Forests. Landscape scale burning is a common practice 
for many forests today. This technique is more efficient and 
incorporates the concepts of ecosystem management in sustaining forest 
health. In order to burn larger areas, some of the standards in the 
Plan need to be reviewed. The proposed action is to provide for 
landscape scale burning and to recognize fire as a management tool 
needed to sustain the forest.
    g. Riparian Areas: Areas next to lakes, perennial, ephemeral, and 
intermittent streams on the Ozark-St. Francis National Forests are 
important for protecting water quality, fish, and other aquatic 
resources. Riparian areas are complex ecosystems that provide food, 
habitat, and movement corridors for both water and land animal 
communities. Streamside management zones (SMZs) are needed to help 
minimize nonpoint source pollution to surface waters, and manage these 
important areas. The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests' current 
direction as outlined in Amendment 5 of the Forest Plan is hard to 
implement for ephemeral streams. The proposed action is to revise the 
Plan to incorporate riparian area management direction and to insure 
SMZ standards can be implemented.
    h. Natural Processes: During the past 15 years, the Forest has 
experienced a number of catastrophic events such as fire, windstorms, 
floods, and insect damage. It is recognized that although they appear 
catastrophic, these events are part of natural processes. The current 
Forest Plan does not provide any direction or guidance for addressing 
these events. The proposed action is to provide management guidelines 
that work with natural processes and recognize how catastrophic 
disturbances can contribute to forest health and productivity.
    Recreation Management: The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests are 
managed to provide a variety of recreational opportunities within a 
wide range of settings. The demand for new recreational opportunities 
including OHV/motorcycle use rock climbing, horseback riding, canoeing, 
kayaking, and full-service campsites has increased dramatically in the 
past decade. Trends indicate traditional recreational opportunities, 
including hunting, fishing, hiking, and primitive camping are expected 
to continue in popularity. Direction is needed to address trail 
compatibility with other uses and where these uses should occur.
    Customer satisfaction needs to be a monitoring tool. Many areas are 
being used beyond capacity and resource damage is occurring. The Limits 
of Acceptable Change (LAC) process could be applied to scenic rivers, 
special areas, and heavily used dispersed areas. The proposed action is 
to provide new direction that responds to demand, demographics, 
marketing strategy, and recreational business management principles.
    Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS): ROS is used to classify 
varieties of outdoor recreational opportunities. The Forest Plan 
references ROS acreages, but does not use it to describe different 
settings or opportunities. ROS can be part of the description of the 
desired future condition (DFC). It can also be used for allocating and 
separating conflicting or competing uses. Establishing ROS will help 
with travel management planning, which influences the opportunities for 
various activities. The proposed action is to identify the ROS 
allocation for each area of the Forest.
    Scenery Management: The 1974 Visual Quality Objective System (VQO) 
used in the Forest Plan needs to be replaced with the Scenery 
Management System (SMS). VQO used scenery to mitigate the effects of 
management actions. SMS recognizes scenery as a resource. SMS will 
establish overall resource goals and objectives to monitor the scenic 
resource. The proposed action is to implement SMS and recognize scenery 
as a resource.
    Public Access and Dispersed Recreation: A number of roads have been 
obliterated or closed in the last decade using earthen mounds, gates, 
and signs. The current Forest Plan off-highway-vehicle (OHV) direction 
prohibits cross-country travel. In the past year, there has been a 
renewed emphasis to enforce the current policy. The closing of roads 
and emphasis on enforcing the OHV policy has received much attention. 
Closing areas to motorized use affects traditional access that many 
perceive as reducing recreational opportunities. Others in the public 
want areas to be managed as non-motorized uses to increase 
opportunities for solitude. Forest Service concerns include lack of 
budgets to maintain the current road system, impacts to the soil and 
water resources, and impacts to wildlife populations and habitat. The 
proposed action is to determine the combination of land allocation for 
motorized and non-motorized trail opportunities and road access to 
minimize conflict among users, provide recreation opportunities, and 
protect the resources.
Special Areas
    a. Special Interest Areas: The 1986 Forest Plan designated 
Management Area 7 as Special Interest Areas (SIAs). These areas total 
approximately 23,000 acres and have unique scenic, geological, 
botanical, or cultural values. The proposed action is to identify 
potential additional special interest areas.
    b. Scenic Byways: The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests have six 
scenic byways. Each of these has unique characteristics, which need to 
be maintained. Corridor managements objectives need to be defined. This 
may include such things as turnout lanes, vistas, and vegetation 
management guidelines. There may be other highways that need 
consideration. The proposed action is for the Plan to provide direction 
that will protect and enhance the qualities of the scenic byways and 
determine if other byways should be nominated.
    c. Other Special Areas: Other special areas on the Forests include 
Research Natural Areas (RNAs) and experimental forests. The current 
Plan has two RNAs: Turkey Ridge (373 acres) on the St. Francis National 
Forest and Dismal Hollow (2,077 acres) on the Ozark National Forest. 
The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests also have two experimental 
forests, the 700-acre Henry Koen Experimental Forest and the 4,200-acre 
Sylamore Experimental Forest. Both of these areas are administered by 
the Southern Research Station (SRS). The need for additional RNAs and 
the continued need for experimental forests will be determined by the 
revision in coordination with the SRS.
    Lands and Special Uses: The current Plan outlined a schedule of 
proposed land acquisitions and identified them on a map. Experience 
over the last 15 years has shown this to be too restrictive. 
Unanticipated acquisition and disposal opportunities have occurred over 
the last 15 years. The Plan should provide broad direction on 
acquisition and disposal goals, objectives, and priorities. The process 
needs to be streamlined to meet public expectations. Lack of funding 
for landlines is leading to many unsolved trespass cases and makes ROW 
(right-of-way) acquisition difficult. There are opportunities to 
consolidate corridors in special uses for electric lines and other 
utilities. The proposed action is to provide better direction for lands 
and special uses.

