Tongass Land Management Plan Revision, Tongass National Forest, Alaska

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Tongass Land Management Plan Revision, Tongass National Forest,

Alaska

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a revised supplement to the draft

environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a revised supplement to the

draft environmental impact statement on a proposal to revise the

Tongass Land Management Plan. This is a revision of the supplement

published in August 1991.

DATES: Formal comments are not being solicited at this time. A revised

supplement to the draft environment impact statement is scheduled to be

filed with the Environmental Protection Agency in November 1995, at

which time a formal comment period will begin.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Lidholm, Public Affairs Officer,

Tongass Revision Team, 8465 Old Dairy Road, Juneau, AK 99801. Telephone

(907) 586-8726.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The original notice of intent for the

Tongass Land Management Plan revision was published September 10, 1987

(52 FR 34264, *34265). A draft environmental impact statement was

available for public review and comment from July 1990 to January 1991,

and a supplement to that draft was available from September to December

1991. Release of a final environmental impact statement was delayed

pending completion of additional studies. Based on the results of these

studies, other new information, and the lapse of time since public

review of the supplement, the Forest Service has decided to issue

another draft document, the revised supplement, for public review.

The issues identified in the August 1991 supplement to the draft

environmental impact statement have been updated. The focus for the

revised supplement will be on the following specific issues: providing

for species viability consistent with the provisions of NFMA and the

Endangered Species Act; evaluating recommendations for additional

fisheries habitat protection; cave and karst management; ensuring

conformance with ecosystem management principles; and the socio-

economic effects of alternative actions. The alternatives described in

the 1991 supplement will be the basis for formulating alternatives to

deal with these issues.

A partnership approach with the agency's Pacific Northwest Research

Station (PNW) will be an important vehicle to bring science to bear on

the issues. PNW will be involved along with the Alaska Region of the

Forest Service at every phase of the project. Other federal agencies

are being asked to cooperate in the planning process, including the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service,

and the Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, the skills and

expertise of Alaska State agencies and Alaska tribal governments will

be sought.

A revised supplement to the draft environment impact statement is

anticipated to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency in

November 1995, and a final environmental impact statement is projected

for June 1996.

The responsible official is Phil Janik, Regional Forester, Alaska

Region, P.O. Box 21628, Juneau, AK 99801.

A 90-day public comment period on the revised supplement to the

draft environmental impact statement will begin on the date the

Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in

the Federal Register. An extensive scoping process has already taken

place with respect to the proposed TLMP revision. No further formal

scoping process is scheduled as part of the preparation of the revised

supplement to the draft environmental impact statement. Public meetings

are expected and will be announced.

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 (or, in this case, the revised

supplement to the draft) 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 contentions. Vermont

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

objections that could be raised at the draft (or revised supplement to

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 90 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.

The revised supplement is preceded by two other draft documents

(the 1990 draft and 1991 supplement referred to earlier). Reviewers

should note that comments on either of these two previous documents are

still valid, and will be considered along with all comments received on

the revised supplement in reaching a final decision. Participation in

any of the three comments periods satisfies the intent of the previous

discussion, provided that the reviewer's position and/or concerns have

been raised.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

and [[Page 22045]] concerns on the proposed action, comments on the

revised supplement to 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 revised supplement to 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.

Dated: April 21, 1995.

Robert Williams,

Acting Regional Forester of the Alaska Region.

[FR Doc. 95-10940 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M