Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan; Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan;

Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) for resource management activities, including biomass

removal, timber harvest, fuelbreak construction and wildlife habitat

improvement work on the Whale Rock Forest Health Multi-resource

Project, involving a total planning area size of about 4,500 acres on

the Pacific Ranger District of the Eldorado National Forest. The agency

invites written comments and suggestions on the scope of the analysis.

The agency also gives notice of the full environmental analysis and

decisionmaking process that will occur on the proposal so that

interested and affected people are aware of how they may participate

and contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received

by April 4, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope

of the analysis to Marie Kennedy, Assistant Silviculturist, Pacific

Ranger Station, Pollock Pines, California, 95726.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Quesitons about the proposed action and EIS should be directed to Marie

Kennedy, Assistant Silviculturist, Pacific Ranger Station, Pollock

Pines, California, 95726, phone 916-644-2349.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Eldorado National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan was completed in January 1989. The Whale Rock

Forest Health Multi-resource Project EIS will tier to the approved

Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Most of the

land in the analysis area is identified in the approved Plan as having

a general management direction of timber management.

There are no known permits or licenses required to implement the

proposed action.

In preparing the EIS, the Forest Service will identify and consider

a range of alternatives for this project. The proposed alternatives

will include the following tentative alternative themes:

1. No Action

2. Forest Health--timber product, including biomass, management

emphasis

3. Forest Health--wildlife management emphasis

4. Forest Health--fuels management emphasis

5. Forest Health--multiple use management emphasis.

These alternatives will consider varying levels and distribution of

vegetation manipulation, timber harvest and fuels management. No new

specified road construction is anticipated. Road reconstruction needs

will include drainage work, clearing and minor realignment. The amount

of road reconstruction necessary for this project will vary between

alternatives. Harvest prescriptions will include understory removal of

both merchantable and sub-merchantable trees, commercial thinning, and

fuelbreak construction guidelines. All harvest prescriptions will

conform with the California Spotted Owl Sierran Province Interim

Guidelines Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice. Adaptive

management strategies for the Spotted Owl may be included under certain

alternatives where benefits to the spotted owl can be shown, that is,

wildlife habitat activities or fuel management activities that are

designed to better maintain future management options of the spotted

owl by improving or retaining stand components most at risk.

Volume estimates of timber to be harvested range from 0 to 10 mmbf

of commercial sawtimber. Biomass estimates range from 0 to 30,000 tons.

These estimates will be dependent on which alternative is chosen.

Preliminary issues that have been identified during the internal

scoping process include:

1. The potential for cumulative watershed effects within the project

area.

2. The selection and application of adaptive management strategies to

best achieve the habitat needs of the spotted owl.

Public participation will be especially important at several points

during the analysis. The first point is during the scoping process (40

CFR 1501.7).

The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and

assistance from federal, state, and local agencies and other

individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected by

the proposed project. This input will be used in preparation of the

draft EIS. The scoping process includes:

1. Defining the scope of the analysis and nature of the decision to be

made.

2. Identifying the issues and determining the significant issues for

consideration and analysis within the EIS.

3. Defining the proper interdisciplinary team make-up.

4. Determining the effective use of time and money in conducting the

analysis.

5. Identifying potential environmental, technical, and social impacts

of the EIS and alternatives.

6. Determining potential cooperating agencies.

7. Identifying groups or individuals interested or affected by the

decision.

Robert Harris, Acting Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National Forest,

is the responsible official.

The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by June

1994. At that time EPA will publish a notice of availability of the

draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the draft EIS

will be 45 days from the date that EPA's notice of availability appears

in the Federal Register.

The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important

to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public

participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of

draft environmental impact statements must structure their

participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is

meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewers's position and

contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,

553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the

draft environmental impact statement stage, but that are not raised

until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may

be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d

1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490

F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980).

Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those

interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 45-

day comment period so 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 environmental impact

statement.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft

environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is

also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the

draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft

environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives

formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer

to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing

the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at

40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.

After the comment period ends on the draft EIS, the comments will

be analyzed and considered by the Forest Service in prearing the final

EIS. The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by October 1994. In the

final EIS the Forest Service is required to respond to the comments and

responses received (40 CFR 1503.4). The responsible official will

considered the comments, responses, and enviornmental consequences

discussed in the draft EIS; and applicable laws, regulations, and

policies in making a decision regarding this project. The responsible

official will document the decision and reasons for the decision in the

Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to appeal pursuant to

36 CFR part 215.

Dated: February 23, 1994.

Robert Harris,

Acting Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National Forest.

[FR Doc. 94-4684 Filed 3-1-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M