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

24828

Vol. 60, No. 90

Wednesday, May 10, 1995

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Office of the Secretary

RIN 0503–AA09

Notice of Designation of Empowerment

Zones and Enterprise Communities

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of designation of

Empowerment Zones and Enterprise

Communities.

SUMMARY: On January 18, 1994 USDA

published an interim rule that

implemented that portion of subchapter

C, part I (Empowerment Zones,

Enterprise Communities and Rural

Development Investment Areas) of Title

XIII of the Omnibus Budget

Reconciliation Act of 1993 dealing with

the designation of Rural Empowerment

Zones and Enterprise Communities. On

January 18, 1994 USDA also published

a notice inviting applications for

designation of Empowerment Zones and

Enterprise Communities.

This notice announces the

jurisdictions that were designated Rural

Empowerment Zones and Enterprise

Communities by USDA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dayton Watkins, Acting Administrator,

Rural Business and Cooperative

Development Service (‘‘RBCDS’’), U.S.

Department of Agriculture, 14th Street &

Independence Avenue, S.W., Rm. 5045

South Agriculture Building,

Washington, DC 20250, or telephone

(202) 720–6165.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 18, 1994 USDA published an

interim rule that implemented that

portion of subchapter C, part I

(Empowerment Zones, Enterprise

Communities and Rural Development

Investment Areas) of Title XIII of the

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of

1993 (‘‘Title XIII’’) which addresses the

designation of Rural Empowerment

Zones and Enterprise Communities (59

FR 2686 (1994)). This interim rule was

made final on February 6, 1995 (60 FR

6945 (1995)).

Title XIII also provides for the

designation of Urban Empowerment

Zones and Enterprise Communities. As

noted in the January 18, 1994 interim

rule, the rural part of the program is

administered by USDA as a FederalState-local and private-sector

partnership. The urban part of the

program is administered by the

Department of Housing and Urban

Development (‘‘HUD’’), which also

published an interim rule on January 18,

1994 (59 FR 2700 (1994)).

On January 18, 1994 USDA also

published a notice inviting applications

from States and local governments

nominating rural areas for designation

as Empowerment Zones and Enterprise

Communities (59 FR 2696 (1994)). The

January 18, 1994 notice provided for an

application deadline of June 30, 1994.

On December 21, 1994 President

William J. Clinton announced the rural

areas that were designated by USDA and

the urban areas that were designated by

HUD as Empowerment Zones and

Enterprise Communities.

Publication in the Federal Register of

this Notice announcing nominated areas

that were designated either as

Empowerment Zones or Enterprise

Communities (Appendix A), fulfills the

requirement, set forth in the January 18,

1994 interim rule (59 FR 2686 (1994)),

that designations published.

Dated: April 27, 1995.

Dan Glickman,

Secretary.

APPENDIX A.—USDA’S RURAL EMPOWERMENT ZONES AND ENTERPRISES COMMUNITIES

Name State Counties

Empowerment Zones

Kentucky Highlands EZ ............................................................. KY Clinton, Jackson, Wayne.

Mid-Delta EZ ............................................................................. MS Bolivar, Sunflower, Leflore, Washington, Humphreys, Holmes.

Rio Grande Valley Empowerment Zone ................................... TX Cameron, Hidalgo, Starr, Willacy.

Enterprise Communities

Chambers County EC ............................................................... AL Chambers.

Greene & Sumter Counties Rural EC ....................................... AL Greene, Sumter.

East Central Arkansas EC ........................................................ AR Cross, Lee, Monroe, St. Francis.

Mississippi County EC .............................................................. AR Mississippi.

Arizona Border Region EC ....................................................... AZ Cochise, Yuma, Santa Cruz.

Imperial County EC ................................................................... CA Imperial.

City of Watsonville/County of Santa Cruz EC .......................... CA Santa Cruz.

Jackson County, Florida EC ..................................................... FL Jackson.

Crisp/Dooly EC .......................................................................... GA Crisp, Dooly.

Central Savannah River Area EC ............................................. GA Burke, Hancock, Jefferson, McDuffie, Taliaferro, Warren.

Northeast Louisiana Delta EC .................................................. LA Madison.

Macon Ridge EC ....................................................................... LA Catahoula, Concordia, Franklin, Morehouse, Tensas.

Lake County EC ........................................................................ MI Lake.

City of East Prairie, Mississippi County, MO EC ...................... MO Mississippi.

North Delta Mississippi EC ....................................................... MS Panola, Quitman, Tallahatchie.

Halifax/Edgecombe/Wilson EC ................................................. NC Halifax, Edgecombe, Wilson.

Robeson County EC ................................................................. NC Robeson.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 1995 / Notices 24829

APPENDIX A.—USDA’S RURAL EMPOWERMENT ZONES AND ENTERPRISES COMMUNITIES—Continued

Name State Counties

La Jicarita EC ............................................................................ NM Mora, Rio Arriba, Taos.

Greater Portsmouth EC ............................................................ OH Scioto.

