Coconino National Forest; Arizona; Flagstaff Watershed Protection Project, 21590-21592 [2013-08455]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
21590
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 78, No. 70
Thursday, April 11, 2013
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
Coconino National Forest; Arizona;
Flagstaff Watershed Protection Project
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Forest Service is
preparing an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to document the
potential effects of the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project (FWPP).
The analysis will evaluate and disclose
the effects of implementing treatments
on the National Forest to reduce the
threat of high severity wildfire and
subsequent flooding in two watersheds
around Flagstaff. Specifically, two key
areas have been identified for analysis
and treatment under this project: The
Dry Lake Hills portion of the Rio de Flag
Watershed north of Flagstaff, and the
Mormon Mountain portion of the Upper
Lake Mary Watershed south of Flagstaff.
The project area includes approximately
10,543 acres (roughly 7,569 acres in the
Dry Lake Hills portion and 2,974 on
Mormon Mountain), and proposed
treatments would include thinning and
prescribed fire on roughly 8,810 of those
acres. The EIS will analyze a variety of
harvesting methods, including the use
of traditional ground-based equipment,
hand thinning, and also methods
atypical for the region, including cable
and helicopter logging, in order to treat
steep, inaccessible terrain.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis must be received by May
13, 2013. The draft environmental
impact statement is expected in early
2014 and the final environmental
impact statement is expected in the
summer of 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
Erin Phelps, Project Leader, USDA
Forest Service, Coconino National
Forest, 5075 N. Hwy 89, Flagstaff, AZ
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:37 Apr 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
86004. Comments may also be sent via
email to comments-southwesterncoconino-flagstaff@fs.fed.us, or via
facsimile to 928–527–8288. Verbal
comments can be submitted in person at
the Flagstaff Ranger District Office, 5075
N. Hwy 89, Flagstaff, AZ 86004 or via
telephone at (928) 527–8240 during
normal business hours (8:30 a.m.–4:30
p.m.).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Visit
our planning Web site at https://
www.fs.usda.gov/projects/coconino/
landmanagement/projects or contact
Erin Phelps, Project Leader, by phone at
(928) 527–8240 or by email at
ephelps@fs.fed.us.
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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
The primary purpose of the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project (FWPP) is
to reduce the risk of high severity
wildfire and subsequent flooding in two
key watersheds around Flagstaff,
Arizona: In the Dry Lake Hills portion
of the Rio de Flag Watershed, and the
Mormon Mountain portion of the Upper
Lake Mary Watershed.
The FWPP analysis area includes
portions of the Coconino National
Forest that have either not been
analyzed or not been treated previously
due to prohibitive costs associated with
very steep terrain, low value material,
and other challenging issues such as
potential impacts to wildlife and visual
concerns.
There is a need to reduce the risk of
high intensity wildfire in watersheds
that contribute to the drinking water for
the City of Flagstaff as well as reducing
the risk of high intensity wildfire in the
watershed that drains into the city itself.
There is also a need to reduce the risk
of severe flooding that would likely
damage the drinking water
infrastructure south of town, and which
could also cause extensive damage to
private municipal property should a
high-intensity wildfire occur in
mountainous areas that make-up the
Upper Lake Mary and Rio de Flag
watersheds.
In general, fire regimes in the analysis
area have shifted from historically more
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
frequent, lower-intensity surface fires
(Fire Regime I and III, Condition Class
I) to less frequent, higher-intensity
crown fires (Condition Class III). There
is a need to reduce the potential for
crown fire and high intensity surface
fire, and to reduce the likelihood of
human-caused ignitions. The desired
condition is to reduce the threat of high
severity wildfire and subsequent
flooding to values at risk within and
adjacent to the project area, including
the City of Flagstaff, outlying
communities, the Kachina Peaks
Wilderness, and Upper Lake Mary. For
the majority of the project area, the
desired condition is to decrease the
departure from historic conditions, and
return the majority of the analysis area
in FRI and FRIII to Condition Class 1.
To meet the project’s purpose and
need, the Forest Service proposes a
combination of thinning and prescribed
burning activities, establishing a
permanent campfire closure order in the
Dry Lake Hills area and
decommissioning about 34 miles of road
in the Flagstaff Watershed Protection
Project area. To facilitate timber
removal, approximately 15.5 miles of
temporary road are also proposed, and
three non-significant Forest Plan
amendments would be necessarily to
implement the proposed activities.
