Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 24, 2014 / Notices 77445 

219 Subpart B). The administrative 

review process provides an individual 

or entity an opportunity for an 

independent Forest Service review and 

resolution of issues before the final 

approval of a plan, plan amendment or 

plan revision. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments or 

questions concerning this notice should 

be addressed to Rio Grande National 

Forest, Attn.: Plan Revision, 1803 W. 

Hwy 160, Monte Vista, CO 81144, or by 

email to: comments-rocky-mountain-riogrande@fs.fed.us (subject heading titled 

Forest Plan Revision). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Waring, Forest Planner, (719) 852– 

6215. Individuals who use 

telecommunication devices for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 

between 5 a.m. and 5 p.m., Pacific Time, 

Monday through Friday. More 

information on the planning process can 

also be found on the Rio Grande 

National Forest Web site at http://www.

fs.usda.gov/riogrande. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

National Forest Management Act 

(NFMA) of 1976 requires that every 

National Forest System (NFS) unit 

develop a land management plan. On 

April 9, 2012, the Forest Service 

finalized its land management planning 

rule (2012 Planning Rule), which 

provides broad programmatic direction 

to National Forests and National 

Grasslands for developing and 

implementing their land management 

plans. Forest plans describe the strategic 

direction for management of forest 

resources for fifteen to twenty years, and 

are adaptive and amendable as 

conditions change over time. 

Under the 2012 Planning Rule, the 

assessment of ecological, social, and 

economic trends and conditions is the 

first stage of the planning process. The 

second stage is a development and 

decision process guided, in part, by the 

NEPA and includes the preparation of a 

draft environmental impact statement 

and revised Forest Plan for public 

review and comment, and the 

preparation of the final environmental 

impact statement and revised Forest 

Plan. The third stage of the process is 

monitoring and feedback, which is 

ongoing over the life of the revised 

forest plans. 

With this notice, the agency invites 

other governments, non-governmental 

parties, and the public to contribute to 

the development of the assessment 

report. The assessment will rapidly 

evaluate the sustainability of existing 

ecological, economic, and social 

conditions and trends within the 

context of the broader landscape. It will 

help inform the planning process 

through the use of Best Available 

Scientific Information, while also taking 

into account other forms of knowledge, 

such as local information, national 

perspectives, and native knowledge. 

Lastly, the assessment will help identify 

the need to change the existing 1996 

plan. 

Collaboration as part of the 

assessment phase supports the 

development of relationships of key 

stakeholders throughout the plan 

revision process, and is an essential step 

to understanding current conditions, 

available data, and feedback needed to 

support a strategic, efficient planning 

process. As public meetings, other 

opportunities for public engagement, 

and public review and comment 

opportunities are identified to assist 

with the development of the forest plan 

revision, public announcements will be 

made, notifications will be posted on 

the Forest’s Web site at http://www.fs.

usda.gov/riogrande, and information 

will be sent out to the Forest’s mailing 

list. If anyone is interested in being on 

the Forest’s mailing list to receive these 

notifications, please contact Amy 

Waring, Forest Planner, at the mailing 

address identified above, by sending an 

email to: comments-rocky-mountain-riogrande@fs.fed.us (subject heading titled 

Forest Plan Revision). 

Responsible Official: The responsible 

official for the revision of the land 

management plan for the Rio Grande 

National Forest is Dan Dallas, Forest 

Supervisor, Rio Grande National Forest, 

1803 W. Hwy 160, Monte Vista, CO 

81144. 

Dated: December 17, 2014. 

Dan S. Dallas, 

Forest Supervisor, Rio Grande National 

Forest. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30189 Filed 12–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

King Fire Restoration Project, 

Eldorado National Forest, Placer and 

El Dorado Counties, California 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: The Eldorado National Forest 

proposes to restore portions of the King 

Fire of 2014. The proposed action 

includes hazard tree removal, fuel 

reduction, salvage logging, reforestation, 

road improvements, watershed 

improvements, and research. 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis must be received by 

January 23, 2015. The draft 

environmental impact statement is 

expected March 2015 and the final 

environmental impact statement is 

expected June 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

100 Forni Road, Placerville, CA 95667, 

Attention: King Fire Restoration Project. 

Comments may also be sent via email to 

comments-pacificsouthwest-eldorado@

fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to 530–621– 

5297. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Ferrell, Team Leader, Eldorado 

National Forest, 100 Forni Road, 

Placerville, CA 95667, phone 530–642– 

5146 or email to pferrell@fs.fed.us. A 

scoping package, maps and other 

information are online at: http://www.fs.

fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php

?project=45952. 

Individuals who use 

telecommunication devices for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

General Background 

The King Fire started September 13, 

2104 and burned approximately 97,000 

acres on the Eldorado National Forest 

and on private timberlands. The project 

area for this analysis is the 

approximately 63,000 acre portion of 

the King Fire on Eldorado National 

Forest lands within the Georgetown, 

Pacific, and Placerville Ranger Districts 

administrative boundary. The project 

area includes all or portions of 30 

watersheds. The large high severity 

portions of this fire resulted in adverse 

effects to forest resources such as soil, 

riparian areas, and wildlife habitat, and 

killed thousands of trees that contribute 

to hazardous conditions for people and 

extremely high fuel loading over time. 

Purpose and Need for Action 

The underlying need(s) for this 

proposal include: Reduce the risk from 

falling dead, dying, and defective trees 

to the safety of forest visitors and 

workers, and of damaging private 

property, structures, and cultural 

resources; reduce accumulation of fuel 

over the long term in strategic fire 

management areas for the purpose of 

improving the ability to manage and 

control future fires; maintain the 

ecological integrity of post fire habitat 

while restoring diverse conifer forests 

and laying the foundation for resiliency 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

77446 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 24, 2014 / Notices 

into the future; expeditiously recover 

timber killed by the fire commensurate 

with available markets, for the purpose 

of generating funds to offset the cost of 

restoration activities and contribute to 

societal needs for wood products; take 

advantage of research opportunities to 

increase knowledge regarding the effects 

of large fires on the environment, how 

to reduce the risk of future fires, and 

how to restore resilient forests after 

fires; reduce existing and potential 

sources of soil movement and 

sedimentation to streams, and reduce 

large woody fuel accumulation in 

sensitive areas where a future fire is 

likely to have detrimental effects on 

soil, water, and cultural resources. 

Proposed Action 

In developing the proposed action, 

consideration was given to areas that 

burned with high severity outside the 

natural range of variation; exclusion of 

hardwood/shrub/grassland areas that 

would continue to persist without 

treatment; maximizing the probability of 

California spotted owl persistence 

within and adjacent to the King Fire, 

maintaining habitat suitable for fire 

obligate wildlife including the blackbacked woodpecker, promoting a 

mosaic of post-fire vegetation important 

for species associated with early seral 

habitats, and minimizing impacts to the 

threatened Sierra Nevada yellow-legged 

frog and California red-legged frog; 

conifer seed dispersal and the need to 

plant trees in areas unlikely to naturally 

regenerate; identification of wildland 

urban interface defense zones where the 

focus is on protecting life and property; 

strategic fuel management zones to 

contain wildfire and facilitate 

prescribed fire; and generally eliminate 

steep slopes from the proposed action 

where treatments would be 

prohibitively expensive, and where 

treatment was not needed to meet other 

objectives of the project. 

Areas identified for treatment are: 

approximately 1,200 acres in the 

wildland urban interface (WUI) defense 

zone where increasing fuel loads pose a 

hazard to community fire protection; 

approximately 7,300 acres within the 

fire management zone which are 

strategic areas identified to establish a 

safe and effective place for future fire 

suppression; approximately 5,600 acres 

in the forest resiliency area where 

reestablishment of conifer forests are 

desired, ecologically sustainable, and 

can be managed to have a high 

probability of surviving subsequent 

wildfire; other specific areas where 

treatment would occur for research and 

watershed improvement; and roads 

needing hazard tree removal 

(approximately 429 miles), repair, 

closure, and/or decommissioning. 

Within Strategic Fuels Management 

Zones, WUI Defense Zones, and Forest 

Resiliency Areas, remove dead conifer 

trees using in excess of soil cover needs 

and wildlife snag retention levels needs. 

In the Forest Resiliency Areas, snags 

will generally be retained in two to five 

acre patches covering 15 to 20 percent 

of a treatment area and incorporating 

the largest snags available. No standing 

snags will be retained in WUI Defense 

Zones, and four large snags per acre up 

to 12sq. ft./acre basal area in a grouped 

configuration will be retained in 

Strategic Fire Management Zones. Trees 

to be removed have brown foliage or no 

foliage remaining as viewed from the 

ground. Mortality monitoring for tree 

removal may be conducted up to 4 years 

following the fire. 

Within Hazard Areas, remove hazard 

trees along Forest Service system roads 

open to the public and roads needed for 

access to treatment areas, along private 

residential property, adjacent to 

structures, and in specific cultural 

resource sites identified by the 

archeologist. Hazard trees to be removed 

are dead and dying trees that have 

potential to reach the road or property 

and live trees that are sufficiently 

damaged or defective to pose a risk of 

falling within the next 5 years. 

Methods include mechanical or other 

ground based logging on approximately 

11,800 acres, skyline or helicopter 

logging on approximately 700 acres, 

hand treatments on approximately 700 

acres, and mastication or machine piling 

on approximately 100 acres. 

In areas identified above, the 

maximum desired surface fuel loading 

is 6–10 tons per acre of material <3′′ 

diameter. In areas described above 

where additional treatment is needed to 

reduce fuel loading to the desired level 

or provide additional soil cover, tops, 

limbs, and unmerchantable boles of 

harvested trees, and small dead trees 

that are not removed using the logging 

methods described, would be treated by 

one or more of the following methods: 

cutting and scattering to within 18 

inches of the ground, cutting and left in 

place, hand piling, mastication or 

chipping with a track mounted 

masticator or chipper; and/or cutting 

trees and piling using tractors or rubber 

tired machinery with brush rakes or 

grapples. Piles would be burned. 

Within portions of watersheds 

determined to be at high risk of soil 

erosion and sedimentation which could 

negatively impact watershed resources, 

treatments include: Increasing 

groundcover using onsite or imported 

material (e.g. mastication, lop and 

scatter, mulching), obliteration of 

existing disturbances, and removal of 

excess woody material. 

Planting of seedlings would occur on 

approximately 14,000 acres of conifer 

forest types where a forested community 

is the desired condition, but where 

natural regeneration of a desired species 

composition and density are not 

expected to occur within the next 

several decades, and where stands can 

reasonably be effectively and efficiently 

managed into the future. Planting 

strategies would be designed to 

maintain ecological integrity while 

balancing future climate projections, 

economics, long-term management 

feasibility, and desired conditions. 

Except in the limited circumstances 

where site preparation to treat residual 

fuels is not needed, salvage logging 

would be completed before planting 

takes place. At the time of planting, the 

planted seedlings would be released 

from competing vegetation by hand 

scraping a radius of 2 to 5 feet around 

the seedlings depending on competing 

vegetation and follow-up treatment 

planned. Follow-up manual and 

herbicide release of seedlings from 

competing vegetation would occur 

where competing vegetation is expected 

to reduce seedling survival or growth 

below an acceptable level. Proposed 

research projects are to study the effect 

of varying salvage and re-planting 

intensities on the fuel complex and 

native/non-native species abundance 

over time; study forest resilience after 

high-severity wildfire: the effect of snag 

density and distribution on the 

retention of forest ecosystem functions; 

and additional projects to be 

determined. 

Responsible Official 

Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National 

Forest. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The decision to be made is whether to 

adopt and implement the proposed 

action, an alternative to the proposed 

action, or take no action to restore the 

King Fire area. 

Scoping Process 

This notice of intent initiates the 

scoping process, which guides the 

development of the environmental 

impact statement. A scoping open house 

will be held January 13, 2015 in 

Placerville, CA. Comments specific to 

the location, methods, and actions 

proposed are the most helpful. 

It is important that reviewers provide 

their comments at such times and in 

such manner that they are useful to the 

agency’s preparation of the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 24, 2014 / Notices 77447 

environmental impact statement. 

Therefore, comments should be 

provided prior to the close of the 

comment period and should clearly 

articulate the reviewer’s concerns and 

contentions. 

Comments received in response to 

this solicitation, including names and 

addresses of those who comment, will 

be part of the public record for this 

proposed action. Comments submitted 

anonymously will be accepted and 

considered, however. 

Dated: December 18, 2014. 

Laurence Crabtree, 

Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. 2014–30158 Filed 12–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Intermountain Region, Payette National 

Forest, Council Ranger District, Idaho, 

Middle Fork Weiser River Landscape 

Restoration Project 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: The Council Ranger District of 

the Payette National Forest will prepare 

an Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) for the Middle Fork Weiser River 

Landscape Restoration Project. The 

Middle Fork Weiser River Landscape 

Restoration Project area is located 

approximately six miles southeast of 

Council, Idaho, primarily in the Middle 

Fork Weiser River watershed. It 

comprises approximately 50,000 acres 

and is within the boundaries of the 

Council Ranger District of the Payette 

National Forest, in Adams County 

Idaho. The project is designed to move 

vegetation toward desired conditions, 

improve wildlife habitat, reduce forest 

fuels, improve watershed conditions 

through a variety of activities including 

commercial and non-commercial 

vegetation management and road system 

modifications and maintenance; 

improve recreation infrastructure and 

opportunities; and improve firefighter 

and public safety by establishing 

fuelbreaks. 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis must be received by 

January 23, 2015. The draft 

environmental impact statement is 

expected August, 2015 and the final 

environmental impact statement is 

expected February 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

Keith Lannom, Forest Supervisor, 500 

N. Mission Street, Building 2, McCall, 

Idaho 83638. Comments may also be 

sent via email to comments-intermtnpayette@fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to 

208–634–0744. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen Penny, Project Team Leader, 

208–253–0164, spenny@fs.fed.us. 

Individuals who use telecommunication 

devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 

a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday 

through Friday. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action 

The purpose is to: (1) Move vegetation 

toward the desired conditions (e.g., 

canopy closure in large tree class, 

species composition, and size class 

distribution) defined in the Forest Plan 

and consistent with the current science 

for restoration of ponderosa pine, 

Douglas-fir, grand fir, subalpine fir and 

lodgepole habitat types, with an 

emphasis on: (a) Improving habitat for 

specific wildlife species of concern, 

such as the species dependent on dry 

coniferous forests, while maintaining 

habitat for federally-listed and sensitive 

species; (b) Maintaining and promoting 

large tree forest structure, early seral 

species composition (for example aspen, 

western larch, ponderosa pine, and 

Douglas-fir) and forest resiliency to fire, 

insects and disease and climate change; 

(c) Reducing the risk of uncharacteristic 

wildland fire, with an emphasis on 

restoring and maintaining desirable 

plant community attributes including 

fuel levels, fire regimes, and other 

ecological processes; and (d) 

Maintaining and promoting large trees 

where retention is consistent with the 

above objectives. (2) Maintaining and 

promoting legacy ponderosa pine and 

western larch and legacy-like Douglas 

fir; (3) Restore heterogeneous fine and 

landscape scale mosaic patterns by 

establishing varying patch sizes 

consistent with spatial patterns that 

promote forest resilience to disturbance; 

(4) Within dry non-forested habitats, 

maintain and promote native grasses 

and restore desired conditions for age 

and canopy class structure on sagebrush 

and bitterbrush; (5) Decrease the conifer 

encroachment into aspen and nonforested habitats; (6) In order of priority, 

move the Granite Creek subwatershed 

from a Watershed Condition Framework 

(WCF) rating of Class 3 (Impaired) to a 

Class 2 (Functioning at Risk), and move 

Mica Creek, Jungle Creek, and Little Fall 

Creek subwatersheds within the Project 

area toward the desired condition for 

soil, water, riparian, and aquatic 

resources; (7) Manage recreation use in 

the Project with an emphasis on 

hardening primary dispersed recreation 

areas, improving existing trails and 

providing new trail opportunities 

including an OHV loop and a nonmotorized trail; (8) Contribute to the 

economic vitality of the communities 

adjacent to the Payette National Forest; 

and (9) Improve firefighter and public 

safety by establishing strategically 

placed defensible fuelbreaks within the 

Project area. 

The need for the Project is based on 

the difference between the existing and 

desired conditions. These differences 

include: (1) Loss of habitat for Family 1 

wildlife species, such as the whiteheaded woodpecker, compared to 

historical conditions; (2) Fewer large 

tree size classes than desired in the drier 

forest types (Potential Vegetation 

Groups 2, and 5), and higher canopy 

cover; (3) Fewer early seral tree species 

(i.e. aspen, ponderosa pine and western 

larch) than desired; (4) Increased stand 

and landscape homogeneity of size 

classes, species diversity, tree 

distributions and canopy closure; (5) 

Increased high canopy closer in the 

large size classes in some vegetation 

types; (6) Increased conifer 

encroachment into aspen and nonforested habitats; (7) Fewer fire resistant 

tree species (i.e., ponderosa pine and 

Western larch) and higher densities of 

non-fire resistant tree species; (8) Higher 

surface fuel loading in those areas that 

have missed one or more fire return 

intervals; (9) Less than desired 

watershed function and integrity, 

including increased sedimentation, 

hydrologic risk from flooding, 

disturbance in RCAs (mainly roadrelated), habitat fragmentation, lack of 

large woody debris in some streams, and 

lack of coarse woody debris in areas of 

past timber harvest; and (10) Trail and 

recreation facilities that do not meet 

current design and accessibility 

standards. 

Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action includes: Up to 

13,002 acres of commercial harvests (a 

combination of Free Thin, Free Thin– 

Patch Cut-Selection Harvest, Aspen 

Restoration, and Mature Plantation 

Harvest). Combined commercial and 

non-commercial vegetation treatments 

include up to 5,280 acres of Meadow 

Restoration and 1,267 acres of 

Restoration of Low Density Timber 

Stands. Non-commercial treatments 

include thinning up to 4,309 acres. 

These acreages include treatments 

designed for and within Riparian 

Conservation Areas (RCAs) and total 

approximately 3,428 acres. Prescribed 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES