Notice of Updated Information Concerning the Atlantic Coast Pipeline Project and Supply Header Project and the Associated Forest Service Land and Resource Management Plan Amendments, 25756-25759 [2017-11484]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
25756
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 106 / Monday, June 5, 2017 / Notices
Done at Washington, DC, May 30, 2017.
Sonny Ramaswamy,
Director, National Institute of Food and
Agriculture.
202–502–8659. The eLibrary link also
provides access to the texts of formal
documents issued by the FERC such as
orders, notices, and rulemakings.
For information related specifically to
the new information provided in this
Notice, please contact Karen Overcash,
Forest Planner, George Washington and
Jefferson National Forests, at 540–265–
5175 or kovercash@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2017–11554 Filed 6–2–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Notice of Updated Information
Concerning the Atlantic Coast Pipeline
Project and Supply Header Project and
the Associated Forest Service Land
and Resource Management Plan
Amendments
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice; updating information.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The USDA Forest Service
(Forest Service) is participating as a
cooperating agency with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
in the preparation of the Atlantic Coast
Pipeline (ACP) and Supply Header
Project Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS). On January 6, 2017, the Forest
Service published in the Federal
Register (82 FR 1685) a Notice of
Availability of the Atlantic Coast
Pipeline and Supply Header Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
and the Draft of Amendments to the
George Washington and Monongahela
National Forests’ Land and Resource
Management Plans (LRMPs) to allow for
the ACP to cross through these National
Forests. Since that publication, the
Forest Service determined there is a
need to disclose the following: New
information relating to the proposed
LRMP amendments; a change in the
Responsible Officials for the
amendments; and the substantive
provisions in the planning regulations
that are likely to be directly related to
the proposed amendments. In addition,
a proposed change to one of the LRMP
amendments will result in a change to
the administrative review procedures as
outlined in the January 6, 2017 Federal
Register Notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Information about the ACP Project is
available from the FERC’s Office of
External Affairs at 866–208–FERC
(3372), or on the FERC Web site
(www.ferc.gov). On the FERC’s Web site,
go to ‘‘Documents & Filings,’’ click on
the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link, click on ‘‘General
Search’’ and enter the docket number
CP15–554. Be sure you have selected an
appropriate date range. For assistance,
please contact FERC Online Support at
FercOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or toll free
at 866–208–3676, or for TTY, contact
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:31 Jun 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
Background
This Notice is specific to the Forest
Service. The Atlantic Coast Pipeline
route would cross 5.1 miles of lands
managed by the Monongahela National
Forest (MNF), in Pocahontas County,
West Virginia and 15.9 miles of lands
managed by the George Washington
National Forest (GWNF), in Highland,
Bath, and Augusta Counties, Virginia.
The Supply Header Project would not
affect the Monongahela or George
Washington National Forests.
The FERC is the NEPA Lead Federal
Agency for the environmental analysis
of the construction and operation of the
proposed ACP and Supply Header
Project. The Forest Service is the
Federal agency responsible for
authorizing this use and issuing special
use permits for natural gas pipelines
across National Forest System (NFS)
lands under its jurisdiction. As a
condition of issuing a Special Use
Permit (SUP) for ACP to construct,
operate, maintain, and eventually
decommission a natural gas
transmission pipeline that crosses NFS
lands, the Forest Service would include
such terms and conditions deemed
necessary to protect Federal property
and otherwise protect the public
interest.
The Forest Service intends to adopt
FERC’s EIS for its decision to authorize
the construction and operation of ACP,
along with the necessary project-specific
amendments to the LRMPs, if the
analysis provides sufficient evidence to
support those decisions and the Forest
Service is satisfied that its comments
and suggestions have been addressed.
Planning Rule Requirements for LRMP
Amendments
On December 15, 2016 the
Department of Agriculture Under
Secretary for Natural Resources and
Environment issued a final rule that
amended the 36 CFR 219 regulations
pertaining to National Forest System
Land Management Planning (the
planning rule) (81 FR 90723, 90737).
The amendment to the 219 planning
rule clarified the Department’s direction
for amending LRMPs. The Department
also added a requirement for amending
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a plan for the responsible official to
provide notice ‘‘about which
substantive requirements of §§ 219.8
through 219.11 are likely to be directly
related to the amendment’’ (36 CFR
219.13(b)(2), 81 FR at 90738). Whether
a rule provision is directly related to an
amendment is determined by any one of
the following: The purpose for the
amendment, a beneficial effect of the
amendment, a substantial adverse effect
of the amendment, or a lessening of plan
protections by the amendment.
The following descriptions of the
proposed or potential LRMP
amendments that are anticipated to be
addressed in the Final EIS include a
description of the ‘‘substantive
requirements of §§ 219.8 through
219.11’’ likely to be directly related to
each amendment.
New Information for LRMP
Amendments and Relationship to
Substantive Requirements in the
Planning Rule
The FERC’s Draft EIS for the ACP and
the Notice of Availability published in
the Federal Register on January 6, 2017
included the consideration of a Forest
Service authorization for construction
and operation of the ACP across NFS
lands and the associated Forest Service
LRMP amendments that would be
needed to make the project consistent
with the respective LRMPs if the Forest
Service were to approve the
authorization (36 CFR 219.15).
The Draft EIS identified ‘‘projectspecific plan amendments’’ that would
be needed for the construction and
operation of the ACP that otherwise
could not, or potentially could not, meet
certain standards in the MNF or GWNF
LRMPs. These amendments are
considered project-specific amendments
because they would apply only to ACP
and would not change LRMP
requirements for other projects.
