United States Department of Agriculture 

Dangerous River Boat Launch 

DRAFT Decision Notice and Finding of No 

Significant Impact

Forest Service 

Alaska Region 

Tongass National Forest 

Yakutat RangerDistrict R10-MB-803b August 2016 
Cover Photo: Existing boat ramp as seen from across the Dangerous River. 

For more information contact: 

Teresa Swanson 

PO Box 327 

712 Ocean Cape Road 

Yakutat, AK 99689-0327 

907-784-3359 

taswanson@fs.fed.us 

Page intentionally left blank.
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 1 of 16 

DRAFT DECISION NOTICE AND FONSI 

DANGEROUS RIVER BOAT LAUNCH

U.S. FOREST SERVICE

TONGASS NATIONAL FOREST

YAKUTAT RANGER DISTRICT

INTRODUCTION

The Yakutat Ranger District proposes to enhance the Dangerous River boat launch recreation 

site by constructing a safe and effective boat launch, improving vehicular flow and providing 

some basic ADA-compliant recreation amenities (informational kiosk, picnic area and toilet). 

Funding through Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) dollars administered by the Federal 

Highway Administration would allow the US Forest Service to enhance this site with minimal 

cost to the agency. 

DRAFT DECISION AND REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Based upon my review of the alternatives presented in the Dangerous River EA, it is my 

intention to select Alternative 2 with modifications based on public comment and 

interdisciplinary team discussion. Modifications include removing the outhouse from site plans 

and adding 4 single car parking spaces east of the planned car/trailer parking spaces. The 

maintenance of the outhouse at this location will not be cost effective, and there is a need for 

single car parking to accommodate a variety of users. This alternative with modifications 

(hereafter the Selected Alternative) best meets the purposes and needs for this project. This 

decision will allow us to resolve safety concerns and provide a quality recreation experience in 

the Dangerous River recreation area by: 

 Constructing a boat launch with a more gradual gradient than the existing one. 

 Constructing a boat ramp with a hardened surface. 

 Expanding the parking area to include pull through parking spaces, parking for vehicles 

without trailers, and a one-way traffic loop to improve usability of the site. 

 Constructing a kiosk and basic ADA recreation amenities (picnic area with a table, and 

fire pit). 

 Reducing the grade into the recreation area from Highway 10 to improve access. 

My decision includes implementing design elements, monitoring, and mitigation, and following 

Tongass National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) direction and Forest 

Service policy. These are important means of minimizing effects to resources and people and 

helping to maintain the resources and experiences the public values. 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 2 of 16 

TIME AND DURATION OF ACTIVITY

Project activities are projected to occur in 2017 with an instream construction window between 

June 1st and June 15th to avoid adverse effects on commercial and subsistence fisherman, as well 

as impacts to salmon eggs and fry. Work would be suspended during commercial fisheries 

activity on the river, typically 5 to 6 weeks beginning in mid-June (Woods 2014, personal 

communication). 

In all cases, all or part of the site will be closed to public use during the construction as long as 

necessary to safeguard the public, personnel and the contractor’s equipment. 

Best management practices (BMPs), design elements and mitigation measures described here 

would apply to the Selected Alternative. 

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, DESIGN ELEMENTS, MITIGATION MEASURES 

AND MONITORING

Best Management Practices 

Project design and implementation will adhere to the following best management practices 

(BMPs) and site-specific design elements to avoid or reduce impacts of the Selected Alternative. 

National BMPs 

Plan-3 Aquatic Management Zone Planning – Maintain and improve or restore the condition of 

land around and adjacent to the Dangerous River in the context of the environment in which it is 

located, recognizing its unique values and importance to water quality while implementing the 

boat launch enhancement project. 

Rec-8 Watercraft Launches – Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to soil, water quality, 

and riparian resources from the Dangerous River recreation area, a location used to launch and 

retrieve watercraft. 

AqEco-2 Operations in Aquatic Ecosystems – Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts to 

water quality when working in aquatic ecosystems. Follow the BMP’s outlined practices for 

working in or near waterbodies. 

AqEco-3 Ponds and Wetlands – Design and implement pond and wetlands projects in a manner 

that increases the potential for success in meeting project objectives and avoids, minimizes, or 

mitigates adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources. 

Road-10 Equipment Refueling and Servicing – Avoid or minimize adverse effects to soil, water 

quality, and riparian resources from fuels, lubricants, cleaners, and other harmful materials 

discharging into nearby surface waters or infiltrating through soils to contaminate groundwater 

resources during equipment refueling and servicing activities. 

Fac-10 Facility Site Reclamation – Reclaim facilities and surrounding disturbed areas to as near 

to the pre-disturbed condition as is reasonably practicable following closure or completion of 

operations, or as necessary for mitigation purposes, to avoid, minimize, or mitigate long-term 

adverse effects to soil, water quality, and riparian resources. 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 3 of 16 

Regional BMPs 

12.5 Wetland Identification, Evaluation and Protection – Identify wetland functions and value, 

and provide appropriate protection measures designed to avoid adverse hydrologic impacts. 

12.6 Riparian Area Designation and Protection – Special attention shall be given to land and 

vegetation approximately 100 feet from the edges of all perennial streams, lakes, and other 

bodies of water. No management practices causing detrimental changes in water temperature or 

chemical composition, blockages of water course, or deposits of sediment shall be permitted 

within these areas which seriously and adversely affect water conditions or fish habitat. 

12.8/12.9 Hazardous Waste Prevention and Pollution Contingency Plan – Any fuels required to 

operate equipment needed for the project (chainsaws, generators, backhoes, fuel drums, etc.) 

should be stored and delivered as far away from ponds, creeks, and wetlands as feasible. 

Contractors should follow the guidelines in the Soil and Water Conservation Handbook (2006) 

regarding storage and servicing/refueling of oil and hazardous substances. 

12.17 Revegetation of Disturbed Areas – Provide ground cover to minimize soil erosion. This 

practice is used to stabilize the surface of disturbed or barren areas by establishing vegetation. 

Site-specific erosion control plans will be developed by the contractor and the contracting 

Officer. 

13.16 Stream Channel Protection – Project design and construction activities will not interfere 

with natural flow regime or channel integrity. Riparian buffers will be maintained to filter 

sediment and other pollutants. 

14.2 Location of Transportation Facilities – Ensure soil and water resources protection measures 

are considered when locating roads and trails. Avoidance of sensitive or fragile areas is a primary 

consideration incorporated into the location of transportation facilities. Avoid riparian areas, 

wetlands, and floodplains to the extent practicable. 

14.3 Design of Transportation Facilities – Incorporate site-specific soil and water resource 

protection measures into the design of roads and trails. The access road, parking area, boat ramp 

and trail to the picnic area should be designed to meet safety requirements and minimize soil 

movement and sedimentation and designed to drain with the appropriate use of drainage 

structures. 

14.5 Road and Trail Erosion Control Plan – Develop Erosion Control Plans for the access road, 

parking area, boat ramp and trail to the picnic area to minimize or mitigate erosion, 

sedimentation and resulting water quality degradation prior to the initiation of construction and 

maintenance activities. Ensure compliance through effective contract administration and timely 

implementation of erosion control measures. 

14.6 Timing Restrictions for Construction Activities – Minimize erosion potential by restricting 

the operating schedule and conducting operations during lower risk periods. 

In-channel construction activities are subject to timing windows and will be determined per the 

Title 16 Memorandum of Understanding with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game – 

Habitat Division. 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 4 of 16 

14.9 Drainage Control to Minimize Erosion and Sedimentation – Minimize the erosive effects of 

concentrated water flows from transportation facilities and the resulting degradation of water 

quality through proper design, and construction of drainage control systems. Stabilizing the road 

prism and adjacent disturbed areas to minimize degradation of water quality from sediment 

generated by the erosive effects of surface runoff. 

If activities are interrupted by seasonal or extended shutdowns (greater than 1 month) erosion 

control measures should be completed prior to suspension or shutdown (BMP 14.11). 

