[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 184 (Thursday, September 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48712-48714]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22952]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Plumas National Forest; California; Flea Project (Renamed Concow 
Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project)

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Corrected notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact 
statement.

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

SUMMARY: With the decline of forestland density reduction treatments, 
overcrowded conditions have increased, forestland diversity has 
declined, California's wildfires have gotten larger, firefighting costs 
have skyrocketed, and resource and property damage have increased. In 
2008, the Butte Lightning Complex burned about 6,190 acres within the 
8,170 acre Concow Project Area.
    In response, the USDA Forest Service, Feather River District Ranger 
of the Plumas National Forest, 875 Mitchell Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965, 
and the USDI Bureau of Land Management, Northern California Redding 
Field Office Manager, 355 Hemsted Drive, Redding, CA 96002, are 
cooperating to prepare the Concow Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project 
Environmental impact Statement. The USDA, Forest Service. Feather River 
Ranger District of the Plumas National Forest is the lead agency 
preparing a draft EIS on a proposal to establish, develop and maintain 
an irregularly shaped network of up to \1/2\ mile wide Defensible Fuels 
Profile Zones (DFPZs) on USDA Forest Service (1,478 acres) and USDI 
Bureau of Land Management (32 acres) administered land, within the 
Wildiand Urban Interface. The Concow Project aims to establish 
Defensible Fuels Profile Zones (DFPZs), implement forestland density 
reduction treatments and post-fire dead and dying hazardous tree 
removal, while simultaneously improving local economic health by 
employing area workers. The DFPZs would be located within and west of 
the 2008 Butte Lightning Complex Fire perimeter, designed to improve 
the capacity of effective, traditional approaches to fire suppression 
and fire-fighting readiness, along with facilitating private land 
efforts. DFPZs would connect existing and proposed Federal and private 
land fuel breaks and parallel residential evacuation routes and primary 
fire suppression access routes. Additionally, treatments would 
integrate the enhancement of degraded oak woodlands and reforestation 
of fire-damaged plantations.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
within 45 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register. 
The draft environmental impact statement is expected November 2009 and 
the fmal environmental impact statement is expected January 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to the USDA Forest Service, Feather 
River Ranger District, 875 Mitchell Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965. 
Comments may also be sent via e-mail to [email protected], 
electronically mailed to [email protected] or 
via facsimile to (530) 532-1210.
    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times 
and in such a way that they are useful to the Agency's preparation of 
the EIS. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of 
the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer's 
concerns and contentions.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation including names 
and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record 
for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be 
accepted and considered, however.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Spinos, Interdisciplinary Team 
Leader at (530) 534-6500 or (530) 532-8932.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of intent to prepare an EIS for the 
Flea Project, designed to fulfill the Herger Feinstein Quincy Library 
Group Forest Recovery Act of 1988, was published in the Federal 
Register on Thursday, August 30, 2007 (Vol. 72, No.168, pp. 50096-
50098). In June, 2008, a series of lightning strikes ignited numerous 
forest fires, which over several months merged, burning through the 
central and eastern portions of the Flea Project Area. This complex of 
fires, subsequently referred to as the Butte Lightning Complex, 
dramatically changed the landscape for the long-term. In September 
2008, the Feather River Ranger District, of the Plumas National Forest, 
began the process to determine

[[Page 48713]]

