Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 17007 

Services (HHS) at 77 FR 4034, January 

26, 2012. The guidelines published by 

HHS are referred to as the poverty 

guidelines. 

Section 246.7(d)(1) of the WIC 

regulations (Title 7, Code of Federal 

Regulations) specifies that State 

agencies may prescribe income 

guidelines either equaling the income 

guidelines established under section 9 

of the Richard B. Russell National 

School Lunch Act for reduced-price 

school meals or identical to State or 

local guidelines for free or reducedprice health care. However, in 

conforming WIC income guidelines to 

State or local health care guidelines, the 

State cannot establish WIC guidelines 

which exceed the guidelines for 

reduced-price school meals, or which 

are less than 100 percent of the Federal 

poverty guidelines. Consistent with the 

method used to compute income 

eligibility guidelines for reduced-price 

meals under the National School Lunch 

Program, the poverty guidelines were 

multiplied by 1.85 and the results 

rounded upward to the next whole 

dollar. At this time, the Department is 

publishing the maximum and minimum 

WIC income eligibility guidelines by 

household size for the period July 1, 

2012, through June 30, 2013. Consistent 

with section 17(f)(17) of the Child 

Nutrition Act of 1966, as amended (42 

U.S.C. 1786(f)(17)), a State agency may 

implement the revised WIC income 

eligibility guidelines concurrently with 

the implementation of income eligibility 

guidelines under the Medicaid Program 

established under Title XIX of the Social 

Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396, et seq.). 

State agencies may coordinate 

implementation with the revised 

Medicaid guidelines, i.e., earlier in the 

year, but in no case may 

implementation take place later than 

July 1, 2012. 

State agencies that do not coordinate 

implementation with the revised 

Medicaid guidelines must implement 

the WIC income eligibility guidelines on 

July 1, 2012. The first table of this 

Notice contains the income limits by 

household size for the 48 contiguous 

States, the District of Columbia, and all 

Territories, including Guam. 

INCOME ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES

[Effective from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013] 

Household size 

Federal poverty guidelines—100% Reduced price meals—185% 

Annual Monthly Twicemonthly Bi-weekly Weekly Annual Monthly Twicemonthly Bi-weekly Weekly 

48 Contiguous States, D.C., Guam and Territories 

1 ................................................................ $11,170 $931 $466 $430 $215 $20,665 $1,723 $862 $795 $398 

2 ................................................................ 15,130 1,261 631 582 291 27,991 2,333 1,167 1,077 539 

3 ................................................................ 19,090 1,591 796 735 368 35,317 2,944 1,472 1,359 680 

4 ................................................................ 23,050 1,921 961 887 444 42,643 3,554 1,777 1,641 821 

5 ................................................................ 27,010 2,251 1,126 1,039 520 49,969 4,165 2,083 1,922 961 

6 ................................................................ 30,970 2,581 1,291 1,192 596 57,295 4,775 2,388 2,204 1,102 

7 ................................................................ 34,930 2,911 1,456 1,344 672 64,621 5,386 2,693 2,486 1,243 

8 ................................................................ 38,890 3,241 1,621 1,496 748 71,947 5,996 2,998 2,768 1,384 

Each add’l family member add ................. +3,960 +330 +165 +153 +77 +7,326 +611 +306 +282 +141 

Alaska 

1 ................................................................ 13,970 1,165 583 538 269 25,845 2,154 1,077 995 498 

2 ................................................................ 18,920 1,577 789 728 364 35,002 2,917 1,459 1,347 674 

3 ................................................................ 23,870 1,990 995 919 460 44,160 3,680 1,840 1,699 850 

4 ................................................................ 28,820 2,402 1,201 1,109 555 53,317 4,444 2,222 2,051 1,026 

5 ................................................................ 33,770 2,815 1,408 1,299 650 62,475 5,207 2,604 2,403 1,202 

6 ................................................................ 38,720 3,227 1,614 1,490 745 71,632 5,970 2,985 2,756 1,378 

7 ................................................................ 43,670 3,640 1,820 1,680 840 80,790 6,733 3,367 3,108 1,554 

8 ................................................................ 48,620 4,052 2,026 1,870 935 89,947 7,496 3,748 3,460 1,730 

Each add’l family member add ................. +4,950 +413 +207 +191 +96 +9,158 +764 +382 +353 +177 

Hawaii 

1 ................................................................ 12,860 1,072 536 495 248 23,791 1,983 992 916 458 

