[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 105 (Thursday, May 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27044-27045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13517]



========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 105 / Thursday, May 30, 1996 / 
Notices

[[Page 27044]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Pest Management Program at the R5 Genetic Resource Center, Chico 
in the Pacific Southwest Region, California, in Butte County

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, will prepare a 
draft and final environmental impact statement (EIS) on a proposed 
action to develop an integrated pest management (IPM) program at the R5 
Genetic Resource Center, Chico which is administered by the Mendocino 
National Forest. The Forest Service began an analysis for the nursery 
portion of the site in 1989; however, the project was canceled in the 
May 1, 1995 Federal Register Notice. The scope of the current proposed 
action includes the nursery and seed orchard operations, arboretums, 
and research areas. The administrative site is approximately 209 acres 
in size, and the analysis area is approximately 121 acres. Areas on the 
administrative site which are excluded from this analysis are the 
office buildings and work areas, residential buildings, boundary fence 
lines, Comanche Creek wildlife and recreation area, intermittent stream 
area in the northern portion of the site, the diversion channel, and 
other small wildlife habitat areas. The excluded area is estimated to 
be approximately 88 acres in size. The Forest Service invites written 
comments on the scope of the analysis. In addition, the Forest Service 
gives notice of the environmental analysis and decisionmaking process 
that will occur on the proposed action so that interested and affected 
people are aware of how they may participate and contribute to the 
final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received 
in writing by July 1, 1996, to ensure timely consideration.

ADDRESS: Send written comments to: Lynne Hartman, Director, USDA Forest 
Service, R5 Genetic Resource Center, Chico, 2741 Cramer Lane, Chico, CA 
95928.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hank Switzer, Horticulturist, R5 Genetic Resource Center, Chico, CA 
95928, (916) 895-1176.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The scope of the analysis will consist of a 
container nursery, approximately one acre in size, which has the 
capacity to grow 1.2 million seedlings a year, and 120 acres that are 
in production as seed orchards for restoration of forest ecosystems or 
arboretums that are active in growing plant material for a variety of 
biological, chemical and clinical research programs. Other areas on the 
site such as the administrative buildings, residential buildings, and 
the recreational and wildlife areas are not within the scope of this 
analysis.
    The Forest Service will conduct an environmental analysis to 
determine what type of pest management program will be used at the 
center. The pest management practices that will be analyzed include, 
but are not limited to, control of unwanted vegetation by mechanical 
and chemical methods; control of diseases using sanitation, biological 
control organisms, and fungicides; control of insect pests with 
biological and chemical insecticides, and use of sanitation; and 
control of animal pests through mechanical, chemical, and preventative 
measures.
    In preparing the environmental impact statement, the Forest Service 
will identify and consider a range of alternative pest management 
programs including an alternative that will be based on the principles 
of integrated pest management as required by the Forest Service Manual. 
The ``no action'' alternative will be described as the continuation of 
current pest management practices.
    Public participation will be especially important at several points 
during the analysis. The first point is during the scoping process (40 
CFR 1501.7), which includes:
    1. Defining the scope of the analysis and nature of the decision to 
be made.
    2. Identifying the issues and determining the significant issues 
for consideration and analysis within the environmental impact 
statement.
    3. Defining the proper make-up of the interdisciplinary team.
    4. Exploring possible alternatives.
    5. Identifying potential environmental effects.
    6. Determining potential cooperating agencies.
    7. Identifying groups or individuals interested or affected by the 
decision.
    The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and 
assistance from Federal, State and local agencies and other individuals 
or organizations interested in or affected by the proposed action.
    Public participation will be solicited by personal notification of 
known interested and affected publics. In addition, news releases will 
be used to keep the public informed. Input from interested people and 
organizations will be used in preparation of the draft environmental 
impact statement.
    The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for 
public review by September 1996. At that time, EPA will publish a 
notice of availability of the draft environmental impact statement in 
the Federal Register.
    The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will 
be 45 days from the date the EPA's notice of availability appears in 
the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in the 
proposed action participate at that time. To be most helpful, comments 
on the draft environmental impact statement should be as specific as 
possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merits of 
the alternatives discussed (see Council on Environmental Quality 
Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National 
Environmental Policy Act 40 CFR 1503.3)
    In addition, Federal court decisions have established that 
reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their 
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is 
meaningfull and alerts an agency to the reviewers' position and 
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 
553 (1978). Environmental objections that

[[Page 27045]]

could have been raised at the draft stage may be waived if not raised 
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement. 
City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Circuit, 1986) and 
Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 
1980). The reason for this is to ensure 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.
    Following the comment period on the draft environmental impact 
statement, comments will be analyzed, considered, and responded to by 
the Forest Service in preparing the final environmental impact 
statement. The final environmental impact statement is scheduled to be 
completed by July 1997.
    The responsible official will consider the comments and responses; 
environmental consequences discussed in the environmental impact 
statement; and applicable laws, regulations and policies in making a 
decision regarding this proposal. The decision and reasons for the 
decision will be documented in the Record of Decision.
    Daniel K. Chisholm, Forest Supervisor, Mendocino National Forest, 
is the responsible official.

    Dated May 22, 1996.

Daniel K. Chisholm,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 96-13517 Filed 5-29-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M