Since the Draft EIS, the Forest Service
has reconsidered whether a projectspecific amendment would still be
necessary to ensure the ACP was
consistent with some of the LRMP
standards, has identified the need for a
project-specific amendment with
respect to several other LRMP
standards, and has determined that a
management prescription reallocation
would not be necessary to approve the
project.
Monongahela National Forest
The following potential amendment
to the MNF LRMP would be a projectspecific amendment, applicable only to
the ACP Project. This amendment
would not change the applicability of
E:\FR\FM\05JNN1.SGM
05JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 106 / Monday, June 5, 2017 / Notices
LRMP requirements for other, future
projects.
Potential Amendment to the MNF
LRMP: The MNF LRMP may need to be
amended to allow for the construction
of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to exceed
two LRMP standards that were
developed for the protection of soils,
specifically Forestwide Standards SW06
and SW07 which are:
Standard SW06: Severe rutting resulting
from management activities shall be confined
to less than 5 percent of an activity area.
Standard SW07: Use of wheeled and/or
tracked motorized equipment may be limited
on soil types that include the following soil/
site area conditions: (a) Steep Slopes (40 to
50 percent), (b) Very Steep Slopes (more than
50 percent), (c) Susceptible to Landslides, (d)
Soils Commonly Wet at or near the Surface
during a Considerable Part of the Year, or
Soils Highly Susceptible to Compaction.
The amendment would provide an
exception from these standards for the
ACP Project and include specific
mitigation measures and project design
requirements for the project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule
requirements likely to be directly
related to this proposed amendment are:
§ 219.8(a)(2)(ii)—‘‘[The plan must include
plan components to maintain or restore] Soils
and soil productivity, including guidance to
reduce soil erosion and sedimentation,’’ and
§ 219.10(a)(3)—‘‘[The responsible official
shall consider] Appropriate placement and
sustainable management of infrastructure,
such as recreational facilities and
transportation and utility corridors.’’
If this potential amendment is
determined to be ‘‘directly related’’ to
the substantive rule requirements, the
Responsible Official must apply those
requirements within the scope and scale
of the amendment and, if necessary,
make adjustments to the amendment to
meet these rule requirements (36 CFR
219.13 (b)(5) and (6)).
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
George Washington National Forest
The following proposed amendment
to the GWNF LRMP would be a projectspecific amendment, applicable only to
the ACP Project. This amendment
would not change the applicability of
LRMP requirements for other, future
projects.
Proposed Amendment, Part 1: In the
Draft EIS for the ACP and the January
6, 2017 Federal Register Notice of
Availability, the original proposed
amendment, part 1 was to amend the
LRMP to reallocate 102.3 acres to
Management Prescription 5C-Designated
Utility Corridors from Management
Prescriptions 7E1–Dispersed Recreation
Areas (7 acres) and 13–Mosaics of
Habitat (95 acres). Management
Prescription 11-Riparian Corridors
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:31 Jun 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
would have remained embedded within
the new Management Prescription 5C
area. The basis for this proposed
amendment was from Forestwide
Standards FW–243 and FW–244:
Standard FW–243: Develop and use
existing corridors and sites to their greatest
potential in order to reduce the need for
additional commitment of lands for these
uses. When feasible, expansion of existing
corridors and sites is preferable to
designating new sites.
Standard FW–244: Following evaluation of
the above criteria, decisions for new
authorizations outside of existing corridors
and designated communication sites will
include an amendment to the Forest Plan
designating them as Management
Prescription Area 5B or 5C.
This Management Prescription (Rx)
allocation change would change
management direction for any future
activities within the designated Rx 5C
corridor, and would not have been
considered a project-specific
amendment.
However, upon further examination,
the Forest Service has determined it
would be preferable to not reallocate the
ACP operational corridor to a
Management Prescription that would
encourage future co-location
opportunities. Instead the proposal is to
now amend the LRMP with a projectspecific amendment that would exempt
the ACP Project from the requirements
in Forestwide Standards FW–243 and
FW–244. With this change, the 53.5 foot
wide right-of-way needed for the ACP
would remain within the existing
management prescription areas (of Rx
4A—Appalachian National Scenic Trail
Corridor, Rx 7E1—Dispersed Recreation
Areas; Rx 11—Riparian Corridors; and
Rx 13—Mosaics of Wildlife Habitat).
This change from a plan amendment
affecting future management to a
project-specific amendment would also
change the administrative review
process for this proposed amendment
from the 36 CFR 219, Subpart B
procedures as described in the January
6, 2017 Federal Register Notice of
Availability, to the 36 CFR 218
administrative review process that
applies to the other proposed projectspecific amendments for this project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule
requirement likely to be directly related
to this part of the amendment is:
§ 219.10(a)(3)—‘‘[The responsible official
shall consider] ‘‘Appropriate placement and
sustainable management of infrastructure,
such as recreational facilities and
transportation and utility corridors.’’
Proposed Amendment, Part 2: The
Forest Service proposes to amend
Forestwide Standards FW–5, FW–8,
FW–16, FW–17 and Management Area
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25757
Prescription Standard 11–003 to allow
for the construction of the Atlantic
Coast Pipeline to exceed these soil and
riparian corridor protection measures.
Standards FW–8 and 11–003 were not
originally identified in the Draft EIS for
the ACP as standards that may need to
be amended. These standards are:
Standard FW–5: On all soils dedicated to
growing vegetation, the organic layers,
topsoil and root mat will be left in place over
at least 85% of the activity area and
revegetation is accomplished within 5 years.
