Jump to main content.

Jarbidge Canyon Analysis; Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Elko County, Nevada

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 
[Federal Register: March 6, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 44)]
[Notices]
[Page 10121-10122]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06mr02-12]

========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
 
Jarbidge Canyon Analysis; Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Elko 
County, Nevada

AGENCY: USDA Forest Service.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will 
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate the environmental 
effects of several alternatives for road reconstruction and maintenance 
and potential watershed and aquatic habitat improvement projects in the 
Canyon of the West Fork of the Jarbidge River. The Forest Service will 
prepare the EIS in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection agency, Elko 
County Commission, Nevada Division of Wildlife, Nevada Division of 
Environmental Quality.

DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be 
received by April 15, 2002, to ensure timely consideration.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Jarbidge EIS Team, Humboldt-
Toiyabe National Forest, 2035 Last Chance Road, Elko, NV 89801.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct questions about the project and 
the preparation of the EIS to Jim Winfrey, Project Team Leader, 
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, P.O. Box 539, Ely, NV 89301. 
Telephone: 775-289-3031.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under the settlement agreement in United States v. John Carpenter 
et al. The Forest Service agreed not to contest Elko County's claim 
that it has a right of way for the South Canyon Road. In exchange, Elko 
County agreed no to do any roadwork on the South Canyon Road without 
Forest Service authorization. In addition, Elko County proposed several 
road and watershed improvement projects to protect and enhance the west 
fork of the Jarbridge River. The Forest Service agreed to complete any 
necessary analysis under NEPA and ESA to authorize proposed work by 
Elko County.
    The Forest Service has received no specific proposals from Elko 
County. However, the Forest Service believes that is it is important to 
begin analyzing alternatives for road reconstruction and watershed 
improvements so they can be implemented as soon as practicable. Elko 
County will be invited to participate as a cooperating agency and can 
submit a proposal and it will be included in this analysis.
    The proposed projects are located between the Idaho/Nevada 
Stateline and south to the Upper Fox Creek Bridge on the Jarbidge 
River. The approximate length of the road in the project area is 11 
miles. By combining the analysis of the proposed projects along the 
length of the river the Forest will be better positioned to address 
cumulative effects of these projects on the river environment. This 
project area was defined in the Settlement Agreement. Within the 
project area there are opportunities for improvements to the 
terrestrial and aquatic environment that will be addressed.
    Preliminary internal scoping and comments received in two earlier 
analyses have identified two issues, which will be addressed in the 
analysis process. The following list of issues is not intended to be 
all-inclusive: (1) The presence of bull trout that are federally listed 
as threatened. (2) The location of most of the proposed work within the 
flood plain of the river. These issues, and others identified during 
the scoping process will be used to develop alternatives to the 
proposed action. In addition, the No Action alternative will be 
considered in the analysis.

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of and need for action is to improve water quality and 
aquatic habitat while preserving and improving access along the road. 
This environmental document will disclose the environmental effects of 
the projects considered for implementation.

Proposed Action

    To implement a set of proposed projects designed to improve the 
environment of the Jarbidge River Watershed. These projects are 
primarily focused on reconstructing portions of the road in the canyon 
bottom to reduce the direct input of sediment into the river from the 
road, to increase shade along the river and increase woody debris. The 
proposed action will be to authorize Elko County, where necessary, and 
allow the Forest Service to proceed with implementation of these 
projects.

Decision To Be Made and Responsible Official

    The Responsible official will decide how Elko County may be 
authorized to reconstruct the South Canyon Road; and determine which 
road and watershed improvement projects to implement in a manner that 
adequately protects the surrounding land and aquatic resources
    The Forest Service is the lead agency for this project and Robert 
L. Vaught; Forest Supervisor is the responsible official. Applicable 
laws, Forest Service regulations and the Humboldt National Forest Land 
and Resource Management Plan (1986 as amended) will be taken into 
account throughout the analysis.

Scoping Process

    As part of the scoping process, the Forest Service is seeking 
information and comments from Federal, State, County and local agencies 
and other individuals or organizations that may be interested in or 
affected by the proposed actions. Scoping meetings will be held between 
5 pm and 7 pm at the Forest service offices in Elko NV, March 18; Twin 
Falls ID, March 19; Boise ID, March 20; and Reno NV, March 21. This 
input will be used in preparation of the draft EIS and final EIS. The 
Scoping process will last 45 days from the publication of this NOI in 
the Federal Register.

Coordination With Other Agencies

    Several government agencies will be invited to participate in this 
project as cooperating or participating agencies. These agencies 
include, but are not limited to, Bureau of Land Management, DOI U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Nevada 
Division of Environmental Protection, Nevada Division of Wildlife, and 
Elko County. Participation by Elko

[[Page 10122]]

County will be required in the implementation of these projects.

Commenting

    The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and be available for review in July 2002. At 
that time, EPA will publish a Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS 
in the Federal Register. The comment period of the Draft EIS will be at 
least 45 days from the date the EPA's Notice of Availability appears 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 
the draft EIS 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 environmental impact 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, 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 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 or 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.

Robert L. Vaught,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 02-5277 Filed 3-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.