14418 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Notices

percent Wood/Forage, 5.3 percent

Winter Range, 3.5 percent SemiPrimitive, Motorized Recreation, 19

percent Semi-Primitive, Non-Motorized

Recreation and 6.4 percent other

ownerships.

No harvest will be proposed within

the Semi-Primitive, Motorized

Recreation, Semi-Primitive, NonMotorized Recreation Management

Areas or other ownership areas. These

areas are included only for analysis of

effects. The proposed action includes

portions of the Profanity, Bald Snow,

South Huckleberry, and Bangs Roadless

Areas which were considered but not

selected for Wilderness designation.

Preliminary issues identified include:

unroaded areas, recreation, sensitive

plants and animals, visuals, water

quality, timber production, and noxious

weed control.

A range of alternatives will be

considered, including a no-action

alternative. Based on the issues gathered

through scoping, alternatives will vary

in (1) the amount and location of acres

considered for treatment, (2) the amount

of road constructed for access, (3) the

silvicultural and post-harvest treatment

prescribed, and (4) the number, type

and location of other integrated resource

projects.

Initial scoping began in March 1995.

Scoping will include identifying issues,

determining alternative driving issues,

and identifying the objectives for the

alternatives. An informal public meeting

will be held at the Kettle Falls Ranger

District office on April 18, 1995. The

Forest Service is seeking information,

comments, and assistance from other

agencies, organizations, Tribes and

individuals who may be interested in or

affected by the proposed action. This

input will be used in preparation of the

draft EIS. Your comments are

appreciated throughout the analysis

process. The draft EIS is to be filed with

the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) and to be available for public

review by November 1995. At that time,

copies of the draft EIS will be

distributed to interested and affected

agencies, organizations, Tribes, and

members of the public for their review

and comment. EPA will publish a notice

of availability of the draft EIS in the

Federal Register. The comment period

on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the

date the EPA notice appears in the

Federal Register. It is important that

those interested in the management of

the Colville National Forest participate

at that time.

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 EIS 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 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 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 and

concerns 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.)

The final EIS is scheduled for

completion by February 1996. In the

final EIS, the Forest Service is required

to respond to substantive comments

received during the comment period for

the draft EIS. Edward L. Schultz, Forest

Supervisor, is the Responsible Official.

He will decide which, if any, of the

alternative will be implemented. His

decision and rationale for the decision

will be documented in the Record of

Decision, which will be subject to Forest

Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR

215).

Dated: March 7, 1995.

George T. Buckingham,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95–6627 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

First Creek Basin Restoration Project,

Wenatchee National Forest, Chelan

County, WA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, USDA,

will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose

the environmental impacts of a sitespecific proposal for the First Creek

Basin Restoration Project. The proposed

action is partially located within the

original Slide Ridge Roadless Area,

approximately 15 miles northwest of the

town of Chelan, in the First Creek,

Baldy, and Granite Falls Creek drainages

on the Chelan Ranger District of the

Wenatchee National Forest. The

purpose of the EIS will be to develop

and evaluate a range of alternatives for

ecosystem restoration activities within

the First Creek Basin. Alternatives may

include fuel reduction activities,

seeding, reforestation, slope

stabilization, wildlife habitat

restoration, stream channel

stabilization, timber harvest, road/trail

construction, and road/trail obliteration.

The alternatives will include a no

action alternative, and at least one

alternative that maintains the unroaded

character of the proposed project area.

Other alternatives will be designed to

respond to relevant issues. The

proposed project will be consistent with

direction given in the Wenatchee

National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan, as amended by the

April 13, 1994, Record of Decision for

Amendments to Forest Service and

Bureau of Land Management Planning

Documents Within the Range of the

Northern Spotted Owl. This Forest

Service proposal is scheduled for

implementation in 1995–1997. The

agency invites written comments on the

scope of this project. In addition, the

agency gives notice of this analysis so

that interested and affected people are

aware of how they may participate and

contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

and implementation of this proposal

must be received by April 28, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments

and suggestions concerning the scope of

the analysis to Al Murphy, District

Ranger, Chelan Ranger District, PO Box

189, Chelan, Washington 98816.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions and comments about this EIS

should be directed to Lisa Gowe or John

Lampereur, Interdisciplinary Team

Leaders, Chelan Ranger District, PO Box

189, Chelan, Washington 98816; phone

509–682–2576.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

summer of 1994, part of the 135,000

acre Tyee Complex wildfire burned

through the analysis area, leaving
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Notices 14419

thousands of acres of intensely-burned

vegetation, altered soils, and increased

fuel loads. The slopes in the area are

steep and subject to severe erosion. This

analysis was initiated to identify

treatments that will lessen long-term

losses in productivity and increase the

rate of recovery of the ecosystems in the

area. The analysis area is approximately

14,210 acres in size. About 280 acres of

the area are unoccupied spotted owl

habitat, with approximately 100 acres of

this habitat being within a Late

Successional Reserve. In addition, about

6,400 acres of the analysis area is

unroaded.

The proposed action is to treat: (1)

Approximately 4,700 acres in the

ponderosa pine zone; (2) approximately

1,600 acres in the mesic Douglas-fir

zone; and (3) approximately 340 acres in

the high elevation zone. Treatments will

be made through a combination of

activities including: fuel disposal

through the use of prescribed fire;

harvest of dead and damaged trees;

thinning; and slope stabilization. This

proposal will include helicopter yarding

as the preferred method of tree removal,

but may require the construction of

approximately 3 miles of temporary

access roads. A transportation plan for

the unroaded portion of the project area

would also be developed.

To date, the following key issues have

been identified:

Roadless Area management

Late Successional Reserves

Public safety and property

Economics

Cultural resources

Control of noxious weeds

Channel protection/restoration

Access management

Forest fuel management

Scenic quality

Recreation opportunities

Wildlife habitat

Revegetation

Water quality

Biodiversity/forest health

Fish/water/soil stability

The decision to be made through this

analysis is where, how, and to what

extent should the various vegetation

management, fuels reduction and slope

stabilization treatments be implemented

within the First Creek analysis area, and

what roading, if any, should occur

within the currently unroaded area.

A range of alternatives will be

considered, including a no action

alternative, and an alternative that

maintains the unroaded character of the

area. Other alternatives will be

developed in response to issues

received during scoping. All alternatives

will need to respond to specific

conditions in the First Creek Basin.

Public participation will be especially

important at several points during the

analysis. The Forest Service will be

seeking information, comments, and

assistance from Federal, State, tribes,

and local agencies, as well as

individuals or organizations who may

be interested in or affected by the

proposed actions. This information will

be used in preparation of the draft EIS.

The scoping process includes:

1. Identifying potential issues.

2. Identifying issues to be analyzed in

depth.

3. Eliminating non significant issues

or those which have been covered by a

relevant previous environmental

process.

4. Exploring additional alternatives.

5. Identifying potential environmental

effects of the proposed action and

alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and

cumulative effects and connected

actions).

6. Determining potential cooperating

agencies and task assignments.

The draft EIS is expected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and to be available for

public review in June, 1995. At that

time, copies of the draft EIS will be

distributed to interested and affected

agencies, organizations, tribes, and

members of the public for their review

and comment. EPA will publish a notice

of availability of the draft EIS in the

Federal Register.

The comment period on the draft EIS

will be 45 days from the date the EPA

notice appears in the Federal Register.

It is very important that those interested

in the management of the Wenatchee

National Forest participate at that time.

To assist the Forest Service in

identifying and considering issues and

concerns 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 those points).

At this early stage, the Forest Service

believes it is important to give reviewers

notice 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. (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 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.

The final EIS is scheduled to be

completed in August 1995. In the final

EIS, the Forest Service is required to

respond to comments and responses

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 the

decision regarding this proposal. Sonny

O’Neal, Forest Supervisor, Wenatchee

National Forest, is the responsible

official. As the responsible official he

will document the decision and reasons

for the decision in the Record of

Decision. That decision will be subject

to Forest Service appeal regulations (36

CFR 215).

Dated: March 9, 1995.

Mark Morris,

Administrative Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–6628 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting

of the Michigan Advisory Committee

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to

the provisions of the rules and

regulations of the U.S. Commission on

Civil Rights, that a meeting of the

Michigan Advisory Committee to the

Commission will convene from 1:00

p.m. until 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, April

6, 1995, at the Westin Hotel,

Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan

48243. The purpose of the meeting is to

discuss current issues and plan future

activities.

Persons desiring additional

information, or planning a presentation

to the Committee, should contact

Committee Chairperson Janice G.

Frazier at 313–259–8180, or Constance

M. Davis, Director of the Midwestern

Regional Office, 312–353–8311 (TDD