35884 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 6, 2000 / Notices

Manti-LaSal National Forest

Manti-LaSal Forest Supervisor

decisions: Sun Advocate, Price, Utah

Sanpete District Ranger decisions: The

Pyramid, Mt. Pleasant, Utah

Ferron District Ranger decisions: Emery

County Progress, Castle Dale, Utah

Price District Ranger decisions: Sun

Advocate, Price, Utah

Moab District Ranger decisions: The

Times Independent, Moab, Utah

Monticello District Ranger decisions:

The San Juan Record, Monticello,

Utah

Payette National Forest

Payette Forest Supervisor decisions:

Idaho Statesman, Boise, Idaho

Weiser District Ranger decisions: Signal

American, Weiser, Idaho

Council District Ranger decisions:

Council Record, Council, Idaho

New Meadows, McCall, and Krassel

District Ranger decisions: Star News,

McCall, Idaho

Salmon-Challis National Forests

Salmon-Challis Forest Supervisor

decisions for the Salmon portion: The

Recorder-Herald, Salmon, Idaho

Salmon-Challis Forest Supervisor

decisions for the Challis portion: The

Challis Messenger, Challis, Idaho

North Fork District Ranger decisions:

The Recorder-Herald, Salmon, Idaho

Leadore District Ranger decisions: The

Recorder-Herald, Salmon, Idaho

Salmon/Cobalt District Ranger

decisions: The Recorder-Herald,

Salmon, Idaho

Middle Fork District Ranger decisions:

The Challis Messenger, Challis, Idaho

Challis District Ranger decisions: The

Challis Messenger, Challis, Idaho

Yankee Fork District Ranger decisions:

The Challis Messenger, Challis, Idaho

Lost River District Ranger decisions:

The Challis Messenger, Challis, Idaho

Sawtooth National Forest

Sawtooth Forest Supervisor decisions:

The Times News, Twin Falls, Idaho

Burley District Ranger decisions:

Ogden Standard Examiner, Ogden,

Utah, for those decisions on the

Burley District involving the Raft

River Unit.

South Idaho Press, Burley Idaho, for

decisions issued on the Idaho

portions of the Burley District

Twin Falls District Ranger decisions:

The Times News, Twin Falls, Idaho

Ketchum District Ranger decisions:

Idaho Mountain Express, Ketchum,

Idaho

Sawtooth National Recreation Area:

Challis Messenger, Challis, Idaho

Fairfield District Ranger Decisions: The

Times News, Twin Falls, Idaho

Uinta National Forest

Uinta Forest Supervisor decisions: The

Daily Herald, Provo, Utah

Pleasant Grove District Ranger

decisions: The Daily Herald, Provo,

Utah

Heber District Ranger decisions: The

Daily Herald, Provo, Utah, and

Spanish Fork District Ranger decisions:

The Daily Herald, Provo, Utah

Wasatch-Cache National Forest

Wasatch-Cache Forest Supervisor

decisions: Salt Lake Tribune, Salt

Lake City, Utah

Salt Lake District Ranger decisions: Salt

Lake Tribune, Salt Lake City, Utah

Kamas District Ranger decisions: Salt

Lake Tribune, Salt Lake City, Utah

Evanston District Ranger decisions:

Uintah County Herald, Evanston,

Wyoming

Mountain View District Ranger

decisions: Uintah County Herald,

Evanston, Wyoming

Ogden District Ranger decisions: Ogden

Standard Examiner, Ogden, Utah

Logan District Ranger decisions: Logan

Herald Journal, Logan, Utah

Dated: May 31, 2000.

Jack A. Blackwell,

Regional Forester.

[FR Doc. 00–14096 Filed 6–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Douglas Project Area Environmental

Impact Statement

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, will prepare

an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) to provide a supply of timber for

the Tongass National Forest timber sale

program, to identify recreation

opportunities and to develop a road

management plan for the forest roads

connected to the City of Kake. The

Record of Decision will disclose where,

if any, the Forest Service has decided to

provide timber harvest units, associated

timber harvesting facilities, identify

dispersed recreation opportunities and

propose any changes to the existing

forest road system. The proposed action

is to harvest timber on an estimated

1,600 acres and to provide multiple

timber sale opportunities for a total of

approximately 35 million board feet

(mmbf) of timber. Timber harvest will

be accomplished using a variety of

silvicultural prescriptions and harvest

methods to meet the standards and

guidelines of the Tongass Forest Plan.

This project would include the

construction of up to 30 miles of road

and may include one new log transfer

facility (LTF) within the project area.

This project may also include an

analysis and decision for a

nonsignificant amendment to the Forest

Plan to revise the location of small Old

Growth Reserve(s) within the project

area. Recreational opportunities for

enhancement may include dispersed

sites for camping, and improved access

for hunting and subsistence users. A

road management plan will be

developed to safely accommodate

public traffic. A range of alternatives

responsive to significant issues will be

developed and will include a no-action

alternative. The Douglas project area is

approximately 95,500 acres in size and

is located in Value Comparison Units

430, 431, 432, 433 and a portion of 429

on Kupreanof Island, Alaska, on the

Petersburg Ranger District of the

Tongass National Forest. The project

area is within an Inventoried Roadless

Area (South Kupreanof #214 as

identified by the Tongass Land and

Resource Management Plan).

