Forest Service: Use of Categorical Exclusions for Vegetation	 
Management Projects, Calendar Years 2003 through 2005 (10-OCT-06,
GAO-07-99).							 
                                                                 
The Forest Service manages over 192 million acres of land, in	 
part through vegetation management projects such as thinning	 
trees. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the 
Forest Service to prepare either an environmental assessment (EA)
or an environmental impact statement (EIS) before approving a	 
project that may significantly affect the environment. The agency
generally does not need to prepare such environmental analyses,  
however, if the project involves categories of activities that it
previously found to have no significant environmental		 
effects--activities known as a categorical exclusion. As of 2003,
the Forest Service had one categorical exclusion--activities to  
improve timber stands or wildlife habitat. It has since added	 
four new exclusions, but little is known about their use. GAO was
asked to determine, for calendar years 2003 through 2005, (1) how
many vegetation management projects the Forest Service approved, 
including those approved using categorical exclusions; (2) which 
categorical exclusions the agency used in approving projects; and
(3) if field offices are not using categorical exclusions, why.  
To answer these objectives, GAO surveyed Forest Service officials
from all of the 155 national forests. In commenting on a draft of
this report, the Forest Service generally agreed with GAO's	 
findings and observations.					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-07-99						        
    ACCNO:   A61984						        
  TITLE:     Forest Service: Use of Categorical Exclusions for	      
Vegetation Management Projects, Calendar Years 2003 through 2005 
     DATE:   10/10/2006 
  SUBJECT:   Environmental assessment				 
	     Environmental impact statements			 
	     Environmental law					 
	     Forest management					 
	     National forests					 
	     Policy evaluation					 
	     Program evaluation 				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-07-99

   

     * [1]Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Forests and
       Forest Health, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives

          * [2]October 2006

     * [3]FOREST SERVICE

          * [4]Use of Categorical Exclusions for Vegetation Management
            Projects, Calendar Years 2003 through 2005

     * [5]Contents

          * [6]Results in Brief
          * [7]Background
          * [8]Categorical Exclusions Were Used to Approve Most Vegetation
            Management Projects and about Half of the Total Treatment Acres
          * [9]Categorical Exclusion for Improving Timber Stands or Wildlife
            Habitat Was Used the Most Frequently to Treat the Most Acreage
          * [10]Primary Reasons for Not Using Categorical Exclusions Varied
            Depending on the Ranger District and Type of Categorical
            Exclusion Used
          * [11]Observations
          * [12]Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

     * [13]Scope and Methodology
     * [14]Forest Service Categorical Exclusions
     * [15]Number of Projects and Acres by Type of Environmental Analysis and
       Forest Service Region (Calendar Years 2003 through 2005)
     * [16]Number of Projects and Acres by Type of Environmental Analysis and
       National Forest (Calendar Years 2003 through 2005)
     * [17]Number of Projects and Acres by Type of Categorical Exclusion and
       Forest Service Region (Calendar Years 2003 through 2005)
     * [18]Number of Projects and Acres by Type of Categorical Exclusion and
       National Forest (Calendar Years 2003 through 2005)
     * [19]Primary Reasons for Not Using Different Vegetation Management
       Categorical Exclusions (Calendar Years 2003 through 2005)
     * [20]Comments from the U.S. Department of Agriculture

          * [21]GAO Comments

     * [22]GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
     * [23]PDF6-Ordering Information.pdf

          * [24]Order by Mail or Phone

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-99 .

To view the full product, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact Robin M. Nazzaro at (202) 512-3841 or
[email protected].

Highlights of [26]GAO-07-99 , a report to the Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health, Committee on Resources, House
of Representatives

October 2006

FOREST SERVICE

Use of Categorical Exclusions for Vegetation Management Projects, Calendar
Years 2003 through 2005

The Forest Service manages over 192 million acres of land, in part through
vegetation management projects such as thinning trees. The National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the Forest Service to prepare
either an environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental impact
statement (EIS) before approving a project that may significantly affect
the environment. The agency generally does not need to prepare such
environmental analyses, however, if the project involves categories of
activities that it previously found to have no significant environmental
effects--activities known as a categorical exclusion. As of 2003, the
Forest Service had one categorical exclusion--activities to improve timber
stands or wildlife habitat. It has since added four new exclusions, but
little is known about their use.

GAO was asked to determine, for calendar years 2003 through 2005, (1) how
many vegetation management projects the Forest Service approved, including
those approved using categorical exclusions; (2) which categorical
exclusions the agency used in approving projects; and (3) if field offices
are not using categorical exclusions, why. To answer these objectives, GAO
surveyed Forest Service officials from all of the 155 national forests.

In commenting on a draft of this report, the Forest Service generally
agreed with GAO's findings and observations.

For calendar years 2003 through 2005, the Forest Service approved 3,018
vegetation management projects to treat about 6.3 million acres. Of these
projects, the Forest Service approved about 28 percent using an EA or EIS
to treat about 3.4 million acres, while it approved the remainder using
categorical exclusions. Although a majority of the projects were approved
using categorical exclusions, these projects accounted for less than half
of the total treatment acres. The number and size of projects and types of
environmental analysis used during the 3-year period varied, depending
upon forest size, ecology, and location, according to Forest Service
officials.

Percentage of Vegetation Management Projects and Treatment Acres Approved
Using an EA, EIS, or Categorical Exclusion, Calendar Years 2003 through
2005

Of nearly 2,200 vegetation management projects approved using categorical
exclusions, the Forest Service approved half of them using the categorical
exclusion for improving timber stands or wildlife habitat. In approving
the remaining projects, the agency primarily used the categorical
exclusion for reducing hazardous fuels, followed by those for salvaging
dead or dying trees, conducting limited harvests of live trees, and
removing trees to control the spread of insects or disease. The projects
approved using the categorical exclusion to improve timber stands or
wildlife habitat accounted for about 2.4 million of the 2.9 million acres
to be treated under projects approved using categorical exclusions.

About 11 percent of the Forest Service's 509 field offices had not used
any of the five vegetation management categorical exclusions during the
3-year period. The reasons why they had not used specific categorical
exclusions varied by office and categorical exclusion. For example, about
91 percent of the field offices had not used the categorical exclusion for
the removal of trees to control the spread of insects or disease primarily
because they did not have a sufficient number of insect- or
disease-infested trees. Similarly, 32 percent of the field offices had not
used the categorical exclusion to improve timber stands or wildlife
habitat, primarily because no projects of this type had been proposed
during the 3-year period.

GAO's Mission

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
[email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470

Congressional Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548

Public Affairs

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548

References

Visible links
  26. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d0799.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-99

 
*** End of document. ***