[Federal Register: May 17, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 96)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27555-27557]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17my01-19]
[[Page 27555]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 219
National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning;
Extension of Compliance Deadline
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department is proposing to extend for one year the date
specified in 36 CFR 219.35(b) by which all land and resource management
plan amendments and revisions would be subject to the new planning
regulations adopted November 9, 2000. The Department has determined
that the Forest Service is not sufficiently prepared to fully implement
the rule agencywide. Without relief from the dates established in 36
CFR 219.35(b), the agency will experience serious disruption in its
planning processes with attendant confusion of employees and the
public. Such disruption and confusion would be contrary to the public
interest. In addition, serious concerns have arisen regarding some of
the provisions of the new planning rule, and an extension of the
compliance date will allow the Department to review these provisions
carefully and to identify any adjustments that may be necessary.
In addition to this proposed rule, the Department is also adopting
an interim final rule to immediately extend the compliance date in 36
CFR 219.35(b) to May 9, 2002. This interim final rule, published
elsewhere in this part of today's Federal Register, will remain in
effect until the Department adopts a final rule following receipt and
consideration of comments on this proposed rule.
DATES: Comments must be received in writing by July 16, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Content Analysis Team, USDA Forest
Service Attention: NFMA Planning Regulations Proposed Extension, 200
East Broadway, Room 301, P.O. Box 7669, Missoula, MT 59807. Send e-mail
comments to mailroom_wo_caet@fs.fed.us and indicate ``Planning Rule
Extension'' in the subject line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Barone, Planning Specialist,
Forest Service, USDA; Telephone (202) 205-1019.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 9, 2000, the Secretary of
Agriculture adopted a final rule, which revised the land and resource
management planning rules at 36 CFR part 219 (65 FR 67514). The new
rule established requirements for the implementation, monitoring,
evaluation, amendment, and revision of land and resource management
plans. Under the requirements of Sec. 219.35, all amendments and
revisions to land and resource management plans must be prepared
pursuant to the new planning rules, unless those amendments and
revisions were initiated before November 9, 2000, and a notice of
availability of the required environmental disclosure document (that
is, a draft environmental impact statement or an environmental
assessment) is published before May 9, 2001.
The Need for Extension
Approximately 34 forests are currently revising land and resource
management plans under the 1982 planning regulations (47 FR 43026,
September 30, 1982) as amended (48 FR 29122; June 24, 1983 and 48 FR
40383; September 7, 1983). About 20 of these forests have conducted
extensive public involvement activities under the 1982 planning
regulations, but are not able to complete the necessary environmental
disclosure documents by May 9, 2001. The new planning regulations
require substantially different analyses to be completed prior to
initiating revisions and engaging the public in the revision process.
The November 2000 regulations also require different procedures for
collaborating with the public in the revision process. Unless the May
9, 2001, date is extended, these ongoing revision efforts must be
halted, and these forests then will have to re-engage the public using
the different procedures and analyses of the new rule. The Department
believes the resulting confusion, disruption of the agency's programs,
and additional expenditure of public funds are unreasonable,
unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest.
Another immediate concern is that many forests need to amend their
land and resource management plans within the next few months to
implement site-specific projects that support the objectives of the
National Fire Plan, which was developed in response to the catastrophic
wildfires of last summer. These projects include activities to reduce
high-hazard fuels near urban and suburban areas and to restore and
rehabilitate areas burned last year. Because the new regulations are
less well understood, and, in some respects, more complicated than the
1982 regulations, the Department is concerned that it may not be
possible for forests to complete the necessary amendments in time to
implement those projects before this year's fire season begins.
Agency Readiness To Implement New Rule
In addition to the foregoing pressing concerns, the Department has
determined that, despite diligent efforts, the Forest Service is not
sufficiently prepared to fully implement the new planning rule
agencywide. Many employees, retirees, elected officials, and
representatives of external organizations interested in National Forest
System management have expressed serious concerns to the new
Administration regarding the agency's ability to implement some of the
provisions of the new planning rule, such as ecological sustainability
and species viability. The agency's ability to promptly implement the
planning regulations has also been called into question through pending
litigation. A coalition of environmental organizations (Citizens for
Better Forestry et al. v. USFS (N.D. Calif.)) and a coalition of timber
and grazing interests (American Forest Paper Association et al. v.
Veneman (D. D.C.)) have filed separate lawsuits challenging the
legality of the new planning regulations on a variety of grounds.
Many of the topics addressed by the new rule are complex; many new
analytical requirements are imposed; several new terms are incorporated
into the planning process, some with little explanation of their
meaning or use, such as critical watersheds. As a result, additional
implementing direction, new training programs, and new types of
technical support and skills are needed to ensure consistent and
efficient implementation of the new rule. While the agency has
undertaken significant efforts to develop the policies, procedures, and
training programs needed to implement the new rule, these tasks not
only have not been completed, but they also require substantial
additional work before they are sufficient to guide the workforce in
implementing the new planning rule. Accordingly, an extension of the
date in Sec. 219.35(b) is necessary for the agency to complete
policies, training, and tools needed to effectively implement the new
planning rule, and for the Department to have adequate opportunity to
review these provisions carefully and to identify any adjustments that
may be needed.
In light of these findings, the Department has directed the agency
to review the new planning rule and
[[Page 27556]]
recommend ways to address these and any other concerns. If the agency
determines that additional revisions are needed, a second proposed rule
incorporating the recommended changes will be published in the Federal
Register for public comment at a later date. Given the liklihood of
additional change to the November 2000 rule, it would be unreasonable
to halt amendments and revisions already begun under the 1982 rule,
resume those efforts under the new procedures of the November 2000
regulations, and then change the process again if revisions to the new
rule are subsequently proposed and adopted.
