[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48596-48598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20703]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Iron Ecosystem Restoration Project, Okanogan-Wenatchee National 
Forests, Kittitas County, Washington State

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) to reduce the risk of wildfire in the Iron Ecosystem 
planning area due to the buildup of both aerial and ground fuels. 
Approximately 12,000 acres will be analyzed with treatment expected on 
3,000 to 3,500 acres within the Swauk Late Successional Reserve (LSR). 
Much of the area is in Condition Class III and IV fuels types, which 
are greater than three to four times the natural range of fire 
occurrence in the area. The possibility of catastrophic wildfire exists 
through ignitions caused both by natural sources and increased traffic 
on U.S. Route 97 and forest roads.
    The Forest Service proposes to thin these stands from below to 
restore forest health and resistance to stand replacing wildfire, and 
to be better protect late successional refugia. Protection of refugia 
would be achieved by breaking up contiguous, heavy fuel loading across 
the Swauk landscape, focusing on dry sites and sites at risk above the 
point of historical fire starts. Techniques such as thinning from below 
(pre-commercial and commercial), mechanical treatments, under burning, 
piling, top yarding, mulching, and fuel wood sales are proposed as 
tools reduce heavy fuel loading. Re-introduction of prescribed fire 
after initial treatments are completed in also proposed. The planning 
area is located approximately 15 miles northeast of Cle Elum, 
Washington. The agency has given 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 car 
participate in the process and contribute to the final decision.

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

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to the Cle Elum Ranger District, Attn: 
Floyd Rogalski, Natural Resource Planner, 803 West Second Street, Cle 
Elum, Washington 98922.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Floyd Rogalski, Natural Resource 
Planner Cle-Elum Ranger District, 803 West Second Street, Cle Elum, 
Washington 98922, (509) 674-4411.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This environmental impact statement (EIS) 
will analyze an areas for possible treatments designed to improve 
forest health while providing forest structure for wildlife habitat, 
such as the Northern Spotted Owl, and protecting other resource values. 
Risk of Wildfire has increased in the planning area due to the buildup 
of both aerial and ground fuels, exclusion of fire, and past harvest 
activities. These past treatment have reduced the presence of health, 
vigorous growing trees, while increasing the risk of stand replacement 
fire within an LSR. The possibility of wildfire ignition exists with 
increased recreational use and vehicle traffic on U.S. Highway 97 and 
lateral roads.
    Purpose and Need for Action. Past timber harvest treatments removed 
many of the early seral species, leaving more shade tolerant species 
such as grant and Douglas-fir. Root diseases are widespread within the 
planning area with grand fir being the most prone and currently showing 
high mortality as a result. Douglas-fir mistletoe is also widespread 
within this area, affecting the vigor of the stands and making them 
more susceptible to insect attacks. Past harvest treatments also 
removed a majority of the dominant overstory trees, changing stocking 
and distribution levels, thus increasing the probability of stand 
replacement fire.
    The primary purpose of the Iron Ecosystem Restoration Project is to 
implement the National Fire Plan, (January 2002) and Healthy Forest 
Initiative (August 2002) in the planning area. Protection of values at 
risk within the Swauk LSR is ultimately of the highest importance. 
Values at risk in the planning area include habitat for threatened and 
endangered species, late-successional habitat, wildland urban 
interface, aquatic habitat values, water quality, science values, and 
long-term forest stability and forest health. A strategic landscape 
plan would be developed and implemented for silviculturally treating 
heavily stocked stands for long-term stability and growth of fire 
resistant overstory trees, for protection of the highest quality 
spotted owl habitat from stand replacement fire, and for protection of 
current and planned home sites on private land in the Wildland Urban 
interface.
    Proposed Action. The proposed action is to treat stands within the 
project area to reduce potential fire spread in the event of an 
ignition and to improve forest health, while continuing to provide 
forest structure for wildlife habitat and other resources. The Forest 
Service would focus treatment on those stands with greater tree 
densities and higher fuel loadings, considering their location on the 
landscape in terms of aspect and slope, and the projected benefits of 
manipulation in these stands to enhance suppression efforts. There have 
been 95 units identified that involve stands that contain a variety of 
mixed conifer and dry-site pine forest.

[[Page 48597]]

These unit vary in size from 5 to 150 acres.
    The proposed action includes burning natural meadow openings 
([sim]120 acres) to stop the encroachment by tree species, use of fire 
and/or mechanical treatments ([sim]2500 acres) to restore open pine 
stands, thinning with fire and mechanical treatments ([sim]3000 acres), 
commercial removal of small diameter trees in stands where thinning 
would reduce competition and benefit residual stand vigor and 
resistance to forest insects and disease, and mechanical piling and 
burning of slash ([sim]2500 acres) in stands with high levels of 
existing hazardous fuel concentrations.
    The existing road and trail system needed to implement vegetative 
treatments within the project area would also be evaluated. This 
evaluation would include the analysis of mitigation measures needed to 
meet resource objectives within the project area. Mitigation measures 
may include relocation, reconstruction, closure, obliteration and 
decommissioning of existing roads and trails. The actual miles of road 
and trails that would be affected by this project have not yet been 
determined; the current road density averages [sim]2 mi/sq mile in the 
planning area.
    Possible Alternatives. Alternative consider at this time include 
following; No Action; Fuel Reduction Outside of Preferred Owl Habitat; 
Fuel Reduction Outside of Preferred habitat and Breeding Radii in Owl 
Habitat; and Fuel Reduction Outside of Preferred, Breeding, and Home 
Range Areas with Light Thinning.
    Nature of Decision To Be Made. The decision to be made is whether 
vegetative treatment and road and trail system changes should be 
carried out within the Iron Ecosystem Restoration Project area and, if 
so, how, where, and to what extent across the landscape.
    Scoping Process. The proposed project was first listed in the 
Wenatchee National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions in 1997 as the 
Iron Thin Project. In January 2000 scoping letters were sent to the 
District NEPA mailing list, referring to this project as the Iron Thin 
Forest Health Project. The project has been listed continuously, under 
one of these names, in the Schedule of Proposed Actions for the 
Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests since the Second Quarter 1997 
edition. Information will continue to be distributed through periodic 
mailings. There are no public meetings scheduled at this time.
    Issues. At this time, the preliminary issues identified include 
potential impacts on: Threatened and endangered species habitat; 
changes in vegetative condition and forest succession resulting from 
the proposed activities; treatment of fuels to modify fire behavior; 
cumulative effects on long term site productivity; management of the 
roads for future access and use within the project area; economic 
viability of the project; and potential impacts to visual quality along 
U.S. Highway 97. Other issues considered in analysis include: Potential 
impacts to cultural resources within the project area; noxious weed 
concerns; potential effects to hydrologic relationships and fish 
habitat conditions; potential effects on recreational access; use 
within the project area [including winter recreation]; and potential 
impacts to Survey and Manage species.
    Comment Requested. Your comments are being sought to aid in the 
identification of additional issues that should be considered in the 
development of the EIS. Public participation will be especially 
important at several points during the analysis. The Forest Service 
will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, 
state, Tribal, and local agencies, and other individuals or 
organizations who may be interested in or affected by the proposed 
actions. This information will be used in preparation of the draft EIS.
    Comments received in response to this notice and through scoping, 
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 215 
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 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.
    A draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and is to be available for public review by 
December 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 completed June 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 coulb be raised at the draft EIS statement 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 
provisions of the National Environmental lPolicy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 
in addressing these points.
    In the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to 
substantive comments and responses received during the comment period 
that pertain to the environmental consequences discussed in the draft 
EIS and applicable laws, regulations and policies considered in making 
a decision regarding the proposal. The Responsible Official is Forest 
Supervisor, Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forests. The Responsible 
Official will document the decision and rationale for the decision in a 
Record of Decision. The decision will be subject to review under Forest 
Service Appeal Regulation (36 CFR part 215).


[[Page 48598]]


    Dated: August 1, 2003.
Alan Quan,
Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-20703 Filed 8-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M