2 ................................................................ 17,410 1,451 726 670 335 32,209 2,685 1,343 1,239 620 

3 ................................................................ 21,960 1,830 915 845 423 40,626 3,386 1,693 1,563 782 

4 ................................................................ 26,510 2,210 1,105 1,020 510 49,044 4,087 2,044 1,887 944 

5 ................................................................ 31,060 2,589 1,295 1,195 598 57,461 4,789 2,395 2,211 1,106 

6 ................................................................ 35,610 2,968 1,484 1,370 685 65,879 5,490 2,745 2,534 1,267 

7 ................................................................ 40,160 3,347 1,674 1,545 773 74,296 6,192 3,096 2,858 1,429 

8 ................................................................ 44,710 3,726 1,863 1,720 860 82,714 6,893 3,447 3,182 1,591 

Each add’l family member add ................. +4,550 +380 +190 +175 +88 +8,418 +702 +351 +324 +162 

Because the poverty guidelines for 

Alaska and Hawaii are higher than for 

the 48 contiguous States, separate tables 

for Alaska and Hawaii have been 

included for the convenience of the 

State agencies. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1786. 

Dated: March 19, 2012. 

Jeffrey J. Tribiano, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7037 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Kootenai National Forest, Cabinet 

Ranger District, Montana Pilgrim 

Timber Sale Project 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
17008 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 

SUMMARY: This vegetation management 

project is designed to achieve goals of 

enhanced forest stand resilience and 

resistance to insect and disease agents 

by altering stand density, species 

composition, and age class structure, via 

use of timber harvesting and prescribed 

fire use. Big game forage would be 

enhanced through use of prescribed fire 

to rejuvenate and increase palatability of 

shrubs and grasses, including some sites 

within Inventoried Roadless Areas 

(IRA). No mechanical activities are 

proposed within IRA boundaries. 

This Project was originally initiated in 

2010 with scoping of the proposed 

action. In addition, in 2011 public 

scoping was again initiated in reference 

to openings sizes exceeding 40 acres 

and the requirement for a projectspecific Forest Plan amendment related 

to open road density in areas managed 

for big game summer range. Subsequent 

analyses of potential environmental 

effects were documented in an 

Environmental Assessment (EA). Based 

on the level of interest, and recognizing 

the scope and potential issues 

associated with the project, as the Forest 

Supervisor for the Kootenai National 

Forest I have made the decision to halt 

the EA process and commence with the 

process to document findings in an 

Environmental Impact Statement. The 

comments received during the scoping 

process for the Environmental 

Assessment will be used in preparation 

of the EIS; therefore scoping will not be 

reinitiated. 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis must be received by 

April 23, 2012. The draft environmental 

impact statement is expected May 2012 

and the final environmental impact 

statement is expected September 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

Kootenai National Forest, Pilgrim 

Timber Sale Project, Cabinet Ranger 

District, 2693 Highway 200, Trout 

Creek, MT 59874. Comments may also 

be sent via email to: commentsnorthern-kootenai-cabinet-fs.fed.us, or 

via facsimile to 406/827–0718. 

Electronic comments must be submitted 

in Microsoft Word format. It is 

important that reviewers provide their 

comments at such times and in such a 

way that they are useful to the Agency’s 

preparation of the EIS. Therefore, 

comments should be provided prior to 

the close of the comment period and 

should clearly articulate the reviewer’s 

concerns and contentions specific to the 

Proposal. 

Comments received in response to 

this solicitation, including the names 

and addresses of those who comment, 

will be part of the public record for this 

proposed action. Comments submitted 

anonymously will be accepted and 

considered, however. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doug Grupenhoff, Team Leader, (406) 

827–3533 or to the Kootenai National 

Forest Web page: http://www.fs.fed.us/ 

nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=31645. 

Individuals who use telecommunication 

devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 

a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday 

through Friday. 

Individuals who use 

telecommunication devices for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday. 

Purpose and Need for Action 

There is a need to reduce stand 

densities, improve growing conditions, 

and increase the proportion of root 

disease-resistant tree species in the area; 

there is a need to increase age class 

diversity in lodgepole pine-dominated 

forest communities in the project area; 

there is a need to provide local 

employment related to forest 

management and restoration activities 

and to supply forest products to 

contribute to the support of that 

segment of the local and regional 

economy dependent on timber products; 

and, there is a need to improve forage 

production and quality through the use 

of such treatments as commercial timber 

harvest, slashing, and prescribed fire. 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action includes timber 

harvest, prescribed burning, and road 

work necessary to provide safe access to 

the proposed treatment areas while 

minimizing resource impacts, as 

summarized below: 

Approximately 500 acres of 

regeneration harvest are proposed, most 

of which would be removed with cable 

logging systems. Approximately 55–75 

acres would be tractor yarded. These 

treatment areas are generally located 

where lodgepole pine is susceptible to 

mountain pine beetle attack or is 

currently infested, or in areas where 

Douglas-fir or true firs are infected with 

root disease at unacceptably high levels. 

