The Manti-La Sal National Forest, Sanpete Ranger District, Utah, Sunroc Gypsum Surface Mine Plan of Operation, 44958-44959 [E8-17667]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
44958
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 149 / Friday, August 1, 2008 / Notices
confine livestock to the appropriate
pasture.
Our analysis will consider
implementation of these options
(development of additional water
sources and construction of a stock
driveway), as well as the upper limits
for stocking, as part of the adaptive
management strategy.
Possible Alternatives
Possible alternatives, in addition to
the proposed action, are No Action
(current management) and No Livestock
Grazing.
Responsible Official
Kevin Riordan, Forest Supervisor,
2880 Skyway Drive, Helena, MT 59601.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The nature of the decision is two-part:
1. Whether livestock grazing should be
authorized on all, part, or none of the
project area. 2. If the decision is to
authorize some level of livestock
grazing, then what management
prescriptions will be applied (including
standards, guidelines, grazing
management, and monitoring) to ensure
that desired condition objectives are met
or that movement occurs toward those
objectives.
Scoping Process
• Scoping Package (mailing)—
August, 2008.
• NOI—August, 2008.
• Post on Web site—August, 2008.
Preliminary Issues
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Preliminary internal review, as well
as public comments from 2007,
indicates concerns with riparian
conditions along relatively short (less
than 1/4 mile), isolated stretches of
streams on the Tarhead Allotment.
Monitoring and follow-up action to
adjust management to improve the
recovery of these areas are the focus of
the proposed action. Internal review has
suggested the possible need in the
future to provide an alternative to the
current route used to trail livestock
between pastures on the Marsh Creek
allotment. Construction of a stock
driveway is incorporated into the
proposed action to address this possible
future need.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the
scoping process which guides the
development of the environmental
impact statement. Comments are due by
August 22, 2008.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:39 Jul 31, 2008
Jkt 214001
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.
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.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22;
Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section
21)
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: July 23, 2008.
Kevin T. Riordan,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E8–17429 Filed 7–31–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
The Manti-La Sal National Forest,
Sanpete Ranger District, Utah, Sunroc
Gypsum Surface Mine Plan of
Operation
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: Sunroc Corporation has
submitted a Plan of Operations (the
Plan) proposing continued gypsum
surface mining operations in the
Chicken Creek East and Chicken Creek
West mines and proposes opening
another pit on it’s existing adjacent
claims. The location of the mine is in
Juab County, Utah, approximately 2
miles east of the town of Levan in
portions of Section(s) 33 and 34, T14S,
R1E, and Section 4, T15S, R1E, SLB&M.
In response, the Manti LaSal National
Forest is preparing an Environmental
Impact Statement to analyze the
environmental effect of the proposed
Plan and determine whether to approve
the Plan as proposed or to require
additional mitigation measures to
protect the environment.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis must be received by 30
days after the publication of the NOI.
The draft environmental impact
statement is expected November, 2008
and the final environmental impact
statement is expected January, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
Rod Player, Acting Forest Supervisor,
Manti LaSal National Forest, 599 West
Price River Drive, Price, Utah 84501.
For further information, mail
correspondence to Tom Lloyd, Team
Leader, by mail: Box 310, Ferron, Utah
84523.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
Tom Lloyd, Team Leader by mail: Box
310, Ferron, Utah, 84523. The Plan of
Operation is available for public review
(36 CFR 228.6) at the District Ranger’s
Office, 540 North Main, Ephraim, Utah
84627–1117.
Purpose and Need for Action
Sunroc Corporation has submitted a
Plan of Operations for continued mining
in the Chicken Creek East and Chicken
Creek West mines and proposed mining
in the Upper Chicken Creek West area.
E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM
01AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 149 / Friday, August 1, 2008 / Notices
The purpose of this EIS is to provide a
timely evaluation of the environmental
impacts of the proposed plan of
operation and determine whether to
approve the Plan as proposed or to
require additional mitigation measures
to protect the environment (in
accordance with Forest Service
regulations for locatable minerals).
The need for action is to allow Sunroc
Corporation to exercise their rights
under U.S. mining laws. Sunroc has a
right to develop its claims as set forth
by the General Mining Law of 1872 as
amended. These laws provide that the
public has a statutory right to conduct
prospecting, exploration, and
development activities (1872 Mining
Law and 1897 Organic Act), provided
they are reasonably incident (1955
Multiple Use Mining Act and case law)
to mining and comply with other federal
laws.
The Forest Service has the
responsibility to protect surface
resources. Mining regulations state that
‘‘operations shall be conducted so as,
where feasible, to minimize adverse
environmental effects on Nation Forest
System surface resources (36 CFR
228.8)’’ provided such regulation does
not endanger or materially interfere
with prospecting, mining, or processing
operations or reasonably incident uses
(1955 Multiple Use Mining Act and case
law).
Proposed Action
The proposed federal action is to
approve Sunroc Corporation’s Plan of
Operation with mitigations needed to
protect other non-mineral surface
resources consistent with Forest Plan,
regulations, and other applicable laws.
Possible Alternatives
1. No Action, 2. Approve the Plan as
presented, 3. Approve the Plan as
presented by Sunroc Corporation, with
stipulations necessary to protect the
non-mineral resources of the area.
Responsible Official
Rod Player, Acting Forest Supervisor,
Manti LaSal National Forest, 599 West
Price River Drive, Price, Utah 84501.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The federal action being considered in
this environmental analysis is the Forest
Service decision to approve the
proposed Plan as submitted, or to
decide what additional mitigations are
needed to protect other resources as
provided for in 36 CFR 228.8.
Scoping Process
Scoping will include NOI to Federal
Register, listing in the Quarterly
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:39 Jul 31, 2008
Jkt 214001
Schedule of Proposed Actions, letters to
interested and affected individuals,
agencies, and organizations, and legal
notices. No public meeting is planned.
Preliminary Issues
Some of the proposed mining area is
in inventoried roadless area, in key
winter range, and the proposed
disturbance does not meet visual quality
objectives of the Forest Plan.
Permits or Licenses Required
The approved Plan of Operation
authorizes mining. Operations must be
consistent with Forest Service
Conditions of Approval, and other
applicable laws and regulations.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the
scoping process which guides the
development of the environmental
impact statement.
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.
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 30day 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
44959
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: July 21, 2008.
Rod Player,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E8–17667 Filed 7–31–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM
PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR
SEVERELY DISABLED
Procurement List; Additions
Committee for Purchase From
People Who Are Blind or Severely
Disabled.
ACTION: Additions to the Procurement
List.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This action adds to the
Procurement List products and a service
to be furnished by nonprofit agencies
employing persons who are blind or
have other severe disabilities.
DATES: Effective Date: August 31, 2008.
ADDRESSES: 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 CONTACT:
Kimberly M. Zeich, Telephone: (703)
603–7740, Fax: (703) 603–0655, or
e-mail CMTEFedReg@jwod.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On May 23 and June 6, 2008, the
Committee for Purchase From People
Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled
published notice (73 FR 30046; 32287)
of proposed additions to the
Procurement List.
After consideration of the material
presented to it concerning capability of
qualified nonprofit agencies to provide
E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM
01AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 149 (Friday, August 1, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44958-44959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17667]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
The Manti-La Sal National Forest, Sanpete Ranger District, Utah,
Sunroc Gypsum Surface Mine Plan of Operation
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Sunroc Corporation has submitted a Plan of Operations (the
Plan) proposing continued gypsum surface mining operations in the
Chicken Creek East and Chicken Creek West mines and proposes opening
another pit on it's existing adjacent claims. The location of the mine
is in Juab County, Utah, approximately 2 miles east of the town of
Levan in portions of Section(s) 33 and 34, T14S, R1E, and Section 4,
T15S, R1E, SLB&M. In response, the Manti LaSal National Forest is
preparing an Environmental Impact Statement to analyze the
environmental effect of the proposed Plan and determine whether to
approve the Plan as proposed or to require additional mitigation
measures to protect the environment.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
by 30 days after the publication of the NOI. The draft environmental
impact statement is expected November, 2008 and the final environmental
impact statement is expected January, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Rod Player, Acting Forest
Supervisor, Manti LaSal National Forest, 599 West Price River Drive,
Price, Utah 84501.
For further information, mail correspondence to Tom Lloyd, Team
Leader, by mail: Box 310, Ferron, Utah 84523.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Tom Lloyd, Team Leader by mail: Box
310, Ferron, Utah, 84523. The Plan of Operation is available for public
review (36 CFR 228.6) at the District Ranger's Office, 540 North Main,
Ephraim, Utah 84627-1117.
Purpose and Need for Action
Sunroc Corporation has submitted a Plan of Operations for continued
mining in the Chicken Creek East and Chicken Creek West mines and
proposed mining in the Upper Chicken Creek West area.
[[Page 44959]]
The purpose of this EIS is to provide a timely evaluation of the
environmental impacts of the proposed plan of operation and determine
whether to approve the Plan as proposed or to require additional
mitigation measures to protect the environment (in accordance with
Forest Service regulations for locatable minerals).
The need for action is to allow Sunroc Corporation to exercise
their rights under U.S. mining laws. Sunroc has a right to develop its
claims as set forth by the General Mining Law of 1872 as amended. These
laws provide that the public has a statutory right to conduct
prospecting, exploration, and development activities (1872 Mining Law
and 1897 Organic Act), provided they are reasonably incident (1955
Multiple Use Mining Act and case law) to mining and comply with other
federal laws.
The Forest Service has the responsibility to protect surface
resources. Mining regulations state that ``operations shall be
conducted so as, where feasible, to minimize adverse environmental
effects on Nation Forest System surface resources (36 CFR 228.8)''
provided such regulation does not endanger or materially interfere with
prospecting, mining, or processing operations or reasonably incident
uses (1955 Multiple Use Mining Act and case law).
Proposed Action
The proposed federal action is to approve Sunroc Corporation's Plan
of Operation with mitigations needed to protect other non-mineral
surface resources consistent with Forest Plan, regulations, and other
applicable laws.
Possible Alternatives
1. No Action, 2. Approve the Plan as presented, 3. Approve the Plan
as presented by Sunroc Corporation, with stipulations necessary to
protect the non-mineral resources of the area.
Responsible Official
Rod Player, Acting Forest Supervisor, Manti LaSal National Forest,
599 West Price River Drive, Price, Utah 84501.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The federal action being considered in this environmental analysis
is the Forest Service decision to approve the proposed Plan as
submitted, or to decide what additional mitigations are needed to
protect other resources as provided for in 36 CFR 228.8.
Scoping Process
Scoping will include NOI to Federal Register, listing in the
Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions, letters to interested and
affected individuals, agencies, and organizations, and legal notices.
No public meeting is planned.
Preliminary Issues
Some of the proposed mining area is in inventoried roadless area,
in key winter range, and the proposed disturbance does not meet visual
quality objectives of the Forest Plan.
Permits or Licenses Required
The approved Plan of Operation authorizes mining. Operations must
be consistent with Forest Service Conditions of Approval, and other
applicable laws and regulations.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides
the development of the environmental impact statement.
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.
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 30-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 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: July 21, 2008.
Rod Player,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E8-17667 Filed 7-31-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
