Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Plan

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of the Secretary

Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact

Statement for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Plan

AGENCY: Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, and the Office of

the Secretary, Department of the Interior. National Marine Fisheries

Service, Department of Commerce is a cooperating agency.

ACTION: Notice of availability of the draft environmental impact

statement for the Exxon Valdez restoration plan.

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

SUMMARY: On behalf of the Exxon Valdez Trustee Council, the Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service announces the availability of the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill

Restoration Plan. This notice announces the locations and dates of

public meetings to solicit comments on the DEIS. The responsible

official for the preparation of the DEIS is the Regional Forester, Phil

Janik. The Restoration Plan will establish management direction and

guide all natural resource restoration activities covered by the civil

settlement to the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

DATES: Comments concerning the DEIS should be received within 45 days

of the publication of the Notice of Availability by the Environmental

Protection Agency in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to or for copies of a Summary of the

DEIS or for copies of the DEIS itself, contact the Oil Spill Public

Information Office, 645 G. Street, Anchorage, Alaska, 99501. Phone

number 907 278-8008 or within Alaska 800 478-7745, outside Alaska 800

283-7745. Copies also will be sent to public libraries in Anchorage,

Juneau, Fairbanks, Valdez, Cordova, Kodiak, Homer, and Seward, Alaska

for review.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Introduction

On October 8, 1991, a federal court approved settlement between the

State and Federal governments and Exxon under which Exxon will pay $1

billion in criminal restitution and civil damages to the governments.

The State and Federal Trustees will receive $900 million in civil

damages from Exxon over the 10 years. The funds are to be used to

restore to their pre-spill condition the natural resources and the

services they provide, that were injured by the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

This includes the restoration of any natural resource injured, lost or

destroyed and the services provided by that resource or which replaces

or substitutes for the injured, lost or destroyed resource and affected

services. Restoration includes all phases of injury assessment,

restoration, replacement, and enhancement of natural resources, and

acquisition of equivalent resources and services.

All decisions about restoration and uses of restoration funds are

determined by six natural resources Trustees, three Federal and three

State. The three Federal Trustees are: The Administrator for the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, and the Secretaries of the Department of Agriculture and of

the Interior. The three State Trustees are: The Commissioners of Fish

and Game and Environmental Conservation, and the Attorney General. A

Trustee Council, located in Alaska, which is made up of the three State

Trustees and designees of the three Federal Trustees, is responsible

for decisions relating to the assessment of injuries, uses of the

restoration funds, and all restoration activities including the

preparation of a Restoration Plan.

On April 10, 1992 (57 FR 12473-12475) on behalf of the Exxon Valdez

Trustee Council, the Forest Service published a Notice of Intent to

prepare an EIS on the Restoration Plan. This was later revised on

January 14, 1994 (59 FR 2352-2353). Since then the Trustee Council

developed a draft Restoration Plan which has become the proposed action

for the analysis conducted in the DEIS.

B. Draft Restoration Plan

The proposed action (Draft Restoration Plan) consists of nine

policy statements, a discussion of categories of restoration actions

and broad objectives for injured resources. The policies for

identifying and conducting restoration actions are:

1. The restoration program will take an ecosystem approach.

2. Restoration activities may be considered for any injured

resource or service.

3. Most restoration activities will occur within the spill area.

However, restoration activities outside the spill are, but within

Alaska, may be considered when the most effective restoration actions

for an injured migratory population are in a part of its range outside

the spill area or when the information acquired from research and

monitoring activities outside the spill area will be important for

restoration or understanding injuries within the spill area.

4. Restoration activities will emphasize resources and services

that have not recovered. Resources and services will be enhanced, as

appropriate, to promote restoration. Restoration projects should not

adversely affect the ecosystem.

5. Projects designed to restore or enhance an injured service must

have a sufficient relationship to an injured resource; must benefit the

same user group that was injured; and, should be compatible with the

character and public uses of the area.

6. Competitive proposals for restoration projects will be

encouraged.

7. Restoration projects will be subject to independent scientific

review before Trustee Council approval.

8. Meaningful public participation in restoration decisions will be

actively solicited.

9. Government agencies will be funded only for restoration work

that they do not normally conduct.

