[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 107 (Friday, June 4, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29989-29991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-14223]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Rocky Mountain Front Minerals Withdrawal EIS--Lewis and Clark and
Helena National Forests
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement on a proposal to withdraw from locatable mineral entry,
429,000 acres of National Forest System lands along Montana's Rocky
Mountain Front in Glacier, Pondera, Teton and Lewis and Clark Counties,
Montana. Specific land descriptions were provided in the Federal
Register (64 FR 5311-5312, Feb. 3, 1999) under the Bureau of Land
Management Notice of Proposed withdrawal. The purpose of the proposal
is to preserve the area for traditional cultural purposes by Native
Americans, protect threatened and endangered species, and preserve the
outstanding scenic values and roadless character. If approved, the
withdrawal would remove National Forest System lands along the Rocky
Mountain Front from new mining claims for up to 20 years. The EIS will
be designed to satisfy the requirements of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 and implementing regulations (43 CFR 2310.1).
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received
on or before July 6, 1999. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
public meeting dates.
ADDRESSES. Send written comments to Rick Prausa, Forest Supervisor,
Lewis and Clark National Forest, 1101 15th Street North, Box 869, Great
Falls, MT 59403. Electronic mail may be sent to comment/lewisclark@fs.fed.us. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
additional information about electronic filing and public meeting
addresses.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Whittekiend, EIS Team Leader,
(406) 466-5341 or (406) 791-7700.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Service proposes to withdraw from
locatable mineral entry, National Forest System lands along the Rocky
Mountain Front. The proposed mineral withdrawal is 429,000 acres of
federal lands, subject to valid existing rights associated with the
existing unpatented mining claims in the study area. The withdrawal
would have an immediate effect on 426,800 acres of currently unclaimed
federal land, which would be withdrawn for up to 20 years. The mineral
withdrawal may or may not affect the remaining acreage (approximately
2,200 acres of unpatented mining claims), depending upon whether the
104 unpatented mining claims constitute valid existing rights. If these
unpatented mining claims were abandoned or determined to be invalid,
the mineral withdrawal would prohibit the relocation of new mining
claims. The mineral withdrawal would be subject to review at the end of
20 years according to federal regulations. The primary purpose of the
proposed mineral withdrawal is to preserve the area for tradition
cultural uses by Native Americans, to protect threatened and endangered
species and protect outstanding scenic values and roadless character.
Many individuals and groups have expressed concern
[[Page 29990]]
about the potential of minerals development along the Rocky Mountain
Front after the staking of 104 claims in the Blackleaf/Muddy Creek
area.
The study area includes areas considered sacred to several Indian
tribes. Traditional cultural uses that take place in the study area
include religious ceremonies and gathering of traditional herbs. The
study area provides habitat for several threatened and endangered
species including grizzly bear, gray wolf, peregrine falcon, and bald
eagle. The risks of mining development to these species include
increased roading, habitat destruction and increased human presence.
The scenic qualities of the study area are believed by many to be among
the best in the nation. These qualities could be degraded by the
development of mineral resources. Withdrawal of these lands would
ensure that the cultural, biological and scenic resources of these
lands would be maintained and the impacts of mining related activities
would be reduced.
Decisions To Be Made
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, has filed an
application with the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land
Management to withdraw 429,000 acres of National Forest System lands
from locatable mineral entry under the United States mining laws. The
Forest Service will prepare an EIS. The Chief of the Forest Service
will have two decisions to make: he will decide whether or not to
recommend that the Secretary of the Interior withdraw this area. If the
Secretary of The Interior withdraws the area, the Chief of the Forest
Service will also amend the Lewis and Clark and Helena National Forest
Plans to reflect the change in management of locatable hardrock
minerals. The Chief's Forest Plan amendments decisions will be
contingent on the Secretary of the Interior's withdrawal decision.
The Chief of the Forest Service will submit his decision and the
EIS to the Montana State Director, Bureau of Land Management who will
submit a recommendation to the Director of the Bureau of Land
Management. The recommendation and supporting documentation will then
be forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior for a decision. The
authority to withdraw lands from mineral entry lies with the Secretary
of the Interior. The Secretary will decide which lands, if any, to
withdraw, and for how long. The Secretary is limited to a maximum
withdrawal period of 20 years. If a withdrawal of over 5,000 acres is
approved, the Secretary of the Interior would advise Congress of the
withdrawal action being taken. No action is required by Congress to
implement a mineral withdrawal. Congress can terminate a withdrawal
with a concurrent resolution from the House and Senate within 90 days
of the approval of the Public Land Order. At the end of the 20 year
period, the withdrawal decision would be reviewed to determine if it is
appropriate to extend it. If the Secretary chooses to implement a
withdrawal, the withdrawal would become effective on the date the
Public Land Order is published in the Federal Register.
Responsible Official
Mike Dombeck, Chief, USDA Forest Service, Auditors Building, 201
14th Street, SW at Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250 is the
Responsible Official for making the withdrawal recommendation to the
Secretary of the Interior. The Chief of the Forest Service is also
responsible for any decision to amend the Forest Plans to reflect any
change in management of locatable hardrock minerals. He will document
his decisions and rationale in a Record of Decision.
Preliminary Issues
Two preliminary issues have been identified: Approval of the
withdrawal would result in the loss of opportunity to extract minerals
from the area and withdrawal would limit the economic base of rural
communities along the Rocky Mountain Front.
Public Involvement, Rationale, and Public Meetings
In February, 1999, a notice of proposed withdrawal was published in
the Federal Register (64 FR 5311-5312, Feb. 3, 1999). This notice
invited public comment for a period of 90 days. Comments received will
be included in the documentation for the EIS. The public is encouraged
to take part in the process and is encouraged 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 and other individuals
or organizations who may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed
action.
While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time,
comments received within 30 days of the publication of this notice will
be especially useful in the preparation of the Draft EIS. Public
meetings associated with the project will be held to gain a better
understanding of public issues and concerns. These meetings will be
held in Choteau, Montana at the Stagestop Inn on June 22, 1999 from 3-8
p.m. and in Lincoln, Montana at the Lincoln Community Hall on June 24,
1999 from 3-7 p.m.
Information from the meetings will be used in preparation of the
draft and final EIS. The scoping process will include identifying:
potential issues, significant issues to be analyzed in depth,
alternatives to the proposed action, and potential environmental
effects of the proposal and alternatives.
Electronic Access and Filing Addresses
Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to comment/
rl__lewisclark@fs.fed.us. Please reference the Rocky Mountain Front
Minerals Withdrawal on the subject line. Also, include your name and
mailing address with your comments so documents pertaining to this
project may be mailed to you.
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 by
January, 2000. At the 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 EIS 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 by August, 2000. 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 applicable
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision
regarding the proposal.
The Reviewers Obligation To Comment
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice at this early stage 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 alters 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.
[[Page 29991]]
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 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.
Dated: June 1, 1999.
Paul Brouha,
Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
[FR Doc. 99-14223 Filed 6-3-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