Southeast Oklahoma EC .......................................................... OK Choctaw, McCurtain.

Josephine County EC ............................................................... OR Josephine.

City of Lock Haven Federal EC ................................................ PA Clinton.

Williamsburg-Lake City EC ....................................................... SC Williamsburg, Florence.

Beadle/Spink/South Dakota EC ................................................ SD Beadle, Spink.

Fayette County/Haywood County Enterprise Community ........ TN Haywood, Fayette.

Scott/McCreary Area Enterprise Community ............................ TN Scott (TN), McCreary (KY).

Accomack-Northampton, Virginia EC ....................................... VA Northampton, Accomack.

Lower Yakima County Rural Enterprise Community ................ WA Yakima.

Central Appalachia EC .............................................................. WV Roane, Braxton, Clay, Nicholas, Fayette.

McDowell County EC ................................................................ WV McDowell.

[FR Doc. 95–11494 Filed 5–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–07–M

Forest Service

Charlie Tyson Project; Idaho

Panhandle National Forests, St. Maries

Ranger District, Benewah County,

Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the Forest Service is gathering

information to prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

This EIS is proposing management

activities designed to move the Charlie

Tyson project area toward its desired

future condition, a healthy and diverse

ecosystem. Desired future condition

goals specific to the project area were

developed by an interdisciplinary team

for the purpose of maintaining

ecosystem productivity and diversity

while incorporating human values and

needs. The goals for this project area are

listed below:

1. The first goal is to provide

vegetation patterns and natural

variability that include important

components within the range of historic

levels. Using historic vegetation patterns

as a reference point, the project will

strive to maintain more mature timber

(80+ years old) in larger patches than

currently exist in the project area. To

maintain historic natural variability for

the project area, the project will strive

to promote more canopy layers and

more species components. This entails

perpetuating seral tree species,

subalpine fir/spruce, quaking aspen and

open ridge tops with large ponderosa

pine. This shift toward the historic

range of vegetation patterns also entails

maintaining riparian area with stable

stream channels and fish habitats

supporting viable populations of desired

fish species; thus the area would be

fully supporting beneficial uses.

2. The second goal is to incorporate

additional human values and needs by

providing commercial wood products, a

long range transportation plan where

only essential roads for land

management exist, a visually attractive

landscape, a diverse array of

recreational activities and maintaining

existing grazing allotments. There are

areas with past clearcut harvest units

that detract from the visual

attractiveness of the landscape; the

harsh edges of these clearcuts could be

softened by partial cutting. For

recreation, emphasis for this area is on

dispersed use and trail development;

unauthorized trail use will be addressed

and three historic Forest Service trails

could be added to the trail system.

3. The third goal is to maintain

wildlife habitats. Currently, the project

area has a lack of quality security for

wildlife. Activities proposed will

include restricting trail and road access

for various kinds of users.

It will take time to implement the

desired future condition described

above; proposed management activities

would entail using techniques to shift

the project area toward desired future

condition. Management techniques

would include prescribed fire, timber

harvesting, road building, road use

restrictions and closures, wildlife

security area(s), watershed/fish habitat

improvements and trail development.

The Forest Service estimates that this

proposed action would include: 415

acres of underburning, 2773 acres of

timber harvesting (commercial

thinning—1892 acres, group selection—

46 acres, irregular shelterwood—381

acres, group shelterwood—403 acres,

seedtree—20 acres, clearcutting—31

acres), 10.6 miles of new road

construction, 1.7 road miles taken off

the road system and a 6200 acre area

closure to all motorized vehicles in the

Charlie-Preston drainages (providing

5000 acres of wildlife security). The

proposed action also entails

implementing fish/watershed

improvement projects in the East Fork

of Charlie, Preston and Brown Creeks

and adding three historic Forest Service

Trails back on the trail system for

maintenance.

DATES: Written comments concerning

the scope of this analysis must be

received within 30 days from the date

of this publication in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to

District Ranger, St. Maries Ranger

District, P.O. Box 407, St. Maries, ID

83861.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions about the proposed action

and EIS should be directed to Tracy J.

Gravelle, St. Maries Ranger District,

Phone: 208–245–2531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Charlie Tyson project area lies within

Benewah County, Idaho and

encompasses the Charlie Creek

drainage. It is located approximately 1

air mile south of Emida, Idaho. The

project area contains 18,100 acres of

which approximately 14,400 acres are

administered by the Forest Service.

Management activities would be

administered by the St. Maries Ranger

District of the Idaho Panhandle National

Forests. This EIS will tier to the Forest

Plan (September 1987) which provides

overall guidance for the Idaho

Panhandle National Forests in terms of

Goals, Objectives, Standards and

Guidelines, and Management Area

direction.

Preliminary scoping, including public

and other agency participation, was

initiated in August 1991 and has

recommenced this year. A public

meeting for the area was held on

September 4, 1991 in St. Maries, Idaho.

An additional public open house was

held in the town of Emida, Idaho on