Standard FW–8: Water saturated soils in
areas expected to produce biomass should
not receive vehicle traffic or livestock
trampling to prevent excessive soil
compaction.
Standard FW–16: Management activities
expose no more than 10% mineral soil in the
channeled ephemeral zone.
Standard FW–17: In channeled ephemeral
zones, up to 50% of the basal area may be
removed down to a minimum basal area of
50 square feet per acre. Removal of additional
basal area is allowed on a case-by-case basis
when needed to benefit riparian dependent
resources.
Standard 11–003: Management activities
expose no more than 10 percent mineral soil
within the project riparian corridor.
The amendment would provide an
exception from these standards for the
ACP Project and include specific
mitigation measures and project design
requirements for the project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule
requirements likely to be directly
related to amending the above standards
are:
§ 219.8(a)(2)(ii)—‘‘[The plan must include
plan components to maintain or restore] Soils
and soil productivity, including guidance to
reduce soil erosion and sedimentation;’’
§ 219.8(a)(2)(iv)—‘‘[The plan must include
plan components to maintain or restore]
Water resources in the plan area, including
lakes, streams, and wetlands; . . . and other
sources of drinking water (including
guidance to prevent or mitigate detrimental
changes in quantity, quality, and
availability);’’ and
§ 219.8(a)(3)(i)—The plan must include
plan components ‘‘to maintain or restore the
ecological integrity of riparian areas in the
plan area, including plan components to
maintain or restore structure, function,
composition, and connectivity.’’
The Draft EIS for the ACP and the
January 6, 2017 Federal Register Notice
of Availability had also identified that
Forestwide Standard FW–15 and
Management Prescription Area Standard
11–019 may need to be amended.
However, a further review of these
standards has determined that the
proposed pipeline project can be made
consistent with these standards and an
amendment to these two standards will
not be needed. These standards are:
E:\FR\FM\05JNN1.SGM
05JNN1
25758
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 106 / Monday, June 5, 2017 / Notices
Standard FW–15: Motorized vehicles are
restricted in the channeled ephemeral zone
to designated crossings. Motorized vehicles
may only be allowed on a case by case basis,
after site specific analysis, in the channeled
ephemeral zone outside of designated
crossings.
Standard 11–019: Tree removals from the
core of the riparian corridor may only take
place if needed to: Enhance the recovery of
the diversity and complexity of vegetation
native to the site; rehabilitate both natural
and human-caused disturbances; provide
habitat improvements for aquatic or riparian
species, or threatened, endangered, sensitive,
and locally rare species; reduce fuel buildup;
provide for public safety; for approved
facility construction/renovation; or as
allowed in standards 11–015 or 11–024.
Proposed Amendment, Part 3: The
GWNF LRMP would be amended to
allow the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to be
exempt from Management Prescription
Area Standard 4A–025 and cross the
Appalachian National Scenic Trail
(ANST) in Augusta County, Virginia.
This standard is:
Standard 4A–025: Locate new public
utilities and rights-of-way in areas of this
management prescription area where major
impacts already exist. Limit linear utilities
and rights-of-way to a single crossing of the
prescription area, per project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule
requirement likely to be directly related
to this part of the amendment is:
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
§ 219.10(b)(1)(vi)—‘‘[The plan must
include plan components to provide for]
Appropriate management of other designated
areas or recommended designated areas in
the plan area.’’
Potential Amendment, Part 4: The
GWNF LRMP may need to be amended
to allow removal of old growth trees
within the construction zone of the
Atlantic Coast Pipeline. The forestwide
standard in the LRMP that may need to
be amended is FW–85, which states that
any stands identified as meeting the
criteria for Dry Mesic Oak or Dry & DryMesic Oak-Pine old growth forest
communities may be suitable for timber
harvest and any decision to harvest such
stands would be made after
consideration of their contribution to
the distribution and abundance of these
old growth forest community types.
Stands identified as meeting the age
criteria for any of the other old growth
community types found on the forest
would be unsuitable for timber
production.
A determination on the need for this
amendment will be made following
completion of an old growth inventory
of the stands within the ACP Project’s
construction zone.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule
requirement likely to be directly related
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:31 Jun 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
to this part of the amendment, if
needed, is:
§ 219.11(c)—‘‘The plan may include plan
components to allow for timber harvest for
purposes other than timber production . . .
or portions of the plan area, as a tool to assist
in achieving or maintaining one or more
applicable desired conditions or objectives of
the plan . . .’’
Potential Amendment, Part 5: The
GWNF may need to amend Management
Area Prescription Standard 2C3–015 to
allow for a major reconstruction of a
National Forest System Road within
Management Prescription Area 2C3 for
the purposes of providing access for
pipeline construction. This standard is:
Standard 2C3–015: Allow road
construction or reconstruction to improve
recreational access, improve soil and water,
to salvage timber, or to protect property or
public safety.
This potential amendment is
contingent on the final location of
access roads needed for the pipeline.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule
requirement likely to be directly related
to this part of the amendment, if
needed, is:
§ 219.10(b)(v)—‘‘Protection of designated
wild and scenic rivers as well as management
of rivers found eligible or determined
suitable for the National Wild and Scenic
River system to protect the values that
provide the basis for their suitability for
inclusion in the system.’’
