Kootenai National Forest, Cabinet Ranger District, Montana Pilgrim Timber Sale Project, 17007-17009 [2012-7052]

Download as PDF 17007 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices Services (HHS) at 77 FR 4034, January 26, 2012. The guidelines published by HHS are referred to as the poverty guidelines. Section 246.7(d)(1) of the WIC regulations (Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations) specifies that State agencies may prescribe income guidelines either equaling the income guidelines established under section 9 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act for reduced-price school meals or identical to State or local guidelines for free or reducedprice health care. However, in conforming WIC income guidelines to State or local health care guidelines, the State cannot establish WIC guidelines which exceed the guidelines for reduced-price school meals, or which are less than 100 percent of the Federal poverty guidelines. Consistent with the method used to compute income eligibility guidelines for reduced-price meals under the National School Lunch Program, the poverty guidelines were multiplied by 1.85 and the results rounded upward to the next whole dollar. At this time, the Department is publishing the maximum and minimum WIC income eligibility guidelines by household size for the period July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013. Consistent with section 17(f)(17) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1786(f)(17)), a State agency may implement the revised WIC income eligibility guidelines concurrently with the implementation of income eligibility guidelines under the Medicaid Program established under Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396, et seq.). State agencies may coordinate implementation with the revised Medicaid guidelines, i.e., earlier in the year, but in no case may implementation take place later than July 1, 2012. State agencies that do not coordinate implementation with the revised Medicaid guidelines must implement the WIC income eligibility guidelines on July 1, 2012. The first table of this Notice contains the income limits by household size for the 48 contiguous States, the District of Columbia, and all Territories, including Guam. INCOME ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES [Effective from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013] Federal poverty guidelines—100% Household size Annual Monthly Twicemonthly Bi-weekly Reduced price meals—185% Weekly Annual Monthly Twicemonthly Bi-weekly Weekly 48 Contiguous States, D.C., Guam and Territories 1 ................................................................ 2 ................................................................ 3 ................................................................ 4 ................................................................ 5 ................................................................ 6 ................................................................ 7 ................................................................ 8 ................................................................ Each add’l family member add ................. $11,170 15,130 19,090 23,050 27,010 30,970 34,930 38,890 +3,960 $931 1,261 1,591 1,921 2,251 2,581 2,911 3,241 +330 $466 631 796 961 1,126 1,291 1,456 1,621 +165 $430 582 735 887 1,039 1,192 1,344 1,496 +153 $215 291 368 444 520 596 672 748 +77 $20,665 27,991 35,317 42,643 49,969 57,295 64,621 71,947 +7,326 $1,723 2,333 2,944 3,554 4,165 4,775 5,386 5,996 +611 $862 1,167 1,472 1,777 2,083 2,388 2,693 2,998 +306 $795 1,077 1,359 1,641 1,922 2,204 2,486 2,768 +282 $398 539 680 821 961 1,102 1,243 1,384 +141 269 364 460 555 650 745 840 935 +96 25,845 35,002 44,160 53,317 62,475 71,632 80,790 89,947 +9,158 2,154 2,917 3,680 4,444 5,207 5,970 6,733 7,496 +764 1,077 1,459 1,840 2,222 2,604 2,985 3,367 3,748 +382 995 1,347 1,699 2,051 2,403 2,756 3,108 3,460 +353 498 674 850 1,026 1,202 1,378 1,554 1,730 +177 248 335 423 510 598 685 773 860 +88 23,791 32,209 40,626 49,044 57,461 65,879 74,296 82,714 +8,418 1,983 2,685 3,386 4,087 4,789 5,490 6,192 6,893 +702 992 1,343 1,693 2,044 2,395 2,745 3,096 3,447 +351 916 1,239 1,563 1,887 2,211 2,534 2,858 3,182 +324 458 620 782 944 1,106 1,267 1,429 1,591 +162 Alaska 1 ................................................................ 2 ................................................................ 3 ................................................................ 4 ................................................................ 5 ................................................................ 6 ................................................................ 7 ................................................................ 8 ................................................................ Each add’l family member add ................. 13,970 18,920 23,870 28,820 33,770 38,720 43,670 48,620 +4,950 1,165 1,577 1,990 2,402 2,815 3,227 3,640 4,052 +413 583 789 995 1,201 1,408 1,614 1,820 2,026 +207 538 728 919 1,109 1,299 1,490 1,680 1,870 +191 Hawaii srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 1 ................................................................ 2 ................................................................ 3 ................................................................ 4 ................................................................ 5 ................................................................ 6 ................................................................ 7 ................................................................ 8 ................................................................ Each add’l family member add ................. 12,860 17,410 21,960 26,510 31,060 35,610 40,160 44,710 +4,550 Because the poverty guidelines for Alaska and Hawaii are higher than for the 48 contiguous States, separate tables for Alaska and Hawaii have been included for the convenience of the State agencies. 1,072 1,451 1,830 2,210 2,589 2,968 3,347 3,726 +380 536 726 915 1,105 1,295 1,484 1,674 1,863 +190 495 670 845 1,020 1,195 1,370 1,545 1,720 +175 Dated: March 19, 2012. Jeffrey J. Tribiano, Acting Administrator. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE [FR Doc. 2012–7037 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] Kootenai National Forest, Cabinet Ranger District, Montana Pilgrim Timber Sale Project BILLING CODE 3410–30–P Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1786. Forest Service AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. ACTION: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:14 Mar 22, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1 17008 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices This vegetation management project is designed to achieve goals of enhanced forest stand resilience and resistance to insect and disease agents by altering stand density, species composition, and age class structure, via use of timber harvesting and prescribed fire use. Big game forage would be enhanced through use of prescribed fire to rejuvenate and increase palatability of shrubs and grasses, including some sites within Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRA). No mechanical activities are proposed within IRA boundaries. This Project was originally initiated in 2010 with scoping of the proposed action. In addition, in 2011 public scoping was again initiated in reference to openings sizes exceeding 40 acres and the requirement for a projectspecific Forest Plan amendment related to open road density in areas managed for big game summer range. Subsequent analyses of potential environmental effects were documented in an Environmental Assessment (EA). Based on the level of interest, and recognizing the scope and potential issues associated with the project, as the Forest Supervisor for the Kootenai National Forest I have made the decision to halt the EA process and commence with the process to document findings in an Environmental Impact Statement. The comments received during the scoping process for the Environmental Assessment will be used in preparation of the EIS; therefore scoping will not be reinitiated. DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received by April 23, 2012. The draft environmental impact statement is expected May 2012 and the final environmental impact statement is expected September 2012. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Kootenai National Forest, Pilgrim Timber Sale Project, Cabinet Ranger District, 2693 Highway 200, Trout Creek, MT 59874. Comments may also be sent via email to: commentsnorthern-kootenai-cabinet-fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to 406/827–0718. Electronic comments must be submitted in Microsoft Word format. It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such a way that they are useful to the Agency’s preparation of the EIS. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer’s concerns and contentions specific to the Proposal. Comments received in response to this solicitation, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:14 Mar 22, 2012 Jkt 226001 proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered, however. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Grupenhoff, Team Leader, (406) 827–3533 or to the Kootenai National Forest Web page: https://www.fs.fed.us/ nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=31645. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. Purpose and Need for Action There is a need to reduce stand densities, improve growing conditions, and increase the proportion of root disease-resistant tree species in the area; there is a need to increase age class diversity in lodgepole pine-dominated forest communities in the project area; there is a need to provide local employment related to forest management and restoration activities and to supply forest products to contribute to the support of that segment of the local and regional economy dependent on timber products; and, there is a need to improve forage production and quality through the use of such treatments as commercial timber harvest, slashing, and prescribed fire. Proposed Action The proposed action includes timber harvest, prescribed burning, and road work necessary to provide safe access to the proposed treatment areas while minimizing resource impacts, as summarized below: Approximately 500 acres of regeneration harvest are proposed, most of which would be removed with cable logging systems. Approximately 55–75 acres would be tractor yarded. These treatment areas are generally located where lodgepole pine is susceptible to mountain pine beetle attack or is currently infested, or in areas where Douglas-fir or true firs are infected with root disease at unacceptably high levels. In the latter case, we propose to increase the proportion of root disease resistant species (such as western larch, western white pine, or ponderosa pine) on the site to maintain viable forest communities over time. This can be done by favoring these species in the residual stand or by replanting these species after harvest if they are not well represented in the original stand. For PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 most areas where regeneration harvest is proposed in lodgepole pine stands, we will generally propose to allow natural revegetation of the site back to lodgepole pine. Approximately 900 acres of intermediate harvest is proposed; approximately one third will be tractor yarded and two thirds will require the use of a cable system. These commercial thinning treatments would leave a fully stocked stand after harvest with the objective of improving growing conditions for the residual trees. To access proposed harvest areas, approximately 3.1 miles of new, permanent road would need to be constructed and approximately 1.8 miles of temporary road would be constructed and removed following completion of treatment activities. In addition, approximately 26 miles of road reconditioning to bring roads up to current standards of surface water management and provide for safe hauling. Approximately 6,950 acres have been identified as a perimeter for prescribed burning to enhance forage quality and quantity for big game species, notably elk, deer, and bears. Generally, these areas are on southerly aspects that have historically provided important forage which is declining due to conifer encroachment and forage senescence. Prescribed burns would occur during the cooler, moister spring period when the risk of large, high intensity fires is lower. On a yearly basis, depending on conditions, it is estimated that ignition would be unlikely to exceed 1,000 acres per year. Portions of three Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) are located within the Project Area and occupy a total of approximately 13,843 acres, or about 46% of the area. There are no harvest activities proposed within these roadless areas. Prescribed burning is being proposed within portions of these IRAs. Burning will be conducted in a manner so as to maintain their natural character and improve wildlife habitat. Because of the extent of a current mountain pine beetle infestation, larger units are proposed to increase the amount of lodgepole treated and more closely approximate typical patch sizes of lodgepole pine in this area while still protecting important resources including stream integrity and fish habitat. Some of these units would create openings that would exceed 40 acres in size, for which approval by the Regional Forester is generally required. All action alternatives propose treatment in MA–12 to meet the purpose and need for this project, and this activity requires the use of roads within MA–12 which are currently closed. E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices Additionally, some alternatives propose new road construction within MA–12. This would result in