[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34436-34437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13394]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

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.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 104 / Tuesday, May 30, 2000 / 
Notices

[[Page 34436]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Ray's Valley Road Realignment, Uinta National Forest, Utah 
County, UT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Uinta National Forest will prepare an environmental impact 
statement on a proposal to realign the existing Ray's Valley Road 
(Forest Development Road #051). Ray's Valley Road is an arterial road 
on the Spanish Fork Ranger District, Uinta National Forest.

DATES: Comments should be received in writing by May 14, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be mailed to Ken Gould, Ray's Valley EIS 
Team Leader, Uinta National Forest, 88W 100N, PO Box 1428, Provo, Utah 
84601 or sent by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3b505c544e575f7b5d48155d5e5f154e48"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9af1fdf5eff6fedafce9b4fcfffeb4efe9">[email protected]</span></a>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Ray's Valley Road is a heavily used 
travel route that connects with the Diamond Fork Road (Forest 
Development Road #029), and the Right Fork Hobble Creek Road (Forest 
Development Road #058) at Springville Crossing. These arterial travel 
routes provide access for the Wasatch Front to Spanish Fork Canyon, and 
Utah State Highway 6 via the Diamond Fork and Ray's Valley Roads. They 
also provide access to and from Utah State Highway 6 and the Strawberry 
Reservoir Recreation Complex via the Ray's Valley Road.
    The surface of the Diamond Fork Road and most of the Ray's Valley 
Road are asphalt pavement or gravel. However, a portion of the Ray's 
Valley Road is narrow, winding, and native-surfaced. During inclement 
weather conditions, the road surface becomes extremely hazardous to 
travel, and/or impassable.
    Some of the existing road lies directly adjacent to tributaries of 
Diamond Fork Creek. Approximately 1.8 miles of this route are located 
on soils subject to severe slumping and/or erosion. Due to the 
proximity of the road to the streams, eroding soil is easily 
transported into Diamond Fork and Sixth Water Creeks. Diamond Fork 
Creek provides habitat for Bonneville Cutthroat Trout, a sensitive 
species. Operation and maintenance costs on this section of road are 
high. Existing road conditions do not meet Road Management Objectives 
for an arterial system road. The Forest Service has long planned to 
realign this road to address these concerns; however, funding has never 
been available.
    The proposed action is to construct the Ray's Valley Road on a new 
alignment and to obliterate the road on its existing alignment. The 
purpose and need of the proposed action is to reduce or eliminate these 
adverse watershed and fisheries impacts, and to provide safer driving 
conditions, while maintaining a key arterial component of the Forest's 
travel system.

Preliminary Issues

    Issues identified at this time include: Health and safety; travel 
management; soils; fisheries; threatened, endangered, and sensitive 
plant and animal species; and roadless areas.

Possible Alternatives

    Three possible alternatives have been identified: (1) No Action--
Leave the road in its current condition; (2) Reconstruct Using the 
Existing Alignment--Reconstruct on the existing alignment and surface 
the road with crushed aggregate; and (3) Construct on a New Alignment 
(Proposed Action)--Reconstruct, realign, and obliterate portions of the 
Ray's Valley Road.
    The No Action Alternative would leave the road in current 
condition. Maintenance would be limited to actions required for passage 
of high clearance vehicles. The road would remain unsafe during periods 
of precipitation. Arterial system road standards for capacity and 
safety would not be addressed by this alternative. Road induced 
sediment in nearby streams would remain at current levels, or increase 
as erosion of the roadway continues.
    The Reconstruct Existing Alignment Alternative would reconstruct 
the road on its existing alignment and add a crushed aggregate surface. 
Reconstruction would provide better control of drainage from roadway 
runoff, provide safer and more comfortable vehicle travel during 
precipitation, and support a greater range of vehicle types. Road 
induced sediment in nearby streams would slightly decrease due to 
better drainage and aggregate surfacing. Road Management Objectives for 
an arterial system road will not be fully accomplished by this 
alternative due to the location.
    The Proposed Action is the Construct New Alignment Alternative. 
Under this alternative a small portion of the existing Ray's Valley 
Road would be reconstructed on its existing alignment. Other portions 
of the Rays Valley Road would be constructed on a new alignment on more 
stable soils, and away from streams and riparian areas. This proposal 
would result in approximately 3.6 miles of a double lane road with a 
crushed aggregate surface. The existing road would be abandoned, 
closed, and rehabilitated. Access to Forest Development Road 715 from 
the new alignment would be maintained by reconstructing a portion of 
Forest Development Road 387. This would ensure continued access to the 
west portal of the Strawberry Tunnel.

Proposed Scoping Process

    This Notice of Intent initiates the scoping process. As part of the 
scoping period, the Forest Service solicits public comment on the 
nature and scope of the environmental, social, and economic issues 
related to the proposed action that should be analyzed in depth in the 
Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Comments on this proposal should 
be sent to the address shown earlier in this notice.
    Public participation will be solicited by notifying affected 
interests through personal contacts and by mail. This project has been 
listed in the Uinta National Forest's ``Schedule of Proposed Actions'' 
(i.e. NEPA Quarterly). News releases will also be utilized to give the 
public general notice. Comments concerning the Proposed Action and EIS 
should address environmental issues to be considered, feasible 
alternatives to examine, possible mitigation, and information relevant 
to or bearing on the Proposed Action.

[[Page 34437]]

    The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will 
be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes 
the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
    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 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, but are not raised until 
after completion of the final environmental impact statement, 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 the 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 be 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.
    Tentative Project Schedule:
    Begin Comment Period--April, 2000; Comment Period Ends--May 26, 
2000; Draft EIS--September 30, 2000; Final EIS--January, 2001; Record 
of Decision--March 2001.
    Responsible Official: Jack A. Blackwell, USDA Forest Service 
Intermountain Regional Supervisor, 324 25th Street, Ogden, Utah 84401.
    For Further Information Contact: Ken Gould, (801) 342-5100 or at 
the address listed previously.

    Dated: April 6, 2000.
Peter W. Karp,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-13394 Filed 5-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>