Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 160 (Thursday, August 20, 2026)

[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 160 (Thursday, August 20, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53827-53832]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-16965]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

36 CFR Part 294

RIN 0596-AD66

Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation

AGENCY: Forest Service, Agriculture (USDA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA or Department) is
proposing to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (2001
Roadless Rule), which established broad prohibitions on road
construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting within
inventoried roadless areas on National Forest System lands. The intent
of this proposed action is to reduce regulatory burden and return
decisionmaking for the management of inventoried roadless areas to the
land management planning process at the individual national forest
level. Rescission of the national-level prohibitions provides
responsible officials with flexibility to better guide management of
National Forest System lands and respond to changing local resource
conditions. The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act
of 1974, as amended by the National Forest Management Act of 1976, and
the associated land management planning processes and plans are the
appropriate and effective mechanisms to guide sustainable, integrated
management of the resources within the plan areas in the context of the
broader landscape, giving due consideration to the relative values of
the various resources in particular areas. The USDA invites public
comment on this proposed rule, the associated draft environmental
impact statement, and cost benefit analysis, which are being published
simultaneously.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by September 21, 2026.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by RIN 0596-AD66, should be sent via
one of the following methods:
Electronically (preferred): Through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal, https://www.regulations.gov, identified by docket
number FS-2025-0001 or RIN 0596-AD66. Follow the instructions for
sending comments; or
Mail: Hardcopy letters must be submitted to the Director,
Ecosystem Management Coordination, 201 14th Street SW, Mailstop 1108,
Washington, DC 20250-1124.
Comments should be confined to issues pertinent to the proposed
rule, should explain the reasons for any recommended changes, and
should reference the specific section and wording being addressed,
where possible. All timely comments, including names and addresses when
provided, will be placed in the record and will be available for public
inspection and copying. Comments may be viewed on the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. In the search box,
enter ``RIN 0596-AD66'' and click the ``Search'' button. For this
reason, please do not include in your comments information of a
confidential nature, such as sensitive personal information or
proprietary information. If you send an email comment, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available for
public viewing. Please note that if your comment includes a standard
confidentiality disclaimer--like the automatic notices added to some
emails--we will still treat your comment as public and may make it
available for anyone to read. A summary of this rule may be found
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua White, Acting Director,
Ecosystem Management Coordination, at the following phone number: 202-
205-0650. Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech
disability may call 711 to reach the Telecommunications Relay Service
and provide the phone number of the person named as a point of contact
for further information.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 12, 2001, the Forest Service promulgated the Roadless
Area Conservation Rule (66 FR 3244) at 36 CFR 294 Subpart B to provide
long-term protection for 58.5 million acres of inventoried roadless
areas across the National Forest System. The 2001 Roadless Rule
generally prohibits road construction, road reconstruction, and timber
harvesting in these areas, subject to limited exceptions.
Since its promulgation, the 2001 Roadless Rule has been the subject
of extensive and complex litigation. The rule has been enjoined and
reinstated on multiple occasions. Notably, a 2006 ruling by the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California set aside a 2005
replacement rule (the State Petitions Rule) and reinstated the 2001
Roadless Rule. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed
this decision in California ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 575 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2009). Consequently, 36 CFR 294
Subpart B, as it was originally promulgated, is the version currently
in effect, although the text published in the Code of Federal
Regulations has not been amended to remove the State Petitions Rule to
reflect this judicial history. In the intervening years, state-specific
rules were developed for Idaho (36 CFR 294 Subpart C) and Colorado (36
CFR 294 Subpart D) in response to petitions received under the
Administrative Procedure Act at 5 U.S.C. 553(e) and Department
regulations at 7 CFR 1.28, and these state-specific rules remain in
effect.

