San Juan National Forest; Columbine Ranger District; Colorado; Hermosa Land Exchange Analysis, 26075-26076 [E8-10223]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 90 / Thursday, May 8, 2008 / Notices commodities that are forfeited to CCC in satisfaction of a farm-stored marketing assistance loan. Beginning with 2008-crop marketing assistance loans, producers must pay or provide for the payment of in-handling charges on warehouse-stored commodities before CCC will accept the commodity as collateral for a warehouse-stored marketing assistance loan. Beginning with the 2008-crop of wheat, feed grains, soybeans, rice, pulses, minor oilseeds, peanuts, honey, wool, and mohair, producers must provide documentation that all inhandling charges have been paid or provided for before a warehouse-stored marketing assistance loan will be disbursed for the commodity. Acceptable documentation will include specific information recorded directly on the warehouse receipt pledged as collateral for a marketing assistance loan. If the information is not recorded directly on the warehouse receipt that is pledged as loan collateral, separate documentation that is signed by the warehouse operator that includes the following language will be accepted as evidence that in-handling charges have been paid or provided for if the document is presented in conjunction with a warehouse receipt that is pledged as collateral for a warehouse-stored marketing assistance loan: mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Arrangements for the payment of inhandling charges have been made by the depositor of the commodity covered by receipt number (Insert Receipt Number). No lien will be asserted by the warehouse operator against the Commodity Credit Corporation or any subsequent holder of the warehouse receipt for in-handling charges. Failure to present the required documentation that in-handling charges have been paid or provided for will result in the commodity represented by the warehouse receipt being determined ineligible as collateral for the marketing assistance loan until the documentation is submitted to the applicable Farm Service Agency county office. For commodities pledged as collateral for farm-stored marketing assistance loans that are forfeited to CCC in satisfaction of an outstanding loan, the producer or warehouse operator that is accepting delivery of the forfeited commodity must provide documentation that in-handling charges have been paid or provided for before the loan settlement will be recorded. If the evidence is not provided as part of the delivery documentation, CCC will reduce the producer’s settlement value for the forfeited commodity to reflect the amount of unpaid in-handling charges, at the rate provided in the VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 May 07, 2008 Jkt 214001 warehouse’s public tariff rates. In the event that a deduction from settlement proceeds is made, CCC will forward the withheld amount to the storing warehouse operator on behalf of the producer and will report the amount paid to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Signed at Washington, DC, on May 1, 2008. Glen L. Keppy, Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation. [FR Doc. E8–10179 Filed 5–7–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–05–P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service San Juan National Forest; Columbine Ranger District; Colorado; Hermosa Land Exchange Analysis Forest Service, USDA. Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The San Juan National Forest is studying a proposal for a land exchange whereby Tamarron Properties Associates would offer 330 acres of nonFederal lands to the U.S. Forest Service in exchange for 265 acres of National Forest System lands and an easement for a new road. Any exchange would require by law that the appraised value of the properties be equal. The nonFederal properties include two inholdings adjacent to the Hermosa Roadless area; Mitchell Lakes and Hermosa Creek. The third inholding is a mining claim located in the Weminuche Wilderness area along the Whitehead Gulch Trail southeast of Silverton. Mitchell Lakes parcel is specifically located in T. 37 N., R. 9 W, Section 23 ; Hermosa Park T. 39 N., R. 10 W., Section 24, La Plata County, The Iron Clad Mining Claim is located in Section 11, T. 40 N., R. 7 W., N.M.P.M., Columbine Ranger District, San Juan National Forest, Colorado. DATES: Formal scoping on the proposed land exchange began on June 11, 2007 and ended on September 10, 2007. Two public open houses were held June 21 and 25, 2007. Public field trips to the parcels were held June 28 and 29, 2007. The draft environmental impact statement is expected in September 2008 and the final environmental impact statement is expected in December 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Cindy Hockelberg, Columbine Public Lands, POB 439, 367 South Pearl Street, Bayfield, CO 81122; e-mail PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 26075 chockelberg@fs.fed.us., telephone 970– 884–1418. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose and Need for Action The purpose of and need for action is for (1) more consolidated Federal and private ownership that reduces cost of Federal management and increases management efficiency; and (2) acquisition of significant non-Federal inholdings within the San Juan National Forest in visible and frequented locations so they are not available for development; and (3) additional Federal jurisdiction within Congressionally designated wilderness or other parcels such as wetlands, floodplains, and riparian areas that provide habitat for threatened or endangered species. The Forest Service is directed to achieve the optimum landownership pattern to provide for the protection and management of resource uses to meet the needs of the nation now and in the future. Further, the Forest Service is to complete land-for-land exchanges to consolidate National Forest System and private, State, or local government land patterns, to permit needed urban or industrial expansion; or to make other adjustments in landownership in the public interest. Proposed Action The proposed action is to complete a land exchange whereby the Forest Service would acquire three nonFederal parcels located within the boundaries of the San Juan National Forest and convey a Federal parcel and road easement for a new road to private ownership. Possible Alternatives The following alternatives have been preliminarily identified: Alternative 1: This alternative is the No Action Alternative. The proposed project as described above would not occur. Alternative 2: This alternative is the proposed action and the project would occur as described above. This alternative was presented in the public scoping that occurred during the summer of 2007. Alternative 3: This alternative is responsive to trail use and moves the northern boundary of the Federal parcel south of the proponent’s proposed location. The northern boundary for Alternative 3 would keep the trails immediately south and adjacent to the Chris Park wetland in Federal ownership. This alternative would include a road easement and limit use. Restrictions on road use for this E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 26076 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 90 / Thursday, May 8, 2008 / Notices alternative, in addition to 4 and 5 may affect the appraised value. Alternative 4: This alternative would be the same as Alternative 3 but would not include the road easement. Like Alternative 3, this alternative is responsive to the concerns expressed by trail users and will help address visual concerns. Alternative 5: This alternative would not include a substantial portion of the federal parcel, as described in the proposed alternative. The alternative is designed to preserve major portions of the wagon road and some wetlands. This alternative would not include the road easement and more directly addresses cultural and recreation concerns. A trade-off of this alternative is that acquisition of both large nonFederal parcels may not be possible due to the requirement that the exchange be equal value. Responsible Official Mark W. Stiles, Center Manager, San Juan Public Lands, 15 Burnett Court, Durango, CO 81301. Nature of Decision To Be Made Given the purpose and need, the deciding official reviews the proposed action and the other alternatives in order to make the following decisions: Will the proposed land exchange occur as proposed, as modified under the various alternatives, or not at all. If the exchange proceeds what mitigation measures will the Forest Service apply to the project? mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Scoping Process Formal scoping has already occurred on this project as described above; comments received indicate that there may be significant impacts for which an EIS is the appropriate level of analysis. Informal scoping responses may be submitted to Cindy Hockelberg (contact information above), if there is an issue that has not been identified. Preliminary Issues During review of all public comments and internal input, the Forest Service has identified the following concerns or issues with the proposal: Recreation, particularly with regard to Chris Park campground and the trails that have been created in the area; The Animas Wagon road and its historical status; Socio-economic issues related to tourism and special use permittees who use the area; Visual impacts to those areas that are sensitive, including Highway 550 and Chris Park Campground; Wildlife impacts that may occur to a potential wildlife corridor on the Federal parcel; Wetlands and VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:22 May 07, 2008 Jkt 214001 hydrology, particularly with regard to quality of wetlands on all parcels; and how the non-Federal parcels will be managed if they are acquired. Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register. This is expected to occur around September 2008. 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 environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final 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 45 day comment period so that 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 21. Dated: May 1, 2008. Mark W. Stiles, Center Manager. [FR Doc. E8–10223 Filed 5–7–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–11–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Title: NOAA Satellite Ground Station Customer Questionnaire. Form Number(s): None. OMB Approval Number: 0648–0227. Type of Request: Regular submission. Burden Hours: 17. Number of Respondents: 102. Average Hours per Response: 15 minutes. Needs and Uses: NOAA requests people who operate ground receiving stations that receive data from NOAA satellites to complete a questionnaire about the types of data received, its use, the equipment involved, and similar subjects. The data obtained are used by NOAA for short-term operations and long-term planning. The collection of this data assists NOAA in complying with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the World Meteorological Organization Administration (NOAA) and other international agreements. Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions; individuals or households; State, Local or Tribal Government. Frequency: On occasion. Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, (202) 395–3897. Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, (202) 482–0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at dHynek@doc.gov). Written comments and recommendations for the proposed E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 90 (Thursday, May 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26075-26076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-10223]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


San Juan National Forest; Columbine Ranger District; Colorado; 
Hermosa Land Exchange Analysis

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The San Juan National Forest is studying a proposal for a land 
exchange whereby Tamarron Properties Associates would offer 330 acres 
of non-Federal lands to the U.S. Forest Service in exchange for 265 
acres of National Forest System lands and an easement for a new road. 
Any exchange would require by law that the appraised value of the 
properties be equal. The non-Federal properties include two inholdings 
adjacent to the Hermosa Roadless area; Mitchell Lakes and Hermosa 
Creek. The third inholding is a mining claim located in the Weminuche 
Wilderness area along the Whitehead Gulch Trail southeast of Silverton. 
Mitchell Lakes parcel is specifically located in T. 37 N., R. 9 W, 
Section 23 ; Hermosa Park T. 39 N., R. 10 W., Section 24, La Plata 
County, The Iron Clad Mining Claim is located in Section 11, T. 40 N., 
R. 7 W., N.M.P.M., Columbine Ranger District, San Juan National Forest, 
Colorado.

DATES: Formal scoping on the proposed land exchange began on June 11, 
2007 and ended on September 10, 2007. Two public open houses were held 
June 21 and 25, 2007. Public field trips to the parcels were held June 
28 and 29, 2007. The draft environmental impact statement is expected 
in September 2008 and the final environmental impact statement is 
expected in December 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Cindy 
Hockelberg, Columbine Public Lands, POB 439, 367 South Pearl Street, 
Bayfield, CO 81122; e-mail chockelberg@fs.fed.us., telephone 970-884-
1418.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of and need for action is for (1) more consolidated 
Federal and private ownership that reduces cost of Federal management 
and increases management efficiency; and (2) acquisition of significant 
non-Federal inholdings within the San Juan National Forest in visible 
and frequented locations so they are not available for development; and 
(3) additional Federal jurisdiction within Congressionally designated 
wilderness or other parcels such as wetlands, floodplains, and riparian 
areas that provide habitat for threatened or endangered species.
    The Forest Service is directed to achieve the optimum landownership 
pattern to provide for the protection and management of resource uses 
to meet the needs of the nation now and in the future.
    Further, the Forest Service is to complete land-for-land exchanges 
to consolidate National Forest System and private, State, or local 
government land patterns, to permit needed urban or industrial 
expansion; or to make other adjustments in landownership in the public 
interest.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to complete a land exchange whereby the 
Forest Service would acquire three non-Federal parcels located within 
the boundaries of the San Juan National Forest and convey a Federal 
parcel and road easement for a new road to private ownership.

Possible Alternatives

    The following alternatives have been preliminarily identified:
    Alternative 1: This alternative is the No Action Alternative. The 
proposed project as described above would not occur.
    Alternative 2: This alternative is the proposed action and the 
project would occur as described above. This alternative was presented 
in the public scoping that occurred during the summer of 2007.
    Alternative 3: This alternative is responsive to trail use and 
moves the northern boundary of the Federal parcel south of the 
proponent's proposed location. The northern boundary for Alternative 3 
would keep the trails immediately south and adjacent to the Chris Park 
wetland in Federal ownership. This alternative would include a road 
easement and limit use. Restrictions on road use for this

[[Page 26076]]

alternative, in addition to 4 and 5 may affect the appraised value.
    Alternative 4: This alternative would be the same as Alternative 3 
but would not include the road easement. Like Alternative 3, this 
alternative is responsive to the concerns expressed by trail users and 
will help address visual concerns.
    Alternative 5: This alternative would not include a substantial 
portion of the federal parcel, as described in the proposed 
alternative. The alternative is designed to preserve major portions of 
the wagon road and some wetlands. This alternative would not include 
the road easement and more directly addresses cultural and recreation 
concerns. A trade-off of this alternative is that acquisition of both 
large non-Federal parcels may not be possible due to the requirement 
that the exchange be equal value.

Responsible Official

    Mark W. Stiles, Center Manager, San Juan Public Lands, 15 Burnett 
Court, Durango, CO 81301.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Given the purpose and need, the deciding official reviews the 
proposed action and the other alternatives in order to make the 
following decisions: Will the proposed land exchange occur as proposed, 
as modified under the various alternatives, or not at all. If the 
exchange proceeds what mitigation measures will the Forest Service 
apply to the project?

Scoping Process

    Formal scoping has already occurred on this project as described 
above; comments received indicate that there may be significant impacts 
for which an EIS is the appropriate level of analysis. Informal scoping 
responses may be submitted to Cindy Hockelberg (contact information 
above), if there is an issue that has not been identified.

Preliminary Issues

    During review of all public comments and internal input, the Forest 
Service has identified the following concerns or issues with the 
proposal: Recreation, particularly with regard to Chris Park campground 
and the trails that have been created in the area; The Animas Wagon 
road and its historical status; Socio-economic issues related to 
tourism and special use permittees who use the area; Visual impacts to 
those areas that are sensitive, including Highway 550 and Chris Park 
Campground; Wildlife impacts that may occur to a potential wildlife 
corridor on the Federal parcel; Wetlands and hydrology, particularly 
with regard to quality of wetlands on all parcels; and how the non-
Federal parcels will be managed if they are acquired.
    Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement will be 
prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental 
impact statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental 
Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal 
Register. This is expected to occur around September 2008.
    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 environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final 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 45 day comment period so that 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 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 21.

    Dated: May 1, 2008.
Mark W. Stiles,
Center Manager.
 [FR Doc. E8-10223 Filed 5-7-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.