64658 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 210 / Monday, October 30, 2000 / Notices

handling, to assist in the development

of standards for substances to be used in

organic production and to advise the

Secretary on any other aspects of the

implementation of OFPA. The NOSB

met for the first time in Washington,

D.C., in March 1992 and currently has

five committees working on various

aspects of the program. The committees

are: Accreditation, Crops, Livestock,

Materials, and Processing.

In August of 1994, the NOSB

provided its initial recommendations for

the National Organic Program (NOP) to

the Secretary of Agriculture. Since that

time the NOSB has submitted 30

addenda to its recommendations and

reviewed more than 170 substances for

inclusion on the National List of

Allowed and Prohibited Substances.

The last meeting of the NOSB was held

on June 6–8, 2000, in Washington, DC.

The Department of Agriculture

(USDA) published its re-proposed

National Organic Program regulation in

the Federal Register on March 13, 2000

(65 FR 13512). Comments were accepted

until June 12, 2000. Forty thousand

seven hundred and seventy four

(40,774) comments were received

during the comment period.

Purpose and Agenda

The principal purposes of this

meeting are to provide an opportunity

for the NOSB to: receive committee

reports; receive an update from the

Aquatic Task Force Working Group;

receive an update from the USDA/NOP;

and review materials for possible

inclusion on, or removal from, the

National List of Approved and

Prohibited Substances. Materials to be

reviewed at the meeting are periacetic

acid, calcium borogluconate, animal

enzymes, leather meal and sodium

chlorate. For further information see

http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop. Copies

of the NOSB meeting agenda can be

requested from Mrs. Toni Strother,

USDA–AMS–TMP–NOP, Room 2510–

So., Ag Stop 0268, P.O. Box 96456,

Washington, D.C. 20090–6456; by phone

at (202) 720–3252; or by accessing the

NOP website at http://

www.ams.usda.gov/nop.

Type of Meeting

This meeting is open to the public.

The NOSB has scheduled time for

public input on Wednesday, November

15, 2000, from 2:00 p.m. until 4:30 p.m.

at the USDA Economic Research

Service, 1800 M Street, NW, South

Tower, Waugh Auditorium, 3rd Floor,

Washington, D.C. 20036. Telephone:

(202) 694–5103. Individuals and

organizations wishing to make an oral

presentation at the meeting should

forward their request to Mrs. Toni

Strother at the above address or by FAX

to (202) 205–7808 by close of business

November 13, 2000. While persons

wishing to make a presentation may

sign up at the door, advance registration

will ensure an opportunity to speak

during the allotted time period and will

help the NOSB to better manage the

meeting and accomplish its agenda.

Individuals or organizations will be

given approximately 5 minutes to

present their views. All persons making

an oral presentation are requested to

provide their comments in writing, if

possible. Written submissions may

contain information other than

presented at the oral presentation.

Written comments may be submitted to

the NOSB at the meeting or to Mrs.

Strother after the meeting at the above

address.

Dated: October 26, 2000.

James A. Caron,

Acting Deputy Administrator, Transportation

and Marketing.

[FR Doc. 00–27896 Filed 10–27–00; 12:31

am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Phase 1—Fuels Treatment for

Community Protection Environmental

Impact Statement, Six Rivers National

Forest, Lower Trinity Ranger District,

Humboldt County, California

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement.

SUMMARY: The Six Rivers National

Forest will prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS) on a proposal to

reduce fuels in high severity burned

stands within strategically located fuel

breaks and associated fuel treatment

areas within the Waterman Ridge, Lone

Pine Ridge and Mill Creek areas. Fuels

reduction treatments are proposed on

approximately 931 acres of

merchantable and 187 acres of nonmerchantable stands. Fuel reduction

was identified as a need in the Forestwide Late-Successional Reserve

Assessment (April 1999) and further

developed in the Horse Linto, Mill and

Tish Tang Watershed Assessment

(March 2000). It is the first phase of the

Megram Fire Recovery Strategy

designed to protect communities from

wildlife and extended exposure to

smoke and to restore affected

watersheds. The entire project is in

federal land ownership.

Treatment within merchantable

stands involves the removal of fire and

insect killed commercial wood material

and treatment of the remaining fuels.