[[Page 21629]]

E. Preliminary Alternatives

    The actual alternatives presented in the DEIS will portray a full 
range of responses to the significant issues. The DEIS will examine the 
effects of implementing strategies to achieve different desired future 
conditions and will develop possible management objectives and 
opportunities that would move the forests toward those desired 
conditions. A preferred alternative will be identified in the DEIS. The 
range of alternatives presented in the DEIS will include one that 
continues current management direction and others that will address the 
range of issues developed in the scoping process.

F. Involving the Public

    The objective in the public involvement process is to create an 
atmosphere of openness where all members of the public feel free to 
share information with the Forest Service on a regular basis. All parts 
of this process will be structured to maintain this openness. The 
Forest Service is seeking information, comments, and assistance from 
individuals, organization, tribal governments, and federal, state, and 
local agencies that 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 inform the public of various steps of the revision process 
and locations of public involvement opportunities. Public participation 
opportunities include written comments, open houses, focus groups, and 
collaborative forums.
    Public participation will be sought throughout the revision process 
but will be particularly important at several points along the way. The 
first formal opportunity to comment is during the scoping process (40 
CFR 150.7). Scoping includes: (1) Identifying additional potential 
issues (other than those previously described); (2) from these, 
identifying significant issues, those which have been covered by prior 
environmental review or those which are non-significant for the plan 
revision; (3) exploring additional alternatives; and (4) identifying 
potential environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives 
(i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects). Three public meetings 
are scheduled during the scoping process.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Date                               Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 13, 2002.............................  Russellville, AR.
June 18, 2002.............................  Jasper, AR.
June 20, 2002.............................  Springdale, AR.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Planning Regulations

    The Department of Agriculture published new planning regulations on 
November 9, 2000. A USDA Forest Service review of this planning rule 
identified concerns with the ability to implement several provisions of 
the 2000 rule. There are also lawsuits challenging the 2000 rule that 
may affect its implementation.
    To address these problems, the Chief of the Forest Service has 
started a process to develop a revision to the November 2000 planning 
rule. On May 10, 2001, Secretary Veneman signed an interim final rule 
allowing Forest Plan amendments or revisions initiated before May 9, 
2002, to proceed under the new planning rule (November 2000) or under 
the 1982 planning regulations. The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests 
will proceed under the 1982 planning regulations pending future 
direction in revised regulations.

H. Release and Review of the EISs

    The DEIS is expected to be filed with the EPA and to be available 
for public comment by September 2004. At that time, the EPA will 
publish a notice of availability of the DEIS in the Federal Register. 
The comment period will be 3 months from the date the EPA publishes the 
notice of availability in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers 
notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the 
environmental review process. Reviewers of the DEIS 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 that are not raised until after completion of the FEIS 
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 3-month comment period 
so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the 
Federal Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and 
respond to them in the FEIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed actions, comments on the DEIS 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 DEIS 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 NEPA at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. 
After the comment period on the DEIS ends, the comments will be 
analyzed, considered, and responded to by the Forest Service in 
preparing the FEIS. The scheduled completion of the FEIS is by 
September 2005. The Responsible Official will consider the comments, 
responses, and environmental consequences discussed in the FEIS 
together with all applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making 
a decision regarding revision. The Responsible Official will document 
the decision and reasons for the decision in a Record of Decision. This 
decision may be subject to appeal in accordance with 36 CFR 217.

    Dated: April 25, 2002.
R. Gray Pierson,
Acting Deputy Regional Forester.
[FR Doc. 02-10778 Filed 4-30-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M