[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 17, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7415-7416]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-3047]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Umatilla National Forest, Oregon, Rimrock Ecosystem Restoration 
Projects

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a supplemental environmental impact 
statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of 
Decision (ROD) for the Rimrock Ecosystem Restoration Projects was 
listed in the Federal Register on June 6, 2003 (68 FR 33934). On August 
14, 2003, the decision to implement commercial and non-commercial 
thinning within the C3 winter range was withdrawn from the ROD. All 
other aspects of the June 6th ROD are being implemented. There is a 
need to amend the Umatilla National Forest Land and Resource Management 
Plan (LRMP) in order to implement the commercial and non-commercial 
thinning within the C3 Management area. The FEIS will be supplemented 
to inform and support a new decision on the C3 area of the Rimrock 
Ecosystem Restoration Projects.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by March 15, 2004. The supplemental draft environmental impact 
statement is expected April 2004 and the final supplemental 
environmental impact statement is expected July 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to the Responsible Official, Jeff 
Blackwood, Forest Supervisor, Umatilla National Forest, 2517 S.W. 
Hailey Avenue, Pendleton, OR 97801. Send electronic comments to 
[email protected]. For further information, 
mail correspondence to David Kendrick, Project Team Leader, Heppner 
Ranger District, PO Box 7, Heppner, OR 97836.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See address above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of this supplement to the Rimrock FEIS is to consider 
new information on the commercial and non-commercial thinning 
treatments in the C3 management area. The existing habitat 
effectiveness index for the Monument winter range is 67. Implementation 
of the commercial and non-commercial thinning portion of the Rimrock 
Ecosystem Restoration Project within the C3 management area in the 
proposed action or alternative actions (Rimrock FEIS pages 26-36) would 
result in a habitat effectiveness index of 67 for the Monument winter 
range. Although there is no change in habitat effectiveness index, an 
index of no less than 70 was not achieved as stated in the LRMP (page 
4-152). Therefore, to fully address the original purpose and need for 
the project and implement the proposed action or alternative actions 
within the C3 management area, an amendment to the LRMP would be 
required. The purpose of the amendment is to permit implementation of 
the commercial and non-commercial thinning in the C3 management area of 
the Rimrock Ecosystem Restoration Projects.

Proposed Action

    In addition to the proposed commercial and non-commercial 
activities as described in the Rimrock FEIS (pages 26-37), the Forest 
Supervisor proposes to amend the LRMP following procedures described in 
Forest Service Handbook 1909.12, Chapter 5 Forest Plan Implementation 
and Amendment Process. The amendment will allow a project specific 
change to the wildlife standard on page 4-152 for all action 
alternatives. The standard reads: ``Elk habitat will be managed on 
designated big game winter ranges to achieve a habitat effectiveness 
index of no less than 70, including discounts for roads open to 
motorized vehicular traffic as described in Wilflife Habitats in 
Managed Forests (Thomas and others, 1979). The habitat effectiveness 
standard will be measured on an individual winter range basis.'' The 
amendment will allow an HEI of 67 for the Monument winter range only 
for the site-specific project called Rimrock Ecosystem Restoration 
Projects.

Possible Alternatives

    All alternatives described in Chapter 2 of the FEIS remain 
unchanged except for an amendment to only change the HEI to 67 for the 
wildlife standard on LRMP page 4-152 for this site-specific project. 
The alternatives are described in detail on pages 23 to 37 in the 
Rimrock FEIS. In addition to these alternatives, one action alternative 
that does not amend the LRMP will be considered.

Responsible Official

    Jeff Blackwood, Forest Supervisor, Umatilla National Forest, 2517 
S.W. Hailey Avenue, Pendleton, OR 97801.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Whether or not to implement the proposed commercial and non-
commercial thinning activities in the C3 management area as described 
in the Rimrock Ecosystem Restoration Projects FEIS and amend the LRMP 
habitat effectiveness standard to 67 for this site-specific project 
only.

Scoping Process

    The formal scoping period opened with publication of the Notice of 
Intent to produce an Environmental Impact Statement, which first 
appeared in the Federal Register on February 25, 1999 (Vol. 64, No. 37, 
page 9310-9311). Notification of the Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement was printed in the Federal Register on September 1, 2000 
(Vol. 65, No. 171, page 53295). A Notice of Availability of the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was printed in the Federal 
Register on June 6, 2003 (Vol. 68, No. 109, page 33934). On August 15, 
2003, a letter was mailed to 156 stakeholders and agency 
representatives, to notify that the commercial and precommercial 
thinning activities in the C3 management area had been withdrawn from 
the decision. An additional scoping period is being conducted to 
examine the need for an LRMP amendment for the HEI in the C3 Monument 
Winter Range.

[[Page 7416]]

Issues

    Issues are described in detail on pages 13 to 16 in the Rimrock 
FEIS and include: (1) Vegetation removal as a management tool and (2) 
Water Quality and Fish Habitat.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process that guides the 
development of the supplement to the environmental impact statement. We 
are seeking comments on a forest plan amendment to change the HEI of 70 
to 67 within the C3 Management Area on the site-specific project of the 
Rimrock Ecosystem Restoration Projects on the Umatilla National Forest. 
All comments previously received during scoping and in response to the 
DEIS will remain part of the project record.

Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review

    A supplemental draft environmental impact statement will be 
prepared for comment. The comment period on the supplemental draft 
environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date the 
Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in 
the Federal Register.
    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 
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 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 FEIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the supplemental 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 statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the 
supplemental 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, including the names and addresses of those who 
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal 
and will be available for public inspection.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 
1909.15, Section 21)

    Dated: February 6, 2004.
Jeff D. Blackwood,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 04-3047 Filed 2-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M