63136 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Notices 

(c) Losses will be determined on an 

individual-nursery basis. Production 

loss from one nursery will not be offset 

by production from another nursery 

operated by the same applicant. 

Payments are calculated by multiplying 

the difference between beginning and 

ending inventory value times 25 percent 

times the producer’s share of the loss. 

The payment for production loss is 

subject to the $80,000 payment 

limitation and AGI provisions. 

(d) Producers are also eligible for a 

payment of $250 per acre for debris 

removal and associated costs from 

hurricane damage if they can document 

that these costs were equal to or greater 

than $250 per acre. None of the payment 

for cleanup is subject to the payment 

limitation and AGI provisions. 

Producers must provide the inventory 

value before the hurricane and the 

inventory value after the hurricane. The 

value of the inventory is the producer’s 

wholesale price list, less the maximum 

customer discount they provide, not to 

exceed the prices in RMA’s ‘‘Eligible 

Plant List and Price Schedule.’’

VI. Florida Vegetable, Fruit and 

Tropical Fruit Disaster Program 

(a) Producers of vegetables, fruits and 

selected tropical fruit are eligible for 

assistance. Payments will be made on a 

per-acre basis, and are based on the type 

of planting application or method 

installed or completed on the date and 

time the hurricanes occurred in that 

area.

(b) Plasticulture refers to production 

practices where the soil has been 

covered with plastic mulch, fumigated, 

fertilized, and with an irrigation system 

installed. For plasticulture losses, 

producers must have a loss that is 50 

percent or greater of plastic or plant 

population, as applicable. Producers 

must also document that the necessary 

materials and procedures were followed 

to produce vegetables using any of the 

practices. Payments are calculated by 

multiplying the payment rate for each 

practice times the affected acres in the 

practice times the producer’s share of 

that crop. A portion of the payment that 

is associated with production losses is 

subject to the $80,000 payment 

limitation and AGI provisions. The 

payment associated with debris removal 

and associated costs from hurricane 

damage are not subject to payment 

limitation or AGI. Plasticulture includes 

the following practices: 

(1) Practice I—the producer laid down 

new plastic, fumigated the soil, put in 

transplants and had a loss or removal of 

more than 50 percent of the plastic per 

acre requiring the replacement of 

preplant inputs and plastic. 

(2) Practice II—the producer laid 

down new plastic, fumigated the soil, 

but did not put in transplants and had 

a loss or removal of more than 50 

percent of the plastic per acre requiring 

the replacement of preplant inputs and 

plastic; or the producer laid down new 

plastic with 50 percent or more loss in 

plant population and did not re-plant 

due to cultural or weather related 

limitations. 

(3) Practice III—the producer doublecropped with respect to the plastic and 

had a loss of greater than 50 percent of 

the plastic per acre; or the producer laid 

down new plastic with 50 percent or 

more loss in plant population and 

replanted. 

(c) Practice IV—The producer who 

plants conventional row crop fruits and 

vegetables must suffer a loss of 50 

percent or more of the plant population. 

Payments are calculated by multiplying 

the number of acres affected by the loss 

times the payment rate times the 

producer’s share of the crop. All 

payments are subject to the total 

payment limitation and AGI provisions. 

(d) Practice V—For tropical fruit 

producers, only those producers in Lee 

County or in Bands 1 or 2 designated 

under the Florida Citrus Program are 

eligible. Producers must have suffered a 

loss of 50 percent or more relative to 

their expected production, as defined in 

7 CFR part 1480.3. Payments are 

calculated by multiplying the number of 

acres affected by the payment rate times 

the producer’s share of the crop. The 

total payment is subject to the payment 

limitation and AGI provisions. 

VII. Payment Conditions for All 

Programs 

(a) Actual losses or costs for any 

program must equal or exceed the 

payment amount received for that 

program. 

(b) Payment rates will be 5 percent 

less for producers who did not obtain 

Federal Crop Insurance, which is 

available from the Risk Management 

Agency, or on coverage from CCC under 

NAP. 

(c) Eligible producers who elected not 

to purchase insurance on an insurable 

crop, or NAP coverage on an 

uninsurable crop for which benefits are 

received under any of these programs, 

must purchase for the next available 

coverage period: 

(1) Crop insurance at least at the 

catastrophic level on that crop, although 

producers who are required to purchase 

a citrus insurance policy may elect to 

purchase a fruit or tree policy; 

(2) NAP coverage for the next 

available coverage period by paying the 

administrative fee and filing all required 

paperwork by the applicable State filing 

deadline. 

(d) If a producer who is required to 

purchase crop insurance or NAP for the 

applicable year fails to do so, the 

producer must refund the disaster 

payment. 

VIII. Appeals 

Any person who is dissatisfied with a 

determination made with respect to 

these programs may make a request for 

reconsideration or appeal of such 

determination in accordance with the 

regulations set forth in 7 CFR parts 11 

and 780.

Signed in Washington, DC, on October 25, 

2004. 

James R. Little, 

Administrator, Farm Service Agency.

[FR Doc. 04–24290 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Northeast Yaak EIS; Kootenai National 

Forest, Lincoln County, Montana

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will 

prepare an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) to disclose the 

environmental effects of urban interface 

fuels treatments, vegetation 

management, watershed rehabilitation 

activities, wildlife habitat improvement, 

and access management changes, 

including road decommissioning. The 

project is located in the Northeast Yaak 

planning subunit on the Three Rivers 

Ranger District, Kootenai National 

Forest, Lincoln County, Montana, and 

northeast of Troy, Montana.

DATES: Scoping Comment Date:

Comments concerning the scope of the 

analysis should be received by 

November 30, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

suggestions concerning the scope of the 

analysis should be sent to Michael L. 

Balboni, District Ranger, Three Rivers 

Ranger District, 1437 Hwy 2, Troy, MT 

59935.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric 

Dickinson, Team Leader, Three Rivers 

Ranger District, 1437 Hwy 2, Troy, MT 

59935. Phone: (406) 295–4693.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

project area is approximately 26 air 

miles northeast of Troy, Montana, 

within all or portions of T37N, R29W–

R32W, and T36N, R30N–R31W, Lincoln 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Notices 63137

County, Montana. The area 

encompasses the following drainages: 

Blacktail, Caribou, East Fork Yaak River, 

Porcupine, Basin, Solo Joe, Windy, 

Bunker Hill, and Vinal drainages and 

several small drainages tributary to the 

East Fork of the Yaak River. 

The purpose and need for this project 

is to: (1) Reduce fuels and the potential 

for crown fires in the urban interface 

and other forested areas; (2) manage for 

more diverse and sustainable vegetative 

conditions; (3) improve conditions in 

old growth habitat; (4) improve growing 

conditions and long-term management 

of overstocked sapling/pole stands; (5) 

improve and maintain winter range 

conditions; (6) improve the quality of 

grizzly bear habitat; (7) provide for 

motorized access to national forest 

resources for recreation and to meet 

management objectives, while 

maintaining wildlife security; (8) 

continue to decrease cumulative 

sediment introduction to streams from 

roads; and (9) contribute forest products 

to the economy. 

To meet this purpose and need this 

project proposes: 

(1) Intermediate tree harvest on 

approximately 2,010 acres and 

regeneration harvest on 340 acres to 

reduce fuels and manage for a more 

diverse and sustainable vegetative 

conditions. Included in the intermediate 

tree harvest is an estimated 140 acres in 

stands designated as old growth (MA–

13) Old growth characteristics would be 

maintained and enhanced with this 

treatment. This proposal includes a 

project-specific forest plan amendment 

to allow for this harvest in MA–13. 

Mechanical fuels reduction is proposed 

on 110 acres, and hand piling fuels 

reduction is proposed on 100 acres, all 

in the wildland urban interface. 

Maintenance underburning is proposed 

on approximately 120 acres in the 

wildland urban interface, including 80 

acres within old growth or replacement 

old growth. This harvest would 

contribute approximately 12 to 16 

million board feet (MMBF) or 29,300 to 

39,000 hundred cubic feet (CCF) of 

timber products to the economy. 

