[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9970-9971]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-4855]


 ========================================================================
 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. 68, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 2003 / 
Notices  

[[Page 9970]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Mission Brush, Bonners Ferry Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle 
National Forests; Boundary County, ID

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Bonners Ferry Ranger District of the Idaho Panhandle 
National Forests is proposing rehabilitation of the vegetation in the 
Brush Creek and Mission Creek watersheds, identified as the Mission 
Brush project area. These watersheds are located 14 and 19 miles, 
respectively, north of Bonners Ferry, Idaho. Priorities are treatment 
of stands of off-site Ponderosa pine and dry sites, and taking steps to 
begin restoring the diversity that was found historically in mixed 
conifer stands. The project, as proposed, will provide additional 
benefits to the water resources and result in some reduction of fuels 
adjacent to private property in a portion of the project area. The USDA 
Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) to 
disclose the potential environmental effects of implementing vegetative 
and aquatic restoration activities on National Forest System lands 
within the project area.

DATES: Comments, suggestions, or requests to be placed on the project 
mailing list, should be received on or before April 1, 2003. The draft 
environmental impact statement is expected to be filed with the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review 
in April 2002.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposal or 
requests to be placed on the project mailing list to Doug Nishek, 
Project Team Leader, Bonners Ferry Ranger District, Route 4, Box 4860, 
Bonners Ferry, Idaho 83805-9764, e-mail address: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Nishek, project leader, Bonners 
Ferry Ranger District, (208) 267-5561, e-mail address: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose and need for this project is 
derived from the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Idaho 
Panhandle National Forests, the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem 
Management Project (ICBEMP), the Northern Region Overview and the 
Kootenai River basin Geographic Assessment (GA). Findings from these 
studies document the dense, insect- and disease-prone state of the dry-
site ecosystems across the Idaho Panhandle National Forests and the 
Kootenai River basin. These large-scale analyses describe the changes 
these ecosystems have undergone over the past century, such as a 
significant loss in the once-dominant western white pine in northern 
Idaho. Current conditions are causing concern due to increased wildfire 
hazard and potential for severe fires. Site-specific information 
indicates these conditions are present in Mission Creek and Brush Creek 
watersheds.
    Initial assessment identified insect and disease problems placing 
stands at a high risk of serious losses through tree mortality and the 
resulting changes in habitat structure. The same is true for stands 
planted with off-site Ponderosa pine following wildfire in 1945. 
Lodgepole pine stands are at high risk of mountain pine beetle 
infestation. Western white pine is no longer a key component of these 
forests.
    Objectives of this project are two-fold, as follows: On dry sites 
begin restoration of historical vegetative conditions that favored 
development of large, open-grown stands of ponderosa pine and western 
larch; and, in the mixed conifer and subalpine forests increase size, 
species, and age-class diversity through treatments to begin returning 
western white pine to its historical role and treating lodgepole pine 
stands at high risk to insects. The management activities would reduce 
fuel loadings and potential for severe fires on National Forest System 
lands adjacent to private property in the western portion of the 
Mission Creek drainage. Water quality and aquatic resources would 
benefit from reconstruction of portions of roads to reduce the amount 
of sediment entering streams. There will also be opportunities to 
improve recreation facilities in the Brush Lake area.
    Preliminary issues include forest health, water quality, timber 
supply and demand, wildlife, fish, and plant species.
    The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives, including 
the ``no action'' alternative, under which there would be no change 
from current management of the area. Additional alternatives will 
represent a range of strategies to accomplish the goals of this 
project. The Forest Plan provides guidance for management objectives 
within the potentially affected area through its goals, objectives, 
standards and guidelines, and management area direction. Inland Native 
Fish Strategy guidelines (USDA Forest Service, 1995) supersede Forest 
Plan guidelines established for riparian areas.
    The first public notice of proposed management activities in this 
area was made in July 1997 for a project identified as Mission Round 
Prairie environmental assessment (EA). At that time the Forest Service 
was assessing the conditions and proposing treatments in a larger area 
that also included Round Prairie Creek, Gillon Creek and Hellroaring 
Creek watersheds. The Mission Brush project will analyze management 
strategies in the watersheds identified as high priority through that 
initial assessment. Based on scoping and changes in Agency direction 
the Forest Service believes an EIS is the appropriate level of 
documentation. Members of the public are encouraged to visit with 
Forest Service officials during the analysis and prior to the decision. 
Comments provided by the public and other agencies will be used to 
develop strategies for management of natural resources in the project 
area. Comments received during the earlier scoping and analysis for the 
Mission Round Prairie EA will be considered during the environmental 
analysis for this EIS and will be a part of the public record. People, 
organizations and agencies on the Mission Round Prairie mailing list 
will be included in the Mission Brush EIS mailing list. The Forest 
Service is also seeking information, comments, and assistance from 
federal, state and local agencies and other individuals or

[[Page 9971]]

organizations that may be interested in or affected by the proposed 
actions.
    The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public 
review in April 2003. At that time, the EPA will publish a Notice of 
Availability of the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal 
Register. The comment period on the draft environmental impact 
statement will end 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice 
of Availability in the Federal Register. It is anticipated that a final 
environmental impact statement will be published in June, 2003. A 
Record of Decision will also be published at that time.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation to 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. 
5129,553 (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 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 regarding 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 environmental impact 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.
    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 may 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 a 
specified number of days.
    I am the responsible official for this environmental analysis. My 
address is Idaho Panhandle National Forest, 3815 Schreiber Way, Coeur 
d'Alene, ID 83814.

    Dated: February 24, 2003.
Ranotta McNair,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-4855 Filed 2-28-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-121-M