[Federal Register: May 1, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 84)]
[Notices]
[Page 21625-21629]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01my02-34]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Ozark-St.
Francis National Forests in Arkansas
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service intends to prepare an environmental
impact statement (EIS) for revising the Ozark-St. Francis National
Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (hereinafter referred to as
the Forest Plan) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5) and USDA Forest
Service National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning
regulations. The revised Forest Plan will supersede the current Forest
Plan, which the Regional Forester approved July 29, 1986, and has been
amended 11 times.
The agency invites written comments and suggestions within the
scope of the analysis described below. In addition, the agency gives
notice that a full environmental analysis and decision-making process
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 on this Notice of Intent (NOI) and, specifically, on
the scope of the analysis to be included in the EIS, should be received
in writing by August 2, 2002. The agency expects to file the draft EIS
(DEIS) with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and make it
available for public comment in 2004. The Agency expects to file the
final EIS (FEIS) in September of 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: Ozark-St. Francis National
Forests, Planning, 605 West Main Street, Russellville, Arkansas 72801.
Electronic mail should be sent to: r8.ozark.planning@fs.fed.us
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deryl Jevons, Forest Planning Tam
Leader, at 479-968-2354. Information will also be posted on the forest
web page at http: //www.fs.fed.us/oonf/ozark/planning/planning. The
Regional Forester for the Southern Region located at 1720 Peachtree
Street, NW., Atlanta, GA 30309, is the Responsible Official.
Affected Counties: This NOI affects Baxter, Benton, Conway,
Crawford, Franklin, Johnson, Lee, Logan, Madison, Marion, Newton,
Phillips, Pope, Searcy, Stone, Van Burden, Washington, and Yell
counties in Arkansas.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background Information
1. The Role of Forest Plans
National Forest System resource allocation and management decisions
are made in two stages. The first stage is the Forest Plan, which
involves the establishment of management direction by allocating lands
and resources within the plan area to various uses or conditions
through management areas and management prescriptions. The second stage
is plan implementation through approval of project decisions. forest
Plans do not compel the agency to undertake any site-specific projects;
rather, they establish overall goals and objectives (or desired
resource conditions) that the individual national forest will strive to
meet. Forest Plans also establish limitations on what actions may be
authorized and what conditions must be met during project decision-
making.
Agency decisions in Forest Plans do the following:
a. Establish forest-wide multiple-use goals and objectives (36 CFR
219.11(b)).
b. Establish management areas and management area direction through
the application of management prescriptions and multiple-use
prescriptions (36 CFR 219.11(c)).
c. Establish monitoring and evaluation requirements (36 CFR
219.11(d)).
d. Establish forest-wide management requirements (standards and
guidelines) (36 CFR 219.13 to 219.27).
e. Determine the suitability and potential capability of lands for
resource production. This includes identifying lands not suited for
timber production and establishment of allowable sale quantity (36 CFR
219.14).
f. Where applicable, recommend official designation of special
areas such as wilderness (36 CFR 219.17) and wild and scenic rivers to
Congress.
g. Where applicable, designate those lands administratively
available for oil and gas leasing and, when appropriate, authorize the
Bureau of Land Management to offer specific lands for leasing. (36 CFR
228.102(d) and (e)).
Note: The above citations are from the 1982 36 CFR 219 planning
regulations. See also section G.
[[Page 21626]]
2. The Beginning of the Forest Plan Revision Effort for the Ozark-St.
Francis National Forests
For the Forest Plan revision, an effort was made to first define
the current situation and estimate the ``need for change.'' A key part
of defining the current situation was the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands
Assessment. On October 16, 1996, a notice was published in the Federal
Register (Vol. 61, No. 201) that identified the relationships between
the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment and Forest Plan revisions for
the National Forests in Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. In addition
to reviewing the results of this broad-scale assessment and the draft
conclusions of a more recent assessment (described below), the Forests
evaluated the ``initial need for change'' using the experience of
employees responsible for implementing the Forest Plan as well as the
results of the mid-plan review, monitoring, research, and public
comments received from 1990 through early 2002. These evaluations are
the basis for the preliminary issues and proposed actions identified in
this notice. Additional issues or topics will be developed as needed to
respond to public comments received in response to this NOI and
subsequent scoping efforts.
3. The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment and the Southern Forest
Resource Assessment
The U.S. Forest Service and many other agencies participated in the
preparation of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment, which
culminated in a final summary and four technical reports that were made
available to the public in early 2000 (available at the Forest Plan web
page address provided near the beginning of this document). This
Assessment included national forest system lands and private lands
within the highlands of Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma.
The Assessment facilitated ecologically based approaches to public
land management in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands by collecting and
analyzing broadscale biological, physical, social, and economic data.
The Assessment supports the revision of the Forest Plan by describing
how the lands, resources, people, and management of the national
forests interrelate within the larger context of the Ozark-Ouachita
Highlands area. This Assessment, however, is not a ``decision
document'' and it did not involve the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) process.
The Southern Forest Resource Assessment was initiated in May 1999
to examine the status, trends, and potential future of southern
forests. The USDA Forest Service led the effort in cooperation with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, EPA, Tennessee Valley Authority, and
southern States represented by their forestry and fish and wildlife
agencies. This Assessment addresses the sustainability of southern
forests in light of increasing urbanization and timber harvests,
changing technologies (including chip mills), forest pests, climatic
changes, and other factors that influence the region's forests. In late
2001, draft reports from the Southern Forest Resource Assessment were
made available to the public. Some of these findings will be
incorporated into the revised Forest Plan.
4. Relationship of the Forest Plan Revision for the Ozark-St. Francis
National Forests to Revision Efforts for the Mark Twain and the
Ouachita National Forests
Forest Plan revision will be conducted simultaneously on these
national forests. The Forests anticipate that a separate EIS and
revised Forest Plan will be produced for each administrative unit. The
respective Forest Supervisors have agreed to coordinate the revisions
when feasible and practical. The respective planning teams will work
together to address common issues.
5. The Role of Scoping in Revising the Land and Resource Management
Plan
This NOI includes a description of ``Preliminary Issues'' and
``Proposed Actions'' for the revision of the Forest Plan of the Ozark-
St. Francis National Forests. The Proposed Actions concern one or more
of the plan decisions identified in the purpose and need. Scoping to
receive public comments on the preliminary issues and proposed actions
will begin following the publication of this NOI. Public comments
received during this period will be used to further define the
preliminary issues that should be addressed, the Forest Plan decisions
that need to be analyzed (the ``proposed actions'' and ``need for
change''), and the range of alternatives that will be developed. For
more information on how the public can become involved during the
scoping period, see Section F of this NOI.
B. Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose for revising the Forest Plan comes from the
requirements for land and resource management planning in the National
Forest Management Act (NFMA) and the implementing regulations contained
in 36 CFR 219. According to 36 CFR 219.10(g), Forest Plans are
ordinarily revised on a 10-15 year cycle. The need to revise this
Forest Plan is also driven by the changing conditions identified in the
Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment, the Southern Forest Resource
Assessment, and ongoing monitoring and evaluation results.
C. Preliminary Issues
Preliminary issues for the Ozark-St. Francis National Forests plan
revision focus on parts of the current Forest Plan where change may be
needed. The preliminary issues were derived from: the Ozark-Highlands
Assessment, the Southern Forest Resource Assessment, internal comments
from forest managers, results of monitoring, the mid-plan review, and a
series of public meetings. The proposed actions in section D give a
detailed description of why the issues were developed.
1. Mix of Developed Recreation Opportunities
The Forest needs to determine the type of development, settings,
and services to provide in the next 15 years.
2. Public Access and Dispersed Recreation Opportunities
The Forest needs to determine the combination of land allocation
for motorized and non-motorized trail and road access to minimize
conflict among users, provide recreation opportunities, and protect the
resources.
3. Special Areas
The Forest needs to determine what special areas are needed. Some
examples are: wild and scenic rivers, special interest areas,
wilderness, scenic byways, research natural areas (RNAs), and
experimental forests.
4. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability
The Forest needs to determine what actions and land allocations are
needed to insure the health of ecosystems while considering plant,
animal, and human interaction.
5. Relationship of NFMA to Communities and Economies
The issue is how to balance the economic and social needs of the
public while managing for forest health and sustainability.
D. Proposed Actions
The following proposed actions are being considered for revision in
the Forest Plan. Each was placed into one
[[Page 21627]]
of two categories: (1) Actions appropriate for inclusion in the
revision because of laws or regulation. (2) Actions identified based on
information found in monitoring reports, insight from Forest Service
employees regarding the effectiveness of the current Plan, and public
demand.
1. Actions Appropriate for Inclusion in the Forest Plan Revision
The following topics will be included in the Forest Plan revision
because law and/or regulation require them to be considered in all
Forest Plan revisions:
a. Wild and Scenic Rivers
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 was enacted to protect and
preserve, in their free-flowing condition, certain selected rivers of
the nation and their immediate environments. The Act established the
National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, designated rivers to be
included in the system, established policy for managing designated
rivers, and prescribed a process for designating additional rivers to
the system. The Act, in Section 5(d)(1), requires consideration of
potential additions to the National System as part of the ongoing
planning process.
The 1986 Forest Plan determined the rivers identified by the
Department of the Interior through the Nationwide Rivers Inventory
(1982) were eligible for further study. In April 1987, the Forest
completed Amendment 2 to the Forest Plan, which classified each
eligible river and established direction to protect those rivers until
a suitability study could be completed. The Forest completed the
sustainability study in 1991. The FEIS and Study Report evaluated 13
rivers, and recommended six. On April 23, 1992, Congress amended the
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, adding the six recommended rivers into the
Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The Forests will review other rivers to
see if they may be eligible for further study.
b. Wilderness Recommendation
Forest Service policy and regulations in 36 CFR 219.17, require
that roadless areas be evaluated and considered for recommendation as
potential wilderness during the forest planning process. The Ozark-St.
Francis National Forests currently have five wilderness areas.
Management Area 1 of the 1986 Forest Plan provides direction for these
areas. These wildernesses were originally identified in the Roadless
Area Review and Evaluation, known as RARE II. There are approximately
73,000 acres left from RARE II not designated as wilderness. This land
was identified in a set of inventoried roadless area maps contained in
the Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation, FEIS, Volume 2, dated
November 2000. Forest Service interim direction 1920-2001-1, dated
December 14, 2001, stated lands remaining from the RARE II inventory
would be re-evaluated for roadless area characteristics during the
Forest Plan revision process. The proposed action is for the Forest to
evaluate these lands as well as any other lands that meet the criteria
for inventoried roadless areas for potential wilderness area
consideration.
c. Reevaluation of Lands Not Suited for Timber
NFMA and its implementing regulations require identification of
lands suitable for timber management. The revision process provides an
opportunity to reassess and better define lands suitable for timber
management and to account for changes in land status and uses. The
revision will also use technology (such as GIS data) that was not
available during development of the original Forest Plan. The proposed
action is to better define which lands are suited for timber production
and make appropriate adjustments.
2. Need for Change--Proposed Actions
The following proposed actions will be included in the revision
based on the following: information found in monitoring reports,
insight from Forest Service employees and their experience with the
current Plan, new direction and policy, the results from the Ozark-
Highlands Assessment, and a series of public meetings.
Ecosystem Sustainability
a. Oak Decline and Oak Mortality: Oak Decline is occurring
throughout the oak component of the forest due to advanced age, low
site index, and three years of drought. These factors have led to an
unprecedented insect epidemic of red oak borer, which has caused
significant mortality on approximately 300,000 acres.
At present the primary areas of mortality are located on the
Pleasant Hill, Bayou, and Boston Mountain Ranger Districts. Trees are
being killed on all sites and in all age classes due to the epidemic
proportions of the insect population. The Forest has approximately
700,000 acres of mature hardwood forest. Red oaks occur in about 95% of
the hardwood forest. The Forest Plan does not address oak decline or
mortality. The proposed action is to develop management plan direction
to improve forest health and restore the oak ecosystem.
b. Silvicultural Practices: During plan development for the 1986
Forest Plan and during the appeal to the Plan in 1991, the public
raised many questions concerning the types of silvicultural systems
being proposed. At that time, there was little in the way of published
research to support the effectiveness of silvicultural practices on the
Ozark-St. Francis National Forests. Since that time, much has been
learned. Monitoring has provided valuable insight for determining what
does and does not work regarding reforestation practices. Research
conducted through the Southern Research Station and the Ouachita/Ozark
NFs has improved our understanding of shade tolerance, species
composition, and stand dynamics. In addition, an increased emphasis on
prescribed fire and the development of new herbicides with better
effectiveness require evaluation for inclusion in this plan revision.
The proposed action is to revise and update silvicultural practices
available to forest managers.
c. Management Area Boundaries: The current Forest Plan divided the
Forest into eight management areas based on similar management
direction. The proposed action is to re-evaluate the effectiveness of
these designations.
d. Ecological Monitoring: Since the 1986 Forest Plan, knowledge of
ecological interactions has grown. Strategies for monitoring and
evaluating effects of forest management on ecosystems need to be re-
evaluated in light of increased knowledge. Revisions of these
strategies would include revising the list of Management Indicator
Species (MIS). The proposed action is to revise the monitoring
requirements.
e. Wildlife Management Practices: The knowledge about managing
wildlife from an ecological perspective has increased since the 1986
Forest Plan. Restoration of certain ecosystems through timber
management and prescribed fire could supplement or replace the current
food plot concept. Forest age class distribution is heavily weighted
toward the older age classes, which in turn has negatively affected
wildlife species dependent upon early and mid-seral habitat. Loss of
the red oak on much of the Forest will negatively affect species
dependent upon mast. Silvicultural prescriptions designed to balance
age classes, re-established the red oak, and create early seral habitat
need to be considered. The proposed action is to develop wildlife
management practices incorporating ecological concepts.
[[Page 21628]]
f. Prescribed Burning: The 1986 Plan did not recognize fire
dependent ecosystems. It is now recognized that fire played a
significant role in the development of the vegetation on the Ozark-St.
Francis National Forests. Landscape scale burning is a common practice
for many forests today. This technique is more efficient and
incorporates the concepts of ecosystem management in sustaining forest
health. In order to burn larger areas, some of the standards in the
Plan need to be reviewed. The proposed action is to provide for
landscape scale burning and to recognize fire as a management tool
needed to sustain the forest.
g. Riparian Areas: Areas next to lakes, perennial, ephemeral, and
intermittent streams on the Ozark-St. Francis National Forests are
important for protecting water quality, fish, and other aquatic
resources. Riparian areas are complex ecosystems that provide food,
habitat, and movement corridors for both water and land animal
communities. Streamside management zones (SMZs) are needed to help
minimize nonpoint source pollution to surface waters, and manage these
important areas. The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests' current
direction as outlined in Amendment 5 of the Forest Plan is hard to
implement for ephemeral streams. The proposed action is to revise the
Plan to incorporate riparian area management direction and to insure
SMZ standards can be implemented.
h. Natural Processes: During the past 15 years, the Forest has
experienced a number of catastrophic events such as fire, windstorms,
floods, and insect damage. It is recognized that although they appear
catastrophic, these events are part of natural processes. The current
Forest Plan does not provide any direction or guidance for addressing
these events. The proposed action is to provide management guidelines
that work with natural processes and recognize how catastrophic
disturbances can contribute to forest health and productivity.
Recreation Management: The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests are
managed to provide a variety of recreational opportunities within a
wide range of settings. The demand for new recreational opportunities
including OHV/motorcycle use rock climbing, horseback riding, canoeing,
kayaking, and full-service campsites has increased dramatically in the
past decade. Trends indicate traditional recreational opportunities,
including hunting, fishing, hiking, and primitive camping are expected
to continue in popularity. Direction is needed to address trail
compatibility with other uses and where these uses should occur.
Customer satisfaction needs to be a monitoring tool. Many areas are
being used beyond capacity and resource damage is occurring. The Limits
of Acceptable Change (LAC) process could be applied to scenic rivers,
special areas, and heavily used dispersed areas. The proposed action is
to provide new direction that responds to demand, demographics,
marketing strategy, and recreational business management principles.
Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS): ROS is used to classify
varieties of outdoor recreational opportunities. The Forest Plan
references ROS acreages, but does not use it to describe different
settings or opportunities. ROS can be part of the description of the
desired future condition (DFC). It can also be used for allocating and
separating conflicting or competing uses. Establishing ROS will help
with travel management planning, which influences the opportunities for
various activities. The proposed action is to identify the ROS
allocation for each area of the Forest.
Scenery Management: The 1974 Visual Quality Objective System (VQO)
used in the Forest Plan needs to be replaced with the Scenery
Management System (SMS). VQO used scenery to mitigate the effects of
management actions. SMS recognizes scenery as a resource. SMS will
establish overall resource goals and objectives to monitor the scenic
resource. The proposed action is to implement SMS and recognize scenery
as a resource.
Public Access and Dispersed Recreation: A number of roads have been
obliterated or closed in the last decade using earthen mounds, gates,
and signs. The current Forest Plan off-highway-vehicle (OHV) direction
prohibits cross-country travel. In the past year, there has been a
renewed emphasis to enforce the current policy. The closing of roads
and emphasis on enforcing the OHV policy has received much attention.
Closing areas to motorized use affects traditional access that many
perceive as reducing recreational opportunities. Others in the public
want areas to be managed as non-motorized uses to increase
opportunities for solitude. Forest Service concerns include lack of
budgets to maintain the current road system, impacts to the soil and
water resources, and impacts to wildlife populations and habitat. The
proposed action is to determine the combination of land allocation for
motorized and non-motorized trail opportunities and road access to
minimize conflict among users, provide recreation opportunities, and
protect the resources.
Special Areas
a. Special Interest Areas: The 1986 Forest Plan designated
Management Area 7 as Special Interest Areas (SIAs). These areas total
approximately 23,000 acres and have unique scenic, geological,
botanical, or cultural values. The proposed action is to identify
potential additional special interest areas.
b. Scenic Byways: The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests have six
scenic byways. Each of these has unique characteristics, which need to
be maintained. Corridor managements objectives need to be defined. This
may include such things as turnout lanes, vistas, and vegetation
management guidelines. There may be other highways that need
consideration. The proposed action is for the Plan to provide direction
that will protect and enhance the qualities of the scenic byways and
determine if other byways should be nominated.
c. Other Special Areas: Other special areas on the Forests include
Research Natural Areas (RNAs) and experimental forests. The current
Plan has two RNAs: Turkey Ridge (373 acres) on the St. Francis National
Forest and Dismal Hollow (2,077 acres) on the Ozark National Forest.
The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests also have two experimental
forests, the 700-acre Henry Koen Experimental Forest and the 4,200-acre
Sylamore Experimental Forest. Both of these areas are administered by
the Southern Research Station (SRS). The need for additional RNAs and
the continued need for experimental forests will be determined by the
revision in coordination with the SRS.
Lands and Special Uses: The current Plan outlined a schedule of
proposed land acquisitions and identified them on a map. Experience
over the last 15 years has shown this to be too restrictive.
Unanticipated acquisition and disposal opportunities have occurred over
the last 15 years. The Plan should provide broad direction on
acquisition and disposal goals, objectives, and priorities. The process
needs to be streamlined to meet public expectations. Lack of funding
for landlines is leading to many unsolved trespass cases and makes ROW
(right-of-way) acquisition difficult. There are opportunities to
consolidate corridors in special uses for electric lines and other
utilities. The proposed action is to provide better direction for lands
and special uses.
[[Page 21629]]
E. Preliminary Alternatives
The actual alternatives presented in the DEIS will portray a full
range of responses to the significant issues. The DEIS will examine the
effects of implementing strategies to achieve different desired future
conditions and will develop possible management objectives and
opportunities that would move the forests toward those desired
conditions. A preferred alternative will be identified in the DEIS. The
range of alternatives presented in the DEIS will include one that
continues current management direction and others that will address the
range of issues developed in the scoping process.
F. Involving the Public
The objective in the public involvement process is to create an
atmosphere of openness where all members of the public feel free to
share information with the Forest Service on a regular basis. All parts
of this process will be structured to maintain this openness. The
Forest Service is seeking information, comments, and assistance from
individuals, organization, tribal governments, and federal, state, and
local agencies that may be interested in or affected by the proposed
action (36 CFR 219.6).
Public participation will be solicited by notifying (in person and/
or by mail) known interested and affected publics. News releases will
be used to inform the public of various steps of the revision process
and locations of public involvement opportunities. Public participation
opportunities include written comments, open houses, focus groups, and
collaborative forums.
Public participation will be sought throughout the revision process
but will be particularly important at several points along the way. The
first formal opportunity to comment is during the scoping process (40
CFR 150.7). Scoping includes: (1) Identifying additional potential
issues (other than those previously described); (2) from these,
identifying significant issues, those which have been covered by prior
environmental review or those which are non-significant for the plan
revision; (3) exploring additional alternatives; and (4) identifying
potential environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives
(i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects). Three public meetings
are scheduled during the scoping process.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 13, 2002............................. Russellville, AR.
June 18, 2002............................. Jasper, AR.
June 20, 2002............................. Springdale, AR.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Planning Regulations
The Department of Agriculture published new planning regulations on
November 9, 2000. A USDA Forest Service review of this planning rule
identified concerns with the ability to implement several provisions of
the 2000 rule. There are also lawsuits challenging the 2000 rule that
may affect its implementation.
To address these problems, the Chief of the Forest Service has
started a process to develop a revision to the November 2000 planning
rule. On May 10, 2001, Secretary Veneman signed an interim final rule
allowing Forest Plan amendments or revisions initiated before May 9,
2002, to proceed under the new planning rule (November 2000) or under
the 1982 planning regulations. The Ozark-St. Francis National Forests
will proceed under the 1982 planning regulations pending future
direction in revised regulations.
H. Release and Review of the EISs
The DEIS is expected to be filed with the EPA and to be available
for public comment by September 2004. At that time, the EPA will
publish a notice of availability of the DEIS in the Federal Register.
The comment period will be 3 months from the date the EPA publishes the
notice of availability in the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the
environmental review process. Reviewers of the DEIS 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
DEIS stage but that are not raised until after completion of the FEIS
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 3-month comment period
so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the
Federal Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and
respond to them in the FEIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed actions, comments on the DEIS 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 DEIS 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 NEPA at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
After the comment period on the DEIS ends, the comments will be
analyzed, considered, and responded to by the Forest Service in
preparing the FEIS. The scheduled completion of the FEIS is by
September 2005. The Responsible Official will consider the comments,
responses, and environmental consequences discussed in the FEIS
together with all applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making
a decision regarding revision. The Responsible Official will document
the decision and reasons for the decision in a Record of Decision. This
decision may be subject to appeal in accordance with 36 CFR 217.
Dated: April 25, 2002.
R. Gray Pierson,
Acting Deputy Regional Forester.
[FR Doc. 02-10778 Filed 4-30-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2002/05/01 EST