Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 96 /Tuesday, May 19, 1998 / Notices 27557

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 scoping 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

developing issues and alternatives. To

assist the Forest Service in identifying

and considering issues on the proposed

action, comments should be as specific

as possible. 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.

John R. Logan, District Ranger, is the

responsible official for this

environmental impact statement. His

address is U.S. Forest Service, Gardiner

Ranger District, P.O. Box 5, Gardiner,

MT 59030.

Dated: May 4, 1998.

David P. Garber,

Forest Supervisor, Gallatin National Forest.

[FR Doc. 98–13285 Filed 5–18–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Timber Harvest, Reforestation, Road

Construction and Road Closure Near

Buck Creek, Taylor Creek and Eldridge

Creek Drainages; Gallatin National

Forest, Gallatin County, Montana

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service,

will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to disclose the

environmental effects of timber harvest,

reforestation, and road construction and

closure in the vicinity of Buck Creek,

Taylor Creek and Eldridge Creek

drainages (herein referred to as the

Taylor Fork Project), located in the

Madison Mountain range, Gallatin

National Forest, Hebgen Lake Ranger

District, Gallatin County, Montana. The

Taylor Fork project is one of several

projects being proposed on the Gallatin

National Forest to contribute timber

volume to facilitate acquisition of

approximately 54,000 acres of lands

currently owned by Big Sky Lumber

Company (BSL) located within the

proclamation boundary of the Gallatin

National Forest. These lands are

checkerboard inholdings that originate

as part of the construction grants given

to the Northern Pacific Railway

Company by the Federal Government in

the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. In

addition, this project will contribute

toward providing a flow of wood

products from National Forest lands.

The Gallatin National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan (Forest

Plan) provides overall guidance for land

management activities, including timber

and road management, within the area.

The proposed actions of timber harvest,

reforestation, road reconstruction, road

construction, and road closures are

being considered together because they

represent either connected or

cumulative actions as defined by the

Council on Environmental Quality (40

CFR 1508.25). This EIS will tier to the

Gallatin Forest Plan Final EIS

(September, 1987).

DATES: Written comments and

suggestions should be on or before June

18, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

and suggestions on the proposed

management activities or a request to be

placed on the project mailing list to Stan

Benes, District Ranger, Hebgen Lake

Ranger District, Gallatin National Forest,

P.O. Box 520, West Yellowstone,

Montana 59758.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Julie Shea, EIS Team Leader, Forest

Ecology Group, Gallatin National Forest,

Phone (406) 585–1655.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Timber

harvest and reforestation is proposed on

approximately 560 acres of forested land

in the Taylor Fork project area, which

has been designated as suitable for

timber management by the Gallatin

Forest Plan. The timber harvest

operations and general administration of

National Forest lands will require

construction up to 3.0 miles of new

roads and reconditioning up to 12.0

miles of existing road. The EIS will also

analyze a proposal of restoring up to 50

miles of existing road that currently are

not open to public use.

The Gallatin Forest Plan provides the

overall guidance for management

activities in the potentially affected area

through its goals, objectives, standards

and guidelines, and management area

direction. The primary purpose of this

project is to utilize available timber

volume within the Taylor Fork area as

one of several federal exchange assets to

be used to facilitate acquisition of

approximately 54,000 acres of lands

currently owned by BSL located within

the proclamation boundary of the

Gallatin National Forest. These lands

are checkerboard inholdings that

originate as part of the construction

grants given to the Northern Pacific

Railway Company by the Federal

Government in the late 1800’s and early

1900’s.

Another purpose for the BSL/Taylor

Fork Timber Sale proposal is to

contribute toward providing a flow of

wood products from National Forest

lands identified as ‘‘suitable’’ for timber

production, as directed in the Gallatin

Forest Plan (Forest Plan, pg. II–1). The

forested areas being considered for

harvest are identified as productive

Forest lands available for timber harvest

provided grizzly bear habitat objectives

are met. The purpose of road

construction and reconstruction is to

access stands of timber to be harvested.

All new roads will be effectively closed

to vehicle travel after completion of

post-sale activities.

The purpose of closing roads is to

minimize future road maintenance

costs, reduce sedimentation, and to

regulate overall open road density to

maintain or improve big game habitat

security.

The project area consists of

approximately 560 acres of National

Forest land located in T8S, R3E, Sec 22

and 26; and T9S, R3E, Sec 10, 11, 15

and 16, P.M. MT. Road work is

proposed across private land in T8S,

R3E, Sec 27 and 35. The majority of the

harvesting would occur within the

Taylor Creek and Eldridge Creek area,

and south of Buck Creek located in the

Madison Mountain range.

The areas of proposed timber harvest

and reforestation would occur within

Management Area 13. Timber harvest

would occur only on suitable timber

land. Road construction and

reconstruction would occur in this

management area plus Management

Area 7 when crossing streams. Below is

a brief description of the applicable

management direction.