In the latter case, we propose to increase 

the proportion of root disease resistant 

species (such as western larch, western 

white pine, or ponderosa pine) on the 

site to maintain viable forest 

communities over time. This can be 

done by favoring these species in the 

residual stand or by replanting these 

species after harvest if they are not well 

represented in the original stand. For 

most areas where regeneration harvest is 

proposed in lodgepole pine stands, we 

will generally propose to allow natural 

revegetation of the site back to 

lodgepole pine. 

Approximately 900 acres of 

intermediate harvest is proposed; 

approximately one third will be tractor 

yarded and two thirds will require the 

use of a cable system. These commercial 

thinning treatments would leave a fully 

stocked stand after harvest with the 

objective of improving growing 

conditions for the residual trees. 

To access proposed harvest areas, 

approximately 3.1 miles of new, 

permanent road would need to be 

constructed and approximately 1.8 

miles of temporary road would be 

constructed and removed following 

completion of treatment activities. In 

addition, approximately 26 miles of 

road reconditioning to bring roads up to 

current standards of surface water 

management and provide for safe 

hauling. Approximately 6,950 acres 

have been identified as a perimeter for 

prescribed burning to enhance forage 

quality and quantity for big game 

species, notably elk, deer, and bears. 

Generally, these areas are on southerly 

aspects that have historically provided 

important forage which is declining due 

to conifer encroachment and forage 

senescence. Prescribed burns would 

occur during the cooler, moister spring 

period when the risk of large, high 

intensity fires is lower. On a yearly 

basis, depending on conditions, it is 

estimated that ignition would be 

unlikely to exceed 1,000 acres per year. 

Portions of three Inventoried Roadless 

Areas (IRAs) are located within the 

Project Area and occupy a total of 

approximately 13,843 acres, or about 

46% of the area. There are no harvest 

activities proposed within these 

roadless areas. Prescribed burning is 

being proposed within portions of these 

IRAs. Burning will be conducted in a 

manner so as to maintain their natural 

character and improve wildlife habitat. 

Because of the extent of a current 

mountain pine beetle infestation, larger 

units are proposed to increase the 

amount of lodgepole treated and more 

closely approximate typical patch sizes 

of lodgepole pine in this area while still 

protecting important resources 

including stream integrity and fish 

habitat. Some of these units would 

create openings that would exceed 40 

acres in size, for which approval by the 

Regional Forester is generally required. 

All action alternatives propose 

treatment in MA–12 to meet the purpose 

and need for this project, and this 

activity requires the use of roads within 

MA–12 which are currently closed. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 17009 

Additionally, some alternatives propose 

new road construction within MA–12. 

This would result in exceeding the open 

road density standard during the life of 

the project and require a site-specific 

Forest Plan amendment. All roads 

opened for project activities and all 

newly constructed roads would be 

effectively closed after completion of 

project activities, so there would be no 

long term increase in open road 

densities. 

Specifically, the proposed action 

(Alternative 2) would increase ORDs in 

MA–12 to 2.3 miles per square mile 

during harvest activities if all roads 

were open concurrently. Alternative 3 

would result in an ORD of 2.6 miles per 

square mile during operations, and 

Alternative 4 would not change the 

existing condition. Following 

completion of project activities, open 

road densities would return to preproject levels. 

Possible Alternatives 

Four alternatives have been 

identified; the No Action, the Proposed 

Action described in this Notice of 

Intent, an action alternative that more 

specifically addresses concerns and 

issues related to an on-going, aggressive 

expansion of mountain pine beetle 

activity into stands dominated by 

lodgepole pine, and an action 

alternative that would address concerns 

regarding new road construction which 

would accomplish stand treatments 

using the existing transportation system. 

