[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 242 (Friday, December 18, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67059-67075]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-30171]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 219
RIN 0596-AB86
National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (the Department) is issuing this
final rule to comply with a June 30, 2009, Federal District Court order
that has the effect of reinstating the National Forest System Land and
Resource Management Planning Rule of November 9, 2000, as amended (2000
rule). This action announces the court's decision and takes the
ministerial (formal) action of reinstating the rule in the Code of
Federal Regulations. This action also makes technical amendments to
that rule, including the interpretative rules issued in 2001 and 2004,
to update transition provisions that will be in effect until a new
planning rule is issued, as announced elsewhere in today's Federal
Register.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective December 18, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You can send a written request for more information to the
Director, Ecosystem Management Coordination Staff, Forest Service,
USDA, Mail Stop 1104, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20250-1104. For more information, including an electronic copy of the
2000 rule and amendments see http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/2000_planning_rule.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ecosystem Management Coordination
staff's Assistant Director for Planning Ric Rine at (202) 205-1022 or
Planning Specialist Regis Terney at (202) 205-1552.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The 2000 National Forest System Land and Resource Management
Planning Rule as amended (2000 rule) is available online at http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/2000_planning_rule.html. See also final rule
at 65 FR 67568 (Nov. 9, 2000); amendments at 67 FR 35434 (May 20,
2002); 68 FR 53297 (Sept. 10, 2003); and interpretative rules at 66 FR
1865 (Jan. 10, 2001) and 69 FR 58057 (Sept. 29, 2004). Although this
rule is now in effect as a consequence of a court injunction, it is not
found in the most recent version of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR). This final rule reinstates the rule in the Code of Federal
Regulations. In addition, the Department is making several technical
amendments to the final rule.
Reinstating the 2000 Rule
The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974
(88 Stat. 476 et seq.), as amended by the National Forest Management
Act of 1976 (NFMA) (90 Stat. 2949 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1601-1614),
requires the Secretary of Agriculture (the Secretary) to issue
regulations under the principles of the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield
Act of 1960 (MUSYA) that set up the process for the development and
revision of land management plans (16 U.S.C. 1604(g)).
The first planning rule, adopted in 1979, was amended on September
30, 1982 (47 FR 43037) (1982 rule). The 1982 rule was itself amended,
in part, on June 24, 1983 (48 FR 29122) and on September 7, 1983 (48 FR
40383). The 1982 rule, as amended, has guided the development,
amendment, and revision of all the land management plans currently in
effect throughout the National Forest System (NFS).
The Department has undertaken rulemaking several times to revise
the planning rule provisions. The Forest Service published an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking on February 15, 1991 (56 FR 6508) for
possible revisions to the 1982 rule. The Forest Service published a
proposed rule on April 13, 1995 (60 FR 18886); however, the Secretary
chose not to continue with that proposal. Another proposed rule was
published on October 5, 1999 (64 FR 54074), and the 2000 rule was
issued on November 9, 2000 (65 FR 67514). Shortly after the issuance of
the 2000 rule, a review of the rule found that it would be unworkable.
The Department proposed a new planning rule on December 6, 2002 (67 FR
72770).
In the meantime, on February 16, 2001, a coalition of twelve
environmental groups sued the Department in Federal District Court to
challenge the validity of the 2000 rule. The district court did not
rule on the merits of plaintiffs' claims. Instead, the plaintiffs
stipulated to a dismissal shortly after the Department issued a new
planning rule to take the place of the 2000 rule (Citizens for Better
Forestry v. USDA, No. 01-0728 (N.D. Cal. March 7, 2005) (Stipulation
and Order dismissing case with prejudice)).
The 2005 rule, intended to replace the 2000 rule, was issued on
January 5, 2005 (70 FR 1055). Shortly thereafter, Citizens for Better
Forestry and others challenged it in Federal District Court. On March
30, 2007, the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California enjoined the Department from further carrying out the 2005
rule pending additional steps to comply with the court's opinion with
respect to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
(Citizens for Better Forestry v. USDA, 481 F. Supp. 2d 1059 (N.D. Cal.
2007)). The effect of the injunction against the 2005 rule was to
reinstate the 2000 rule (the rule previously in effect).
To respond to the district court's injunction of the 2005 rule, the
Forest Service proposed a new planning rule. A notice of intent to
prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) was published in the
Federal Register on May 11, 2007 (72 FR 26775) with a public comment
period ending June 11, 2007. The proposed rule was published on August
23, 2007 (72 FR 48514), and the notice of availability for the
supporting draft EIS was published in the Federal Register on August
31, 2007 (72 FR 50368). The notice of availability of the final EIS was
published in the Federal Register on February 15, 2008 (73 FR 8869) and
the final rule was issued and published in the Federal Register on
April 21, 2008 (73 FR 21468). Citizens for Better Forestry and others
promptly challenged the 2008 rule in court.
On June 30, 2009, the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California invalidated the Forest Service's 2008 rule,
holding that it was developed in violation of NEPA and ESA. The
district court vacated the 2008 rule, enjoined the USDA from further
implementing it and remanded it to the USDA for further proceedings
(Citizens for Better Forestry v. USDA, 632 F. Supp. 2d 968 (N.D. Cal.
2009)). The court stated that, although the effect of invalidating an
agency rule is to reinstate the rule previously in force, the Agency
may choose whether to reinstate the 2000 rule or the 1982 rule.
[[Page 67060]]
(See court decision available online at http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/index.htm.)
The district court's order allowing the Forest Service to choose
either the 2000 rule or the 1982 rule did not eliminate the
responsibility to follow appropriate procedures involved in making that
choice. Under established legal principles, in circumstances like those
here, the 2000 rule was immediately back in effect, without any
process: ``The effect of invalidating an agency rule is to reinstate
the rule previously in effect,'' Paulsen v. Daniels, 413 F. 3d 999,
1008 (9th Cir. 2005). A return to the 1982 rule, however, would require
the entire lengthy process of notice and comment rulemaking, which
includes issuing a proposed rule for public review and comment before
issuing a final rule. Re-issuing the 1982 rule is unnecessary because
the transition provision of the 2000 rule will allow the Forest Service
to use the provisions of the 1982 rule in revising and amending plans
until a new rule is issued. Furthermore, because the Department has
announced that a new rulemaking is in order, as announced elsewhere in
today's Federal Register, to re-issue the 1982 rule for an interim time
period would be a costly and time-consuming distraction.
Therefore, the Department has determined that the 2000 rule, as
amended in 2002 and 2003 and as clarified by interpretative rules
issued in 2001 and 2004, is now in effect, and should be reinstated in
the Code of Federal Regulations.
Technical Amendments
The 2000 rule included provisions for an orderly transition from
planning under the prior, 1982 rule (36 CFR 219.35). The Forest Service
expects that until the Department issues a new rule, responsible
officials will continue to take advantage of the 2000 rule's transition
provisions to amend or revise plans. See Forest Service memorandum of
July 15, 2009, signed by Joel Holtrop, Deputy Chief for National Forest
System. The memorandum is available online at http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/2000_planning_rule.html.
However, the time frames described in the transition provisions are
out of date. Therefore, the Department has decided to update the
wording of the 2000 rule's transition provisions to provide that the
transition will extend until a new planning rule is issued. In
addition, unnecessary wording is deleted in the transition section and
interpretative rules issued in 2001 and 2004 and the reference in the
2001 interpretative rule to the optional appeal procedures is being
corrected.
Need To Update Transition Provisions With Respect to Plan Revisions and
Amendments
36 CFR 219.35(a). The Department is not changing paragraph (a) of
section 219.35, but acknowledges that a definitive interpretation is in
order. Paragraph (a) provides that the transition period ends upon
completion of the revision process for each unit of the NFS, and that
during that period the responsible official must consider the best
available science in implementing and, if appropriate, amending the
current plan. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has interpreted this
paragraph to mean that the transition period for each unit of the NFS
ends upon a plan revision developed and completed under provisions of
the 1982 rule, as well as revisions completed in accordance with the
2000 rule process (Utah Environmental Congress v. Troyer, 479 F. 3d
1269 (10th Cir. 2007)). The court held that as a consequence, paragraph
(a)'s requirement that the best available science be considered in
amending and implementing current plans ``encompass[ed] only plans that
pre-dated the 2000 planning rules,'' 479 F. 3d at 1281. Under this
reasoning, the requirement to consider the best available science would
not apply on a forest that completed revision after the issuance of the
2000 rule even if the 1982 rule provisions were used for the revision.
The Department's position is that the purpose of section 219.35(a)
has always been, and continues to be, that the transition period for
each forest ends upon the completion of the revision using the process
of the 2000 rule. That intent is made evident by the cross-reference in
paragraph (a) to section 219.9, the revision section of the 2000 rule.
If a forest plan has not been revised using the 2000 rule process, the
transition periods of sections 219.35(b) and (d) apply. Furthermore, on
a unit where the plan has not been revised under the 2000 rule process,
there must be consideration of the best available science when making
project decisions or amending the plan. The reference in the paragraph
to ``the current plan'' simply means the plan in effect during
transition, prior to plan revision using the 2000 rule process.
36 CFR 219.35(b). The transition provision at 219.35(b) originally
provided that planning initiated under the 1982 rule prior to November
9, 2000, the date the 2000 rule was issued, may continue under the
provisions of that rule, instead of adjusting to the requirements of
the 2000 rule (65 FR 67579 (Nov. 9, 2000)). However, shortly after the
2000 rule was issued, the Department determined that it was unworkable
and announced the intent to issue a new rule in the December 3, 2001,
Semiannual Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
Actions. So that planning need not comply with the requirements of the
2000 rule, the Department extended the rule's transition period until
the issuance of the new rule, and allowed the responsible official to
elect, not only to continue, but also to initiate, plan amendments or
revisions under the provisions of the 1982 rule.
The Department extended the transition provisions in paragraph (b)
twice; the most recent extension, issued as an interim final rule on
May 20, 2002, provides that the plan amendment or revision process may
be continued or initiated under the provisions of the 1982 planning
regulations under certain circumstances. The interim final rule said
use of the transition provisions can continue ``[u]ntil the Department
promulgates the revised final planning regulations announced in the
December 3, 2001, Semiannual Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions'' at 219.35(b) 67 FR 35434 (May 20, 2002). This
transition provision also explained what was meant by initiation of a
plan amendment or revision.
Because paragraph (b) refers to the rulemaking process that
resulted in the 2005 rule, which the district court held invalid, the
Department is updating this paragraph to clarify that the transition
will extend until the issuance of a rule replacing the current 2000
rule. The notice of intent to prepare an EIS for a new rule appears
elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The Department is also deleting
the unnecessary explanation regarding initiation of plan amendment or
revision.
Simply put, the changes to paragraph (b) ensure that, until a new
planning rule is issued, responsible officials may continue to revise
or amend land management plans under either the 1982 rule provisions or
the 2000 rule provisions.
Need To Update the Time Frame for Projects' Conformance to the 2000
Rule
36 CFR 219.35(d). The 2000 rule includes project-specific
provisions, and, at 219.35(d), set November 9, 2003, as the deadline
for compliance with those provisions at 65 FR 67579 (November 9, 2000).
