Shasta-Trinity National Forest, California; Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Pilgrim Vegetation Management Project, 46236-46238 [E8-17994]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
46236
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 154 / Friday, August 8, 2008 / Notices
Secretary of Agriculture and the
Secretary of the Interior to plan and
conduct hazardous fuels reduction
projects on National Forest System and
Bureau of Land Management Lands. The
Forest Service, Bureau of Land
Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife
Service, and many State agencies with
fire protection responsibilities have
undertaken a very ambitious and
expensive forest fuels reduction
program. The Forest Service (FS) and
university researchers will contact
recipients of a phone/mail questionnaire
to help forest and fire managers
understand value trade-offs regarding
fire hazard reduction programs in the
wildland-urban interface.
Need and Use of the Information:
Through the questionnaire, researchers
will evaluate the responses of Florida
residents to different scenarios related
to fire hazard reduction programs, how
residents think the programs presented
to them are effective, and calculate how
much residents would be willing to pay
to implement the alternatives. The
collected information will help
researchers provide better information
to natural resources, forest, and fire
managers when they are contemplating
the kind and type of fire hazard
reduction program to implement to
achieve forest land management
planning objectives. Without the
information the agencies with fire
protection responsibilities will lack the
capability to evaluate the general public
understanding of proposed fuels
reduction projects and programs or their
willingness to pay for implementing
such programs.
Description of Respondents:
Individuals or households.
Number of Respondents: 500.
Frequency of Responses: Reporting:
Other (One time only).
Total Burden Hours: 317.
Charlene Parker,
Departmental Information Collection
Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E8–18308 Filed 8–7–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Office of the Under Secretary,
Research, Education, and Economics;
Notice of the Advisory Committee on
Biotechnology and 21st Century
Agriculture Meeting
AGENCY:
Agricultural Research Service,
USDA.
ACTION:
Notice of meeting.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:25 Aug 07, 2008
Jkt 214001
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5
U.S.C. App. 2, the United States
Department of Agriculture announces a
meeting of the Advisory Committee on
Biotechnology and 21st Century
Agriculture (AC21).
DATES: The meeting dates are August 26,
2008, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., and August 27,
2008, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Waugh Auditorium, USDA
Economic Research Service, Third
Floor, South Tower, 1800 M Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20036.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Schechtman, Telephone (202)
720–3817.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
twentieth meeting of the AC21 has been
scheduled for August 26–27, 2008. The
AC21 consists of members representing
the biotechnology industry, farmers,
commodity processors and shippers,
livestock handlers, environmental and
consumer groups, and academic
researchers. In addition, representatives
from the Departments of Commerce,
Health and Human Services, and State,
and the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Office of the United States
Trade Representative, and the National
Association of State Departments of
Agriculture serve as ‘‘ex officio’’
members. At this meeting, the
committee will continue its
consideration of governance issues in
the oversight of genetically engineered
animals, with an emphasis on food
animals intended for food or non-food
uses. Background information regarding
the work of the AC21 will be available
on the USDA Web site at https://
www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/
_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?navid=
BIOTECH&parentnav=AGRICULTURE&
navtype=RT.
Requests to make oral presentations at
the meeting may be sent to Michael
Schechtman, Designated Federal
Official, Office of the Deputy Secretary,
USDA, 202 B Jamie L. Whitten Federal
Building, 12th Street and Jefferson
Drive, SW., Washington, DC 20250,
Telephone (202) 720–3817; Fax (202)
690–4265; e-mail
Michael.schechtman@ars.usda.gov. On
August 26, 2008, if time permits,
reasonable provision will be made for
oral presentations of no more than five
minutes each in duration. Written
requests to make oral presentations at
the meeting must be received by the
contact person identified herein at least
three business days before the meeting.
The meeting will be open to the public,
but space is limited. If you would like
to attend the meetings, you must register
by contacting Ms. Dianne Fowler at
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(202) 720–4074, by fax at (202) 720–
3191 or by e-mail at
Dianne.fowler@ars.usda.gov at least five
business days prior to the meeting.
Please provide your name, title,
business affiliation, address, and
telephone and fax numbers when you
register. If you require a sign language
interpreter or other special
accommodation due to disability, please
indicate those needs at the time of
registration.
Dated: July 30, 2008.
Jeremy Stump,
Senior Advisor to the Secretary for
International and Homeland Security Affairs
and Biotechnology.
