Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2001 / Notices 20625

Preliminary Issues—Comments from

Native American Indian tribes, the

public, and other agencies were

considered in identifying the following

preliminary issues: effects to threatened,

endangered, and sensitive species;

effects to management indicator species,

effects to wild and scenic river corridor

characteristics; effects from road

construction and road closures; effects

to motorized recreational access.

Public Participation—The Forest

Service is seeking comments from

Federal, State, and local agencies, as

well as local Native American tribes and

other individuals or organizations that

may be interested in or affected by the

proposed actions. Comments received in

response to this notice will become a

matter of public record. While public

participation is welcome at any time,

comments on the proposed actions

received by June 15, 2001, will be

especially useful in the preparation of

the draft EIS. Timely comments will be

used to identify: potential issues with

the proposed actions, alternatives to the

proposed actions that respond to the

identified needs and significant issues,

and potential environmental effects of

the proposed actions and alternatives

considered in detail. In addition, the

public is encouraged to contact and/or

visit Forest Service officials at any time

during the planning process.

Relation to Forest Plan Revision—The

Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest is

in the process of revising and combining

the existing Land and Resource

Management Plans (Forest Plans) for the

Chequamegon National Forest and the

Nicolet National Forest, which were

administratively separate at the time the

Forest Plans were developed. A Notice

of Intent to revise and combine the

Forest Plans was issued in 1996. As part

of this process, various inventories and

evaluations are occurring. Additionally,

the Forest is in the process of

developing alternative land

management scenarios that could

change the desired future conditions

and management direction for the

Forest. A Draft Environmental Impact

Statement (DEIS) will be published in

the near future that will disclose the

consequences of the different land

management direction scenarios

considered in detail. As a result of the

Forest Plan revision effort, the Forest

has new and additional information

beyond that used to develop the existing

Forest Plans. This information will be

used where appropriate in the analysis

of this project to disclose the effects of

the proposed activities and any

alternatives developed in detail.

The decisions associated with the

analysis of this project will be

consistent with the existing Forest Plan,

unless amended, for the Nicolet. Under

regulations of the National

Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR

1506.1), the Forest Service can take

actions while work on a Forest Plan

revision is in progress because a

programmatic Environmental Impact

Statement—the existing Forest Plan

Final EIS, already supports the actions.

The relationship of this project to the

proposed FP revision will be considered

as appropriate as part of this planning

effort.

Estimated Dates for Filing—The draft

EIS is expected to be filed with the

Environmental Protection Agency and

available for public review in December,

2001. A 45-day comment period will

follow publication of a Notice of

Availability of the draft EIS in the

Federal Register. Comments received on

the draft EIS will be used in preparation

of the final EIS, expected in July, 2002.

A Record of Decision (ROD) will also be

issued at that time along with the

publication of a Notice of Availability of

the final EIS and ROD in the Federal

Register.

Reviewer’s Obligation to Comment—

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 the draft EIS must structure

their participation in the environmental

review of the proposal in such a way

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, 513

(1978). Also, environmental objections

that could be raised at the draft EIS

stage but that are not raised until after

completion of the final EIS 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 45-

day comment period of the draft EIS in

order that substantive comments and

objections are available to the Forest

Service at a time when it can

meaningfully consider them and

respond to them in the final EIS. To

assist the Forest Service in identifying

and considering issues and concerns 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.

Dated: April 18, 2001.

Lynn Roberts,

Forest Supervisor, Chequamegon-Nicolet

National Forest.

[FR Doc. 01–10058 Filed 4–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Sunken Moose Project; Chequamegon/

Nicolet National Forest, Bayfield

County, Wisconsin

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice, intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will

prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to document the

analysis and disclose the environmental

effects of proposed land management

activities, and corresponding

alternatives, within the Sunken Moose

Project Area.

The purpose of the Sunken Moose

project is to implement land

management activities that are

consistent with direction in the

Chequamegon Nation Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan (Forest

Plan) and to respond to specific needs,

identified during Watershed Analysis,

within the project area. The project

specific needs include addressing: forest

vegetation composition, age, ecological

structure and processes; stand tending;

transportation management; erosion

control; access to lakes; and wildfire

prevention.

