[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 244 (Monday, December 21, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70383-70385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-33695]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
EIS for The Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery
Act Pilot Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 21, 1998, the President of the United States signed
the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
including Section 401, The Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest
Recovery Act (Act).
The Act states that the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through
the Forest Service and after completion of an environmental impact
statement, shall conduct a pilot project on described Federal lands to
demonstrate the effectiveness of specific resource management
activities including fuelbreaks, group selection and individual tree
selection, and avoidance or protection of specified areas. A Record of
Decision (ROD) is to be adopted by August 17, 1999. Additionally, the
Forest Service is to develop a program for riparian restoration. The
Pilot Project is defined in the Act as Quincy Library Group Proposal,
as described in the ``Quincy Library Group-Community Stability
Proposal'', to be implemented on Federal lands identified on the map
(MAP) entitled ``Quincy Library Group Community Stability Proposal'',
dated October 12, 1993, and prepared by Vestra Resources of Redding,
California.
DATES: The public is asked to submit any issues (points of concern,
debate, dispute or disagreement) regarding potential effects of the
proposed action or alternatives by January 19, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to David Peters, Project Manager, USDA Forest
Service, Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act
Pilot Project, PO Box 11500, Quincy, CA 95971.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Contact David Peters, Project Manager, USDA Forest Service, Herger-
Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act Pilot Project, PO
Box 11500, Quincy, CA 95971. Copies of the Quincy Library Group
Community Stability Proposal, the ACT, the MAP and associated documents
are available upon request from the Project Manager.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Early Public Involvement
The pilot project is based on an agreement by a coalition of
representatives of fisheries, timber, environmental, county government,
citizen groups, and local communities that formed in northern
California to develop a resource management program that promotes
ecologic and economic health for certain Federal lands and communities
in the Sierra Nevada area. The agreement is the ``Quincy Library Group-
Community Stability Proposal,'' which has received broad public review
over a period of years. The proposal was developed by an active cross-
section from the local communities. The proposal was included for
analysis in the ``Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Managing
California Spotted Owl Habitat in the Sierra Nevada National Forests of
California, an Eco-system Approach'', 1996. Additionally, there were
congressional hearings and debate associated with the proposed Bill as
it was introduced in the House of Representatives.
Proposed Action
The Act directs the Forest Service to develop a Pilot Project,
described as follows
Pilot Project Area and Exclusions. The pilot project is
limited to certain Federal lands (National Forest System Lands of the
Plumas, Lassen, and Tahoe National Forests) and local communities of
the Sierra Nevada area, that are identified on the MAP as ``Available
for Group Selection''. All spotted owl habitat areas and protected
activity centers located in the pilot project area will be deferred
from resource management activities.
Riparan Protection and Limitation. The Scientific Analysis
Team (SAT) guidelines for riparian protection are described in the
document entitled ``Viability Assessments and Management considerations
for Species Associated with Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forests of
the Pacific Northwest'', a Forest Service research document dated March
1993 and coauthorized by the Scientific Analysis Team, including Dr.
Jack Ward Thomas. The ACT does not require the application of SAT
guidelines to any livestock grazing in the pilot project area during
the term of the pilot project, unless the livestock grazing is being
conducted in the specific location at which the SAT guidelines are
being applied to a required ``Resource Management Activity''.
Compliance. All required ``Resource Management
Activities'' shall be implemented to the extent consistent with
applicable Federal Law and the standards and guidelines for the
conservation of the California spotted owl as set forth in the
California Spotted Owl Sierran Province Interim Guidelines or
subsequently issued guidelines.
Roadless Area Protection. Required ``Resource Management
Activities'', road building, riparian managment activity that utilize
road construction, and timber harvesting activities, shall not be
conducted on National Forest System Lands that are designated as either
``Off Base'' or ``Deferred'' on the MAP.
Required ``Resource Management Activities''. The following
``Resource Management Activities'' shall be implemented in compliance
with Section 401 (1) on an acreage basis during the term of the pilot
project:
(1) Fuelbreak Construction.--Construction of a strategic system of
defensible fuel profile zones, including
[[Page 70384]]
shaded fuelbreaks, utilizing thinning, individual tree selection, and
other methods of vegetation management consistent with the Quincy
Library Group--Community Stability Proposal, on not less than 40,000,
but not more than 60,000, acres per year.
