EIS for The Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act Pilot Project

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

EIS for The Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery

Act Pilot Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: On October 21, 1998, the President of the United States signed

the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,

including Section 401, The Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest

Recovery Act (Act).

The Act states that the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through

the Forest Service and after completion of an environmental impact

statement, shall conduct a pilot project on described Federal lands to

demonstrate the effectiveness of specific resource management

activities including fuelbreaks, group selection and individual tree

selection, and avoidance or protection of specified areas. A Record of

Decision (ROD) is to be adopted by August 17, 1999. Additionally, the

Forest Service is to develop a program for riparian restoration. The

Pilot Project is defined in the Act as Quincy Library Group Proposal,

as described in the ``Quincy Library Group-Community Stability

Proposal'', to be implemented on Federal lands identified on the map

(MAP) entitled ``Quincy Library Group Community Stability Proposal'',

dated October 12, 1993, and prepared by Vestra Resources of Redding,

California.

DATES: The public is asked to submit any issues (points of concern,

debate, dispute or disagreement) regarding potential effects of the

proposed action or alternatives by January 19, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to David Peters, Project Manager, USDA Forest

Service, Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act

Pilot Project, PO Box 11500, Quincy, CA 95971.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Contact David Peters, Project Manager, USDA Forest Service, Herger-

Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act Pilot Project, PO

Box 11500, Quincy, CA 95971. Copies of the Quincy Library Group

Community Stability Proposal, the ACT, the MAP and associated documents

are available upon request from the Project Manager.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Early Public Involvement

The pilot project is based on an agreement by a coalition of

representatives of fisheries, timber, environmental, county government,

citizen groups, and local communities that formed in northern

California to develop a resource management program that promotes

ecologic and economic health for certain Federal lands and communities

in the Sierra Nevada area. The agreement is the ``Quincy Library Group-

Community Stability Proposal,'' which has received broad public review

over a period of years. The proposal was developed by an active cross-

section from the local communities. The proposal was included for

analysis in the ``Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Managing

California Spotted Owl Habitat in the Sierra Nevada National Forests of

California, an Eco-system Approach'', 1996. Additionally, there were

congressional hearings and debate associated with the proposed Bill as

it was introduced in the House of Representatives.

Proposed Action

The Act directs the Forest Service to develop a Pilot Project,

described as follows

Pilot Project Area and Exclusions. The pilot project is

limited to certain Federal lands (National Forest System Lands of the

Plumas, Lassen, and Tahoe National Forests) and local communities of

the Sierra Nevada area, that are identified on the MAP as ``Available

for Group Selection''. All spotted owl habitat areas and protected

activity centers located in the pilot project area will be deferred

from resource management activities.

Riparan Protection and Limitation. The Scientific Analysis

Team (SAT) guidelines for riparian protection are described in the

document entitled ``Viability Assessments and Management considerations

for Species Associated with Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forests of

the Pacific Northwest'', a Forest Service research document dated March

1993 and coauthorized by the Scientific Analysis Team, including Dr.

Jack Ward Thomas. The ACT does not require the application of SAT

guidelines to any livestock grazing in the pilot project area during

the term of the pilot project, unless the livestock grazing is being

conducted in the specific location at which the SAT guidelines are

being applied to a required ``Resource Management Activity''.

Compliance. All required ``Resource Management

Activities'' shall be implemented to the extent consistent with

applicable Federal Law and the standards and guidelines for the

conservation of the California spotted owl as set forth in the

California Spotted Owl Sierran Province Interim Guidelines or

subsequently issued guidelines.

Roadless Area Protection. Required ``Resource Management

Activities'', road building, riparian managment activity that utilize

road construction, and timber harvesting activities, shall not be

conducted on National Forest System Lands that are designated as either

``Off Base'' or ``Deferred'' on the MAP.

Required ``Resource Management Activities''. The following

``Resource Management Activities'' shall be implemented in compliance

with Section 401 (1) on an acreage basis during the term of the pilot

project:

(1) Fuelbreak Construction.--Construction of a strategic system of

defensible fuel profile zones, including

[[Page 70384]]

shaded fuelbreaks, utilizing thinning, individual tree selection, and

other methods of vegetation management consistent with the Quincy

Library Group--Community Stability Proposal, on not less than 40,000,

but not more than 60,000, acres per year.

(2) Group Selection and Individual Tree Selection.--Utilization of

group selection and individual tree selection uneven-aged forest

management prescriptions described in the Quincy Library Group-

Community Stability Proposal to achieve a desired future condition of

all-age, multistory, fire resilient forests as follows:

(A) Group Selection.--Group selection on an average acreage of 0.57

percent of the pilot project land each year of the pilot project.

(B) Individual Tree Selection--Individual tree selection may also

be utilized within the pilot project area.

(3) Total Acreage.--The total acreage on which resource management

activities be implemented under this subsection shall not exceed 70,000

acres each year.

(4) Riparian Management.--A program of riparian management,

including wide protection zones and riparian restoration projects,

consistent with SAT guidelines.

Term of Pilot Project.--The pilot project shall continue

for five years unless the amendment or revision of the land and

resource management plans for the Plumas, Lassen and Tahoe National

Forests as directed are completed earlier.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

To comply with NEPA, the Forest Service will evaluate alternatives

to the proposed action within the EIS, including No Action and other

alternatives responding to public comments. Each alternative would be

rigorously explored and evaluated, or rationale would be given for

eliminating an alternative from detailed study. The range of

alternatives to be considered would include, but not be limited to:

Identification of strategic systems of defensible fuel profile

zones (DFPZ), that would include shaded fuelbreaks and would be

achieved through thinning, individual tree selection, and other

vegetative management activities. The strategic systems would include

complete descriptions of the physical arrangement of living and dead

vegetation remaining in the DFPZ when completed, and identification of

topographic, elevation, vegetation type, and other physical and

biological criteria within which each ``typical'' DFPZ would also be

appropriate.

Identification of a strategy to evaluate the effectiveness of

uneven-age management that would be achieved by application of thinning

and group selection prescriptions. The strategy would include

identification of topography, elevation, vegetation type, and other

physical and biological criteria that would be used to determine where

and how group selection and individual tree selection prescriptions

would be applied.

Strategies developed would include standards and guidelines for

monitoring the effectiveness of each strategic system of DFPZs, and

each uneven-aged management strategy.

Relationships With Sierra Nevada Framework for Conservation and

Collaboration (SNFCC)

Selection 401 of the 1999 Department of the Interior and Related

Agencies Appropriations Act (the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group

Forest Recovery Act), 112 Stat. 2681, directs the Secretary to

implement a pilot project on certain federal lands within the Plumas,

Lassen, and Tahoe National Forests. We will coordinate the Sierra

Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Project Environment Impact Statement with

the HFQLG environmental impact statement to implement section 401. We

would like comments from the public and interested groups concerning

the relationship between the two environmental impact statements.

Public Scoping Process

This Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environment Impact Statement is

the initiation of a public scoping process related to implementation of

the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act's Pilot

Project. The public is invited to comment by submitting any issues

(points of concern, debate, disagreement, or dispute) they may have

regarding potential effects of the proposed action.

Public information meetings will be hosted by the Lassen, Plumas,

and Tahoe National Forests at Loyalton, Blairsden, Quincy, Oroville,

Chico, Burney, and Chester, CA, between January 4th and January 16th,

1999. Additionally, two scoping workshops will be held, one at

Susanville and one at Quincy, on Saturday, January 16th. Location and

times for the meetings will be published in the official newspapers of

record for each forest. Throughout the scoping process, coordination

will occur with Federal and State agencies, Tribal governments, local

governments, and historically under-represented communities.

Commenting

A draft environmental statement is expected to be available for

public review and comment in June, 1999 and a final environmental

impact statement in August, 1999. The comment period on the draft

environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date of

availability published in the Federal Register by the Environmental

Protection Agency.

Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names

and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the

public record on this proposed action and will be available for public

inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and

considered. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may

request the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by

showing how the Freedom of Information (FOIA) permits such

confidentiality. Persons requesting such confidentiality should be

aware that, under the FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very

limited circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest

Service will inform the requester of the agency's decision regarding

the request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the

agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the

comments may be resubmitted with or without name and address.

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 the 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 environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised

until after completion of the final environmental state may be waived

or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 3 F.2d 1016, 1022

(9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp.

1334 (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

[[Page 70385]]

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 Environment Policy Act at 40

CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.

Dated: December 15, 1998.

Mark J. Madrid,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 98-33695 Filed 12-18-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M