Merchantable stands have the size,

quality and condition suitable for

market under current economic

conditions. Treatment of remaining

fuels would use a combination of

methods including: Lop and scatter,

masticating (chipping) of treatment

units or strips along roads and skid

trails, excavator piling, hand piling,

burning of piles and concentration of

fuels (jackpot burning), yarding

unmerchantable material to landings

and burning it, felling unmerchantable

material and burning, and broadcast

burning.

Non-merchantable stands would be

treated to reduce fuels by cutting dead

vegetation and hand piling and burning.

Planting of nursery stock would occur

on understocked acres upon completion

of fuel treatments. Stand tending

treatments include release for conifer

establishment and growth, conifer

thinning and pruning.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of this project should be received in

writing by December 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Please send written

comments to S.E. ‘‘Lou’’ Woltering,

Forest Supervisor, Six Rivers National

Forest, 1330 Bayshore Way, Eureka,

California 95501.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Larson, Lower Trinity District

Ranger, Six Rivers National Forest,

(530) 625–2118; or

Dave Webb, EIS Team Leader, Six

Rivers National Forest, P.O. Box 228,

Gasquet, CA 95543, (707) 457–3131,

extension 120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the

summer and fall of 1999, the Megram

Fire burned approximately 49,400 acres

within the Horse Linto, Mill Creek and

Tish Tang Creek (HLMTT) watersheds.

Subsequent to the Fire, the HLMTT

Watershed Assessment (WA) was

completed in March 2000.

The Megram Recovery Strategy was

prepared in June of 2000, which set

priorities for implementation of the

recommendations made in the WA. The

Watershed Analysis emphasizes the

need to restore watershed functions,

protect remaining mature and old

growth stands from catastrophic loss,

accelerate development of latesuccessional habitat, reduce fuel levels

in strategic locations and create stand

conditions that would lower the

potential for future catastrophic fire

and, at the same time, provide for

community protection from future

wildfires and extended exposure to

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 210 / Monday, October 30, 2000 / Notices 64659

smoke. It also points out that restoring

natural fire regimes to the area is an

ideal way of realizing these goals. Based

on resource needs and public input, the

Forest Strategic Leadership Team

determined that watershed and soil

restoration, along with providing for

community protection for future

wildfires, were the primary focus at this

time.

The proposal is also consistent with

the National Fire Plan that was

developed from the report by the

Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to

the President in response to the

wildfires of 2000 (‘‘Managing the Impact

of Wildfires on Communities and the

Environment’’, September 8, 2000). This

proposal is consistent with two of the

five key points of the Plan: Reducing the

risk of fire through hazardous fuels

reduction and working directly with

communities to ensure adequate

protection. Successful implementation

of the Plan will, in the long term, reduce

the number of small fires that become

large; restore natural ecological systems

to minimize uncharacteristically intense

fires; and reduce the threat to life and

property from catastrophic wildfire. A

key element in the Plan focuses on

collaboration with communities,

interest groups, State and Federal

agencies and tribal governments.

The Megram Fire created extensive

areas of dead and dying trees and shrubs

dispersed across a landscape that

already had high historic vegetation

densities and high fuel loading. In

addition, a tremendous number of snags

were created and will continue to be

created within the severely burned areas

as trees are killed by insects and burnrelated stress. This extensive snag

component, in combination with the

relatively high lightning occurrence in

the area and a hazardous fuel situation,

increases the probability of future

lightning ignitions and potentially large

stand-replacing wildfires. The extent

and distribution of this fire hazard and

risk present a substantial threat to local

communities, both from wildfires and

high levels of smoke. Fears and

concerns of long-term public health

issues are significant to the local

communities, as is preventing a similar

future fire from occurring. Wildlife

protection of local communities and

Tribal Trust responsibilities for the

Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation are

critical components of this proposal.

Active management would be

instrumental in reducing this risk. One

such management strategy, a system of

fuel breaks with associated fuel

treatment areas, was identified in the

Forest-Wide Late-Successional Reserve

Assessment and further developed

within the HLMTT WA. Proposed

activities within fuel breaks and

associated fuel treatment areas include

treatments necessary to modify areas

with high concentrations of standing

dead and down trees or brush to a more

open fuel type. Fuel breaks and fuel

treatment areas would be located

strategically on ridges or natural land

features, on the upper 1⁄3 of slopes or

along a road. Most of the areas proposed

for treatment are located on south and

west facing slopes because these slopes

are generally drier and would burn

hotter than north and east facing slopes.