Responsible Official 

As the Kootenai National Forest 

Supervisor, I am the responsible official 

for this decision. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

My decision will be whether or not to 

implement the proposed action as 

described, including timber harvest, 

road work, prescribed burning to 

enhance big game forage, approval of a 

project-specific amendment to the 

Forest Plan for open road density in 

MA–12, changes in some Management 

Area designation for difficult 

regeneration sites, and to exceed the 40 

acre opening size limit under the 

National Forest Management Act (1976), 

or to implement an alternative course of 

action, as expressed in alternatives to 

the proposed action. 

Scoping Process 

It is important that reviewers provide 

their comments at such times and in 

such manner that they are useful to the 

agency’s preparation of the 

environmental impact statement. 

Therefore, comments should be 

provided prior to the close of the 

comment period and should clearly 

articulate the reviewer’s concerns and 

contentions. 

Comments received in response to 

this solicitation, including names and 

addresses of those who comment, will 

be part of the public record for this 

proposed action. Comments submitted 

anonymously will be accepted and 

considered, however. 

Dated: March 8, 2012. 

Paul Stantus, 

Acting Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7052 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL 

COORDINATOR FOR ALASKA 

NATURAL GAS TRANSPORTATION 

PROJECTS 

Review of Federal Permit Conditions 

AGENCY: Office of the Federal 

Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas 

Transportation Projects. 

ACTION: Notice and request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The Office of the Federal 

Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas 

Transportation Projects is proposing to 

implement its statutory responsibilities 

under the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline 

Act (15 U.S.C. 720) with respect to 

federal permit conditions imposed on 

the gas pipeline project. This policy 

statement will establish the agency’s 

procedures for determining whether 

certain conditions included in a 

certificate, right-of-way, permit, lease, or 

other authorization for an Alaska 

natural gas transportation project by 

other federal agencies are prohibited 

under the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline 

Act. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

April 23, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments 

concerning this notice to Frank 

Richards, Deputy Federal Coordinator, 

Office of the Federal Coordinator for 

Alaska Natural Gas Transportation 

Projects; 188 W. Northern Lights Blvd., 

Suite 600; Anchorage, AK 99503. 

Submit electronic comments to: 

frichards@arcticgas.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Frank Richards, Deputy Federal 

Coordinator, Alaska Natural Gas 

Transportation Projects, 907–271–5240. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Congress enacted the Alaska Natural 

Gas Pipeline Act in 2004 (15 U.S.C. 720) 

to encourage completion of a pipeline to 

deliver natural gas from Alaska’s North 

Slope to the Lower 48 states. The Alaska 

Natural Gas Pipeline Act establishes a 

new process for approval and 

construction of the pipeline, either a 

project that completes the Alaska 

Natural Gas Transportation System that 

President Carter approved in 1977 

pursuant to the Alaska Natural Gas 

Transportation Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 

719), or a different pipeline project 

under the Natural Gas Act. The Alaska 

Natural Gas Pipeline Act of 2004 created 

the Office of the Federal Coordinator for 

Alaska Natural Gas Transportation 

Projects and charged the Federal 

Coordinator, the agency head, with four 

primary responsibilities: (1) Coordinate 

the expeditious discharge of all 

activities by all federal agencies with 

respect to an Alaska natural gas 

pipeline; (2) Ensure that all federal 

agencies comply with the Alaska 

Natural Gas Pipeline Act; (3) Prohibit 

federal agencies from imposing permit 

conditions that would prevent or impair 

in any significant respect the 

expeditious construction and operation 

of the project unless the conditions are 

required by law. The act directs the 

Federal Coordinator to determine 

whether a term or condition would 

prevent or impair in any significant 

respect the expeditious construction 

and operation of the project; and (4) 

Participate with the state of Alaska in a 

joint construction surveillance and 

monitoring agreement. 

In addition, Congress transferred to 

the Federal Coordinator all of the 

responsibilities and authorities of the 

Federal Inspector under the Alaska 

Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1976. 

These responsibilities will be applicable 

if the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation 

System gas line is completed or if the 

1980’s prebuilt sections of that project 

are expanded or modified within the 

United States to handle Alaska gas. 

This policy addresses the third of the 

four statutory requirements listed above 

by explaining how the Federal 

Coordinator will determine whether 

conditions that federal agencies intend 

to impose on permits, rights-of-way or 

other authorizations for an Alaska gas 

transportation project will prevent or 

impair in any significant respect the 

expeditious construction and operation 

of the project. 

Several sections of the Alaska Natural 

Gas Pipeline Act require the Federal 

Coordinator to consider permit 

conditions imposed by federal agencies 

with respect to the pipeline. Section 

106(d)(2), Public Law 108–324, 118 Stat. 

1255 prohibits agencies from including 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES