[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14175-14176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-6900]


 ========================================================================
 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. 56 / Monday, March 24, 2003 / 
Notices  

[[Page 14175]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Easy Fire Recovery Project, Malheur National Forest, Grant 
County, OR

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) on a proposal to assist the recovery of the area that 
burned in the Easy Fire in the Summer of 2002. The proposal is to 
salvage fire-killed and fire-damaged timber, implement re-forestation 
in the project area, and implement projects to reduce the potential for 
future damage to wildlife habitat and aquatic resources as a result of 
the Easy Fire. The 5,839 acre project area is located on the Prairie 
City Ranger District and is centered approximately 11 miles east of 
Prairie City, Oregon, with the Upper Middle Fork John Day River and 
Upper John Day River Watersheds. The agency gives notice of the full 
environmental analysis and decision making process that will occur on 
the proposal so that interested and affected people may become aware of 
how they can participate in the process and contribute to the final 
decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by April 30, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Ryan Falk, Acting District Ranger, 
Prairie City Ranger District, 327 Front Street, Prairie City, Oregon 
97869.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Ornberg, Easy Fire Recovery 
Project Team Leader, Middle Fork Ranger District, Williamette National 
Forest; Phone: 541-782-5217. Email [email protected] or use the 
Malheur National Forest Web site at http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/malheur.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In July and August 2002, the Easy Fire 
burned approximately 5,839 acres on the Malheur National Forest. The 
decision area for the Easy Fire Recovery Project is located in the 
Upper Middle Fork John Day River watershed and the Upper John Day River 
Watershed. The project area is entirely within National Forest System 
lands.
    Purpose and Need for Action. The purposes and need for actions 
``here'' within the Easy Fire Recovery Project area and ``now'' are:
    [sbull] Capture the economic value of the dead and dying trees that 
are in excess to other resource needs;
    [sbull] Reduce the fuels levels of dead standing and down;
    [sbull] Improve resiliency of forest vegetation to insect and 
disease outbreaks, and restore ecologically appropriate forest 
structure in the surviving stands;
    [sbull] Replant and restore forest vegetation for the benefit of 
wildlife, fish, and timber products;
    [sbull] Replace Dedicated and Replacement Old Growth areas that 
burned and are not longer suitable;
    [sbull] Reduce road and skid trail impacts to meet Forest Plan 
standards for wildlife, fisheries, and water quality; and
    [sbull] Provide safe access for administrative, recreational, and 
fire recovery activities.
    Proposed Action. The following actions are proposed to respond to 
the purpose and need for action: approximately 3,200 acres, in areas of 
moderate and high burned severity, would be salvaged (including dead, 
dying, and green trees) and replanted; approximately 400 acres of lower 
severity burned forest would be salvaged and replanted to improve stand 
resiliency to insects and disease outbreak; approximately 160 acres of 
fire-killed or damaged post and pole-sized stands will be salvaged; 
designate new Dedicated and Replacement Old Growth areas to replace 
areas now unsuitable due to fire damage; and hazard trees would be 
removed along system roads. About 50 percent of the proposed timber 
salvage units would be harvested using ground-based logging systems, 10 
percent would be harvested using skyline logging systems, and 40 
percent would be harvested by helicopter. No new system road 
construction is proposed for the salvage harvest. Construction of 
approximately 0.6 miles of temporary roads and approximately 69 miles 
of road maintenance would be required for timber salvage. The temporary 
roads would be decommissioned after project activities. Connected 
actions in association with salvage include water barring and erosion 
control measures such as scattering of slash on skid trails and 
treatment of slash.
    Approximately 3,760 acres would be planted following salvage and 
site preparation. Snag retention levels would meet Forest Plan 
standards. Fuels would be reduced to within the range of historic 
variability throughout the project area. A variety of fuel treatment 
methods would be used (salvage, burning in place, piling and burning, 
and whole-tree yarding). Selection of new Dedicated and Replacement Old 
Growth areas would require a non-significant amendment to the Forest 
Plan.
    Alternatives. A full range of alternatives will be considered, 
including a ``no-action'' alternative in which none of the activities 
proposed above would be implemented. Based on the issues gathered 
through scoping, the action alternatives would differ in: the 
silvicultural and post-harvest treatments prescribed; the amount and 
location of harvest; or the amount and location of fuels reduction 
activity. Other management activities which will be used to develop 
other alternatives may include: avoid salvage harvest on the steeper 
slopes above Clear Creek and Easy Creek to reduce sediment delivery to 
these streams (which are habitat or tributary to habitat for threatened 
fish species); consider various regeneration strategies (i.e. low 
stocking levels); and consider current science on snag and coarse woody 
debris dependent species habitat (this could result in site-specific 
Forest Plan amendment to update standards and guidelines).
    Scoping. The scoping process will include: identifying potential 
issues, identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth, eliminating 
non-significant issues or those previously covered by a relevant 
environmental analysis, and identifying potential environmental effects 
of this proposed action and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and 
cumulative effects and connected actions). The public will have the 
opportunity to participate at several points during the analysis 
process. The

[[Page 14176]]

public will be kept informed of the EIS process through the quarterly 
publication of the ``Malheur National Forest's Schedule of Proposed 
Actions'' and letters to agencies, organizations, and individuals who 
have previously indicated their interest in similar activities.
    Issues. Preliminary issues include effects of proposed actions on: 
Water quality and fish habitat for resident and anadromous threatened 
species; snags and downed wood habitat; noxious weeds; late and old 
growth structure; Armillaria root rot; restoration of historic 
vegetation composition, structure, and pattern; potential loss of 
commercial timber value; and economic viability of timber salvage.
    Comments. Public comments about this proposal are requested in 
order to assist in properly scoping issues, determining how to best 
manage the resources, and fully analyzing environmental effects. 
Comments received to this notice, 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 parts 214 and 217. 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 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.
    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and made available for public review by July 
2003. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date 
the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register. 
The final EIS is scheduled to be available in October 2003. 
Implementation is expected to occur in 2004.
    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 
a draft EIS 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 EIS stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final EIS 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 EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on 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 also 
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 at 
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
    The Forest Service is the lead agency. The Responsible Official is 
the Forest Supervisor, Malheur National Forest. The Responsible 
Official will decide which, if any, of the proposed projects will be 
implemented. The Responsible Official may also decide on site-specific 
Forest Plan amendments regarding standards and guidelines for snag and 
coarse woody debris, as well as big game habitat, if warranted by the 
analysis of those components in light of recent science. The 
Responsible Official will document the Easy Fire Recovery Project 
decision and reasons for the decision in the Record of Decision. That 
decision will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR 
part 215).

    Dated: March 13, 2003.
Roger Willians,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-6900 Filed 3-21-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M