Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Notices 21203 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology should be addressed to: Desk 

Officer for Agriculture, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), 

OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV or 

fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental 

Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail 

Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250–

7602. Comments regarding these 

information collections are best assured 

of having their full effect if received 

within 30 days of this notification. 

Copies of the submission(s) may be 

obtained by calling (202) 720–8681. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor a collection of information 

unless the collection of information 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number and the agency informs 

potential persons who are to respond to 

the collection of information that such 

persons are not required to respond to 

the collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

Title: Federal Seed Act Program. 

OMB Control Number: 0581–0026. 

Summary of Collection: The Federal 

Seed Act (FSA) (7 U.S.C. 1551–1611) 

regulates agricultural and vegetable 

seeds in interstate commerce. 

Agricultural and vegetable seeds 

shipped in interstate commerce are 

required to be labeled with certain 

quality information such as the name of 

the seed, the purity, the germination, 

and the noxious-weed seeds of the state 

into which the seed is being shipped. 

State seed regulatory agencies refer to 

the Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) complaints involving seed found 

to be mislabeled and to have moved in 

interstate commerce. AMS investigates 

the alleged violations and if the 

violation is substantiated, takes 

regulatory action ranging from letters of 

warning to monetary penalties. AMS 

will collect information from records of 

each lot of seed and make them 

available for inspection by agents of the 

Secretary. 

Need and Use of the Information: The 

information collected consists of records 

pertaining to interstate shipments of 

seed which have been alleged to be in 

violation of the FSA. The shipper’s 

records pertaining to a complaint are 

examined by FSA program specialists 

and are used to determine if a violation 

of the FSA occurred. The records are 

also used to determine the precautions 

taken by the shipper to assure that the 

seed was accurately labeled. The FSA 

program would be ineffective without 

the ability to examine pertinent records 

as necessary to resolve complaints of 

violations. 

Description of Respondents: Business 

or other for-profit; Farm. 

Number of Respondents: 2,880. 

Frequency of Responses: 

Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion. 

Total Burden Hours: 40,263. 

Charlene Parker, 

Departmental Information Collection 

Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. E7–8154 Filed 4–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Wild and Scenic River Suitability Study 

for National Forest System Lands in 

Utah; Ashley, Dixie, Fishlake, Manti-La 

Sal, Uinta, and Wasatch-Cache 

National Forests; Utah 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a 

legislative environmental impact 

statement. 

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, in 

cooperation with the State of Utah, will 

prepare a draft and final legislative 

environmental impact statement (LEIS) 

to complete the process for giving 

consideration to potential national wild, 

scenic, and recreational river areas on 

the National Forests in Utah under the 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Portions of 

those National Forests extend into 

Colorado and Wyoming, and those areas 

will be included in the study. The 

Forest Service has evaluated river 

segments on these National Forests to 

determine which ones meet criteria for 

eligibility for inclusion in the National 

Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The 

purpose of the LEIS is to determine 

which eligible river segments are 

suitable for inclusion in the National 

Wild and Scenic Rivers System. More 

information including: the full text of 

the proposal, a list of eligible river 

segments by county and forest, and a 

map showing eligible river segments is 

posted on the web at: http:// 

www.fs.fed.us/r4/rivers/. 

The Forest Service invites written 

comments and suggestions on the 

suitability of eligible river segements for 

designation as wild, scenic, or 

recreational rivers. The Forest Service 

gives notice of the environmental 

analysis and determinations that will 

occur as a result of this study so that 

interested and affected people are aware 

of how they may participate and 

contribute to the final determination of 

suitability for inclusion in the National 

Wild and Scenic Rivers System. 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis will be most useful if 

submitted on or before June 30, 2007. 

The draft legislative environmental 

impact statement is expected in 

November 2007 and the final legislative 

environmental impact statement is 

expected to be completed by the 

summer of 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments 

concerning the suitability of the river 

segments to: Catherine Kahlow, USFS 

WSR Team Leader, Attention: WSR, 

P.O. Box 68, Kamas, UT 84036. 

Comments can also be hand delivered 

Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 4:30 

pm at: 50 East Center Street in Kamas, 

Utah. In addition, comments can be 

submitted electronically to: 

r4_utah_rivers@fs.fed.us on or before 

June 30, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Visit 

the website for up-to-date information 

at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/rivers/ or 

contact Catherine Kahlow, USFS WSR 

Team Leader (see previous address 

information). For information regarding 

meetings or media inquiries contact: 

Loyal Clark, USFS Public Affairs Officer 

(Northern Utah) at (801) 342–5117 or 

Kenton Call, USFS Public Affairs Officer 

(Southern Utah) at (435) 865–3730. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action 

This Forest Service proposes to 

complete the process for considering 

potential national wild, scenic, and 

recreational river areas on the National 

Forest System lands in Utah under the 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The 

purpose of and need for this study is to 

assess whether or not eligible river 

segments should be recommended to 

Congress for inclusion in the National 

Wild and Scenic Rivers System. 

Proposed Action 

The Forest Service is proposing to 

conduct an environmental analysis to 

complete the process for considering 

potential national wild, scenic, and 

recreational river areas on the National 

Forests in Utah under the Wild and 

Scenic Rivers Act. This action is 

conducted pursuant to the Wild and 

Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (Public Law 

90–542) and complies with the National 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
21204 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Notices 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 

1969. 

The final record of decision may also 

include amendments to the Land and 

Resource Management Plans for the 

Utah National Forests to provide 

direction for management of river 

segments determined to be suitable for 

inclusion in the National Wild and 

Scenic Rivers System. 

Background: Over the past decade, 

National Forests in Utah have evaluated 

river segments on the National Forest 

for potential eligibility for designation 

under the National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers System. The majority of the 

eligibility inventory and tentative 

classification took place during forest 

land and resource management plan 

revision processes. However, eight river 

segments on the Dixie National Forest 

were analyzed in conjunction with the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in 

the Grand Staircase Escalante National 

Monument Management Plan. 

In order to be eligible, a river segment 

must be free-flowing and must possess 

at least one outstandingly remarkable 

value. River segments determined to be 

eligible were assigned a potential 

classification as wild, scenic, or 

recreational based on the level of 

development and access along the river 

corridor. 

Forest Supervisors proposed interim 

direction for the management of 

activities and uses that have the 

potential to affect the outstandingly 

remarkable values and/or the wild, 

scenic, or recreational classification of 

the eligible river segments until such a 

time that the suitability studies are 

completed and a new management 

emphasis is developed. 

The eligibility process has largely 

been completed for all National Forests 

in Utah. The purpose of this study is to 

further evaluate the suitability of 

eligible river segements for inclusion in 

the National Wild and Scenic Rivers 

System. 

A suitability study is the final 

administrative step before a 

recommendation is made to Congress. 

Evaluation of suitability will provide an 

opportunity to determine if it will be 

appropriate to pursue Congressional 

designation for specific river segments. 

The Forest Service and State of Utah 

will consider, but not be limited to, the 

following: ‘‘worthy additions’’ to the 

National System; tradeoffs in 

management scenarios other than 

designation; land ownership status; 

existing and potential uses of that 

segment; interest expressed by the 

public, and tribal, Federal, State, and 

local agencies; estimated costs for 

management and protection of 

identified outstandingly remarkable 

values; ability of agency to manage and/ 

or protect the river; and, historical and 

existing uses which could be affected. 

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Team will 

evaluate the suitability of the eligible 

river segments together in one analysis 

to maintain consistency and to complete 

the work efficiently. 

Possible Alternatives 

A range of alternatives will be 

considered. The range of alternatives 

will include, as required be NEPA, a no 

action alternative that does not 

recommend any eligible river segment 

for designation into the National Wild 

and Scenic Rivers System, and may 

include an alternative that recommends 

designation of all eligible rivers (All 

Suitable). Additional alternatives may 

be developed from information analyzed 

during the suitability study, including 

public comments received during the 

scoping process. 

Cooperating Agencies 

The State of Utah is a Cooperating 

Agency. 

Responsible Officials 

Kevin B. Elliott, Ashley National 

Forest, 355 North Vernal Avenue, 

Vernal, Utah 84078; 

Rob MacWhorter, Dixie National 

Forest, 1789 North Wedgewood Lane, 

Cedar City, Utah 84720; 

Mary C. Erickson, Fishlake National 

Forest, 115 East 900 North, Richfield, 

Utah 84701; 

Alice B. Carlton, Manti-La Sal 

National Forest, 599 West Price River 

Dr., Price, Utah 84501; 

Brian A. Ferebee, Uinta National 

Forest, 88 West 100 North, Provo, Utah 

84601; 

Faye L. Krueger, Wasatch-Cache 

National Forest, 125 South State Street, 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84138. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The record of decision will answer 

the following question: Which, if any, of 

the eligible river segments under 

consideration should be recommended 

to the Congress of the United States for 

inclusion in the National Wild and 

Scenic Rivers System? 

Scoping Process 

Public participation is especially 

important at several points in the study 

process. The first is the scoping process. 

The Forest Service is seeking 

information and comments from 

Federal, State, and local agencies, 

Tribes, organizations, and individuals 

who may be interested in or affected by 

the proposed action. Public input will 

be considered during preparation of the 

Draft LEIS. 

Scoping meetings will be held around 

the State of Utah and in Paradox, 

Colorado and Lyman, Wyoming during 

May and June of 2007. For a list of 

meeting dates and locations, please 

check the WSR Web site at: http:// 

www.fs.fed.us/r4/rivers. 

Comment Requested 

This notice of intent initiates the 

scoping process which guides the 

development of the environmental 

impact statement. This suitability study 

is driven by suitability factors that will 

shape the analysis of each river 

segment. These suitability factors are 

used to identify and evaluate the tradeoffs between competing uses and need 

for potential designation of these rivers 

to the Wild and Scenic River System. 

Suitability factors are noted on the 

website at http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/ 

rivers. Comment on the application of 

existing suitability factors, additional 

factors for the agency to consider, 

potential alternatives to analyze and 

other related specific comments is 

requested. 