Purpose and Need for Action

The Department is proposing this rule rescission to reduce
regulatory burden and return land management decisionmaking for
inventoried roadless areas to local Forest Service officials. In 2001,
the Roadless Area Conservation Rule established a single, nationwide
set of prohibitions intended to provide lasting protection for
inventoried roadless areas within the National Forest System in the
context of multiple-use management. Today, the Department believes
increased management flexibility in the administration of these lands
is needed

[[Page 53828]]

to better meet the multiple-use mission and provide benefits to the
American people. This approach prioritizes decisionmaking by local
Forest Service officials informed by Tribes, State, and local
communities. As explained below, there is a need to increase local
management flexibility and, where necessary, allow for active
management to respond to changing and localized conditions, such as
increasing wildfire risk, the spread of insect and disease
infestations, and the need for community protection in the wildland-
urban interface.
Under the current Administration, the Department has refocused
policies, programs, and resources on increasing rural economic
opportunity, decreasing Federal regulation, and streamlining Federal
Government services. Specifically, this deregulatory action advances
the policy objectives of Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation, to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens. In
Executive Order 14225, Immediate Expansion of American Timber
Production, the President declared that ``the United States has an
abundance of timber resources that are more than adequate to meet our
domestic timber production needs, but heavy-handed Federal policies
have prevented full utilization of these resources.'' In Executive
Order 14154, Unleashing American Energy, the President likewise
declared that ``it is in the national interest to unleash America's
affordable and reliable energy and natural resources.'' In Executive
Order 14153, Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential, the
President declared that ``it is the policy of the United States to
fully avail itself of Alaska's vast lands and resources'' and
``maximize the development and production of the natural resources
located on both Federal and State lands within Alaska.'' Consistent
with this policy, Executive Order 14153 directed the Secretary of
Agriculture to reinstate the 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule that exempted
the Tongass National Forest in Alaska from the 2001 Roadless Rule. This
proposed rescission does not mandate timber cutting or road
construction but would relieve regulatory burden relative to management
of National Forest System lands.

Rationale for the Proposal

As resource conditions and national policy have evolved, the
Department has determined that a single, national blanket approach to
the management of inventoried roadless areas taken in the 2001 Roadless
Rule constrains responsible officials from exercising the timely,
place-based discretion needed to meet the Forest Service's multiple-use
mission. In addition, evolving national priorities and changed
conditions have required more active management approaches. The 2001
Roadless Rule limited the Forest Service's ability to conduct
vegetation management within inventoried roadless areas and has
contributed to the lack of active management of the national forests,
which in turn has contributed to challenges in addressing forest health
concerns. The 2001 Roadless Rule prohibited cutting, sale, or removal
of timber--except when one of a limited set of exceptions applied. Per
the Rule's text, the use of these exceptions was ``expected to be
infrequent'' (36 CFR 294.13(b) (2001)). In addition, while exceptions
were available, their use was limited and inconsistent due to
associated reviews and approvals to demonstrate consistency with the
2001 Roadless Rule. Furthermore, the limited number of roads within
inventoried roadless areas and the inability to reconstruct or build
new roads to provide the needed access further limit management
flexibility. Taken together, the prohibitions have removed important
management tools for key areas where there are needs or opportunities
to address overgrown and fuel-loaded national forests.
This proposed rescission is intended to return primary authority
for determining the appropriate management of inventoried roadless
areas at the local level to the land management planning process
mandated by the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1600
et seq.). The National Forest Management Act requires that plans shall
assure multiple use and sustained yield of National Forest System
products and services and include coordination of outdoor recreation,
range, timber, watershed, wildlife and fish, and wilderness (16 U.S.C.
1604(e)(1)). The National Forest Management Act establishes the
requirement for the Forest Service to develop land management plans,
including direction in 16 U.S.C. 1604(a) and (b) for interdisciplinary
planning and consideration of landscape-level conditions. These
statutory requirements are implemented through the Agency's land
management planning framework, which require consideration of the plan
area in the context of the broader landscape and requires that each
plan reflects the unit's expected distinct roles and contributions to
the local area, region, and Nation. The land management planning
framework ensures each land management plan addresses similar
conservation objectives as the 2001 Roadless Rule was intended to
address, such as ecological integrity (including air, soil, and water),
sources of public drinking water, diversity of plant and animal
communities (including federally listed threatened and endangered
species), sustainable recreation, scenic character, and protection of
cultural and historic resources. At the same time, this planning
approach allows for place-based, collaborative decisionmaking that is
responsive to specific on-the-ground resource conditions, rather than a
``one-size-fits-all'' national mandate. While national-level
considerations are important, land management planning efforts by local
decisionmakers at the national forest or regional scale are best
positioned to make decisions about inventoried roadless areas because
they understand the unique ecological, economic, and social needs of
their communities.
In 2001, USDA and the Forest Service asserted that a national
prohibition was the best means to reduce conflict and potential for
incremental impacts to the ecological and social values of these areas.
Since then, conditions across National Forest System lands have changed
substantially, especially in the Western United States where many
inventoried roadless areas are located, with increasing drought,
extreme temperatures, wildfire frequency and severity, and insect and
disease outbreaks. Alongside these landscape changes, the Agency's land
management planning framework has become more adaptive, science-based,
efficient, and effective. These changes, combined with evolving
Department priorities for active forest management and deregulation,
diminish the basis for a national prohibition. The proposed rule would
return land management decisionmaking for inventoried roadless areas to
local Forest Service officials--giving them the flexibility to address
conservation and resource issues informed by input from stakeholders,
communities, and state, local, and tribal governments. Local
decisionmaking would remain subject to the substantive requirements of
the Endangered Species Act, National Forest Management Act, and other
related laws and regulations.
The Secretary of Agriculture has broad authority under statutes
such as the Organic Administration Act of 1897 and the Multiple-Use
Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 to manage the National Forest System for a
variety of uses. Just as the establishment of the 2001

[[Page 53829]]

Roadless Rule was discretionary, this proposed rule is an exercise of
discretion to determine the most appropriate process for balancing
competing values and uses in inventoried roadless areas within that
legal framework.

Scope of the Proposed Rule

The USDA proposes to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation
Rule by removing and reserving 36 CFR part 294, Subpart B. The state-
specific roadless rules for Idaho (36 CFR part 294, Subpart C) and
Colorado (36 CFR part 294, Subpart D) will not be affected by this
proposed rule and will remain in effect.
If this proposed rule is finalized, the management direction for
inventoried roadless areas would continue to be governed by the
applicable land management plans for each unit of the National Forest
System. This action does not authorize any specific ground-disturbing
projects. Nor does it require or compel the amendment or revision of
any land management plan. When this rule is implemented, the governing
land management plan could still include restrictions on road
construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting in roadless
areas within the management unit, as well as management direction that
influences when, where and how these activities may be carried out.
Further, any future proposals for timber harvesting or road
construction within an inventoried roadless area would require site-
specific compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
and other applicable laws, and would have to be consistent with the
governing land management plan. Future projects in inventoried roadless
areas will be proposed, reviewed, and approved by local Forest Service
officials.
Any State, Tribe, or other interested entity seeking to establish
roadless management provisions tailored to specific geographic or
resource conditions may submit a petition for rulemaking under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(e)) and USDA regulations at
7 CFR 1.28. The Department will consider such petitions consistent with
applicable law and policy. Federally recognized Tribes may separately
submit requests for related roadless management provisions under
government-to-government consultation. Records of such consultation
will be retained and may be referenced in future rulemaking. This
process ensures that requests for new or modified roadless management
approaches are evaluated transparently and in accordance with
established rulemaking procedures.