In addition, the location of these areas

is related to suppression capability and

availability of resources.

Phase 1 would reduce fuels in both

merchantable and non-merchantable

stands in the Horse Linto and Mill Creek

watersheds within the Waterman Ridge,

Lone Pine Ridge and Mill Creek areas.

Fuels reduction would only occur in

those stands that have vegetation

mortality of 60 percent or greater, that

are not suitable survey and manage

species habitat, and are located within

the areas identified for community

protection. There are other areas with

mortality greater than 60 percent

containing merchantable and nonmerchantable stands that will not be

treated because these areas do not

provide for strategic community

protection. Fuels reduction would not

occur in the Tish Tang watershed,

which is within the Orleans Mountain

‘‘C’’ Roadless Area.

Water quality parameters are

important to the analysis area, which

include temperature, sediment and

turbidity. These parameters are the most

critical water quality parameters for

beneficial uses within the analysis area

since they can be modified by land

management activities. Future wildfires

in these areas would tend to burn with

high severity again, which would

increase the likelihood of future

accelerated surface erosion and possibly

mass-wasting, delivering sediment to

fish-bearing streams.

Treatment of merchantable stands

would include the removal of fire and

insect killed commercial wood material,

treatment of remaining fuels,

reforestation and stand tending. Stand

tending treatments would include

release for conifer establishment and

growth, conifer thinning and pruning.

Live trees would be retained, as well as

sufficient numbers of large, dead trees

within each stand to meet Forest

standards and guidelines for snag

retention. However, for units within fuel

breaks, lower densities of snags would

be left on ridge tops for firefighter safety

and to facilitate fire suppression.

Treatment of remaining fuels would use

a combination of methods including:

lop and scatter, masticating (chipping)

of treatment units or strips along roads

and skid trails, excavator piling, hand

piling, burning of piles and

concentration of fuels (jackpot burning),

yarding unmerchantable material to

landings and burning, felling

unmerchantable material and burning,

and broadcast burning. Reforestation

would be accomplished through

retention of pockets of natural

regeneration and/or by hand planting of

nursery stock. Stand tending would be

long term and directed towards creating

stands with non-continuous fuel ladders

that are less conducive to high intensity

crown fires.

Three merchantable stands (six acres)

would be treated within Waterman

Ridge. For all three, commercial

material would be removed by tractor,

with approximately 0.2 miles of

temporary roads constructed to access

one merchantable stand.

Twenty-eight merchantable stands

(267 acres) would be treated within the

Mill Creek area. Merchantable material

would re removed by helicopter from 22

stands (228 acres) and by tractor from

six stands (39 acres). Approximately

0.35 miles of existing roads and 0.45

miles of existing temporary roads would

be reopened to access three stands.

Fifty-eight merchantable stands (658

acres) would be treated within the Lone

Pine Ridge area. Merchantable material

would be removed by helicopter from

17 stands (256 acres), by tractor from 28

stands (173 acres) and by cable from 13

stands (229 acres). Approximately 0.1

miles of new temporary road would be

constructed to access one stand and

approximately 1.05 miles of existing

roads and 0.75 miles of existing

temporary roads would be reopened to

access seven stands.

One non-merchantable plantation (17

acres) would be treated within

Waterman Ridge to reduce fuel loading.

This plantation was heavily stocked

with hardwoods before the Megram

Fire. Fire-killed vegetation would be

removed using commercial and/or

personal use firewood permits. The

temporary road used to access an

adjoining merchantable stand would be

extended approximately 0.1 mile along

Waterman Ridge. Slash resulting from

this treatment would be piled and

burned. The stand would be reforested

using nursery stock, with stand tending

occurring over the long term.

Two non-merchantable stands would

be treated within the Mill Creek Area to

reduce fuel loading. In one stand, a

plantation (45 acres) of fire-killed

vegetation would be cut, live trees

64660 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 210 / Monday, October 30, 2000 / Notices

would be pruned and cut vegetation

would be hand piled and burned. A

portion of this stand would need

reforestation. In the other stand, a

natural stand (56 acres), merchantable

trees would be retained and nonmerchantable trees and brush would be

cut, hand piled and burned.

Reforestation would be accomplished

through retention of pockets of natural

regeneration and by hand planting of

nursery stock. Stand tending would

occur over the long term.