Potential Amendment, Part 6: The
GWNF may need to amend Forestwide
Standard FW–182 to allow for the
construction of the Atlantic Coast
Pipeline to deviate from the Scenic
Integrity Objectives (SIOs) established
in the LRMP. This standard is:
Standard FW–182: The Forest SIOs are met
for all new projects (including special uses).
Existing conditions may not currently meet
the assigned SIO.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule
requirement likely to be directly related
to this part of the amendment is:
§ 219.10(b)(i)—‘‘[The plan must include plan
components to provide for] ‘‘Sustainable
recreation; . . . and scenic character.’’
If any of the six parts of the proposed
amendment to the GWNF LRMP
described above are determined to be
‘‘directly related’’ to a substantive rule
requirement, the Responsible Official
must apply that requirement within the
scope and scale of the proposed
amendment and, if necessary, make
adjustments to the proposed
amendment to meet the rule
requirement (36 CFR 219.13(b)(5) and
(6)).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Administrative Review of Plan
Amendment Decisions
The Forest Service’s January 6, 2017
Notice of Availability in the Federal
Register indicated that following the
issuance of FERC’s Final EIS, the Forest
Service would prepare separate records
of decision for the authorization to
construct and operate the ACP and for
the plan amendment decisions.
However, the Regional Foresters now
intend to sign one record of decision for
both the authorizations to construct and
operate the pipeline on the MNF and
GWNF and for the project-specific plan
amendment decisions to the MNF LRMP
and the GWNF LRMP. Two Regional
Foresters are involved with the ACP
Project since the pipeline will cross
both the MNF, which is in the Eastern
Region of the Forest Service, and the
GWNF, which is in the Southern Region
of the Forest Service. Doing so will
simplify the decisionmaking process for
internal Forest Service administrative
purposes as well as for the public’s right
to participate in the predecisional
review process. A Forest Service
decision to authorize the construction
and operation of the ACP will be subject
to the Forest Service predecisional
administrative review procedures
established in 36 CFR 218. At the same
time, project-specific amendments to
the MNF and GWNF LRMPs will also be
subject to the administrative review
procedures under the 36 CFR 218
regulations (per 36 CFR 219.59(b)).
Since the Regional Foresters will be
the Responsible Officials for both the
decisions to authorize the construction
and operation of the ACP as well as the
LRMP amendments, the Reviewing
Official for all of the decisions will be
the National Forest System Associate
Deputy Chief (36 CFR 218.3(a)).
Responsible Officials for Forest
Service Authorizations To Construct
and Operate the Atlantic Coast Pipeline:
The Regional Forester Eastern Region
for NFS lands on the MNF and the
Regional Forester Southern Region for
NFS lands on the GWNF are the
Responsible Officials. (Note that Forest
Service Manual 2704.32 provides that
the Regional Forester has authority to
issue special use authorizations for
pipelines 24 inches or more in diameter,
and may not delegate that authority to
a lower-level official.)
Responsible Officials for Forest
Service LRMP Amendments: The
January 6, 2017 Federal Register Notice
of Availability had identified the Forest
Supervisor for the Monongahela
National Forest and the Forest
Supervisor for the George Washington
and Jefferson National Forests as the
E:\FR\FM\05JNN1.SGM
05JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 106 / Monday, June 5, 2017 / Notices
Responsible Officials for the MNF
LRMP Amendment and the GWNF
LRMP Amendment, respectively.
However, since the Regional Foresters
for the Eastern and Southern Region
will be the Responsible Officials for the
decision to authorize the construction
and operation of ACP, in the interest of
administrative efficiencies as well as to
simplify the administrative review
process for the public, the Responsible
Officials for the LRMP Amendments
will now be the Regional Forester
Eastern Region for the MNF LRMP
Amendment and the Regional Forester
Southern Region for the GWNF LRMP
Amendment.
Dated: May 10, 2017.
Robert M. Harper,
Acting Associate Deputy Chief, National
Forest System.
[FR Doc. 2017–11484 Filed 6–2–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Payette and Boise National Forests;
Valley County, Idaho; Stibnite Gold
Project Environmental Impact
Statement
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Payette National Forest
(PNF) is preparing an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate and
disclose the potential environmental
effects from: (1) Approval of the
‘‘Stibnite Gold Project Plan of
Restoration and Operations’’ (Plan)
submitted by Midas Gold Idaho, Inc.
(Midas Gold) in September 2016, to
occupy and use National Forest System
(NFS) lands for operations associated
with open-pit mining and ore
processing; and (2) related amendments
to the Payette National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan (Payette
Forest Plan, 2003) and/or the Boise
National Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan (Boise Forest Plan, as
amended in 2010).
The United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) will cooperate on
the preparation of the EIS and evaluate
its content to ensure that the EIS can be
adopted by the USACE to support an
eventual decision to either issue, issue
with conditions, or deny a Department
of the Army Permit under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for the
Plan. The United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) will cooperate
on the preparation of the EIS and
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:31 Jun 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
evaluate its content to ensure that the
EIS can be adopted in support of the
decision-making process for issuance of
a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
under Section 402 of the CWA.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis must be received by July
20, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Webform submission of
comments is encouraged. Comments can
be submitted via the project Web page
at https://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/payette/
StibniteGold by selecting the ‘‘Comment
on Project’’ link on the right side of the
page. Written comments may also be
sent to Payette National Forest, ATTN:
Forest Supervisor Keith Lannom—
Stibnite Gold EIS, 500 N. Mission St.,
McCall, Idaho 83638. Comments may
also be sent via email with a subject line
reading ‘‘Stibnite Gold EIS Scoping
Comment’’ to comments-intermtnpayette@fs.fed.us or via facsimile (FAX)
to 1–208–634–0744. Additional
information regarding submittal of
comments is provided below in the
Scoping Process section. Written
comments may also be submitted during
public scoping meetings that will be
held by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest
Service), as follows:
1. June 27, 2017, 5:00–7:00 p.m., Ashley
Inn, Cascade, Idaho
2. June 28, 2017, 5:00–7:00 p.m., Payette
Forest Supervisor’s Office, McCall,
Idaho
3. June 29, 2017, 1:00–3:00 and 5:00–
7:00 p.m., Holiday Inn Express and
Suites (Airport), Boise, Idaho
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Harris, Public Affairs Officer, at
1–208–634–0784 or bdharris@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: The
Stibnite Gold Project (Project) is located
in both the PNF and BNF. The PNF will
be the lead unit for processing and
administering the Plan on NFS lands.
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose of the Forest Service’s
action is to provide for approval of the
Plan, which would govern occupancy
and use of NFS lands for operations that
are reasonably incident to mining. To
provide for such approval, the
Responsible Official needs to determine
whether reasonable changes or
additions to the Plan are necessary in
order to meet the requirements of
regulations set forth in 36 CFR 228
Subpart A and other applicable laws,
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25759
regulations, or policies, prior to
approval.
Midas Gold submitted a plan of
operations for mining on NFS lands,
titled ‘‘Stibnite Gold Plan of Restoration
and Operations’’ (Plan) to the Forest
Service in September 2016, in
accordance with Forest Service
regulations for locatable minerals set
forth at 36 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) 228 Subpart A. In order to comply
with its statutory and regulatory
obligations to respond to the Plan
submitted by Midas Gold Idaho, Inc.
(Midas Gold), the Forest Service must:
(1) Evaluate the Plan; (2) consider
requirements set forth at 36 CFR 228.8,
including those to minimize adverse
effects to the extent feasible, comply
with applicable laws, regulations, and
standards for environmental protection,
and provide for reclamation; and (3)
respond to the Plan as set forth at 36
CFR 228.5(a). The Responsible Official
determined the Plan to be
administratively complete in December
2016. Approval of the Plan and issuance
of permits under the CWA would be
major federal actions subject to the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). Accordingly, the federal land
management and regulatory agencies
must also prepare an EIS to consider
and publicly disclose the potential
environmental effects of the proposed
action.
Proposed Action
The Responsible Official proposes to
approve the Plan submitted by Midas
Gold, with any modifications
determined necessary through the
analysis to comply with applicable laws
and regulations. USACE would review
the Plan and EIS for purposes of
evaluating Midas Gold’s application for
a Department of the Army Permit under
Section 404 of the CWA. EPA would
review the Plan and EIS for purposes of
evaluating Midas Gold’s application for
a related NPDES Permit under Section
402 of the CWA. As described in the
Plan, the Project would affect federal,
state, and private lands. The proposed
action by the Forest Service would only
authorize approval of mining-related
operations on NFS lands, because the
Forest Service does not have
jurisdiction to regulate mining
operations that occur on private or state
land. However, the EIS will consider
and disclose environmental effects of
mining-related operations that would
occur on private and state lands.
Connected actions related to the Plan,
including but not necessarily limited to
CWA permitting by USACE and EPA
and related amendments of the Payette
and Boise Forest Plans, will be
E:\FR\FM\05JNN1.SGM
05JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 106 (Monday, June 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25756-25759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11484]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Notice of Updated Information Concerning the Atlantic Coast
Pipeline Project and Supply Header Project and the Associated Forest
Service Land and Resource Management Plan Amendments
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; updating information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) is participating as a
cooperating agency with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
in the preparation of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) and Supply
Header Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). On January 6,
2017, the Forest Service published in the Federal Register (82 FR 1685)
a Notice of Availability of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and Supply
Header Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement and the Draft of
Amendments to the George Washington and Monongahela National Forests'
Land and Resource Management Plans (LRMPs) to allow for the ACP to
cross through these National Forests. Since that publication, the
Forest Service determined there is a need to disclose the following:
New information relating to the proposed LRMP amendments; a change in
the Responsible Officials for the amendments; and the substantive
provisions in the planning regulations that are likely to be directly
related to the proposed amendments. In addition, a proposed change to
one of the LRMP amendments will result in a change to the
administrative review procedures as outlined in the January 6, 2017
Federal Register Notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information about the ACP Project is
available from the FERC's Office of External Affairs at 866-208-FERC
(3372), or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). On the FERC's Web site,
go to ``Documents & Filings,'' click on the ``eLibrary'' link, click on
``General Search'' and enter the docket number CP15-554. Be sure you
have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at FercOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or toll free at 866-
208-3676, or for TTY, contact 202-502-8659. The eLibrary link also
provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the FERC
such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
For information related specifically to the new information
provided in this Notice, please contact Karen Overcash, Forest Planner,
George Washington and Jefferson National Forests, at 540-265-5175 or
kovercash@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This Notice is specific to the Forest Service. The Atlantic Coast
Pipeline route would cross 5.1 miles of lands managed by the
Monongahela National Forest (MNF), in Pocahontas County, West Virginia
and 15.9 miles of lands managed by the George Washington National
Forest (GWNF), in Highland, Bath, and Augusta Counties, Virginia. The
Supply Header Project would not affect the Monongahela or George
Washington National Forests.
