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

','

(JUU1.;;Ll

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

72775

authority granted by MUSY A as the
overall goal for managing the National
Forest System.
This section of the rule sels forth a
clear process for establIshing. amending,
and revising plans and for monitoring
plan implementation. As provided in
~219.1 of the 2000 rule. this proposed
rule also recognizes that planning may
consider many time framt!s and
geographic areas C1nd that it is an
ongoing process. However, the proposed
rule would not determine the selection
or implementation of site-specific
actions. Rather. the proposed rule
requires documentation thi3! a future
project decision is consistent with the
plan. The agency believes that a rule
which focuses solely on programmatic-
level planning will be better understood
and more consistently applied than a
rule that includes direction on both
programmatic and project-level
decisionmaking. Agency guidelines on
project-level planning are specified in
FSM 1950and FSH 1909.15.
The USDA Office of General Counsel,
Natural Resources Division working
paper entitled "Overview of Forest
Planning and Project Level
D8cisionmaking," describes the naturl:
of the agency's two-staged
decision making process. The paper is
available on the World Wide Web at
www.fs.fed.uslemclnfmo. The relevant
iSS'.l8S, levels and kinds of analysis
needed, and decisions to be made in a
programmatic plan are quite different
from those required for development of
site-specific projects. The paragraph in
this section regarding the applicability
of the proposed rule is the same as
S 219.34 of the 2000 rule, except thaI it
adds a reference to subsequent statutes
in order to allow for any future
additions to the National Forest System.
Proposed section 219.2-Nature and
scope of Llland and resource
management plan. This section of the
proposed rule establishes the
fundamental purpose of a plan and
provides specific requirements on how
that purpose will bEl met. In contrast to
99219,1-219,5 of the 2000 rule, this
proposed section describes the nature of
a land and resource management plan
concisely, and, thereby. sets the stage
for a planning process that is more
tlexible and efficient.
Proposed paragraph (a) of this section
establishes that the fundamental
purpose of a plan is (1) to establish the
desired conditions to be achieved
through the management of the lands
and various renewable resources of the
National Forest System and (2) to guide
the Forest Service in fulfilling its
responsibilities for stewardship of the
National Forest System to best meet tho

presenl and future needs of the
American people. This concept is
central to the planning vision. In
contrast to the lengthy and nO]1-
regulatory exposition of SS 219.1-219.5
of the 2000 mle. ~ 219.2 of this
proposed rule concisely describes the
nature of a land and resource
management plan.
Proposed paragraph (b) is somewhat
similar to ~ 219.2 oftlIe 2000 rule in that
it sets out principles on which that rule
is based. Rather than dwelling on
principles modifying the rules.
however, paragraph (b) imposes core
requirements for which the Responsible
Official will be held accountable in plan
development, amendment or revision.
While brief i1nd concise, l118se
requirements tOLlch all the major
principles covered in 9219.2 of the 2000
rule-sustainability, use of science,
consultation with government agencies
and Tribes. public participation,
interdisciplinary planning, and
monitoring and evaluation.
Proposed paragraph (c) recognizes the
role of plans in integrating the various
statutory authorities applicable to
National Forest System management. It
also recognizes the Forest Service
Oirecti ve System as the primary source
of agency-wide management direction
relevant to planning and management of
National Forest System lands and
resources. Planning is conducted in the
context of the body of environmental
laws, regulations, Executive orders, and
policy. The plan itself does not
generally repeat existing law, regulation.
Executive order, or policy but rather
interprets their requirements as they
apply to the plan area.
Although fhe proposed rule does not
explicitly address integrating statutory
authorities, it does at ~ 219.1(a) identify
the principal authorities applicable to
National Forest System lands.
Paragraph (d) of proposed ~ 219.2
describes the force and effect of land
and resource management plans,
making clear that:
. These plans do not grant, \vithhold,
or modify any contract, permit.
authorizatiori, or other legal instrument;
. These plans do not subject anyone
to civil or criminalliabilitv; and
. These plans create no'legal rights.
This proposed paragraph better
recognizes the programmatic nature of
plans than the 2000 rule, and therefore,
more accurately describes the n,Hure of
a land and resource management plan.
Since a plan provides only the
framework for management, a plan
normally does not specifically authorize
any ground-disturbing activities nor
does it specifically commit funding or
resources. Therefore, the analysis

associated with a plan should be
proportional to the level of decisions
made in a plan. Also, a plan focuses all
desired conditions. It zones the forest.
grassland, or prairie into defined areas
where activities could occur to help
meet those desired conditions and sets
out a program for monitoring progress
toward desired conditions. This kind of
plan can be supported by an analysis
that evaluates, on a broad level, the
areas' suitability for future potential
activities.
The typo of plan level analysis that
the Forest Service has found most useful
for developing a plan. and for project
analysis thereafter. is baseline and
general trend analysis, which gives as
complete a picture of the forest or
grassland as possible at one time and
provides the best information of trends
of natural processes and of uses in the
plan area and surrounding lands. The
Forest Service wm continue such
analyses in the planning process. The
Forest Service believes that
environmental analyses are most useful
when done in the development of site-
specific decisions that will executo on-
the-ground management. More
specifically, while a plan guides project
implementation. extensi\'e up-front
effects disclosure is generally too
speculative to bo useful for project
analysis. Thus, the opportunity to "tier"
a project's NEPA analysis to a plan EIS,
as provided in NEPA regulations (40
CFR 1502.20), is useful only for certain
aspects of analysis and in practice has
proven mOl'e theoretical than real. 'The
Forest Service therefore intends to
conduct most detailed analysis on the
site-specific project level. '
Plan management direction should be
flexible and allow for adaptive
management. Monitoring should not
only measure progress toward desired
conditions but also help measure the
success of adaptive management
strategies and actions.
A plan is generally a zoning
document. It may allow for later. site-
specific authorization of activities and
may restrict activities in specific areas.
There are different ways this zoning is
applied depending on the type of
existing or potential future activities.
For example, a plan may allow
transportation development or
motorized use on some portions of the
National Forest System unit, but not on
others. Such a plan decision does not
immediatelv authorize road
construclio;l, but rather identifies zones
where road construction may occur in
the {u\.me, ba'5ed on a.n appropriate
project-specific NEPA analysis, public
involvement, and a future decision.