Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 78 / Tuesday April 24, 2007 / Notices 20319 

Record keeping burden only: Each 

State agency would be required to keep 

a record of the information gathered and 

submitted to FNS. We estimate this to 

be 7 minutes per year for the 53 State 

agencies to equal a total of 6 burden 

hours annually. (53 × 7 minutes/60 

minutes per hour = 6 hours annual 

burden). 

Summary of burden hours: 

Affected Public: State agencies and 

local governments administering the 

Food Stamp Program. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

53. 

Estimated Number of Responses Per 

Respondent: 2.16. 

Estimated Number of Responses: 115. 

Estimated Hours Per Response: 2.05. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 236. 

Dated: April 17, 2007. 

Roberto Salazar, 

Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–7715 Filed 4–23–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Shasta-Trinity National Forest, 

California Mudflow Vegetation 

Management Project 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: Shasta-Trinity National Forest 

proposes to harvest timber and remove 

accumulations of down wood (fuels) on 

approximately 2900 acres of National 

Forest System lands. Trees on about 

80% of the area would be thinned by 

removing a portion of the trees from 

overcrowded forest stands. Trees 

removed would be those infected with 

disease or insects and those generally 

smaller in size than trees that will be 

retained. Most of the trees on 

approximately 15% of the area are 

infected by root disease and insects and 

would be removed. Young tree seedlings 

would be planted in the openings 

created in these areas. Encroaching 

conifers will be removed from the 

remaining 5% of the area to restore and 

maintain wet meadow characteristics in 

a condition that existed in the past. The 

majority of project area is within 

township T40N, R2W, MDM with minor 

inclusions in T39N, R2W and T40N, 

R3W, MDM. The project is located 

immediately north and east of the town 

of McCloud, California. The Forest Land 

and Resource Management Plan has 

allocated portions of the project area to 

Late-Successional Reserves and Special 

Area Management (Research Natural 

Area) with the remainder designated as 

Matrix lands. About five percent of the 

area is zoned as Riparian Reserve 

(wetlands and areas adjacent to 

streams). 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis should be received no 

later than 30 days after the publication 

of this notice in the Federal Register. 

The draft environmental impact 

statement is expected in June 2007 and 

the final environmental impact 

statement is expected in September 

2007. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

District Ranger Michael Hupp, ShastaMcCloud Management Unit, 204 W. 

Alma Street, Mt. Shasta, California 

96067. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dusty Miller, McCloud Ranger Station, 

P.O. Box 1620, McCloud, California 

96057, telephone (530) 964–3771 or via 

e-mail at dmiller@fs.fed.us. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action 

A century of fire exclusion in the 

project area has resulted in overcrowded 

forest conditions and the loss of wet 

meadow habitat. Overcrowded 

conditions in forested areas have 

reduced tree vigor, reduced the 

proportion of hardwoods in forested 

areas and promoted the spread of root 

diseases. In the absence of fire, an 

understory of shrubs and small trees has 

developed which can act as a fuel 

ladder and carry fire into the forest 

canopy resulting in the loss of forest 

habitat. The lack of fire has resulted in 

accumulations of ground fuels which 

also increases the likelihood of flames 

reaching the canopy layer. The purpose 

of this project is to meet Forest Plan 

objectives by restoring forest ecosystem 

health within the project area through a 

variety of management activities. 

There is a need to reduce tree density 

in areas where overcrowded forest 

conditions currently exist. Thinning 

will improve the health of these forest 

areas by making more water, nutrients 

and sunlight available for use by the 

remaining trees with a subsequent 

improvement in the ability of trees to 

withstand insects, pathogens and 

drought. Removing small trees from the 

understory will remove ladder fuels that 

may otherwise carry fire from the 

ground into the forest canopy if wildfire 

occurs. This is important because it will 

leave the treated stands in a more 

sustainable, healthy condition. There is 

a need to break the current cycle of reinfection in areas heavily infected by 

root diseases. The removal of groups of 

diseased trees will remove the source of 

infection from affected areas. Replanting with conifer species suited to 

the specific root disease problems 

identified at each site will reestablish 

live trees. This is important because it 

will reduce future tree mortality and 

slow or stop the spread of root diseases 

in the project area. 