The FERC is the NEPA Lead Federal Agency for the environmental
analysis of the construction and operation of the proposed ACP and
Supply Header Project. The Forest Service is the Federal agency
responsible for authorizing this use and issuing special use permits
for natural gas pipelines across National Forest System (NFS) lands
under its jurisdiction. As a condition of issuing a Special Use Permit
(SUP) for ACP to construct, operate, maintain, and eventually
decommission a natural gas transmission pipeline that crosses NFS
lands, the Forest Service would include such terms and conditions
deemed necessary to protect Federal property and otherwise protect the
public interest.
The Forest Service intends to adopt FERC's EIS for its decision to
authorize the construction and operation of ACP, along with the
necessary project-specific amendments to the LRMPs, if the analysis
provides sufficient evidence to support those decisions and the Forest
Service is satisfied that its comments and suggestions have been
addressed.
Planning Rule Requirements for LRMP Amendments
On December 15, 2016 the Department of Agriculture Under Secretary
for Natural Resources and Environment issued a final rule that amended
the 36 CFR 219 regulations pertaining to National Forest System Land
Management Planning (the planning rule) (81 FR 90723, 90737). The
amendment to the 219 planning rule clarified the Department's direction
for amending LRMPs. The Department also added a requirement for
amending a plan for the responsible official to provide notice ``about
which substantive requirements of Sec. Sec. 219.8 through 219.11 are
likely to be directly related to the amendment'' (36 CFR 219.13(b)(2),
81 FR at 90738). Whether a rule provision is directly related to an
amendment is determined by any one of the following: The purpose for
the amendment, a beneficial effect of the amendment, a substantial
adverse effect of the amendment, or a lessening of plan protections by
the amendment.
The following descriptions of the proposed or potential LRMP
amendments that are anticipated to be addressed in the Final EIS
include a description of the ``substantive requirements of Sec. Sec.
219.8 through 219.11'' likely to be directly related to each amendment.
New Information for LRMP Amendments and Relationship to Substantive
Requirements in the Planning Rule
The FERC's Draft EIS for the ACP and the Notice of Availability
published in the Federal Register on January 6, 2017 included the
consideration of a Forest Service authorization for construction and
operation of the ACP across NFS lands and the associated Forest Service
LRMP amendments that would be needed to make the project consistent
with the respective LRMPs if the Forest Service were to approve the
authorization (36 CFR 219.15).
The Draft EIS identified ``project-specific plan amendments'' that
would be needed for the construction and operation of the ACP that
otherwise could not, or potentially could not, meet certain standards
in the MNF or GWNF LRMPs. These amendments are considered project-
specific amendments because they would apply only to ACP and would not
change LRMP requirements for other projects.
Since the Draft EIS, the Forest Service has reconsidered whether a
project-specific amendment would still be necessary to ensure the ACP
was consistent with some of the LRMP standards, has identified the need
for a project-specific amendment with respect to several other LRMP
standards, and has determined that a management prescription
reallocation would not be necessary to approve the project.
Monongahela National Forest
The following potential amendment to the MNF LRMP would be a
project-specific amendment, applicable only to the ACP Project. This
amendment would not change the applicability of
[[Page 25757]]
LRMP requirements for other, future projects.
Potential Amendment to the MNF LRMP: The MNF LRMP may need to be
amended to allow for the construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to
exceed two LRMP standards that were developed for the protection of
soils, specifically Forestwide Standards SW06 and SW07 which are:
Standard SW06: Severe rutting resulting from management
activities shall be confined to less than 5 percent of an activity
area.
Standard SW07: Use of wheeled and/or tracked motorized equipment
may be limited on soil types that include the following soil/site
area conditions: (a) Steep Slopes (40 to 50 percent), (b) Very Steep
Slopes (more than 50 percent), (c) Susceptible to Landslides, (d)
Soils Commonly Wet at or near the Surface during a Considerable Part
of the Year, or Soils Highly Susceptible to Compaction.
The amendment would provide an exception from these standards for
the ACP Project and include specific mitigation measures and project
design requirements for the project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule requirements likely to be directly
related to this proposed amendment are:
Sec. 219.8(a)(2)(ii)--``[The plan must include plan components
to maintain or restore] Soils and soil productivity, including
guidance to reduce soil erosion and sedimentation,'' and
Sec. 219.10(a)(3)--``[The responsible official shall consider]
Appropriate placement and sustainable management of infrastructure,
such as recreational facilities and transportation and utility
corridors.''
If this potential amendment is determined to be ``directly
related'' to the substantive rule requirements, the Responsible
Official must apply those requirements within the scope and scale of
the amendment and, if necessary, make adjustments to the amendment to
meet these rule requirements (36 CFR 219.13 (b)(5) and (6)).
George Washington National Forest
The following proposed amendment to the GWNF LRMP would be a
project-specific amendment, applicable only to the ACP Project. This
amendment would not change the applicability of LRMP requirements for
other, future projects.
Proposed Amendment, Part 1: In the Draft EIS for the ACP and the
January 6, 2017 Federal Register Notice of Availability, the original
proposed amendment, part 1 was to amend the LRMP to reallocate 102.3
acres to Management Prescription 5C-Designated Utility Corridors from
Management Prescriptions 7E1-Dispersed Recreation Areas (7 acres) and
13-Mosaics of Habitat (95 acres). Management Prescription 11-Riparian
Corridors would have remained embedded within the new Management
Prescription 5C area. The basis for this proposed amendment was from
Forestwide Standards FW-243 and FW-244:
Standard FW-243: Develop and use existing corridors and sites to
their greatest potential in order to reduce the need for additional
commitment of lands for these uses. When feasible, expansion of
existing corridors and sites is preferable to designating new sites.
Standard FW-244: Following evaluation of the above criteria,
decisions for new authorizations outside of existing corridors and
designated communication sites will include an amendment to the
Forest Plan designating them as Management Prescription Area 5B or
5C.
This Management Prescription (Rx) allocation change would change
management direction for any future activities within the designated Rx
5C corridor, and would not have been considered a project-specific
amendment.
However, upon further examination, the Forest Service has
determined it would be preferable to not reallocate the ACP operational
corridor to a Management Prescription that would encourage future co-
location opportunities. Instead the proposal is to now amend the LRMP
with a project-specific amendment that would exempt the ACP Project
from the requirements in Forestwide Standards FW-243 and FW-244. With
this change, the 53.5 foot wide right-of-way needed for the ACP would
remain within the existing management prescription areas (of Rx 4A--
Appalachian National Scenic Trail Corridor, Rx 7E1--Dispersed
Recreation Areas; Rx 11--Riparian Corridors; and Rx 13--Mosaics of
Wildlife Habitat).
This change from a plan amendment affecting future management to a
project-specific amendment would also change the administrative review
process for this proposed amendment from the 36 CFR 219, Subpart B
procedures as described in the January 6, 2017 Federal Register Notice
of Availability, to the 36 CFR 218 administrative review process that
applies to the other proposed project-specific amendments for this
project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule requirement likely to be directly
related to this part of the amendment is:
Sec. 219.10(a)(3)--``[The responsible official shall consider]
``Appropriate placement and sustainable management of
infrastructure, such as recreational facilities and transportation
and utility corridors.''
Proposed Amendment, Part 2: The Forest Service proposes to amend
Forestwide Standards FW-5, FW-8, FW-16, FW-17 and Management Area
Prescription Standard 11-003 to allow for the construction of the
Atlantic Coast Pipeline to exceed these soil and riparian corridor
protection measures. Standards FW-8 and 11-003 were not originally
identified in the Draft EIS for the ACP as standards that may need to
be amended. These standards are:
Standard FW-5: On all soils dedicated to growing vegetation, the
organic layers, topsoil and root mat will be left in place over at
least 85% of the activity area and revegetation is accomplished
within 5 years.
Standard FW-8: Water saturated soils in areas expected to
produce biomass should not receive vehicle traffic or livestock
trampling to prevent excessive soil compaction.
Standard FW-16: Management activities expose no more than 10%
mineral soil in the channeled ephemeral zone.
Standard FW-17: In channeled ephemeral zones, up to 50% of the
basal area may be removed down to a minimum basal area of 50 square
feet per acre. Removal of additional basal area is allowed on a
case-by-case basis when needed to benefit riparian dependent
resources.
Standard 11-003: Management activities expose no more than 10
percent mineral soil within the project riparian corridor.
The amendment would provide an exception from these standards for
the ACP Project and include specific mitigation measures and project
design requirements for the project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule requirements likely to be directly
related to amending the above standards are:
Sec. 219.8(a)(2)(ii)--``[The plan must include plan components
to maintain or restore] Soils and soil productivity, including
guidance to reduce soil erosion and sedimentation;''
Sec. 219.8(a)(2)(iv)--``[The plan must include plan components
to maintain or restore] Water resources in the plan area, including
lakes, streams, and wetlands; . . . and other sources of drinking
water (including guidance to prevent or mitigate detrimental changes
in quantity, quality, and availability);'' and
Sec. 219.8(a)(3)(i)--The plan must include plan components ``to
maintain or restore the ecological integrity of riparian areas in
the plan area, including plan components to maintain or restore
structure, function, composition, and connectivity.''
The Draft EIS for the ACP and the January 6, 2017 Federal Register
Notice of Availability had also identified that Forestwide Standard FW-
15 and Management Prescription Area Standard 11-019 may need to be
amended. However, a further review of these standards has determined
that the proposed pipeline project can be made consistent with these
standards and an amendment to these two standards will not be needed.
These standards are:
[[Page 25758]]
Standard FW-15: Motorized vehicles are restricted in the
channeled ephemeral zone to designated crossings. Motorized vehicles
may only be allowed on a case by case basis, after site specific
analysis, in the channeled ephemeral zone outside of designated
crossings.
Standard 11-019: Tree removals from the core of the riparian
corridor may only take place if needed to: Enhance the recovery of
the diversity and complexity of vegetation native to the site;
rehabilitate both natural and human-caused disturbances; provide
habitat improvements for aquatic or riparian species, or threatened,
endangered, sensitive, and locally rare species; reduce fuel
buildup; provide for public safety; for approved facility
construction/renovation; or as allowed in standards 11-015 or 11-
024.
Proposed Amendment, Part 3: The GWNF LRMP would be amended to allow
the Atlantic Coast Pipeline to be exempt from Management Prescription
Area Standard 4A-025 and cross the Appalachian National Scenic Trail
(ANST) in Augusta County, Virginia. This standard is:
Standard 4A-025: Locate new public utilities and rights-of-way
in areas of this management prescription area where major impacts
already exist. Limit linear utilities and rights-of-way to a single
crossing of the prescription area, per project.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule requirement likely to be directly
related to this part of the amendment is:
Sec. 219.10(b)(1)(vi)--``[The plan must include plan components
to provide for] Appropriate management of other designated areas or
recommended designated areas in the plan area.''
