Department of Agriculture December 15, 2006 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

National Environmental Policy Act Documentation Needed for Developing, Revising, or Amending Land Management Plans; Categorical Exclusion
Document Number: E6-21370
Type: Notice
Date: 2006-12-15
Agency: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
The Forest Service is revising procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations. The procedures are being revised through issuance of a final directive that amends Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.15, chapter 30. This chapter describes categorical exclusions; that is, categories of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and therefore, normally do not require further analysis and documentation in either an environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental impact statement (EIS). The amendment adds one such category of actions to the Agency's NEPA procedures for final decisions on proposals to develop, amend, or revise land management plans.
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Document Number: E6-21343
Type: Notice
Date: 2006-12-15
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Document Number: E6-21341
Type: Notice
Date: 2006-12-15
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Dixie National Forest, UT, Dixie National Forest Motorized Travel Plan
Document Number: E6-21145
Type: Notice
Date: 2006-12-15
Agency: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
Notice is hereby given that the Dixie National Forest intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Forest Service to establish a system of designated roads, trails and areas for motorized vehicle use, thereby developing a Motorized Travel Plan. A new Motorized Travel Plan is needed to improve the management and enforcement of motor vehicle use on these National Forest System lands and meet the requirements of national policy for travel management. This notice describes the components to be included in a new travel plan, decisions to be made, estimated dates pertaining to the project, information concerning public participation, and the names, address and roles of the agency officials involved. The project area is defined by the boundaries of Dixie National Forest, including the Pine Valley, Cedar City, Powell and Escalante Ranger Districts, as well as the Teasdale portion of the Fremont River Ranger District, now administered by the Fishlake National Forest. For the purpose of this notice, the Dixie National Forest will include the Fremont River Ranger District.
Thorn Fire Salvage Recovery Project, Malheur National Forest, Grant County, OR
Document Number: 06-9716
Type: Notice
Date: 2006-12-15
Agency: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) to disclose environmental effects on a proposed action to recover the economic value of dead and dying trees damaged in the Shake Table Fire Complex, and remove potential hazard trees from open forest travel routes within the Todd, Duncan, Fields Creek and Dry Creek subwatersheds. Shake Table Fire Complex, located approximately 20 miles south west of John Day, Oregon, burned approximately 14,527 acres across mixed ownership in August 2006, of that approximately 13,536 acres were on National Forest System Lands administered by the Blue Mountain Ranger District, Malheur National Forest. The proposed action is the Thorn Fire Salvage Recovery Project.
Spruce Creek Project, Boise National Forest, Idaho
Document Number: 06-9686
Type: Notice
Date: 2006-12-15
Agency: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
The Cascade Ranger District of the Boise National Forest will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a resource management project in the Gold Fork River drainage. The entire project is located in the watersheds that drain into the Gold Fork River, which in turn drains into Cascade Reservoir. The 9,997 acre project area is located 10 miles northeast of Cascade, Idaho, and about 120 miles north of Boise, Idaho. The agency invites written comments and suggestions on the scope of the analysis. The agency also hereby gives notice of the environmental analysis and decisionmaking process that will occur on the proposal so interested and affected people are aware of how they may participate and contribute to the final decision. At this time no public meetings to discuss the project are planned. Proposed Action: Eight objectives have been identified for the project: (1) Retain the existing size class of stands currently identified as large tree and manipulate the structure of small and medium tree size class stands to accelerate their movement towards the large tree size class, thereby retaining and potentially contributing to habitat for some terrestrial wildlife species associated with large tree size class; (2) Reduce the densities of stands currently identified as large tree size class in order to maintain or restore canopy closures within desired conditions, and to potentially contribute to habitat for those terrestrial wildlife species associated with large tree size class stands with low to moderate canopy closures; (3) Consistent with the particular habitat type, discriminate against shade tolerant species such as grand fir and subalpine fir and encourage retention and recruitment of seral species; (4) Relative to Douglas-fir beetle, mountain pine beetle, western pine beetle, western spruce budworm, and/or dwarf mistletoe, manipulate the structures, densities, and compositions of stands in order to maintain a low or moderate susceptibility level, or to decrease susceptibility to a low or moderate level; (5) Maintain or restore aspen and immature whitebark pine by eliminating competition with other conifer species; (6) Improve long term stand growth to or near levels indicative of sustainable forests; (7) Provide wood products to support local and regional economies; and; (8) Stabilize the cutslope failure on the 498 road. The Proposed Action would implement silvicultural activities, including thinning of sub-merchantable trees, aspen enhancement, and whitebark pine enhancement, on 2,702 acres. An estimated 9.0 MMbf would be removed using tractor, off-road jammer, skyline, and helicopter yarding systems. The Proposed Action would employ a variety of silvicultural prescriptions including clearcut with reserve trees, commercial thin, improvement cut, irregular shelterwood, individual tree selection, sanitation, thinning of sub-merchantable trees, aspen enhancement, and whitebark pine enhancement. Road maintenance activities would occur on an estimated 0.4 miles of existing road under this alternative. Specifically, one under-sized culvert along the 402 road would be replaced with a culvert sufficient in size to accommodate a 100-year flow event; a series of drive-through dips would be installed on the 402F1 road to prevent erosion; a culvert would be installed on the 402F road to facilitate silvicultural activities, and; an existing slump on the cutslope along the 498 road would be stabilized. Roughly 1.1 miles of temporary road would be constructed to facilitate harvest activities and six helicopter landings constructed. Post-implementation management of the existing transportation system within the project area would not change under this alternative. All existing road restrictions would be reinstated upon completion of harvest activities. Preliminary Issues: Preliminary concerns with the Proposed Action include potential impacts on water quality and terrestrial wildlife species. Possible Alternatives to the Proposed Action: One alternative to the Proposed Action that has been discussed thus far is a no action alternative. Other alternatives will likely be developed as issues are identified and information received. Decisions to be Made: The Boise National Forest Supervisor will decide the following: (1) Should vegetation be managed within the project area at this time, and if so, which stands should be treated and what silvicultural systems applied? (2) Should temporary roads be built at this time, and if so, how many miles should be built and where should they occur within the project area? (3) Should aspen and immature whitebark pine be enhanced by eliminating competing conifer species, and if so, where within the project area? (4) Should identified road maintenance activities occur on portions of roads 402, 402F1, 402F, and 498 at this time? (5) What design features, mitigation measures, and/or monitoring should be applied to the project?
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.