14.12 Control of Excavation and Sidecast Material – Erodible material will not be deposited in 

surface waters. Material will be end-hauled from the site to selected disposal area. 

14.14 Control of In-Channel Operations – Sediment laden water resulting from excavation 

during the installation of the new boat launch ramp should be pumped or otherwise directed to 

approved settling areas and not discharged directly into the Dangerous River. 

14.15 Diversion of Flows Around Construction Sites – During the construction of the boat ramp, 

identify and implement diversion and de-watering requirements to protect water quality and 

downstream uses. 

14.18 Development and Rehabilitation of Gravel Sources and Quarries – Minimize sediment 

from borrow pits, gravel sources, and quarries, and limit channel disturbance from gravel sources 

permitted for development within floodplains. 

14.19 Disposal of Construction Slash and Stumps – Ensure that the slash and stumps generated 

during the construction of the recreation site are disposed of properly through scattering, use as a 

base mat for rock fill, chipping, piling and burning, removal to designated disposal sites, or buck 

large limbs and logs into manageable lengths for firewood. 

16.1 Recreation Facilities Planning and Location – Protect soil and water resources through 

appropriate planning, design and location of the Dangerous River Boat Launch recreation 

amenities. 

16.4 Trail Construction and Maintenance – Minimize soil erosion and water quality problems 

originating from trails and their drainage structures. 

Design Elements 

In addition to BMPs, the following site-specific design elements will be used in project design 

and implementation to avoid or reduce impacts of the Selected Alternative. 

1. New and redesigned Federal facilities must meet accessibility standards as outlined for 

outdoor recreation areas in the USDA publication, Accessibility Guidebook for Outdoor 

Recreation and Trails (Zeller et al. 2012) and the Forest Service Outdoor Recreation 

Accessibility Guidelines (USDA Forest Service 2013). This project would be designed to 

meet these standards. Each site feature would be selected or designed to provide 

accessibility to the greatest extent practicable within its given setting. 

2. The floodplain has been identified and project has been located and designed to avoid 

adverse effects to hydrologic impacts and flow dynamics of the Dangerous River; thereby 

reducing potential for erosion or sedimentation instream or on the floodplain. 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 5 of 16 

3. An erosion control plan (dewatering plan, sediment fences, contaminant booms, and other 

water quality measures) will be included in the construction contract to ensure protective 

measures and a quick response to any construction related water quality issues. The 

erosion control plan will be approved by Forest Service fisheries, hydrology, and 

engineering staff before project implementation. 

4. Project design would strive to borrow from colors and textures found in the natural 

landscape (USDA Forest Service 2008, p. 4-58), meaning that subdued shades of greens, 

browns, and grays, and flat, non-reflective textures would be used. 

5. Project design would strive to use topographic and vegetative screening when locating 

project elements, and preserve alders between Forest Highway 10 and the recreation site. 

6. Vegetation removed from the project area would be hauled away, buried, burned, or 

scattered, and not visible from the road or the river. 

7. In accordance with Forest Plan standards and guidelines, if a new eagle nest is 

discovered, the Forest Service would follow the US Fish and Wildlife Service National 

Bald Eagle Management Plan, and avoid habitat alterations and disturbance (including 

repeated human activity) within 330-660 feet of all bald eagle nests. 

8. Instream work in Dangerous River should be avoided from mid-June through July. Work 

within these dates could negatively impact commercial and subsistence access to 

resources. 

9. Revegetate bare soil resulting from project activity if prompt natural regeneration is not 

expected. Use native material when available. See current seeding guidelines (FSM 2080 

TNF Supplement, Exhibit 2) for detailed procedures and appropriate mixes. 

10. Survey gravel pits and other boat ramp, road and trail material sources for invasive plant 

species prior to using it as a gravel source. If invasive plants are present, treat prior to 

using to avoid spreading. 

11. Prevent invasive plant establishment during construction by washing tools and equipment 

prior to entering the project site or when re-entering an un-infested area from an area 

infested by invasive plants. 

12. Vegetable-based hydraulic oils will be used in equipment operating in or near the water 

to avoid contamination of surface or subsurface water resources. 

13. Areas for refueling and staging construction materials and equipment will be identified 

on-site and approved by the Forest Service hydrologist or fisheries biologist to prevent 

contamination of waters from accidental spills. 

14. If a previously unidentified archaeological or historic site(s) is encountered, the 

contractor shall discontinue work in the general area and notify a Forest Service 

archaeologist to determine further action. 

15. If any previously undiscovered endangered, threatened, proposed or sensitive species or 

key habitats for any Management Indicator Species are encountered at any point in time 

prior to or during the implementation of this project, a Forest Service biologist will be 

consulted and appropriate measures will be enacted. 

16. The District will create a sign plan, for directional and informative signs to assure the 

signs and their locations meet Department of Transportation and Forest Service 

specifications. 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 6 of 16 

Mitigation Measures 

The following mitigation measures will be used to reduce impacts on the Selected Alternative. 

1. Work with district fisheries personnel to install block nets and trap and relocate fish near 

the creek/road crossing during instream construction. This will minimize direct impacts 

to resident and rearing fish from mechanized damage and excess siltation during ground 

disturbing activities. 

2. Minimize stream work with motorized equipment. Use temporary planks during 

construction where feasible to minimize damage to the stream banks. 

3. Re-vegetate bare soil resulting from project activity if prompt natural regeneration is not 

expected. Use native material when available. See current seeding guidelines (FSM 2080 

TNF Supplement, Exhibit 2) for detailed procedures and appropriate mixes. 

Monitoring 

The following monitoring is expected to occur to assure that effects are limited. 

1. A Forest Service fisheries biologist, fisheries technician or hydrologist should be on-site 

during construction activities to monitor the project. 

2. The project manager will ensure that botany mitigation measures are implemented. A 

Forest Service botany specialist or designated representative will monitor implementation 

and effectiveness of these measures within 3 years of project completion. 

3. When possible, inspect areas where gravel or other materials (including seed) have been 

imported for 2-3 years after implementation to ensure no invasive plants are present. See 

item number 10 in FSM 2080 TNF Supplement, Exhibit 1. 

PERMITS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS

This project requires concurrence for instream work from the Alaska Department of Fish and 

Game Habitat Division (ADF&G), and a general boat launch permit and a 404 permit from the 

Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). 

ESA does not require consultation for “no effect” determinations. Therefore consultation with 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to review the effects of 

this project on threatened, endangered and candidate species is not required. 

In accordance with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Forest Service will need to 

apply for a permit to conduct an activity that might result in a discharge into waters of the U.S. 

The Forest Service will need to obtain certification from the Alaska Department of 

Environmental Conservation (ADEC) that the discharge will comply with the CWA, the Alaska 

Water Quality Standards (WQS, 18 AAC 70), and other applicable State laws. 

OTHER ALTERNATIVE CONSIDERED AND WHY IT WAS NOT SELECTED

In addition to the Selected Alternative, I considered the No Action Alternative. Descriptions of 

both alternatives can be found in the EA on pages 3 and 4. The No Action Alternative was not 

selected because it would not meet the purpose and need. Instead, the area would remain a 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 7 of 16 

primitive boat launch with a steep, gravelly ramp that is inaccessible to many users. In addition, 

parking at the site would remain inadequate and there would be no recreation amenities. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND SCOPING

A proposal to upgrade the existing boat ramp and parking area was presented at the Yakutat 

Sustainable Outdoor Recreation Action Plan meetings held between 2011 and 2013. The most 

recent meeting was on November 25, 2013. The Forest Service has coordinated project 

development with the Yakutat City and Borough and the Yakutat Tlingit Tribe (YTT). The YTT 

and NPS have written letters of support for the project as documented in the 2013 Alaska Federal 

Lands Access Program Project (FLAP) Proposal (AK-17). 

In February 2015, the Forest Service mailed a scoping letter requesting scoping comments on 

this project. The letter was mailed to over 80 individuals via email and postal mail. Included in 

the postal mailing were Sealaska Corporation, the Sealaska Heritage Institute, Yak-Tat-Kwaan 

and the Yakutat Tlingit Tribe. 

Four agencies provided comments on this project during the February 2015 scoping effort. These 

comments in addition to those submitted during the Outdoor Recreation Action Plan meetings 

are available on the project website at http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=45816 and in the 

project record. 

Public scoping has shown an interest in use-appropriate improvements to the area. Stated top 

priorities are safety and ramp usability by modifying the boat ramp to a more typical slope. An 

additional priority for the District is to have the improvements as low maintenance as possible. 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

The following is a summary of the project analysis to determine significance, as defined by 

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15_05. “Significant” as used in NEPA requires consideration of 

both context and intensity of the expected project effects. 

Context is the geographic, social, and environmental setting and timeframe within which the 

project may have effects. Intensity is a measure of the severity, extent, or quantity of effects, and 

is based on information from the effects analysis of this EA and the references in the project 

record. The effects of this project have been appropriately and thoroughly considered with an 

analysis that is responsive to concerns and issues raised by the public. The agency has taken a 

hard look at the environmental effects using relevant scientific information, GIS analysis, and 

knowledge of site-specific conditions gained from field visits. My finding of no significant 

impact is based on the context of the project and intensity of effects using the ten factors 

identified in 40 CFR 1508.27(b). 

1. Impacts may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant effect may exist even if 

the Federal agency believes that on the balance the effects will be beneficial. My 

finding of no significant environmental effects is not biased by the beneficial effects of 

the action. I have considered both the negative and beneficial effects. Possible negative 

effects of project implementation, such as an increased risk in the spread of invasive 

weeds and short-term effects on aquatic habitat and fish species are expected to be 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 8 of 16 

minimal if mitigation measures, best management practices, and design elements are 

properly implemented. 

2. The degree to which the proposed actions affect public health or safety. Safety 

concerns and the functionality of the Dangerous River Boat Launch would be addressed 

by this alternative. Under the Selected Alternative the Dangerous River Boat Launch 

project will provide a safer recreation area and would provide a higher quality recreation 

experience for all users. The new boat launch with a more gradual gradient and hardened 

surface will allow trailers to be backed safely and easily into the water for efficient 

launching a removal from the river. In addition, the access road and parking will be 

improved and made safer by adjusting the angle of the entrance road into the recreation 

area and with the designation of pull-through parking spots. Installing a handicap 

accessible picnic area improves the usability of the site for all users. 

3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or 

cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or 

ecologically critical areas. There will be no significant effects on unique characteristics 

of the area because design elements and mitigation measures will protect or mitigate 

effects to the Dangerous River recreation area, wetlands and historic resources, and 

because no other unique characteristics or ecologically critical areas are connected to the 

area. 

4. The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely 

to be highly controversial. The effects on the quality of the human environment are not 

likely to be highly controversial, because there is no known controversy over the impacts 

of the project. 

5. The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly 

uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The effects analysis shows the effects 

are not highly uncertain, and do not involve unique or unknown risk. Additionally, my 

decision includes design elements and BMPs to minimize potential negative resource 

effects and reduce risk. 

6. The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with 

significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration.

The Selected Alternative is within the scope of the 2008 Forest Plan and is not expected 

to establish a precedent for future actions. 

7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but 

cumulatively significant impacts. The cumulative impacts of this action are not 

significant. Cumulative impacts were considered in the EA. Based on known past, 

current, and reasonably foreseeable actions, cumulative effects are expected to be 

negligible or minor for all resources and opportunities (see the Cumulative Effects 

sections in the EA: pages 9, 11, 12 and 13). 

8. The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, 

structures, or objects listed in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause 

loss or destruction of significant cultural or historical resources. The action will have 

no significant adverse effect on Districts, highways, or objects listed in or eligible for 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 9 of 16 

listing in the National Register of Historic Places because those resources are not present 

(EA page 13). 

9. The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened 

species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered 

Species Act. The analysis concluded that no threatened or endangered species would be 

affected by the selected alternative. Biological evaluations for threatened, endangered, 

proposed, and sensitive species are available in the Dangerous River project record. 

10. Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or 

requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. The Forest Service will 

obtain concurrence for instream work form Alaska Department of Fish and Game 

(ADF&G) for instream work, consultation with National Marine Fisheries (NMFS) and a 

general boat launch permit from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). The Forest 

Service will also consult with National Marine Fisheries (NMFS). Forest Service will 

also obtain a Department of Transportation (DOT) Right-of-Way permit. 

CONCLUSION

After considering the environmental effects described in the EA and specialist reports, I have 

determined that the Selected Alternative will not have significant effects on the quality of the 

human environment considering the context and intensity of the impacts (40 CFR 1508.27). 

Thus, an environmental impact statement will not be prepared. 

FINDINGS REQUIRED BY OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS

National Forest Management Act – The Selected Alternative is consistent with all Forest Plan 

standards and guidelines, and all proposed activities are allowable as described above under 

Semi-remote Recreation Land Use Designation (LUD). The BMPs and design elements included 

in this decision will help to protect resources in the LUD. No Forest Plan amendment is required 

to meet the conditions set for this area. 

Endangered Species Act – Biological evaluations were completed for threatened, endangered, 

proposed, and sensitive animal and plant species. No threatened and endangered animal or plant 

species would be affected by the Selected Alternative. 

Bald Eagle Protection Act – Management activities within bald eagle habitat will be in 

accordance with the US Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eagle Management Plan. No 

bald eagle nests are known in the project area. 

ANILCA Section 810, Subsistence Evaluation and Finding – No significant change in any of 

the subsistence harvested food (such as, but not limited to moose, bear, lynx, marten, otter, goat, 

wolf, wolverine, hare, grouse, fox, coyote, berries and other plants/plant products or fish) 

distribution or abundance is expected to result from implementing the Selected Alternative. 

Access to the project area will remain unchanged. This project should not cause a significant 

increase in harvest of any of the subsistence fish and wildlife species by non-rural residents over 

rural residents. For these reasons, this alternative will not result in a significant possibility of a 

significant restriction of subsistence use of wildlife, fish, or other foods. There is potential for a 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 10 of 16 

short-term displacement of the subsistence users harvesting fish in the Dangerous River 

associated with blocked access during construction activities. 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 –The Forest Service program for compliance with 

the National Historic Preservation Act includes locating, inventorying and nominating all 

cultural sites that may be directly or indirectly affected by scheduled activities. This activity has 

been reviewed by a qualified archeologist and a determination has been made that the Selected 

Alternative will have no adverse effects to historic properties. 

Floodplain Management (E.O. 11988), Protection of Wetlands (E.O. 11990) –With 

implementation of design elements, this activity would not impact the functional value of any 

floodplain as defined by Executive Order 11988. Executive Order 11990 requires Federal 

agencies to avoid, to the extent possible, the long- and short-term adverse impacts associated 

with the destruction or modification of wetlands. The Selected Alternative avoids wetlands by 

constructing recreation features (picnic area, parking area) in uplands. 

Executive Order 12898 – Environmental Justice – Implementation of this project is not 

anticipated to cause disproportionate adverse human health or environmental effect to minority 

or low-income populations because the proposed activities are expected to benefit human health 

and are not expected to result in meaningful adverse environmental consequences. 

Executive Order 13112 – Invasive Species – Invasive species populations will have potential to 

spread beyond their current locations in the project area. However the current infestations consist 

of species that are not high priority for treatment on the Tongass National Forest and design 

elements and mitigation should greatly reduce the risk of introduction and spread of invasive 

species. Findings and recommendations are incorporated into this project design and decision. 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act – The Selected Alternative 

will have “no adverse effect” on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The affected area does not contain 

unique habitat, nor is it considered to be limited in availability. The Selected Alternative could 

generate short-term increases in sediment levels during the construction phase of the new boat 

launch. However, in the opinion of the Forest Service, the fishery will not be impacted such that 

sustainability or ecosystem health would be impaired. 