Potential Amendment, Part 4: The GWNF LRMP may need to be amended
to allow removal of old growth trees within the construction zone of
the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. The forestwide standard in the LRMP that
may need to be amended is FW-85, which states that any stands
identified as meeting the criteria for Dry Mesic Oak or Dry & Dry-Mesic
Oak-Pine old growth forest communities may be suitable for timber
harvest and any decision to harvest such stands would be made after
consideration of their contribution to the distribution and abundance
of these old growth forest community types. Stands identified as
meeting the age criteria for any of the other old growth community
types found on the forest would be unsuitable for timber production.
A determination on the need for this amendment will be made
following completion of an old growth inventory of the stands within
the ACP Project's construction zone.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule requirement likely to be directly
related to this part of the amendment, if needed, is:
Sec. 219.11(c)--``The plan may include plan components to allow
for timber harvest for purposes other than timber production . . .
or portions of the plan area, as a tool to assist in achieving or
maintaining one or more applicable desired conditions or objectives
of the plan . . .''
Potential Amendment, Part 5: The GWNF may need to amend Management
Area Prescription Standard 2C3-015 to allow for a major reconstruction
of a National Forest System Road within Management Prescription Area
2C3 for the purposes of providing access for pipeline construction.
This standard is:
Standard 2C3-015: Allow road construction or reconstruction to
improve recreational access, improve soil and water, to salvage
timber, or to protect property or public safety.
This potential amendment is contingent on the final location of
access roads needed for the pipeline.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule requirement likely to be directly
related to this part of the amendment, if needed, is:
Sec. 219.10(b)(v)--``Protection of designated wild and scenic
rivers as well as management of rivers found eligible or determined
suitable for the National Wild and Scenic River system to protect
the values that provide the basis for their suitability for
inclusion in the system.''
Potential Amendment, Part 6: The GWNF may need to amend Forestwide
Standard FW-182 to allow for the construction of the Atlantic Coast
Pipeline to deviate from the Scenic Integrity Objectives (SIOs)
established in the LRMP. This standard is:
Standard FW-182: The Forest SIOs are met for all new projects
(including special uses). Existing conditions may not currently meet
the assigned SIO.
The 36 CFR 219 planning rule requirement likely to be directly
related to this part of the amendment is:
Sec. 219.10(b)(i)--``[The plan must include plan components to
provide for] ``Sustainable recreation; . . . and scenic character.''
If any of the six parts of the proposed amendment to the GWNF LRMP
described above are determined to be ``directly related'' to a
substantive rule requirement, the Responsible Official must apply that
requirement within the scope and scale of the proposed amendment and,
if necessary, make adjustments to the proposed amendment to meet the
rule requirement (36 CFR 219.13(b)(5) and (6)).
Administrative Review of Plan Amendment Decisions
The Forest Service's January 6, 2017 Notice of Availability in the
Federal Register indicated that following the issuance of FERC's Final
EIS, the Forest Service would prepare separate records of decision for
the authorization to construct and operate the ACP and for the plan
amendment decisions. However, the Regional Foresters now intend to sign
one record of decision for both the authorizations to construct and
operate the pipeline on the MNF and GWNF and for the project-specific
plan amendment decisions to the MNF LRMP and the GWNF LRMP. Two
Regional Foresters are involved with the ACP Project since the pipeline
will cross both the MNF, which is in the Eastern Region of the Forest
Service, and the GWNF, which is in the Southern Region of the Forest
Service. Doing so will simplify the decisionmaking process for internal
Forest Service administrative purposes as well as for the public's
right to participate in the predecisional review process. A Forest
Service decision to authorize the construction and operation of the ACP
will be subject to the Forest Service predecisional administrative
review procedures established in 36 CFR 218. At the same time, project-
specific amendments to the MNF and GWNF LRMPs will also be subject to
the administrative review procedures under the 36 CFR 218 regulations
(per 36 CFR 219.59(b)).
Since the Regional Foresters will be the Responsible Officials for
both the decisions to authorize the construction and operation of the
ACP as well as the LRMP amendments, the Reviewing Official for all of
the decisions will be the National Forest System Associate Deputy Chief
(36 CFR 218.3(a)).
Responsible Officials for Forest Service Authorizations To
Construct and Operate the Atlantic Coast Pipeline: The Regional
Forester Eastern Region for NFS lands on the MNF and the Regional
Forester Southern Region for NFS lands on the GWNF are the Responsible
Officials. (Note that Forest Service Manual 2704.32 provides that the
Regional Forester has authority to issue special use authorizations for
pipelines 24 inches or more in diameter, and may not delegate that
authority to a lower-level official.)
Responsible Officials for Forest Service LRMP Amendments: The
January 6, 2017 Federal Register Notice of Availability had identified
the Forest Supervisor for the Monongahela National Forest and the
Forest Supervisor for the George Washington and Jefferson National
Forests as the
[[Page 25759]]
Responsible Officials for the MNF LRMP Amendment and the GWNF LRMP
Amendment, respectively. However, since the Regional Foresters for the
Eastern and Southern Region will be the Responsible Officials for the
decision to authorize the construction and operation of ACP, in the
interest of administrative efficiencies as well as to simplify the
administrative review process for the public, the Responsible Officials
for the LRMP Amendments will now be the Regional Forester Eastern
Region for the MNF LRMP Amendment and the Regional Forester Southern
Region for the GWNF LRMP Amendment.
Dated: May 10, 2017.
Robert M. Harper,
Acting Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.
[FR Doc. 2017-11484 Filed 6-2-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
