Mill Creek Timber Sales and Related Activities, Rogue River National Forest Jackson County, OR

The Mill Creek Timber Sales and Related

Activities Project will take place within the following sub-watersheds within the Upper Rogue River watershed: Barr Creek, Ginkgo Creek, Union Creek, Upper and Lower Mill Creek, and Castle Creek. Only Forest Service managed lands would be treated. The project area is approximately 45 air miles north of Medford, Oregon. It is bounded on the north by Castle Creek, on the west by State Highway 62, on the south by Red Blanket Creek, and on the east by Crater Lake National Park. The Forest Service is proposing to implement activities which include, in part, one or more timber sales involving approximately 7,500 acres of harvest units. Silvicultural prescriptions include: density management of overstocked stands of trees (approximately 3,800 acres); treating mature stands with small group selections or even-aged management (approximately 2,000 acres); and, density management of small, younger stands for forest health and stand development (approximately 1,700 acres). Other projects include road decommissioning (approximately 22 miles), prescribed fire for wildlife habitat improvement and fuels reduction (approximately 500 acres), density management of stands of young trees less than six inches in diameter (approximately 2,000 acres), and other wildlife improvement projects. Minor amounts of new road construction or reconstruction may be necessary to access harvest units. these activities are proposed on Matrix lands in the Northwest Forest Plan. Incidental treatments, not including timber harvest, are proposed within Riparian Reserves. The Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action is to plan timber sales and associated road and vegetation management activities to implement management direction from the Rogue River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and the Northwest Forest Plan and to manage for ecosystem needs. The Forest Service will consider issues with the Proposed Action, and develop additional alternatives to the Proposed Action that respond to the significant issues. The no-action alternative will also be considered. Public participation will be important during the analysis. Reviewers may refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the national Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1501.7. The Forest Service will seek written concerns and comments regarding the Proposed Action from Federal, State, and local agencies, any affected Indian tribes, and other individuals who may be interested in or affected by the Proposed Action. This input will be used to develop additional alternatives. The Draft EIS is expected to be filled with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and be available for review by April 2000. The comment period for the Draft EIS will be 45 days from the date that the EPA publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. Comments received in response to this notice, 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, however, those who submit anonymous comments will not have standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR part 215. 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 Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality. Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that, under the FOIA, confidentially 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 maybe resubmitted with or without name and address within a specified number of days. 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, a reviewer of a Draft EIS must structure their participation in the environmental review process of the proposal so that it is specific, meaningful, and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 533 (1978). also, environmental objections that could be raised at the Draft EIS stage, but that are not raised until after the 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, 409 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 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 inadequacy of the Draft EIS or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the EIS. 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. After the 45 day comment period ends on the Draft EIS, comments will be considered and analyzed by the Agency in preparing the Final EIS. The Final EIS is scheduled for release by August 2000. In the Final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to the 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 the decision regarding the proposal. The Forest Service is the lead agency. The Responsible Official is Joel King, Prospect District Ranger. The Responsible Official will consider the 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 in making a decision regarding the Mill Creek Timber Sales and Related Activities. The Responsible Official will document the decision and rationale in the Record of Decision. The decision will be subject to appeal by the general public under Forest Service appeal regulations (36 CFR part 215).

Dated: November 22, 1999. Joel T. King, Prospect District Ranger. [FR Doc. 99-31346 Filed 12-13-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-M