On September 10, 2003, the Department extended this transition period
``until the Department promulgates the final planning regulations
published as proposed on
[[Page 67061]]
December 6, 2002 (67 FR 72770,'' by amending the wording of 36 CFR
219.35(d) at 68 FR 53297 (Sept. 10, 2003). Because this provision
refers to the rulemaking process that resulted in the 2005 rule, which
was held invalid, the Department is updating 36 CFR 219.35(d) to
clarify that the transition will extend until the issuance of a rule
superseding the current 2000 rule.
Therefore, until the Department issues a new planning rule, the
transition wording of the 2000 rule exempts project and activity
decisions from the rule's project-specific requirements. As provided in
paragraph (a), during the transition the responsible official must
consider the best available science when developing and carrying out
projects.
Note that 36 CFR 219.35(g) says that within 1 year of November 9,
2000, the Chief of the Forest Service must establish a schedule for
completion of the revision process for each unit of the National Forest
System. The Chief established the schedule, and the Chiefs schedule is
now available online at http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/includes/LRMPschedule.pdf.
Need To Correct the 2001 Interpretative Rule With Respect to the
Administrative Review Procedures and Delete Unnecessary Wording
36 CFR 219.35 Appendix A. On January 10, 2001 (66 FR 1864), the
Department published a interpretative rule related to 36 CFR 219.35(b)
to make explicit its intent that a responsible official's option of
using the provisions of the 1982 rule included the further option of
providing an administrative appeal opportunity, in accordance with 36
CFR part 217, in effect before the 2000 rule was issued, or the
objection opportunity set out in the 2000 rule. This interpretative
rule was published as Appendix A to Section 219.35, ``Interpretive Rule
Related to Paragraph 219.35(b)'' to explain how section 219.32
(regarding objections) and section 219.35(b) (a transition provision)
operate together.
This interpretative rule cites ``36 CFR part 217'' twice. However,
citing 36 CFR part 217 is not appropriate because that part no longer
exists and has not been codified in the CFR since 2000, and refers to
the July 1, 2000, revision of the CFR that is out of date. This
reference is likely to confuse the public. Therefore, the Department is
correcting Appendix A to Section 219.35 of the 2000 rule.
In the place of 36 CFR part 217 the corrected interpretative rule
identifies these procedures as the ``optional appeal procedures
available during the planning rule transition period'' and references
the Federal Register notices that had established the procedures
formerly codified at 36 CFR part 217. The ``optional appeal procedures
available during the planning rule transition period,'' are 54 FR 3357
(January 23, 1989), as amended at 54 FR 13807 (April 5, 1989); 54 FR
34509 (August 21, 1989); 55 FR 7895 (March 6, 1990); 56 FR 4918
(February 6, 1991); 56 FR 46550 (September 13, 1991); and 58 FR 58915
(November 4, 1993). The ``optional appeal procedures available during
the planning rule transition period,'' are available at http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/applit/includes/PlanAppealProceduresDuringTransition.pdf.
The interpretative rule also explained what was meant by initiation
of a plan amendment or revision; the Department is deleting this
unnecessary provision.
The effect of these changes is simply that responsible officials
can continue to choose either the appeals process for plan revisions or
the objections process for plan revisions established in the 2000 rule.
Need To Delete Unnecessary Wording in 2004 Interpretative Rule
36 CFR 219.35 Appendix B. On September 29, 2004, the Department
published an interpretative rule related to 36 CFR 219.35(a) and (b),
to clarify the intent of the transition provisions in those paragraphs.
The Department published the interpretative rule as ``Appendix B to
Section 219.35, Interpretative Rule Related to Paragraphs 219.35(a) and
(b)'' (69 FR 58057). In explaining the duration of the transition, the
interpretative rule included two sentences that referred to the
proposed rule published on December 6, 2002, and stated that a final
rule had yet to be issued. The Department is deleting these unnecessary
sentences.
Good Cause Statement
The Department has determined, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b), that
prior notice and opportunity for public comment on this rulemaking are
``impractical, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest.'' This
rulemaking is undertaken to reinstate in the Code of Federal
Regulations the planning rule now in effect and to update and clarify
the transition time periods set out in that rule. This rulemaking also
identifies the optional appeal process available during the transition.
As explained earlier in this notice, the 2000 rule is currently in
effect. The reinstatement of the entire 2000 rule in the Code of
Federal Regulations, therefore, is simply a housekeeping matter, to
make the rule readily available to the public.
Notice and comment opportunities for the transition updates in
paragraphs (b) and (d) are unnecessary, as they simply reflect the
Department's long held intent, evidenced by the 2001, 2002, and 2003
extensions and the 2004 interpretative rule, to allow the continued use
of the 1982 planning rule provisions until a successful rulemaking to
replace the 2000 rule is accomplished. Additionally, the deletion in
paragraph (b) of the explanation of ``initiation'' of plan amendments
or revisions does not in any way change the effect of the rule.
Furthermore, notice and comment rulemaking for this planning rule is
impractical and against the public interest, as it would distract the
Department's and the public's attention from the more pressing task at
hand: to develop, through notice and comment rulemaking, a new,
replacement planning rule. Notice and comment rulemaking to reinstate
the 2000 rule would delay the issuance of a new rule. It is also likely
that the confusion caused by two simultaneous notice and comment
rulemakings for planning would not be in the public interest. With
respect to the interpretative rules, good cause is not needed to exempt
them from the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative
Procedure Act. In any event, the minor changes to the interpretative
rules do not affect the Department's interpretation of the 2000 rule.
This rulemaking merely continues the status quo for forest planning
by updating 36 CFR Part 219 to reflect the fact that the 2008 rule has
been held invalid and the 2000 rule is therefore in place until new
planning regulations are issued.
Regulatory Certifications
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is, therefore,
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Because
the Agency has made a ``good cause'' finding that this action is not
subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601,
et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it is not
economically significant.
[[Page 67062]]
In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments or impose a significant intergovernmental mandate, as
described in sections 203 and 204 of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995. This rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). This rule will 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
The rule also does not involve special consideration of
environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12630, and it has been determined
that the rule does not pose the risk of a taking of constitutionally
protected private property.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), the information collection or reporting requirements
included in the rule have been approved by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) and assigned control number 0596-0158.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. As adopted, (1) All state and local laws and
regulations that are in conflict with this rule or which would impede
its full implementation are to be preempted; (2) No retroactive effect
is given to this rule; and (3) It does not require administrative
proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging its
provisions. Several respondents commented about the Federal
Government's authority to preempt state and local laws. The Department
has carefully reviewed this language and finds that this is entirely
consistent with the legal responsibilities of the Federal Government.
The Department's compliance with these statutes and Executive
orders for the rule is discussed in the November 9, 2000, Federal
Register notice.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 219
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact
statements, Indians, Intergovernmental relations, National forests,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Science and technology.
0
Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 219 of title
36 of the Code of Federal Regulations is revised to read as follows:
PART 219--PLANNING
Subpart A--National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning
Purpose and Principles
Sec.
219.1 Purpose.
219.2 Principles.
The Framework for Planning
219.3 Overview.
219.4 Identification and consideration of issues.
219.5 Information development and interpretation.
219.6 Proposed actions.
219.7 Plan decisions.
219.8 Amendment.
219.9 Revision.
219.10 Site-specific decisions.
219.11 Monitoring and evaluation for adaptive management.
Collaborative Planning for Sustainability
219.12 Collaboration and cooperatively developed landscape goals.
219.13 Coordination among Federal agencies.
219.14 Involvement of State and local governments.
219.15 Interaction with American Indian tribes and Alaska Natives.
219.16 Relationships with interested individuals and organizations.
219.17 Interaction with private landowners.
219.18 Role of advisory committees.
Ecological, Social, and Economic Sustainability
219.19 Ecological, social, and economic sustainability.
219.20 Ecological sustainability.
219.21 Social and economic sustainability.
The Contribution of Science
219.22 The overall role of science in planning.
219.23 The role of science in assessments, analyses, and monitoring.
219.24 Science consistency evaluations.
219.25 Science advisory boards.
Special Considerations
219.26 Identifying and designating suitable uses.
219.27 Special designations.
219.28 Determination of land suitable for timber harvest.
219.29 Limitation on timber harvest.
Planning Documentation
219.30 Plan documentation.
219.31 Maintenance of the plan and planning records.
Objections and Appeals
219.32 Objections to amendments or revisions.
219.33 Appeals of site-specific decisions.
Applicability and Transition
219.34 Applicability.
219.35 Transition.
Definitions
219.36 Definitions.
Subpart B [Reserved]
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; and Secs. 6 and 15, 90 Stat. 2949,
2952, 2958 (16 U.S.C. 1604, 1613).
Subpart A--National Forest System Land and Resource Management
Planning
Purpose and Principles
Sec. 219.1 Purpose.
(a) Land and resource management planning guides how the Forest
Service will fulfill its stewardship of the natural resources of the
National Forest System to fulfill the designated purposes of the
national forests and grasslands and honor their unique place in
American life. The regulations in this subpart set forth a process for
amending and revising land and resource management plans, hereafter
referred to as plans, for the National Forest System and for monitoring
the results of plan implementation under the Forest and Rangeland
Renewable Resources Act of 1974, as amended by the National Forest
Management Act of 1976, 16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq. The regulations in this
subpart also guide the selection and implementation of site-specific
actions. The principal authorities governing the development and the
management of the National Forest System include: The Organic
Administration Act of 1897, as amended (16 U.S.C. 473 et seq.); the
Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. 528 et seq.); the
Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1121 et seq.); the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); the Forest and Rangeland
Renewable Resource Act of 1974, as amended by the National Forest
Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.); and the Clean Water
Act of 1948, as amended by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1977 and the Water Quality Act of 1987 and other laws (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1323 et seq.).
(b) The National Forest System constitutes an extraordinary
national legacy created by people of vision and preserved for future
generations by diligent and far-sighted public servants and citizens.
These are the peoples' lands, emblems of the nation's democratic
traditions.
(1) The national forests and grasslands provide a wide variety of
uses, values,
[[Page 67063]]
products, and services that are important to many people, including
outdoor recreation, forage, timber, wildlife and fish, biological
diversity, productive soils, clean air and water, and minerals. They
also afford intangible benefits such as beauty, inspiration, and
wonder.
(2) To assure the continuation of this array of benefits, this
regulation affirms sustainability as the overall goal for stewardship
of the natural resources of each national forest and grassland
consistent with the laws that guide management of these lands.
(3) Sustainability, composed of interdependent ecological, social,
and economic elements, embodies the principles of multiple-use and
sustained-yield without impairment to the productivity of the land.
Sustainability means meeting needs of the present generation without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
Planning contributes to social and economic sustainability without
compromising the basic composition, structure, and functioning of
ecological systems. The progress toward achievement of sustainability
is assessed through monitoring and evaluation.
Sec. 219.2 Principles.
The planning regulations in this subpart are based on the following
principles:
(a) The first priority for planning to guide management of the
National Forest System is to maintain or restore ecological
sustainability of national forests and grasslands to provide for a wide
variety of uses, values, products, and services. The benefits sought
from these lands depend upon long-term ecological sustainability.
Considering increased human uses, it is essential that uses of today do
not impair the functioning of ecological processes and the ability of
these natural resources to contribute to sustainability in the future.
(1) Planning provides the guidance for maintaining or restoring the
diversity of plant and animal communities and the productive capacity
of ecological systems, the core elements of ecological sustainability.
(2) Planning is based on science and other knowledge, including the
use of scientifically based strategies for sustainability and benefits
from independent scientific peer review.
(3) Planning is based on the temporal and spatial scales necessary
for sustainability.
(4) Planning includes the monitoring and evaluation of the
achievement of goals.
(b) Planning contributes to social and economic sustainability by
providing for a wide variety of uses, values, products, and services
without compromising the basic composition, structure, and function of
ecological systems.
(1) Planning recognizes and fosters a broad-based understanding of
the interdependence of national forests and grasslands with economies
and communities.
(2) Planning fosters strategies and actions that provide for human
use in ways that contribute to long-term sustainability.
(c) Planning is efficiently integrated into the broader geographic,
legal, and social landscape within which national forests and
grasslands exist. Other agencies, governments, corporations, and
citizens manage land in and around the national forests and grasslands.
Planning, therefore, is outward looking with the goal of understanding
the broader landscape in which the national forests and grasslands lie.
(1) Planning fosters coordination among all affected federal
agencies.
(2) Planning proceeds in close cooperation with state, tribal, and
local governments.
(3) Planning recognizes the rights of American Indian tribes and
Alaska Natives.
(4) Planning is interdisciplinary, providing analyses and options
that are responsive to a broad range of ecological, social, and
economic.
(5) Planning acknowledges the limits and variability of likely
budgets.
(d) Planning meaningfully engages the American people in the
stewardship of their national forests and grasslands. Just as the
Forest Service can help the American people learn about the limits and
capabilities of the national forests and grasslands, managers also
should be guided by the knowledge and values of the American people.
(1) Planning encourages extensive collaborative citizen
participation and builds upon the human resources in local communities
and throughout the nation.
(2) Planning actively seeks and addresses key issues and promotes a
shared vision of desired conditions.
(3) Planning and plans are understandable.
(4) Planning restores and maintains the trust of the American
people in the management of the national forests and grasslands.
(e) Planning is an ongoing process, where decisions are adapted, as
necessary, to address new issues, new information, and unforeseen
events.
(1) Planning is innovative and practical.
(2) Planning is expeditious and efficient in achieving goals.
(f) Planning seeks to manage National Forest System resources in a
combination that best serves the public interest without impairment of
the productivity of the land consistent with the Multiple-Use
Sustained-Yield Act of 1960.
The Framework for Planning
Sec. 219.3 Overview.
(a) The planning framework. Land and resource management planning
is a flexible process for fitting solutions to the scope and scale of
needed action. Planning, conducted according to the planning framework
outlined in Sec. Sec. 219.3 through 219.11, involves engaging the
public (Sec. Sec. 219.12 through 219.18) and applying the best
available science (Sec. Sec. 219.22 through 219.25) to contribute to
sustainability (Sec. Sec. 219.19 through 219.21) in the use and
enjoyment of National Forest System lands.
(b) Levels of planning. Planning may be undertaken at the national,
regional, national forest or grassland, and/or ranger district
administrative levels depending on the scope and scale of issues.
(1) The Chief of the Forest Service is responsible for national
planning. National planning includes the Forest Service national
strategic plan required under the Government Performance and Results
Act of 1993 (5 U.S.C. 306, 31 U.S.C. 1115-1119 and 9703-9704) that
establishes national long-term goals, outcome measures, and strategies
to be considered in managing the National Forest System and the
Resources Planning Act Program (16 U.S.C. 1600).
(2) The Forest or Grassland Supervisor is the responsible official
for a plan amendment or revision, except to the extent the Regional
Forester or Chief decides to act as the responsible official.
(3) When appropriate, two or more Forest or Grassland Supervisors,
one or more Regional Foresters, or the Chief of the Forest Service may
undertake planning which may amend or revise one or more plans.
(4) The Chief of the Forest Service, Regional Foresters, National
Forest and Grassland Supervisors, or District Rangers may authorize and
implement site-specific actions.
(c) An interdisciplinary, collaborative approach to planning. An
interdisciplinary, collaborative approach to planning may be achieved
by engaging the skills and interests of appropriate combinations of
Forest Service staff, consultants, contractors, other federal agencies,
states, American
[[Page 67064]]
Indian tribes, Alaska Natives, or local government personnel, or other
interested or affected people consistent with applicable laws.
(d) Key elements. The planning cycle begins with the identification
and consideration of issues and concludes with the monitoring and
evaluation of results. Based upon the scope and scale of issues,
planning includes one or more of the following key elements:
(1) Identification and consideration of issues (Sec. 219.4);
(2) Information development and interpretation (Sec. 219.5);
(3) Proposed actions (Sec. 219.6);
(4) Plan decisions (Sec. 219.7);
(5) Amendment (Sec. 219.8);
(6) Revision (Sec. 219.9);
(7) Site-specific decisions (Sec. 219.10); and
(8) Monitoring and evaluation for adaptive management (Sec.
219.11).
Sec. 219.4 Identification and consideration of issues.
(a) Origination of issues. Issues may originate from a variety of
sources including, but are not limited to: Inventories, assessments,
analyses, monitoring and evaluation of projects; discussions among
people and proposals by organizations or governments interested in or
affected by National Forest System management; Presidential,
Departmental, and Forest Service conservation leadership initiatives;
cooperatively developed landscape goals (Sec. 219.12(b)); evaluation
of sustainability (Sec. 219.9(b)(4)); enactment of new laws; policies
such as the Forest Service national strategic plan; and applications
for authorization for occupancy and use of National Forest System
lands.
(b) Consideration of issues. The responsible official has the
discretion to determine, at any time, whether and to what extent an
issue is appropriate for consideration.
(1) In making this determination, the responsible official should
consider:
(i) The scope, complexity, and geographic scale of potential
actions that may address an issue;
(ii) Statutory requirements;
(iii) Organizational and community capabilities and available
resources, including current and likely Forest Service budgets;
(iv) The scientific basis and merit of available data and analyses;
(v) The relationship of possible actions to the Forest Service
national strategic plan, other existing plans, adopted conservation
strategies, biological opinions, or other strategies applicable within
all or a portion of the plan area; and
(vi) The opinions of interested or affected individuals,
organizations, or other entities and the social and cultural values
related to an issue.
(2) The responsible official should consider the extent to which
addressing the issue relates to or provides:
(i) Opportunities to contribute to the achievement of cooperatively
developed landscape goals;
(ii) Opportunities for the national forests and grasslands to
contribute to the restoration or maintenance of ecological
sustainability, including maintenance or restoration of watershed
function, such as water flow regimes to benefit aquatic resources,
groundwater recharge, municipal water supply, or other uses, and
maintaining or restoring ecological conditions needed for ecosystem and
species diversity;
(iii) Opportunities for the national forests or grasslands to
contribute to social and economic sustainability;
(iv) Opportunities to recover threatened or endangered species and
maintain or restore their habitat;
(v) The potential for negative environmental effects, including
human health, economic and social effects, upon minority and low income
communities;
(vi) Opportunities to maintain or restore ecological conditions
that are similar to the biological and physical range of expected
variability (Sec. 219.20(b)(1)); and
(vii) Opportunities to contribute to knowledge about and
preservation of historic and cultural resources.
Sec. 219.5 Information development and interpretation.
If the responsible official determines an issue should receive
consideration, the responsible official should review relevant
information such as inventories, broad-scale assessments, local
analyses, or monitoring results to determine if additional information
is desirable and if it can be obtained at a reasonable cost and in a
timely manner. The responsible official, at his or her discretion, may
choose the methods and determine the scope of information development
and interpretation for an issue under consideration. A broad-scale
assessment or a local analysis may be developed or supplemented if
appropriate to the scope and scale of an issue. Broad-scale
assessments, local analyses, monitoring results, and other studies are
not site-specific or plan decisions or proposals for agency action
(Sec. 219.6(a)) subject to Forest Service NEPA procedures.
(a) Broad-scale assessments. Broad-scale assessments provide
information regarding ecological, economic, or social issues that are
broad in geographic scale, sometimes crossing Forest Service regional
administrative boundaries. Ecological information and analyses that may
be provided in an assessment are addressed in Sec. 219.20(a). Social
and economic information and analyses that may be provided in an
assessment are addressed in Sec. 219.21(a).
(1) Broad-scale assessment should provide the following as
appropriate:
(i) Findings and conclusions that describe historic conditions,
current status, and future trends of ecological, social, and/or
economic conditions, their relationship to sustainability, and the
principal factors contributing to those conditions and trends. The
responsible official may use these findings and conclusions to identify
other issues (Sec. 219.4), develop proposals for action (Sec. 219.6),
or for other purposes.
(ii) Identification of needs for additional research to develop new
information or address conflicting interpretations of existing
information.
(2) Station Directors and Regional Foresters must have joint
responsibility for Forest Service participation in broad-scale
assessments. Each broad-scale assessment should be designed and
conducted with the assistance of scientists, resource professionals,
governmental entities, and other individuals and organizations
knowledgeable of the assessment area.
(b) Local analyses. Local analyses provide ecological, social, or
economic information as deemed appropriate by the responsible official.
Local analyses may cover watersheds, ecological units, and social and
economic units, and may tier to or provide information to update a
broad-scale assessment. Local analyses should provide the following, as
appropriate:
(1) Characterization of the area of analysis;
(2) Description of issues within the analysis area;
(3) Description of current conditions;
(4) Description of likely future conditions;
(5) Synthesis and interpretation of information; and
(6) Recommendations for proposals (Sec. 219.6(a)) or
identification of other issues (Sec. 219.4).
Sec. 219.6 Proposed actions.
(a) Proposal. The responsible official may propose to amend or
revise a plan, propose a site-specific action, or both.
(b) NEPA requirements. Unless otherwise provided by law, the
responsible official must analyze the effects of the proposal and
alternative(s) in conformance with Forest Service
[[Page 67065]]
NEPA procedures. The responsible official may use issues identified and
information reviewed pursuant to Secs. 219.4-219.5 for scoping required
in Forest Service NEPA procedures.
Sec. 219.7 Plan decisions.
Plan decisions guide or limit uses of National Forest System
resources and provide the basis for future agency action. Plan
decisions link the requirements of laws, regulations, Executive Orders,
policies, and the Forest Service national strategic plan to specific
national forests and grasslands. While plan decisions generally do not
commit resources to a site-specific action, plan decisions provide a
framework for authorizing site-specific actions that may commit
resources. In making decisions, the responsible official should seek to
manage National Forest System resources in a combination that best
serves the public interest without impairment of the productivity of
the land consistent with the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960.
Plan decisions may apply to all or part of a plan area. Paragraphs (a)
through (e) of this section describe the decisions in a plan.
(a) Desired resource conditions. These plan decisions define the
resource conditions sought within all or portions of the plan area.
Desired resource conditions may include, but are not limited to, the
desired watershed and ecological conditions and aquatic and terrestrial
habitat characteristics.
(b) Objectives. These plan decisions are concise statements
describing measurable results intended to contribute to sustainability
(Sec. 219.19), including a desired level of uses, values, products,
and services, assuming current or likely budgets and considering other
spending levels as appropriate. Objectives include an estimate of the
time and resources needed for their completion.
(c) Standards. These plan decisions are the requirements and
limitations for land uses and management actions necessary for the
achievement of desired conditions and objectives and compliance with
applicable laws, regulations, Executive Orders, and policies. Standards
include, but are not limited to:
(1) Limitations on even-aged timber harvest methods;
(2) Maximum size openings from timber harvest;
(3) Methods for achieving aesthetic objectives by blending the
boundaries of vegetation treatments; and
(4) Other requirements to achieve multiple-use of the national
forests and grasslands.
(d) Designation of suitable land uses. These plan decisions
identify lands within the National Forest System that are or are not
suitable for specific uses (Sec. 219.26), including, but not limited
to: the transportation system; livestock grazing; special designations
as described in Sec. 219.27; and lands where timber production is an
objective (Sec. 219.28).
(e) Monitoring strategy. A monitoring strategy is required by each
plan as described in Sec. 219.11(a).
Sec. 219.8 Amendment.
(a) Amending plans. A plan amendment may add, modify, or rescind
one or more of the decisions of a plan (Sec. 219.7). An amendment
decision must be based on the identification and consideration of
issues (Sec. 219.4), applicable information (Sec. 219.5), and an
analysis of the effects of the proposed amendment (Sec. 219.6). In
developing an amendment, the responsible official must provide
opportunities for collaboration consistent with Sec. 219.12 through
Sec. 219.18.
(b) Environmental review of a proposed plan amendment. For each
proposal for a plan amendment, the responsible official must complete
appropriate environmental analyses and public involvement in accordance
with Forest Service NEPA procedures. A proposed amendment that may
create a significant environmental effect and thus require preparation
of an environmental impact statement is considered to be a significant
change in the plan. If a proposal for amendment requires the
preparation of an environmental impact statement, the responsible
official must give public notice and an opportunity to comment on the
draft environmental impact statement for at least 90 calendar days.
Sec. 219.9 Revision.
(a) Application of the revision process. Revision of a plan is
required by 16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5). The revision process is a review of
the overall management of a unit of the National Forest System and an
opportunity to consider the likely results if plan decisions were to
remain in effect.
(b) Initiating revision. To begin the revision process, the
responsible official must:
(1) Provide opportunities for collaboration consistent with Sec.
219.12 through Sec. 219.18;
(2) Summarize those issues the responsible official determines to
be appropriate for consideration (Sec. 219.4), any relevant
inventories, new data, findings and conclusions from appropriate broad-
scale assessments and local analyses, monitoring and evaluation
results, new or revised Forest Service policies, relevant portions of
the Forest Service national strategic plan, and changes in
circumstances affecting the entire or significant portions of the plan
area;
(3) Develop the information and complete the analyses described in
Sec. 219.20(a) and Sec. 219.21(a);
(4) Evaluate the effectiveness of the current plan in contributing
to sustainability (Secs. 219.19-219.21) based on the information,
analyses, and requirements described in Sec. 219.20(a) and (b) and
Sec. 219.21(a) and (b), and provide for an independent scientific peer
review (Sec. 219.22) of the evaluation;
(5) Identify new proposals for special areas, special designation,
or for recommendation as wilderness (Sec. 219.27);
(6) Identify specific watersheds in need of protective or
restoration measures;
(7) Identify lands classified as not suitable for timber production
(Sec. 219.28);
(8) Identify and evaluate inventoried roadless areas and unroaded
areas based on the information, analyses, and requirements in Sec.
219.20(a) and Sec. 219.21(a). During the plan revision process or at
other times as deemed appropriate, the responsible official must
determine which inventoried roadless areas and unroaded areas warrant
additional protection and the level of protection to be afforded; and
(9) Develop an estimate of outcomes that would be anticipated,
including uses, values, products, or services, for a 15-year period
following initiation of the revision process, if the plan decisions in
effect at the time the revision process began remain in effect.
(c) Public notice of revision process and review of information.
After the responsible official has compiled the information required
under paragraph (b) of this section, the responsible official must give
public notice of the plan revision process and make the information
compiled under paragraph (b) of this section available for public
comment for at least 45 calendar days.
(d) Notice of Intent. Based upon the information compiled under
paragraph (b) of this section and any comments received during the
comment period required under paragraph (c) of this section, the
responsible official must publish a Notice of Intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement to add, modify, remove, or continue in
effect the decisions embodied in a plan. The responsible official must
give the public notice and an opportunity to comment on the draft
environmental impact
[[Page 67066]]
statement for at least 90 calendar days. Following public comment, the
responsible official must oversee preparation of a final environmental
impact statement in accordance with Forest Service NEPA procedures.
(e) Final decision on plan revision. The revision process is
completed when the responsible official signs a record of decision for
a plan revision.
Sec. 219.10 Site-specific decisions.
To the extent appropriate and practicable and subject to valid
existing rights and appropriate statutes, the responsible official must
provide opportunities for collaboration consistent with Sec. Sec.
219.12 through 219.18, follow the planning framework described in
Sec. Sec. 219.4 through 219.6 and comply with Sec. 219.11 to make
site-specific decisions. All site-specific decisions, including
authorized uses of land, must be consistent with the applicable plan.
If a proposed site-specific decision is not consistent with the
applicable plan, the responsible official may modify the proposed
decision to make it consistent with the plan, reject the proposal; or
amend the plan to authorize the action.
Sec. 219.11 Monitoring and evaluation for adaptive management.
(a) Plan monitoring strategy. Each plan must contain a practicable,
effective, and efficient monitoring strategy to evaluate sustainability
in the plan area (Sec. Sec. 219.19 through 219.21). The strategy must
require monitoring of appropriate plan decisions and characteristics of
sustainability.
(1) Monitoring and evaluation of ecological sustainability. The
plan monitoring strategy for the monitoring and evaluation of
ecological sustainability must require monitoring of:
(i) Ecosystem diversity. Monitoring must be used to evaluate the
status and trend of selected physical and biological characteristics of
ecosystem diversity (Sec. 219.20(a)(1)). The plan monitoring strategy
must document the reasons for selection of characteristics to be
monitored, monitoring objectives, methodology, and designate critical
values that will prompt reviews of plan decisions.
(ii) Species diversity. Monitoring must be used to evaluate focal
species and species-at-risk as follows:
(A) The status and trends of ecological conditions known or
suspected to support focal species and selected species-at-risk must be
monitored. The plan monitoring strategy must document the reasons for
the selection of species-at-risk for which ecological conditions are to
be monitored, including the degree of risk to the species, the factors
that put the species at risk, and the strength of association between
ecological conditions and population dynamics.
(B) In addition to monitoring of ecological conditions, the plan
monitoring strategy may require population monitoring for some focal
species and some species-at-risk. This monitoring may be accomplished
by a variety of methods including population occurrence and presence/
absence data, sampling population characteristics, using population
indices to track relative population trends, or inferring population
status from ecological conditions.
(C) A decision by the responsible official to monitor populations
and the responsible official's choice of methodologies for monitoring
selected focal species and selected species-at-risk may be based upon
factors that include, but are not limited to, the degree of risk to the
species, the degree to which a species' life history characteristics
lend themselves to monitoring, the reasons that a species is included
in the list of focal species or species-at-risk, and the strength of
association between ecological conditions and population dynamics.
Monitoring of population trend is often appropriate in those cases
where risk to species viability is high and population characteristics
cannot be reliably inferred from ecological conditions. The reasons for
selection of species, monitoring objectives, and methodologies must be
documented as part of the plan monitoring strategy. Critical values
that will prompt reviews of plan decisions must be designated in the
monitoring strategy.
(iii) Monitoring effectiveness. As a part of the plan monitoring
strategy, the responsible official must evaluate the effectiveness of
selected characteristics of ecosystem diversity and species diversity
in providing reliable information regarding ecological sustainability.
(2) Monitoring and evaluation of social and economic
sustainability. The plan monitoring strategy for the monitoring and
evaluation of social and economic sustainability should provide for
periodic review of national, regional, and local supply and demand for
products, services, and values. Special consideration should be given
to those uses, values, products, and services that the National Forest
System is uniquely poised to provide. Monitoring should improve the
understanding of the National Forest System contributions to social and
economic sustainability. The plan monitoring strategy must require the
responsible official to evaluate the effectiveness of information and
analyses described in Sec. 219.21(a) in providing reliable information
regarding social and economic sustainability.
(b) Monitoring of site-specific actions. The decision document
authorizing a site-specific action should describe any required
monitoring and evaluation for the site-specific action. The responsible
official must determine that there is a reasonable expectation that
anticipated funding is adequate to complete any required monitoring and
evaluation prior to authorizing a site-specific action.
(c) Monitoring methods. Unless required by the monitoring strategy,
monitoring methods may be changed to reflect new information without
plan amendment or revision.
(d) Use of monitoring information. Where monitoring and evaluation
is required by the plan monitoring strategy, the responsible official
must ensure that monitoring information is used to determine one or
more of the following:
(1) If site-specific actions are completed as specified in
applicable decision documents;
(2) If the aggregated outcomes and effects of completed and ongoing
actions are achieving or contributing to the desired conditions;
(3) If key assumptions identified for monitoring in plan decisions
remain valid; and
(4) If plan or site-specific decisions need to be modified.
(e) Coordination of monitoring activities. To the extent
practicable, monitoring and evaluation should be conducted jointly with
other federal agencies, state, local, and tribal governments,
scientific and academic communities, and others. In addition, the
responsible official must provide appropriate opportunities for the
public to be involved and utilize scientists as described in Sec.
219.23.
(f) Annual monitoring and evaluation report. The responsible
official must prepare a monitoring and evaluation report for the plan
area within 6 months following the end of each fiscal year. The report
must be maintained with the plan documents (Sec. 219.30(d)(5)), and
include the following:
(1) A list or reference to monitoring required by the plan; and
(2) A summary of the results of monitoring and evaluation performed
during the preceding fiscal year and appropriate results from previous
years. The summary must include:
(i) A description of the progress toward achievement of desired
conditions within the plan area; and
[[Page 67067]]
(ii) A description of the plan area's contribution to the
achievement of applicable outcomes of the Forest Service national
strategic plan.
Collaborative Planning for Sustainability
Sec. 219.12 Collaboration and cooperatively developed landscape
goals.
(a) Collaboration. To promote sustainability, the responsible
official must actively engage the American public, interested
organizations, private landowners, state, local, and Tribal
governments, federal agencies, and others in the stewardship of
National Forest System lands. To engage people in the stewardship of
National Forest System lands, the responsible official may assume many
roles, such as leader, organizer, facilitator, or participant. The
responsible official must provide early and frequent opportunities for
people to participate openly and meaningfully in planning taking into
account the diverse roles, jurisdictions, and responsibilities of
interested and affected organizations, groups, and individuals. The
responsible official has the discretion to determine how to provide
these opportunities in the planning process.
(b) Cooperatively developed landscape goals. (1) The responsible
official and other Forest Service employees involved in planning must
invite and encourage others to engage in the collaborative development
of landscape goals. Using information from broad-scale assessments or
other available information, and subject to applicable laws, the
responsible official may initiate or join ongoing collaborative efforts
to develop or propose landscape goals for areas that include National
Forest System lands.
(2) During collaborative efforts, responsible officials and other
Forest Service employees, must communicate and foster understanding of
the nation's declaration of environmental policy as set forth in
section 101(b) of the National Environmental Policy Act, as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321-4347), which states that it is the continuing
responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable means,
consistent with other essential considerations of national policy, to
improve and coordinate federal plans, functions, programs, and
resources to the end that the Nation may--
(i) Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of
the environment for succeeding generations;
(ii) Assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and
esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
(iii) Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment
without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and
unintended consequences;
(iv) Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of
our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment
which supports diversity, and variety of individual choice;
(v) Achieve a balance between population and resource use which
will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's
amenities; and
(vi) Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the
maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources.
(3) Cooperatively developed landscape goals, whether the result of
efforts initiated by the Forest Service or others, must be deemed an
issue for the purposes under Sec. 219.4.
Sec. 219.13 Coordination among Federal agencies.
The responsible official must provide early and frequent
coordination with appropriate Federal agencies and may provide
opportunities:
(a) For interested or affected Federal agencies to participate in
the identification of issues and formulation of proposed actions;
(b) For the streamlined coordination of Federal agency policies,
resource management plans, or programs; and
(c) The development, where appropriate and practicable, of joint
resource management plans.
Sec. 219.14 Involvement of State and local governments.
The responsible official must provide early and frequent
opportunities for State and local governments to:
(a) Participate in the planning process, including the
identification of issues; and
(b) Contribute to the streamlined coordination of resource
management plans or programs.
Sec. 219.15 Interaction with American Indian tribes and Alaska
Natives.
(a) The Forest Service shares in the Federal Government's overall
trust responsibility for federally recognized American Indian tribes
and Alaska Natives.
(b) During planning, the responsible official must consider the
government-to-government relationship between American Indian or Alaska
Native tribal governments and the Federal Government.
(c) The responsible official must consult with and invite American
Indian tribes and Alaska Natives to participate in the planning process
to assist in:
(1) The early identification of treaty rights, treaty-protected
resources, and American Indian tribe trust resources;
(2) The consideration of tribal data and resource knowledge
provided by tribal representatives; and
(3) The consideration of tribal concerns and suggestions during
decisionmaking.
Sec. 219.16 Relationships with interested individuals and
organizations.
The responsible official must:
(a) Make planning information available to the extent allowed by
law;
(b) Conduct planning processes that are fair, meaningful, and open
to persons with diverse opinions;
(c) Provide early and frequent opportunities for participation in
the identification of issues;
(d) Encourage interested individuals and organizations to work
collaboratively with one another to improve understanding and develop
cooperative landscape and other goals;
(e) Consult with individuals and organizations who can provide
information about current and historic public uses within an assessment
or plan area, about the location of unique and sensitive resources and
values and cultural practices related to issues in the plan area; and
(f) Consult with scientific experts and other knowledgeable
persons, as appropriate, during consideration of collaboratively
developed landscape goals and other activities.
Sec. 219.17 Interaction with private landowners.
The responsible official must seek to collaborate with those who
have control or authority over lands adjacent to or within the external
boundaries of national forests or grasslands to identify:
(a) Local knowledge;
(b) Potential actions and partnership activities;
(c) Potential conditions and activities on the adjacent lands that
may affect management of National Forest System lands, or vice versa;
and
(d) Issues (Sec. 219.4).
Sec. 219.18 Role of advisory committees.
(a) Advisory committees. Advisory committees can provide an
immediate, representative, and predictable structure within which
public dialogue can occur and the Forest Service can develop
relationships with diverse communities of interests. The responsible
official may seek the assistance or advice from a committee, consistent
with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C.
app.) in determining whether there is a
[[Page 67068]]
reasonable basis to propose an action to address an issue. Each Forest
or Grassland Supervisor must have access to an advisory committee with
knowledge of local conditions and issues, although an advisory
committee is not required for each national forest or grassland.
Responsible officials may request establishment of advisory committees
and recommend members to the Secretary of Agriculture. Advisory
committees used by other agencies may be utilized through proper
agreements.
(b) Participation in other types of community-based groups. When
appropriate, the responsible official should consider participating in
community-based groups organized for a variety of public purposes,
particularly those groups organized to develop landscape goals (Sec.
219.12(b)).
Ecological, Social, and Economic Sustainability
Sec. 219.19 Ecological, social, and economic sustainability.
Sustainability, composed of interdependent ecological, social, and
economic elements, embodies the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of
1960 (16 U.S.C. 528 et seq.) without impairment to the productivity of
the land and is the overall goal of management of the National Forest
System. The first priority for stewardship of the national forests and
grasslands is to maintain or restore ecological sustainability to
provide a sustainable flow of uses, values, products, and services from
these lands.
Sec. 219.20 Ecological sustainability.
To achieve ecological sustainability, the responsible official must
ensure that plans provide for maintenance or restoration of ecosystems
at appropriate spatial and temporal scales determined by the
responsible official.
(a) Ecological information and analyses. Ecosystem diversity and
species diversity are components of ecological sustainability. The
planning process must include the development and analysis of
information regarding these components at a variety of spatial and
temporal scales. These scales include geographic areas such as
bioregions and watersheds, scales of biological organization such as
communities and species, and scales of time ranging from months to
centuries. Information and analyses regarding the components of
ecological sustainability may be identified, obtained, or developed
through a variety of methods, including broad-scale assessments and
local analyses (Sec. 219.5), and monitoring results (Sec. 219.11).
For plan revisions, and to the extent the responsible official
considers appropriate for plan amendments or site-specific decisions,
the responsible official must develop or supplement the following
information and analyses related to ecosystem and species diversity:
(1) Characteristics of ecosystem and species diversity.
Characteristics of ecosystem and species diversity must be identified
for assessing and monitoring ecological sustainability. In general,
these identified characteristics should be consistent at various scales
of analyses.
(i) Ecosystem diversity. Characteristics of ecosystem diversity
include, but are not limited to:
(A) Major vegetation types. The composition, distribution, and
abundance of the major vegetation types and successional stages of
forest and grassland systems; the prevalence of invasive or noxious
plant or animal species.
(B) Water resources. The diversity, abundance, and distribution of
aquatic and riparian systems including streams, stream banks, coastal
waters, estuaries, groundwater, lakes, wetlands, shorelines, riparian
areas, and floodplains; stream channel morphology and condition, and
flow regimes.
(C) Soil resources. Soil productivity; physical, chemical and
biological properties; soil loss; and compaction.
(D) Air resources. Air quality, visibility, and other air resource
values.
(E) Focal species. Focal species that provide insights to the
larger ecological systems with which they are associated.
(ii) Species diversity. Characteristics of species diversity
include, but are not limited to, the number, distribution, and
geographic ranges of plant and animal species, including focal species
and species-at-risk that serve as surrogate measures of species
diversity. Species-at-risk and focal species must be identified for the
plan area.
(2) Evaluation of ecological sustainability. Evaluations of
ecological sustainability must be conducted at the scope and scale
determined by the responsible official to be appropriate to the
planning decision. These evaluations must describe the current status
of ecosystem diversity and species diversity, risks to ecological
sustainability, cumulative effects of human and natural disturbances,
and the contribution of National Forest System lands to the ecological
sustainability of all lands within the area of analysis.
(i) Evaluation of ecosystem diversity. Evaluations of ecosystem
diversity must include, as appropriate, the following:
(A) Information about focal species that provide insights to the
integrity of the larger ecological system to which they belong.
(B) A description of the biological and physical properties of the
ecosystem using the characteristics identified in paragraph (a)(1)(i)
of this section.
(C) A description of the principal ecological processes occurring
at the spatial and temporal scales that influence the characteristic
structure and composition of ecosystems in the assessment or analysis
area. These descriptions must include the distribution, intensity,
frequency, and magnitude of natural disturbance regimes of the current
climatic period, and should include other ecological processes
important to ecological sustainability, such as nutrient cycling,
migration, dispersal, food web dynamics, water flows, and the
identification of the risks to maintaining these processes. These
descriptions may also include an evaluation of the feasibility of
maintaining natural ecological processes as a tool to contribute to
ecological sustainability.
(D) A description of the effects of human activities on ecosystem
diversity. These descriptions must distinguish activities that had an
integral role in the landscape's ecosystem diversity for a long period
of time from activities that are of a type, size, or rate that were not
typical of disturbances under which native plant and animal species and
ecosystems developed.
(E) An estimation of the range of variability of the
characteristics of ecosystem diversity, identified in paragraph
(a)(l)(i) of this section, that would be expected under the natural
disturbance regimes of the current climatic period. The current values
of these characteristics should be compared to the expected range of
variability to develop insights about the current status of ecosystem
diversity.
(F) An evaluation of the effects of air quality on ecological
systems including water.
(G) An estimation of current and foreseeable future Forest Service
consumptive and non-consumptive water uses and the quantity and quality
of water needed to support those uses and contribute to ecological
sustainability.
(H) An identification of reference landscapes to provide for
evaluation of the effects of actions.
(ii) Evaluations of species diversity. Evaluations of species
diversity must include, as appropriate, assessments of the risks to
species viability and the identification of ecological conditions
needed to maintain species viability over time based on the following:
[[Page 67069]]
(A) The viability of each species listed under the Endangered
Species Act as threatened, endangered, candidate, and proposed species
must be assessed. Individual species assessments must be used for these
species.
(B) For all other species, including other species-at-risk and
those species for which there is little information, a variety of
approaches may be used, including individual species assessments and
assessments of focal species or other indicators used as surrogates in
the evaluation of ecological conditions needed to maintain species
viability.
(C) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A) of this section,
for species groups that contain many species, assessments of
functional, taxonomic, or habitat groups rather than individual species
may be appropriate.
(D) In analyzing viability, the extent of information available
about species, their habitats, the dynamic nature of ecosystems and the
ecological conditions needed to support them must be identified.
Species assessments may rely on general conservation principles and
expert opinion. When detailed information on species habitat
relationships, demographics, genetics, and risk factors is available,
that information should be considered.
(b) Plan decisions. When making plan decisions that will affect
ecological sustainability, the responsible official must use the
information developed under paragraph (a) of this section. The
following requirements must apply at the spatial and temporal scales
that the responsible official determines to be appropriate to the plan
decision:
(1) Ecosystem diversity. Plan decisions affecting ecosystem
diversity must provide for maintenance or restoration of the
characteristics of ecosystem composition and structure within the range
of variability that would be expected to occur under natural
disturbance regimes of the current climatic period in accordance with
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(1)(iv) of this section, in
situations where ecosystem composition and structure are currently
within the expected range of variability, plan decisions must maintain
the composition and structure within the range.
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(1)(v) of this section,
where current ecosystem composition and structure are outside the
expected range of variability, plan decisions must provide for
measurable progress toward ecological conditions within the expected
range of variability.
(iii) Where the range of variability cannot be practicably defined,
plan decisions must provide for measurable progress toward maintaining
or restoring ecosystem diversity. The responsible official must use
independently peer-reviewed scientific methods other than the expected
range of variability to maintain or restore ecosystem diversity. The
scientific basis for such alternative methods must be documented in
accordance with (Sec. Sec. 219.22 through 219.25).
(iv) Where the responsible official determines that ecological
conditions are within the expected range of variability and that
maintaining ecosystem composition and structure within that range is
ecologically, socially or economically unacceptable, plan decisions may
provide for ecosystem composition and structure outside the expected
range of variability. In such circumstances, the responsible official
must use independently peer-reviewed scientific methods other than the
expected range of variability to provide for the maintenance or
restoration of ecosystem diversity. The scientific basis for such
alternative methods must be documented in accordance with (Sec. Sec.
219.22 through 219.25).
(v) Where the responsible official determines that ecological
conditions are outside the expected range of variability and that it is
not practicable to make measurable progress toward conditions within
the expected range of variability, or that restoration would result in
conditions that are ecologically, socially or economically
unacceptable, plan decisions may provide for ecosystem composition and
structure outside the expected range of variability. In such
circumstances, the responsible official must use independently peer-
reviewed scientific methods other than the expected range of
variability to provide for the maintenance or restoration of ecosystem
diversity. The scientific basis for such alternative methods must be
documented (Sec. Sec. 219.22 through 219.25).
(2) Species diversity. (i) Plan decisions affecting species
diversity must provide for ecological conditions that the responsible
official determines provide a high likelihood that those conditions are
capable of supporting over time the viability of native and desired
non-native species well distributed throughout their ranges within the
plan area, except as provided in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) through (iv) of
this section. Methods described in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section
may be used to make the determinations of ecological conditions needed
to maintain viability. A species is well distributed when individuals
can interact with each other in the portion of the species range that
occurs within the plan area. When a plan area occupies the entire range
of a species, these decisions must provide for ecological conditions
capable of supporting viability of the species and its component
populations throughout that range. When a plan area encompasses one or
more naturally disjunct and self-sustaining populations of a species,
these decisions must provide ecological conditions capable of
supporting over time viability of each population. When a plan area
encompasses only a part of a population, these decisions must provide
ecological conditions capable of supporting viability of that
population well distributed throughout its range within the plan area.
(ii) When conditions outside the authority of the agency prevent
the agency from providing ecological conditions that provide a high
likelihood of supporting over time the viability of native and desired
non-native species well distributed throughout their ranges within the
plan area, plan decisions must provide for ecological conditions well
distributed throughout the species range within the plan area to
contribute to viability of that species.
(iii) Where species are inherently rare or not naturally well
distributed in the plan area, plan decisions should not contribute to
the extirpation of the species from the plan area and must provide for
ecological conditions to maintain these species considering their
natural distribution and abundance.
(iv) Where environmental conditions needed to support a species
have been so degraded that it is technically infeasible to restore
ecological conditions that would provide a high likelihood of
supporting viability, plan decisions must provide for ecological
conditions to contribute to supporting over time viability to the
degree practicable.
(3) Federally listed threatened and endangered species. (i) Plan
decisions must provide for implementing actions in conservation
agreements with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National
Marine Fisheries Service that provide a basis for not needing to list a
species. In some situations, conditions or events beyond the control or
authority of the agency may limit the Forest Service's ability to
prevent the need for federal listing. Plan decisions should reflect the
unique opportunities
[[Page 67070]]
that National Forest System lands provide to contribute to recovery of
listed species.
(ii) Plan decisions involving species listed under the Endangered
Species Act must include, at the scale determined by the responsible
official to be appropriate to the plan decision, reasonable and prudent
measures and associated terms and conditions contained in final
biological opinions issued under 50 CFR part 402. The plan decision
documents must provide a rationale for adoption or rejection of
discretionary conservation recommendations contained in final
biological opinions.
Sec. 219.21 Social and economic sustainability.
To contribute to economic and social sustainability, the
responsible official involves interested and affected people in
planning for National Forest System lands (Sec. Sec. 219.12 through
219.18), provides for the development and consideration of relevant
social and economic information and analyses, and a range of uses,
values, products, and services.
(a) Social and economic information and analyses. To understand the
contribution national forests and grasslands make to the economic and
social sustainability of local communities, regions, and the nation,
the planning process must include the analysis of economic and social
information at variable scales, including national, regional, and local
scales. Social analyses address human life-styles, cultures, attitudes,
beliefs, values, demographics, and land-use patterns, and the capacity
of human communities to adapt to changing conditions. Economic analyses
address economic trends, the effect of national forest and grassland
management on the well-being of communities and regions, and the net
benefit of uses, values, products, or services provided by national
forests and grasslands. Social and economic analyses should recognize
that the uses, values, products, and services from national forests and
grasslands change with time and the capacity of communities to
accommodate shifts in land uses change. Social and economic analyses
may rely on quantitative, qualitative, and participatory methods for
gathering and analyzing data. Social and economic information may be
developed and analyzed through broad-scale assessments and local
analyses (Sec. 219.5), monitoring results (Sec. 219.11), or other
means. For plan revisions, and to the extent the responsible official
considers to be appropriate for plan amendments or site-specific
decisions, the responsible official must develop or supplement the
information and analyses related to the following:
(1) Describe and analyze, as appropriate, the following:
(i) Demographic trends; life-style preferences; public values;
land-use patterns; related conservation and land use policies at the
state and local level; cultural and American Indian tribe and Alaska
Native land settlement patterns; social and cultural history; social
and cultural opportunities provided by national forest system lands;
the organization and leadership of local communities; community
assistance needs; community health; and other appropriate social and
cultural information;
(ii) Employment, income, and other economic trends; the range and
estimated long-term value of market and non-market goods, uses,
services, and amenities that can be provided by national forest system
lands consistent with the requirements of ecological sustainability,
the estimated cost of providing them, and the estimated effect of
providing them on regional and community well-being, employment, and
wages; and other appropriate economic information. Special attention
should be paid to the uses, values, products, or services that the
Forest Service is uniquely poised to provide;
(iii) Opportunities to provide social and economic benefits to
communities through natural resource restoration strategies;
(iv) Other social or economic information, if appropriate, to
address issues being considered by the responsible official (Sec.
219.4).
(2) Analyze community or region risk and vulnerability. Risk and
vulnerability analyses assess the vulnerability of communities from
changes in ecological systems as a result of natural succession or
potential management actions. Risk may be considered for geographic,
relevant occupational, or other related communities of interest.
Resiliency and community capacity should be considered in a risk and
vulnerability analysis. Risk and vulnerability analysis may also
address potential consequences to communities and regions from land
management changes in terms of capital availability, employment
opportunities, wage levels, local tax bases, federal revenue sharing,
the ability to support public infrastructure and social services, human
health and safety, and other factors as necessary and appropriate.
(b) Plan decisions. When making plan decisions that will affect
social or economic sustainability, the responsible official must use
the information analyses developed in paragraph (a) of this section.
Plan decisions contribute to social and economic sustainability by
providing for a range of uses, values, products, and services,
consistent with ecological sustainability.
The Contribution of Science
Sec. 219.22 The overall role of science in planning.
(a) The responsible official must ensure that the best available
science is considered in planning. The responsible official, when
appropriate, should acknowledge incomplete or unavailable information,
scientific uncertainty, and the variability inherent in complex
systems.
(b) When appropriate and practicable and consistent with applicable
law, the responsible official should provide for independent,
scientific peer reviews of the use of science in planning. Independent,
scientific peer reviews are conducted using generally accepted
scientific practices that do not allow individuals to participate in
the peer reviews of documents they authored or co-authored.
Sec. 219.23 The role of science in assessments, analyses, and
monitoring.
(a) Broad-scale assessments. If the Forest Service is leading a
broad-scale assessment, the assessment must be led by a Chief Scientist
selected by the Deputy Chief of Research and Development. When
appropriate and practicable, a responsible official may provide for
independent, scientific peer review of the findings and conclusions
originating from a broad-scale assessment. Independent, scientific peer
review may be provided by scientists from the Forest Service, other
federal, state, or tribal agencies, or other institutions.
(b) Local analyses. Though not required, a responsible official may
include scientists in the development or technical reviews of local
analyses and field reviews of the design and selection of subsequent
site-specific actions.
(c) Monitoring. (1) The responsible official must include
scientists in the design and evaluation of monitoring strategies.
Additionally, the responsible official must provide for an independent,
scientific peer review of plan monitoring on at least a biennial basis
to validate adherence to appropriate protocols and methods in
collecting and processing of monitoring samples and to validate that
data are summarized and interpreted properly.
(2) When appropriate and practicable, the responsible official
should include scientists in the review of monitoring
[[Page 67071]]
data and analytical results to determine trends relative to ecological,
economic, or social sustainability.
Sec. 219.24 Science consistency evaluations.
(a) The responsible official must ensure that plan amendments and
revisions are consistent with the best available science. The
responsible official may use a science advisory board (Sec. 219.25) to
assist in determining whether information gathered, evaluations
conducted, or analyses and conclusions reached in the planning process
are consistent with the best available science. If the responsible
official decides to use a science advisory board, the board and the
responsible official are to jointly establish criteria for the science
advisory board and the responsible official to use in reviewing the
consistency of proposed plan amendments and revisions with the best
available science.
(b) The science advisory board is responsible for organizing and
conducting a scientific consistency evaluation to determine the
following:
(1) If relevant scientific (ecological, social, or economic)
information has been considered by the responsible official in a manner
consistent with current scientific understanding at the appropriate
scales;
(2) If uncertainty of knowledge has been recognized, acknowledged,
and adequately documented; and
(3) If the level of risk in achievement of sustainability is
acknowledged and adequately documented by the responsible official.
(c) If substantial disagreement among members of the science
advisory board or between the science advisory board and the
responsible official is identified during a science consistency
evaluation, a summary of such disagreement should be noted in the
appropriate environmental documentation within Forest Service NEPA
procedures.
Sec. 219.25 Science advisory boards.
(a) National science advisory board. The Forest Service Deputy
Chief for Research and Development must establish, convene, and chair a
science advisory board to provide scientific advice on issues
identified by the Chief of the Forest Service. Board membership must
represent a broad range of scientific disciplines including, but not
limited to, the physical, biological, economic, and social sciences.
(b) Regional science advisory boards. Based upon needs identified
by Regional Forester(s) or Research Station Director(s), the Forest
Service Research Station Director(s), should establish and convene
science advisory boards consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (5 U.S.C. app.) to provide advice to one or more Regional Foresters
regarding the application of science in planning and decisionmaking for
National Forest System lands. At least one regional science advisory
board must be available for each national forest and grassland. The
Station Director(s) must chair the board or appoint a chair of such
boards. The geographical boundaries of the boards need not align with
National Forest System Regional boundaries. Board membership must
represent a broad range of science disciplines including, but not
limited to, the physical, biological, economic, and social sciences.