Treatments would include
mechanical and hand thinning as well
as prescribed fire on approximately
8,810 acres. Mechanical tree thinning
would occur within Mexican spotted
owl protected activity centers (MSO
PACs) with a desired condition of trees
greater than 16 inches dbh contributing
more than 50 percent of the stand basal
area and maintaining a minimum of 40
percent canopy cover in pine-oak and
60 percent in mixed conifer per the
MSO Recovery Plan (2012), followed by
prescribed burning. Thinning treatments
have been designed in coordination
with the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) to occur within MSO nest/roost
habitat to reduce the risk of high
severity wildfire. Some treatments
proposed within occupied PACs may
need to occur during the breeding
season (March 1–August 31); however
treatments within PACs would be
prioritized to be completed as quickly as
possible to avoid long-term impacts and
would be coordinated with FWS.
Prescribed fire would include initial
pile burning to remove slash
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2013 / Notices
accumulated through harvesting,
followed by broadcast burning.
Maintenance burning may occur every
five to seven years following
implementation in order to maintain
lower fuel loading levels and to restore
a frequent, low-intensity fire regime.
Areas of mixed conifer on steep slopes
may not receive prescribed burning
treatments due to the difficulty and
safety concerns associationed with
implementation in these fuel types and
terrain, and also because the vegetation
type may not require as frequent
burning due to longer historic fire
intervals.
Three project-specific, non-significant
amendments to the Coconino National
Forest Land Management Plan (Forest
Plan; 1987, as amended) would be
required to implement the proposed
action. A site (project) specific plan
amendment is a one-time variance in
Forest Plan direction for the project;
Forest Plan direction reverts back to its
original language/direction upon
completion of the specified project. The
language proposed does not apply to
any other forest project.
The Forest Plan is currently under
revision; depending on the timing of the
release of the final Forest Plan
document, the final FWPP analysis will
be consistent with the revised Forest
Plan. Additionally, a revised MSO
Recovery Plan, issued by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) was
finalized in December of 2012 (USDI
2012). The current Forest Plan is
consistent with the previous MSO
Recovery Plan (USDI 1995). For this
project, a Forest Plan amendment would
be needed to utilize the revised recovery
plan direction if it is different than what
is currently included in the Forest Plan.
The proposed Forest Plan amendments
include:
Amendment 1: Adding the desired
percentage of interspace within unevenaged stands to facilitate restoration in
northern goshawk habitat (excluding
nest areas), add the interspace distance
between tree groups, add language
clarifying how canopy cover would be
measured, and add a definition to the
Forest Plan glossary for the terms
‘‘interspaces,’’ ‘‘open reference
condition,’’ and ‘‘stands.’’
Amendment 2: Adding language to
allow mechanical treatments in MSO
PACs beyond 9 inches dbh, treatments
in MSO restricted habitat above 24
inches dbh, and also to allow treatments
and prescribed burning within MSO
nest/cores. The monitoring requirement
specified under the Forest Plan would
be amended to include the monitoring
plan developed by the Forest Service,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:37 Apr 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
Rocky Mountain Research Station. This
amendment would also remove timing
restrictions for the duration of the FWPP
project. Treatments within PACs would
be prioritized to be completed as
quickly as possible to avoid long-term
impacts and would be coordinated with
FWS.
Amendment 3: Removing language
restricting mechanical equipment to
slopes less than 40 percent and language
identifying slopes above 40 percent as
inoperable. This amendment would
allow mechanical harvesting on slopes
greater than 40 percent within the
project area. Since the Forest Plan was
written and amended, mechanized
ground-based equipment has progressed
to be able to operate on steep slopes
more effectively. In order to be able to
utilize such equipment to treat slopes
above 40 percent in the project area and
meet the purpose and need, this Forest
Plan amendment is needed.
Possible Alternatives
A full range of alternatives to the
proposed action, including a no-action
alternative, will be considered. The noaction alternative represents no change
and serves as the baseline for the
comparison among the action
alternatives.
Cooperating Agencies
The City of Flagstaff is a Cooperating
Agency for the Flagstaff Watershed
Protection Project, and is participating
in the planning and analysis process.
