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