Five non-merchantable stands (69

acres), all plantations, would be treated

within the Lone Pine Ridge area to

reduce fuel loading. In two plantations

(16 acres), fire killed vegetation would

be cut, live trees would be pruned and

cut vegetation would be hand piled and

burned. In three plantations (53 acres),

dead trees would be felled, live trees

would be thinned and pruned. In all

five plantations, no reforestation would

occur.

This proposal is Phase 1 in the overall

strategy to protect communities from

wildfires and extended exposure to

smoke and to restore affected

watersheds. Phase II would continue the

work that is proposed in Phase I, by

reducing fuels in unburned and

moderately burned areas within the

strategic fuelbreaks. Connecting the high

severity and less severely burned fuel

treatment areas would create a more

continuous and effective fuelbreak. The

unburned and moderately burned areas

are suitable habitat for survey and

manage species. Surveys for these

species will be initiated during the fall

of 2000 and spring of 2001. Results of

these surveys would be utilized in the

development of Phase II proposed

actions, which would be analyzed under

separate environmental analysis. The

potential foreseeable future actions

under Phase II would be considered in

the cumulative effects analysis

completed for Phase I.

Public participation will be an

integral component of the analysis

process and will be especially important

at several points during the analysis.

During the scoping process, the Forest

Service will seek information,

comments and assistance from Federal,

State, County and local agencies, tribes,

individuals and organizations that may

be interested in or affected by the

proposed activities. The scoping process

will determine the scope of the issues to

be addressed, determine the significant

issues related to the proposed action,

identify and eliminate other issues,

assign tasks and determine disciplines,

determine the existence of related

environmental documents and identify

schedules for analysis and decision

making. Written scoping comments will

be solicited through a scoping package

that will be sent to the project mailing

list and the local newspaper. Public

open houses to present the proposed

action and answer questions will be

held from 7 PM to 9 PM, PST at the

following locations:

• November 8, 2000 at the Trinity

Valley Elementary School, Highway 96,

Willow Creek, CA, 95513

• November 9, 2000 at Redwood

Acres Turf Club, 3750 Harris Street,

Eureka, CA 95501

For the Forest Service to best use the

scoping input, comments should be

received by December 1, 2000. The

scoping package is available by

contacting Dave Webb at the address or

phone number listed above. Tentative

issues that may be analyzed in the EIS

include the potential effects to water

quality and downstream cumulative

watershed impacts to beneficial uses; to

air quality; to threatened, endangered

and sensitive wildlife, plant and fish

species and associated habitat; and to

soil productivity.

Based on the results of scoping and

the resource conditions within the

project area, alternatives (including a

no-action alternative) will be developed

for the draft EIS. The draft EIS is

projected to be filed with the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

in February 2001. The final EIS is

anticipated in April 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.

To assist the Forest Service in

identifying and considering issues and

concerns on the proposed action,

comments should be as specific as

possible. 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 the 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

designated 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.

No Permits or special authorizations

would be required. The Six Rivers

National Forest is the lead agency for

preparation of this document. There are

no cooperating agencies on this project.

Consultation will occur with local

tribes, National Marine Fisheries

Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service. S.E. ‘‘Lou’’ Woltering, Forest

Supervisor, Six Ribers National Forest,

is the responsible official. In making the

decision, the Responsible Official will

consider the comments; responses;

disclosure of environmental

consequences; and applicable laws,

regulations and policies. The

Responsible Official will state the

rationale for the chosen alternative in

the Record of Decision.

Dated: October 23, 2000.

S.E. ‘‘Lou’’ Woltering,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 00–27728 Filed 10–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation

Service

Notice of Proposed Change to Section

IV of the Virginia Field Office Technical

Guide

AGENCY: Natural Resources

Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S.

Department of Agriculture.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of

proposed changes in the Virginia NRCS

Field Office Technical Guide for review

and comment.

SUMMARY: It has been determined by the

NRCS State Conservationist for Virginia

that changes must be made in the NRCS

Field Office Technical Guide

specifically in practice standards:

#7021, Agrichemical Handling Facility;

#314, Brush Management; #327,

Conservation Cover; #328, Conservation

Crop Rotation; #330, Contour Farming;

#329B, Residue Management, Mulch

Till; and #329C, Residue Management,

Ridge Till to account for improved

technology. These practices will be used

to plan and install conservation