Responsible Official
M. Earl Stewart, Forest Supervisor,
Coconino National Forest.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Forest Supervisor is the
responsible official for deciding whether
or not, and in what manner, lands
within the Flagstaff Watershed
Protection Project area would be treated
to reduce wildfire and flooding hazards.
Items in this decision will include:
Number of acres treated mechanically;
number of acres treated by hand
thinning; number of acres treated with
prescribed fire; treatments within the
MSO restricted habitat; treatments
within MSO PACs and protected
habitat; treatments within northern
goshawk habitat; construction of new
temporary roads; decommissioning/
obliteration of closed roads; type of
implementation method to be used;
issuance of a permanent camfire
restriction order in the Dry Lake Hills;
project-specific Forest Plan
amendments; and design features to
protect forest resources of soil, water,
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21591
scenery values, wildlife and habitat, and
rare plants.
The decision will be based on a
consideration of the environmental
effects of implementing the proposed
action or alternatives. The Forest
Supervisor may select the proposed
action, any alternative analyzed in
detail, a modified proposed action or
alternative, or no action.
Scoping Process
This notice of intent initiates the
formal scoping process, which guides
the development of the environmental
impact statement. Multiple public
meetings will be held throughout the
planning process for the FWPP project,
including a general information sharing
and comment gathering meeting
scheduled for May 1, 2013 at the
Aquaplex in Flagstaff (1702 N. 4th
Street) from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. The
Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership
(GFFP) will also be hosting meetings on
behalf of the City of Flagstaff. Please
visit the FWPP project Web site at
https://
www.flagstaffwatershedprotection.org/
for more information and a calendar of
upcoming meeting dates.
This project is subject to the objection
process pursuant to 36 CFR part 218
(March 27, 2013), and is not being
authorized under the Healthy Forest
Restoration Act (HFRA). As such, those
who provide specific written comments
during the formal scoping and/or the
comment periods in accordance with
§ 218.5 will be eligible to participate in
the objection process. Issues raised in
objections must be based on previously
submitted timely, specific written
comments regarding the proposed
project unless new information arises
after designated opportunities (36 CFR
218.7).
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 30 day
scoping 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, but will not be eligible for
objection per § 218.5.
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
21592
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2013 / Notices
Dated: April 5, 2013.
M. Earl Stewart,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2013–08455 Filed 4–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE ;P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
[Docket No. 130313244–3244–01]
XRIN 0694–XC007
Reporting for Calendar Year 2012 on
Offsets Agreements Related to Sales
of Defense Articles or Defense
Services to Foreign Countries or
Foreign Firms
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; annual reporting
requirements.
AGENCY:
This notice is to remind the
public that U.S. firms are required to
report annually to the Department of
Commerce (Commerce) information on
contracts for the sale of defense articles
or defense services to foreign countries
or foreign firms that are subject to
offsets agreements exceeding $5,000,000
in value. U.S. firms are also required to
report annually to Commerce
information on offsets transactions
completed in performance of existing
offsets commitments for which offsets
credit of $250,000 or more has been
claimed from the foreign representative.
This year, such reports must include
relevant information from calendar year
2012, and must be submitted to
Commerce no later than June 15, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Reports should be
addressed to ‘‘Offsets Program Manager,
U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of
Strategic Industries and Economic
Security, Bureau of Industry and
Security, Room 3878, Washington, DC
20230.’’
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Ronald DeMarines, Office of Strategic
Industries and Economic Security,
Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S.
Department of Commerce, telephone:
202–482–3755; fax: 202–482–5650;
email: ronald.demarines@bis.doc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 723(a)(1) of the Defense
Production Act of 1950, as amended
(DPA, 50 U.S.C. 2172(a)(1)) requires the
President to submit an annual report to
Congress on the impact of offsets on the
U.S. defense industrial base. Section
723(a)(2) (50 U.S.C. 2172(a)(2)) directs
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:37 Apr 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary)
to prepare the President’s report, and to
develop and administer the regulations
necessary to collect offsets data from
U.S. defense exporters.
The authorities of the Secretary
regarding offsets have been delegated to
the Under Secretary of Commerce for
Industry and Security. The regulations
associated with offsets reporting are set
forth in part 701 of title 15 of the Code
of Federal Regulations. Offsets are
compensation practices required as a
condition of purchase in either
government-to-government or
commercial sales of defense articles
and/or defense services, as defined by
the Arms Export Control Act and the
International Traffic in Arms
Regulations. For example, a company
that is selling a fleet of military aircraft
to a foreign government may agree to
offset the cost of the aircraft by
providing training assistance to plant
managers in the purchasing country.