There is a need to reduce 

accumulations of ground fuels to levels 

where flames are not likely to reach the 

canopy layer in case of wildfire. 

Machine piling and burning will reduce 

fuel loads in treatment areas while still 

meeting other resource needs. This is 

important because it will reduce the 

probability of stand replacing wildfires. 

There is a need to restore the historic 

size, continuity, and function of wet 

meadow ecosystems in the project area. 

Encroaching conifers will be removed 

from areas that were historically 

meadows and where trees may not be 

sustainable due to mortality resulting 

from fluctuating water tables. The 

removal of competing conifers will 

promote the development of naturally 

occurring hardwoods and meadow 

vegetation. Restoration activities will 

return meadows to conditions that will 

allow the reintroduction of fire to 

maintain natural ecosystem function. 

This is important because meadows 

provide significant water storage and 

biodiversity. 

There is a need to provide for the 

long-term sustainability of hardwoods 

in the landscape. In dense mixed 

conifer/hardwood forests, the 

abundance and vigor of hardwoods is 

declining as overtopping conifers block 

necessary sunlight. Treatments in such 

areas will emphasize the removal of 

some competing conifers to provide 

growing space and sunlight for 

overtopped hardwoods. In dense mature 

oak stands with little reproduction, oak 

trees will be thinned to promote growth 

and encourage stump sprouting. In areas 

where the surrounding conifer forest has 

encroached and replaced historic aspen 

stands, most conifer trees will be 

removed to allow residual aspen trees to 

reclaim the site. This is important 

because hardwoods provide valuable 

wildlife habitat and stand diversity and 

are important in Native American 

traditions. 

Proposed Action 

The project will include the following 

treatments: 

1. Thinning treatments on 

approximately 2100 acres. 

In all thinning treatments, trees will 

be thinned to a spacing that is 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
20320 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 78 / Tuesday April 24, 2007 / Notices 

appropriate for the species, age, and 

site. The smallest trees will generally be 

removed from the stand leaving the 

healthiest dominant trees. 

a. On approximately 350 acres of 25–

45 year old ponderosa pine plantations, 

trees will be thinned to a spacing of 

approximately 20–30 feet by generally 

removing the smallest trees. 

b. On approximately 1100 acres of 75–

95 year old mixed conifer forest, trees 

will be thinned to a spacing that is 

appropriate for the species, age, and 

site. The smallest trees will generally be 

removed from the stand leaving the 

healthiest dominant trees. 

c. On approximately 250 acres of 75–

95 year old mixed conifer and 

ponderosa pine forest, dense stands of 

trees will be thinned but groups of trees 

will also be harvested on 20% of the 

area to create 1.5 to 3.5 acre openings. 

These openings will be concentrated in 

areas of heavy mortality and will be 

replanted with a mix of species 

determined to be appropriate for the 

site. The remaining 80% of the area will 

be thinned as described in ‘‘b’’ above to 

promote the health and growth of the 

trees. Group selection is applied as an 

uneven-aged silvicultural treatment 

intended to regenerate forest stands 

gradually over time and to develop 

stand structure and age diversity. 

d. On approximately 400 acres of 75–

95 year old mixed conifer forest with 

pockets of root disease, trees will be 

thinned as described in ‘‘b’’ above. In 

addition, all dead, dying, and diseased 

trees in pockets infected with root 

disease will be removed unless they are 

needed to meet other resource needs. 

Resulting openings will be replanted 

with species resistant to the specific 

root disease found at the site. 

2. Shaded fuelbreak on approximately 

120 acres. 

A 100-meter wide shaded fuelbreak 

will be established along the eastern 

perimeter of the Shasta Mudflow 

Research Natural Area (RNA). The 

crowns of overstory trees will be spaced 

to reduce the risk of wildfire entering or 

leaving the RNA. Understory trees and 

brush will be removed or spaced to 

eliminate fuel ladders which can carry 

ground fire into the forest canopy. 

3. Sanitation treatments on 

approximately 350 acres. 

