[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 8 (Thursday, January 12, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2015-2016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-248]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Miller West Fisher Project, Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln 
County, MT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of vegetation 
management through commercial timber harvest, precommercial thinning 
and prescribed fire; access management changes; trail construction and 
improvement; treatment of fuels in campgrounds; and watershed 
rehabilitation activities. The project is located in the Silverfish 
planning subunit on the Libby Ranger District, Kootenai National 
Forest, Lincoln County, Montana, and south of Libby, Montana.
    Scoping Comment Date: The scoping period will close and comments 
will be due 30 days following publication of this notice.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the 
analysis should be sent to Malcolm R. Edwards, District Ranger, Libby 
Ranger District, 12557 Hwy 37, Libby, MT 59923.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Leslie Ferguson, Team Leader, 
Libby Ranger District, 12557 Hwy 37, Libby, MT 59923. Phone: (406) 293-
7773.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The project area is approximately 20 air 
miles south of Libby, Montana, within all or portions of T27N, R29W-
R31W, T26N, R29W-R31W, and T25N, R29W-R31W, PMM, Lincoln County, 
Montana. The area contains the Miller, West Fisher and Silver Butte 
Creek watersheds.
    The purpose and need for this project is to (1) Maintain ecosystem 
function and vegetative health; (2) Reduce hazardous fuels and restore 
natural fire regimes; (3) Provide commodities; (4) Provide appropriate 
levels and types of access while minimizing impacts to resources; (5) 
Maintain or improve watershed condition; (6) Maintain or improve 
wildlife habitat; and (7) Improve recreational opportunities through 
several segments of trial reconstruction, and fuels treatment in Lake 
Creek campground.
    To meet this purpose and need this project proposes:
    (1) Vegetation treatments, including commercial timber harvest and 
associated fuel treatments, precommercial thinning, and prescribed 
burning without associated timber harvest. Vegetation treatments total 
5,800 acres of treated area.
    (2) Road and access management, including access changes new road 
construction, and road storage and decommissioning. Access changes 
would occur over approximately 8.72 miles. Approximately 1.2 miles of 
new road construction if proposed. Approximately 12.1 miles of road 
storage and 0.87 of road decommissioning are also proposed.
    (3) Improvement, construction and reconstruction of trail tread for 
a total of 5.5 miles in the project area.
    (4) Fuels and hazardous tree removal in Lake Creek Campground.
    (5) Watershed condition improvement in the form of best management 
practices (BMP) implementation, including installation of ditch relief 
culverts, culvert replacement, surface water deflectors and cleaning 
ditches is proposed for all haul routes. Additional BMP work on roads 
not used for timber haul is proposed and will be performed as funding 
becomes available. Stream stabilization projects are also proposed.
    (6) Design features and mitigations to maintain and protect 
resource values.
    Range of Alternatives: The Forest Service will consider a range of 
alternatives. One of these will be the ``no action'' alternative in 
which none of the proposed activities will implemented. Additional 
alternatives will examine varying levels and locations for the proposed 
activities to achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to 
the issues and other resource values.
    Public Involvement and Scoping: The public is encouraged to take 
part in the process and to visit with Forest Service officials at any 
time during the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service 
will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, 
State, and local agencies, Tribal governments, and other individuals or 
organizations that may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed 
action. This input will be used in preparation of the draft and final 
EIS. The scoping process will include:
    1. Identifying potential issues.
    2. Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.
    3. Identifying alternatives to the proposed action.
    4. Exploring additional alternatives that will be derived from 
issues recognized during scoping activities.
    5. Identifying potential environmental effects of this proposal 
(i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and connected actions).
    Estimated Dates For Filing: The draft EIS is expected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for 
public review in April of 2006. At that time EPA will publish a Notice 
of Availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. 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. It is very 
important that those interested in the management of this area 
participate at that time.
    The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in July 2006. In the 
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and 
responses received during the comment period that pertain to the 
environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and to applicable 
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision 
regarding the proposal.
    Reviewer's Obligations: 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 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 and respond to them in the final EIS.
    To be most helpful, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific 
as possible and may address the adequacy

[[Page 2016]]

of the statement or the merit of the alternatives discussed. 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.
    Responsible Official: As the Forest Supervisor of the Kootenai 
National Forest, 1101 U.S. Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923, Bob 
Castaneda is the Responsible Official. As the Responsible Official, Bob 
will decide if the proposed project will be implemented. Bob will 
document the decision and reasons for the decision in the Record of 
Decision. Bob has delegated the responsibility for preparing the DEIS 
and FEIS to Malcolm R. Edwards, District Ranger, Libby Ranger District.

    Dated: January 4, 2006.
Cami Winslow,
Acting Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 06-248 Filed 1-11-06; 8:45am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M