6454 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2008 / Notices 

State Office, 5353 Yellowstone (P.O. 

Box 1828), Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The Forest Service will determine if 

and how the current Forest Plan oil and 

gas leasing decision, as it relates to the 

44,720 acres, should be changed based 

on new information. If a new decision 

is determined not to be needed 

following preparation of the 

Supplemental environmental impact 

statement, that determination is not 

subject to appeal in accordance with 36 

CFR 215.12. The BLM will then decide 

whether or not the revised FS NEPA 

analysis is adequate, and subsequently 

whether to lift the suspension on the 

existing leases and whether or not to 

issue leases on the other lease parcels. 

Scoping Process 

Scoping for a supplemental statement 

is not required (40 CFR 1502.9(c)(4)), 

but due to the length of time since 

scoping associated with the current 

leasing decision was conducted, the 

agencies are soliciting comments 

specific to new issues or information. 

Letters will be sent to the forest mailing 

list of known interested parties. Public 

meetings held in 2006 in association 

with forest plan revision efforts 

generated issues relative to oil and gas 

leasing. Comments received during 

those meetings will be considered in 

this supplemental analysis. The scoping 

process will assist the agencies in 

identifying specific issues to be 

addressed related to the purpose and 

need and the scope of the decision. Mail 

comments to the addresses given above 

for further information. Ongoing 

information related to the proposed 

action and related analysis will be 

posted on the Bridger-Teton National 

Forest Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/ 

btnf. 

Preliminary Issues 

Preliminary issues associated with the 

proposed action include: 

(1) The drilling and production of 

wells subsequent to leasing could 

impact air quality and air quality related 

values, with emphasis on cumulative 

effects due to extensive development in 

the Pinedale area. 

(2) The T&E listed Lynx, or its habitat, 

could be impacted by subsequent 

exploration and development activities. 

(3) Impacts to water quality due to 

subsequent surface disturbing activities 

could adversely affect the Colorado 

River Cutthroat Trout. 

(4) The development of a 

transportation system to support field 

development could adversely affect 

mule deer migration routes in the area 

and fragment habitat. 

Comment Requested 

This notice of intent initiates the 

scoping process which guides the 

development of the supplemental 

environmental impact statement. 

Early Notice of Importance of Public 

Participation in Subsequent 

Environmental Review: A Supplemental 

DEIS will be prepared for comment. The 

comment period on the SDEIS will be 

for a perod of 45 days from the date the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

publishes the notice of availability in 

the Federal Register. 

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 a DEIS 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 DEIS 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 45- 

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. 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. Comments may also address 

the adequacy of the DEIS 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. 

Comments received, including the 

names and addresses of those who 

comment, will be considered part of the 

public record on this proposal and will 

be available for public inspection. 

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; 

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 

21) 

Dated: January 25, 2008. 

Kniffy Hamilton, 

Forest Supervisor, Bridger-Teton National 

Forest. 

Jane D. Darnell, 

Acting Wyoming State Director, Bureau of 

Land Management. 

[FR Doc. 08–472 Filed 2–1–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Clearwater National Forest, ID; Travel 

Management Plan 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Revised notice; intent to 

prepare an environmental impact 

statement. The original notice was 

published in the Federal Register Vol. 

72, No. 228, November 28, 2007/ 

Notices, pages 67268–67270. A revised 

notice was published in the Federal 

Register Vol. 72, No. 243, December 19, 

2007/Notices, pages 71874–71876. 

SUMMARY: On November 28, 2007, the 

USDA Forest Service announced its 

intent to prepare a travel planning 

environmental impact statement (EIS). 

The proposed action would designate a 

site-specific transportation system and 

prohibit indiscriminate cross-country 

traffic. The EIS will analyze the effects 

of the proposed action and alternatives. 

A Revised Notice was published to 

extend the due date for scoping 

comments to January 11, 2008. This 

Revised Notice is being published 

because the due date for scoping 

comments has been extended to 

February 29, 2008. The Clearwater 

National Forest invites comments and 

suggestions on the issues to be 

addressed. The agency gives notice of 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) analysis and decision-making 

process on the proposal so interested 

and affected members of the public may 

participate and contribute to the final 

decision. 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis must be received by 

February 29, 2008. A 45-day public 

comment period will follow the release 

of the draft environmental impact 

statement that is expected in June 2008. 

The final environmental impact 

statement is expected in January 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Send written or electronic 

comments to: Lochsa Ranger District, 

Kamiah Ranger Station; Attn: Lois 

Foster, Interdisciplinary Team Leader; 


ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2008 / Notices 6455 

Rt. 2, Box 191; Kamiah, ID 83536; Fax 

208–935–4275; E-mail commentsnorthern-clearwater@fs.fed.us. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois 

Foster, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, 

(208) 935–4258. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose 

and Need for Action is to (1) Implement 

national OHV Rule direction, (2) Limit 

indiscriminate cross-county motorized 

travel, (3) Designate selected roads and 

trails for motorized travel, (4) Designate 

appropriate areas or routes for travel 

with oversnow vehicles, (5) Balance 

travel opportunities with maintenance 

and management capability including 

costs, (6) Provide for a better spectrum 

of motorized, non-motorized, and nonmechanized travel opportunities across 

the CNF in recognition of the need to 

retain the character of lands 

recommended for Wilderness 

designation and the CNF’s ability to 

provide for non-motorized recreation 

opportunities that are not available on 

other land ownerships, (7) Manage 

impacts to Forest resources, (8) Improve 

clarity and consistency of existing travel 

restrictions, and (9) Amend the 1987 

Forest Plan as necessary to accomplish 

the actions described above. 

The need for revision of the Forest 

Plan is supported by nationwide 

awareness within the Forest Service of 

the negative effects of indiscriminate 

off-road travel by motorized users. 

These concerns led to publication of the 

Travel Management final rule on 

November 9, 2005 in the Federal 

Register, 36 CFR Parts 212, 251, 261, 

295 ‘‘Travel Management: Designated 

Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle 

Use’’ (Federal Register 2005: 79 FR 

68264). The rule requires each National 

Forest to designate those roads, trails, 

and areas that are open to motor vehicle 

use. The rule prohibits use of motor 

vehicles off the designated system, as 

well as use of motor vehicles on routes 

and in areas that are not consistent with 

the designation. The rule does not 

require that over-snow vehicles, such as 

snowmobiles, are limited to a 

designated system by exempting them 

under 121.51, but also states in 212.81 

that ‘‘use by over-snow vehicles * * * 

on National Forest system lands may be 

allowed, restricted, or prohibited.’’ The 

CNF chose to include over-snow 

vehicles in the analysis. 

The Proposed Action would designate 

motorized road and trail routes for 

summer travel on the Clearwater 

National Forest. Existing conditions 

include roads and trails identified as 

open to motorized travel in the 2005 

Travel Guide, plus any error corrections 

or project-level NEPA decisions made 

since then. The Proposed Action would 

include any changes from existing 

conditions, such as road to trail 

conversions, designating some roads 

previously not thought to be travelable, 

and not designating some roads that 

were previously thought to be 

travelable. 

The transportation system for snowfree travel would include: 

• 1,623 miles of roads open yearlong 

to all highway-legal vehicles (an 

increase of 8 miles compared to existing 

conditions); 

• 509 miles of roads open yearlong to 

small vehicles such as ATVs and 

motorcycles, but not including UTVs 

(an increase of 9 miles); 

• 663 miles of roads open seasonally 

to all highway-legal vehicles (a decrease 

of 13 miles); 

• 151 miles of roads open seasonally 

to small vehicles (a decrease of 1 mile); 

• 93 miles of trails open yearlong to 

small vehicles (a change of 0 miles); 

• 226 miles of trails open yearlong to 

motorcycles (a decrease of 178 miles); 

• 75 miles of trails open seasonally to 

small vehicles (an increase of 2 miles); 

and 

• 93 miles of trails open seasonally to 

motorcycles (a change of 0 miles). 

The proposed action would also 

modify the dates of seasonal restrictions 

for roads and trails to reduce the variety 

of restricted periods, and ultimately 

improve the clarity of the Motor Vehicle 

Use Map (MVUM). Motorized travel up 

to 300 feet off of designated routes to 

access established campsites would be 

permitted in most areas. In certain areas, 

off-route travel would be permitted only 

to access specifically designated 

campsites. 

Existing restrictions for bicycles on all 

but one road would be eliminated. 

Bicycle restrictions on roads would 

drop from a total of 10 miles currently 

to only 1 mile, which would be entirely 

within the CNF seed orchard. Areas 

recommended for wilderness by the 

Forest Plan would become off limits to 

bicycles. System trails available to 

bicycles would drop from 811 miles to 

730 miles (a reduction of 81 miles). 

Over-snow vehicle use would be 

restricted in areas recommended for 

wilderness by the Forest Plan. Within 

the areas where over-snow vehicle use 

would generally be permitted, there 

would continue to be some specific 

routes where over-snow vehicles would 

be restricted. Over-snow vehicle use 

would be prohibited forest-wide from 

October 1 to November 4. The 

transportation system for over-snow 

vehicles would include: 

• 364 miles of groomed snowmobile 

routes (no change from existing 

conditions); 

• 1,322,943 acres generally open to 

over-snow vehicles except for certain 

restricted routes; 

• 3,484 miles of roads where oversnow vehicles would be permitted from 

November 5 until snowmelt in the 

spring, compared to 3,174 acres 

available currently (an increase of 310 

acres); and 

• 503,057 acres closed to over-snow 

vehicles, compared to 302,856 acres 

available currently (a decrease of 

200,201 acres). 

The numbers above are only 

approximate at this time. 

The existing Forest Plan will be 

amended. When the Forest Plan was 

completed in 1987, trail vehicles were 

few and travel planning was focused 

almost completely on roads and 

highway vehicles. Motorized use has 

increased dramatically since then, and 

modern vehicles such as snowmobiles, 

ATV’s, and motorcycles have 

capabilities that could not have been 

envisioned in 1987. The Forest Plan also 

contains some conflicting information 

regarding the intent for management of 

certain areas. Changes may include: 

• Better coordination between the 

level of motorized travel and the focus 

of certain management areas, primarily 

those in roadless areas; 

• Additions or changes to Forest Plan 

standards to permit implementation of 

the national Travel Management rule; 

and 

• Other goals, objectives, and 

standards affecting travel management. 