exceeding the open road density standard during the life of the project and require a site-specific Forest Plan amendment. All roads opened for project activities and all newly constructed roads would be effectively closed after completion of project activities, so there would be no long term increase in open road densities. Specifically, the proposed action (Alternative 2) would increase ORDs in MA–12 to 2.3 miles per square mile during harvest activities if all roads were open concurrently. Alternative 3 would result in an ORD of 2.6 miles per square mile during operations, and Alternative 4 would not change the existing condition. Following completion of project activities, open road densities would return to preproject levels. Possible Alternatives Four alternatives have been identified; the No Action, the Proposed Action described in this Notice of Intent, an action alternative that more specifically addresses concerns and issues related to an on-going, aggressive expansion of mountain pine beetle activity into stands dominated by lodgepole pine, and an action alternative that would address concerns regarding new road construction which would accomplish stand treatments using the existing transportation system. Responsible Official As the Kootenai National Forest Supervisor, I am the responsible official for this decision. srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Nature of Decision To Be Made My decision will be whether or not to implement the proposed action as described, including timber harvest, road work, prescribed burning to enhance big game forage, approval of a project-specific amendment to the Forest Plan for open road density in MA–12, changes in some Management Area designation for difficult regeneration sites, and to exceed the 40 acre opening size limit under the National Forest Management Act (1976), or to implement an alternative course of action, as expressed in alternatives to the proposed action. Scoping Process It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency’s preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:14 Mar 22, 2012 Jkt 226001 provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer’s concerns and contentions. Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered, however. Dated: March 8, 2012. Paul Stantus, Acting Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 2012–7052 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–11–P OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL COORDINATOR FOR ALASKA NATURAL GAS TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS Review of Federal Permit Conditions Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects. ACTION: Notice and request for public comment. AGENCY: The Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects is proposing to implement its statutory responsibilities under the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act (15 U.S.C. 720) with respect to federal permit conditions imposed on the gas pipeline project. This policy statement will establish the agency’s procedures for determining whether certain conditions included in a certificate, right-of-way, permit, lease, or other authorization for an Alaska natural gas transportation project by other federal agencies are prohibited under the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act. DATES: Submit comments on or before April 23, 2012. ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to Frank Richards, Deputy Federal Coordinator, Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects; 188 W. Northern Lights Blvd., Suite 600; Anchorage, AK 99503. Submit electronic comments to: frichards@arcticgas.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Richards, Deputy Federal Coordinator, Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects, 907–271–5240. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Background Congress enacted the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act in 2004 (15 U.S.C. 720) PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17009 to encourage completion of a pipeline to deliver natural gas from Alaska’s North Slope to the Lower 48 states. The Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act establishes a new process for approval and construction of the pipeline, either a project that completes the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation System that President Carter approved in 1977 pursuant to the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. 719), or a different pipeline project under the Natural Gas Act. The Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act of 2004 created the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects and charged the Federal Coordinator, the agency head, with four primary responsibilities: (1) Coordinate the expeditious discharge of all activities by all federal agencies with respect to an Alaska natural gas pipeline; (2) Ensure that all federal agencies comply with the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act; (3) Prohibit federal agencies from imposing permit conditions that would prevent or impair in any significant respect the expeditious construction and operation of the project unless the conditions are required by law. The act directs the Federal Coordinator to determine whether a term or condition would prevent or impair in any significant respect the expeditious construction and operation of the project; and (4) Participate with the state of Alaska in a joint construction surveillance and monitoring agreement. In addition, Congress transferred to the Federal Coordinator all of the responsibilities and authorities of the Federal Inspector under the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Act of 1976. These responsibilities will be applicable if the Alaska Natural Gas Transportation System gas line is completed or if the 1980’s prebuilt sections of that project are expanded or modified within the United States to handle Alaska gas. This policy addresses the third of the four statutory requirements listed above by explaining how the Federal Coordinator will determine whether conditions that federal agencies intend to impose on permits, rights-of-way or other authorizations for an Alaska gas transportation project will prevent or impair in any significant respect the expeditious construction and operation of the project. Several sections of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act require the Federal Coordinator to consider permit conditions imposed by federal agencies with respect to the pipeline. Section 106(d)(2), Public Law 108–324, 118 Stat. 1255 prohibits agencies from including E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17007-17009]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7052]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Kootenai National Forest, Cabinet Ranger District, Montana 
Pilgrim Timber Sale Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

[[Page 17008]]

SUMMARY: This vegetation management project is designed to achieve 
goals of enhanced forest stand resilience and resistance to insect and 
disease agents by altering stand density, species composition, and age 
class structure, via use of timber harvesting and prescribed fire use. 
Big game forage would be enhanced through use of prescribed fire to 
rejuvenate and increase palatability of shrubs and grasses, including 
some sites within Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRA). No mechanical 
activities are proposed within IRA boundaries.
    This Project was originally initiated in 2010 with scoping of the 
proposed action. In addition, in 2011 public scoping was again 
initiated in reference to openings sizes exceeding 40 acres and the 
requirement for a project-specific Forest Plan amendment related to 
open road density in areas managed for big game summer range. 
Subsequent analyses of potential environmental effects were documented 
in an Environmental Assessment (EA). Based on the level of interest, 
and recognizing the scope and potential issues associated with the 
project, as the Forest Supervisor for the Kootenai National Forest I 
have made the decision to halt the EA process and commence with the 
process to document findings in an Environmental Impact Statement. The 
comments received during the scoping process for the Environmental 
Assessment will be used in preparation of the EIS; therefore scoping 
will not be reinitiated.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by April 23, 2012. The draft environmental impact statement is expected 
May 2012 and the final environmental impact statement is expected 
September 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Kootenai National Forest, Pilgrim 
Timber Sale Project, Cabinet Ranger District, 2693 Highway 200, Trout 
Creek, MT 59874. Comments may also be sent via email to: comments-
northern-kootenai-cabinet-fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to 406/827-0718. 
Electronic comments must be submitted in Microsoft Word format. It is 
important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in 
such a way that they are useful to the Agency's preparation of the EIS. 
Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the 
comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns 
and contentions specific to the Proposal.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including the 
names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public 
record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be 
accepted and considered, however.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Grupenhoff, Team Leader, (406) 
827-3533 or to the Kootenai National Forest Web page: https://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=31645. Individuals who use 
telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 
p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

Purpose and Need for Action

    There is a need to reduce stand densities, improve growing 
conditions, and increase the proportion of root disease-resistant tree 
species in the area; there is a need to increase age class diversity in 
lodgepole pine-dominated forest communities in the project area; there 
is a need to provide local employment related to forest management and 
restoration activities and to supply forest products to contribute to 
the support of that segment of the local and regional economy dependent 
on timber products; and, there is a need to improve forage production 
and quality through the use of such treatments as commercial timber 
harvest, slashing, and prescribed fire.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action includes timber harvest, prescribed burning, 
and road work necessary to provide safe access to the proposed 
treatment areas while minimizing resource impacts, as summarized below:
    Approximately 500 acres of regeneration harvest are proposed, most 
of which would be removed with cable logging systems. Approximately 55-
75 acres would be tractor yarded. These treatment areas are generally 
located where lodgepole pine is susceptible to mountain pine beetle 
attack or is currently infested, or in areas where Douglas-fir or true 
firs are infected with root disease at unacceptably high levels. In the 
latter case, we propose to increase the proportion of root disease 
resistant species (such as western larch, western white pine, or 
ponderosa pine) on the site to maintain viable forest communities over 
time. This can be done by favoring these species in the residual stand 
or by replanting these species after harvest if they are not well 
represented in the original stand. For most areas where regeneration 
harvest is proposed in lodgepole pine stands, we will generally propose 
to allow natural revegetation of the site back to lodgepole pine.
    Approximately 900 acres of intermediate harvest is proposed; 
approximately one third will be tractor yarded and two thirds will 
require the use of a cable system. These commercial thinning treatments 
would leave a fully stocked stand after harvest with the objective of 
improving growing conditions for the residual trees.
    To access proposed harvest areas, approximately 3.1 miles of new, 
permanent road would need to be constructed and approximately 1.8 miles 
of temporary road would be constructed and removed following completion 
of treatment activities. In addition, approximately 26 miles of road 
reconditioning to bring roads up to current standards of surface water 
management and provide for safe hauling. Approximately 6,950 acres have 
been identified as a perimeter for prescribed burning to enhance forage 
quality and quantity for big game species, notably elk, deer, and 
bears. Generally, these areas are on southerly aspects that have 
historically provided important forage which is declining due to 
conifer encroachment and forage senescence. Prescribed burns would 
occur during the cooler, moister spring period when the risk of large, 
high intensity fires is lower. On a yearly basis, depending on 
conditions, it is estimated that ignition would be unlikely to exceed 
1,000 acres per year.
    Portions of three Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) are located 
within the Project Area and occupy a total of approximately 13,843 
acres, or about 46% of the area. There are no harvest activities 
proposed within these roadless areas. Prescribed burning is being 
proposed within portions of these IRAs. Burning will be conducted in a 
manner so as to maintain their natural character and improve wildlife 
habitat.
    Because of the extent of a current mountain pine beetle 
infestation, larger units are proposed to increase the amount of 
lodgepole treated and more closely approximate typical patch sizes of 
lodgepole pine in this area while still protecting important resources 
including stream integrity and fish habitat. Some of these units would 
create openings that would exceed 40 acres in size, for which approval 
by the Regional Forester is generally required.
    All action alternatives propose treatment in MA-12 to meet the 
purpose and need for this project, and this activity requires the use 
of roads within MA-12 which are currently closed.

[[Page 17009]]

Additionally, some alternatives propose new road construction within 
MA-12. This would result in exceeding the open road density standard 
during the life of the project and require a site-specific Forest Plan 
amendment. All roads opened for project activities and all newly 
constructed roads would be effectively closed after completion of 
project activities, so there would be no long term increase in open 
road densities.
    Specifically, the proposed action (Alternative 2) would increase 
ORDs in MA-12 to 2.3 miles per square mile during harvest activities if 
all roads were open concurrently. Alternative 3 would result in an ORD 
of 2.6 miles per square mile during operations, and Alternative 4 would 
not change the existing condition. Following completion of project 
activities, open road densities would return to pre-project levels.

Possible Alternatives

    Four alternatives have been identified; the No Action, the Proposed 
Action described in this Notice of Intent, an action alternative that 
more specifically addresses concerns and issues related to an on-going, 
aggressive expansion of mountain pine beetle activity into stands 
dominated by lodgepole pine, and an action alternative that would 
address concerns regarding new road construction which would accomplish 
stand treatments using the existing transportation system.

Responsible Official

    As the Kootenai National Forest Supervisor, I am the responsible 
official for this decision.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    My decision will be whether or not to implement the proposed action 
as described, including timber harvest, road work, prescribed burning 
to enhance big game forage, approval of a project-specific amendment to 
the Forest Plan for open road density in MA-12, changes in some 
Management Area designation for difficult regeneration sites, and to 
exceed the 40 acre opening size limit under the National Forest 
Management Act (1976), or to implement an alternative course of action, 
as expressed in alternatives to the proposed action.

Scoping Process

    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times 
and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of 
the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be 
provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly 
articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names 
and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record 
for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be 
accepted and considered, however.

    Dated: March 8, 2012.
Paul Stantus,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2012-7052 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.