[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22044-22045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10940]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Tongass Land Management Plan Revision, Tongass National Forest, 
Alaska

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a revised supplement to the draft 
environmental impact statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a revised supplement to the 
draft environmental impact statement on a proposal to revise the 
Tongass Land Management Plan. This is a revision of the supplement 
published in August 1991.

DATES: Formal comments are not being solicited at this time. A revised 
supplement to the draft environment impact statement is scheduled to be 
filed with the Environmental Protection Agency in November 1995, at 
which time a formal comment period will begin.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Lidholm, Public Affairs Officer, 
Tongass Revision Team, 8465 Old Dairy Road, Juneau, AK 99801. Telephone 
(907) 586-8726.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The original notice of intent for the 
Tongass Land Management Plan revision was published September 10, 1987 
(52 FR 34264, *34265). A draft environmental impact statement was 
available for public review and comment from July 1990 to January 1991, 
and a supplement to that draft was available from September to December 
1991. Release of a final environmental impact statement was delayed 
pending completion of additional studies. Based on the results of these 
studies, other new information, and the lapse of time since public 
review of the supplement, the Forest Service has decided to issue 
another draft document, the revised supplement, for public review.
    The issues identified in the August 1991 supplement to the draft 
environmental impact statement have been updated. The focus for the 
revised supplement will be on the following specific issues: providing 
for species viability consistent with the provisions of NFMA and the 
Endangered Species Act; evaluating recommendations for additional 
fisheries habitat protection; cave and karst management; ensuring 
conformance with ecosystem management principles; and the socio-
economic effects of alternative actions. The alternatives described in 
the 1991 supplement will be the basis for formulating alternatives to 
deal with these issues.
    A partnership approach with the agency's Pacific Northwest Research 
Station (PNW) will be an important vehicle to bring science to bear on 
the issues. PNW will be involved along with the Alaska Region of the 
Forest Service at every phase of the project. Other federal agencies 
are being asked to cooperate in the planning process, including the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, 
and the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, the skills and 
expertise of Alaska State agencies and Alaska tribal governments will 
be sought.
    A revised supplement to the draft environment impact statement is 
anticipated to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency in 
November 1995, and a final environmental impact statement is projected 
for June 1996.
    The responsible official is Phil Janik, Regional Forester, Alaska 
Region, P.O. Box 21628, Juneau, AK 99801.
    A 90-day public comment period on the revised supplement to the 
draft environmental impact statement will begin on the date the 
Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in 
the Federal Register. An extensive scoping process has already taken 
place with respect to the proposed TLMP revision. No further formal 
scoping process is scheduled as part of the preparation of the revised 
supplement to the draft environmental impact statement. Public meetings 
are expected and will be announced.
    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 (or, in this case, the revised 
supplement to the draft) 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, 
objections that could be raised at the draft (or revised supplement to 
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 90 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.
    The revised supplement is preceded by two other draft documents 
(the 1990 draft and 1991 supplement referred to earlier). Reviewers 
should note that comments on either of these two previous documents are 
still valid, and will be considered along with all comments received on 
the revised supplement in reaching a final decision. Participation in 
any of the three comments periods satisfies the intent of the previous 
discussion, provided that the reviewer's position and/or concerns have 
been raised.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and [[Page 22045]] concerns on the proposed action, comments on the 
revised supplement to 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 revised supplement to 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: April 21, 1995.

Robert Williams,

Acting Regional Forester of the Alaska Region.

[FR Doc. 95-10940 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M