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, 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). 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 

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 comments 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Notices 21205 

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 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 24, 2007. 

Faye L. Krueger, 

Wasatch-Cache Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. E7–8149 Filed 4–27–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Pacific Southwest Region, Regional 

Office, California, Sierra Nevada 

Forests—Management Indicator 

Species Amendment 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: The Pacific Southwest Region 

of the U.S. Forest Service proposes to 

adopt a common list of Management 

Indicator Species (MIS) and associated 

monitoring strategies by amending the 

Land and Resource Management Plans 

(LRMPs) for the Eldorado, Inyo, Lassen, 

Modoc, Plumas, Sequoia, Sierra, 

Stanislaus, and Tahoe National Forests 

and Lake Tahoe Basin Management 

Unit. These will likely be nonsignificant forest plan amendments. 

DATES: To be most effective, comments 

concerning the scope of the analysis 

should be received by May 21, 2007. 

Public scoping for this analysis, 

originally expected to be documented in 

an Environmental Assessment, began on 

February 21, 2007. Unless response to 

this notice raises concerns not yet 

expressed, the draft environmental 

impact statement is expected in late 

May 2007 and the final environmental 

impact statement is expected in July 

2007. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the 

Forest Service at the following 

addresses. Hardcopy mail: U.S. Forest 

Service, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo, CA 

94592, ATTN: Brenda Kendrix. 

Electronic mail: commentspacificsouthwest-regionaloffice@fs.fed.us, Subject Line: Sierra 

Nevada Forests MIS Amendment. Use 

Rich Text Format (.rtf) or Word (.doc). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information contact Diana Craig, 

Interdisciplinary Team Leader, at U.S. 

Forest Service, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo, 

CA, or at the e-mail address above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action 

This proposed action responds to a 

need for a more suitable and 

manageable list of MIS, while 

maintaining a sufficient number of 

species to cover the range of habitats in 

the Sierra Nevada affected by Forest 

Service management activities. 

Monitoring and recent judicial 

interpretations have led to the 

conclusion that the Forest plan 

provisions related to MIS and MIS 

monitoring are in need of 

reconsideration. Specifically, some MIS 

currently identified in the LRMPs are 

problematic because (1) no tested 

monitoring methodology exists or the 

methodology is prohibitively expensive, 

(2) some MIS currently identified in the 

LRMPs are not strongly linked to 

habitats or ecosystem components that 

are affected by national forest 

management activities, or (3) some MIS 

do not occur on or occur only 

incidentally on a Forest and, therefore, 

neither populations nor habitat 

relationships can be monitored for MIS 

objectives. 

In addition, the current lists provide 

no coordination or standardization 

across the Sierra Nevada Forests. Each 

national forest has a different, and often 

unrelated, MIS list. Often forest scale 

information does not provide the most 

meaningful biological data. Maintaining 

a monitoring program on each 

individual forest is not strategic and is 

an inefficient use of money and 

resources. 

The purpose of this action is to 

improve the ability of the national 

forests to provide for the diversity of 

plant and animal communities, as 

identified in the National Forest 

Management Act (NFMA). This will be 

accomplished by identifying MIS for the 

10 national forests (1) that are clearly 

linked to habitats or ecosystem 

components that are affected by national 

forest management activities, and (2) for 

which population or habitat status and 

change can be effectively and affordably 

monitored and evaluated. 

Proposed Action 

The Forest Service proposes to adopt 

common list of MIS and associated 

monitoring strategies by amending, via 

non-significant forest plan amendment, 

the LRMPs for the ten Sierra Nevada 

National Forests in the Pacific 

Southwest Region (Eldorado, Inyo, 

Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Sequoia, Sierra, 

Stanislaus, and Tahoe National Forests 

and Lake Tahoe Basin Management 

Unit). These ten national forests occur 

in Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El 

Dorado, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Lassen, 

Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, 

Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, 

Siskiyou, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yuba, and 

Douglas Counties in California and 

Esmeralda and Mineral Counties in 

Nevada. 

This action will replace the existing 

MIS lists and associated monitoring 

strategies identified in the LRMPs for 

each of the 10 national forests. Other 

MIS-related parts of the LRMPs (e.g., 

habitat objectives, desired conditions, 

standards and guidelines) will NOT be 

changed by this proposal; therefore, 

habitat and species-specific protection 

measures will continue for all current 

MIS. 

The proposed action will have the 

following components: (1) Major 

habitats or ecosystem components that 

are affected by national forest 

management activities on the ten 

national forests; (2) suitability and 

feasability criteria to assess whether a 

species meets the identified need; (3) 

MIS for major habitats or ecosystem 

components identified in component 1; 

and (4) appropriate monitoring 

strategies for each identified MIS 

(habitat or population monitoring, 

including the specific type of 

population monitoring). 

Possible Alternatives 

Public comment has suggested an 

alternative analyzing all species 

identified as MIS in Appendix E of the 

2001 Final Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Sierra Nevada Forest 

Plan Amendment (2001 SNFPA FEIS) 

and associated monitoring. We will 

analyze this alternative, called SNFPA 

Appendix E, in detail. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES