14414 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Notices

authority of the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 301 et

seq.). The FDA published a statement of

policy on foods derived from new plant

varieties in the Federal Register on May

29, 1992 (57 FR 22984–23005). The FDA

statement of policy includes a

discussion of the FDA’s authority for

ensuring food safety under the FFDCA,

and provides guidance to industry on

the scientific considerations associated

with the development of foods derived

from new plant varieties, including

those plants developed through the

techniques of genetic engineering.

Zeneca has notified the FDA that it has

completed its food safety and

nutritional assessment for the subject

tomato lines.

In accordance with § 340.6(d) of the

regulations, we are publishing this

notice to inform the public that APHIS

will accept written comments regarding

the Petition for Determination of

Nonregulated Status from any interested

person for a period of 60 days from the

date of this notice. The petition and any

comments received are available for

public review, and copies of the petition

may be ordered (see the ADDRESSES

section of this notice).

After the comment period closes,

APHIS will review the data submitted

by the petitioner, all written comments

received during the comment period,

and any other relevant information.

Based on the available information,

APHIS will furnish a response to the

petitioners, either approving the

petition in whole or in part, or denying

the petition. APHIS will then publish a

notice in the Federal Register

announcing the regulatory status of

Zeneca/Petoseed’s tomato lines B, Da,

and F and the availability of APHIS’

written decision.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150aa-150jj, 151–167,

and 1622n; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51,

and 371.2(c).

Done in Washington, DC, this 13th day of

March 1995.

Terry L. Medley,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 95–6651 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

Forest Service

Elsmere Canyon Proposed Solid Waste

Management Facility

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Revised date for end of

comment period.

SUMMARY: The Angeles National Forest

made available an Environmental

Impact Statement for the Elsmere

Canyon Proposed Solid Waste

Management Facility on January 20,

1995. This was announced in the

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 13 /

Friday, January 20, 1995 by the

Environmental Protection Agency,

under the Environmental Impact

Statements, Notice of Availability. The

EIS No. is 950009, Draft EIS. The

comment period was to end on April 28,

1995.

The Angeles National Forest has

extended the comment period.

Comments are due by close of business,

August 4, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Paul Johnson, Deputy Forest Supervisor

at 818–574–5217 or Charles McDonald

at 818–574–5257 or written questions

may be directed to the U.S. Forest

Service, Elsmere EIS, 701 N. Santa Anita

Ave., Arcadia, CA 91006.

Dated: March 10, 1995.

Paul Johnson,

Deputy Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95–6633 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

Beaver/Cedar Land Exchange;

Clearwater National Forest; Clearwater

and Latah Counties, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; Intent to prepare an

environmental Impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Clearwater

National Forest, with assistance from

Potlatch Corporation, will prepare an

EIS (environmental impact statement)

for a proposal to exchange National

Forest land for Potlatch owned land.

The project area is located on the North

Fork Ranger District on the Clearwater

National Forest and the Palouse Ranger

District on the St. Joe National Forest

and administered by the Clearwater

National Forest, head-quartered in

Orofino, Idaho. The Agreement to

Initiate a land exchange was signed by

Potlatch Corporation on September 17,

1993, and the Forest Service on October

8, 1993. This exchange is proposed

pursuant to the General Exchange Acts

of March 1, 1911 and March 20, 1922,

as amended, and the Federal Land

Policy Management Act of October 21,

1976.

The EIS will tier to the Clearwater

National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan Final EIS of

September, 1987, which provides

overall guidance of all land management

activities on the Clearwater National

Forest. Analyses will also be conducted

in compliance with the Stipulation of

Dismissal agreed to for the lawsuit

between the Forest Service and the

Sierra Club, et al (signed September 13,

1993).

The agency invites written comments

and suggestions on the issues and

management opportunities for the area

being analyzed.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of the analysis should be received

within 45 days following publication of

this notice to receive timely

consideration in the preparation of the

Draft EIS. The Draft EIS is anticipated to

be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency in August 1995. The

Final EIS and Record of Decision are

expected to be issued in December of

1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

and suggestions on the proposed action

or requests to be placed on the project

mailing list to James L. Caswell, Forest

Supervisor, Clearwater National Forest,

12730 U.S. Highway 12, Orofino, ID,

83544. FAX: 208–476–8329.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bill Jones, Interdisciplinary Team

Leader, Clearwater National Forest,

Supervisor’s Office, telephone (208)

476–4541.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Potlatch

Corporation owns approximately thirtyseven sections of land, each containing

approximately 640 acres, within the

Cedars-Trout area of the North Fork

Ranger District. These sections alternate

with National Forest sections, and

together they comprise what is referred

to as a ‘‘checkerboard’’ area on the

Clearwater National Forest. The

majority of this area is unroaded and is

adjacent to the Upper North Fork and

Great Burn roadless areas. Large

portions of the area were impacted by

the 1910 burn and have returned to

stands of lodgepole pine, where as, the

unburned areas support stands of

western redcedar, grand fir, Douglas-fir,

western larch, Engelmann spruce, and

subalpine fir. A good elk population

inhabits the area, as do mule deer, white

tail deer, moose, mountain lion, river

otter, black bear, and maybe some

mountain goats in the higher elevations.

Fishing is excellent with an abundance

of cutthroat trout and bull trout, with

some brook trout in the smaller cold

streams. The area contains the popular

Cedars Campground and is adjacent to

a lot of historic gold mining activity in

Moose City and the surrounding

country.

The Beaver Block, owned by the

Forest Service, is characterized as an

island of timber surrounded by cut-over

private lands. It has a good gravel road
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Notices 14415

system and has been intensively

managed since the 1940’s. The area is

very productive due to a good ash cap,

that once supported large stands of

western white pine. Western redcedar,

grand fir, Douglas-fir, and minor

amounts of Engelmann spruce, western

white pine, ponderosa pine, and

western larch now inhabit the area. The

area provides excellent habitat for elk,

and its rolling dissected topography is a

favorite place for big-game hunters. Also

present are moose, black bear, and white

tail deer. Fishing is fair and is limited

to brook trout in the South Fork of

Beaver Creek. There is a lot of historic

evidence of old logging cord wood roads

and camp sites within the area.

The Clearwater Forest Plan provides

guidance for land exchange within the

potentially affected area through its

goals, objectives, standards, guidelines

and management area direction. The

areas of proposed land exchange would

occur mostly within Management Area

E1. There are several inclusions of

Management Area C4 within the Beaver

Block area. Below is a brief description

of the applicable management direction.

Management Area E1—Timber

Management—Provide optimum,

sustained production of timber products

in a cost-effective manner while

protecting soil and water quality. Lands

Goal—Seek opportunities to consolidate

land ownership through land exchange.

Management Area C4—Elk Winter

Range/Timber—Provide sufficient

winter forage and thermal cover for

existing and projected big game

populations while achieving timber

production outputs. Lands Goal—

Acquire private inholdings.

Initial negotiations began in 1985

with DAW Forest Products Company on

a land exchange involving federal and

non-federal parcels within the CedarsTrout area. DAW later decided to get out

of the area totally in favor of acquiring

federal property on the Lolo National

Forest to facilitate their mill in Superior,

Montana. As this would take legislative

action, DAW did not pursue this action

and decided to not engage in a land

exchange.

In January 1993, the Clearwater

National Forest was approached by a

local real estate representative wanting

to know if the Forest would be

interested in a land exchange involving

DAW, the State of Idaho, and the Forest

Service. Under this proposal, DAW

would exchange their lands in the

Cedars-Trout area to the State of Idaho

for some State land near St. Maries,

Idaho. The State would in turn

exchange their newly acquired CedarsTrout parcels for the federally owned

Beaver Block. Before this proposal could

be acted upon, all of the property owned

by DAW went up for sale.

Later that year Potlatch Corporation

informed the Forest that they were

interested in purchasing the CedarsTrout area from DAW, and asked if the

Forest would be interested in a land

exchange for the Beaver Block. On

August 19, 1993, a letter was sent to

Potlatch Corporation stating the Forest

was interested in the exchange, but,

with no guarantees that the exchange

would be consummated. After some

internal scoping, an Agreement to

initiate was signed by both Potlatch

Corporation and the Forest Service.

Later in September, Potlatch

Corporation and Bennett Lumber

Company co-purchased the CedarsTrout area as well as the other DAW

owned lands on the Palouse Ranger

District. Potlatch Corporation is

currently giving Bennett Lumber

Company some of their other land

holdings in exchange for sole ownership

of the newly acquired DAW lands.

As a result of internal scoping and

negotiations with Potlatch, the

following tracts are being proposed for

exchange: Nonfederal Land (Property

that Potlatch Corporation will consider

exchanging)

Location Acres Total

T40N, R10E,

Clearwater

County, North

Fork Ranger District:

Sec 1 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2N1⁄2,S1⁄2 ... ................. 650.08

T40N, R11E,

Clearwater

County, North

Fork Ranger District:

Sec 1 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4,S1⁄2 . 649.28

Sec 3 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2N1⁄2,S1⁄2 ... 652.24

Sec 4 Lots 2,4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

SW1⁄4 ............. 368.27

Sec 5 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4,S1⁄2 . 650.08

Sec 7 Lots 1,2,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

NE1⁄4,E1⁄2SE1⁄4 388.49

Sec 8

N1⁄2,W1⁄2SW1⁄4 400.00

Sec 9 all ............ 640.00

Sec 10 all .......... 640.00

Sec 11 all .......... 640.00

Sec 13 all .......... 640.00

Sec 14 all .......... 640.00

Sec 15

N1⁄2,SE1⁄4,

E1⁄2SW1⁄4 ....... 560.00

Sec 23 E1⁄2NE1⁄4 080.00

6,948.36

Location Acres Total

T40N, R12E,

Clearwater

County, North

Fork Ranger District:

Sec 5 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4,S1⁄2 . 648.88

Sec 7 Lots 1–4,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

E1⁄2SW1⁄4,E1⁄2 618.80

Sec 9 all ............ 640.00

Sec 17 all .......... 640.00

Sec 19 Lots 1,2,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

NE1⁄4,E1⁄2SE1⁄4 390.48

2,938.16

T41N, R10E,

Clearwater

County, North

Fork Ranger District:

Sec 13 all .......... 640.00

Sec 23 all .......... 640.00

Sec 25 all .......... 640.00

Sec 27 all .......... 640.00

Sec 33 all .......... 640.00

Sec 35 all .......... 640.00

3,840.00

T41N, R11E,

Clearwater

County, North

Fork Ranger District:

Sec 3 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4,S1⁄2 . 644.04

Sec 9 all ............ 640.00

Sec 11 all .......... 640.00

Sec 15 all .......... 640.00

Sec 17 all .......... 640.00

Sec 19 Lots 1–4,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

E1⁄2SW1⁄4,E1⁄2 631.36

Sec 21 all .......... 640.00

Sec 23 all .......... 640.00

Sec 25 all .......... 640.00

Sec 28

SE1⁄4SW1⁄4,

S1⁄2SE1⁄4,

NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 ...... 160.000

Sec 29 all .......... 640.00

Sec 31 Lots 1–4,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

E1⁄2SW1⁄4,E1⁄2 638.00

Sec 32 all .......... 640.00

Sec 33 all .......... 640.00

Sec 35 all .......... 640.00

9,113.40

Subtotal acres

in CedarsTrout area .. 23,490.00

Nonfederal Land

in the Neva

Hill Area

T40N, R1E, Clearwater County,

Palouse Ranger

District:

Sec 22

NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 ...... ................. 40.00
14416 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Notices

Location Acres Total

Nonfederal Land

in the Elk

Creek Drainage

T39N, R2E, Clearwater County,

Palouse Ranger

District:

Sec 11

SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 ..... 40.00

Sec 14 E1⁄2,

SE1⁄4NW1⁄4,

E1⁄2SW1⁄4,

SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 .... 480.00

Sec 15 Lots 3,4,

E1⁄2SW1⁄4,

NW1⁄4SE1⁄4,

S1⁄2SE1⁄4 ........ 279.08

Sec 21 Lots 2,3, 86.10

Sec 22 E1⁄2,

NE1⁄4SW1⁄4,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 ... 480.00

1,365.18

Nonfederal Land

in the Columbia Mine Area

T42N, R1W, Latah

County, Palouse

Ranger District:

Sec 7 Mineral

Survey 3311 .. 34.09

Sec 8 Mineral

Survey 3311 .. 45.00

79.09

Nonfederal Land

in the Mt.

Gulch Area

T43N, R1W, Latah

County, Palouse

Ranger District:

Sec 31 Mineral

Survey 2425 ...... ................. 56.62

Subtotal acres on

Palouse Ranger

District ............... 1,540.89

Total Nonfederal

land for possible

acquisition ......... 25,030.89

Outstanding

Rights: Subject

to the rights of

the United States

and third parties

recited in the

patent from the

United States.

Federal lands

(Property the

Forest Service

Will Consider

Exchanging)

T40N, R6E, Clearwater County,

North Fork

Ranger District:

Sec 31 Lots 1–4,

E1⁄2W1⁄2, E1⁄2 . 633.96

Sec 32

W1⁄2,SE1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4 ........ 560.00

Location Acres Total

Sec 33

N1⁄2NE1⁄4,

NW1⁄4SE1⁄4,

NW1⁄4,

N1⁄2SW1⁄4,

SE1⁄4NE1⁄4 ...... 400.00

Sec 30 Lots 3,4,

SE1⁄4SW1⁄4,

SE1⁄4SE1⁄4 ...... 156.56

1,750.52

T39N, R6E, Clearwater County,

North Fork

Ranger District:

Sec 4 Lots 3,4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

W1⁄2SW1⁄4,

SE1⁄4SW1⁄4 ..... 285.66

Sec 5 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4S1⁄2 .. 649.20

Sec 6 Lots 1–7,

SE1⁄4NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4,

E1⁄2SW1⁄4,

SE1⁄4 .............. 638.49

Sec 7 Lots 1–4,

E1⁄2W1⁄2,E1⁄2 .. 637.20

Sec 8 all ............ 640.00

Sec 9 W1⁄2NE1⁄4,

NW1⁄4,

N1⁄2SW1⁄4,

SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 .... 360.00

Sec 16 NW1⁄4 .... 160.00

Sec 17 all .......... 640.00

Sec 18 Lots 1–4,

E1⁄2W1⁄2, E1⁄2 . 637.64

Sec 19 Lots 1–4,

E1⁄2W1⁄2, E1⁄2 . 637.32

Sec 20 N1⁄2,

N1⁄2S1⁄2,

SW1⁄4SW1⁄4,

SE1⁄4SE1⁄4 ...... 560.00

Sec 30 Lots 1–4,

NE1⁄4SW1⁄4,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

W1⁄2NE1⁄4 ....... 358.72

Sec 31 Lot 1 ...... 39.82

6,244.05

T39N, R5E, Clearwater County,

North Fork

Ranger District:

Sec 1 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4,S1⁄2 . 639.44

Sec 2 Lots 1–4,

S1⁄2NW1⁄4,

S1⁄2NE1⁄4,S1⁄2 . 637.72

Sec 11 NE1⁄4,

E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

SE1⁄4,

S1⁄2SW1⁄4,

NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 ..... 520.00

Sec 12 all .......... 640.00

Sec 13 all .......... 640.00

Sec 14 all .......... 640.00

Sec 15

E1⁄2NE1⁄4,

SE1⁄4,

S1⁄2SW1⁄4 ....... 320.00

Sec 23 E1⁄2,

NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 .... 360.00

Sec 24 all .......... 640.00

Location Acres Total

Sec 25 all .......... 640.00

Sec 26 all .......... 640.00

Sec 27 E1⁄2,

S1⁄2SW1⁄4,

NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 ..... 440.00

Sec 34 NW1⁄4,

N1⁄2NE1⁄4,

W1⁄2SW1⁄4 ...... 320.00

Sec 35

NE1⁄4NE1⁄4,

S1⁄2SE1⁄4,

NW1⁄4NE1⁄4,

N1⁄2NW1⁄4,

SE1⁄4NW1⁄4 ..... 280.00

Sec 36

N1⁄2NE1⁄4,

W1⁄2,W1⁄2SE1⁄4 480.00

7,837.16

Total Federal

Acres Identified for Exchange ....... 15,831.73

Land reservations of the United

States, exceptions to title and uses to be

recognized.

A range of alternatives will be

considered, including a no action

alternative and the proposal identified

above. Based on the issues identified

through scoping, all action alternatives

will vary in the number of acres to be

exchanged, the location of the acres to

be exchanged, and the kind of

mitigation measures. Issues will drove

the formulation of feasible alternatives,

as will acceptance of each alternative by

Potlatch Corporation and the Forest

Service.

The EIS will analyze the direct,

indirect and cumulative environmental

effects of the alternatives. Past, present

and projected activities on both private

and National Forest lands will be

considered. The EIS will disclose the

analysis of site-specific mitigation

measures and their effectiveness.

Comments from the public and other

agencies will be used in preparation of

the Draft EIS.

The scoping process will continue to

be used to:

1. Identify potential issues.

2. Identify major issues to be analyzed

in depth.

3. Eliminate minor issues or those

which have been covered by a

relevant previous environmental

analysis, such as the Clearwater

Forest Plan EIS.

4. Identify alternatives to the proposed

action.

5. Identify potential environmental

effects of the proposed action and

alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect and

cumulative effects).

6. Determine potential cooperating

agencies and task assignments.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Notices 14417

Preliminary issues identified as a

result of internal and public scoping

include: equal value of land being

exchanged, plus, effects of the proposal

on wildlife habitat, old growth habitat,

water quality, riparian areas, fisheries,

roadless areas, federal investigations

already made, revenues to the counties,

road access, deferred road maintenance,

fire protection boundaries, timber

program, visual quality of the area,

recreation, and effects on threatened,

endangered and sensitive species. This

list will be verified, expanded and/or

modified based on continued scoping

for this proposal.

Public participation is important all

through the analysis process. Two key

time periods have been identified for

receipt of formal comments on the

proposal and analysis:

1. Scoping period, which starts with

publication of this notice and

continues for the next 45 days; and

2. Review of the Draft EIS in September

and October, 1995.

The Forest Service expects to file the

Draft EIS with the Environmental

Protection Agency in August 1995. 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 Final EIS and

Record of Decision are expected in

December 1995.

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 a draft EIS 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 EIS stage but that are

not raised until after completion of the

final EIS may be waived or dismissed by

the courts. Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v.

Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D.

Wisc. 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 EIS.

To assist the Forest Service in

identifying and considering issues on

the proposed action, comments on the

Draft EIS should be as specific as

possible. It is also helpful if comments

refer to specific pages or chapters of the

Draft EIS.

Comments may also address the

adequacy of the Draft EIS 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.)

I am the responsible official for this

environmental impact statement. My

address is Clearwater National Forest,

Forest Supervisor’s Office, 12730

Highway 12, Orofino, ID 83544.

Dated: March 8, 1995.

James L. Caswell,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95–6551 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

Nosiy Divide Timber Sale and Other

Integrated Resource Projects, Colville

National Forest, Pend Oreille County,

WA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Cancellation Notice.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, USDA, is

no longer involved in the preparation of

an environmental impact statement for

the Noisy Divide Timber Sale and Other

Integrated Resource Projects on the

Sullivan Lake Ranger District of the

Colville National Forest (Pend Oreille

County, Washington). The Notice of

Intent, published in the Federal

Register on January 2, 1991 is hereby

rescinded (56 FR 58).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tim Bertram, Project Leader, Sullivan

Lake Ranger District, Colville National

Forest; at Metaline Falls, Washington

99153, or phone 509–446–2681.

Dated: March 7, 1995.

George T. Buckingham,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95–6626 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

North Sherman and Fritz Timber Sales,

Colville National Forest, Ferry County,

WA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, USDA,

will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) on a proposal to harvest

and regenerate timber and to construct

and reconstruct roads. The proposed

projects will be in compliance with the

1988 Colville National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan (The Plan)

which provides the overall guidance for

management of this area for the next ten

years. The projects are proposed within

portions of the Sherman Creek and

South Fork Sherman Creek drainages on

the Kettle Falls Ranger District in fiscal

year 1996. The Colville National Forest

invites written comments and

suggestions on the scope of the analysis.

The agency will give notice of the full

environmental analysis and decision

making process that will occur on the

proposal so as to provide interested and

affected people awareness as to how

they may participate and contribute in

the final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of the analysis should be received in

writing by April 30, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and

suggestions concerning the management

of this area to Meredith Webster, District

Ranger, 225 W. 11th, Kettle Falls,

Washington 99141.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions about the proposed project

work and EIS should be directed to

Ralph Egan, Planning Assistant, 225 W.

11th, Kettle Falls, Washington 99141

(phone: 509–738–6111).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

proposed action includes harvesting

timber and constructing roads on North

Sherman and Fritz timber sales.

The timber sales are proposed within

the Sherman Creek and South Fork

Sherman Creek drainages on the Kettle

Falls Ranger District. This analysis will

evaluate a range of alternatives for

implementation of the timber sales. The

area being analyzed is 69,557 acres.

The North Sherman timber sale would

be located north of Washington State

Highway 20 with the proposed harvest

centered between McGahee and Elbow

Creeks. The majority of the harvest

would be landscape scale selection

harvest. The proposed sale would

harvest 10.0 MMBF from 2,000 acres.

The Fritz timber sale would be

located south of Washington State

Highway 20 with the proposed harvest

centered around upper Fritz Creek,

Scalawag Ridge and Paradise Peak. The

majority of the harvest would be

landscape scale selection harvest. The

proposed sale would harvest 10.0

MMBF from 2,000 acres.

The Draft EIS will be tiered to The

Plan. The Plan’s Management Area

direction for this analysis area is

approximately 4.1 percent Old Growth

Dependent Species Habitat, 8.3 percent

Recreation, 30 percent Scenic/Timber,

1.3 percent Scenic/Winter Range, 22.1