The project area is located on

National Forest System lands within the

Bayfield Peninsula Southeast, Bayfield

Peninsula Northwest, Iron River, and

Fish Creek Watersheds west of

Washburn, Wisconsin. A general legal

description of the area follows: Land

lying within the National Forest

Boundary within Township 47 North,

Range 6 West, Sections 2–8, 17, 18;

Township 47 North, Range 7 West,

Sections 1–18, 21,22; Township 47

North, Range 8 West, Section 1;

Township 48 North, Range 5 West,

Section 6; Township 48 North, Range 6

West; Township 48 North, Range 7

West; Township 48 North, Range 8

West, Sections 12, 13, 24, 25, 36;

Township 49 North, Range 5 West,

Sections 6–7,18–19,30–31; Township 49

North, Range 6 West; Township 49

North, Range 7 West, Sections 1, 11–17,

20–29, 32–36.

20626 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2001 / Notices

DATES: Comments concerning the

proposed land management activities

should be received by June 8, 2001 of

this notice to receive timely

consideration in the preparation of the

draft Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS).

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and

suggestions on the proposed action, or

Requests to be placed on the project

mailing list, to: Keith W. Fletcher,

Acting District Ranger, Washburn

Ranger District, P.O. Box 578, 113 East

Bayfield St., Washburn, WI 54891. Email comments should have a subject

line that reads ‘‘NEPA Washburn

Sunken Moose’’ and be sent to

rkiewit@fs.fed.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ray

Kiewit, Project Leader/NEPA

Coordinator, Washburn Ranger District,

P.O. Box 578, 113 East Bayfield St.,

Washburn, WI 54891, phone (715) 373–

2667,or email at rkiewit@fs.fed.us.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

information presented in this notice is

included to help the reviewer determine

if they are interested in or potentially

affected by proposed management

activities. The information presented is

summarized. Those who wish to

provide comments, or are otherwise

interested in or affected by the project,

are encouraged to obtain additional

information from the contact identified

in the For Further Information Contact

section.

Proposed Actions—The proposed

land management activities (proposed

actions) include the following, with

approximate acreage values:

(1) Forest vegetation composition, age,

ecological structure—Do partial tree

removal on 12,800 acres of red pine

plantations in a manner that encourages

introduction of within-stand vegetative

diversity (including white pine),

introduces understory species, and

leads to fewer, larger overstory red pine

trees on sites (This includes some row

thinning, some individual tree removal,

and some creation of canopy gaps). Do

partial tree removal on 8,000 acres of

oak forest types. About one-fourth of the

acres would consist of modified

shelterwood activity—with no overstory

removal—to remove aspen and

reintroduce white pine where feasible.

Trees on the remaining acres would be

thinned to increase tree vigor. Do

shelterwood treatment on 900 acres of

paper birch. About two thirds of the

acres would be treated to regenerate

new stands of paper birch, while one

third would convert to red oak or white

pine species. Do partial tree removal

within 250 acres of aspen stands to

encourage longer lived species such as

red oak or white pine. Clearcut 100

acres of aspen in small (5–15 acre)

patches to increase aspen age-class

diversity. Underplant white pine

seedlings on 10 acres near riparian

areas. Plant red pine seedlings in the

vicinity of Horseshoe Lake

Campground.

(2) Ecological processes—Use

prescribed burning on 2000 acres to

promote Barrens and Pine Savannah

vegetation communities.

(3) Stand tending—Do hand release

(remove over-topping vegetation near

young tree seedlings) within 3500 acres

of pine plantations.

(4) Transportation management—

Complete roads analysis (Forest Service

Manual 7712.1) for the project area.

Resulting proposed activities may

include road construction,

decommissioning and reclassification

(mileage, locations, and purpose of each

will be part of the Draft EIS).

(5) Erosion control—Rehabilitate

approximately 30 sites, including the

hillside near Long Lake, areas near

lakeshores, pipeline corridors, and

portions of trail corridors, where

recreational use has caused soil erosion.

Restrict use of dispersed site on east

side of Horseshoe Lake to daytime only

(no overnight camping). Repair Forest

Road 697 where it crosses Four mile

Creek and relocate Forest Road 847 near

Bladder Lake so that erosion and

sedimentation is greatly reduced or

halted.

(6) Access to lakes—Restrict

motorized access to Sawdust, Moose,

Little Bladder, Mirror, Summit, Crystal,

East Twin, and Cabin Lakes. Stabilize

soil on lake access points after effective

traffic control devices have been

installed.

(7) Wildfire prevention—Install dry

hydrants and/or improve access for fire

equipment to draft water at Pine,

Lenawee, Rib, Moose, Cabin, Long,

Mirror, Bladder, Sawdust, and Summit

Lakes plus one un-named lake in the

central portion of Township 48 North,

Range 8 West, Section 36.

Responsible Official—The Acting

District Ranger of the Washburn Ranger

District, Keith W. Fletcher, is the

responsible official for making projectlevel decisions, within the project area.

Decision Space—Decision-making

will be limited to if, when, how, and

where to schedule specific activities

relating to the proposed actions. The

primary decision to be made will be

whether or not to implement the

proposed actions or another action

alternative that responds to the project’s

purpose and needs.

Project History—Other projects in the

same vicinity have been presented to

the public in the past for review and

comment. Fourteen environmental

assessments, including Pipeline (1992)

and Lenawee (1993), were completed,

and approved through Decision Notices/

Findings of No Significant Impact

between 1988 and 2000. They included

projects to manage vegetation within the

Moquah Barrens Wildlife area, to

salvage jack pine trees following ice

storm, to thin plantations, and to

accomplish recreation projects. In 1991,

the Sunken Camp EIS was approved

through a Record of Decision for

vegetative management activities in the

area, as well.

Preliminary Issues—Comments from

the public, American Indian tribes, and

other agencies were considered in

identifying the following preliminary

issue: potential effects on Threatened,

Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) species

and Management Indicator Species

(MIS); concern over new road

construction and road closures; concern

over motorized recreational access;

concern over forest health, in relation to

the current vegetative patterns,

structures, and species composition;

and, potential effects of restoration

activities on the overall watershed.

Public Participation—The Forest

Service is seeking comments from

Federal, State, and local agencies, as

well as local Native American tribes and

other individuals or organizations that

may be interested in or affected by the

proposed action. Comments received in

response to this notice will become a

matter of public record. While public

participation is welcome at any time,

comments on the proposed actions

received within 30 days of this notice

will be especially useful in the

preparation of the draft EIS. Timely

comments will be used to identify:

potential issues with the proposed

actions; alternatives to the proposed

actions that respond to the identified

needs and significant issues, and

potential environmental effects of the

proposed actions and alternatives

considered in detail. In addition, the

public is encouraged to contact and/or

visit Forest Service officials at any time

during the planning process.

Relation to Forest Plan Revision—The

Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest is

in the process of revising and combining

the existing Land and Resource

Management Plans (Forest Plans) for the

Chequamegon National Forest and

Nicolet National Forest, which were

administratively separate at the time the

Forest Plans were developed. A Notice

of Intent to revise and combine the

Forest Plans was issued in 1996. As part

of this process, various inventories and

evaluations are occurring. Additionally,

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2001 / Notices 20627

the Forest is in the process of

developing alternative land

management scenarios that could

change the desired future conditions

and management direction for the

Forest. A Draft Environmental Impact

Statement (DEIS) will be published in

the near future that will disclose the

consequences of the different land

management direction scenarios

considered in detail. As a result of the

Forest Plan revision effort, the Forest

has new and additional information

beyond that used to develop the existing

Forest Plans. This information will be

used where appropriate in the analysis

of this project to disclose the effects of

the proposed activities and any

alternatives developed in detail.

The decisions associated with the

analysis of this project will be

consistent with the existing Forest Plan,

unless amended, for the Chequamegon.

Under regulations of the National

Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR

1506.1), the Forest Service can take

actions while work on a Forest Plan is

in progress because a programmatic

Environmental Impact Statement—the

existing Forest Plan Final EIS—already

covers the actions. The relationship of

the project to the proposed Forest Plan

revision will be considered as

appropriate as part of this planning

effort.

Estimated Dates for Filing—The draft

EIS is expected to be filed with the

Environmental Protection Agency and

available for public review in January,

2002. A 45-day comment period will

follow publication of a Notice of

Availability of the draft EIS in the

Federal Register. Comments received on

the draft EIS will be used in preparation

of a final EIS, expected in May 2002. A

Record of Decision (ROD) will be issued

at that time along with the publication

of a Notice of Availability of the final

EIS and ROD in the Federal Register.

The Reviewer’s Obligation to

Comment—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 the draft EIS must structure

their participation in the environmental

review of the proposal in such a way

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, 513

(1978). Also, environmental objections

that could be raised at the draft EIS state

but that are not raised until after

completion of the final EIS may be

waived or dismissed by the courts. City

of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016,

1022 (9th Cir. 1986), and Wisconsin

Heritages Ubc, 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 45-day

comment period of the draft EIS in order

that substantive comments and

objections are available to the Forest

Service at a time when it can

meaningfully consider them and

respond to them in the final EIS. To

assist the Forest Service in identifying

and considering issues and concerns 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.

Dated: April 18, 2001.

Lynn Roberts,

Forest Supervisor, Chequamegon/Nicolet

National Forest.

[FR Doc. 01–10059 Filed 4–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Rural Utilities Service

Oglethorpe Power Corporation; Notice

of Finding of No Significant Impact

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of finding of no

significant impact.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) has

made a finding of no significant impact

with respect to the construction and

operation of a 520-megawatt, natural gas

fired, combined cycle electric

generation plant in Heard County,

Georgia. Oglethorpe Power Corporation

proposes to be the agent to construct

and operate the plant. The Rural

Utilities Service (RUS) may provide

financing for the plant to an entity made

up of members of Oglethorpe Power

Corporation. The specifics of that entity

have yet to be determined.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob

Quigel, Environmental Protection

Specialist, Engineering and

Environmental Staff, RUS, Stop 1571,

1400 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20250–1571, telephone

(202) 720–0468, e-mail at

bquigel@rus.usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Oglethorpe Power Corporation proposes

to construct the proposed facility at the

Hal B. Wansley Plant site in northeast

Heard County approximately six miles

southeast of Roopville, Georgia. The

Wansley Plant is owned by Georgia

Power Company, Oglethorpe Power

Corporation, the Municipal Electricity

Authority of Georgia, and the City of

Dalton. Currently in operation at the site

are two 865-megawatt, coal fired,

electric generation units and a 49-

megawatt, oil fired, combustion turbine.

Oglethorpe Power Corporation’s

proposed plant is one of four blocks of

additional electric generation facilities

planned for construction at the site.

Each block of additional generation is

proposed to consist of two combustion

turbines, two heat recovery steam

generators, and one steam turbine. The

total build-out of the four blocks would

total approximately 2,280 megawatts.

The proposed project will be

composed of two, nominal 167

megawatt Siemens V84.3A2 combustion

turbines, each connected to a heat

recovery steam generator which will

power a nominal 187 megawatt Siemens

steam turbine, for a total of 520

megawatts. It is the goal of Oglethorpe

Power Corporation to have the plant in

operation by the spring of 2003.

Copies of the Finding of No

Significant Impact are available from

RUS at the address provided herein or

from Mr. Greg Jones of Oglethorpe

Power Corporation, P.O. Box 1349,

Tucker, Georgia 30085–1349, (800) 241–

5374 x7890; greg.jones@opc.com.

Copies of the environmental assessment

are available for review at Oglethorpe

Power Corporation and RUS at the

addresses provided herein.

Dated: April 18, 2001.

Blaine D. Stockton,

Assistant Administrator, Electric Program.

[FR Doc. 01–10116 Filed 4–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P

ARCHITECTURAL AND

TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS

COMPLIANCE BOARD

Meeting

AGENCY: Architectural and

Transportation Barriers Compliance

Board.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Architectural and

Transportation Barriers Compliance

Board (Access Board) has scheduled its

regular business meetings to take place

in Washington, DC on Monday,

Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday,

May 7–10, 2001, at the times and

location noted below.

DATES: The schedule of events is as

follows: