Lassen National Forest, Almanor Ranger District, CA, Creeks II Forest Restoration Project, 28794-28795 [E8-11063]
Download as PDF
28794
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 73, No. 97
Monday, May 19, 2008
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Lassen National Forest, Almanor
Ranger District, CA, Creeks II Forest
Restoration Project
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Forest Service proposes
to address fuels and firefighter safety,
forest health issues, and focus on the
specific concerns of wildlife habitat and
habitat connectivity by developing a
network of defensible fuel profile zones
(DFPZ’s), establish group selection
harvest units, and conduct area
thinnings on the Almanor Ranger
District in the Lassen National Forest.
These management activities were
developed to implement and be
consistent with the Lassen National
Forest (LNF) Land and Resource
Management Plan (LRMP, 1993), as
amended by the Herger-Feinstein
Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery
Act FEIS, FSEIS, and RODs (1999,
2003), and the Sierra Nevada Forest
Plan Amendment FEIS, FSEIS, and
RODs (2001, 2004).
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis should be received in
writing within 30 days of the date of
publication of this Notice of Intent in
the Federal Register. The expected
filing date with the Environmental
Protection Agency for the draft EIS is
October 8, 2008. The expected filing
date for the final EIS is February 11,
2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted to: Alfred Vazquez, District
Ranger, Almanor Ranger District, at P.O.
Box 767, Chester, CA 96020 or (530)
258–5194 (fax) during normal business
hours. The Almanor Ranger District
business hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. Monday through Friday. Electronic
comments, in acceptable plain text
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:18 May 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
(.txt), rich text (.rtf), or Word (.doc)
formats, may be submitted to:
comments-pacificsouthwestlassenalmanor@fs.fed.us using Subject:
Creeks II Forest Restoration Project.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al
Vazquez, District Ranger, or John
Zarlengo, Interdisciplinary Team
Leader, may be contacted by phone at
(530) 258–2141 for more information
about the proposed action and the
environmental impact statement or at
the Almanor Ranger District, P.O. Box
767, Chester, CA 96020.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A proposal to address forest health
conditions throughout the Creeks Forest
Health Recovery Project (Creeks) area of
the Lassen National Forest (LNF) was
placed on the LNF Schedule of
Proposed Actions in February 2004. The
project was sent to the public for
scoping in 2004 and the Responsible
Official, Forest Supervisor Laurie
Tippin, signed the Record of Decision
(ROD) for the Creeks Forest Health
Recovery Project in September 2005. A
lawsuit was filed and in August 2006,
the Decision was remanded to Forest
Supervisor Tippin. On May 30, 2007,
the Forest Supervisor agreed to cancel
the original Creeks project. A
Cancellation of the Notice of Intent to
prepare a Supplement to the
Environmental Impact Statement for
this project was published in the
Federal Register on June 14, 2007. A
new project was placed on the LNF
Schedule of Proposed Actions on July 1,
2007, and a public meeting to discuss
the project was held on February 28,
2008. A new purpose and need
statement was developed and a new
proposed action was crafted to address
the specific concerns of wildlife habitat
and habitat connectivity, taking action
to improve the overall forest health, and
reducing the risk of large, intense
wildfires highlighted within the original
Creeks analysis area. The new project is
known as the Creeks II Forest
Restoration Project (Creeks II).
Purpose and Need for Action
Conditions fostered by past fire
suppression, a climate favorable for
conifer regeneration and growth, and
past management activities have
contributed to current dense stands
conditions in the Creeks II project area.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Existing high stand densities in the
Creeks II project area place the large tree
component of late-seral stands at
increased risk of mortality from insects
and disease, especially during times of
prolonged drought. Dense stand
conditions also increase the likelihood
that wildfire will move into the forest
canopy and result in a high-intensity
fire that destroys large areas of forest.
The existing habitat considered suitable
for both California spotted owl and
American marten is composed of
densely forested stands and is at
increased risk of loss to wildfire.
Modification of the fire regime has
also affected the health of the area’s
aspen communities. In the Sierra
Nevada, aspen communities are rare on
the landscape, increasing their value in
a vastly conifer dominated ecosystem.
There is also a need in the Creeks II
project area to protect aquatic habitats
and their adjacent areas, specifically to
recruit large trees, improve vegetative
diversity, and reduce ladder fuels in
riparian habitat conservation areas
(RHCAs).
Proposed Action
Creeks II proposes to utilize sitespecific prescriptions to meet the
objectives of maintaining and
developing long-term sustainable lateseral attributes that provide habitat
connectivity and vegetation
heterogeneity across the landscape;
reducing conifer density to better
withstand the rigors of extended periods
of low soil moisture; reducing the
potential for large, intense wildfire;
providing firefighters a safe area from
which to attack fire; reducing stand
density to lower individual large tree
mortality during fires; promoting
desired future conditions for vegetation
diversity in aspen stands; moving
toward desired conditions for water
quality by reducing sediment delivery
from area roads; and, improving
vegetative conditions in RHCAs to
protect aquatic habitats and adjacent
areas. Work in the project area includes
DFPZs (4,092 acres), group selection
harvest units (708 acres), aspen
enhancement (688 acres), area thinning
(3,003 acres), and work in riparian
habitat conservation areas (400 acres) to
total an estimated 8,891 acres of
treatment and would be spread over a
33,000 acre project area. Included in
this proposal are the use of National
E:\FR\FM\19MYN1.SGM
19MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 97 / Monday, May 19, 2008 / Notices
Forest system roads, the use of
temporary roads, and the
decommissioning of some system and
temporary roads. The project would be
implemented through a combination of
commercial timber sales, service
contracts, and agency crews.
Alternatives
Alternatives proposed to date are the
Proposed Action as described above and
the No Action.
Responsible Official and Mailing
Address: Kathleen Morse, Forest
Supervisor, 2550 S. Riverside Drive,
Susanville, CA 96130 is the responsible
official.
Nature of Decision to Be Made: The
decision to be made is whether to
implement the proposed action as
described above, to meet the purpose
and need for action through some other
combination of activities, or to take no
action at this time.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Scoping Process
The environmental analysis will be
documented in an environmental
impact statement. This notice of intent
initiates the scoping process which
guides the development of the
environmental impact statement. The
scoping process will be used to identify
issues regarding the proposed action.
An issue is defined as a point of
dispute, debate, or disagreement related
to a specific proposed action based on
its anticipated effects. Significant issues
brought to our attention are used during
an environmental analysis to develop
alternatives to the proposed action.
Some issues raised in scoping may be
considered non-significant because they
are: (1) Beyond the scope of the
proposed action and its purpose and
need; (2) already decided by law,
regulation, or the Land and Resource
Management Plan; (3) irrelevant to the
decision to be made; or (4) conjectural
and not supported by scientific or
factual evidence.
Reviewer’s Obligation to Comment
On December 27, 2007, the HergerFeinstein Quincy Library Group
(HFQLG) Forest Recovery Act was
amended by H.R. 2764 to utilize the
analysis and appeal process identified
under H.R. 1904, known as the Healthy
Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (HFRA).
Provisions 104–106 of the HFRA apply
to HFQLG projects with a fuels
reduction component. The Creeks II
Forest Restoration Project is authorized
under the HFRA and is subject to the
use of notice, comment, and objection
process as described under 36 CFR 218.
The comment period on the draft EIS
will be 45 days from the date the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:18 May 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability of
the draft EIS in the Federal Register. To
be eligible to object to an EIS, an
individual or organization must submit
specific written comments related to a
project during the comment period for
the draft EIS. A 30-day objection period
prior to a decision being made will be
provided for this project, rather than an
appeal process after decision.
Objections will receive administrative
review and will be responded to within
30 days and before a decision is made.
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 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 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28795
public record on this proposal and will
be available for public inspection.
Jack T. Walton,
Acting Lassen National Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E8–11063 Filed 5–16–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
[Docket No. 080512652–8653–01]
Request for Public Comments on
Deemed Export Advisory Committee
Recommendations: Narrowing the
Scope of Technologies on the
Commerce Control List Subject to
Deemed Export Licensing
Requirements and Implementing a
More Comprehensive Set of Criteria for
Assessing Probable Country Affiliation
for Foreign Nationals
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Inquiry.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and
Security (BIS) is publishing a notice of
inquiry in order to elicit comments
regarding two specific recommendations
made by the Deemed Export Advisory
Committee (DEAC) with respect to BIS’s
deemed export licensing policy. BIS is
requesting comments on whether the
scope of technologies on the Commerce
Control List that are subject to deemed
export licensing requirements should be
narrowed, and if so, which technologies
should be subject to deemed export
licensing requirements. Additionally,
BIS is seeking comments on whether a
more comprehensive set of criteria
should be used to assess country
affiliation for foreign nationals with
respect to deemed exports.
DATES: Comments must be received no
later August 18, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex
Lopes, Director, Deemed Exports and
Electronics Division, 202–482–4875,
alopes@bis.doc.gov. Ilona Shtrom,
Senior Export Policy Analyst, Deemed
Exports and Electronics Division, 202–
482–3235, ishtrom@bis.doc.gov. The
DEAC report may be accessed at
https://tac.bis.doc.gov/2007/
deacreport.pdf.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ‘‘DEAC Report comments,’’
by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: rpd2@bis.doc.gov. Include
‘‘DEAC Report comments’’ in the subject
line of the message.
E:\FR\FM\19MYN1.SGM
19MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 97 (Monday, May 19, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28794-28795]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-11063]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 97 / Monday, May 19, 2008 / Notices
[[Page 28794]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Lassen National Forest, Almanor Ranger District, CA, Creeks II
Forest Restoration Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service proposes to address fuels and firefighter
safety, forest health issues, and focus on the specific concerns of
wildlife habitat and habitat connectivity by developing a network of
defensible fuel profile zones (DFPZ's), establish group selection
harvest units, and conduct area thinnings on the Almanor Ranger
District in the Lassen National Forest. These management activities
were developed to implement and be consistent with the Lassen National
Forest (LNF) Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP, 1993), as amended
by the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act FEIS,
FSEIS, and RODs (1999, 2003), and the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan
Amendment FEIS, FSEIS, and RODs (2001, 2004).
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received
in writing within 30 days of the date of publication of this Notice of
Intent in the Federal Register. The expected filing date with the
Environmental Protection Agency for the draft EIS is October 8, 2008.
The expected filing date for the final EIS is February 11, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to: Alfred Vazquez, District
Ranger, Almanor Ranger District, at P.O. Box 767, Chester, CA 96020 or
(530) 258-5194 (fax) during normal business hours. The Almanor Ranger
District business hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through
Friday. Electronic comments, in acceptable plain text (.txt), rich text
(.rtf), or Word (.doc) formats, may be submitted to: comments-
pacificsouthwest-lassenalmanor@fs.fed.us using Subject: Creeks II
Forest Restoration Project.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Vazquez, District Ranger, or John
Zarlengo, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, may be contacted by phone at
(530) 258-2141 for more information about the proposed action and the
environmental impact statement or at the Almanor Ranger District, P.O.
Box 767, Chester, CA 96020.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A proposal to address forest health conditions throughout the
Creeks Forest Health Recovery Project (Creeks) area of the Lassen
National Forest (LNF) was placed on the LNF Schedule of Proposed
Actions in February 2004. The project was sent to the public for
scoping in 2004 and the Responsible Official, Forest Supervisor Laurie
Tippin, signed the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Creeks Forest
Health Recovery Project in September 2005. A lawsuit was filed and in
August 2006, the Decision was remanded to Forest Supervisor Tippin. On
May 30, 2007, the Forest Supervisor agreed to cancel the original
Creeks project. A Cancellation of the Notice of Intent to prepare a
Supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement for this project was
published in the Federal Register on June 14, 2007. A new project was
placed on the LNF Schedule of Proposed Actions on July 1, 2007, and a
public meeting to discuss the project was held on February 28, 2008. A
new purpose and need statement was developed and a new proposed action
was crafted to address the specific concerns of wildlife habitat and
habitat connectivity, taking action to improve the overall forest
health, and reducing the risk of large, intense wildfires highlighted
within the original Creeks analysis area. The new project is known as
the Creeks II Forest Restoration Project (Creeks II).
Purpose and Need for Action
Conditions fostered by past fire suppression, a climate favorable
for conifer regeneration and growth, and past management activities
have contributed to current dense stands conditions in the Creeks II
project area. Existing high stand densities in the Creeks II project
area place the large tree component of late-seral stands at increased
risk of mortality from insects and disease, especially during times of
prolonged drought. Dense stand conditions also increase the likelihood
that wildfire will move into the forest canopy and result in a high-
intensity fire that destroys large areas of forest. The existing
habitat considered suitable for both California spotted owl and
American marten is composed of densely forested stands and is at
increased risk of loss to wildfire.
Modification of the fire regime has also affected the health of the
area's aspen communities. In the Sierra Nevada, aspen communities are
rare on the landscape, increasing their value in a vastly conifer
dominated ecosystem. There is also a need in the Creeks II project area
to protect aquatic habitats and their adjacent areas, specifically to
recruit large trees, improve vegetative diversity, and reduce ladder
fuels in riparian habitat conservation areas (RHCAs).
Proposed Action
Creeks II proposes to utilize site-specific prescriptions to meet
the objectives of maintaining and developing long-term sustainable
late-seral attributes that provide habitat connectivity and vegetation
heterogeneity across the landscape; reducing conifer density to better
withstand the rigors of extended periods of low soil moisture; reducing
the potential for large, intense wildfire; providing firefighters a
safe area from which to attack fire; reducing stand density to lower
individual large tree mortality during fires; promoting desired future
conditions for vegetation diversity in aspen stands; moving toward
desired conditions for water quality by reducing sediment delivery from
area roads; and, improving vegetative conditions in RHCAs to protect
aquatic habitats and adjacent areas. Work in the project area includes
DFPZs (4,092 acres), group selection harvest units (708 acres), aspen
enhancement (688 acres), area thinning (3,003 acres), and work in
riparian habitat conservation areas (400 acres) to total an estimated
8,891 acres of treatment and would be spread over a 33,000 acre project
area. Included in this proposal are the use of National
[[Page 28795]]
Forest system roads, the use of temporary roads, and the
decommissioning of some system and temporary roads. The project would
be implemented through a combination of commercial timber sales,
service contracts, and agency crews.
Alternatives
Alternatives proposed to date are the Proposed Action as described
above and the No Action.
Responsible Official and Mailing Address: Kathleen Morse, Forest
Supervisor, 2550 S. Riverside Drive, Susanville, CA 96130 is the
responsible official.
Nature of Decision to Be Made: The decision to be made is whether
to implement the proposed action as described above, to meet the
purpose and need for action through some other combination of
activities, or to take no action at this time.
Scoping Process
The environmental analysis will be documented in an environmental
impact statement. This notice of intent initiates the scoping process
which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The
scoping process will be used to identify issues regarding the proposed
action. An issue is defined as a point of dispute, debate, or
disagreement related to a specific proposed action based on its
anticipated effects. Significant issues brought to our attention are
used during an environmental analysis to develop alternatives to the
proposed action. Some issues raised in scoping may be considered non-
significant because they are: (1) Beyond the scope of the proposed
action and its purpose and need; (2) already decided by law,
regulation, or the Land and Resource Management Plan; (3) irrelevant to
the decision to be made; or (4) conjectural and not supported by
scientific or factual evidence.
Reviewer's Obligation to Comment
On December 27, 2007, the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group
(HFQLG) Forest Recovery Act was amended by H.R. 2764 to utilize the
analysis and appeal process identified under H.R. 1904, known as the
Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (HFRA). Provisions 104-106 of
the HFRA apply to HFQLG projects with a fuels reduction component. The
Creeks II Forest Restoration Project is authorized under the HFRA and
is subject to the use of notice, comment, and objection process as
described under 36 CFR 218. The comment period on the draft EIS will be
45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the
notice of availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. To be
eligible to object to an EIS, an individual or organization must submit
specific written comments related to a project during the comment
period for the draft EIS. A 30-day objection period prior to a decision
being made will be provided for this project, rather than an appeal
process after decision. Objections will receive administrative review
and will be responded to within 30 days and before a decision is made.
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 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.
Jack T. Walton,
Acting Lassen National Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E8-11063 Filed 5-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M