On approximately 350 acres, 

understocked ponderosa pine forests 

that are heavily infected with root 

disease will be sanitized. All infected 

trees will be removed from the site to 

break the cycle of re-infection. Resulting 

understocked areas will be replanted 

with an appropriate mix of conifer 

species suited to the specific root 

disease problems identified at each site. 

There are insufficient large healthy trees 

on approximately 200 acres to meet 

standards and guidelines for Reserve 

Trees; therefore, a site specific forest 

plan amendment will be required. 

Excess ground fuels will be piled and 

burned. 

4. Regeneration treatments on 

approximately 100 acres. 

On approximately 100 acres, 

understocked ponderosa pine forests 

resulting from continuing mortality due 

to root disease will be regenerated with 

reserve trees retained on 15% of the 

area. Reserve trees will be selected with 

an emphasis on retaining the largest and 

oldest trees and those species resistant 

to the specific root diseases identified at 

each site. Existing healthy natural 

reproduction will be retained wherever 

possible. All other trees will be 

removed. Accumulations of dead and 

down trees and ground fuels will be 

piled and burned. These areas will be 

replanted with a mix of species 

determined to be appropriate for the 

site. 

5. Meadow and wetland restoration 

on approximately 200 acres. 

On approximately 200 acres, 

vegetation will be treated to restore and 

maintain wet meadow ecosystems in a 

size and condition observed in the 

earliest available aerial photography and 

using existing plant communities as a 

indicator of areas suitable for meadow 

restoration. Encroaching smaller 

conifers, generally less than 80 years 

old, will be removed to enhance 

hardwoods and riparian vegetation and 

to restore natural functioning of the 

meadow ecosystem. Scattered large 

overstory trees will be retained. Fuels 

will be modified to allow the future use 

of prescribed fire to maintain meadows 

in their naturally occurring condition. 

6. Hardwood thinning on 

approximately 50 acres. 

On approximately 50 acres of black 

oak stands, overcrowded oak clumps 

will be thinned to promote growth and 

prevent future decline of the hardwood 

habitat type in the area. Suppressed and 

understory oak stems will be removed 

where trees are obviously overcrowded. 

Some competing conifers will be 

removed to promote development of 

black oak. 

On all proposed treatments, excess 

trees will be removed as commercial 

wood products wherever possible. 

Small-diameter trees will be removed as 

wood chips while larger trees will be 

removed as sawlogs. Whole tree removal 

will be used wherever possible to 

minimize the accumulation of 

additional ground fuels. Heavy 

concentrations of down wood will be 

reduced by tractor piling and burning. 

All fresh conifer stumps greater than 14 

inches in diameter will be treated with 

borax to prevent the spread of annosus 

root disease. 

The project may include the 

construction of short lengths of 

temporary road and the closure or 

decommissioning of other roads. 

Anticipated timber harvest outputs 

from this project are approximately 20–

25 thousand CCF (10–15 MMBF) of 

sawlog products plus approximately 

1,500 tons of wood chips. 

Lead and Cooperating Agencies 

Lead Agency: USDA, Forest Service. 

Responsible Official 

J. Sharon Heywood, Forest 

Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National 

Forest, 3644 Avtech Parkway, Redding, 

CA 96002. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The Forest Supervisor will decide 

whether to implement the proposed 

action, take an alternative action that 

meets the purpose and need, or take no 

action. 

A non-significant Forest Plan 

amendment regarding the green-tree 

retention standard and guideline will be 

part of this decision to address 

deteriorating forest conditions in large 

areas of dead and dying trees resulting 

from root disease. 

Scoping Process 

The project is included in the ShastaTrinity National Forest’s quarterly 

schedule of proposed actions (SOPA). 

Information on the proposed action will 

also be posted on the Forest Web site, 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/shastatrinity/ 

projects, and advertised in both the 

Redding Record Searchlight and the 

Mount Shasta Herald. This notice of 

intent initiates the scoping process, 

which guides the development of the 

environmental impact statement. 