Possible Alternatives the Forest 

Service will consider include a noaction alternative, which will serve as a 

baseline for comparison of alternatives. 

The proposed action will be considered 

along with additional alternatives that 

will be developed to meet the purpose 

and need for action, and to address 

significant issues identified during 

scoping. 

The Responsible Official is Thomas K. 

Reilly, Clearwater Forest Supervisor, 

Clearwater National Forest, 12730 

Highway 12, Orofino, ID 83544. 

The Decision to be Made is whether 

to adopt the proposed action, in whole 

or in part, or another alternative; and 

what mitigation measures and 

management requirements will be 

implemented. 

The Scoping Period for the EIS is 

being extended with this notice. The 

scoping process will identify issues to 

be analyzed in detail and will lead to 

the development of alternatives to the 

proposal. The Forest Service is seeking 


ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
6456 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2008 / Notices 

information and comments from other 

Federal, State, and local agencies; Tribal 

governments; and organizations and 

individuals who may be interested in or 

affected by the proposed action. 

Comments received in response to this 

notice, including the names and 

addresses of those who comment, will 

be part of the project record and 

available for public review. Public 

meetings were held on December 18, 19, 

and 20, 2007. If additional public 

meetings are scheduled, the times, dates 

and locations for them will be published 

in the Lewiston, Idaho Lewiston 

Morning Tribune. 

Early Notice of Importance of Public 

Participation in Subsequent 

Environmental Review: A draft 

environmental impact statement will be 

prepared for comment. The second 

major opportunity for public input will 

be when the Draft EIS is published. The 

comment period on the draft 

environmental impact statement will be 

45 days from the date the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

publishes the notice of availability in 

the Federal Register. The Draft EIS is 

anticipated to be available for public 

review in June 2008. 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, 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 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 (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 comment 

period for the Draft EIS 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. 

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. 

After the comment period for the 

Draft EIS ends, the Forest Service will 

analyze comments received and address 

them in the Final EIS. The Final EIS is 

scheduled to be released by January 

2009. The Responsible Official (Forest 

Supervisor Thomas K. Reilly) will 

document the decision and rationale in 

a Record of Decision (ROD). The 

decision will be subject to review under 

Forest Service appeal regulations at 36 

CFR Part 215. 

Preliminary Issues identified by the 

Forest Service interdisciplinary team 

include: changing motorized and nonmotorized recreation opportunities, 

costs of road and trail management and 

maintenance, soil issues, effects on 

aquatic environments and species, 

effects on wildlife, the spread of 

noxious weeds, changes in motorized 

access to roads, trails and areas that are 

not designated as part of the travel 

planning analysis, and motorized access 

for people with disabilities. 

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; 

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 

21) 

Dated: January 24, 2008. 

Thomas K. Reilly, 

Clearwater Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. 08–470 Filed 2–1–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory 

Committee 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Lake Tahoe Basin Federal 

Advisory Committee will hold a 

meeting on February 15, 2008 at the 

U.S. Forest Service Office, 35 College 

Drive, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150. 

This Committee, established by the 

Secretary of Agriculture on December 

15, 1998 (64 FR 2876), is chartered to 

provide advice to the Secretary on 

implementing the terms of the Federal 

Interagency Partnership on the Lake 

Tahoe Region and other matters raised 

by the Secretary. 

DATES: The meeting will be held 

February 15, 2008, beginning at 8:30 

a.m. and ending at 10:30 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the U.S. Forest Service Office, 35 

College Drive, South Lake Tahoe, CA 

96150. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arla 

Hains, Lake Tahoe Basin Management 

Unit, Forest Service, 35 College Drive, 

South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150, (530) 

543–2773. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Items to 

be covered on the agenda include: (1) 

Aquatic Invasive Species update; (2) 

SNPLMA Round 9; and, (3) Public 

Comment. All Lake Tahoe Basin Federal 

Advisory Committee meetings are open 

to the public. Interested citizens are 

encouraged to attend at the above 

address. Issues may be brought to the 

attention of the Committee during the 

open public comment period at the 

meeting or by filing written statements 

with the secretary for the Committee 

before or after the meeting. Please refer 

any written comments to the Lake 

Tahoe Basin Management Unit at the 

contact address stated above. 

Dated: January 25, 2008. 

Terri Marceron, 

Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. 08–462 Filed 2–1–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Roadless Area Conservation National 

Advisory Committee 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Roadless Area 

Conservation National Advisory 

Committee will meet in Las Vegas, 

Nevada. The purpose of the meeting is 

to discuss the proposed rule for the 

management of roadless areas on 

National Forest System lands in the 

State of Idaho and to discuss other 

related roadless area matters. 

DATES: The meeting will be held 

February 20 to February 21, 2008, from 

9 a.m. to 5 p.m each day. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the University of Nevada Las Vegas 

(UNLV), Richard Tam Alumni Center, 


ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES