East Beaver Creek Timber Sale and Prescribed Burning Project, Targhee National Forest, Clark County, ID

The Targhee National Forest Revised Land Management Plan was approved in 1997. One of the decisions in the Revised Plan was to allow for the production and utilization of wood fiber from certain areas of the Forest. The geographic area where the proposed action would take place has primarily a prescription of timber management with emphasis on big game security (5.1.4b). Prescriptions for other lands in the area are described below. Aquatic Influence Zones (2.8.3)--Management emphasis is directed at the application of ecological knowledge to restore and maintain the health of these areas in ways that also produce desired resource values, products, protection, restoration, enhancement, interpretation, and appreciation of these areas. Visual Quality Maintenance (2.1.2)--This prescription emphasizes maintaining the existing visual quality within major travel corridors with quality natural vistas, while allowing livestock production, and other compatible commodity outputs. There is no scheduled timber harvesting. No scheduled harvests means timber removed from these areas does not contribute toward the Forests annual allowable sale quantity. Initial public involvement will include mailing maps and a project description to interested parties to solicit comments on the proposal. Preliminary issues include: water quality, fisheries, elk habitat, and motorized access by the public. Additional opportunity to comment on the project will occur on the draft Environmental Impact Statement (draft EIS). The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency and available for public review in August 1998. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in the Federal Register. At the same time, copies of the draft EIS will be distributed to interested and affected

agencies, organizations, tribes, and members of the public for their review and comment. It is very important that those interested in the proposed action participate at that time. 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 reviewers' position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, (9th Circuit, 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 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. 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 scheduled to be completed in November 1998. In the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments 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 the decisions on this proposal.

Responsible Official

Jerry B. Reese, Forest Supervisor, is the responsible official. As responsible official, he will document the selected alternative for the East Beaver Creek Timber Sale and Prescribed Burning Project EIS and his rationale in a Record of Decision. The decision for the East Beaver Creek Timber Sale and Prescribed Burning Project will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR part 215).

Dated: April 9, 1998. Jerry B. Reese, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 98-10270 Filed 4-17-98; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-M