45790 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 1997 / Notices

The responsible official is Robert T.

Jacobs, Regional Forester, Eastern

Region, 310 W. Wisconsin Ave,

Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203.

Dated: August 12, 1997.

Robert T. Jacobs,

Regional Forester.

[FR Doc. 97–22313 Filed 8–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Notice of Intent; Environmental Impact

Statement for the Crane and Rowan

Mountain Timber Sales, Tongass

National Forest, Stikine Area,

Petersburg, AK

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement.

SUMMARY: This proposed action was

announced on April 1, 1997 as two

separate Environmental Assessments

(EA), one each for the Crane and Rowan

Mountain Timber Sales. The decision to

prepare EAs for these projects was based

upon, among other things, several prior

extensive environmental analyses that

have been conducted for similar

projects. Individually they did not

indicate a significant effect to the

human environment. After considering

the public input, we have decided to

document the analysis of these two

proposed timber sales in an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

1. Purpose and scope of the decision.

The purpose of the projects is to make

available for harvest approximately 10–

15 million board feet (MMBF) of timber

from the Crane Timber Sale and

approximately 9–12 MMBF from the

Rowan Mountain Timber Sale. These

projects will contribute sawlog and

utility timber volume and related

employment and income opportunities

to the timber industry in Southeast

Alaska and will help meet the goals and

objectives of the Revised Tongass Land

Management Plan.

The geographic location of this

proposed project is the north portion of

Kuiu Island and includes value

comparison units (VCU) 399, 400, 402,

and 421. The western portion of VCU

420 (west side of Port Camden) is also

included. Timber harvesting and

roading has occurred in all of the VCU’s.

The decision to be made is:

(1) Whether or not timber harvest will

occur in the Crane and Rowan Mountain

project area;

(2) How much timber will be

harvested;

(3) Location and design of harvest

units;

(4) Location and design of road

construction and potential

reconstruction; and

(5) What mitigation measures and

monitoring will be implemented.

A reasonable range of alternatives will

be developed, including a No Action

alternative. No additional road building

or timber harvest would occur under the

No Action alternative.

2. Scoping and public participation.

Public scoping for these projects began

on April 1, 1997. We mailed a scoping

letter to interested groups,

organizations, and members of the

public who indicated an interest in the

project by responding to the Stikine

Area Project Schedule, or who

otherwise notified the Stikine Area that

they were interested in the Crane and

Rowan Mountain Timber Harvest

Projects. This Notice of Intent

constitutes an extension of this scoping

process, which will end September

19th, 1997. At the time of this notice, a

scoping letter is being mailed to

interested groups, organizations, and

members of the public explaining the

transition from an Environmental

Analysis to an Environmental Impact

Statement Process.

Scoping results from the April 1, 1997

mailing have reinforced the preliminary

issues identified and did not suggest

additional issues. The issues as noted in

the April 1 mailing are listed below:

1. Cultural Resources—How should

timber management activities be

designed to protect cultural resources?

2. Economics—How should the

project be designed to contribute to the

economic health of Southeast Alaska?

3. Fish—How should fish habitat be

managed and what effect would timber

harvest and related activities have on

fish habitat?

4. Recreation—How should recreation

opportunities be protected or enhanced

in the design of timber management

activities?

5. Soil—How should timber

management activities be designed to

protect the soil resource? What effects

would activities have on soil

productivity?

6. Subsistence—How should timber

management activities be designed to

protect traditional subsistence uses?

What effect would activities have on

subsistence uses and users?

7. Timber Management—How should

the project be designed to provide for

efficient and long-term timber

management?

8. Scenery—How should timber

management activities be designed to

protect areas of high scenic quality and

what effect would activities have on the

landscapes of Kuiu Island?

9. Water Quality—How should timber

management activities be designed to

protect water quality? What effects

would activities have on water quality?

10. Wildlife Habitat—What effects

would timber harvest and related

activities have on wildlife habitat?

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of the analysis should be received in

writing by September 19, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Information relating to the supplement

may be obtained by contacting Bob

Gerdes, Interdisciplinary Team Leader,

USDA Forest Service, P.O. Box 309,

Petersburg, AK 99833.

EXPECTED TIME FOR COMPLETION: A draft

EIS is projected for issuance

approximately 2 months from the date

of the Notice of Intent, or October 17,

1997.

The Final Environmental Impact

Statement and Record of Decision is

expected to be released by March 30,

1998. The Responsible Official will

make a decision regarding this proposal

after considering public comments, and

the environmental consequences

displayed in the Final Environmental

Impact Statement, and applicable laws,

regulations, and policies. The decision

and supporting reason will be

documented in the Record of Decision.

