[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63434-63436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25969]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County, Montana; Grizzly 
Vegetation and Transportation Management Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

[[Page 63435]]


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

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

SUMMARY: The Kootenai National Forest will prepare a Supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Grizzly Vegetation and 
Transportation Management Project (Grizzly Project). The Grizzly 
Project includes vegetation management, fuels reduction, watershed 
rehabilitation activities, wildlife habitat improvement, and access 
management changes, including road decommissioning. The project is 
located in the Grizzly planning subunit on the Three Rivers Ranger 
District, Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County, Montana, and 
northeast of Troy, Montana. The Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS 
for this project was published in the Federal Register (72 FR 31821) on 
June 8, 2007, and the notice of the Final EIS (74 FR 24006) on May 22, 
2009. The Record of Decision was issued concurrently with the Final 
EIS. On June 29, 2010, the United States District Court for the 
District of Montana issued a sixty-nine page decision granting in part 
and denying in part cross motions for summary judgment in this case 
which alleged that the Forest Service's authorization of the Grizzly, 
Miller, and Little Beaver Projects on the Kootenai National Forest 
violated NEPA, NFMA, and the ESA. Plaintiffs generally alleged that in 
authorizing these Projects for vegetation management, fuels reduction, 
watershed restoration, timber harvest, and other purposes, the Forest 
Service failed to adequately evaluate their impact on the threatened 
Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bears which inhabit the area. Regarding the 
Grizzly Vegetation and Transportation Management Project the court 
found that (1) the agency's conclusion that the Project was consistent 
with the Kootenai Forest Plan violated NFMA because there was 
insufficient information in the record to determine whether the 
Projects complied with the standard for Management Situation 1 lands 
which require the agency to ``favor the needs of the grizzly bear when 
grizzly habitat and other land use values compete''; and (2) the 
agency's failure to explain why it used the bear management unit 
instead of the Forest as the proper level for analysis of cumulative 
effects and its failure to disclose and discuss the problems with the 
``Wakkinen Study'' regarding grizzly habitat standards violated NEPA's 
``hard look'' requirement. The Court enjoined all three Projects and 
remanded them to the agency to address the defects identified in its 
decision. (09-160, D. Mont.). A Supplemental EIS is being prepared for 
the Grizzly Vegetation and Transportation Management Project to address 
these disclosures in the grizzly bear analysis.

DATES: Under 40 CFR 1502.9(c)(4), there is no formal scoping period for 
this proposed action. The supplemental draft environmental impact 
statement is expected to be available for public review and comment in 
late November, 2010 and the environmental impact statement is expected 
in February, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The line officer responsible for this analysis is Cami 
Winslow, Acting District Ranger, Three Rivers Ranger District, 12385 
U.S. Hwy 2, Troy, MT 59935.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Kathy Mohar, Team Leader, 
Three Rivers Ranger District, at (406) 295-4693.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Grizzly Project Area is approximately 18 
air miles northeast of Troy, Montana, within all or portions of T34N, 
R32W-R33W, T35N, R32W-R33W, and T36N, R32W-R33W, Lincoln County, 
Montana.
    The Grizzly Project Supplemental EIS will provide additional 
information and disclosures on the grizzly bear analysis in support of 
the Record of Decision issued in April 2009. More specifically, the 
Supplemental EIS will provide clarification and additional information 
on the following disclosures as requested by the District Court of 
Montana:
    1. Why the Bear Management Unit is the appropriate scale of 
analysis for cumulative effects.
    2. Further discussion on the limitations of Wakkinen and Kasworm 
(1997) utilized as the Best Available Science in regard to grizzly bear 
habitat protection in the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem Grizzly Bear Recovery 
Zone.
    3. Further explanation on how the Grizzly Project was made 
compatible with grizzly bear needs, consistent with the Kootenai 
National Forest 1987 Forest Plan.

Record of Decision--Alternative 2a

    The Grizzly Project Record of Decision issued in April 2009 
authorized the following:
    Vegetation treatments: Restoration of western white pine and 
western larch on 340 acres; restoration of low and moderate intensity 
fire regime vegetation characteristics on 548 acres; enhancement of 
aspen habitat on 19 acres; ecosystem and wildlife burning on 468 acres; 
precommercial thinning on 515 acres. These activities will contribute 
an estimated 8.2 million board feet of forest products to markets.
    Transportation actions: Placing 15.5 miles of road in intermittent 
stored service status to improve grizzly bear habitat; active 
decommissioning on 15.4 miles of unneeded road, and storage work on 9.7 
miles of road to reduce sediment delivery prior to placing in grizzly 
bear core habitat; best management practices on 36 miles of road; 
passive decommissioning of 27 miles of road; designate 65.5 miles of 
currently open roads as open to motorized use; designate 39 miles of 
existing trails within grizzly bear habitat for non-motorized use. The 
proposed action and alternatives were originally described and analyzed 
in the FEIS, located at http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/kootenai/projects/projects/Grizzly/index.shtml. At this time no new alternatives are 
expected.

Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

    A Draft SEIS is expected to be available for public review and 
comment in late November 2010; and a Final SEIS in February 2011. The 
comment period for the Draft SEIS 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 final supplemental environmental impact statement.

[[Page 63436]]

    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the Draft SEIS should 
be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to 
specific pages or chapters of the draft 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.
    Responsible Official: Paul Bradford, Forest Supervisor of the 
Kootenai National Forest, 31374 US Hwy 2, Libby, MT 59923 is the 
Responsible Official for the Grizzly Project.

    Dated: October 8, 2010.
Paul Bradford,
Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 2010-25969 Filed 10-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P