Option To Implement New Rule
While most units are not prepared to fully implement the November
2000 rule, this proposed rule would not prohibit forests from preparing
amendments or revisions of land and resource management plans under the
November 2000 rule. In fact, there are several forests that have begun
revisions to their land and resource management plans under the
November 2000 rule, and these planning efforts may provide valuable
information about implementing the new rule.
Conclusion
For the reasons identified in this preamble, the Department is
proposing to extend the date by which land and resource management plan
amendments or revisions must comply with the November 2000 planning
rule. In Sec. 219.35(b), the date is proposed to be extended from May
9, 2001, to May 9, 2002. In addition to this extension, this proposed
rule would include at Sec. 219.35(b) the interpretation of the term
``initiated'' as published in an interpretive rule on January 10, 2001
(66 FR 1864) to clarify this term as it applies to amendments or
revisions initiated prior to May 9, 2002. The proposed changes to
Sec. 219.35(b) are also fully consistent with the other provisions of
the interpretive rule.
This proposed rule is necessary to grant relief to the
approximately 20 units that have begun plan revisions under the 1982
regulations but could not meet the May 9, 2001, deadline. The proposed
rule is also needed to facilitate timely implementation of site-
specific projects that support the National Fire Plan. The Department
is simultaneously publishing this extension in an interim final rule
effective immediately. Nevertheless, the Department also believes the
public should have an opportunity to comment on the modification of
Sec. 219.35(b) which would extend the period during which the 1982
planning rule could be used.
Regulatory Certification
Regulatory Impact
This is not a significant rule. This proposed rule will not have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy, or adversely
affect productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health
or safety, or State or local governments. This proposed rule will not
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency, or raise
new legal or policy issues. Finally, this proposed rule will not alter
the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients of such programs.
Accordingly, this proposed rule is not subject to Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) review under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, this
proposed rule has been considered in light of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This proposed rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities as defined by the Act. This proposed rule will not impose
recordkeeping requirements; will not affect their competitive position
in relation to large entities; and will not affect their cash flow,
liquidity, or ability to remain in the market.
Environmental Impact
This proposed rule has no direct or indirect effect on the
environment, but merely proposes to extend the date by which amendments
and revisions of land and resource management plans may be continued
under the 1982 planning rule, as well as the date by which plans must
conform to the November 2000 rule. The planning regulation itself deals
with the development and adoption of Forest Service land and resource
management plan decisions as well as procedures for developing site-
specific decisions that may include decisions regarding the occupancy
and use of National Forest System land. An environmental assessment was
completed on the November 2000 planning rule, with a finding that the
rule would have no significant impact on the environment. Section 31.1b
of Forest Service Handbook 1909.15 (57 FR 43180; September 18, 1992)
excludes from documentation in an environmental assessment or impact
statement rules, regulations or policies to establish Service-wide
administrative procedures, program processes, or instructions. Based on
the nature and scope of this rulemaking and the procedural nature of 36
CFR part 219, the agency has determined that this proposed rule falls
within this category of actions and that no extraordinary circumstances
exist which would require preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
No Takings Implications
This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12360, and it has
been determined that the proposed rule will not pose the risk of a
taking of private property, as the proposed rule is limited to
adjustment of the compliance date in the new planning rule.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule (1) does not preempt State and
local laws and regulations that conflict with or impede its full
implementation; (2) has no retroactive effect; and (3) will not require
administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court
challenging its provisions.
Unfunded Mandates
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2
U.S.C. 1531-1538), which the President signed into law on March 22,
1995, the agency has assessed the effects of this proposed rule on
State, local and tribal governments and the private sector. This
proposed rule will not compel the expenditure of $100 million or more
by any State, local, or tribal government or anyone in the private
sector. Therefore, a statement under section 202 of the Act is not
required.
Federalism and Consultation and Coordination With Tribal Governments
The Department has considered this proposed rule under the
requirements of Executive Orders 12612 and 13132 and concluded that the
rule does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Therefore, the agency has determined that no further
assessment of federalism implications is necessary at this time.
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications as defined in
Executive Order 13175 and, therefore, advance consultation with tribes
is not required.
[[Page 27557]]
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public
This proposed rule does not contain any recordkeeping or reporting
requirements or other information collection requirements as defined in
5 CFR part 1320. Accordingly, the review provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 219
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact
statements, Indians, Intergovernmental relations, Forest and forest
products, National forests, Natural resources, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Science and technology.
Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 219 of
title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 219--PLANNING
Subpart A--National Forest System Land and Resource Management
Planning
1. The authority citation for subpart A continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; and Secs. 6 and 15, 90 Stat. 2949,
2952, 2958 (16 U.S.C. 1604, 1613).
2. Revise paragraph (b) of Sec. 219.35 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.35 Transition.
* * * * *
(b) Until May 9, 2002, a responsible official may elect to continue
or to initiate new plan amendments or revisions under the 1982 planning
regulations in effect prior to November 9, 2000 (See 36 CFR Parts 200
to 299, Revised as of July 1, 2000), or the responsible official may
conduct the amendment or revision process in conformance with the
provisions of this subpart. For the purposes of this paragraph, the
reference to a plan amendment or revision initiated before May 9, 2002,
means that the agency has issued a Notice of Intent or other public
notification announcing the commencement of a plan amendment or
revision as provided for in the Council on Environmental Quality
regulations at 40 CFR 1501.7 or in Forest Service Handbook 1909.15,
Environmental Policy and Procedures Handbook, section 11.
* * * * *
Dated: May 10, 2001.
Ann M. Veneman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-12385 Filed 5-14-01; 2:27 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
Go to the Top