This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

75292

Vol. 69, No. 241

Thursday, December 16, 2004

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Upper Granite Mining Projects; 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, 

Baker County, OR

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service 

will prepare an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) on a proposed action to 

approve Proposed Plans of Operations 

on mining claims located in the Granite 

Creek Watershed. The project area is 

located on the Whitman Unit of the 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, 

approximately 30 miles west of Baker 

city, Oregon. 

The proposed action is a compilation 

of plans submitted by claimants 

operating within the analysis area. 

These plans describe the type of mining 

operations proposed and how they 

would be conducted, the type and 

standard of access routes, the means of 

transportation to be used, the period 

during which the proposed mining 

activity will take place and measures to 

be taken to meet the requirements for 

environmental protection. Operations 

include the exploration and extraction 

of valuable minerals from placer and 

lode deposits. Methods range from hand 

panning to more complex operations 

utilizing mechanical equipment. The 

1990 Land and Resource Management 

Plan final EIS for the Wallowa-Whitman 

National Forest, as amended, provides 

overall guidance for management of this 

area.

DATES: Written comments concerning 

the scope of the analysis should be 

received within 30 days of the scoping 

letter postmark.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and 

suggestions to Richard Haines, Whitman 

Unit Ranger, 3165 10th Street, Baker 

City, Oregon 97814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sophia Millar, Interdisciplinary Team 

Leader, Wallowa Mountains Office, 

Enterprise, OR, Phone: (541) 426–5540.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

planning area is within the boundary of 

the Granite Creek Watershed. The legal 

description of the decision area is as 

follows: T8–10S, R35E, 35–1⁄2E, 36E, 

W.M. surveyed. 

The Oregon department of 

Environmental Quality (DEQ) has listed 

Beaver Creek, Bull Run Creek, and 

Granite Creek as water quality impaired 

under section 303(d) of the Clean Water 

Act. The Forest Service has determined 

that mining operations have the 

potential to affect water quality. 

Accordingly, the effects of new, 

existing, or modified Plans of 

Operations prepared under regulations 

at 36 CFR 228.4 and 228.5, and 36 CFR 

228 Subpart C, will be analyzed in this 

EIS. 

Mining operations are associated with 

the extraction of precious metals from 

placer and lode deposits. A number of 

different practices are being proposed 

on the various claims within the 

analysis area. These may include one or 

more of the following practices: 

Test Pits: Holes are dug either by hand 

or mechanical equipment to sample subsurface deposits. 

Drilling: Portable drills are used as 

part of the exploration process to 

sample sub-surface mineral deposits. 

Placer Mining: This includes a wide 

variety of practices to extract minerals 

from placer deposits. The techniques 

include handwork with shovels and 

pans, small sluice boxes and more 

complex operations that use mechanical 

equipment. On the more heavily worked 

claims backhoes and front end loaders 

are used for digging, and power 

trommels for separation and extraction. 

Water, to varying degrees, is used in all 

these techniques. Some minor road 

maintenance and maintenance of 

existing structures is also planned. 

Lode Mining: This includes tunneling 

or other mechanical methods used to 

extract lode deposits. 

Activities, which would occur in 

association with mining operation, 

include mitigation practices such as 

construction or maintenance of settling 

ponds, and reclamation activities such 

as recontouring, seeding, and treatment 

of noxious weeds. 

Road Construction: This includes 

construction of 1⁄2 mile of road to access 

an existing operation.

Preliminary issues include effects of 

proposed activities on—water quality 

and fish habitat. 

The Forest Service will consider a full 

range of alternatives, including a ‘‘no 

action’’ alternative. The no-action 

alternative is evaluated order to 

establish a baseline condition of existing 

and future environmental conditions in 

the project area. Based on the issues 

gathered through scoping, the action 

alternatives may vary in the type of 

operations permitted, the timing of 

permitted operations and the types of 

mitigation required. Action alternatives 

include—the proposed mining activities 

and alternatives that modify the 

proposed plans with additional 

mitigation to address effects of mining 

on water quality and fisheries habitat. 

Public participation will be especially 

important at several points during the 

analysis, beginning with the scoping 

process (40 CFR 1501.7). This 

environmental analysis and decision 

making process will enable additional 

interested and affected people to 

participate and contribute to the final 

decision. 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, local agencies, tribes, and other 

individuals or organizations that may be 

interested in, or affected by the 

proposal. This input will be used in 

preparation of the draft EIS. The scoping 

process includes: Identifying potential 

issues; identifying major issues to be 

analyzed in depth; identifying issues 

which have been covered by a relevant 

previous environmental analysis; 

considering additional alternatives 

based on themes which will be derived 

from issues recognized during scoping 

activities; and identifying potential 

environmental effects of this project and 

alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects and connected 

actions). 

The draft EIS is expected to be filed 

with the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) and to be available to the 

public for review by May 2005. The 

comment period on the draft EIS will be 

45 days from the date the EPA publishes 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 241 / Thursday, December 16, 2004 / Notices 75293

the Notice of Availability in the Federal 

Register. It is important that those 

interested in the management of the 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forest 

participate at that time. 

Comments received in response to 

this notice, 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; however, 

those who submit anonymous 

comments will not have standing to 

appeal the subsequent decision under 

36 CFR Parts 215. 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 Act (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 within a specified 

number of days. 

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 EIS’s 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 EIS stage but that are 

not raised until completion of the final 

EIS 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 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 EIS or 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). 

The final EIS is scheduled for 

completion July 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 

applicable laws, regulations, and 

policies considered in making a 

decision regarding the proposal. 

The Forest Service is the lead agency. 

The Whitman Unit Ranger is the 

Responsible Official. The Responsible 

Official will decide which, if any, of the 

proposed plans will be implemented. 

The Responsible Official will also 

document the decision and reasons for 

the decision in the Record of Decision. 

That decision will be subject to Forest 

Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR 

Part 215).

Dated: December 9, 2004. 

Richard Haines, 

Whitman Unit Ranger.

[FR Doc. 04–27526 Filed 12–15–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[I.D. 121304C]

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request

The Department of Commerce has 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for clearance the 

following proposal for collection of 

information under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35).

Agency: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Title: Northeast Region Sea Scallop 

Framework 16 Adjustment.

Form Number(s): None.

OMB Approval Number: None.

Type of Request: Emergency 

submission.

Burden Hours: 863.

Number of Respondents: 274.

Average Hours Per Response: VMS 

installation, 1 hour; VMS verification, 5 

minutes; VMS daily report, 10 minutes; 

Notification, 5 minutes; VMS polling, 5 

seconds.

Needs and Uses: Sea Scallop 

fishermen fishing under the general 

category permit wishing to fish in 

exemption areas are subject to certain 

vessel monitoring system (VMS) and 

communication reporting requirements. 

This submission requests clearance for a 

new collection as it pertains to 

Framework 16 to the Sea Scallop FMP 

reporting requirements that all scallop 

vessels including general category 

vessels fishing re-opened closed areas 

have a functional VMS.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations, individuals or 

households, and not-for-profit 

institutions.

Frequency: On occasion, monthly, 

daily, every 30 minutes.

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory.

OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, 

(202) 395-3897.

Copies of the above information 

collection proposal can be obtained by 

calling or writing Diana Hynek, 

Departmental Paperwork Clearance 

Officer, (202) 482-0266, Department of 

Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and 

Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, 

DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 

dHynek@doc.gov).

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent by 

December 19, 2004 to David Rostker, 

OMB Desk Officer, FAX number (202) 

395-7285, or 

David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov.

Dated: December 9, 2004.

Gwellnar Banks,

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–27561 Filed 12–15–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

[Docket 53–2004] 

Foreign-Trade Zone 7—Mayaguez, PR, 

Application for Subzone, Ortho 

Biologics, LLC (Pharmaceutical 

Intermediates), Manatı ́, PR; Correction 

The Federal Register notice (69 FR 

70121–70122, 12/02/2004) describing 

the application by the Puerto Rico 

Industrial Development Company 

(PRIDCO), grantee of FTZ 7, requesting 

special-purpose subzone status for the 

pharmaceutical intermediate 

manufacturing facility of Ortho 

Biologics, LLC (OBI) in Manatı ́, Puerto 

Rico, is corrected as follows: