Site-Specific Invasive Plant Treatment Project-Mt. Hood National Forest and Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; Oregon, 22294-22296 [05-8577]

Download as PDF 22294 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 82 / Friday, April 29, 2005 / Notices Agency, is the credit agency for agricultural and rural development for the Department of Agriculture. The Agency offers supervised credit to build and operate family farms, modest housing, water and sewer systems, essential community facilities, and business and industrial operations in rural areas. Section 331 and 335 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended, authorize the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Agency, to establish provisions for security servicing policies for the loans and grants in questions. If there is a problem which exists, a recipient of the loan, grant, or loan guarantee must furnish financial information which is used to aid in resolving the problem through reamortization, sale, transfer, debt restructuring, liquidation, or other means provided in the regulations. Need and Use of the Information: RHS will collect information to determine applicant/borrower eligibility and project feasibility for various servicing actions. The information enables field staff to ensure that borrowers operate on a sound basis and use loan and grant funds for authorized purposes. Description of Respondents: State, Local or Tribal Government; Not-forprofit institutions. Number of Respondents: 555. Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion. Total Burden Hours: 1,175. Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. 05–8586 Filed 4–28–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–XT–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Site-Specific Invasive Plant Treatment Project—Mt. Hood National Forest and Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; Oregon Forest Service, USDA. Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to document and disclose the potential environmental effects of proposed invasive plant treatments. The Proposed Action is to apply manual, mechanical, biological, and/or herbicide treatments to control known invasive plant sites within approximately 13,000 acres (208 sites) VerDate jul<14>2003 16:04 Apr 28, 2005 Jkt 205001 on the Mt. Hood National Forest and southern Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area in Oregon. The Proposed Action would also establish criteria for responding to infestations that cannot be predicted. This notice of intent revises the Notice to Intent to prepare an EIS announced in the Federal Register on February 23, 2004; more information will be submitted at a later date for the National Forest System lands in Washington. DATES: Comments concerning the scope of this analysis must be received no later than May 31, 2005, to ensure they are fully incorporated into the Draft EIS. ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Jennie O’Connor, Mt. Hood National Forest, 16400 Champion Way, Sandy OR 97055. Electronic comments can be submitted to commentspacificnorthwest-mthood@fs.fed.us. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennie O’Connor, Natural Resource Planner, Mt. Hood National Forest, 16400 Champion Way, Sandy OR 97055 or by emailing jmoconnor@fs.fed.us or by calling (503) 668–1645. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Need for the Proposal Invasive plants are compromising our ability to manage the National Forest for a healthy native ecosystem. Invasive plants create a host of environmental and other effects, most of which are harmful to native ecosystem processes, including: displacement of native plants; reduction in functionality of habitat and forage for wildlife and livestock; loss of threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; increased soil erosion and reduced water quality; alteration of physical and biological properties of soil, including reduced soil productivity; changes to the intensity and frequency of fires; high cost (dollars spent) of controlling invasive plants; and loss of recreation opportunities. Approximately 3,000 acres of forests and grasslands are known to already be degraded on the Mt. Hood National Forest and Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area by infestations of invasive, non-native plants. These infestations are situated on about 208 individual locations or sites. These infestations have a high potential to expand and further degrade forests and grasslands. Infested areas represent potential seed sources for further invasion onto neighboring lands. There is an underlying need on these National Forest System lands for: (1) Reduce the extent of specific invasive plants at identified sites; and (2) timely treat new/additional invasive plant sites PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 that may appear in the future. Without action, invasive plant populations will continue to grow, compromising our ability to manage for healthy native ecosystems and contributing to the spread of invasive plants. Proposed Action The Proposed Action for this project is to treat approximately 13,000 infested acres and associated spread zones on the Mt. Hood National Forest and southern Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area in Oregon. This includes 7 proposed treatment areas (2,000 acres) in the National Scenic Area, with the remainder of the sites on Mt. Hood National Forest. Treatment of these invasive plant sites would be a combination of manual, mechanical, biological, and herbicide treatment methods. Through the development long-term site goals, treatment of infested areas would be linked to revegetation and monitoring. Treatment would address 21 invasive plant species present on these sites. Site-specific treatment prescriptions would be based on the biology of particular invasive plant species, site location, proximity to water, and size of the infestation. Prescriptions would follow integrated pest management principles. Integrated pest management (IPM) is a process by which one selects and applies a combination of management techniques (manual, mechanical, biological for example) that, together, would control a particular invasive plant species or infestation efficiently and effectively, with minimum adverse impacts to non-target organisms. IPM seeks to combine two or more management techniques which would interact to provide better control than any one of the actions might provide alone. It is typically speciesspecific, site-specific and designed to be practical with minimal risk. On Mt. Hood National Forest and Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, the proposed action includes approximately 20 acres of biological treatment, 30 acres of herbicide only treatment, 510 acres of herbicide plus manual treatments, 2025 acres of herbicide plus mechanical treatments, 130 acres of manual plus mechanical treatments, and 10385 acres of herbicide plus manual and mechanical treatments. Treatments may be repeated over several years until control/restoration objectives are met. The proportion of specific treatment methods may change over time. In addition, a set of criteria that can be used for future invasive plant sites that may occur would also be established under the Proposed Action. E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM 29APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 82 / Friday, April 29, 2005 / Notices Sites that are discovered subsequent to completion of this assessment would require evaluation and potential treatment. If the effects were found to be within the scope of this assessment, then these new populations would also be treated. Criteria would be designed to prescribe the potential treatment methods that would be effective and consistent within certain types of sites. For new sites, yet unidentified, only high priority invasive plants would be treated. Maps of the proposed treatment sites and additional information on the proposal are available by contacting Jennie O’Connor, Mt. Hood National Forest (see above). Proposed Scoping Public participation is an important part of the analysis. The Forest Service is seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State and local agencies, tribes, and other individuals or organizations that may be interested in or affected by the proposed action. Comments submitted during the scoping process should be in writing, and they should be specific to the action being proposed and should describe as clearly and completely as possible any issues the commenter has with the proposal. This input will be used in preparation of the draft EIS. Comments submitted during the scoping conducted for the ‘‘Invasive Plant Treatment Project—Olympic, Gifford Pinchot, and Mt. Hood Nationals Forests and Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; Oregon and Washington’’ from February 23 to April 5, 2004 will be retained and considered in the development of this EIS. If you have additional comments on the revised proposed action these will be considered in conjunction with the previous comments. In addition to this scoping, the public may visit Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior to the decision. To facilitate public participation additional scoping opportunities will include: A scoping letter, public meetings (dates and locations yet to be determined), and Web sites with addresses https:// www.fs.fed.us/r6/invasiveplant-eis/ multiforest-sitespecific-information.htm and https://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mthood/ projects/. Preliminary Issues Identified to Date The potential for impacts/effects as a result of the establishment and spread of invasive plants and the potential for impacts/effects as a result of treatment actions designed to manage invasive plants are both important considerations VerDate jul<14>2003 16:04 Apr 28, 2005 Jkt 205001 that need to be addressed in the analysis. The following issues were identified during the initial scoping process: • Human Health—Invasive plant treatments may result in health risks to forestry workers and the public, including contamination of drinking water. • Treatment Effectiveness—Invasive plant treatments can vary in effectiveness. The presence and spread of invasive plants within National Forest System lands may affect the presence and spread of invasive plants on neighboring ownerships. • Social and Economic—Invasive plant treatments vary in cost and affect the acreage that can be effectively treated each year given a set budget. Manual treatment methods may cost more per acre and provide more employment. • Non-Target Plants and Animals— Impacts to non-target plant and animal species varies by invasive plant treatments. Mitigation and protection measures need to protect plant and animal species from the adverse effects of the proposed action. • Soils, Water Quality and Aquatic Biota—Soil and ground disturbing impacts, effects to aquatic organisms, and water quality impacts vary by invasive plant treatments. Alternatives Considered The No Action alternative will serve as a baseline for comparison of alternatives. Under the No Action alternative, Mt. Hood National Forest and the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area would continue to treat invasive plant species as authorized under existing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents. As approved by NEPA decisions, 450 acres of herbicide treatments, 100 acres of manual treatments, and 10 acres of mechanical treatment are applied each year on Mt. Hood National Forest. As approved by NEPA decisions, approximately 150 acres using herbicide treatments, 25 acres using manual treatments, and 500 acres using mechanical treatment are applied each year on the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. The proposed action, as described above will be considered as an alternative. Additional alternatives may be developed to address key issues identified in the scoping and public involvement process. Estimated Dates for Draft and Final EIS The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 22295 public comment by January 2006. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register. The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of the 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 objectives that could be raised at the draft EIS stage but that are not raised until after the 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 Heritage, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334 (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 the comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. 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 provision of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1503.3). Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposed action and will be available for public inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments may not have standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR part 215. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing how the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality. Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that, E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM 29APN1 22296 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 82 / Friday, April 29, 2005 / Notices under the FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very limited circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest Service will inform the requester of the agency’s decision regarding the request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the comments may be resubmitted with or without name and address within a specified number of days. Comments on the draft EIS will be analyzed, considered, and responded to by the Forest Service in preparing the final EIS. The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in May 2006. There will be two responsible officials for this EIS. Duties of the Responsible Official will be shared between Gary Larsen, Forest Supervisor of the Mt. Hood National Forest, and Daniel Harkenrider, Area Manager of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. They will consider comments, responses, environmental consequences discussed in the final EIS, and applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making a decision regarding this proposed action. The responsible officials will document the decision and rationale for the decision in the Record of Decision. It will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR Part 215). Dated: April 22, 2005. Gary L. Larsen, Forest Supervisor, Mt. Hood National Forest. Dated: April 22, 2005. Daniel T. Harkenrider, Area Manager, Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. [FR Doc. 05–8577 Filed 4–28–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–11–M COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Additions and Deletions Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled. ACTION: Additions to and deletions from Procurement List. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This action adds to the Procurement List products and services to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and deletes from the Procurement List products previously furnished by such agencies. EFFECTIVE DATE: VerDate jul<14>2003 May 29, 2005. 16:04 Apr 28, 2005 Jkt 205001 ADDRESS: Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia, 22202–3259. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT COMMENTS CONTACT: Sheryl D. Kennerly, Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: (703)603–0655, or email SKennerly@jwod.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Additions On February 25, and March 4, 2005, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice (70 FR 9269, and 10596) of proposed additions to the Procurement List. After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the products and services and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the products and services listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46–48c and 41 CFR 51– 2.4. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the products and services to the Government. 2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products and services to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in connection with the products and services proposed for addition to the Procurement List. End of Certification Accordingly, the following products and services are added to the Procurement List: Products Product/NSN: 120cc High Density Polyethylene Pharmacy Bottle,6530–00– NIB–0120. NPA: Alphapointe Association for the Blind, Kansas City, Missouri. Contracting Activity: Veterans Affairs National Acquisition Center, Hines, PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Illinois. Product/NSN: Flat Highlighters, Pink, 7520– 01–351–9146. NPA: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Contracting Activity: Office Supplies & Paper Products Acquisition Center, New York, NY. Services Service Type/Location: Administrative Service, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy Office, Crystal Square 4, Suite 200A, Arlington, Virginia. NPA: Anchor Mental Health Association (Anchor Services Workshop), Washington, DC. Contracting Activity: HQ Bolling—11th CONS/LGCO, Bolling AFB, DC. Service Type/Location: Custodial Services, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Boulder Laboratories, Boulder, Colorado. NPA: Bayaud Industries, Inc., Denver, Colorado. Contracting Activity: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado. Deletions On March 4, 2005, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice (70 FR 10596) of proposed deletions to the Procurement List. After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the products listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46–48c and 41 CFR 51– 2.4. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. The action may result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities. 2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in connection with the products deleted from the Procurement List. End of Certification Accordingly, the following products are deleted from the Procurement List: Products Product/NSN: Kit, Backpack, 1375–01–204– 1930. NPA: Blind Industries & Services of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland. E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM 29APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 82 (Friday, April 29, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22294-22296]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-8577]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Site-Specific Invasive Plant Treatment Project--Mt. Hood National 
Forest and Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; Oregon

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) to document and disclose the potential environmental 
effects of proposed invasive plant treatments. The Proposed Action is 
to apply manual, mechanical, biological, and/or herbicide treatments to 
control known invasive plant sites within approximately 13,000 acres 
(208 sites) on the Mt. Hood National Forest and southern Columbia River 
Gorge National Scenic Area in Oregon. The Proposed Action would also 
establish criteria for responding to infestations that cannot be 
predicted. This notice of intent revises the Notice to Intent to 
prepare an EIS announced in the Federal Register on February 23, 2004; 
more information will be submitted at a later date for the National 
Forest System lands in Washington.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of this analysis must be received 
no later than May 31, 2005, to ensure they are fully incorporated into 
the Draft EIS.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Jennie O'Connor, Mt. Hood 
National Forest, 16400 Champion Way, Sandy OR 97055. Electronic 
comments can be submitted to comments-pacificnorthwest-
mthood@fs.fed.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennie O'Connor, Natural Resource 
Planner, Mt. Hood National Forest, 16400 Champion Way, Sandy OR 97055 
or by emailing jmoconnor@fs.fed.us or by calling (503) 668-1645.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Need for the Proposal

    Invasive plants are compromising our ability to manage the National 
Forest for a healthy native ecosystem. Invasive plants create a host of 
environmental and other effects, most of which are harmful to native 
ecosystem processes, including: displacement of native plants; 
reduction in functionality of habitat and forage for wildlife and 
livestock; loss of threatened, endangered, and sensitive species; 
increased soil erosion and reduced water quality; alteration of 
physical and biological properties of soil, including reduced soil 
productivity; changes to the intensity and frequency of fires; high 
cost (dollars spent) of controlling invasive plants; and loss of 
recreation opportunities.
    Approximately 3,000 acres of forests and grasslands are known to 
already be degraded on the Mt. Hood National Forest and Columbia River 
Gorge National Scenic Area by infestations of invasive, non-native 
plants. These infestations are situated on about 208 individual 
locations or sites. These infestations have a high potential to expand 
and further degrade forests and grasslands. Infested areas represent 
potential seed sources for further invasion onto neighboring lands.
    There is an underlying need on these National Forest System lands 
for: (1) Reduce the extent of specific invasive plants at identified 
sites; and (2) timely treat new/additional invasive plant sites that 
may appear in the future. Without action, invasive plant populations 
will continue to grow, compromising our ability to manage for healthy 
native ecosystems and contributing to the spread of invasive plants.

Proposed Action

    The Proposed Action for this project is to treat approximately 
13,000 infested acres and associated spread zones on the Mt. Hood 
National Forest and southern Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area 
in Oregon. This includes 7 proposed treatment areas (2,000 acres) in 
the National Scenic Area, with the remainder of the sites on Mt. Hood 
National Forest. Treatment of these invasive plant sites would be a 
combination of manual, mechanical, biological, and herbicide treatment 
methods. Through the development long-term site goals, treatment of 
infested areas would be linked to revegetation and monitoring. 
Treatment would address 21 invasive plant species present on these 
sites.
    Site-specific treatment prescriptions would be based on the biology 
of particular invasive plant species, site location, proximity to 
water, and size of the infestation. Prescriptions would follow 
integrated pest management principles. Integrated pest management (IPM) 
is a process by which one selects and applies a combination of 
management techniques (manual, mechanical, biological for example) 
that, together, would control a particular invasive plant species or 
infestation efficiently and effectively, with minimum adverse impacts 
to non-target organisms. IPM seeks to combine two or more management 
techniques which would interact to provide better control than any one 
of the actions might provide alone. It is typically species-specific, 
site-specific and designed to be practical with minimal risk.
    On Mt. Hood National Forest and Columbia River Gorge National 
Scenic Area, the proposed action includes approximately 20 acres of 
biological treatment, 30 acres of herbicide only treatment, 510 acres 
of herbicide plus manual treatments, 2025 acres of herbicide plus 
mechanical treatments, 130 acres of manual plus mechanical treatments, 
and 10385 acres of herbicide plus manual and mechanical treatments. 
Treatments may be repeated over several years until control/restoration 
objectives are met. The proportion of specific treatment methods may 
change over time.
    In addition, a set of criteria that can be used for future invasive 
plant sites that may occur would also be established under the Proposed 
Action.

[[Page 22295]]

Sites that are discovered subsequent to completion of this assessment 
would require evaluation and potential treatment. If the effects were 
found to be within the scope of this assessment, then these new 
populations would also be treated. Criteria would be designed to 
prescribe the potential treatment methods that would be effective and 
consistent within certain types of sites. For new sites, yet 
unidentified, only high priority invasive plants would be treated.
    Maps of the proposed treatment sites and additional information on 
the proposal are available by contacting Jennie O'Connor, Mt. Hood 
National Forest (see above).

Proposed Scoping

    Public participation is an important part of the analysis. The 
Forest Service is seeking information, comments, and assistance from 
Federal, State and local agencies, tribes, and other individuals or 
organizations that may be interested in or affected by the proposed 
action. Comments submitted during the scoping process should be in 
writing, and they should be specific to the action being proposed and 
should describe as clearly and completely as possible any issues the 
commenter has with the proposal. This input will be used in preparation 
of the draft EIS.
    Comments submitted during the scoping conducted for the ``Invasive 
Plant Treatment Project--Olympic, Gifford Pinchot, and Mt. Hood 
Nationals Forests and Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; Oregon 
and Washington'' from February 23 to April 5, 2004 will be retained and 
considered in the development of this EIS. If you have additional 
comments on the revised proposed action these will be considered in 
conjunction with the previous comments.
    In addition to this scoping, the public may visit Forest Service 
officials at any time during the analysis and prior to the decision. To 
facilitate public participation additional scoping opportunities will 
include: A scoping letter, public meetings (dates and locations yet to 
be determined), and Web sites with addresses https://www.fs.fed.us/r6/
invasiveplant-eis/multiforest-sitespecific-information.htm and https://
www.fs.fed.us/r6/mthood/projects/.

Preliminary Issues Identified to Date

    The potential for impacts/effects as a result of the establishment 
and spread of invasive plants and the potential for impacts/effects as 
a result of treatment actions designed to manage invasive plants are 
both important considerations that need to be addressed in the 
analysis. The following issues were identified during the initial 
scoping process:
     Human Health--Invasive plant treatments may result in 
health risks to forestry workers and the public, including 
contamination of drinking water.
     Treatment Effectiveness--Invasive plant treatments can 
vary in effectiveness. The presence and spread of invasive plants 
within National Forest System lands may affect the presence and spread 
of invasive plants on neighboring ownerships.
     Social and Economic--Invasive plant treatments vary in 
cost and affect the acreage that can be effectively treated each year 
given a set budget. Manual treatment methods may cost more per acre and 
provide more employment.
     Non-Target Plants and Animals--Impacts to non-target plant 
and animal species varies by invasive plant treatments. Mitigation and 
protection measures need to protect plant and animal species from the 
adverse effects of the proposed action.
     Soils, Water Quality and Aquatic Biota--Soil and ground 
disturbing impacts, effects to aquatic organisms, and water quality 
impacts vary by invasive plant treatments.

Alternatives Considered

    The No Action alternative will serve as a baseline for comparison 
of alternatives. Under the No Action alternative, Mt. Hood National 
Forest and the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area would continue 
to treat invasive plant species as authorized under existing National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents. As approved by NEPA 
decisions, 450 acres of herbicide treatments, 100 acres of manual 
treatments, and 10 acres of mechanical treatment are applied each year 
on Mt. Hood National Forest. As approved by NEPA decisions, 
approximately 150 acres using herbicide treatments, 25 acres using 
manual treatments, and 500 acres using mechanical treatment are applied 
each year on the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. The 
proposed action, as described above will be considered as an 
alternative. Additional alternatives may be developed to address key 
issues identified in the scoping and public involvement process.

Estimated Dates for Draft and Final EIS

    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public comment by 
January 2006. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from 
the date the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the Federal 
Register.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
the 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 objectives 
that could be raised at the draft EIS stage but that are not raised 
until after the 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 Heritage, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334 (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 the comments refer to 
specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. 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 provision of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 
CFR 1503.3).
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names 
and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the 
public record on this proposed action and will be available for public 
inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and 
considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments may not have 
standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR part 215. 
Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request the 
agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing how 
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality. 
Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that,

[[Page 22296]]

under the FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very limited 
circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest Service 
will inform the requester of the agency's decision regarding the 
request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the 
agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the 
comments may be resubmitted with or without name and address within a 
specified number of days.
    Comments on the draft EIS will be analyzed, considered, and 
responded to by the Forest Service in preparing the final EIS. The 
final EIS is scheduled to be completed in May 2006. There will be two 
responsible officials for this EIS. Duties of the Responsible Official 
will be shared between Gary Larsen, Forest Supervisor of the Mt. Hood 
National Forest, and Daniel Harkenrider, Area Manager of the Columbia 
River Gorge National Scenic Area. They will consider comments, 
responses, environmental consequences discussed in the final EIS, and 
applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making a decision 
regarding this proposed action. The responsible officials will document 
the decision and rationale for the decision in the Record of Decision. 
It will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR Part 
215).

    Dated: April 22, 2005.
Gary L. Larsen,
Forest Supervisor, Mt. Hood National Forest.

    Dated: April 22, 2005.
Daniel T. Harkenrider,
Area Manager, Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area.
[FR Doc. 05-8577 Filed 4-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.