Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />FROM :DWR DIV4 <br /> <br />FRX NO. :970 249 8728 <br />.-...J. <br /> <br />Mar. 01 2004 02:05PM P4 <br /> <br />2.20 (a)(2)(ii)), The Ul1der Secretary is also charged under 7CFR 2.20 (a)(2)(viii) to <br />"exeroise the administrativc appeal flllJ.ctions ofthc Secretary of Agriculruro in review of <br />decisions of the C.hiefofthe Forest Service pursuant to 36 CFR parts2l5 and 217 mld 36 <br />CFR 25 I, Subpart C," Under 7 CFR 2.59, all duties antl powers delegated to the Under <br />Secretary may be performed by the Depllty Undor Secretary. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />TIle appeal.regulations allow discreu'll1ary review of the Chief's decision by the: Undcr <br />Sccrctary. The Undt;r Secretary has unlimited discretion in deciding whether O.r not to <br />undertake a discretionary review. 111e regulation identifies factors that shollld be <br />considered in muking a determination of whether to undertuke a discretiomlry review. <br />'T11.ese factors include, but axe not limited to, such factors as the "controversy surrounding <br />the decision, the potential for litigati,)fl, whether the decision is precedential in naturc, or <br />whether the decision modifies existing or eotabli~Ii.~~ new policy." '1'he Chiefs appeal <br />decision involves all ofthese factors,^ccol'dingly, r concluded that a discretionary <br />review ofthe Chief's appeal decision was warril.ll[t;d. <br /> <br />The Revised Forest Plan was p.repared under NI'MA =d its implcmenting regulations <br />promulgated in 19&2 at 36 CFR 219 (47 FR 43073, Scpt. 30, 1982): Unde!: the terms of <br />,he newly issucd NFMA planning regulations at 36 CFR 219 (65 FR 67514, November?, <br />2000), the Arapaho mid Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee Natiollal Grassland <br />Fotest Plan is governed by the 1982 version of these regulations. Accordingly, I based <br />myr~view on the 1982 regulations, Likewise, any additi')l1al planning neceSSi>ry under <br />my decision will be conducted under tho 1 9H2 regulations. All retetelJces to 36 CFR 2l? <br />in ,h.is decision refers to the 1982 version of those regulations. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Deputy Under Secrct>\ry Decision Summary <br /> <br />The Chief's appeal decision identifies issues raised in the Notice of Appeal (NOA) 1\l1d <br />gTOuped them ill fivc topic areas. 'Ine appeal decisi(m al~o contlli,t1~ an ul1"ly~is l1fthe <br />appeal poims for each issue in each topic area, and the Chiefs decision. All this <br />jnformation was analyzed and cOl1~idered during my discretionary review. Bascd upon a <br />review of the appeal record. i have decided to allil'm with clarifying discussion an.d <br />il,~tructi()Xl~ the Chief'~ ;"ml>U'Y 15, 2003 appeal decisioJ1. My deci~ioll on e"ch issue <br />di$cus~ed in t.he Chief's ttppeal.decision is as follows: <br /> <br />1. Water,....,...".....,..,.....,......,...,.... ..Chiefis affirmed, with clwifications <br />and instmctions <br />2. Wildlife and Fisheries....., ..... ........." ,chiefi~ affirmed <br />3. L"nd.~.."......,.."............ ............ ....chief is affinned <br />4, Research Natural ArcuS..,."..."""..... ,Chief is affirmed <br />5, Access and Travel Management. , . , ., ..... Chief is affirmed <br />'Ini~ deci~i(lll is th~ final administrative dctcrmination ofthe Department of Agriculture <br />under 36 CFR 217. By copy ofthi.s decision, I atnnotifying all pBl.ticipants afmy <br />decision. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />2 <br />