Approximately 0.6 miles of new 

specified road construction and 0.7 

miles of road realignment would be 

needed for this project and to provide 

for long-term management needs. The 

road would be placed in storage after 

treatment. It is estimated that five 

temporary roads ranging from 0.2 to 0.5 

miles would be constructed to 

accomplish this harvest and would be 

obliterated following activities. Best 

Management Practice work and road 

maintenance work would be 

implemented on haul roads. Precommercial thinning is proposed on 

approximately 270 acres to improve 

growing conditions and maintain 

structural diversity in managed sapling 

stands. 

(2) Decommissioning all or portions of 

13 roads (approximately 17 miles) 

which were determined through an 

interdisciplinary process to be 

unneeded and are at risk of contributing 

sediment to streams. the 

decommissioning work would include 

outsloping portions of the road prism, 

installing ditch-intercept waterbars, and 

reestablishing stream crossings. Several 

roads in the upper Caribou and Bloom 

Creek area used in the 1950s are 

inaccessible and would be abandoned. 

To improve motorized public access, 

Road 746 would be opened for public 

travel. 

(3) To enlarge and consolidate grizzly 

bear core habitat while maintaining the 

55 percent standard in Bear 

Management Unit 16, Road 5816 (at the 

junction of Road 6810H), Road 6004, 

and Road 6005, would be bermed and 

stabilized. These roads are currently 

gated, so public access would not 

change. A smaller core area in the Solo 

Joe/Hudson Cr. area would be 

eliminated. 

(4) Design features and mitigations to 

maintain and protect resource values. 

Range of Alternatives 

The Forest Service will consider a 

range of alternatives. One of these will 

be the ‘‘no action’’ alternative in which 

none of the proposed activities will be 

implemented. Additional alternatives 

will examine varying levels and 

locations for the proposed activities to 

achieve the proposal’s purposes, as well 

as to respond to the issues and other 

resource values. 

Public Involvement and Scoping 

The public is encouraged to take part 

in the process and 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, 

Tribal governments, and other 

individuals or organizations that may be 

interested in, or affected by, the 

proposed action. This input will be used 

in preparation of the draft and final EIS. 

The scoping process will include: 

1. Identifying potential issues. 

2. Identifying major issues to be 

analyzed in depth. 

3. Identifying alternatives to the 

proposed action. 

4. Exploring additional alternatives 

that will be derived from issues 

recognized during scoping activities. 

5. Identifying potential environmental 

effects of this proposal (i.e., direct, 

indirect, and cumulative effects and 

connected actions). 

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 in February 2005. At that 

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 EPA 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 in June 2005. 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 to 

applicable laws, regulations, and 

policies considered in making a 

decision regarding the proposal. 

Reviewer’s Obligations 

The Forest Service believes 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 

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 and respond to them in the 

final EIS. 

To be most helpful, comments on the 

draft EIS should be as specific as 

possible and may address the adequacy 

of the statement or the merit of the 

alternatives discussed. Reviewers may 

wish to refer to the Council on 

Environmental Quality regulations for 

implementing the procedural provisions 

of the National Environmental Policy 

63138 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Notices 

Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing 

these points. 

Responsible Official 

As the Forest Supervisor of the 

Kootenai National Forest, 1101 U.S. 

Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923, I am 

the Responsible Official. As the 

Responsible Official, I will decide if the 

proposed project will be implemented. 

I will document the decision and 

reasons for the decision in the Record of 

Decision. I have delegated the 

responsibility for preparing the DEIS 

and FEIS to Michael L. Balboni, District 

Ranger, Three Rivers Ranger District.

Dated: October 25, 2004. 

Bob Castaneda, 

Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.

[FR Doc. 04–24211 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Salmon River Canyon Project; Nez 

Perce National Forest, Payette National 

Forest, Bitteroot National Forest, 

Salmon/Challis National Forest, Idaho 

County, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Cancellation of an 

environmental impact statement. EIS 

No. 990413. 