Summary of Potential Impacts

While the Department believes the rescission of the 2001 Roadless
Rule is an important step towards reducing regulatory burden and
returning decisionmaking to local Forest Service officials, USDA
acknowledges the near-term effects of the rescission would be bounded
by existing land management plan direction, as well as operability,
budget, and legal constraints. Where plans allow, rescission of the
2001 Roadless Rule could increase management flexibility for access
(roads), vegetation management, targeted fuels treatments, and access
for minerals or energy uses. However, management opportunities would be
modest and localized. A discussion of the potential environmental and
economic impacts is described in the draft Environmental Impact
Statement and cost benefit analysis. A summary of key considerations
follows:
Roads. Budget, conservation objectives, and physical
resource limits are expected to constrain new permanent road
construction. Following transportation planning, roads could be
constructed for a variety of administrative or multiple use benefits,
though timber harvest or other vegetation management activity would
likely create the greatest need for new roads. Any near-term permanent
road additions would be anticipated to occur on lands where current
land management plans allow them (but where the 2001 Roadless Rule
currently prohibits them)--totaling about 18.2 million acres, or 45.5
percent of the potentially affected environment. Temporary roads, if
proposed, are more likely to occur on lands within 0.5 miles of
existing roads--totaling about 11.3 million acres, or 28.3 percent of
the potentially affected environment. Permanent road construction
within the same 0.5-mile band is less likely because of costs, terrain,
and maintenance obligations.
Timber. Rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule would expand
opportunities for active forest management on lands where both
operability and plan allowances are met--totaling about 4.8 million
acres, or 16 percent of forested areas in potentially affected
inventoried roadless areas. The management flexibility or opportunities
in these areas could provide resulting benefits, aligned with land
management plan desired conditions, such as improving habitat or
reducing wildfire risk to resources. In addition, if annual timber
harvest in all those areas occurred (which is unlikely due to budgets,
unforeseen limits on operability, and market conditions), it could
result in an estimated 5 to 10 percent increase in total annual
National Forest System sawtimber harvest and $5.2 to $11.4 million per
year in revenue to the Treasury and Forest Service and $4.6 to $10.6
million per year in revenue to the timber industry. However, given the
small number of operable areas for timber harvest in roadless areas and
the large number of variables that may occur, it is difficult to
predict the potential impact rule rescission may have on timber
harvest. Increased planning flexibility may improve timber sale design
(such as more direct haul routes and access to stands that appraise
positively). This could lower delivered costs and make some sales more
feasible under current plan goals. However, any efficiency gains are
expected to be incremental and limited by road costs, maintenance
funding gaps, and the $6.9 billion deferred maintenance backlog for
roads and bridges.
Wildfire risk. While greater public access can increase
human-caused ignition potential in some locations, the 2001 Roadless
Rule's prohibitions have limited mechanical thinning options and some
fire control tactics in inventoried roadless areas. Substantial acreage
within potentially affected inventoried roadless areas has a relatively
high likelihood of burning under high intensity conditions that are
difficult to manage or could pose a risk to communities,
infrastructure, or drinking water sources. Rescinding the 2001 Roadless
Rule would increase opportunities for hazardous fuel treatments in the
wildland-urban interface, where 9.8 million acres (or 24 percent)
overlap with inventoried roadless areas, and, where justified, would
allow strategically placed roads that can improve suppression
effectiveness near communities and critical infrastructure.
Recreation. U.S. National Forests--including inventoried
roadless areas--support a wide range of recreation and tourism
activities. These lands are used by outfitters, guides, tour operators,
visitors, and the general public for recreational fishing, hunting,
hiking, bicycling, wildlife viewing, boating, and other recreation and
tourism. Under the proposed rule, there could be temporary impacts to
recreation and related industry opportunities, including noise, visible
infrastructure, and temporary closures. In the longer term, developed
and road-based recreation could expand through development of some new
permanent roads, though this expansion

[[Page 53830]]

is uncertain and anticipated to be limited due to land management
plans, budget, and resources. This expansion could increase road-based
recreation and accessibility improvements but would result in tradeoffs
with opportunities for quiet, remote and self-reliant recreation and
may increase user conflicts and result in lost economic benefits.
Losses in economic benefit to recreationists are most likely to be
associated with the operable areas of current IRAs and could be an
estimated $6.1 million annually.
Commercial Fishing and Seafood Processing. Given the small
amount of operable areas for timber harvest in roadless areas, the
proposed rule is not expected to have a significant change to the
commercial fishing or fish-processing industries. Any changes in the
long term to land management plans could result in effects to
commercial fisheries if resource conditions are affected.
Minerals and Energy. Locatable mineral exploration and
development is generally accompanied by an access right, and therefore,
there are no anticipated changes based on the proposed rule. Under this
proposed rule, there is additional flexibility for potential future
leasable mineral development (primarily oil, gas, and coal)
opportunities and it is reasonably foreseeable that some development
could occur in potentially affected inventoried roadless areas,
resulting in associated costs and benefits. However, it is anticipated
that there would be no net change, relative to baseline conditions, in
domestic leasable production under the proposed rule for domestic oil,
gas, and coal production.
Although the estimated annual economic effects span a wide range,
the additional impacts associated with the proposed rule could exceed
$100 million. Some industries, including recreation and tourism, could
experience trade-offs as a result of the proposed rule. The cost
benefit analysis discusses potential industry impacts in more detail
for timber, recreation (including tourism), commercial fishing and
seafood processing, minerals and energy. The Department is interested
in comments on the baselines and range of impacts expected from the
proposed rule across relevant industries, and additional data that
demonstrates whether these industries would experience direct effects
or distributional effects or both, with a description of the data and
analytic methods used to determine these effects.
Local responsible officials (forest supervisors and regional
foresters) would continue to have discretion to amend or revise a land
management plan. If the proposed rule were finalized, subsequent land
management plan amendments and revisions could increase the area where
timber harvest and road construction would be allowed, resulting in
additional management opportunities or impacts beyond those summarized
above. While changes to land management plans are beyond the scope of
the proposed rule, USDA nevertheless requests comment and estimates on
baselines and range of impacts considering subsequent potential changes
in land management plans.

Public Involvement

On August 29, 2025, the USDA published in the Federal Register a
notice of intent (90 FR 42179) to prepare an environmental impact
statement and rulemaking concerning the management of inventoried
roadless areas on National Forest System lands. During a 21-day public
comment period, the USDA received more than 220,000 comment letters on
behalf of over 625,000 individuals and organizations. Public comments
received during the comment period helped inform the development of
alternatives to the proposed rule and analysis of potential
environmental impacts in the draft environmental impact statement.
The USDA invites comments on all aspects of this rulemaking,
including the alternatives analyzed in the draft environmental impact
statement, the expected economic costs and benefits, any reliance
interests in the current rule that could be affected by this proposal,
and any additional costs and benefits. Comments received during the
comment period on the proposed rule and draft environmental impact
statement will be considered in developing a final rule and supporting
analyses.
Consistent with the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
(ANILCA) Section 810, the Forest Service will hold public subsistence
hearings to evaluate potential impacts of the proposed rule on
subsistence uses in Alaska. These hearings provide an opportunity for
affected communities and individuals to share input on how rescinding
the 2001 Roadless Rule may influence subsistence activities, including
access to resources and traditional practices. Details regarding the
dates, times, and locations of these hearings will be announced in a
subsequent notice and posted on the Forest Service's website at https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless. Interested parties
may also contact the Forest Service for additional information or to
request accommodations for participation. The Forest Service encourages
all interested individuals, Tribes, and organizations to attend these
hearings and provide input. Comments received during the hearings will
be considered in the development of the final rule and supporting
analyses.

Petition for Rulemaking

During the public comment period on the notice of intent to prepare
an environmental impact statement for this rulemaking, the Department
received a petition for rulemaking from a resident of the State of
Alaska, requesting review and potential amendment or repeal of
regulations implementing the national Roadless Area Conservation Rule
as applied to Alaska. The petitioner asserts that existing Federal
statutes guarantee access rights to timber supply and for road
construction that are inconsistent with a nationwide prohibition on
road building. The petition further requests that any future roadless
regulation recognize statutory rights of access for statehood lands,
valid existing rights, mining claims, and inholdings, and exclude areas
where roads already exist. The petition is included in the project
record, and the Department is considering these issues as part of this
rulemaking.

Regulatory Certifications

Regulatory Planning and Review

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides that the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management
and Budget will determine whether a regulatory action is significant as
defined by E.O. 12866 and will review significant regulatory actions.
This proposed rule has been determined to be economically significant
under E.O. 12866 section 3(f)(1). E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles
of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the Nation's regulatory
system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the
best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving
regulatory ends. The Department has developed the proposed rule
consistent with E.O. 13563.

National Environmental Policy Act

[[Page 53831]]

environmental impact statement to the proposed rule.
Accompanying the proposed rule, the USDA has prepared a draft
environmental impact statement that discloses the potential
environmental impacts that may result from the proposed rule and its
alternatives. All documents, including the proposed rule and other
supporting information, may be found at https://www.regulations.gov,
under docket number FS-2025-0001, or on the following website: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless.
This draft environmental impact statement is also being published
to facilitate comments on the proposal and alternatives in accordance
with Department regulations (7 CFR 1b.7(n)). The USDA invites written
electronic comments on the proposed rule and draft environmental impact
statement per the instructions provided in the ADDRESSES section above.
Substantive comments received will be published electronically and will
be considered in developing the final environmental impact statement
and final rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This proposed rule has been considered in light of E.O. 13272 that
addresses the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as
amended, which requires agencies to prepare and make available to the
public a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the economic
effect of a proposed or final rule on small entities (that is, small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions)
when the agency is required to publish a general notice of proposed
rulemaking for a rule. Furthermore, section 605 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu of
preparing an analysis, if the proposed rulemaking is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule is not expected to impose any direct
requirements or compliance obligations on small entities. Further, this
rule is intended to remove a redundant layer of regulation. The
Department nevertheless has considered the effects of the proposed rule
on small entities and prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis. The
analysis can be found at https://www.regulations.gov, under docket
number FS-2025-0001, or on the following website: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless. The Forest Service is
directly affected by this rulemaking and is not a small entity. The
proposed rule imposes no costs or recordkeeping requirements on small
entities; nor does it seek to impose any direct regulatory restrictions
on any small entities. A number of small and large entities may
experience greater flexibility under the proposed rule or otherwise
benefit from it. In consideration of the facts and analysis set forth
in the regulatory flexibility analysis prepared by the Forest Service,
the undersigned has determined and certified by signature on this
document that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Federalism

The Department has considered this proposed rule under the
requirements of E.O. 13132, Federalism. The Department has determined
that the proposed rule conforms with the federalism principles set out
in this E.O., would not impose compliance costs on the States, and
would not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the Federal government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Therefore, the Department has concluded that this proposed
rule would not have federalism implications.

Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, requires Federal agencies to consult and coordinate with
Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies that have Tribal
implications, including regulations, legislative comments or proposed
legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes. While Section I(B) of the Office of
Management and Budget memorandum on Streamlining the Review of
Deregulatory Actions (M-25-36, October 21, 2025) states that rescinding
a regulation does not inherently require consultation, the Department
has determined that removing and reserving 36 CFR part 294 Subpart B
would have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes and therefore warrants consultation under
E.O. 13175. Accordingly, the U.S. Forest Service will coordinate with
the Department's Office of Tribal Relations to ensure meaningful
consultation occurs, and the remainder of this section summarizes
Tribal engagements and input received to date.
Tribal Consultation and Collaboration
On July 22, 2025, the Forest Service notified Tribes and Alaska
Native Corporations of the opportunity to consult on the rulemaking to
rescind the 2001 Roadless Rule, with a summary analysis of proposed
changes and an invitation to a Tribal forum engagement session. This
information was also emailed to Regional Foresters on July 25, 2025.
The Forest Service Office of Tribal Relations held a Tribal forum
engagement session on August 5, 2025.
To date, the Forest Service received 64 requests for consultation,
34 consultations have been scheduled, and 29 consultations have been
held. Tribal consultations were held either in person or virtually with
local or regional Forest Service line officers serving as consulting
officials. Some Tribes submitted letters in lieu of, or in addition to,
consultations. Consultations will be ongoing throughout the rulemaking
process, and a final Tribal Impact Summary Statement will be included
with the final rule. In addition, many Tribes submitted comment letters
during the public comment period on the notice of intent published on
August 29, 2025. The comment letters received from Tribes or Tribal
organizations during the comment period (via hardcopy or the
regulations.gov comment portal) were included in the public comment
summary and considered in the development of the draft environmental
impact statement and proposed rule. The summary below includes the
input received to date through the consultation process.
Tribal Input Received
The majority sentiment among Tribal governments consulted is
opposition to the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule,
viewing it as a threat to inherent rights, Tribal sovereignty, cultural
survival, and the ecological health of ancestral homelands. Support for
the proposed rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule was received from an
Alaska Native Corporation, which asserted that the national rule limits
their economic and legal rights to access and develop lands. According
to the majority Tribal sentiment, a central procedural concern is the
Federal Government's failure to fulfill its trust responsibilities by
proceeding without adequate government-to-government consultation.
Tribes consistently argued that removing this layer of national

[[Page 53832]]

protection shifts the unsustainable burden of project-level review onto
their limited resources and exposes previously untouched areas to
industrial activity, mining interests, and destructive recreational
access, all of which threaten sacred sites, traditional gathering
areas, water quality, and subsistence resources. Proposed alternatives
that were frequently requested included retaining the existing rule
(``No Action'') or establishing new co-management structures, such as a
``Strengthened Roadless Rule Alternative'' or a ``Traditional Homelands
Conservation Rule'' that integrates Traditional Ecological Knowledge,
Tribal co-stewardship, and Tribal consent for major decisions. For
ancestral lands in Alaska, representatives stressed the need for a
comprehensive ANILCA Section 810 subsistence analysis prior to any
decision and noted the global climate significance of the forest as a
critical carbon sink.
A complete Tribal summary impact statement may be found at https://www.regulations.gov, under docket number FS-2025-0001, or on the
following website: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/planning/roadless.

Family Policymaking Assessment

Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277), requires Federal agencies to issue a
Family Policymaking Assessment for a rule that may affect family well-
being. The proposed rule would have no impact on the autonomy or
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, the Department
has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment for the proposed rule.

Takings Implications

The Department has analyzed the proposed rule in accordance with
the principles and criteria in E.O. 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. The
Department has determined that the proposed rule would not pose the
risk of a taking of private property.

Energy Effects

The Department has reviewed the proposed rule under E.O. 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The Department has determined that the proposed
rule would not constitute a significant energy action as defined in
E.O. 13211.

Civil Justice Reform

The Department has analyzed the proposed rule in accordance with
the principles and criteria in E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Upon
publication of the proposed rule, (1) all State and local laws and
regulations that conflict with the proposed rule or that impede its
full implementation would be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect would
be given to this proposed rule; and (3) it would 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), the Department has assessed the effects of the
proposed rule on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private
sector. The proposed rule would not compel the expenditure of $100
million or more, adjusted annually for inflation, in any 1 year by
State, local, and Tribal governments in the aggregate or by the private
sector. Therefore, a statement under section 202 of the Act is not
required.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The proposed rule does not contain any recordkeeping or reporting
requirements or other information collection requirements as defined in
5 CFR part 1320 that are not already required by law or not already
approved for use. Accordingly, the review provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 294

National forests, Recreation areas, Roadless area management.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of
Agriculture proposes to amend part 294 of title 36 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 294--SPECIAL AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 294 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 472, 529, 551, 1608, 1613; 23 U.S.C. 201,
205.

Subpart B--[Removed and Reserved]

0
2. Remove and reserve subpart B, consisting of Sec. Sec. 294.10
through 294.18.

Stephen Alexander Vaden,
Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
[FR Doc. 2026-16965 Filed 8-19-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411-15-P