Anchor Hill Project, Gilt Edge Mine, Environmental Impact Statement Supplement, Black Hills National Forest, SD

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Anchor Hill Project, Gilt Edge Mine, Environmental Impact

Statement Supplement, Black Hills National Forest, SD

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a draft supplement to a final

environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: J. Thomas Millard, Spearfish/Nemo District Ranger, of the

Black Hills National Forest gives notice of the agency's intent to

prepare a Draft Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement

for the Anchor Hill Project of the Gilt Edge Mine. The responsible

official for this project is John C. Twiss, Forest Supervisor, Black

Hills National Forest.

DATES: The Draft Supplement should be available for public comment by

the end of April 1998. The Final Supplement should be ready for public

review in July of 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to District Ranger, Spearfish/Nemo

District, P.O. Box 407, Deadwood, SD 57732.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Don Murray Lands and Minerals Staff on the Spearfish/Nemo Ranger

District, (605) 578-2744.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Draft Supplement will provide additional

information and clarification of items in the Final Environmental

Impact Statement for the Anchor Hill Project published in November

1997. The Anchor Hill Project is the proposed expansion of an existing

open pit gold

[[Page 25197]]

mine on to 37 acres of land in the Black Hills National Forest, which

is located four miles southeast of Deadwood, South Dakota.

The comment period on the draft supplement to the final

environmental impact statement will be a minimum of 45 days from the

date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of

availability 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 supplements to the final 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

reviewer'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 supplement to the final environmental

impact statement stage but that are not raised until after completion

of the final supplement to 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 objectives 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 supplement

to the final environmental impact statement should be as specific as

possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or

chapters of the draft supplement. Comments may also address the

adequacy of the draft supplement to the final 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 3, 1998.

J. Thomas Millard,

District Ranger.

[FR Doc. 98-12089 Filed 5-6-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M