[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 5, 1994)] [Unknown Section] [Page 0] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 94-24565] [[Page Unknown]] [Federal Register: October 5, 1994] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project, Tahoe National Forest, Sierra County, CA AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for proposed watershed restoration, timber salvage, fuels reduction, wildlife habitat improvement, and reforestation activities within the xx,xxx-acre Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project analysis area located in the Feather River and Truckee River watersheds. The project area is located within all or portions of T19N, R15 & 16E, T20N, R15, 16, & 17E; and T21N, R15, 16, and 17E, MDB&M. The agency invites comments and suggestions on the scope of the analysis. In addition, the agency gives notice of the full environmental analysis and decision-making 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 should be made in writing and received by November 21, 1994. ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning the project should be directed to Steve Bishop, District Ranger, Sierraville Ranger District, P.O. Box 95, Sierraville, CA 96126. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Bishop, District Ranger, Sierraville Ranger District, Sierraville, CA 96126, telephone (916) 994-3401, or Martha Twarkins, Project Team Leader, at the above location or at (916) 478-6293. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice of Intent to prepare the Eastside Forest Restoration Project EIS was published in the Federal Register on May 16, 1994 [59 FR 25440-25441]. That 85,000-acre project was proposed to address the area's extensive tree mortality and overstocked timber stands. Opportunities were identified to treat those stands in order to improve forest health and reduce the fire hazard, while concurrently accomplishing watershed restoration and wildlife habitat improvement goals. Significant new circumstances have occurred that bear on the original proposal. From August 16 through August 31, 1994, the 48,000- acre Cottonwood Fire burned through the Eastside Forest Restoration Project analysis area, affecting about 36,300 acres of National Forest System land and 11,700 acres of lands of other ownership on both the Tahoe and Toiyabe National Forests. The fire burned with high-to-moderate intensity on over 90 percent of the affected area, leaving only skeletons of burned trees and shrubs. Less than 10 percent of the area burned with low intensity, leaving partially burned or scattered live trees. This loss of vegetation has resulted in large areas of exposed soils and, thus, unstable watershed conditions, large amounts of new fuels, and the loss of standing timber and future timber growth potential. The fire also affected other important resources, such as wildlife habitat, recreation sites, visual quality, historic and pre-historic sites, fisheries, sensitive plant and animal species, and water quantity and quality. The unburned portion (about xx,xxx acres) of Eastside Forest Restoration Project EIS is being deferred for analysis until the completion of the Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project EIS; a revised Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the remaining area, along with new time schedules, will be placed in the Federal Register at a later date. The Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project analysis area is about xx,xxx acres in size, and includes xx,xxx acres of National Forest System lands and xx,xxx acres of lands of other ownerships. Most of the area is in the Feather River watershed, with a small portion in the Truckee River watershed. It is located east of the town of Sierraville and Highway 89, north of Sardine Peak and Lewis Mill, west of Babbitt Peak and the crest of the Bald Mountain Range, and south of the town of Loyalton. Major drainages within the project area include Cottonwood Creek, Lemon Canyon, Turner Canyon, Smithneck Creek, Bear Valley Creek, and Badenaugh Canyon. The project area includes all lands within the fire boundary on the Sierraville Ranger District of the Tahoe National Forest; the area burned on the Carson Ranger District of the Toiyabe National Forest will be analyzed separately. In preparing the environmental impact statement, the Forest Service will identify and analyze a range of alternatives that address the issues developed for this area. One of the alternatives will be no treatment. Other alternatives will consider differing levels of implementation of salvage treatments, fuels reduction, watershed restoration, road obliteration, wildlife habitat improvement, and new road construction and reconstruction. An ecological approach will be used to achieve multiple-use management of the Cottonwood Fire area. It also means that the needs of people and environmental values will be blended in such a way that this area's desired condition would represent a diverse, healthy, productive, and sustainable ecosystem. Public participation will be important during the analysis, especially during the review of the draft environmental impact statement. The Forest Service is 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. This input will be used in preparation of the draft environmental impact statement. The scoping process includes: 1. Identifying potential issues. 2. Identifying issues to be analyzed in depth. 3. Eliminating insignificant issues or those which have been covered by a relevant previous environmental analysis. 4. Exploring additional alternatives. 5. Identifying potential environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and connected actions). 6. Determining potential cooperating agencies and task assignments. The following list of issues has been identified through initial scoping: (1) To what extent can the potential for future large, catastrophic wildlife be reduced within the project area? (2) To what extent can the forest health be restored within the project area? (3) What level of timber commodities could result from forest health restoration projects? (4) To what extent will erodable and sensitive soils, and thus long-term soil productivity, be affected by the proposed activities? (5) To what extent will the view from Highways 49 and 89 be affected? What visual character will result from the proposed activities, and to what extent can visual quality be improved in sensitive areas affected by the fire? (6) To what extent will vegetative diversity be improved to support a wide variety of biological communities? (7) To what extent and at what timing will wildlife habitat be restored for the large variety of wildlife using the area? (8) To what extent will watershed conditions be improved and restored by the proposed activities? (9) To what extent will air quality in the Sierra Valley and Truckee areas be affected by the proposed activities? Comments from other Federal, State, and local agencies, organizations, and individuals who may be interested in, or affected by the decision, are encouraged to identify other significant issues. Public participation will be solicited through mailing letters to potentially interested or affected mining claim owners, private land owners, and special use permittees on the Sierraville Ranger District; posting information in local towns; and mailing letters to local timber industries, politicians, school boards, county supervisors, and environmental groups. Continued participation will be emphasized through individual contacts. Public meetings used as a method of public involvement during preparation and review of the draft environmental impact statement will be announced in newspapers of general circulation in the geographic area of such meetings well in advance of scheduled dates. The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by December, 1995. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA 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 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 EIS stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final EIS 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 the 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 EIS. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft EIS. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft EIS 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. The final EIS is expected to be available by March, 1995. The responsible official is John H. Skinner, Forest Supervisor, Tahoe National Forest. Dated: September 26, 1994. Larry Gruver, Acting Forest Supervisor [FR Doc. 94-24565 Filed 10-4-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-M