Although this distorts the true price of
the aircraft, the foreign government may
require this sort of extra compensation
as a condition of awarding the contract
to purchase the aircraft. As described in
the regulations, U.S. firms are required
to report information on contracts for
the sale of defense articles or defense
services to foreign countries or foreign
firms that are subject to offsets
agreements exceeding $5,000,000 in
value. U.S. firms are also required to
report annually information on offsets
transactions completed in performance
of existing offsets commitments for
which offsets credit of $250,000 or more
has been claimed from the foreign
representative.
Commerce’s annual report to Congress
includes an aggregated summary of the
data reported by industry in accordance
with the offsets regulation and the DPA.
As provided by section 723(c) (50 U.S.C.
2172(c)) of the DPA, BIS will not
publicly disclose individual firm
information it receives through offsets
reporting unless the firm furnishing the
information specifically authorizes
public disclosure. The information
collected is sorted and organized into an
aggregate report of national offsets data,
and therefore does not identify
company-specific information.
In order to enable BIS to prepare the
next annual offset report reflecting
calendar year 2012 data, U.S. firms must
submit required information on offsets
agreements and offsets transactions from
calendar year 2012 to BIS no later than
June 15, 2013.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: April 1, 2013.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013–08413 Filed 4–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–JT–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–983]
Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks from the
People’s Republic of China: Amended
Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty
Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: Based on affirmative final
determinations by the Department of
Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) and the
International Trade Commission
(‘‘ITC’’), the Department is issuing an
antidumping duty order on drawn
stainless steel sinks (‘‘drawn sinks’’)
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’). In addition, the Department is
amending its final determination to
correct a ministerial error.
DATES: Effective Date: April 11, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brooke Kennedy or Eve Wang, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3818 or (202) 482–
6231, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On February 26, 2013, the Department
published the final determination of
sales at less than fair value in the
antidumping duty investigation of
drawn sinks from the PRC.1 On April 4,
2013, the ITC notified the Department of
its final determination pursuant to
section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), that an
industry in the United States is
materially injured by reason of imports
of drawn sinks from the PRC.2
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the scope of
this order are drawn stainless steel sinks
1 See Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks From the
People’s Republic of China: Investigation, Final
Determination, 78 FR 13019 (February 26, 2013)
(‘‘Final Determination’’).
2 See Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks from China,
USITC Pub. 4390, Investigation Nos. 701–TA–489
and 731–TA–1201 (Final) (April 2013).
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21590-21592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08455]
========================================================================
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. 78, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2013 /
Notices
[[Page 21590]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Coconino National Forest; Arizona; Flagstaff Watershed Protection
Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service is preparing an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to document the potential effects of the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project (FWPP). The analysis will evaluate and
disclose the effects of implementing treatments on the National Forest
to reduce the threat of high severity wildfire and subsequent flooding
in two watersheds around Flagstaff. Specifically, two key areas have
been identified for analysis and treatment under this project: The Dry
Lake Hills portion of the Rio de Flag Watershed north of Flagstaff, and
the Mormon Mountain portion of the Upper Lake Mary Watershed south of
Flagstaff. The project area includes approximately 10,543 acres
(roughly 7,569 acres in the Dry Lake Hills portion and 2,974 on Mormon
Mountain), and proposed treatments would include thinning and
prescribed fire on roughly 8,810 of those acres. The EIS will analyze a
variety of harvesting methods, including the use of traditional ground-
based equipment, hand thinning, and also methods atypical for the
region, including cable and helicopter logging, in order to treat
steep, inaccessible terrain.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
by May 13, 2013. The draft environmental impact statement is expected
in early 2014 and the final environmental impact statement is expected
in the summer of 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Erin Phelps, Project Leader, USDA
Forest Service, Coconino National Forest, 5075 N. Hwy 89, Flagstaff, AZ
86004. Comments may also be sent via email to comments-southwestern-coconino-flagstaff@fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to 928-527-8288. Verbal
comments can be submitted in person at the Flagstaff Ranger District
Office, 5075 N. Hwy 89, Flagstaff, AZ 86004 or via telephone at (928)
527-8240 during normal business hours (8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m.).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Visit our planning Web site at https://www.fs.usda.gov/projects/coconino/landmanagement/projects or contact
Erin Phelps, Project Leader, by phone at (928) 527-8240 or by email at
ephelps@fs.fed.us.