Regional science advisory board tasks may include, but are not limited,
to:
(1) Evaluating significance and relevance of new information
related to current plan decisions, including the results of monitoring
and evaluation; and
(2) Evaluating science consistency as described in Sec. 219.24.
(c) Work groups. With the concurrence of the appropriate chair and
subject to available funding, the national or regional science advisory
boards may convene work groups to study issues and provide
recommendations.
Special Considerations
Sec. 219.26 Identifying and designating suitable uses.
National forests and grasslands are suitable for a wide variety of
public uses, such as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, timber
harvest, off-road vehicle travel, or other uses except where lands are
determined to be unsuited for a particular use. Lands are not suited
for a particular use if that use: is prohibited by law, regulation, or
Executive Order; is incompatible with the mission or policies of the
National Forest System; or would result in substantial and permanent
impairment of the productivity of the land. Through a plan amendment or
revision, the responsible official may determine whether specific uses
may begin, continue, or terminate within the plan area. Planning
documents should describe or display lands suitable for various uses in
areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic
adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and conditions.
Sec. 219.27 Special designations.
The Forest Service may recommend special designations to higher
authorities or, to the extent permitted by law, adopt special
designations through plan amendment or revision. Special designations
are areas within the National Forest System that are identified for
their unique or special characteristics and include the following:
(a) Congressionally designated areas. Congressionally designated
areas may include, but are not limited to, wilderness, wild and scenic
rivers, national trails, scenic areas, recreation areas, and monuments.
These nationally significant areas must be managed as required by
Congress and may have specific requirements for their management.
(b) Wilderness area reviews. Unless federal statute directs
otherwise, all undeveloped areas that are of sufficient size as to make
practicable their preservation and use in an unimpaired condition must
be evaluated for recommended wilderness designation during the plan
revision process. These areas may be evaluated at other times as
determined by the responsible official.
(c) Administratively designated areas. Administratively designated
areas may include, but are not limited to, critical watersheds,
research natural areas, national monuments, geological areas,
inventoried roadless areas, unroaded areas, motorized and non-motorized
recreation areas, botanical areas, and scenic byways.
Sec. 219.28 Determination of land suitable for timber harvest.
(a) Lands where timber may not be harvested. The plan must identify
lands within the plan area where timber may not be harvested. These
lands include:
(1) Lands where timber harvest would violate statute, Executive
Order, or regulation and those lands that have been withdrawn from
timber harvest by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Chief of the
Forest Service;
(2) Lands where technology is not available for conducting timber
harvesting without causing irreversible damage to soil, slope, or other
watershed conditions or produce substantial and permanent impairment of
the productivity of the land; and
(3) Lands where there are no assurances that such lands can be
adequately restocked within 5 years after harvest;
(b) Lands where timber may be harvested for timber production. The
responsible official may establish timber production as a multiple-use
plan objective for lands not identified in paragraph (a) of this
section if the costs of timber production are justified by the
ecological, social, or economic benefits considering physical,
economic, and other pertinent factors to the extent
[[Page 67072]]
feasible. Lands where timber production is not established as a plan
objective are deemed not suited for timber production. These lands must
be reviewed by the responsible official at least once every 10 years,
or as prescribed by law, to determine their suitability for timber
production considering physical, economic, and other pertinent factors
to the extent feasible. Based on this review, timber production may be
established as a plan objective for these lands through amendment or
revision of the plan.
(c) Lands where timber may be harvested for other multiple-use
values. Except for lands identified in paragraph (a) of this section,
timber may be harvested from land where timber production is not
established as a plan objective if, based on a site-specific analysis,
the responsible official determines and documents that such timber
harvest would contribute to achievement of desired conditions and
ecological sustainability, and is necessary to protect multiple-use
values other than timber production.
Sec. 219.29 Limitation on timber harvest.
(a) Estimate of the limitation of timber harvest. The responsible
official must estimate the amount of timber that can be sold annually
in perpetuity on a sustained-yield basis from National Forest System
lands other than those identified in Sec. 219.28(a). This estimate
must be based on the yield of timber that can be removed consistent
with achievement of objectives or desired conditions in the applicable
plan. In those cases where a national forest has less than 200,000
acres of forested land identified in lands other than those in Sec.
219.28(a), two or more national forests may be combined for the purpose
of estimating amount of timber that can be sold annually on a
sustained-yield basis. Estimations for lands where timber production is
established as a plan objective Sec. 219.28(b) and estimations for
lands identified in Sec. 219.28(c) cannot be combined.
(b) Limitation of timber harvest. The responsible official must
limit the sale of timber from the lands where timber production is an
objective and from other lands to a quantity equal to or less than that
estimated in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Exceptions to limitations of timber harvest. For purposes of
limiting the sale of timber, the responsible official may sell timber
from areas that are substantially affected by fire, wind, or other
events, or for which there is an imminent threat from insects or
disease, and may either substitute such timber for timber that would
otherwise be sold or, if not feasible, sell such timber over and above
the plan limit established in paragraph (b) of this section. If
departure from the quantity of timber removal established in paragraph
(b) of this section is necessary to meet overall multiple-use
objectives, the requirements in 16 U.S.C. 1611 must be followed.
Planning Documentation
Sec. 219.30 Plan documentation.
A plan is a repository of documents that integrates and displays
the desired conditions, objectives, standards, and other plan decisions
that apply to a unit of the National Forest System. The plan also
contains maps, monitoring and evaluation results, the annual monitoring
and evaluation report, and other information relevant to how the plan
area is to be managed. Planning documents should be clear,
understandable, and readily available for public review. Plan documents
should be updated through amendments, revision, and routine maintenance
(Sec. 219.31). Plan documents include, at a minimum, the following:
(a) A summary of the plan. The summary is a concise description of
the plan that includes a summary of the plan decisions and a
description of the plan area and appropriate planning units. The
summary should include a brief description of the ecological, social,
and economic environments within the plan area and the overall strategy
for maintenance or restoration of sustainability, including desired
conditions and objectives for their achievement. The summary also
includes appropriate maps, a description of the transportation system,
utility corridors, land ownership patterns and proposed land ownership
adjustments, charts, figures, photographs, and other information to
enhance understanding.
(b) Display of public uses. The plan documents must identify the
suitability of the plan area for various uses (Sec. 219.26) such as
recreation uses, livestock grazing, timber harvest, and mineral
developments. The plan documents must identify land where timber may
not be harvested and where timber production is an objective (Sec.
219.28). The plan documents also must describe the limitations on the
removal of timber (Sec. 219.29) and the standards for timber harvest
and regeneration methods (Sec. 219.7(c)).
(c) Plan decisions. The plan documents must display or describe the
plan decisions (Sec. 219.7).
(d) Display of actions and outcomes. The plan documents must also
contain:
(1) An annually updated list or other display of proposed,
authorized, and completed actions to achieve desired conditions and
objectives within the plan area;
(2) A 2-year schedule, updated annually, of anticipated outcomes
which may include anticipated uses, values, products, or services based
on an estimate of Forest Service budget and capacity to perform the
identified program of work. The estimate of Forest Service budget and
capacity should be based on recent funding levels;
(3) A 2-year summary, updated annually, of the actual outcomes
which may include specific uses, values, products, or services provided
as a result of completed site-specific actions;
(4) A projected range of outcomes which may include anticipated
uses, values, products, and services for the next 15 years, assuming
current or likely budgets while considering other spending levels as
appropriate. These projections are estimates and as such often contain
a high degree of uncertainty; they are intended to describe expected
progress in achieving desired conditions and objectives within the plan
area. The projections are to be updated during revision of each plan;
(5) A description of the monitoring strategy to occur in the plan
area and the annual monitoring and evaluation report; and
(6) A summary of the projected program of work, updated annually,
including costs for inventories, assessments, proposed and authorized
actions, and monitoring. The projected program of work must be based on
reasonably anticipated funding levels. Reasonably anticipated funding
levels should be based on recent funding levels. The plan documents
must also include a description of the total current-year budget,
funded actions, projections for future budgets over the next 2 years;
and a display of the budget trends over at least the past 5 years.
(e) Other components. A plan must contain or reference a list of
materials, Forest Service policies, and decisions used in forming plan
decisions. The information should include, but is not limited to, lists
of previous decision and environmental documents, assessments,
conservation agreements and strategies, biological opinions,
inventories, administrative studies, monitoring results, and research
relevant to adoption of plan decisions.
Sec. 219.31 Maintenance of the plan and planning records.
(a) Each National Forest or Grassland Supervisor must maintain a
complete
[[Page 67073]]
set of the planning documents required under Sec. 219.30 that
constitute the plan for the unit. The set of documents must be readily
available to the public using appropriate and relevant technology.
(b) The following administrative corrections and additions may be
made at any time, are not plan amendments or revisions, and do not
require public notice or the preparation of an environmental document
under Forest Service NEPA procedures:
(1) Corrections and updates of data and maps;
(2) Updates to activity lists and schedules as required by Sec.
219.30(d)(1) through (6);
(3) Corrections of typographical errors or other non-substantive
changes; and
(4) Changes in monitoring methods other than those required in a
monitoring strategy (Sec. 219.11(c)).
Objections and Appeals
Sec. 219.32 Objections to plan amendments or plan revisions.
(a) Any person may object to a proposed amendment or revision
prepared under the provisions of this subpart, except for an amendment
or revision proposed by the Chief. The objection must be filed within
30 calendar days from the date that the Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability of a final environmental impact
statement regarding a proposed amendment or revision in the Federal
Register, or within 30 calendar days of the publication of a public
notice of a proposed amendment not requiring preparation of an
environmental impact statement. Within 10 days after the close of the
objection period, the Responsible Official shall publish notice of all
objections in the local newspaper of record. An objection must be filed
with the reviewing officer identified in the notice and contain:
(1) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the person
filing the objection;
(2) A specific statement of the basis for each objection; and
(3) A description of the objector's participation in the planning
process for the proposed amendment or revision, including a copy of any
relevant documents submitted during the planning process.
(b) Objectors may request meetings with the reviewing officer and
the responsible official to discuss the objection, to narrow the
issues, agree on facts, and explore opportunities for resolution. The
reviewing officer must allow other interested persons to participate in
such meetings. An interested person must file a request to participate
in an objection within ten days after publication of the notice of
objection as described in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) The reviewing officer must respond, in writing, to an objection
within a reasonable period of time and may respond to all objections in
one response. The reviewing officer's response regarding an objection
is the final decision of the Department of Agriculture.
(d) The responsible official may not approve a proposed amendment
or revision until the reviewing officer has responded to all
objections. A decision by the responsible official approving an
amendment or revision must be consistent with the reviewing officer's
response to objections to the proposed amendment or revision.
(e) Where the Forest Service is a participant in a multi-agency
decision subject to objection under this subpart, the responsible
official and reviewing officer may waive the objection procedures of
this subpart to adopt the administrative review procedure of another
participating federal agency, if the responsible official and the
responsible official of the other agencies agree to provide a joint
response to those who have filed for administrative review of the
multi-agency decision.
(f) The information collection requirements of this section have
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget and assigned
control number 0596-0158.
Sec. 219.33 Appeals of site-specific decisions.
If a site-specific decision is proposed in conjunction with a plan
amendment or revision, a person may object to the proposed plan
amendment or revision as described in (Sec. 219.32). If a decision is
made to authorize a site-specific action, a person may request
administrative review of that decision as described in 36 CFR part 215.
Applicability and Transition
Sec. 219.34 Applicability.
The provisions of this subpart are applicable to all units of the
National Forest System as defined by 16 U.S.C. 1609.
Sec. 219.35 Transition.
(a) The transition period begins on November 9, 2000, and ends upon
the completion of the revision process (Sec. 219.9) for each unit of
the National Forest System. During the transition period, the
responsible official must consider the best available science in
implementing and, if appropriate, amending the plan.
(b) Until the Department promulgates superseding planning
regulations pursuant to the National Forest Management Act, 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.
(c) If a review of lands not suited for timber production is
required before the completion of the revision process, the review must
take place as described by the provisions of Sec. 219.28, except as
provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
(d) The date by which site-specific decisions made by the
responsible official must be in conformance with the provisions of this
subpart is extended from November 9, 2003, until the Department
promulgates superseding planning regulations pursuant to the National
Forest Management Act.
(e) Within 1 year of November 9, 2000, the Regional Forester must
withdraw the regional guide. When a regional guide is withdrawn, the
Regional Forester must identify the decisions in the regional guide
that are to be transferred to a regional supplement of the Forest
Service directive system (36 CFR 200.4) or to one or more plans and
give notice in the Federal Register of these actions. The transfer of
direction from a regional guide to a regional supplement of the Forest
Service directive system or to one or more plans does not constitute an
amendment, revision, or site-specific action subject to Forest Service
NEPA procedures.
(f) Within 3 years after completion of the revision process for a
unit, the responsible official must complete the first monitoring and
evaluation report as required in Sec. 219.11(f).
(g) Within 1 year of November 9, 2000, the Chief of the Forest
Service must establish a schedule for completion of the revision
process for each unit of the National Forest System.
Appendix A to Sec. 219.35
Interpretive Rule Related to Sec. 219.35(b)
The Department is making explicit its preexisting understanding of
Sec. 219.35(b) with regard to the appeal or objection procedures that
may be applied to amendments or revisions of land and resource
management plans during the transition from the appeal procedures in
[[Page 67074]]
effect prior to November 9, 2000, to the objection procedures of Sec.
219.32 as follows:
1. During the transition period, the option to proceed under the
1982 regulations or under the provisions of this subpart specifically
includes the option to select either the objection procedures of this
subpart or the optional appeal procedures published at 54 FR 3357
(January 23, 1989), as amended at 54 FR 13807 (April 5, 1989); 54 FR
34509 (August 21, 1989); 55 FR 7895 (March 6, 1990); 56 FR 4918
(February 6, 1991); 56 FR 46550 (September 13, 1991); and 58 FR 58915
(November 4, 1993).
Appendix B to Sec. 219.35
Interpretative Rule Related to Sec. 219.35(a) and (b)
The Department is clarifying the intent of the transition
provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of Sec. 219.35 with regard to the
consideration and use of the best available science to inform project
decisionmaking that implements a land management plan as follows:
1. Under the transition provisions of paragraph (a), the
responsible official must consider the best available science in
implementing and, if appropriate, in amending existing plans. Paragraph
(b) allows the responsible official to elect to prepare plan amendments
and revisions using the provisions of the 1982 planning regulation
until a new final planning rule is adopted.
2. Until a new final rule is promulgated, the transition provisions
of Sec. 219.35 remain in effect. The 1982 rule is not in effect.
During the transition period, responsible officials may use the
provisions of the 1982 rule to prepare plan amendments and revisions.
Projects implementing land management plans must comply with the
transition provisions of Sec. 219.35, but not any other provisions of
the 2000 planning rule. Projects implementing land management plans and
plan amendments, as appropriate, must be developed considering the best
available science in accordance with Sec. 219.35(a). Projects
implementing land management plans must be consistent with the
provisions of the governing plan.
Definitions
Sec. 219.36 Definitions.
Definitions of the special terms used in this subpart are set out
in alphabetical order in this section as follows:
Adaptive management: An approach to natural resource management
wherein the effects of policies, plans, and actions are monitored for
the purpose of learning and adjusting future management actions.
Successive iteration of the adaptive process is essential in
contributing to sustainability.
Assessment or analysis area: The geographic area included within
the scope of a broad-scale assessment or local analysis.
Candidate species: Species identified by the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), which are considered to be candidates for listing under the
Endangered Species Act as published in the Federal Register.
Conservation agreement: A formal agreement between the Forest
Service and the USFWS and/or NMFS identifying management actions
necessary to prevent the need to list species under the Endangered
Species Act.
Current climatic period: The period of time since establishment of
the modern major vegetation types, which typically encompass the late
Holocene Epoch including the present, including likely climatic
conditions within the planning period. The climatic period is typically
centuries to millennia in length, a period of time that is long enough
to encompass the variability that species and ecosystems have
experienced.
Desired condition: A statement describing a common vision for a
specific area of land or type of land within the plan area. Statements
of desired conditions should include the estimated time required for
their achievement.
Desired non-native species: Those species of plants or animals
which are not indigenous to an area but valued for their contribution
to species diversity or their high social, cultural or economic value.
Disturbance regime: Actions, functions, or events that influence or
maintain the structure, composition, or function of terrestrial or
aquatic ecosystems. Natural disturbances include, among others,
drought, floods, wind, fires, insects, and pathogens. Human-caused
disturbances include actions such as recreational use, livestock
grazing, mining, road construction, timber harvest, and the
introduction of exotic species.
Diversity of plant and animal communities: The distribution and
relative abundance of plant and animal communities and their component
species occurring within an area.
Ecological conditions: Components of the biological and physical
environment that can affect the diversity of plant and animal
communities, including species viability, and the productive capacity
of ecological systems. These could include the abundance and
distribution of aquatic and terrestrial habitats, roads and other
structural developments, human uses, and invasive and exotic species.
Ecological sustainability: The maintenance or restoration of the
composition, structure, and processes of ecosystems including the
diversity of plant and animal communities and the productive capacity
of ecological systems.
Ecosystem composition: The plant and animal species and communities
in the plan area.
Ecosystem processes: Ecological functions such as photosynthesis,
energy flow, nutrient cycling, water movement, disturbance, and
succession.
Ecosystem structure: The biological and physical attributes that
characterize ecological systems.
Focal species: Focal species are surrogate measures used in the
evaluation of ecological sustainability, including species and
ecosystem diversity. The key characteristic of a focal species is that
its status and trend provide insights to the integrity of the larger
ecological system to which it belongs. Individual species, or groups of
species that use habitat in similar ways or which perform similar
ecological functions, may be identified as focal species. Focal species
serve an umbrella function in terms of encompassing habitats needed for
many other species, play a key role in maintaining community structure
or processes, are sensitive to the changes likely to occur in the area,
or otherwise serve as an indicator of ecological sustainability.
Certain focal species may be used as surrogates to represent ecological
conditions that provide for viability of some other species, rather
than directly representing the population dynamics of those other
species.
Forest Service NEPA procedures: The Forest Service policy and
procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and the Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR
chapter V) as described in Chapter 1950 of the Forest Service Manual
and Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Environmental Policy and
Procedures Handbook (See 36 CFR 200.4 for availability).
Inherently rare species: A species is inherently rare if it occurs
in only a limited number of locations, has low population numbers, or
has both limited occurrences and low population numbers, and those
conditions are natural characteristics of the life history and ecology
of the species and not
[[Page 67075]]
primarily the result of human disturbance.
Inventoried roadless areas: Areas are identified in a set of
inventoried roadless area maps, contained in Forest Service Roadless
Area Conservation, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2,
dated May 2000, which are held at the National headquarters office of
the Forest Service, or any subsequent update or revision of those maps.
Major vegetation types: Plant communities, which are typically
named after dominant plant species that are characteristic of the
macroclimate and geology of the region or sub-region.
Native species: Species of the plant and animal kingdom indigenous
to the plan area or assessment area.
Plan area: The geographic area of National Forest System lands
covered by an individual land and resource management plan. The area
may include one or more administrative units.
Productive capacity of ecological systems: The ability of an
ecosystem to maintain primary productivity including its ability to
sustain desirable conditions such as clean water, fertile soil,
riparian habitat, and the diversity of plant and animal species; to
sustain desirable human uses; and to renew itself following
disturbance.
Range of variability: The expected range of variation in ecosystem
composition, and structure that would be expected under natural
disturbance regimes in the current climatic period. These regimes
include the type, frequency, severity, and magnitude of disturbance in
the absence of fire suppression and extensive commodity extraction.
Reference landscapes: Places identified in the plan area where the
conditions and trends of ecosystem composition, structure, and
processes are deemed useful for setting objectives for desired
conditions and for judging the effectiveness of plan decisions.
Responsible official: The officer with the authority and
responsibility to oversee the planning process and make decisions on
proposed actions.
Reviewing officer: The supervisor of the responsible official.
Social and economic sustainability: Meeting the economic, social,
aesthetic, and cultural needs and desires of current generations
without reducing the capacity of the environment to provide for the
needs and desires of future generations, considering both local
communities and the nation as a whole. It also involves the capacity of
citizens to communicate effectively with each other and to make sound
choices about their environment.
Species: Any member of the animal or plant kingdom that is
described as a species in a peer-reviewed scientific publication and is
identified as a species by the responsible official pursuant to a plan
decision, and must include all species listed under the Endangered
Species Act as threatened, endangered, candidate, or proposed for
listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine
Fisheries Service.
Species-at-risk: Federally listed endangered, threatened,
candidate, and proposed species and other species for which loss of
viability, including reduction in distribution or abundance, is a
concern within the plan area. Other species-at-risk may include
sensitive species and state listed species. A species-at-risk also may
be selected as a focal species.
Species viability: A species consisting of self-sustaining and
interacting populations that are well distributed through the species'
range. Self-sustaining populations are those that are sufficiently
abundant and have sufficient diversity to display the array of life
history strategies and forms to provide for their long-term persistence
and adaptability over time.
Successional stages: The different structural and compositional
phases of vegetation development of forests and grasslands that occur
over time following disturbances that kill, remove, or reduce
vegetation and include the major developmental or seral stages that
occur within a particular environment.
Timber production: The sustained long-term and periodic harvest of
wood fiber from National Forest System lands undertaken in support of
social and economic objectives identified in one or more land and
resource management plans. For purposes of this regulation, the term
timber production includes fuel wood.
Undeveloped areas: Areas, including but not limited to inventoried
roadless areas and unroaded areas, within national forests or
grasslands that are of sufficient size and generally untrammeled by
human activities such that they are appropriate for consideration for
wilderness designation in the planning process.
Unroaded areas: Any area, without the presence of a classified
road, of a size and configuration sufficient to protect the inherent
characteristics associated with its roadless condition. Unroaded areas
do not overlap with inventoried roadless areas.
Subpart B--[Reserved]
Dated: December 8, 2009.
Harris D. Sherman,
Under Secretary, NRE.
[FR Doc. E9-30171 Filed 12-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P