Revision of Land Management Plan, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests, Located In West-Central Colorado, 30059-30060 [05-10396]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Notices
best be served by preparing a
Supplement to the FEIS.
This notice begins the public
involvement process. I will use the
public response plus interdiscplinary
team analysis to decide whether to
revise, amend or reaffirm the original
McCaslin Record of Decision.
The proposed action and purpose and
need of the McCaslin Project remains
unchanged from the October 2003 FEIS.
The purpose is to move the structure
and cover of the existing forest closer to
desired conditions described under
Forest Plan management direction, and
to provide forest products while doing
so. A concurrent purpose is to eliminate
unneeded roads and manage needed
roads in a more efficient and effective
way.
Early Notice of Importance of Public
Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review: A draft
supplement to the environmental
impact statement will be prepared for
comment. The comment period on the
draft statement will be 45 days from the
date the Environmental Protection
Agency 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 draft environmental impact
statements 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 objections that could be
raised at the draft supplemental
environmental impact statement stage
but that are not raised until after
completion of the final supplemental
environmental impact statement may be
waived or dismissed by the courts. City
of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016,
1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin
Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp.
1334, 1338 (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 45day 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
environmental impact statement. To
assist the Forest Service in identifying
and considering issues and concerns on
the proposed action, comments on the
draft environmental impact statement
should be as specific as possible. It is
also helpful if comments refer to
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:52 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
specific pages or chapters of the draft
statement. Comments may also address
the adequacy of the draft environmental
impact statement 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 provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act at 40
CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Comments received, including the
names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the
public record on this proposal and will
be available for public inspection.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22;
Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section
20)
Dated: May 19, 2005.
Anne F. Archie,
Forest Supervisor, Chequamegon-Nicolet
National Forest.
[FR Doc. 05–10405 Filed 5–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Revision of Land Management Plan,
Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and
Gunnison National Forests, Located In
West-Central Colorado
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Grand Mesa,
Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National
Forests (GMUG) will exercise its option
to adjust its land management plan
revision process from compliance with
the 1982 planning regulations, to
conformance with new planning
regulations adopted in January 2005.
This adjustment will have the following
effects:
1. The new rule redefines forest plans
to be more strategic and flexible to
better facilitate adaptive management
and public collaboration.
2. The new rule focuses more on the
goals of ecological, social, and economic
sustainability and less on prescriptive
means of producing goods and services.
3. The Responsible Official who will
approve the final plan will now be the
Forest Supervisor instead of the
Regional Forester.
4. The GMUG will establish an
environmental management system (per
ISO 14001:2004(E)) prior to completion
of the revised forest plan.
5. Upon completion of final
rulemaking, the planning and decisionmaking process may be categorically
excluded from analysis and
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30059
documentation in an environmental
impact statement and record of decision
(see draft rule at 70 FR 1062, January 5,
2005.
6. The emphasis on public
involvement will shift from public
comment on a range of alternative plans,
to an iterative public-Forest Service
collaboration process intended to yield
a single broadly supported plan.
7. Administrative review has changed
from a post-decision appeals process to
a pre-decision objection process.
Public Involvement: There has been a
great deal of public participation and
collaborative work on this planning
process over the past few years,
including more than 60 public meetings.
Results of this work and a detailed
proposed action are available for review
and comment. Current information and
details of upcoming public participation
opportunities are posted on our Web
site: https://www.fs.fed.us/r2/gmug/
policy/plan_rev/.Contact Anne Janik at
(970) 874–6637, or e-mail at,
ajanik@fs.fed.us to be placed on our
mailing list.
ADDRESSES: Physical location: GMUG
Forest Planning, 2250 Highway 50,
Delta CO, 81416; or by e-mail:
r2_GMUG_planning@fs.fed.us.
Gary
Shellhorn, Analysis Team Leader,
GMUG National Forest, (970) 874–6666
or e-mail: gshellhorn@fs.fed.us; or view
our Web site at https://www.fs.fed.us/r2/
gmug/policy/plan_rev/.
DATES: Transition is effective
immediately upon publication of this
notice in the Federal Register.
Responsible Official: Charles S.
Richmond, Forest Supervisor, Grand
Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison
National Forest, 2250 Highway 50, Delta
CO, 81416.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Grand
Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison
National Forests (GMUG) are managed
as a single administrative unit. In
September of 1999, the GMUG formally
initiated its land management plan
revision process with publication of a
notice of intent to prepare and
environmental impact statement for
plan revision (64 FR 52266, September
28, 1999). After the initiation, several
delays were experienced due to budget
and administrative matters. When plan
revision began in earnest in 2002, the
GMUG began an extensive ‘‘pre-NEPA’’
public participation and collaboration
process. In addition, the planning team
has been working on comprehensive
geographic area analyses of conditions
and trends for the ecological, social and
economic components of the plan area.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\25MYN1.SGM
25MYN1
30060
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 2005 / Notices
The first phase of public participation
was focused primarily on development
of ‘‘vision’’ statements, desired
conditions, management issues, and
suitable land uses to be incorporated
into the preliminary proposed action.
Over forty community meetings were
conducted in this effort. During the
second phase, the planning team met
with the public to review the content of
the preliminary proposal and to get
feedback as to its desirability and
feasibility. Also during the second
phase, we displayed the draft findings
of the comprehensive analyses of
ecological, social, and economic
conditions. We are still accepting
comments on the preliminary proposed
action and the analyses. We are using
these comments to modify the plan
proposal through an iterative process of
public participation and adjustment.
The planning team will be taking
additional collaborative steps to finish
the draft plan components and to
identify potential options. Remaining
work includes formulation of plan
objectives (projections of measurable,
time-specific actions toward achieving
or maintaining desired conditions),
guidelines (information and guidance
for projects), monitoring program, and
environmental management system.
This is an open planning process with
numerous opportunities for the public
to obtain information, provide
comment, or participate in collaborative
stakeholder activities. Options for the
public include any of the following
methods: (1) Reviewing and
commenting on the preliminary
proposed action, analysis results, and
supporting maps posted on our website,
(2) attending open house meetings, (3)
requesting planning team presentations
to specific groups, (4) newsletters, (5)
participating in callaborative dialogue
in-topic working groups, or (6)
providing input during formal comment
periods.
The focal points of the future
collaborative work will be: (1) Review
and adjustment of the preliminary
proposed action (desired conditions and
suitability of land areas for various
purposes) and identification of options,
(2) development of management
objectives to assist in attaining or
maintaining desired conditions, (3)
formulation of guidelines to serve as
operational controls to help ensure
projects move toward or maintain
desired conditions, and (4) development
of the plan monitoring framework and
environmental management system to
guide adaptive management. We expect
to complete this phase of collaboration
by early Fall 2005. Our remaining forest
VerDate jul<14>2003
20:24 May 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
plan revision schedule will be
approximately as follows:
Release of Draft Forest Plan and start of 90day public comment period—Fall 2005.
Release of Final Plans and start of 30-day
objection period—Summer 2006.
Final decision and start of plan
implementation—Fall 2006.
Please see our Web site to review draft
revised plan components in progress and
other details.
Dated: May 20, 2005.
Charles S. Richmond,
Forest Supervisor, Grand Mesa,
Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National
Forests.
[FR Doc. 05–10396 Filed 5–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–ES–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Housing Service
Funding Opportunity: Section 525
Technical and Supervisory Assistance
(TSA) Grants
Announcement Type: Initial notice of
Funds Availability (NOFA) inviting
applications from qualified
organizations for Fiscal Year 2005
funding.
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Number (CFDA): 10.441.
SUMMARY: The Rural Housing Service
(RHS) announces it is soliciting
competitive applications under its
Technical and Supervisory Assistance
(TSA) grant program. Grants will be
awarded to eligible applicant
organizations to conduct programs of
technical and supervisory assistance for
low-income rural residents to obtain
and/or maintain occupancy of adequate
housing.
DATES: The deadline for receipt of
preapplication proposals by Rural
Development State Offices is the close
of business on June 24, 2005.
Preapplications received after June 24,
2005, will not be considered for
funding. Within 30 days after the
closing date, each State Director will
forward to the National Office the
original preapplication(s) and
supporting documents of the selected
applicant. State Directors will be
advised of the National Office’s action
on their selected preapplications.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nica
Mathes, Senior Loan Specialist, USDA
Rural Development, Single Family
Housing Direct Loan Division, Special
Programs and New Initiatives Branch,
Mail Stop 0783, Room 2206–S, 1400
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–0783, phone:
(202) 205–3656 or (202) 720–1474, e-
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
mail: nica.mathes@usda.gov, or FAX:
(202) 690–3555.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Paperwork Reduction Act
The reporting requirements contained
in this Notice have been approved by
the Office of Management and Budget
under Control Number 0575–0188.
Overview
This notice is published as required
by 7 CFR 1944.525 (b) and 1944.528,
which states the RHS Administrator
must provide annual notice in the
Federal Register on the distribution of
appropriated TSA funds, the number of
preapplications to be submitted to the
National Office from the State Offices,
and the maximum grant amount per
project, and the dates governing the
review and selection of TSA grant
preapplications.
Complete agency regulations for the
TSA program are contained in RD
Instruction 1944–K, accessible online at
https://www.rurdev.usda.gov/regs, or in 7
CFR part 1944, subpart K.
Up to $1,000,000 in competitive
grants will be awarded to eligible
applicants. No single award will exceed
$100,000.
In accordance with 7 CFR 1944.525,
the Administrator of RHS will distribute
a portion of the funds to those States
with the highest degree of substandard
housing and persons in poverty in rural
areas eligible to receive RHS housing
assistance. These States are: New
Mexico, Montana, South Dakota,
Mississippi, and Kentucky. Up to
$500,000 will be targeted to eligible
TSA programs in these States.
Remaining funds will be available for
national competition. No more than one
grant per State will be awarded.
The State Director may submit
multiple preapplications, ranked in
order of preference, to the National
Office for consideration.
The performance period of grant
activities will be two years from the date
the grant agreement is executed.
Reimbursement of pre-award costs is
not allowed.
To be eligible for a grant, the
applicant must be a nonprofit
corporation, agency, institution,
organization, Indian tribe or other
association. A private nonprofit
corporation, which is owned and
controlled by private persons or
interests, must have local representation
from the area being served, be organized
and operated by private persons or
interests for purposes other than making
gains or profits for the corporation, and
be legally precluded from distributing
any gains or profits to its members.
E:\FR\FM\25MYN1.SGM
25MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30059-30060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10396]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Revision of Land Management Plan, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and
Gunnison National Forests, Located In West-Central Colorado
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests
(GMUG) will exercise its option to adjust its land management plan
revision process from compliance with the 1982 planning regulations, to
conformance with new planning regulations adopted in January 2005. This
adjustment will have the following effects:
1. The new rule redefines forest plans to be more strategic and
flexible to better facilitate adaptive management and public
collaboration.
2. The new rule focuses more on the goals of ecological, social,
and economic sustainability and less on prescriptive means of producing
goods and services.
3. The Responsible Official who will approve the final plan will
now be the Forest Supervisor instead of the Regional Forester.
4. The GMUG will establish an environmental management system (per
ISO 14001:2004(E)) prior to completion of the revised forest plan.
5. Upon completion of final rulemaking, the planning and decision-
making process may be categorically excluded from analysis and
documentation in an environmental impact statement and record of
decision (see draft rule at 70 FR 1062, January 5, 2005.
6. The emphasis on public involvement will shift from public
comment on a range of alternative plans, to an iterative public-Forest
Service collaboration process intended to yield a single broadly
supported plan.
7. Administrative review has changed from a post-decision appeals
process to a pre-decision objection process.
Public Involvement: There has been a great deal of public
participation and collaborative work on this planning process over the
past few years, including more than 60 public meetings. Results of this
work and a detailed proposed action are available for review and
comment. Current information and details of upcoming public
participation opportunities are posted on our Web site: https://
www.fs.fed.us/r2/gmug/policy/plan_rev/.Contact Anne Janik at (970)
874-6637, or e-mail at, ajanik@fs.fed.us to be placed on our mailing
list.
ADDRESSES: Physical location: GMUG Forest Planning, 2250 Highway 50,
Delta CO, 81416; or by e-mail: r2--GMUG_planning@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Shellhorn, Analysis Team Leader,
GMUG National Forest, (970) 874-6666 or e-mail: gshellhorn@fs.fed.us;
or view our Web site at https://www.fs.fed.us/r2/gmug/policy/plan_rev/.
DATES: Transition is effective immediately upon publication of this
notice in the Federal Register.
Responsible Official: Charles S. Richmond, Forest Supervisor, Grand
Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forest, 2250 Highway 50, Delta
CO, 81416.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison
National Forests (GMUG) are managed as a single administrative unit. In
September of 1999, the GMUG formally initiated its land management plan
revision process with publication of a notice of intent to prepare and
environmental impact statement for plan revision (64 FR 52266,
September 28, 1999). After the initiation, several delays were
experienced due to budget and administrative matters. When plan
revision began in earnest in 2002, the GMUG began an extensive ``pre-
NEPA'' public participation and collaboration process. In addition, the
planning team has been working on comprehensive geographic area
analyses of conditions and trends for the ecological, social and
economic components of the plan area.
[[Page 30060]]
The first phase of public participation was focused primarily on
development of ``vision'' statements, desired conditions, management
issues, and suitable land uses to be incorporated into the preliminary
proposed action. Over forty community meetings were conducted in this
effort. During the second phase, the planning team met with the public
to review the content of the preliminary proposal and to get feedback
as to its desirability and feasibility. Also during the second phase,
we displayed the draft findings of the comprehensive analyses of
ecological, social, and economic conditions. We are still accepting
comments on the preliminary proposed action and the analyses. We are
using these comments to modify the plan proposal through an iterative
process of public participation and adjustment. The planning team will
be taking additional collaborative steps to finish the draft plan
components and to identify potential options. Remaining work includes
formulation of plan objectives (projections of measurable, time-
specific actions toward achieving or maintaining desired conditions),
guidelines (information and guidance for projects), monitoring program,
and environmental management system.
This is an open planning process with numerous opportunities for
the public to obtain information, provide comment, or participate in
collaborative stakeholder activities. Options for the public include
any of the following methods: (1) Reviewing and commenting on the
preliminary proposed action, analysis results, and supporting maps
posted on our website, (2) attending open house meetings, (3)
requesting planning team presentations to specific groups, (4)
newsletters, (5) participating in callaborative dialogue in-topic
working groups, or (6) providing input during formal comment periods.
The focal points of the future collaborative work will be: (1)
Review and adjustment of the preliminary proposed action (desired
conditions and suitability of land areas for various purposes) and
identification of options, (2) development of management objectives to
assist in attaining or maintaining desired conditions, (3) formulation
of guidelines to serve as operational controls to help ensure projects
move toward or maintain desired conditions, and (4) development of the
plan monitoring framework and environmental management system to guide
adaptive management. We expect to complete this phase of collaboration
by early Fall 2005. Our remaining forest plan revision schedule will be
approximately as follows:
Release of Draft Forest Plan and start of 90-day public comment
period--Fall 2005.
Release of Final Plans and start of 30-day objection period--Summer
2006.
Final decision and start of plan implementation--Fall 2006.
Please see our Web site to review draft revised plan components
in progress and other details.
Dated: May 20, 2005.
Charles S. Richmond,
Forest Supervisor, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National
Forests.
[FR Doc. 05-10396 Filed 5-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-ES-M