the scope (the depth and breadth) of the 2008 wildfire disturbance on 
the environment. At that time, the draft Flea Project EIS was being 
prepared. In December 2008, after field reconnaissance was completed, 
the Forest Service, Plumas National Forest, determined to divide the 
Flea Project Area into two individual management units and projects. 
The westerly, unburned portion and the fire damaged, central portion of 
the Flea Project Area, located alongside communities in the Wildland 
Urban Interface, to be documented in one EIS. A draft EIS will be 
prepared with a modified purpose and need; renamed the Concow Hazardous 
Fuels Reduction Project. The easterly portion of the Flea Project Area, 
affected by predominantly low severity wildfire, is to be deferred.
    The portion of the proposed action located on USDA Forest Service 
administered land is designed to meet the standards and guidelines for 
land management activities in the Plumas National Forest Land and 
Resource Management Plan (1988), as amended by the Herger-Feinstein 
Quincy Library Group (FIFQLG) Final Supplemental Environmental Impact 
Statement (FSEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) (1999, 2003), 
legislatively extended from 2009 to 2012, per the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act (HR 2754), as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest 
Plan Amendment FSEIS and ROD (2004). Additionally, in December 2007, 
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764), stated that the 
2003-adopted Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA: Public Law 108-148) 
applies to HFQLG projects.
    The Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003 (16 U.S.C. at 
1611-6591) emphasizes public collaboration processes for developing and 
implementing hazardous fuel reduction projects on certain types of 
``at-risk'' National Forest System Land, and also provides other 
authorities and direction to help restore healthy forests.
    The portion of the proposed action located on USDI Bureau of Land 
Management administered land is designed to meet the standards and 
guidelines for land management activities in the Redding Resource 
Management Plan (1993). Purpose and Need for Action The USDA Forest 
Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management propose to: (1) Reduce risk 
to rural communities from high intensity wildfires; (2) establish and 
maintain Defensive Fuel Profile Zones (DFPZs), linking Federal and 
private land, to further collaborative fire prevention and suppression 
efforts to improve the capability to control and contain wildfire; (3) 
restore recent fire-damaged forests to promote forest health and 
wildlife habitat diversity; and (4) contribute to the stability and 
economic health of local communities.
    The presence of overcrowded forests and fire-damaged vegetation 
would sustain high intensity fire behavior, in the event of ignition. 
High concentrations of forest, woody, standing and ground hazardous 
fuels, particularly adjacent to homes, challenge fire suppression 
tactics aimed at controlling and containing wildfire. Hazardous fuels 
need to be removed and/or rearranged to reduce threats to communities 
at a high risk to destructive wildfire. Additionally, wildfire 
disturbance has functioned to shift species composition, simplify 
vegetative structure and reduce age-class diversity. Post-fire re-
growth in oak dominated ecosystems have become overcrowded, choking 
migratory routes for various wildlife species. Wildfire also destroyed 
plantations, which are now under-stocked.
    The project would reduce tree densities in overcrowded forests, 
remove dead and dying scorched trees, and reduce surface hazardous 
fuels to establish DFPZs up to \1/2\ mile wide within the Wildland 
Urban Interface, beginning in 2010. Roadside danger trees that pose a 
safety hazard to the public along access routes would also be removed. 
Fire-damaged plantations would be re-planted during the initial entry. 
Two maintenance treatments would occur over a 10 year period. The 
project is located in all or portions of sections 2, 12, 24, T23N, R3E; 
6, 18, 30, 32. 34, 36, T23N, R4E; 2, 12, 14, 22, T22N, R4E; in Butte 
County, California.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action would initially establish DFPZs by reducing 
hazardous ladder and canopy fuels by applying a combination of 
thinning-from-below and radial release on 217 acres in the unburned 
areas. Dead and dying tree removal would occur on 320 acres in areas 
burned in 2008. Surface fuels in burned and unburned areas would be 
treated by applying mastication on 671 acres, chipping on 385 acres, 
lopping and scattering on 118 acres, hand cutting, hand-piling and pile 
burning on 666 acres, and prescribed under burning treatments on 117 
acres. Defensible Fuels Profile Zones would be maintained by applying 
mastication on 671 acres, lopping and scattering on 118 acres, hand-
cutting, hand-piling and pile burning on 666 acres, and prescribed 
under burning of surface fuels treatments on 468 acres, from 2 to 5 
years after the initial treatments, depending on site conditions. 
Similar secondary maintenance treatments would be applied from 7 to 9 
years after the initial treatments, depending on site conditions. 
Within unburned areas canopy cover would be reduced to approximately 40 
to 50 percent in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) 
system Size Class 4 stands (trees 11-24 inches diameter at breast 
height [dbh]) and Size Class 5 stands (greater than 24 inches dbh), 
where it presently exceeds that amount. Conifers ranging from 9.0 to 
29.9 inches dbh would be removed as necessary and processed as sawlogs. 
Harvested hardwoods less than 6 inches dbh, and conifers 3.0 to 8.9 
inches dbh are considered biomass and would be piled and burned or 
removed from units and processed at appropriate facilities. All trees 
30 inches dbh or larger would be retained, unless removal is required 
for operability (e.g., new skid trails, landings, or temporary roads). 
Residual spacing of conifers would be a mosaic of even and clumpy 
spacing depending on the characteristics of each stand prior to 
implementation. CWHR Size Class 3 stands (averaging 6-11 inches dbh) 
and plantations would not have any canopy cover restrictions and would 
be thinned to residual spacing of approximately 18 to 22 feet (25 percent), depending on average residual tree size and forest 
health conditions, to allow retention of the healthiest, largest, and 
tallest 6 conifers and black oaks. Radial thinning or release will 
occur around large diameter black oak and the healthiest growing sugar 
pine, or ponderosa pine >24 inches in diameter on a per acre basis. 
Radial thinning would correlate to tree DBH. All mechanized thinning 
and biomass removal in DFPZ units would be conducted with feller 
buncher equipment. Shrubs would be masticated, as would trees less than 
9 inches dbh unless needed for proper canopy cover and spacing. 
Equipment restriction zone widths within Riparian Habitat Conservation 
Areas (RHCAs) would range from 25-150 feet, depending on environmental 
conditions. Hand cutting and pile burning would be used to reduce fuels 
in RHCAs and other areas where mechanical equipment is not allowed. In 
burned areas, dead trees with commercial value greater than 20 inches 
in diameter in excess of wildlife needs will be removed utilizing 
helicopter and/or ground based logging systems. Dead non-merchantable 
trees 12 to 19.9 inches will be removed and disposed of by one of the 
following ways; chipped, incinerated or as firewood. Shrubs would be 
masticated, as would trees up

[[Page 48714]]

to 12 inches in diameter. In units with limited accessibility, trees up 
to 19.9 inches will be masticated. Black oak stump sprouts will be left 
untreated at an approximate spacing of 18-25 feet, with mastication in 
between. Fire-injured trees may be removed in order to meet post-fire 
fuels and operational objectives. Snags would be retained in snag 
retention areas, and in treatment areas at a minimum of 2 snags per 
acre and up to 4 snags per acre (exception is along the Rim Road, where 
either all snags would be removed or up to 2 snags per acre would be 
retained). Approximately 30 acres would be required for log and biomass 
landing activities. No new road construction would be required. 
Approximately 56 acres of fire-damaged plantations would be reforested 
and 40 acres of ``spot planting'' with conifer seedlings would occur in 
widely spaced clusters to emulate a naturally established forest. The 
areas would be reforested with a mixture of native species. In both 
burned and unburned areas, manual cutting of shrubs, trees 1 to 9 
inches dbh, and/or thinning aggregations of 1 to 9 inches dbh conifers 
or plantation trees would occur.

Possible Alternatives

    In addition to the proposed action, two other alternatives would be 
analyzed, a no action alternative (alternative A), and an action 
alternative consistent with the 2001 SNFPA ROD (alternative C).

Lead and Cooperating Agencies

    The USDA, Forest Service is the lead agency for this proposal. The 
USDI, Bureau of Land Management is a cooperating agency for the purpose 
of this EIS.

Responsible Official

    USDA Forest Service, Feather River District Ranger of the Plumas 
National Forest and the USDI Bureau of Land Management, Northern 
California Redding Field Manager are the Responsible Officials.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The decision to be made is whether to: (1) Implement the proposed 
action; (2) meet the purpose and need for action through some other 
combination of activities; or, (3) take no action at this time.

Preliminary Issues

    The proposed action may increase adverse effects to water and other 
aquatic dependent resources in municipal watersheds, already considered 
highly disturbed. Specifically, implementing ground-disturbing 
activities in watersheds that are already over the threshold of concern 
may increase the risk of adverse and cumulative watershed effects. The 
proposed action may increase adverse cumulative loss of snag (post-fire 
dead tree) habitat, already depleted over roughly 8,000 acres in 
surrounding areas, along with the species that are dependent on them 
for nesting and roosting.

Permits or Licenses Required

    An Air Pollution Permit and a Smoke Management Plan are required by 
local agencies.

Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement. A public field 
trip will be held on October 10, 2009, starting at 9 a.m, leaving from 
the Pines Yankee Hill Hardware Store, 11 300A Highway 70, Oroville, CA 
95965.
    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times 
and in such a manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation 
of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be 
provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly 
articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions. The submission of 
timely and specific comments can affect a reviewer's ability to 
participate in subsequent administrative appeal or judicial review.

    Dated: September 14, 2009.
Karen L. Hayden,
Feather River District Ranger.
[FR Doc. E9-22952 Filed 9-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M