69496 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 223 / Friday, November 17, 2000 / Notices

Land Between the Lakes National

Recreation Area, Kentucky and

Tennessee

The Paducah Sun, published daily in

Paducah, KY

National Forests in Mississippi,

Mississippi

Forest Supervisor Decisions: ClarionLedger, published daily in Jackson,

MS

District Ranger Decisions:

Bienville Ranger District: ClarionLedger, published daily in Jackson,

MS

Chickasawhay Ranger District:

Clarion-Ledger, published daily in

Jackson, MS

Delta Ranger District: Clarion-Ledger,

published daily in Jackson, MS

De Soto Ranger District: Clarion

Ledger, published daily in Jackson,

MS

Holly Springs Ranger District:

Clarion-Ledger, published daily in

Jackson, MS

Homochitto Ranger District: ClarionLedger, published daily in Jackson,

MS

Tombigbee Ranger District: ClarionLedger, published daily in Jackson,

MS

National Forests in North Carolina,

North Carolina

Forest Supervisor Decisions: The

Asheville Citizen-Times, published

daily in Asheville, NC

District Ranger Decisions:

Appalachian Ranger District: The

Asheville Citizen-Times, published

daily in Asheville, NC

Cheoah Ranger District: Graham Star,

published weekly (Thursday) in

Robbinsville, NC

Croatan Ranger District: The Sun

Journal, published weekly (Sunday

through Friday) in New Bern, NC

Grandfather Ranger District:

McDowell News, published daily in

Marion, NC

Highlands Ranger District: The

Highlander, published weekly (mid

May–mid Nov Tues & Fri; mid

Nov–mid May Tues only) in

Highlands, NC

Pisgah Ranger District: The Asheville

Citizen-Times, published daily in

Asheville, NC

Tusquitee Ranger District: Cherokee

Scout, published weekly

(Wednesday) in Murphy, NC

Unwharrie Ranger District:

Montgomery Herald, published

weekly (Wednesday) in Troy, NC

Wayah Ranger District: The Franklin

Press, published bi-weekly

(Wednesday and Friday) in

Franklin, NC

Ouachita National Forest, Arkansas,

Oklahoma

Forest Supervisor Decisions: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

District Ranger Decisions:

Caddo Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Cold Springs Ranger District:

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette,

published daily in Little Rock, AR

Fourche Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Jessieville Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Mena Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Oden Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Poteau Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Winona Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Womble Ranger District: Arkansas

Democrat-Gazette, published daily

in Little Rock, AR

Choctaw Ranger District: Tulsa World,

published daily in Tulsa, OK

Kiamichi Ranger District: Tulsa

World, published daily in Tulsa,

OK

Tiak Ranger District: Tulsa World,

published daily in Tulsa, OK

Ozark-St. Francis National Forest:

Arkansas

Forest Supervisor Decisions: The

Courier, published daily (Tuesday

through Sunday) in Russellville, AR

District Ranger Decisions:

Sylamore Ranger District: Stone

County Leader, published weekly

(Tuesday) in Mountain View, AR

Buffalo Ranger District: Newton

County Times, published weekly in

Jasper, AR

Bayou Ranger District: The Courier,

published daily (Tuesday through

Sunday) in Russellville, AR

Pleasant Hill Ranger District: Johnson

County Graphic, published weekly

(Wednesday) in Clarksville, AR

Boston Mountain Ranger District:

Southwest Times Record, published

daily in Fort Smith, AR

Magazine Ranger District: Southwest

Times Record, published daily in

Fort Smith, AR

St. Francis Ranger District: The Daily

World, published daily (Sunday

through Friday) in Helena, AR

National Forests and Grasslands in

Texas, Texas

Forest Supervisor Decisions: The Lufkin

Daily News, published daily in

Lufkin, TX

District Ranger Decisions:

Angelina National Forest: The Lufkin

Daily News, published daily in

Lufkin, TX

Davy Crockett National Forest: The

Lufkin Daily News, published daily

in Lufkin, TX

Sabine National Forest: The Lufkin

Daily News, published daily in

Lufkin, TX

Sam Houston National Forest: The

Courier, published daily in Conroe,

TX

Caddo & LBJ National Grasslands:

Denton Record-Chronicle,

published daily in Denton, TX

The Responsible Official under 36

CFR part 215 gave annual notice in the

Federal Register published on May 18,

2000, of principal newspapers to be

utilized for publishing notices of

proposed actions and of decisions

subject to appeal under 36 CFR 215. The

list of newspapers to be used for 215

notice and decision is corrected as

follows:

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest,

Georgia

District Ranger Decisions:

Oconee Ranger District:

Change:

Monticello News to Eatonton

Messenger, published weekly

(Thursday) in Eatonton, GA

Kisatchie National Forest, Louisiana

District Ranger Decisions:

Calcaseiu Ranger District:

Clarify:

Rapides Parish Area—The Town Talk,

published in Alexandria, LA

Add:

Vernon Parish Area—Leesville Leader,

published daily in Leesville, LA

Dated: November 7, 2000.

David G. Holland,

Deputy Regional Forester.

[FR Doc. 00–29122 Filed 11–16–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Dry Fork Vegetation Restoration EIS—

Lewis and Clark National Forest

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 223 / Friday, November 17, 2000 / Notices 69497

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will

prepare an environmental impact

statement on a proposal to treat

vegetation on approximately 4,100 acres

in Cascade and Judith Basin Counties,

Montana. An assessment titled Dry Fork

Vegetation and Recreation Restoration

Environmental Assessment (EA) was

completed in August 1999 and a

Decision Notice/Finding of No

Significant Impact was released on June

15, 2000. On appeal, a portion of the

decision dealing with vegetative

restoration was reversed. In order to

further the purposes of the National

Environmental Policy Act and to

provide additional disclosure, the

analysis will now be revisited and

documented in an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS).

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of the analysis, issues, the alternatives,

and evaluation of alternatives were

received during development of the EA.

Although no formal scoping period is

proposed for this EIS, comments will be

accepted and an opportunity to

comment on the draft EIS will be

provided.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to

Rick Prausa, Forest Supervisor, Lewis

and Clark National Forest, 1101 15th

Street North, Box 869, Great Falls, MT

59403. Electronic mail may be sent to

comment/rl lewisclark@fs.fed.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Scheer, EIS Team Leader, (406)

791–7700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest

Service proposes to treat vegetation on

approximately 4,100 acres in the Dry

Fork of Belt Creek drainage on the Kings

Hill Ranger District of the Lewis and

Clark National Forest. The entire project

area covers about 40,700 acres in the

western portion of the Little Belt

Mountains. The purpose of the

proposed action is to move the

condition of the area’s forest and

grasslands in a direction more closely

approximated under natural conditions

in which fire succession played a larger

role. In addition, the proposed action

will reduce the risk of large wildfire by

reducing fuel accumulation. The

previous EA considered, in detail, five

alternatives for vegetative treatment.

This EIS will include those alternatives,

but will replace Alternative 5 in the EA

with the modified alternative previously

identified for selection in the decision

notice. The alternatives evaluate a

variety of treatment methods, including

timber harvest, prescribed burning, road

construction or reconstruction, and road

closure to address issues and concerns

in the project area.

Decisions To Be Made: The Forest

Supervisor will decide whether and

where vegetative treatment activities

would take place in the project area. He

will decide the number of acres, if any,

on which treatment would take place

and the types of treatment methods to

be used. He will decide when any

management activities would take place,

what mitigation measures would be

implemented to address concerns, and

whether the action requires

amendment(s) to the Lewis and Clark

Forest Plan.

Responsible Official: Rick Prausa,

Forest Supervisor, is the Responsible

Official for making the decision to

implement any of the alternatives

evaluated. He will document his

decision and rationale in a Record of

Decision.

Preliminary Issues: Issues associated

with vegetative treatments that were

identified during scoping and

development of the Environmental

Assessment include impacts of

proposed activities on wildlife and fish

species and their habitat, soil resources,

water quality and water yield, and forest

health.

Public Involvement, Rationale, and

Public Meetings: Initial scoping for this

project began in April 1998. A letter was

sent to 376 individuals requesting

comment on the proposed action. Public

participation, including public

meetings, field trips, and community

involvement, occurred throughout the

development of the EA. Comments were

received on the EA and an opportunity

provided for appeal of the decision. A

portion of the decision resulting from

the EA was reversed on appeal. As

scoping on this proposal has already

taken place during development of the

EA, no formal scoping period or public

meetings on the proposal are being

considered at this time, however, public

participation in this analysis is welcome

at any time. Documenting the analysis

in an Environmental Impact Statement

provides an opportunity to strengthen

the analysis and allow for additional

public review and comment. A 45-day

review period for comments on the Draft

EIS will be provided. Comments

received will be considered and

included in documentation of the Final

EIS. The public is encouraged to take

part in the process and to visit with

Forest Service officials at any time

during the analysis and prior to the

decision. The Forest Service has sought

and will continue to seek information,

comments and assistance from Federal,

State and local agencies and other

individuals or organizations who may

be interested in, or affected by, the

proposed action.

Electronic Access and Filing

Addresses: Comments may be sent by

electronic mail (e-mail) to comment/

r1 lewisclark@fs.fed.us. Please

reference the Dry Fork Vegetation

Restoration EIS on the subject line.

Also, include your name and mailing

address with your comments so

documents pertaining to this project

may be mailed to you.

Estimated Dates for Filing: The Draft

EIS is expected to be filed with the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

and to be available for public review by

December, 2000. At that time EPA will

publish a Notice of Availability of the

draft EIS in the Federal Register. The

comment period on the draft EIS will be

45 days from the date the EPA publishes

the Notice of Availability in the Federal

Register. It is very important that those

interested in the management of this

area participate at that time.

The final EIS is scheduled to be

completed by March, 2001. In the final

EIS, the Forest Service is required to

respond to comments received during

the comment period that pertain to the

environmental consequences of the

action, as well as those pertaining to

applicable laws, regulations, and

policies. These will be considered in

making a decision regarding the

proposal.

