This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

3078

Vol. 63, No. 13

Wednesday, January 21, 1998

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Routt Divide Blowdown Analysis,

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest,

Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger

District, Routt County, CO

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Medicine

Bow-Routt National Forest will prepare

an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) to assess and disclose the

environmental effects of proposed

salvage logging of a portion of the Routt

Divide Blowdown outside the Mount

Zirkel Wilderness Area on the Hans

Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District. The

analysis area location is approximately

24 miles north of Steamboat Springs,

Colorado, in portions of sections 3, 4, 5,

8, 9 and 10 of T9N, R83W; sections 1,

2, and 11 of T9N, R84W; sections 17, 20,

21, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33 and 34 of T10N,

R83W; sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13,

14, 15, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 34, 35 and

36 of T10N, R84W; and sections 33, 34,

35, and 36 of T11N, R84W.

This Notice of Intent is being issued

under the authority of the Routt

National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan and Final EIS of

November 1983, which is the current

guidance for forest management of the

area. It is anticipated that the final

Revised Land and Resource

Management Plan for the Routt National

Forest will be issued before the project

decision for the Routt Divide Blowdown

Analysis is complete. Therefore,

information from the draft Proposed

Revised Land and Resource

Management Plan, issued in January

1996, is also included so readers can

evaluate how the project would fit

within guidance provided by the revised

plan. The project will tier to the plan

that is in effect when the project

decision is made.

The majority of lands affected by the

blowdown event within the analysis

area are currently allocated to

Management Area 4B (wildlife habitat),

as described in the current Forest Land

and Resource Management Plan for the

Routt National Forest, approved in

1983. There are also some inclusions of

blowdown within Management Areas

2A (semiprimitive motorized recreation)

and 6B (range management). The North

Fork and Middle Fork of Elk River are

identified as eligible for consideration

by Congress for Scenic River

designation. Forested lands within

management areas 4B, 6B and 2A are

designated as suitable for timber

production by the forest plan and do

contribute to the Allowable Sale

Quantity (ASQ) calculation. Following

is a summary of the general forest plan

direction for the area.

Management Area 4B—Wildlife

Habitat: Emphasizes wildlife habitat for

one or more indicator species.

Semiprivate motorized recreation

opportunities will be provided, but

vegetation manipulation and human

activities are managed to provide

optimum habitat for the selected

species.

Management Area 2A—Semiprimitive

motorized recreation: Emphasizes

semiprimitive motorized recreation

opportunities such as snowmobiling,

four-wheel driving and motorcycling

both on and off roads and trails in a

naturally appearing environment.

Management activities are visually

subordinate. Timber harvest includes

clearcutting and shelterwood and will

enhance wildlife diversity.

Management area 6B—Rangeland

Management: Emphasizes improving

and/or maintaining rangeland.

Improvements may include seeding,

burning, spraying, crushing, or plowing

as well as structural improvements.

The Forest Plan is being revised as

required by the National Forest

Management Act. The Draft Revised

Land and Resource Management Plan

for the Routt National Forest was issued

in January 1996. The preferred

alternative for the forest plan revision

(Alternative C as described in the DEIS)

allocates the majority of the project area

to management area 5.11 (General Forest

and Rangelands—Forest Vegetation

Emphasis, which provides for a mix of

forest products, forage, wildlife habitat

and recreation), and management area

5.13 (Forest Products, which is managed

to produce commercial wood products).

These lands are included in the ASQ

calculations as suitable lands. The

analysis area also includes lands

allocated to management area 1.32

(Backcountry Recreation with Limited

Motorized Winter Use), which provides

for backcountry recreation opportunities

in a natural-appearing landscape and

continues to consider the North Fork

and Middle Fork of Elk River as eligible

for Scenic River designation. These

lands are not included in the ASQ

calculations as suitable lands.

DATES: Written comments and

suggestions should be postmarked or

received by February 21, 1998. The

estimated date for filing the draft EIS is

March 1998, followed by the final

decision in May 1998.

ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is

Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest Supervisor;

Medicine Bow—Routt National Forest;

925 Weiss Drive; Steamboat Springs, CO

80487–9315. Written comments and

suggestions concerning the scope of the

analysis may be sent to him at that

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Larry Lindner, Interdisciplinary Team

Leader. Phone: 970–870–2220

(Steamboat Springs, CO) or 307–745–

2424 (Laramie, WY).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

October 25, 1997, approximately 20,000

acres of Engelmann spruce and

subalpine fir along the western

boundary of the Mount Zirkel

Wilderness Area were subjected to a

windthrow event. The majority of trees

were windthrown in about 40–50

patches ranging in size from about 50 to

4,000 acres. Approximately 12,000 acres

of windthrow are within the Mount

Zirkel Wilderness and approximately

8,000 acres are outside and to the west

of the wilderness boundary. This Notice

of Intent to prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement concerns a portion of

the blowdown that is within the North

Fork and Middle Fork of Elk River

watersheds outside the Mount Zirkel

Wilderness Area. Additional analysis

responsive to the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) will

be completed for any activities that may

be proposed for the remaining

blowdown area.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 1998 / Notices 3079

Preliminary estimates indicate that as

much as 80 million board feet of timber

may be salvageable within the analysis

area. Insects, rots and stains are

expected to greatly reduce the economic

value of the logs within a few years.

Therefore, a timely decision is needed

to maximize any economic benefit the

people of the United States would

achieve should the decision be made to

salvage the blowdown sawtimber or any

efforts to do so would be foregone.

Proposed Action

To restore recreation opportunities, to

enhance regeneration of stands, and to

use blowdown timber through salvage

logging opportunities in response to the

Routt Divide Blowdown event within

one of the largest patches where road

access already exists. The Forest Service

intends to analyze: (a) The effects of the

blowdown to the natural, social and

economic resources; (b) the

opportunities to mitigate the effects of

the blowdown through salvage logging

or other methods; and (c) the effects of

salvage logging as well as any needed

mitigation measures.

Most projects developed by the Forest

Service are tailored to fit on-the-ground

conditions and must meet numerous

design constraints, such as size and

shape of units, etc. The Routt Divide

Blowdown was a natural disturbance

rather than the result of a planned

activity by the Forest Service. Since the

blowdown was an act of nature rather

than of Forest Service design, some

aspects of projects developed in

response to the blowdown may not look

like projects that are regularly

conceived, designed and implemented

by the Forest Service.

Much of the analysis area has been

inventoried as part of the analysis

process for past and proposed sales, so

there is already specific data and

general information available. The

Interdisciplinary Team will develop a

site specific proposed action as part of

its analysis for disclosure in the draft

EIS. The design of any activities

proposed for the area must be

responsive to the effects of the event

itself and will be guided by applicable

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines.

Should circumstances warrant deviation

from the Forest Plan Standards and

Guidelines, an amendment(s) to the

Plan subject to the NEPA process may

be necessary. Some proposed activities

may be innovative and non-traditional

due to the nature of the blowdown

itself.

This environmental analysis shall

consider the environmental

consequences of the proposed action, as

well as alternatives reasonably

implemented, while meeting the

purpose and need of the action.

Decision To Be Made

The Medicine Bow-Routt Forest

Supervisor will make a decision about

the selection of one alternative among

several concerning whether a portion of

the Routt Divide Blowdown outside

wilderness will be salvage logged and

what mitigation measures will be

required. The issues and alternatives

developed from public comment and

Interdisciplinary Team analysis will be

clearly disclosed in the Environmental

Impact Statement. From the project

record alone, the Forest Supervisor and

others who may review the decision,

will be able to fully understand the

consequences of implementing the

selected alternative.

Preliminary Issues

—Effects to recreation

—Effects to Mount Zirkel Wilderness

area

—Effects to Wild and Scenic River

classification

—Effects to Roadless areas

—Effects to National Forest permittees

—Effects to local communities and

Forest Users

—Effects to channel stability from

increased water yield

—Effects to soil productivity from

surface erosion

—Effects to wildlife and fish, including

Threatened, Endangered and

Sensitive species

—Social effects

—Safety

—Regeneration of new forests in the

blowdown

—Effects of salvage logging

—Effects of road construction required

to salvage logs

—Visual effects (including those

resulting from the need to maintain

roughness, shade and structure within

a contiguous large area of blowdown)

—Potential that the blowdown material

may lead to epidemic levels of insect

populations and the effects of such an

epidemic

Reviewers Obligations

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, 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

draft Environmental Impact Statement

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.

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.