(2) Group Selection and Individual Tree Selection.--Utilization of
group selection and individual tree selection uneven-aged forest
management prescriptions described in the Quincy Library Group-
Community Stability Proposal to achieve a desired future condition of
all-age, multistory, fire resilient forests as follows:
(A) Group Selection.--Group selection on an average acreage of 0.57
percent of the pilot project land each year of the pilot project.
(B) Individual Tree Selection--Individual tree selection may also
be utilized within the pilot project area.
(3) Total Acreage.--The total acreage on which resource management
activities be implemented under this subsection shall not exceed 70,000
acres each year.
(4) Riparian Management.--A program of riparian management,
including wide protection zones and riparian restoration projects,
consistent with SAT guidelines.
Term of Pilot Project.--The pilot project shall continue
for five years unless the amendment or revision of the land and
resource management plans for the Plumas, Lassen and Tahoe National
Forests as directed are completed earlier.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
To comply with NEPA, the Forest Service will evaluate alternatives
to the proposed action within the EIS, including No Action and other
alternatives responding to public comments. Each alternative would be
rigorously explored and evaluated, or rationale would be given for
eliminating an alternative from detailed study. The range of
alternatives to be considered would include, but not be limited to:
Identification of strategic systems of defensible fuel profile
zones (DFPZ), that would include shaded fuelbreaks and would be
achieved through thinning, individual tree selection, and other
vegetative management activities. The strategic systems would include
complete descriptions of the physical arrangement of living and dead
vegetation remaining in the DFPZ when completed, and identification of
topographic, elevation, vegetation type, and other physical and
biological criteria within which each ``typical'' DFPZ would also be
appropriate.
Identification of a strategy to evaluate the effectiveness of
uneven-age management that would be achieved by application of thinning
and group selection prescriptions. The strategy would include
identification of topography, elevation, vegetation type, and other
physical and biological criteria that would be used to determine where
and how group selection and individual tree selection prescriptions
would be applied.
Strategies developed would include standards and guidelines for
monitoring the effectiveness of each strategic system of DFPZs, and
each uneven-aged management strategy.
Relationships With Sierra Nevada Framework for Conservation and
Collaboration (SNFCC)
Selection 401 of the 1999 Department of the Interior and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act (the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group
Forest Recovery Act), 112 Stat. 2681, directs the Secretary to
implement a pilot project on certain federal lands within the Plumas,
Lassen, and Tahoe National Forests. We will coordinate the Sierra
Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Project Environment Impact Statement with
the HFQLG environmental impact statement to implement section 401. We
would like comments from the public and interested groups concerning
the relationship between the two environmental impact statements.
Public Scoping Process
This Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environment Impact Statement is
the initiation of a public scoping process related to implementation of
the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act's Pilot
Project. The public is invited to comment by submitting any issues
(points of concern, debate, disagreement, or dispute) they may have
regarding potential effects of the proposed action.
Public information meetings will be hosted by the Lassen, Plumas,
and Tahoe National Forests at Loyalton, Blairsden, Quincy, Oroville,
Chico, Burney, and Chester, CA, between January 4th and January 16th,
1999. Additionally, two scoping workshops will be held, one at
Susanville and one at Quincy, on Saturday, January 16th. Location and
times for the meetings will be published in the official newspapers of
record for each forest. Throughout the scoping process, coordination
will occur with Federal and State agencies, Tribal governments, local
governments, and historically under-represented communities.
Commenting
A draft environmental statement is expected to be available for
public review and comment in June, 1999 and a final environmental
impact statement in August, 1999. The comment period on the draft
environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date of
availability published in the Federal Register by the Environmental
Protection Agency.
Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names
and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the
public record on this proposed action and will be available for public
inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and
considered. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may
request the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by
showing how the Freedom of Information (FOIA) permits such
confidentiality. Persons requesting such confidentiality should be
aware that, under the FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very
limited circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest
Service will inform the requester of the agency's decision regarding
the request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the
agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the
comments may be resubmitted with or without name and address.
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 the 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 state may be waived
or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 3 F.2d 1016, 1022
(9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp.
1334 (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
[[Page 70385]]
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 Environment Policy Act at 40
CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Dated: December 15, 1998.
Mark J. Madrid,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 98-33695 Filed 12-18-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
