[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64585-64586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-28161]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


McKean County, Pennsylvania; Intent To Prepare an Environmental 
Impact Statement; Proposed Martin Run Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
SUMMARY: The Forest Service, Allegheny National Forest, Bradford Ranger 
District, will prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement to 
disclose the environmental consequences of the proposed Martin Run 
Project. The Forest Service is proposing actions that would move the 
Martin Run Project Area from the existing condition towards the Desired 
Future Condition (DFC) and would maintain the DFC in situations where 
it has been attained. The DFC is described in the Allegheny National 
Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan).
    Proposed activities to meet the Desired Future Condition fall into 
four main categories.
    (1) Timber harvest and reforestation treatments consist of: 
Shelterwood seedcut/removal cut, shelterwood removal cut, salvage 
removal cut, salvage shelterwood seed cut/removal cut, single tree 
selection, group selection, commercial thinning, salvage intermediate 
thinning, intermediate thinning, pre-commercial thinning, improvement 
cutting, manual site preparation and release, herbicide application, 
fertilization, fencing, controlled burning, scarification, and tree 
planting.
    (2) Wildlife habitat improvement treatments consist of: 
Noncommercial thinning, oak/hickory/shrub underplanting, pruning and 
release of apple trees, release of white pine trees, hawthorn release, 
constructing new openings, opening reconditioning, planting/fencing 
shrubs in openings, mowing, topdressing, seeding with wildflowers and 
grass, constructing bat boxes, bluebird boxes and vernal ponds.
    (3) Recreation treatments consist of: trail relocation and 
decomissioning, trail improvement, interpretation upgrades.
    (4) Transportation treatments consist of: road decommissioning, 
road repair, road construction, road resurfacing, obtaining a right-of-
way from an adjacent property owner, expanding stone pits, and changing 
road access.

DATES: Comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the analysis 
should be submitted (postmarked) by December 15, 2003 to ensure timely 
consideration.

ADDRESSES: Submit written, oral, or e-mail comments by: (1) Mail 
``Martin Run Project,'' ID Team Leader, 29 Forest

[[Page 64586]]

Service Dr., Bradford, PA 16701; (2) phone: 814-362-4613; (3) e-mail: 
anf/[email protected] (please note: when commenting by e-mail be 
sure to list Martin Run EIS in the subject line and include a U.S. 
Postal Service address so we may add you to our mailing list). For 
further information contact Jason A. Rodrigue, project team leader, 
Bradford Ranger District, at 814-362-4613 or mail/e-mail correspondence 
to addresses listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Allegheny National Forest Land and 
Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) sets site-specific goals for the 
management of forest resources. The Martin Run Project includes 
portions of Management Area (MA) 3.0, which emphasizes timber 
harvesting as a means to make desired changes to forest vegetation and 
satisfy the public demand for wood products. The project area also 
includes portions of MA 6.1, which emphasizes providing habitat for 
wildlife, attractive scenery, and opportunities for semi-primitive 
motorized recreation. Finally, the project area includes portions of MA 
8.0, which emphasizes protection of unique ecosystems for scientific 
purposes and dispersed recreation.
    Preliminary Issues were identified based on past projects in the 
area (environmental assessments), issues developed for similar 
projects, and site-specific concerns raised by the resource 
specialists. These issues, listed below, will provide a framework that 
the Forest Service will use to analyze a range of alternatives, 
including No Action for the Project Area.
    (1) Road management--The Martin Run project area contains a network 
of National Forest (NF) system, public, and private roads. The road 
system (in total) provides access for resource management, recreational 
opportunities for the public, access for private mineral owners, and 
forest research. Changes in the current National Forest road system 
will be supported by some people and opposed by others.
    (2) Old growth connectivity and its management--Within the Martin 
Run project area, management conditions (i.e. Management Area 
designations) and on the ground investigations suggest managed old 
growth possibilities may center around connectivity on NF lands, 
riparian habitat, and social goals. The topic of old growth and its 
management has been an issue of previous concern within this project 
area and across the forest.
    (3) Even-Aged/Uneven-Aged Management--Previous environmental 
analyses have shown that many members of the public have a strong 
interest in the silvicultural system used on National Forest lands. 
Forest Plan direction for the Martin Run Project area does not 
emphasize uneven-aged management. The Martin Run proposed action 
contains silvicultural prescriptions dominated by even-aged management 
with a few stands receiving uneven-aged prescriptions where favorable 
species composition prevails.
    (4) Tionesta Scenic and Research Natural Area (TSRNA)--A recent 
Citizens' Wilderness Proposal (for review during forest plan revision) 
by the Friends of the Allegheny Wilderness includes seeking a 
wilderness designation for lands surrounding the TSRNA (approximately 
14,960 acres in total). The proposed action for the Martin Run Project 
will continue with Forest Plan direction in this area.
    Comment Requested: This notice of intent initiates the scoping 
process, which guides the development of the environmental impact 
statement. Your comments will help the Forest Service refine and 
enhance the list of issues that are considered when analyzing 
alternatives to the proposed action. When this analysis is nearly 
complete, the Draft EIS will be filed with the Environmental Protection 
Agency and become available for public review (expected by October 
2004). At that time the Environmental Protection Agency will publish a 
Notice of Availability of the document in the Federal Register (this 
will begin the 45-day comment period on the Draft EIS). After the 
comment period ends on the Draft EIS, the comments will be analyzed and 
considered by the Forest Service in preparing the final environmental 
impact statement. The Final EIS is scheduled for release in March 2005.
    Comments received, including names and addresses of those who 
comment, will be considered part of the public record and may be 
subject to public disclosure. 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.
    The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers 
notice at this early stage of several court rulings related to public 
participation in 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. 519 
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 impact statement 
stage may be waived or dismissed by the courts (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 the above 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 are made available to 
the Forest Service at a time when they can be meaningfully considered 
and responded to in the final environmental impact statement. Comments 
on the draft environmental impact statement should be as specific as 
possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages, 
sections, or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address 
the adequacy of the draft environmental impact statement or the merits 
of the alternatives formulated and environmental impact statement 
should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer 
to specific pages, sections, or chapters of the draft 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 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.
    This decision will be subject to appeal under 36 CFR part 215. The 
responsible official is Nancy S. Larson, Deputy District Ranger, 
Bradford Ranger District, 29 Forest Service Way, Bradford, PA 16701.

Kevin B. Elliott,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-28161 Filed 11-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P