[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 81 (Thursday, April 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21992-21993]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-8483]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Main Boulder Fuels Reduction Project, Big Timber Ranger District, 
Gallatin National Forest, Park and Sweet Grass Counties, MT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact 
Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service is releasing a Supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to further address the 
environmental effects that the Main Boulder Fuels Reduction Project 
would have on the northern goshawk. This is a hazardous fuels reduction 
project consisting of approximately 2500 acres of overstory and 
understory canopy thinning, prescribed burning, and aspen stimulation.

DATES: The Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement is 
expected May of 2005 and the Supplemental Final Environmental Impact 
Statement and Record of Decision are expected August of 2005.

ADDRESSES: Written correspondence should be sent to Bill Avey, District 
Ranger, Big Timber Ranger District, P.O. Box 1130, Big Timber, MT 
59011-1130. Copies of the Main Boulder Fuels Reduction SEIS will be 
available at the Big Timber Ranger District Office, 225 Big Timber Loop 
Road, Big Timber, MT and the Bozeman Ranger District Office, 3710 
Fallon Street, Bozeman, MT. Electronic copies will also available on 
the Internet at http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/gallatin in the Projects and 
Plans area.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Avey, District Ranger or Brent 
Foster, ID Team Leader, Big Timber Ranger District at (406) 932-5155 or 
Barbara Ping, Co-ID Team Leader, Bozeman Ranger District at (406) 522-
2558 (see addresses above).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose and need of the project is to provide for public and 
firefighter safety by minimizing the probability and effects of future 
fire starts in the wildland/urban interface of the Main Boulder River 
Corridor, to extend the potential time available for evacuation in the 
event of a wildfire by reducing the fire hazard along the Main Boulder 
Road, and to reduce fuel loadings by breaking up the vertical and 
horizontal fuel composition in the corridor, wherever possible.

Proposed Action

    Stand density reduction, utilizing ground based harvest equipment, 
would occur on approximately 1060 acres on slopes up to 35%. 
Approximately 1040 acres on slopes >35% would be treated with other 
specialized methods or hand-treatments. A minimum of 15 to 20% of each 
unit would be left untreated to provide diversity across the landscape. 
In addition to reducing surface fuel loading by commercial thinning and 
salvage, small diameter fuel reduction, understory and/or pile burning 
would occur. Conifers would be slashed and prescribed burning would 
occur on approximately 400 acres of meadow-type habitats. Aspen clones 
would have conifers removed within a 100 foot radius to encourage aspen 
regeneration. A maximum of 7.4 miles of temporary road may be 
constructed to access the areas proposed for mechanical fuels 
treatment. No permanent roads would be constructed.

Alternatives

    Alternatives that were considered in detailed study include the No 
Action Alternative and the Proposed Action Alternative. Seven other 
alternatives were considered, but did not merit detailed analysis or 
further consideration in the process.

Responsible Official

    Rebecca Heath, Forest Supervisor, Gallatin National Forest, P.O. 
Box 130, 10 East Babcock, Bozeman, MT 59011.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The scope of actions in the decision are limited to stand density 
reduction and the reduction of downed fuel loadings on National Forest 
Land including the thinning of large diameter conifers, removal of 
insect or disease damaged/killed conifers, cutting of small diameter 
conifers, slashing of conifers encroaching into meadow or aspen stands, 
prescribed burning of meadow areas, underburning of some treated 
stands, piling and removal or burning of downed woody materials 
resulting from treatment actions.

[[Page 21993]]

Scoping Process

    Collaboration with the public has been an important part of the 
project. The proposal was developed with input from adjacent private 
landowners,the local watershed association, and numerous state, county, 
and local officals and groups. More than 20 meetings have been held 
providing information and updates pertaining to the project. Numerous 
field trips to the project area have been conducted involving various 
individuals, agencies and organizations. In December 2002, a formal 
scoping letter was sent to interested parties. The DEIS was released 
for public comment in July of 2004 followed by a 45 day review and 
comment period. In January of 2005 the FEIS and ROD were released and a 
45 day appeal filing period began. Three appeals were received and 
subsequently the decision was reversed to update and clarify the 
analysis to better address the impacts to northern goshawk.

Preliminary Issues

    Key issues that were identified include the possible negative 
environmental effects to water quality, fisheries, scenery, wildlife, 
recreation, and air quality. Key issues also included the threat of 
fuel accumulation and the potential for increasing the risk of noxious 
weed spread.

Comment Requested

    The Draft Supplemental EIS is expected to be filed with the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review 
in May 2005. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of Availability 
(NOA) of the Draft Supplemental EIS in the Federal Register. The 
comment period on the Draft Supplemental EIS will be 45 days from the 
publication date of the NOA. A Supplemental Final Environmental Impact 
Statement and new Record of Decision will then be prepared.

Early Notice of the 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, 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 final environmental impact statement.
    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.

    Dated: April 21, 2005.
Rebecca Heath,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 05-8483 Filed 4-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P