Management Area 13—This

management area consists of forested,

occupied grizzly bear habitat. The

productive Forest lands area available

for timber harvest provided grizzly bear

habitat objectives are met. Management

goals for MA 13 include: (1) managing

vegetation to provide habitat necessary

to recover the grizzly bear; (2) meet

grizzly bear mortality reduction goals as

established by the Interagency Grizzly

Bear Committee; (3) allow a level of

timber harvest compatible with Goal 1;

and (4) meet State water quality

standards and maintain stream channel

stability.

Management Area 7—These are

riparian zones or areas where vegetation
27558 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 96 /Tuesday, May 19, 1998 / Notices

is present that requires either free or

unbounded water or soil moistures in

excess of what is normally found in the

area. Lands within this management

area are suitable for timber harvest as

long as soil, water, vegetation, fish, and

dependent wildlife species are

protected. These suitable lands must

also be adjacent to other management

areas suitable for timber management.

The Forest Service will consider a

range of alternatives. One of these will

be the ‘‘no action’’ alternative, in which

none of the proposed activities would

be implemented. Additional alternatives

will examine varying levels and

locations for the proposed activities in

response to issues and other resource

values.

The EIS will analyze the direct,

indirect, and cumulative environmental

effects of the alternatives. Past, present,

and projected activities on both private

and National Forest lands will be

considered, including the effects caused

by recent and past harvesting and road

construction on private lands. The EIS

will disclose the analysis of site-specific

mitigation measures and their

effectiveness.

Public participation is an important

part of the analysis, commencing with

the initial scoping process (40 CFR

1501.7), which will occur during May

1998. In addition to this initial scoping,

the public may visit Forest Service

officials at any time during the analysis

and prior to the decision. The Forest

Service will be seeking 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. No public meetings are

scheduled at this time.

Comments from the public and other

agencies will be used in preparation of

the Draft EIS. The scoping process will

be used to:

1. Identify potential issues.

2. Identify issues to be analyzed in

depth.

3. Eliminate insignificant issues or

those which have been covered by a

relevant previous environmental

analysis, such as the Gallatin Forest

Plan EIS.

4. Identify alternatives to the

proposed action.

5. Identify potential environmental

effects of the proposed action and

alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and

cumulative effects).

6. Determine potential cooperating

agencies and task assignments.

The following principle issues have

been identified so far:

1. The potential effect of proposed

timber harvest and associated road

development on grizzly bear habitat

(primarily security and cover).

2. The potential of proposed timber

harvest and associated road

development activities to displace

grizzly bears use within the sale area.

3. The potential for proposed harvest

and associated road development to

affect water quality and stream

conditions.

Other issues commonly associated

with timber harvesting and road

construction include: effects on native

fisheries, old growth habitat, big game

species, sensitive wildlife and plant

species, cultural resources, soils, and

scenery in the area. This list will be

verified, expanded, or modified based

on public scoping for this proposal.

The Draft EIS is expected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and available for public

review in August of 1998. At that time,

the 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’s notice of availability

appears in the Federal Register. It is

every important that those interested in

management of the Taylor Fork project

area participate at that time. The Final

EIS is scheduled to be completed by

mid-November, 1998.

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, 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. 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 30-

day scoping 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

developing issues and alternatives. To

assist the Forest Service in identifying

and considering issues, comments

should be as specific to this proposal as

possible. 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.

I am the responsible official for this

environmental impact statement. My

address is Gallatin National Forest, P.O.

Box 130, Federal Building, Bozeman,

MT 59771.

Dated: May 6, 1998.

David P. Garber,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 98–13287 Filed 5–18–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

DOC has submitted to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) for

clearance the following proposal for

collection of information under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

Agency: Bureau of the Census.

Title: Annual Retail Trade Report.

Form Number(s): B–151, B–151–A, B–

151D, B–153, B–153D.

Agency Approval Number: 0607–

0013.

Type of Request: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

Burden: 9,817 hours.

Number of Respondents: 23,700.

Avg Hours Per Response: 25 minutes.

Needs and Uses: The Bureau of the

Census conducts the Annual Retail

Trade Survey to collect annual totals of

sales, inventories, inventory valuation

methods, purchases, and accounts

receivable balances from a sample of

retail establishments in the United

States. The estimates compiled from this

survey are critical to the accurate

measurement of total economic activity

and are used in computing such

indicators of economic well-being as the

Gross Domestic Product and the

National Income and Product Accounts.

Survey results also provide valuable

information for economic policy

decisions and actions by the

government and are widely used by

private businesses, trade organizations,

professional associations, and others for

market research and analysis.

This request for revision informs

OMB of a recent change in sample

design. This redesign has increased the

number of respondents by about 3,000,

while decreasing, on average, the

number of data requests to each

respondent.