[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 96 (Thursday, May 17, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27555-27557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12385]



  Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2001 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[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 [email protected] 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