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 or 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 the 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 within 10 days.
3080 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 1998 / Notices

Responsible Official

Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest Supervisor;

Medicine Bow—Routt National Forest;

2468 Jackson Street, Laramie, WY 82070

is the Responsible Official. As the

Responsible Official, I will decide

which, if any of the alternatives to be

described in the draft Environmental

Impact Statement will be implemented.

I will document the decision and the

reasons for my selection of the decision

in the Record of Decision.

Dated: January 14, 1998.

Jerry E. Schmidt,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 98–1324 Filed 1–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–GM–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

National Agricultural Statistics Service

Notice of Intent To Request an

Extension of a Currently Approved

Information Collection

AGENCY: National Agricultural Statistics

Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.

L. 104–13) and Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) regulations at 5 CFR

part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29,

1995), this notice announces the

National Agricultural Statistics Service’s

(NASS) intention to request an

extension of a currently approved

information collection, the Agricultural

Prices that expires May 31, 1998.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be

received by March 27, 1998 to be

assured of consideration.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS:

Contact Rich Allen, Associate

Administrator, National Agricultural

Statistics Service, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, 1400 Independence

Avenue, SW, Room 4117 South

Building, Washington, DC 20250–2000,

(202) 720–4333.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Agricultural Prices.

OMB Number: 0535–0003.

Expiration Date of Approval: May 31,

1998.

Type of Request: To extend a

currently approved information

collection.

Abstract: The primary objective of the

National Agricultural Statistics Service

is to prepare and issue state and

national estimates of crop and livestock

production and prices. The Agricultural

Prices surveys provide estimates of

prices received by farmers and prices

paid for production goods and services

needed by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture. These price estimates are

used to compute Parity Prices in

accordance with requirements of the

Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 as

amended (Title III, Subtitle A, Section

301a). In addition, price data are used

to administer target price provisions

(deficiency payments) of the Food,

Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade

Act of 1990. The Agricultural Prices

Surveys has approval from OMB for a 3-

year period. NASS intends to request

that the survey be approved for another

3 years.

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting

burden for this collection of information

is estimated to average 11 minutes per

response.

Respondents: Individual Job

Applicants.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

81,800.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on

Respondents: 15,000 hours.

Copies of this information collection

and related instructions can be obtained

without charge from Larry Gambrell, the

Agency OMB Clearance Officer, at (202)

720–5778.

Comments

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether

the proposed collection of information

is necessary for the proper performance

of the functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information

on those who are to respond, such as

through the use of appropriate

automated, electronic, mechanical, or

other technological collection

techniques or other forms of information

technology. Comments may be sent to:

Larry Gambrell, Agency OMB Clearance

Officer, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

1400 Independence Ave., SW, Room

4162 South Building, Washington, DC,

20250–2000. All responses to this notice

will be summarized and included in the

request for OMB approval. All

comments will also become a matter of

public record.

Signed at Washington, DC, January 14,

1998.

Rich Allen,

Acting Administrator, National Agricultural

Statistics Service.

[FR Doc. 98–1301 Filed 1–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–20–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

National Agricultural Statistics Service

Notice of Intent To Request an

Extension of a Currently Approved

Information Collection

AGENCY: National Agricultural Statistics

Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.

L. 104–13) and Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) regulations at 5 CFR

part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29,

1995), this notice announces the

National Agricultural Statistics Service’s

(NASS) intention to request an

extension of a currently approved

information collection, the Fruits, Nuts,

and Specialty Crops that expires May

31, 1998.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be

received by March 27, 1998 to be

assured of consideration.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS:

Contact Rich Allen, Associate

Administrator, National Agricultural

Statistics Service, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, 1400 Independence

Avenue, SW, Room 4117, South

Building, Washington, D.C. 20250–2000,

(202) 720–4333.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Fruits, Nuts, and Specialty

Crops.

OMB Number: 0535–0039.

Expiration Date of Approval: May 31,

1998.

Type of Request: To extend a

currently approved information

collection.

Abstract: The primary objective of the

National Agricultural Statistics Service

is to prepare and issue state and

national estimates of crop and livestock

production. The Fruits, Nuts, and

Specialty Crops survey program collects

information on acreage, yield,

production, and value of non-citrus

fruits and nuts and other specialty crops

in states with significant commercial

production. The program provides data

needed by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture and other government

agencies to administer programs and to