Four types of restoration actions are identified and discussed in

the Draft Restoration Plan: General restoration, habitat protection and

acquisition, monitoring and research, and public information and

administration. Alternatives to the proposed action place different

emphases on each of these categories of restoration actions.

General Restoration consists of activities that fall within

manipulation of the environment, management of human use for reduction

of marine pollution. Decisions about conducting general restoration

projects would look at the following factors: Extent of natural

recovery, the value of an injured resource to the ecosystem and to the

public, the duration of benefits, the technical feasibility of the

project, the likelihood of success, the relationship of costs to

expected benefits, potential for harmful side effects, benefits to more

than one resource, effects on health and human safety, consistency with

applicable laws, and policies, and duplication with other actions.

Habitat Protection and Acquisition is a category that includes

purchase of private land or interests in land such as conservation

easements, mineral rights, or timber rights. It also includes

recommendations for changing public agency management practices.

Specific policies that relate to habitat protection and acquisition are

proposed. These policies deal with ranking potential lands to determine

potential benefits, the need for a willing seller, purchasing at fair

market value, post acquisition management of the acquired lands and

involving the public in the prioritization process.

Monitoring and Research consists of recovery monitoring,

restoration monitoring and ecological monitoring and research. Specific

policies governing the selecting and performance of monitoring

activities are discussed in the Draft Restoration Plan.

Public Information and Administration is the last category of

restoration actions. It consists of all necessary administrative

actions that are not attributable to a particular project. The Draft

Restoration Plan goal for this category is for administrative costs to

average no more than 5% of overall restoration expenditures for the

remainder of the settlement period.

General restoration objectives have been developed for resources

that are recovering, resources not recovering, resources where the

recovery is unknown, resources such as archaeological resources and

wilderness, and services. These broad objectives will guide in the

development of annual work plans.

Further information regarding the proposed action and possible

restoration alternatives is included in the Draft Exxon Valdez Oil

Spill Restoration Plan, Summary of Alternatives for Public Comment,

April 1993; the Supplement to Draft Exxon Valdez Oil spill Restoration

Plan, Summary of Alternatives for Public Comment, June 1993; the

Summary of Public Comment on Alternatives of the Draft Exxon Valdez Oil

Spill Restoration Plan, September 1993; and the Draft Exxon Valdez Oil

Spill Restoration Plan, November 1993. Copies of these documents may be

requested from the Oil Spill Public Information Office, 645 G. Street,

Anchorage, Alaska, 99501. Phone number 907 278-8008 or within Alaska

800 478-7745, outside Alaska 800 283-7745.

C. Public Meetings

During the comment period for the DEIS public meetings will be held

on the following dates at the locations shown:

June 27, 1994--EVOS Trustee Council Restoration Office, 645 G. Street,

suite 100, Anchorage, AK

June 29, 1994--Kenai Fjords National Park Visitor's Center, 1212 4th

Avenue, Small Boat Harbor, Seward, AK

July 1, 1994--City Council Chambers, 491 E Pioneer Avenue, Homer, AK

July 5, 1994--Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game Conference Room, 211

Mission Road, Kodiak, AK

July 7, 1994--U.S. Forest Service Third Floor Conference Room, 612

Second Street, Cordova, AK

July 19, 1994--City Council Chambers, 212 Chenega Avenue, Valdez, AK

D. Comments

The comment period on the DEIS will be 45 days from the date the

Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in the

Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in this

proposed action participate at this time. To be most helpful, comments

on the DEIS statement should be as specific as possible, and may

address the adequacy of the statement or the merits of the alternatives

discussed. (See the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for

implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental

Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3).

In addition, Federal court decisions have established that

reviewers of DEIS statements must structure their participation in the

environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and

alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and concerns. Vermont

Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC. 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978).

Environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage

may be waived if not raised until after completion of the final EIS.

Wisconsin Heritage, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis.

1980). The reason for this is to ensure that substantive comments and

objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it

can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final.

Dated: June 9, 1994.

Phil Janik,

Regional Forester, Alaska Region Forest Service, Department of

Agriculture.

Dated: June 13, 1994.

Robert P. Davison,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Department

of the Interior.

[FR Doc. 94-14716 Filed 6-16-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M