SUMMARY: On July 24, 1998, a notice of 

intent to prepare an environmental 

impact statement (EIS) for the Salmon 

River Canyon Project; Nez Perce 

National Forest, Payette National Forest, 

Bitteroot National Forest, Salmon/

Challis National Forest was published 

in the Federal Register (63 FR 39810). 

The Forest Service has decided to 

cancel the preparation of an EIS for this 

proposed action. The Notice of Intent is 

hereby withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions regarding this 

cancellation may be directed to Ken 

Stump, Assistant Fire Management 

Officer, RR 2 Box 475 Grangeville, ID 

83530 or telephone 208–983–1950.

Steve E. Williams, 

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 04–24210 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Olympic Provincial Advisory 

Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Olympic Province 

Advisory Committee (OPAC) will meet 

on Friday, November 19, 2004. The 

meeting will be held at the Olympic 

National Forest Headquarters, 1835 

Black Lake Blvd., SW., Olympia, 

Washington. The meeting will begin at 

9:30 a.m. and end at approximately 3:30 

p.m. Agenda topics are: Current status 

of key Forest issues; Special Forest 

Products Update; Invasive Plant Update; 

Strategic Resource Planning; Open 

forum; and Public comments. 

All Olympic Province Advisory 

Committee Meetings are open to the 

public. Interested citizens are 

encouraged to attend.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions regarding this meeting 

to Ken Eldredge, Province Liaison, 

USDA, Olympic National Forest 

Headquarters, 1835 Black Lake Blvd, 

Olympia, WA 98512–5623, (360) 956–

2323 or Dale Hom, Forest Supervisor, at 

(360) 956–2301.

Dated: October 22, 2004. 

Dale Hom, 

Forest Supervisor, Olympic National Forest.

[FR Doc. 04–24212 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

ARCHITECTURAL AND 

TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS 

COMPLIANCE BOARD 

Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Architectural and 

Transportation Barriers Compliance 

Board.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Architectural and 

Transportation Barriers Compliance 

Board (Access Board) has scheduled its 

ad hoc committee and board meetings to 

take place in Washington, DC on 

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 as 

noted below.

DATES: The schedule of events is as 

follows: 

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 

9:30 a.m.–Noon: Ad Hoc Committee 

on Public Rights-of-Way—Closed 

1:30 p.m.–3 p.m. Board Meeting

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Wardman Park Marriott Hotel, 2660 

Woodley Road, NW., Washington, DC 

20008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information regarding this 

meeting, please contact Lawrence W. 

Roffee, Executive Director, (202) 272–

0001 (voice) and (202) 272–0082 (TTY).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the 

Board meeting, the Access Board will 

consider the following agenda items: (a) 

Approval of the July 12, 2004 draft 

meeting minutes; and, (b) public rightsof-way guidelines (closed). 

This meeting is accessible to persons 

with disabilities. If you plan to attend 

and require a sign language interpreter 

or similar accommodation, please make 

your request with the Board by 

November 1, 2004. Persons attending 

Board meetings are requested to refrain 

from using perfume, cologne, and other 

fragrances for the comfort of other 

participants.

James J. Raggio, 

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 04–24158 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8150–01–P

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM 

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR 

SEVERELY DISABLED 

Procurement List; Deletion

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase from 

People Who Are Blind or Severely 

Disabled.

ACTION: Deletion from procurement list.

SUMMARY: This action deletes from the 

Procurement List a product previously 

furnished by nonprofit agencies 

employing persons who are blind or 

have other severe disabilities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 28, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase 

From People Who Are Blind or Severely 

Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 

1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, 

Arlington, Virginia, 22202–3259.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sheryl D. Kennerly, (703) 603–7740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Deletion 

On April 30, 2004, the Committee for 

Purchase From People Who Are Blind 

or Severely Disabled published notice 

(69 FR 23723) of proposed deletion to 

the Procurement List. After 

consideration of the relevant matter 

presented, the Committee has 

determined that the product listed 

below is no longer suitable for