WSP09638

• File Number: 8027
• Description: Section D General Correspondence - Federal Agencies ‎(Alpha, not Basin Related)‎
• Date: 12/6/2002
• Author: USDA Forest Service
• Title: RMP - Proposed Rules - Federal Register - Part III - 36 CFR Part 219 - National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning: Proposed Rules
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

"

~'

U,hJlld

Federal Register / Vol. 67, No, 235/ Friday, December 6, 2002/ Proposed Rules

72773

on consensus-based identification of
and reasonable choices for desired
conditions.
. Planning will continue to actively
involve our Federal. State. county, and
Tribal partners.
. Science wi II be integrated
throughout the planning process, from
initial data collection and
interpretation, through issue
identification, to the analysis process, to
development and design of monitoring.
and later to evaluation of monitoring
results.
. The agency's strategic plan.
national assessments, and monitoring
results will provide lIseful information
for the development of land and
resource management plans and a
national context for planning.
. Planning analysis will be more
focused on desired conditions rather
than speculative and detailed
examinatIOn of fulure project effects.
. Planning will continue to focus on
addressing baseline conditions and
trends applicable to the planning issues.
Baseline condition and trend analvsis
will clearly display anticipated progress
toward desired conditions if active
management occurs and also what may
happen if active management is
restricted.
. Planning analysis will focus on
reasonf'lhlp. choices for zoning the
landscape.
. Planning will recognize budget
limitations in order to help the
Responsible Official prioritize and
balance competing planning activities.
such as choosing the appropriate
approach for monitoring watersheds.

Plan Contents

The agency's vision of planning
expects a land and resource
management plan to contain:
. Broad, programmatic direction for a
forest. grassland, or prairie. Plans will
make such key strategic decisions as
identification of priority areas for
wildfire hazard reduction; designating
major utility corridors: identification of
areas of especially high diversity. or
areas containing rare or unique species.
ecosystems, or biotic communities that
need certain protections: identification
of lands at the broad-scale (not an acre-
by-acre determination) suitable for
timber harvest or grazing, or other
consumptive uses; identification of
areas suitable for motorized use; and
identification of areas where certain
types of recreation use may be
emphasized.
. More specific statements of desired
conditions for such resources as
vegetation, recreation, cultural and
heritage resources, and watersheds,

developed within the context of
ecological. economic, and social
systems.
. More specific outcome-based
objectives (i.e., measurable standards of
performance).
. A set of standards that set
appropriate limitations on activities to
help achieve desired conditions.
Standards will be fewer, simpler, and
better allow for adapti....e management
than existing plans.
. Identified special areas, such as
areas recommended for wilderness or
wild and scenic river status. Plans will
continue to include specific direction
for these areas.
. As needed, associated materials
such as maps or other documents
necessary to make plan decisions.
. Plans will be brief and will refer to.
rather than repeat, what is already in the
Forest Service Directive System,
existing law, regulation, or policy.
. Collaborative work with the public
and emphasis on consensus building
should lead to fewer unresolved issues
and, therefore, fewer plan alternatives.
The goal of the agency is to have a
planning rule that is simpler and easier
to implement than the 2000 rule and
that allows the agency to more easily
adapt to changing issues and
opportunities. Available agency
budgets. personnel availability, and
other resomce limitations are
recognized as important because they
help provide a framework for the
Responsible Official to make decisions
such as the following: What issues can
the Responsible Official reasonably
address? What method will be used to
solicit meaningful public involvement?
What are the pressing resource needs?
What data needs to be collected? Does
the unit need to hire specialists to
support the planning action? Are
contracts needed to obtain various kinds
of information? Recognition of budget
availability and limitations helps the
Responsible Official make choices about
how to weigh and balance competing
needs and to consider the costs and
benefits of various actions for optimal
results.
The proposed rule retains the
important improvements of the 2000
rule. These indude:
. Emphasis on sustainability:
. Strong public involvement and
collaboration;
. Use of science throughout the
planning process;
. An emphasis on monitoring and
evaluation as fundamental to adaptive
management;
. Need-for-change planning;
. Use of the objection process;

. The identification of the Forest,
Grassland. or Prairie Supervisor as the
Responsible Official; and
. The concept of planning as a
dynamic process.
The Forest Service believes the
proposed rule will apply these
important improvements more
efficiently than does the 2000 rule. The
Forest Service believes that the
proposed rule provides as efficient a
planning process as possible within the
scope of the National Forest
Management Act (NFMA) requirements.
In addition to retention of the key
improvements, the agency also looked
to earlier versions of published and
unpublished proposed planning rules as
sources of ideas in revising specific
sections. Finally, the Forest Service has
applied over 20 years of planning
experience to craft this proposed rule.
It is also useful at this point to discuss
in more detail one important component
of the body of direction that governs the
Responsible Official's actions. The
Forest Service Directive System consists
of the Forest Service Manual (FSMJ and
Handbook (FSH), which codify the
agency's policy, practice. and
procedure. The system serves as the
primary basis for the internal
management and control of all programs
and the primary source of
administrative direction to Forest
Service employees.
The FSM contains legal authorities,
objectives, policies, responsibilities,
instructions, and guidance needed on a
continuing basis by Forest Service line
officers and primary staff in more than
one unit to plan and execute assigned
programs and activities. The FSH is the
principal source of specialized guidance
and instruction for carrying out the
direction issued in the FSM. Examples
include Handbooks on land
management planning and
environmental analysis.
As discussed throughout this
proposed rule, the Directive System
plays and will continue to play an
important role in directing field
employees on how to conduct planning.
Section 219.5 of the 2000 rule is a
specific example of direction belter
included in the agency's Directive
System. The agency believes that much
of the process direction, such as
potential uses of an assessment (e.g..
identification of additional research
needs). or who has responsibility for a
broad-scale assessment (Regiomil
Foresters and Station Directors). or
examples of what a local analysis
should describe (e.g. likely future
conditions, characterizations of the area
of analysis) are more appropriately
addressed in the Directive System, not

i

/

;'