Comments submitted during this 

scoping process should be in writing 

and should be specific to the proposed 

action. The comments should describe 

as clearly and completely as possible 

any issues the commenter has with the 

proposal. The scoping process include: 

(a) Identifying potential issues. 

(b) Identifying issues to be analyzed 

in depth. 

(c) Eliminating non-significant issues 

or those previously covered by a 

relevant previous environmental 

analysis. 

(d) Exploring additional alternatives. 

(e) Identifying potential 

environmental effects of the proposed 

action and alternatives. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 78 / Tuesday April 24, 2007 / Notices 20321 

Early Notice of Importance of Public 

Participation in Subsequent 

Environmental Review 

A draft environmental impact 

statement will be prepared for comment. 

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 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 

but that are not raised until after 

completion of the final environmental 

impact statement may be dismissed by 

the courts. (City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 

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

Wisconsin Heritage, 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 thus 

ensuring substantive comments and 

objections are 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 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. 

Comments received, including the 

names and addresses of those who 

comment, will be considered part of the 

public record on this proposal and will 

be available for public inspection. 

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; 

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 

21) 

Dated: April 4, 2007. 

J. Sharon Heywood, 

Forest Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National 

Forest. 

[FR Doc. 07–2018 Filed 4–23–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains 

National Monument Advisory 

Committee 

AGENCIES: Forest Service, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture; and Bureau 

of Land Management, U.S. Department 

of the Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of meetings of the Santa 

Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains 

National Monument Advisory 

Committee for 2007 and 2008. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act of 

1972 (FACA), the Santa Rosa and San 

Jacinto Mountains National Monument 

Advisory Committee (Monument 

Advisory Committee) will meet as 

indicated below. 

DATES:

• March 3, 2007. 

• June 2, 2007. 

• September 8, 2007. 

• December 1, 2007. 

• March 1, 2008. 

• June 7, 2008. 

• September 6, 2008. 

• December 6, 2008. 

All meetings of the Monument 

Advisory Committee will start at 9 a.m. 

and conclude at 1 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Meetings of the Monument 

Advisory Committee will be held at the 

Palm Desert City Council Chambers, 

73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, 

California. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Foote, Monument Manager, Santa Rosa 

and San Jacinto Mountains National 

Monument, c/o Bureau of Land 

Management, P.O. Box 581260, North 

Palm Springs, CA 92258; phone (760) 

251–4800. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meetings 

of the Monument Advisory Committee 

focus on implementation of the Santa 

Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains 

National Monument Management Plan. 

A public comment period, when 

members of the public may address the 

Monument Advisory Committee, will 

occur at 11 a.m. during each meeting. 

Written comments may be sent to the 

Monument Manager at the address 

listed above. All meetings are open to 

the public; however, transportation, 

lodging, and meals are the responsibility 

of the participating public. 

Dated: February 9, 2007. 

Laurie Rosenthal, 

District Ranger, Forest Service, San Jacinto 

Ranger District, San Bernardino National 

Forest. 

Dated: February 9, 2007. 

John R. Kalish, 

Acting Field Manager, Bureau of Land 

Management, Palm Springs-South Coast Field 

Office. 

Dated: February 9, 2007. 

Jim Foote, 

Monument Manager, Santa Rosa and San 

Jacinto Mountains National Monument. 

[FR Doc. 07–2014 Filed 4–23–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration 

Request for Extension and Revision of 

a Currently Approved Information 

Collection 

AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice 

announces our intention to request a 3- 

year extension and revision of a 

currently approved information 

collection for ‘‘Regulations Governing 

the National Inspection and Weighing 

System under the United States Grain 

Standards Act and under the 

Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946.’’

DATES: We will consider comments that 

we receive by June 25, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit 

comments on this notice. You may 

submit comments by any of the 

following methods: 

• E-Mail: Send comments via 

electronic mail to 

comments.gipsa@usda.gov. 

• Mail: Send hardcopy written 

comments to Tess Butler, GIPSA, USDA, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 

1647–S, Washington, DC 20250–3604. 

• Fax: Send comments by facsimile 

transmission to: (202) 690–2755. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

comments to: Tess Butler, GIPSA, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES