24098 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2001 / Notices

Forest Service at a time when it can

meaningful consider them and respond

to them in the FEIS.

To assist the Forest Service in

identifying and considering issues and

concerns on the proposed action,

comments on the DEIS should be as

specific as possible. It is also helpful if

comments refer to specific pages or

chapters of the draft 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.

Responsible Official: Anne F. Archie,

Acting Forest Supervisor, Boise

National Forest, 1249 South Vinnell

Way, Boise, ID 83709.

Dated: May 3, 2001.

Anne F. Archie,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 01–11611 Filed 5–10–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Idaho Panhandle/Kootenai/Lolo

National Forests Grizzly Bear Forest

Plan Amendment; Idaho Panhandle,

Kootenai and Lolo National Forests;

Lincoln and Sanders Counties, MT;

Boundary and Bonner Counties; Idaho;

and Pend Oreille County, WA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare

environmental impact statement to

amend land and resource management

plans for the Idaho Panhandle,

Kootenai, and Lolo National Forests.

SUMMARY: The Forest Supervisors of the

Idaho Panhandle, Kootenai and Lolo

National Forests give notice of the

agency’s intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS) in

conjunction with the establishment of

new management direction for the

grizzly bear within the Selkirk and

Cabinet/Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery

Zones. The Forest Service has identified

the need to update management

direction, based on new information

regarding grizzly bear biology.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of the analysis should be postmarked by

June 11, 2001. The agency expects to file

a draft EIS with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and make it

available for public, agency, and tribal

government comment in the summer of

2001. A final EIS is expected to be filed

in February 2002.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to

Bob Castaneda, Forest Supervisor,

Kootenai National Forest, 1101 US Hwy

2 West, Libby, MT 59923.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob

Carlin, Grizzly Bear Plan Amendment

Interdisciplinary Team Leader (406)

882–4451.

Responsible Officials: Pat Aguilar,

Idaho Panhandle National Forests—

Acting Forest Supervisor; Bob

Castaneda, Kootenai National Forests—

Forest Supervisor; and Deborah Austin,

Lolo National Forest—Forest

Supervisor.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1998,

the Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak grizzly Bear

Subcommittee recommended new

access management direction to aid in

the recovery of the threatened grizzly

bear within the Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak

Grizzly Bear Recovery Zones. This

direction was titled the ‘‘Interim Access

Management Strategy’’. Additional

information was provided in an

‘‘Interim Access Management Rule Set.’’

This new direction is based on new

information regarding grizzly bear

habitat needs, including the need for

core security areas. The purpose for the

amendment is to update Forest Plan

management direction to respond to the

recommendations and new information

presented by the Selkirk/Cabinet Yaak

Grizzly Bear Subcommittee.

Proposed Action

The Forest Supervisors are proposing

to amend their respective Forest Plans

regarding Forest Plan standards and

monitoring requirements that respond to

the recommendations of the Interim

Access Management Strategy and

Interim Access Management Rule Set.

The decision to be made is whether to

adopt the proposed action as designed,

with different requirements, or not at

all.

This amendment would result in a

new appendix to the Idaho Panhandle

and Lolo National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plans (Forest

Plans). It will be an addendum to the

Kootenai National Forest, Forest Plan,

Appendix 8.

The Interim Access Management

Strategy and Interim Access

Management Rule Set comprise a set of

access related guidelines developed

over the past few years by the Selkirk/

Cabinet-Yaak Subcommittee of the

Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee

(IGBC). The guidelines address the

following access management

parameters: (1) Habitat security, (2) core

area, (3) trial use of access related to

habitat quality/season, (4) motorized

access route density, (5) monitoring, and

(6) coordination with state wildlife

agencies. The Rule Set also clearly

discloses definitions of terminology

related to each specific parameter. The

complete text of these two documents is

available on the IGBC internet website

at http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/wildlife/igbc/

scy/main.htm. Copies may also be

requested by contacting Rob Carlin, ID

Team Leader, at 406–882–4451.

Preliminary Issues and Alternatives

Some preliminary issues have already

been identified and are listed below.

These issues apply only to National

Forest System lands on the units listed

previously in this notice.

The interim access management

strategy and rule set may affect the

ability to use roads and trails, the

construction of roads and trails, and the

closure and decommissioning of roads

and trails. This potentially influences

activities such as timber harvest,

recreation use, administrative

management activities, and other uses

associated with Forest Service roads and

trails.

The interim access management

strategy and rule set did not recommend

standards for total and open motorized

route density. Therefore, some people

are concerned that the strategy and rule

set do not fully address the habitat

needs of grizzly bears.

Public Involvement

The first public participation efforts

involving the Interim Access

Management Strategy and Rule Set

began in the spring and summer of 1997

with a series of seven workshops held

throughout Washington, Idaho, and

Montana. Nearly 300 individuals either

sent letters or asked to be placed on the

project mailing list. The key public

concerns identified at the workshops

were: (1) The need to consider habitat

needs in relation to timing of road

access restrictions; (2) the need to

consider hunting regulations and law

enforcement; and (3) the need to

consider access options to provide the

public a reasonable level of access to the

National Forests.

The Forest Supervisors are giving

notice that the Idaho Panhandle,

Kootenai, and Lolo National Forests are

beginning an environmental analysis

and decision-making process for this

proposed action so that interested or

affected people can participate in the

analysis and contribute to the final

decision. The Forest Service is seeking

comments from individuals,

organizations, tribal governments, and

Federal, State, and local agencies that

are interested or may be affected by the

proposed action. The public is invited

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2001 / Notices 24099

to help identify issues that define the

range of alternatives to be considered in

the environmental impact statement.

The range of alternatives considered in

the DEIS will be based on the issues and

specific decisions to be made. Written

comments identifying issues for analysis

and the range of alternatives are

encouraged.

Estimated Dates for Filing

The draft EIS is expected to be filed

with the EPA and to be available for

public review in the summer of 2001.

The comment period on the draft

environmental impact statement will be

90 days from the date the EPA publishes

the Notice of Availability in the Federal

Register.

The final EIS is scheduled to be

completed by February 2002. In the

final EIS, the Forest Service is required

to respond to comments received during

the comment period that pertain to the

environmental consequences discussed

in the draft EIS and applicable laws,

regulations, and policies considered in

making a decision regarding the

proposal.

The Reviewer’s Obligation To Comment

The Forest Service believes it is

important to give reviewers notice at

this early stage 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 [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 objects 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 Natural

Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR

1503.3 in addressing these points.

Dated: April 24, 2001.

Bob Castaneda,

Forest Supervisor—Kootenai National Forest.

[FR Doc. 01–11813 Filed 5–10–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Rural Utilities Service

Rock Springs Generation, LLC; 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 development of a

1,020-megawatt, natural gas fired

combustion turbine electric generation

plant in Cecil County, Maryland, by Old

Dominion Electric Cooperative and

Outwater Limited Funding Partnership.

RUS may provide financing for the plant

to an affiliate of Old Dominion Electric

Cooperative to be known as the Rock

Springs Generation, LLC. The specifics

of that entity have yet to be determined.

The plant will be named the Rock

Springs Generation Station. Rock

Springs Generation, LLC, will initially

own one-half of the plant (510

megawatts).

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: The plant

will be located in the community of

Rock Springs, in northwestern Cecil

County, Maryland, at the intersection of

Old Mill Road and U.S. Route 222. The

plant comprises six, 170-megawatt, gasfired General Electric Frame 7FA

combustion turbines. Each combustion

turbine will have a 75-foot exhaust

stack. The entire plant will be situated

on approximately 26 acres of the 93-acre

site. No major natural gas pipeline or

electric transmission line improvements

will be needed beyond the proposed site

boundaries. A short electric

transmission line span will be

constructed on a 5-acre parcel owned by

Rock Springs Generation, LLC adjacent

to the plant site to tie the plant to an

existing 500 kilovolt transmission line

located southwest of Old Mill Road.

Copies of the Finding of No

Significant Impact are available from

RUS at the address provided herein or

from Mr. David Smith of Old Dominion

Electric Cooperative, Insbrook Corporate

Center, 4201 Dominion Boulevard; Glen

Allen, Virginia 23060, telephone (804)

968–4045. Mr. Smith’s e-mail address is

dsmith@odec.com.

Dated: May 7, 2001.

Blaine D. Stockton,

Assistant Administrator, Electric Program.

[FR Doc. 01–11936 Filed 5–10–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR

SEVERELY DISABLED

Procurement List; Additions

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From

People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled.

ACTION: Additions to the Procurement

List.

SUMMARY: This action adds to the

Procurement List commodities and

services to be furnished by nonprofit

agencies employing persons who are

blind or have other severe disabilities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase

From People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800,

1421 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patrick T. Mooney (703) 603–7740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

December 1, 2000 and March 23, 2001

the Committee for Purchase From

People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled published notices (65 FR

75241 and 66 FR 16174) of proposed

additions to the Procurement List.

After consideration of the material

presented to it concerning capability of

qualified nonprofit agencies to provide

the commodities and services and

impact of the additions on the current

or most recent contractors, the

Committee has determined that the

commodities and services listed below

are suitable for procurement by the

Federal Government under 41 U.S.C.

46–48c and 41 CFR 51–2.4.