E.O. 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments) – The 

following federally recognized tribal governments and organizations were contacted via the 

scoping letter and briefed by the District Staff during a tribal board meeting: 

 Yakutat Tlingit Tribe 

 Yak-Tat-Kwaan 

 Sealaska Corporation 

 Sealaska Heritage Institute 

No formal consultation has been requested by any tribal governments or organizations regarding 

the Dangerous River Boat Launch Enhancement project. 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 11 of 16 

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND OBJECTION RIGHTS

This decision is subject to administrative review (objection) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 218. 

Individuals who submitted specific, written comments during the 30-day comment period or the 

February 2015 scoping period will have standing to participate in the pre-decisional review and 

objection process. 

After this draft decision and EA are made available to the public, a legal notice announcing the 

objection period for this project will be published in the Juneau Empire, the newspaper of 

record. The publication date in the Juneau Empire is the exclusive means for calculating the time 

to file an objection of this project. Those wishing to object to this proposed project should not 

rely upon dates or timeframe information provided by any other source. 

Objections will be accepted only from those who have previously submitted specific written 

comments regarding the proposed project during scoping or other designated opportunity for 

public comment in accordance with 36 CFR 218.5(a). Issues raised in objections must be based 

on previously submitted timely, specific written comments regarding the proposed project unless 

based on new information arising after designated comment opportunities. Individual members 

of organizations must have submitted their own comments to meet the requirements of eligibility 

as an individual. Objections received on behalf of an organization are considered as those of the 

organization only. If an objection is submitted on behalf of a number of individuals or 

organizations, each individual or organization listed must meet the eligibility requirement (36 

CFR 218.7). Names and addresses of objectors will become part of the public record. 

The objection must be in writing and meet the content requirements at 36 CFR 218.8(d). Written 

objections, including any attachments, must be filed (regular mail, fax, email, hand-delivery, or 

express delivery) with the Reviewing Officer, Earl Stewart, Forest Supervisor, within 45 days 

following the publication date of the legal notice in the Juneau Empire. Incorporation of 

documents by reference in any objection is permitted only as provided for at 36 CFR 218.8(b). 

Objections may be sent to: 

Earl Stewart, Reviewing Officer 

USFS, Tongass National Forest 

648 Mission Street, Federal Building 

Ketchikan, AK 99901-6591 

Fax: (907) 228-6215 

Email: objections-alaska-tongass@fs.fed.us

The office business hours for those submitting hand-delivered objections are: 8:00 AM to 4:30 

PM, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Electronic objections must be submitted in a 

format such as an email message, pdf, plain text (.txt), rich text format (.rtf), and Word (.doc or 

.docx). It is the responsibility of Objectors to ensure their objection is received in a timely 

manner (36 CFR 218.9). 

IMPLEMENTATION

The regulations at 36 CFR 218 now provide for a pre-decision administrative review rather than 

a post-decision appeal process. At this time, I am releasing a DRAFT decision (instead of a 
— Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact — 

Page 12 of 16 

“final” decision) and will publish a legal notice initiating a 45-day objection period in the Juneau 

Empire. At that point, members of the public may file an objection seeking a pre-decisional 

administrative review of the proposed project and activities. If an objection is filed, a review 

process begins. 

Pursuant to 36 CFR 218.12, I may not sign the Decision Notice until the Reviewing Officer has 

responded in writing to all pending objections. Based on the discussions and findings in that 

review, I will issue a final decision. My decision will be consistent with the final review on the 

project. It is important to note that the project may be implemented after my final decision. No 

appeal period will be provided after the final decision is made. 

If no objections are received, I may sign the decision notice five (5) business days after the close 

of the objection filing period. Implementation may begin immediately after the decision notice is 

signed. 

For further information concerning the Dangerous River Boat Launch Enhancement Project, 

contact: 

Teresa Swanson, Project Team Leader 

Tongass National Forest 

Yakutat Ranger District 

PO Box 327 

712 Ocean Cap Road 

Yakutat, AK 99689-0327 

907-784-3359 

taswanson@fs.fed.us

Approved by: 

________________________ ________________ 

LEE BENSON Date 

Yakutat District Ranger 

Tongass National Forest