40094 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 / Notices

The environmental assessments and

findings of no significant impact have

been prepared in accordance with: (1)

The National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969, as amended (NEPA)(42 U.S.C.

4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the

Council on Environmental Quality for

implementing the procedural provisions

of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3)

USDA regulations implementing NEPA

(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA

Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part

372).

Done in Washington, DC, this 22nd day of

July 1998.

Charles P. Schwalbe,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 98–19996 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Saveno DeBorgiac Timber Sales and

Road Rehabilitation; Superior Ranger

District, Lolo National Forest; Mineral

County, Montana

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will

prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to disclose the

environmental effects of timber

harvesting, prescribed burning, road

access changes, and watershed

rehabilitation in a 38,000 acre area near

St. Regis, Montana.

DATES: Initial comments concerning the

scope of the analysis should be received

in writing no later than August 26, 1998.

Comments received during the initial

scoping will be considered in the

analysis and do not need to be

resubmitted during this comment time

period.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to

Cindy Chapman Enstrom, District

Ranger, Superior Ranger District, Box

460, Superior, MT 59872.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ron Mason, Saveno DeBorgiac

Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Superior

Ranger District, as above, or phone:

(406) 822–4233.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

responsible official who will make

decisions based on this EIS is Charles C.

Wildes, Forest Supervisor, Lolo

National Forest, Building 24 Fort

Missoula, Missoula, MT 59804. He will

decide on this proposal after

considering comments and responses,

environmental consequences discussed

in the Final EIS, and applicable laws,

regulations, and policies. The decision

and reasons for the decision will be

documented in a Record of Decision.

The Forest Service proposed to

harvest about 33,000 hundred cubic feet

of timber from about 1700 acres (about

1030 of those acres to be burned after

harvest), to reconstruct or recondition

about 7.5 miles of road and stabilize

and/or obliterate about 10.3 miles of

existing road (primarily to mitigate

existing water quality and fish habitat

impacts), and to add new yearlong road

closures to about 7.3 miles of currently

open roads. New road construction

would be limited to about 2.5 miles of

permanent road and about 3.4 miles of

temporary road.

Lands affected are within the Twin

Creek, Savenac Creek, Timber Creek,

McManus Creek and Packer Creek

drainages, tributary to the St. Regis

River, between Saltese and DeBorgia,

Montana. The project area is bounded

by Interstate 90 to the south and the

divide between Plains/Thompson Falls

and superior Ranger Districts to the

north.

The purpose of this proposal is to

carry out the goals and direction given

in the Lolo National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan with

ecosystem management principles. Key

elements of the purpose and need are:

(1) Maintain existing elk security

habitat;

(2) Modify stand structures in

lodgepole pine to reduce susceptibility

to mountain pine beetle;

(3) Accelerate succession in mid seral,

moist mixed conifer stands where

potential exists to develop late seral,

multi-storied structures with old growth

characteristics;

(4) Replace the ponderosa pine

communities which developed from

poorly adapted seed from other states.

The trees were planted in the early

1900’s. These stands are experiencing

extensive mortality from diseases, and

are also increasingly susceptible to bark

beetle attacks. These communities are

also naturally reproducing, and

degrading the locally adapted gene pool;

(5) Develop stand structures that are

equivalent to single story, moisture

limited conditions resembling structures

developed from very frequent, low

intensity ground fires. The resulting

stand structures will enhance growth

and development of ponderosa pine,

western larch and Douglas-fir stands;

(6) The St. Regis River is a priority

watershed for bull trout recovery; we

will protect the species and seek

opportunities to enhance and restore

habitat;

(7) The St. Regis River is a Water

Quality Limited Segment (WQLS).

Increased sediment has resulted in the

‘‘cold water fishery’’ to be only partially

supported. The proposal seeks

opportunities to eliminate erosion and

control sediment sources to improve

water quality in the streams entering the

St. Regis River; and

(8) Provide forest products in support

of forest plan goals.

The decision to be made is to what

extent, if at all, the Forest Service

should conduct timber harvest,

prescribed burning, road construction or

reconstruction, road reclamation, and

road closure in the Twin Creek, Savenac

Creek, Timber Creek, McManus Creek

and Packer Creek drainages, given the

above purpose and need. This is a site

specific project decision, not a general

management plan nor a programmatic

analysis.

Public scoping has been conducted on

this proposal and the alternatives

developed for this proposal.

While quite a number of issues have

been identified for environmental

effects analysis, the following issues are

the one which so far have been found

significant enough to guide alternative

development and provide focus for the

EIS.

(1) Water quality and fisheries habitat

effects resulting from timber harvest and

road construction and rehabilitation

activities;

(2) Forest health issues pertaining to

even-aged management and restoration;

and

(3) Economic effects on local

communities resulting from different

access methods and resulting timber

values.

The proposed action could have both

beneficial and adverse effects on these

resources. In addition to the proposed

action, a range of alternatives have been

developed in response to issues

identified during scoping. Alternatives

planned for detailed study are:

(1) No action; none of the proposed

activities would be implemented.

(2) Restoration of offsite ponderosa

pine stands. Mid-seral stands will be

treated to develop multi-storied stands

with large trees, and dry sites with a

history of high fire frequency will be

thinned to develop open stands of

ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and larch.

Approximately 77 percent of the volume

will be helicopter yarded, 12 percent

will be tractor yarded and 11 percent

will skyline yarded.

Road work

Approximate

miles

Construction, new roads ............... 0.0
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 / Notices 40095

Road work

Approximate

miles

Reconstruction, existing roads ..... 2.7

Reclamation, existing roads ......... 12.9

Construct and obliterate temporary roads .............................. 0.0

Reconstruct and reclaim, existing

road ........................................... 0.0

Change travel management ......... 7.3

(3) Then lodgepole pine stands to

make them resistant to mountain pine

beetle attacks. Harvest from existing

roads and from short-term and

temporary roads on gentle ridgetops and

upper sidelopes, harvest with no

evenaged management cuts.

Approximately 1 percent of the volume

will be helicopter yarded, 64 percent

will be tractor yarded and 35 percent

will skyline yarded.

Road work

Approximate

miles

Construction, new roads ............... 0.0

Reconstruction, existing roads ..... 2.7

Reclamation, existing roads ......... 8.6

Construct and obliterate temporary roads .............................. 3.4

Reconstruct and reclaim, existing

road ........................................... 4.3

Change travel management ......... 7.3

(4) Restoration of offsite ponderosa

pine stands. Mid-seral stands will be

treated to develop multi-storied stands

with large trees, and dry sites with a

history of high fire frequency will be

thinned to develop open stands of

ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and larch.

Thin lodgepole pine stands to make

them more resistant to mountain pine

beetle attacks. Approximately 43

percent of the volume will be helicopter

yarded, 33 percent will be tractor

yarded and 24 percent will skyline

yarded.

Road work

Approximate

miles

Construction, new roads ............... 2.5

Reconstruction, existing roads ..... 2.7

Reclamation, existing roads ......... 6.7

Construct and obliterate temporary roads .............................. 3.4

Reconstruct and reclaim, existing

road ........................................... 0.4

Change travel management ......... 0.0

(5) Restoration of offsite ponderosa

pine stands. Mid-seral stands will be

treated to develop multi-storied stands

with large trees, and dry sites with a

history of high fire frequency will be

thinned to develop open stands of

ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and larch.

Thin lodgepole pine stands to make

them more resistant to mountain pine

beetle attacks. Approximately 20

percent of the volume will be helicopter

yarded, 45 percent will be tractor

yarded and 35 percent will skyline

yarded.

Road work

Approximate

miles

Construction, new roads ............... 2.5

Reconstruction, existing roads ..... 3.2

Reclamation, existing roads ......... 2.6

Construct and obliterate temporary roads .............................. 3.4

Reconstruct and reclaim, existing

road ........................................... 4.3

Change travel management ......... 0.0

Public participation is important to

the analysis. People may visit with

Forest Service officials at any time

during the analysis and prior to the

decision. No formal scoping meetings

are planned. However, two periods are

specifically designated for comments on

the analysis:

(1) During this scoping process; and

(2) During the draft EIS comment

period.

During the scoping process, the Forest

Service is seeking information and

comments from Federal, State, and local

agencies and other individuals or

organizations who may be interested in

or affected by the proposed action. A

scoping document will be mailed to

parties known to be interested in the

proposed action. The agency invites

written comments and suggestions on

this action, particularly in terms of

issues and alternatives.

The Forest Service will continue to

involve the public and will inform

interested and affected parties as to how

they may participate and contribute to

the final decision. Another formal

opportunity for response will be

provided following completion of a

draft EIS.

The draft EIS should be available for

review in March, 1999. The final EIS is

scheduled for completion in June, 1999.

The comment period on the draft EIS

will be 45 days from the date the

Environmental Protection Agency

publishes the notice of availability in

the Federal Register.

The Forest Service believes it is

important, at this early stage, 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 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, 533 (1978). Also,

environmental objections that could be

raised at the draft environmental impact

statement stage but 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

Heritage v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334,

1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these

court rulings, it is very important those

interested in this proposed action

participate by the close of the 45 day

comment period so 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.

I am the responsible official for this

environmental impact statement. My

address is Lolo National Forest,

Building 24, Fort Missoula, Missoula

MT 59804.

Authority: 40 CFR 1508.220.

Dated: July 10, 1998.

Charles C. Wildes,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 98–19726 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation

Service

Task Force on Agricultural Air Quality

AGENCY: Natural Resources

Conservation Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Task Force on

Agricultural Air Quality will hold a

teleconference to discuss the

relationship between agricultural

production and air quality. The meeting

is open to the public.