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of this project should be received by

July 7, 2000 (30 days from expected

publication).

ADDRESSES: Please send written

comments to the Petersburg Ranger

District, Tongass National Forest; Attn:

Dan McMahon; Douglas Project Area

EIS; PO Box 1328; Petersburg, AK

99833. The FAX number is (907) 772–

5995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions about the proposal and EIS

should be directed to Patricia Grantham,

District Ranger, Petersburg Ranger

District, Tongass National Forest, PO

Box 1328, Petersburg, AK 99833;

telephone (907) 772–3871 or Dan

McMahon, Interdisciplinary Team

Leader, Petersburg Ranger District, PO

Box 1328, Petersburg, AK 99833;

telephone (907) 772–3871.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public

participation has been an integral

component of the study process and

will be especially important at several

points during the analysis. During the

last year, the Forest Service has been

seeking information, comments, and

assistance from Federal, State, and local

agencies Federally-recognized Indian

tribes, and individuals and

organizations that may be interested in,

or affected by, the proposed activities.

Written scoping comments have been

solicited through an informal scoping

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 6, 2000 / Notices 35885

package that was sent to the project

mailing list and available at open

houses in Petersburg and Kake, Alaska.

The scoping process includes: (1)

Identification of potential issues; (2)

identification of issues to be analyzed in

depth; and (3) elimination of

insignificant issues or those which have

been covered by a previous

environmental review. For the Forest

Service to best use the scoping input,

comments should be received by July 7,

2000 (30 days from expected

publication).

Based on results of scoping and the

resource capabilities within the project

area, alternatives including a ‘‘no

action’’ alternative will be developed for

the Draft Environmental Impact

Statement. The Draft Environmental

Impact Statement is projected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) in the summer of 2000.

Subsistence hearings as provided for in

Title VIII, Section 810 of the Alaska

National Interest Lands Conservation

Act (ANILCA), will occur, if necessary,

during the comment period on the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement. The

Final Environmental Impact Statement

and Record of Decision are anticipated

to be published in March, 2001. 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, at this

early stage, 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).

Environmental objections that could

have been raised at the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement stage

may be waived or dismissed by the

courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803

F.2nd 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and

Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490

F. Supp. 1334 (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 of the proposed action,

comments during scoping and

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 Environmental

Impact 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.

Comments received in response to this

solicitation, 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 or 217. 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. Requesters should be

aware that, under 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 7 days.

Permits required for implementation

include the following:

1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

—Approval of discharge of dredged or fill

material into the waters of the United

States under Section 404 of the Clean

Water Act;

—Approval of the construction of structures

or work in navigable waters of the United

States under Section 10 of the Rivers and

Harbors Act of 1899;

2. Environmental Protection Agency

—National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System (402) Permit;

—Review Spill Prevention Control and

Countermeasure Plan;

3. State of Alaska, Department of Natural

Resources

—Tideland Permit and Lease or Easement;

4. State of Alaska, Department of

Environmental Conservation

—Solid Waste Disposal Permit;

—Certification of Compliance with Alaska

Water Quality Standards (401 Certification)

Responsible Official: Carol Jorgensen,

Assistant Forest Supervisor, Tongass

National Forest, PO Box 309, Petersburg,

Alaska 99833, is the responsible official.

The responsible official will consider

the comments, response, disclosure of

environmental consequences, and

applicable laws, regulations, and

policies in making the decision and

stating the rationale in the Record of

Decision.

Dated: May 22, 2000.

Carol J. Jorgensen,

Assistant Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 00–14065 Filed 6–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation

Service

Black Bayou Culverts Hydrologic

Restoration Project (CS–29), Calcasieu

Parish, LA

AGENCY: Natural Resources

Conservation Service.

ACTION: Notice of finding of no

significant impact.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c)

of the National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969; the Council on

Environmental Quality Regulations (40

CFR Part 1500); and the Natural

Resources Conservation Service

Regulation (7 CFR Part 650); the Natural

Resources Conservation Service, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, gives notice

that an environmental impact statement

is not being prepared for the Black

Bayou Culverts Hydrologic Restoration

Project (CS–29), Calcasieu Parish,

Louisiana.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald W. Gohmert, State

Conservationist, Natural Resources

Conservation Service, 3737

Governmental Street, Alexandria,

Louisiana, 71302, telephone (318) 473–

7751.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

environmental assessment of this

federally assisted action indicates that

the project will not cause significant

local, regional, or national impacts on

the environment. As a result of these

findings, Donald W. Gohmert, State

Conservationist, has determined that the

preparation and review of an

environmental impact statement are not

needed for this project.