PUBLIC COMMENT: Interested parties are

invited to comment. The comment

period on the Draft EIS will be 45 days

from the first day after publication of

notice of availability in the Federal

Register by the Environmental

Protection Agency. 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 helpful

for comments to refer to specific pages

or chapters 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 while addressing these

points.

In addition, Federal court decisions

have established that reviewer’s of Draft

EISs 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. versus

NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 533 (1978).

Environmental objections that could
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 1997 / Notices 45791

have been raised at the draft stage may

be waived if not raised until after

completion of the Final EIS. City of

Angonn versus Hodel, (9th Circuit,

1986) and Wisconsin Hertage’s, Inc.

versus Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338

(E.D. Wis. 1980). The reason for this is

to ensure 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 EIS.

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 and 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. Persons requesting such

confidentiality 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.

The responsible official for the

decision in Patricia A. Grantham, Acting

Forest Supervisor, Stikine Area, Tongass

National Forest, Alaska Region,

Petersburg, Alaska.

Dated: August 15, 1997.

Patricia A. Grantham,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 97–23000 Filed 8–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation

Service

Notice of proposed change to Section

IV of the Field Office Technical Guide

(FOTG) of the NRCS in MS

AGENCY: Natural Resources

Conservation Service (NRCS) in

Mississippi, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.

ACTION: Notice of availability of

proposed changes in Section IV of the

FOTG of the NRCS in Mississippi for

review and comment.

SUMMARY: NRCS in Mississippi is

issuing the following new conservation

practice standards: Agrichemical Mixing

Center (Code 702), Conservation Crop

Rotation (Code 3289), Cross Slope

Farming (Code 733), Fence (Code 382),

Filter Strip (Code 393), Forage Harvest

Management (Code 511), Forest Harvest

Trials and Landings (Code 655), Forest

Site Preparation (Code 490), Forest

Stand Improvement (Code 666), Heavy

Use Protection Area (Code 561),

Prescribed Grazing (Code 528A),

Residue Management No-Till & StripTill (Code 329A), Residue Management,

Mulch Till (Code 329B), Residue

Management, Ridge Till (Code 329C),

Residue Management, Seasonal (Code

344), Stream Crossing (Code 733), Tree/

Shrub Establishment (Code 612), Use

Exclusion (Code 472), Vegetative Barrier

(Code 734), Waste Storage Facility (Code

313), Waste Treatment Lagoon (Code

359), Well Decommissioning (Code 351)

in Section IV of the FOTG.

DATES: Comments will be received on or

before September 29, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Inquire in writing to Homer L. Wilkes,

State Conservationist, Natural Resources

Conservation Service, Suite 1321

Federal Bldg., 100 West Capitol St.,

Jackson, MS 39269. Copies of the

practice standards will be made

available upon written request.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

343 of the Federal Agriculture

Improvement and Reform Act of 1996

states that revisions made after

enactment of the law to NRCS State

technical guides used to carry out

highly erodible land and wetland

provisions of the law shall be made

available for public review and

comment. For the next 30 days the

NRCS in Mississippi will receive

comments relative to the stated

summary. Following that period a

determination will be made by the

NRCS in Mississippi regarding

disposition of those comments and a

final determination of change will be

made.

Dated: August 21, 1997.

Homer L. Wilkes,

State Conservationist, NRCS, Jackson, MS.

[FR Doc. 97–23077 Filed 8–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–21–M

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR

SEVERELY DISABLED

Procurement List; Proposed Additions

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From

People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed additions to

procurement list.

SUMMARY: The Committee has received

proposals to add to the Procurement List

commodities and services to be

furnished by nonprofit agencies

employing persons who are blind or

have other severe disabilities.

COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED ON OR

BEFORE: September 29, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase

From People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled, Crystal Square 3, Suite 403,

1735 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, Virginia 22202–3461.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Beverly Milkman (703) 603–7740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

notice is published pursuant to 41

U.S.C. 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. Its

purpose is to provide interested persons

an opportunity to submit comments on

the possible impact of the proposed

actions.

If the Committee approves the

proposed additions, all entities of the

Federal Government (except as

otherwise indicated) will be required to

procure the commodities and services

listed below from nonprofit agencies

employing persons who are blind or

have other severe disabilities.

I certify that the following action will

not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The major factors considered for this

certification were:

1. The action will not result in any

additional reporting, recordkeeping or

other compliance requirements for small

entities other than the small

organizations that will furnish the

commodities and services to the

Government.

2. The action does not appear to have

a severe economic impact on current

contractors for the commodities and

services.

3. The action will result in

authorizing small entities to furnish the

commodities and services to the

Government.

4. There are no known regulatory

alternatives which would accomplish

the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in

connection with the commodities and

services proposed for addition to the