[FR Doc. E8–18276 Filed 8–7–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–03–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Shasta-Trinity National Forest,
California; Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Pilgrim Vegetation Management
Project
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to supplement
an Environmental Impact Statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Shasta-Trinity National
Forest will prepare a Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (SETS)
for the Pilgrim Vegetation Management
Project to present additional
information consistent with the court
ruling Conservation Congress v. Forest
Service, Case No. 07–0264 (E.D. Cal.,
May 13, 2008). This action will require
modification of the current Project Level
Management Indicator Assemblage
Report for the Pilgrim Vegetation
Management Project dated February 15,
2007.
DATES: The draft SETS is expected to be
issued in September 2008 and the final
SETS expected in November 2008.
ADDRESSES: Shasta-McCloud
Management Unit, 204 W. Alma St., Mt.
Shasta, California 96067.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deimis Poehlmann, Planning Officer,
Shasta-McCloud Management Unit,
McCloud Ranger Station, P.O. Box 1620,
McCloud, California 96057, telephone
(530) 926–9656 or via e-mail at
dpoehlmann@fs.fed.us.
The Forest
Service is proposing to prepare a
supplement to the final environmental
impact statement for the Pilgrim
Vegetation Management Project in
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 154 / Friday, August 8, 2008 / Notices
sanitation harvest on approximately
3100 acres of overstocked coniferous
stands, sanitation and salvage harvest
on approximately 10 acres of knobcone
pine, and regeneration of approximately
415 acres of diseased and insect infested
stands—15% green tree retention will
not be met on approximately 255 of
these acres because there are not enough
disease-free trees to meet this standard.
All regeneration units will be replanted
with healthy conifer seedlings.
Alternative 1 would also release
approximately 20 acres of aspen by
removing competing conifers, restore
approximately 275 acres of dry
meadows by removal of encroaching
conifer trees, underburn approximately
200 acres of natural and activity fuels,
mechanically pile and burn
approximately 700 acres of activity
fuels, close approximately 10 miles of
roads to reduce maintenance costs,
decommission approximately 2 miles of
roads not needed for future
management, reconstruct one roadstream crossing, and construct
approximately 0.3 miles of new road
needed for present and future
management. Alternative 2 is the same
as Alternative 1 except that on
approximately 535 acres of proposed
thinning/sanitation, canopy closure
would be maintained at 60% on
average. Alternative 3 is the same as
Alternative 1 except that on
approximately 415 acres of regeneration
harvest, 15% of the area would be
retained in trees that are generally the
largest and/or oldest trees in the stands
even though they are diseased.
Purpose and Need for Action
The draft SEIS will not change the
purpose and need for the Pilgrim
Vegetation Management Project as
described in Chapter 1, pages 1 through
15, of the FEIS. The draft SEIS will
provide additional analysis and
supplemental information specific to
the issues identifed in the court ruling,
Conservation Congress v. Forest Service,
Case No. 07–0264 (E.D. Cal., May 13,
2008), and document the analysis and
changes made within the Project Level
Management Indicator Assemblage
Report (Appendix L) and within the
FEIS as necessary.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
accordance with FSH 1909.15—Chapter
10—Section 18.1 and Section 18.2.
The Record of Decision (ROD),
Pilgrim Vegetation Management Project
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS) and other relevant
documentation can be found on the
Shasta McCloud Management Unit
website at: https://www.fs.fed.us/r5/
shastatrinity/projects/smmuprojects.shtml.
The original Notice of Intent for this
project was published in the Federal
Register February 14, 2005. The Notice
of Availability of the Pilgrim Vegetation
Management Project Draft
Environmental Impact Statement was
published in the Federal Register on
June 23, 2006. In June 1, 2007, a ROD
was issued. This decision was appealed
on August 5, 2007 and August 6, 2007.
The Appeal Deciding Officer upheld the
decision on September 18, 2007. A
motion for summary judgment was filed
by Conservation Congress and Klamath
Forest Alliance in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of
California on March 17, 2008.
In the recent court ruling concerning
the ROD for the Pilgrim Vegetation
Management Project, Conservation
Congress v. Forest Service, Case No. 07–
0264 (E.D. Cal., May 13, 2008), the court
ruled the Forest Service did not fully
comply with its monitoring obligations
for certain species as outlined in the
forest plan, and remanded the matter to
the agency for further action consistent
with the order. This SEIS will address
and respond to the specific issues
identified in the court ruling.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies
Lead Agency: USDA, Forest Service.
Proposed Action
The proposed action and alternatives
will remain the same as described in
Chapter 2, pages 17 through 33, of the
FEIS. In summary, the FEIS considers
four alternatives in detail. Alternative 4
is the no action alternative. Alternative
1, the Preferred Alternative, would
restore forest health and ecosystem
functions by commercial thinning and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:25 Aug 07, 2008
Jkt 214001
Responsible Official
J. Sharon Heywood, Forest
Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National
Forest, 3644 Avtech Parkway, Redding,
CA 96002.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Responsible Official will review
the supplemental information and
determine if any modifications should
be made to the June 1, 2007 ROD.
Scoping Process
Scoping is not required for
supplements to environmental impact
statements (40 CFR 1502.9(c)4).
Early Notice of Importance of Public
Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
A draft SETS will be prepared for
comment. A legal notice will be
published in the newspaper of record
and a Notice of Availability will be
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
46237
published in the Federal Register to
inform the public that supplemental
information is available for review and
comment. The draft SETS will be
distributed to all parties that received
the 2007 FETS and ROD and to those
parties that filed an appeal of the 2007
decision. The comment period on the
draft SEIS will be 45 days from the date
the Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability in
the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes it is
important to give reviewers notice of
several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental
review process. First, reviewers of draft
SETS 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 SETS stage but are not
raised until after completion of the final
SETS may be 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. Timely submittal
of comments and objections to the
Forest Service ensures they can be
meaningfully considered and responded
to in the final SETS.
To assist the Forest Service in
identifying and considering issues and
concerns on the proposed action,
comments on the draft SETS should be
as specific as possible. It is also helpful
if comments refer to specific pages or
chapters of the draft supplement.
Comments may also address the
adequacy of the draft SEIS or the merits
of the alternatives fonnulated and
discussed in the statement. In
addressing these points, 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.
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)
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
46238
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 154 / Friday, August 8, 2008 / Notices
Dated: July 29, 2008.
J. Sharon Heywood,
Forest Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National
Forest.
[FR Doc. E8–17994 Filed 8–7–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Shasta-Trinity National Forest,
California; Shasta-Trinity National
Forest Motorized Travel Management
EIS
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement.
AGENCY:
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Shasta-Trinity National
Forest (Forest) will prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement to
disclose the impacts associated with the
following proposed actions:
1. Prohibition of cross-country
motorized vehicle travel (with the
exception of snowmobiles) off
designated National Forest System
(NFS) roads, NFS trails and areas by the
public except as allowed by permit or
other authorization (Travel Management
Rule, 36 CFR Part 212, Subpart B).
2. Amend the Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan (Plan) to
conform with the Travel Management
Rule, Subpart B, by removing reference
to OHV cross-country travel in the
Forest Plan and include as a forest-wide
standard ‘‘Prohibit wheeled vehicle
travel off designated roads and trails
except for administrative use or uses
under permitted activities or within
designated areas.’’
3. Add approximately 32 miles of
existing unauthorized routes to the
National Forest Transportation System
(NFTS) as roads open to the public for
wheeled motorized vehicle use by
vehicle class and season of use.
4. Add approximately 11 miles of
existing unauthorized routes to the
NFTS as motorized trails open to the
public for wheeled motorized vehicle
use by vehicle class and season of use.
5. Restrict use below the high-water
mark at Shasta Lake and Trinity Lake,
(within the Shasta-Trinity National
Recreation Area) to only highway legal
vehicles and provide a maximum speed
limit of 15 miles per hour (mph).
DATES: The comment period on the
proposed action will extend 30 days
from the date the Notice of Intent is
published in the Federal Register.
Completion of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
is expected in January 2009 and the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:25 Aug 07, 2008
Jkt 214001
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS) is expected in July 2009.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to:
Travel Management Team, ShastaTrinity National Forest, 3644 Avtech
Parkway, Redding, CA 96002. Electronic
comments may be submitted to
comments-pacificsouthwest-shastatrinity@fs.fed.us with Subject:
Motorized Travel.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Remillard, Shasta-Trinity
National Forest, 3644 Avtech Parkway,
Redding, CA 96002, Phone: (530) 226–
2421, Fax: (530) 226–2470, e-mail:
rremillard@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Over the past few decades, the
availability and capability of motorized
vehicles, particularly off-highway
vehicles (OHVs) and sport utility
vehicles (SUVs) has increased
tremendously. Nationally, the number
of OHV users has climbed sevenfold in
the past 30 years, from approximately 5
million in 1972 to 36 million in 2000.
The ten states with the largest
population also have the most OHV
users. California has 4.35 million OHV
users accounting for almost 11% of the
U.S. total (Off-Highway Vehicle
Recreation in the United States, Regions
and States: A National Report from the
National Survey on Recreation and the
Environment (NSRE) Cordell, Betz,
Green and Owens June 2005). There
were 786,914 ATVs and OHV
motorcycles registered in 2004, up
330% since 1980. Annual sales of ATVs
and OHV motorcycles in California were
the highest in the U.S. for the last 5
years. Four-wheel drive vehicle sales in
California also increased by 1500% to
3,046,866 from 1989 to 2002.
Unmanaged OHV use has resulted in
unplanned roads and trails, erosion,
watershed and habitat degradation, and
impacts to cultural resource sites.
Compaction and erosion are the primary
effects of OHV use on soils. Riparian
areas and aquatic dependent species are
particularly vulnerable to OHV use.
Unmanaged recreation, including
impacts from OHVs, is one of ‘‘Four Key
Threats Facing the Nation’s Forests and
Grasslands.’’ (USDA Forest Service,
June 2004).
On August 11, 2003, the Pacific
Southwest Region of the Forest Service
entered into a Memorandum of Intent
(MOT) with the California Off-Highway
Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission,
and the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle
Recreation Division of the California
Department of Parks and Recreation.
That MOI set in motion a region-wide
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
effort to ‘‘Designate OHV roads, trails,
and any specifically defined open areas
for motorized wheeled vehicles on maps
of the 19 National Forests in California
by 2007.’’
On November 9, 2005, the Forest
Service published final travel
management regulations in the Federal
Register (FR Vol. 70, No. 216–Nov. 9,
2005, pp 68264–6829 1). Subpart B of
the final Travel Management Rule
requires designation of those roads,
trails, and areas that are open to motor
vehicle use on National Forests. Route
designations will be made by class of
vehicle and, if appropriate, by time of
year. The final rule allows for motor
vehicle use only on designated system
routes and in designated areas.
On some NFS lands, long managed as
open to cross-country motor vehicle
travel, repeated use has resulted in
unplanned, unauthorized, roads and
trails. These routes generally were
developed without environmental
analysis or public involvement, and do
not have the same status as NFS roads
and NFS trails included in the forest
transportation system. Nevertheless,
some unauthorized routes are wellsited, provide excellent opportunities
for outdoor recreation by motorized and
non-motorized users, and would
enhance the National Forest system of
designated roads, trails and areas. Other
unauthorized routes are poorly located
and cause unacceptable impacts. Only
NFS roads and NFS trails can be
designated for wheeled motorized
vehicle use. For an unauthorized route
to be designated, it must first be added
to the national forest transportation
system (NFTS).
In accordance with the Memorandum
of Intent, the Forest recently completed
an inventory of unauthorized routes on
NFS lands and identified approximately
5,085 unauthorized routes totaling 1,198
miles. The Forest then used an
interdisciplinary process to conduct
travel analysis to determine whether
any of the unauthorized routes should
be proposed for addition to the NFTS in
this proposed action. A number of
routes were identified which could be
considered in this or future decisions on
the NFTS as a part of travel management
on the Forest. The Responsible Official
has made decisions on what, if any,
changes to the existing NFTS would be
a part of this proposed action.
Roads, trails and areas that are
currently part of the Forest
transportation system and are open to
wheeled motorized vehicle travel will
remain designated for such unless
changed by this proposal. This proposal
focuses only on the prohibition of
wheeled motorized vehicle travel off
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 154 (Friday, August 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46236-46238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Shasta-Trinity National Forest, California; Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement for the Pilgrim Vegetation Management
Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to supplement an Environmental Impact
Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Shasta-Trinity National Forest will prepare a Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (SETS) for the Pilgrim Vegetation
Management Project to present additional information consistent with
the court ruling Conservation Congress v. Forest Service, Case No. 07-
0264 (E.D. Cal., May 13, 2008). This action will require modification
of the current Project Level Management Indicator Assemblage Report for
the Pilgrim Vegetation Management Project dated February 15, 2007.
DATES: The draft SETS is expected to be issued in September 2008 and
the final SETS expected in November 2008.
ADDRESSES: Shasta-McCloud Management Unit, 204 W. Alma St., Mt. Shasta,
California 96067.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deimis Poehlmann, Planning Officer,
Shasta-McCloud Management Unit, McCloud Ranger Station, P.O. Box 1620,
McCloud, California 96057, telephone (530) 926-9656 or via e-mail at
dpoehlmann@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Service is proposing to prepare a
supplement to the final environmental impact statement for the Pilgrim
Vegetation Management Project in
[[Page 46237]]
accordance with FSH 1909.15--Chapter 10--Section 18.1 and Section 18.2.
The Record of Decision (ROD), Pilgrim Vegetation Management Project
Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and other relevant
documentation can be found on the Shasta McCloud Management Unit
website at: https://www.fs.fed.us/r5/shastatrinity/projects/smmu-
projects.shtml.
The original Notice of Intent for this project was published in the
Federal Register February 14, 2005. The Notice of Availability of the
Pilgrim Vegetation Management Project Draft Environmental Impact
Statement was published in the Federal Register on June 23, 2006. In
June 1, 2007, a ROD was issued. This decision was appealed on August 5,
2007 and August 6, 2007. The Appeal Deciding Officer upheld the
decision on September 18, 2007. A motion for summary judgment was filed
by Conservation Congress and Klamath Forest Alliance in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of California on March
17, 2008.
In the recent court ruling concerning the ROD for the Pilgrim
Vegetation Management Project, Conservation Congress v. Forest Service,
Case No. 07-0264 (E.D. Cal., May 13, 2008), the court ruled the Forest
Service did not fully comply with its monitoring obligations for
certain species as outlined in the forest plan, and remanded the matter
to the agency for further action consistent with the order. This SEIS
will address and respond to the specific issues identified in the court
ruling.
Purpose and Need for Action
The draft SEIS will not change the purpose and need for the Pilgrim
Vegetation Management Project as described in Chapter 1, pages 1
through 15, of the FEIS. The draft SEIS will provide additional
analysis and supplemental information specific to the issues identifed
in the court ruling, Conservation Congress v. Forest Service, Case No.
07-0264 (E.D. Cal., May 13, 2008), and document the analysis and
changes made within the Project Level Management Indicator Assemblage
Report (Appendix L) and within the FEIS as necessary.
Proposed Action
The proposed action and alternatives will remain the same as
described in Chapter 2, pages 17 through 33, of the FEIS. In summary,
the FEIS considers four alternatives in detail. Alternative 4 is the no
action alternative. Alternative 1, the Preferred Alternative, would
restore forest health and ecosystem functions by commercial thinning
and sanitation harvest on approximately 3100 acres of overstocked
coniferous stands, sanitation and salvage harvest on approximately 10
acres of knobcone pine, and regeneration of approximately 415 acres of
diseased and insect infested stands--15% green tree retention will not
be met on approximately 255 of these acres because there are not enough
disease-free trees to meet this standard. All regeneration units will
be replanted with healthy conifer seedlings. Alternative 1 would also
release approximately 20 acres of aspen by removing competing conifers,
restore approximately 275 acres of dry meadows by removal of
encroaching conifer trees, underburn approximately 200 acres of natural
and activity fuels, mechanically pile and burn approximately 700 acres
of activity fuels, close approximately 10 miles of roads to reduce
maintenance costs, decommission approximately 2 miles of roads not
needed for future management, reconstruct one road-stream crossing, and
construct approximately 0.3 miles of new road needed for present and
future management. Alternative 2 is the same as Alternative 1 except
that on approximately 535 acres of proposed thinning/sanitation, canopy
closure would be maintained at 60% on average. Alternative 3 is the
same as Alternative 1 except that on approximately 415 acres of
regeneration harvest, 15% of the area would be retained in trees that
are generally the largest and/or oldest trees in the stands even though
they are diseased.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies
Lead Agency: USDA, Forest Service.
Responsible Official
J. Sharon Heywood, Forest Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National
Forest, 3644 Avtech Parkway, Redding, CA 96002.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Responsible Official will review the supplemental information
and determine if any modifications should be made to the June 1, 2007
ROD.
Scoping Process
Scoping is not required for supplements to environmental impact
statements (40 CFR 1502.9(c)4).
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
A draft SETS will be prepared for comment. A legal notice will be
published in the newspaper of record and a Notice of Availability will
be published in the Federal Register to inform the public that
supplemental information is available for review and comment. The draft
SETS will be distributed to all parties that received the 2007 FETS and
ROD and to those parties that filed an appeal of the 2007 decision. The
comment period on the draft SEIS will be 45 days from the date the
Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in
the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the
environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft SETS 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 SETS stage but are not
raised until after completion of the final SETS may be 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. Timely submittal of comments and objections
to the Forest Service ensures they can be meaningfully considered and
responded to in the final SETS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft SETS should
be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to
specific pages or chapters of the draft supplement. Comments may also
address the adequacy of the draft SEIS or the merits of the
alternatives fonnulated and discussed in the statement. In addressing
these points, 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.
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)
[[Page 46238]]
Dated: July 29, 2008.
J. Sharon Heywood,
Forest Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National Forest.
[FR Doc. E8-17994 Filed 8-7-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