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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
The primary purpose of the Flagstaff Watershed Protection Project
(FWPP) is to reduce the risk of high severity wildfire and subsequent
flooding in two key watersheds around Flagstaff, Arizona: In the Dry
Lake Hills portion of the Rio de Flag Watershed, and the Mormon
Mountain portion of the Upper Lake Mary Watershed.
The FWPP analysis area includes portions of the Coconino National
Forest that have either not been analyzed or not been treated
previously due to prohibitive costs associated with very steep terrain,
low value material, and other challenging issues such as potential
impacts to wildlife and visual concerns.
There is a need to reduce the risk of high intensity wildfire in
watersheds that contribute to the drinking water for the City of
Flagstaff as well as reducing the risk of high intensity wildfire in
the watershed that drains into the city itself. There is also a need to
reduce the risk of severe flooding that would likely damage the
drinking water infrastructure south of town, and which could also cause
extensive damage to private municipal property should a high-intensity
wildfire occur in mountainous areas that make-up the Upper Lake Mary
and Rio de Flag watersheds.
In general, fire regimes in the analysis area have shifted from
historically more frequent, lower-intensity surface fires (Fire Regime
I and III, Condition Class I) to less frequent, higher-intensity crown
fires (Condition Class III). There is a need to reduce the potential
for crown fire and high intensity surface fire, and to reduce the
likelihood of human-caused ignitions. The desired condition is to
reduce the threat of high severity wildfire and subsequent flooding to
values at risk within and adjacent to the project area, including the
City of Flagstaff, outlying communities, the Kachina Peaks Wilderness,
and Upper Lake Mary. For the majority of the project area, the desired
condition is to decrease the departure from historic conditions, and
return the majority of the analysis area in FRI and FRIII to Condition
Class 1.
To meet the project's purpose and need, the Forest Service proposes
a combination of thinning and prescribed burning activities,
establishing a permanent campfire closure order in the Dry Lake Hills
area and decommissioning about 34 miles of road in the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project area. To facilitate timber removal,
approximately 15.5 miles of temporary road are also proposed, and three
non-significant Forest Plan amendments would be necessarily to
implement the proposed activities.
Treatments would include mechanical and hand thinning as well as
prescribed fire on approximately 8,810 acres. Mechanical tree thinning
would occur within Mexican spotted owl protected activity centers (MSO
PACs) with a desired condition of trees greater than 16 inches dbh
contributing more than 50 percent of the stand basal area and
maintaining a minimum of 40 percent canopy cover in pine-oak and 60
percent in mixed conifer per the MSO Recovery Plan (2012), followed by
prescribed burning. Thinning treatments have been designed in
coordination with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to occur
within MSO nest/roost habitat to reduce the risk of high severity
wildfire. Some treatments proposed within occupied PACs may need to
occur during the breeding season (March 1-August 31); however
treatments within PACs would be prioritized to be completed as quickly
as possible to avoid long-term impacts and would be coordinated with
FWS.
Prescribed fire would include initial pile burning to remove slash
[[Page 21591]]
accumulated through harvesting, followed by broadcast burning.
Maintenance burning may occur every five to seven years following
implementation in order to maintain lower fuel loading levels and to
restore a frequent, low-intensity fire regime. Areas of mixed conifer
on steep slopes may not receive prescribed burning treatments due to
the difficulty and safety concerns associationed with implementation in
these fuel types and terrain, and also because the vegetation type may
not require as frequent burning due to longer historic fire intervals.
Three project-specific, non-significant amendments to the Coconino
National Forest Land Management Plan (Forest Plan; 1987, as amended)
would be required to implement the proposed action. A site (project)
specific plan amendment is a one-time variance in Forest Plan direction
for the project; Forest Plan direction reverts back to its original
language/direction upon completion of the specified project. The
language proposed does not apply to any other forest project.
The Forest Plan is currently under revision; depending on the
timing of the release of the final Forest Plan document, the final FWPP
analysis will be consistent with the revised Forest Plan. Additionally,
a revised MSO Recovery Plan, issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) was finalized in December of 2012 (USDI 2012). The
current Forest Plan is consistent with the previous MSO Recovery Plan
(USDI 1995). For this project, a Forest Plan amendment would be needed
to utilize the revised recovery plan direction if it is different than
what is currently included in the Forest Plan. The proposed Forest Plan
amendments include:
Amendment 1: Adding the desired percentage of interspace within
uneven-aged stands to facilitate restoration in northern goshawk
habitat (excluding nest areas), add the interspace distance between
tree groups, add language clarifying how canopy cover would be
measured, and add a definition to the Forest Plan glossary for the
terms ``interspaces,'' ``open reference condition,'' and ``stands.''
Amendment 2: Adding language to allow mechanical treatments in MSO
PACs beyond 9 inches dbh, treatments in MSO restricted habitat above 24
inches dbh, and also to allow treatments and prescribed burning within
MSO nest/cores. The monitoring requirement specified under the Forest
Plan would be amended to include the monitoring plan developed by the
Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Rocky Mountain
Research Station. This amendment would also remove timing restrictions
for the duration of the FWPP project. Treatments within PACs would be
prioritized to be completed as quickly as possible to avoid long-term
impacts and would be coordinated with FWS.
Amendment 3: Removing language restricting mechanical equipment to
slopes less than 40 percent and language identifying slopes above 40
percent as inoperable. This amendment would allow mechanical harvesting
on slopes greater than 40 percent within the project area. Since the
Forest Plan was written and amended, mechanized ground-based equipment
has progressed to be able to operate on steep slopes more effectively.
In order to be able to utilize such equipment to treat slopes above 40
percent in the project area and meet the purpose and need, this Forest
Plan amendment is needed.
Possible Alternatives
A full range of alternatives to the proposed action, including a
no-action alternative, will be considered. The no-action alternative
represents no change and serves as the baseline for the comparison
among the action alternatives.
Cooperating Agencies
The City of Flagstaff is a Cooperating Agency for the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project, and is participating in the planning and
analysis process.
Responsible Official
M. Earl Stewart, Forest Supervisor, Coconino National Forest.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Forest Supervisor is the responsible official for deciding
whether or not, and in what manner, lands within the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project area would be treated to reduce wildfire
and flooding hazards.
Items in this decision will include: Number of acres treated
mechanically; number of acres treated by hand thinning; number of acres
treated with prescribed fire; treatments within the MSO restricted
habitat; treatments within MSO PACs and protected habitat; treatments
within northern goshawk habitat; construction of new temporary roads;
decommissioning/obliteration of closed roads; type of implementation
method to be used; issuance of a permanent camfire restriction order in
the Dry Lake Hills; project-specific Forest Plan amendments; and design
features to protect forest resources of soil, water, scenery values,
wildlife and habitat, and rare plants.
The decision will be based on a consideration of the environmental
effects of implementing the proposed action or alternatives. The Forest
Supervisor may select the proposed action, any alternative analyzed in
detail, a modified proposed action or alternative, or no action.
Scoping Process
This notice of intent initiates the formal scoping process, which
guides the development of the environmental impact statement. Multiple
public meetings will be held throughout the planning process for the
FWPP project, including a general information sharing and comment
gathering meeting scheduled for May 1, 2013 at the Aquaplex in
Flagstaff (1702 N. 4th Street) from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. The Greater
Flagstaff Forests Partnership (GFFP) will also be hosting meetings on
behalf of the City of Flagstaff. Please visit the FWPP project Web site
at https://www.flagstaffwatershedprotection.org/ for more information
and a calendar of upcoming meeting dates.
This project is subject to the objection process pursuant to 36 CFR
part 218 (March 27, 2013), and is not being authorized under the
Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA). As such, those who provide
specific written comments during the formal scoping and/or the comment
periods in accordance with Sec. 218.5 will be eligible to participate
in the objection process. Issues raised in objections must be based on
previously submitted timely, specific written comments regarding the
proposed project unless new information arises after designated
opportunities (36 CFR 218.7).
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 30 day scoping 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, but will not be eligible for objection per
Sec. 218.5.
[[Page 21592]]
Dated: April 5, 2013.
M. Earl Stewart,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2013-08455 Filed 4-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE ;P