The Reviewers Obligation To

Comment: The Forest Service believes it

is important to give reviewers notice at

this early stage 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.

versus NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 533 (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. Wisconsin

Heritages, Inc. versus 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

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.

69498 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 223 / Friday, November 17, 2000 / Notices

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.

Dated: October 11, 2000.

Robin Strathy,

Acting Lewis and Clark Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 00–29476 Filed 11–16–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Opal Creek Scenic Recreation Area

(SRA) Advisory Council

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

SUMMARY: An Opal Creek Scenic

Recreation Area Advisory Council

meeting will convene in Stayton,

Oregon on Monday, December 11, 2000.

The meeting is scheduled to begin at 6

p.m., and will conclude at

approximately 8:30 p.m. The meeting

will be held in the South Room of the

Stayton Community Center located on

400 West Virginia Street in Stayton,

Oregon.

The Opal Creek Wilderness and Opal

Creek Scenic Recreation Area Act of

1996 (Opal Creek Act) (Public Law 104–

208) directed the Secretary of

Agriculture to establish the Opal Creek

Scenic Recreation Area Advisory

Council. The Advisory Council is

comprised of thirteen members

representing state, county and city

governments, and representatives of

various organizations, which include

mining industry, environmental

organizations, inholders in Opal Creek

Scenic Recreation Area, economic

development, Indian tribes, adjacent

landowners and recreation interests.

The council provides advice to the

Secretary of Agriculture on preparation

of a comprehensive Opal Creek

Management Plan for the SRA, and

consults on a periodic and regular basis

on the management of the area. The

tentative agenda will include refining

issue statements and describing the

desired future condition of the SRA.

The public comment period is

tentatively scheduled to begin at 8 p.m.

Time allotted for individual

presentations will be limited to 3

minutes. Written comments are

encouraged, particularly if the material

cannot be presented within the time

limits of the comment period. Written

comments may be submitted prior to the

December 11 meeting by sending them

to Designated Federal Official Stephanie

Phillips at the address given below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

more information regarding this

meeting, contact Designated Federal

Official Stephanie Phillips; Williamette

National Forest, Detroit Ranger District,

HC 73 Box 320, Mill City, OR 97360;

(503) 854–3366.

Dated: November 13, 2000.

Y Robert Iwamoto,

Deputy Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 00–29455 Filed 11–16–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Rural Utilities Service

South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.;

Notice of Intent to Hold A Public

Workshop and Prepare An

Environmental Assessment

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to hold a public

workshop and prepare an

environmental assessment.

SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service

(RUS) intends to hold a public scoping

meeting/workshop and prepare an

environmental assessment (EA) in

connection with possible impacts

related to the construction and

operation of a combined cycle

combustion turbine generation facility.

The project is proposed by South Texas

Electric Cooperative (STEC), of Nursery,

Texas and Medina Electric Cooperative,

Inc., of Victoria, Texas. RUS may

provide financing assistance for the

project. RUS will conduct a public

scoping meeting/workshop at the Sam

Rayburn Generating Plant Pavilion,

which is located three miles west of

Nursery, Texas on FM 447. The

meeting/workshop will be held on

Wednesday, December 6, 2000, from

6:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m.

FOR FUTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dennis E. Rankin, Environmental

Protection Specialist, RUS, Engineering

and Environmental Staff, Stop 1571,

1400 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20250–1571, telephone:

(202) 720–1953 or e-mail: or Joe Araiza,

Project Manager, Burns and McDonnell,

1776 Yorktown, Suite 840, Houston,

Texas 77056, telephone: (713) 622–0224

or e-mail: jaraiza@burnsmcd.com.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: STEC and

Medina are proposing to construct a 3-

on-1 LM6000 combined-cycle

combustion turbine 186 MW generation

plant available for commercial dispatch

in January 2003. The preferred site is

the existing Sam Rayburn Plant, which

is located in Nursery, Texas. The

existing plant infrastructure will be

utilized for this new generation addition

including existing gas lines, cooling

water ponds and switchyard.

Alternatives to be considered by RUS

include no action, load management

and energy conservation, purchase

power, alternative generators and

alternative sites.

Comments regarding the proposed

project may be submitted in writing at

the public meeting/workshop or in

writing no later than January 5, 2001, to

RUS at the address provided above.

An environmental assessment (EA)

will be prepared for the proposed

project. Based on a review of the

Environmental Assessment and other

relevant information, RUS will

determine if the preparation of an

environmental impact statement is

necessary. Should RUS determine that

the preparation of an environmental

impact statement is not necessary, it

will prepare a Finding of No Significant

Impact.

Any final action by RUS related to the

proposed project will be subject to, and

contingent upon, compliance with all

relevant Federal, State and local

environmental laws and regulations and

completion of the environmental review

procedures as prescribed by RUS’s

Environmental Policies and Procedures.

Dated: November 13, 2000.

Glendon D. Deal,

Acting Director, Engineering and

Environmental Staff.

[FR Doc. 00–29483 Filed 11–16–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR

SEVERELY DISABLED

Procurement List; Proposed Additions

and Deletions

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From

People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed additions to and

deletions from procurement list.