[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 10, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59428-59429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8557]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Plantation Fuel Reduction, Eldorado National Forest, El Dorado 
County, CA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service, Eldorado National Forest will 
prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a proposal to treat 
approximately 4,637 acres of selected plantations on the Georgetown and 
Pacific Ranger Districts. The proposal will involve mechanical 
precommercial thinning and control of competitive vegetation using 
mechanical and chemical treatments.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by November 3, 2006. The draft environmental impact statement is 
expected in January 2007 and the final environmental impact statement 
is expected May 2007.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Tim Dabney, District Ranger, 
Georgetown Ranger District, 7600 Wentworth Springs Road, Georgetown, CA 
95634, Attention: Plantation Fuel Reduction Project.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Howard, Project Leader, Georgetown 
Ranger Station, 7600 Wentworth Springs Road, Georgetown, CA 95634, or 
by telephone at 530-333-4312 or by e-mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    It is the purpose of the Plantation Fuel Reduction Project to begin 
the process of enhancing forest health, vigor, growth, resilience to 
fire, and sustainability of the desired vegetation of the plantations, 
and thereby improve, maintain, and perpetuate the other dependent 
resources as directed in the Eldorado Forest Land and Resource 
Management Plan (LRMP) as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan 
Amendment, 2004 (SNFPA).
    The specific purpose and need of the Proposed Action is to: Reduce 
present and future fuel loads; alter the vegetative structure in 
plantations to reduce the risk of loss to wildland fire by maintaining 
flame lengths below six feet (four feet in defense and threat zones); 
reduce rate of spread and increase the fire line production rates; 
maintain the effectiveness of fuel treatments for more than five years; 
improve forest health, and, maintain valuable wildlife habitat and to 
create conditions that accelerate the development of old forest 
characteristics.

Proposed Action

    The Georgetown and Pacific Ranger Districts propose precommercial 
thinning and control of competitive vegetation using mechanical and 
chemical treatments of vegetation on approximately 4,637 acres of 
selected conifer plantations about 20 air miles north and east of 
Placerville, California on the Eldorado National Forest in El Dorado 
County. The legal description is: T.11N., R.11E.; T.11N., R.13E; 
T.11N.; R.14E; T.11N., R.15E; T.12N., R.11E.; T12N., R.13E.; T.12N., 
R14E.; T.12N., R.15E.; T13N., R.11E.; T.13N., R.12E.; T.13N., R.13E.; 
T.13N., R.14E.; T.13N., R.15E.; T.14N., R.12E.; T.14N., R.13E.; and, 
T.14N., R.14E. The project proposal would involve the following timber 
stand improvement activities: (1) Mechanical mastication treatment of 
approximately 3,039 acres using low ground pressure equipment to flail 
or ``masticate'' undesirable vegetation and conifers. Follow-up 
chemical treatment with ground-based application of herbicides (2,738 
acres of foliar treatment using a 3% glyphosate solution and 301 acres 
of foliar treatment using a 1.5% triclopyr solution) within one year 
following the completion of mechanical mastication activities. (2) Hand 
cut treatment of approximately 136 acres using hand tools. Follow-up 
chemical treatment with ground-based application of herbicides (136 
acres of foliar treatment using a 3% glyphosate solution) within one 
year following the completion of hand cutting activities. (3) Chemical 
treatment of approximately 1,462 acres (1,193 acres of foliar treatment 
using a 3% glyphosate solution and 269 acres of foliar treatment using 
a 1.5% triclopyr solution). Follow-up chemical treatment (1,193 acres 
of foliar treatment using a 3% glyphosate solution and 269 acres of 
foliar treatment using a 1.5% triclopyr solution), if necessary, three 
to five years after the initial treatment.
    The proposed project activities would begin in 2007 and with the 
goal of being completed by 2015, dependent upon funding.

Lead and Cooperating Agencies

    The lead agency will be the U.S.D.A. Forest Service.

Responsible Official

    Tim Dabney, Georgetown District Ranger is the responsible Official. 
As the responsible official he will document the decision and reasons 
for the decision in the Record of Decision. That decision will be 
subject to Forest Service appeal regulations (36 CFR Part 215).

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The decision to be made is whether to adopt and implement the 
proposed action, an alternative to the proposed action, or take no 
action to conduct fuel reduction and timber stand improvement 
treatments in plantations.

Scoping Process

    Public participation will be especially important at several points 
during the analysis. The Forest Service will be seeking information, 
comments, and assistance from the Federal, State, and local agencies 
and other individuals or organizations who may be interested in or 
affected by the proposed action. To facilitate public participation, 
information about the proposed action will be mailed to all who express 
interest in the proposed action and notification of the public scoping 
period will be published in the Mountain Democrat, Placerville, CA.
    Comments submitted during the scoping process should be in writing 
and should be specific to the proposed action. The comments should 
describe as clearly and completely as possible any issues the commenter 
has with the proposal. The scoping process includes: (1) Identifying 
the potential issues; (2) Identifying issues to be analyzed in depth; 
(3) Eliminating nonsignificant issues or those previously covered by a 
relevant previous environmental analysis; (4) Exploring additional 
alternatives; and, (5) Identifying potential environmental effects of 
the proposed action and alternatives.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement.

[[Page 59429]]

Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review

    A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for 
comment. The comment period on the 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 comment period so that 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 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 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: September 29, 2006.
Timothy A. Dabney,
Georgetown District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 06-8557 Filed 10-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M