Rocky Mountain Front Minerals Withdrawal EISLewis and Clark and Helena National Forests

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Front Minerals Withdrawal EIS--Lewis and Clark and

Helena National Forests

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement on a proposal to withdraw from locatable mineral entry,

429,000 acres of National Forest System lands along Montana's Rocky

Mountain Front in Glacier, Pondera, Teton and Lewis and Clark Counties,

Montana. Specific land descriptions were provided in the Federal

Register (64 FR 5311-5312, Feb. 3, 1999) under the Bureau of Land

Management Notice of Proposed withdrawal. The purpose of the proposal

is to preserve the area for traditional cultural purposes by Native

Americans, protect threatened and endangered species, and preserve the

outstanding scenic values and roadless character. If approved, the

withdrawal would remove National Forest System lands along the Rocky

Mountain Front from new mining claims for up to 20 years. The EIS will

be designed to satisfy the requirements of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976 and implementing regulations (43 CFR 2310.1).

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

on or before July 6, 1999. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for

public meeting dates.

ADDRESSES. Send written comments to Rick Prausa, Forest Supervisor,

Lewis and Clark National Forest, 1101 15th Street North, Box 869, Great

Falls, MT 59403. Electronic mail may be sent to comment/rl_

[email protected]. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for

additional information about electronic filing and public meeting

addresses.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Whittekiend, EIS Team Leader,

(406) 466-5341 or (406) 791-7700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Service proposes to withdraw from

locatable mineral entry, National Forest System lands along the Rocky

Mountain Front. The proposed mineral withdrawal is 429,000 acres of

federal lands, subject to valid existing rights associated with the

existing unpatented mining claims in the study area. The withdrawal

would have an immediate effect on 426,800 acres of currently unclaimed

federal land, which would be withdrawn for up to 20 years. The mineral

withdrawal may or may not affect the remaining acreage (approximately

2,200 acres of unpatented mining claims), depending upon whether the

104 unpatented mining claims constitute valid existing rights. If these

unpatented mining claims were abandoned or determined to be invalid,

the mineral withdrawal would prohibit the relocation of new mining

claims. The mineral withdrawal would be subject to review at the end of

20 years according to federal regulations. The primary purpose of the

proposed mineral withdrawal is to preserve the area for tradition

cultural uses by Native Americans, to protect threatened and endangered

species and protect outstanding scenic values and roadless character.

Many individuals and groups have expressed concern

[[Page 29990]]

about the potential of minerals development along the Rocky Mountain

Front after the staking of 104 claims in the Blackleaf/Muddy Creek

area.

The study area includes areas considered sacred to several Indian

tribes. Traditional cultural uses that take place in the study area

include religious ceremonies and gathering of traditional herbs. The

study area provides habitat for several threatened and endangered

species including grizzly bear, gray wolf, peregrine falcon, and bald

eagle. The risks of mining development to these species include

increased roading, habitat destruction and increased human presence.

The scenic qualities of the study area are believed by many to be among

the best in the nation. These qualities could be degraded by the

development of mineral resources. Withdrawal of these lands would

ensure that the cultural, biological and scenic resources of these

lands would be maintained and the impacts of mining related activities

would be reduced.

Decisions To Be Made

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, has filed an

application with the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land

Management to withdraw 429,000 acres of National Forest System lands

from locatable mineral entry under the United States mining laws. The

Forest Service will prepare an EIS. The Chief of the Forest Service

will have two decisions to make: he will decide whether or not to

recommend that the Secretary of the Interior withdraw this area. If the

Secretary of The Interior withdraws the area, the Chief of the Forest

Service will also amend the Lewis and Clark and Helena National Forest

Plans to reflect the change in management of locatable hardrock

minerals. The Chief's Forest Plan amendments decisions will be

contingent on the Secretary of the Interior's withdrawal decision.

The Chief of the Forest Service will submit his decision and the

EIS to the Montana State Director, Bureau of Land Management who will

submit a recommendation to the Director of the Bureau of Land

Management. The recommendation and supporting documentation will then

be forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior for a decision. The

authority to withdraw lands from mineral entry lies with the Secretary

of the Interior. The Secretary will decide which lands, if any, to

withdraw, and for how long. The Secretary is limited to a maximum

withdrawal period of 20 years. If a withdrawal of over 5,000 acres is

approved, the Secretary of the Interior would advise Congress of the

withdrawal action being taken. No action is required by Congress to

implement a mineral withdrawal. Congress can terminate a withdrawal

with a concurrent resolution from the House and Senate within 90 days

of the approval of the Public Land Order. At the end of the 20 year

period, the withdrawal decision would be reviewed to determine if it is

appropriate to extend it. If the Secretary chooses to implement a

withdrawal, the withdrawal would become effective on the date the

Public Land Order is published in the Federal Register.

Responsible Official

Mike Dombeck, Chief, USDA Forest Service, Auditors Building, 201

14th Street, SW at Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250 is the

Responsible Official for making the withdrawal recommendation to the

Secretary of the Interior. The Chief of the Forest Service is also

responsible for any decision to amend the Forest Plans to reflect any

change in management of locatable hardrock minerals. He will document

his decisions and rationale in a Record of Decision.

Preliminary Issues

Two preliminary issues have been identified: Approval of the

withdrawal would result in the loss of opportunity to extract minerals

from the area and withdrawal would limit the economic base of rural

communities along the Rocky Mountain Front.

Public Involvement, Rationale, and Public Meetings

In February, 1999, a notice of proposed withdrawal was published in

the Federal Register (64 FR 5311-5312, Feb. 3, 1999). This notice

invited public comment for a period of 90 days. Comments received will

be included in the documentation for the EIS. The public is encouraged

to take part in the process and is encouraged to visit with Forest

Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior to the

decision. 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

action.

While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time,

comments received within 30 days of the publication of this notice will

be especially useful in the preparation of the Draft EIS. Public

meetings associated with the project will be held to gain a better

understanding of public issues and concerns. These meetings will be

held in Choteau, Montana at the Stagestop Inn on June 22, 1999 from 3-8

p.m. and in Lincoln, Montana at the Lincoln Community Hall on June 24,

1999 from 3-7 p.m.

Information from the meetings will be used in preparation of the

draft and final EIS. The scoping process will include identifying:

potential issues, significant issues to be analyzed in depth,

alternatives to the proposed action, and potential environmental

effects of the proposal and alternatives.

Electronic Access and Filing Addresses

Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to comment/

[email protected]. Please reference the Rocky Mountain Front

Minerals Withdrawal on the subject line. Also, include your name and

mailing address with your comments so documents pertaining to this

project may be mailed to you.

Estimated Dates for Filing

The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental

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

January, 2000. At the 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 the EIS publishes the Notice of

Availability in the Federal Register. It is very important that those

interested in the management of this area participate at that time.

The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by August, 2000. In the

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

responses received during the comment period that pertain to the

environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable

laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision

regarding the proposal.

The Reviewers Obligation To Comment

The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers

notice at this early stage 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 alters 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 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.

[[Page 29991]]

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.

Dated: June 1, 1999.

Paul Brouha,

Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System.

[FR Doc. 99-14223 Filed 6-3-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M