Preparation for Sale, 69714-69717 [05-22779]
Download as PDF
69714
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
The area would be depicted on
aeronautical charts for pilot reference.
The coordinates for this airspace docket
are based on North American Datum 83.
The Class E airspace areas designated as
700/1200 foot transition areas are
published in paragraph 6005 in FAA
Order 7400.9N, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated September
1, 2005, and effective September 15,
2004, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this
document would be published
subsequently in the Order.
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current. It,
therefore—(1) is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant
rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February
26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as
the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will
only affect air traffic procedures and air
navigation, it is certified that this rule,
when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator.
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the
agency’s authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated
under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section
40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace.
Under that section, the FAA is charged
with prescribing regulations to ensure
the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace. This regulation is
within the scope of that authority
because it proposes to establish Class E
airspace sufficient in size to contain
aircraft executing instrument
procedures at Koyuk Airport and
represents the FAA’s continuing effort
to safely and efficiently use the
navigable airspace.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as
follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS;
AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING
POINTS
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9N,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated September 1, 2005, and
effective September 15, 2005, is to be
amended as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet or more above the
surface of the earth.
*
*
*
AAL AK E5
*
*
Koyuk, AK [Revised]
Koyuk Airport, AK
(Lat. 64°56′22″ N., long. 161°09′15″ W.)
Koyuk NDB, AK
(Lat. 64°55′55″ N., long. 161°08′52″ W.)
Norton Bay NDB, AK
(Lat. 64°41′46″ N., long. 162°03′47″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 9-mile radius
of the Koyuk Airport and 4 miles west and
8 miles east of the Koyuk NDB 210° bearing
extending from the 9-mile radius to 17 miles
southwest of the airport; and that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the
surface within 5 miles west and 11 miles east
of the Koyuk NDB 210° bearing extending
from the NDB to 30 miles southwest of the
NDB and 4.5 miles either side of the line
between the Norton Bay NDB and the Koyuk
NDB, and the area within 20 miles of the
Koyuk Airport extending clockwise from the
Koyuk NDB 140° bearing to the 187° bearing,
and the area within 25 miles of the Koyuk
Airport extending clockwise from the Koyuk
NDB 220° bearing to the 230° bearing.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Anchorage, AK, on November 8,
2005.
Michael A. Tarr,
Manager, Operations Support.
[FR Doc. 05–22772 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:59 Nov 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 5420
[WO–270–1820–00–24 1A]
RIN 1004–AD70
Preparation for Sale
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) proposes to amend
its regulations on preparation for timber
sales to allow third party scaling on
density management sales with an
upper limit on the quadratic mean
diameter at breast height (DBH) of the
trees to be harvested of 20 inches. Third
party scaling would be limited to the
situations described in the amended
provision, that is, if a timber disaster
has occurred and a critical resource loss
is imminent, and tree cruising and BLM
scaling are inadequate to permit orderly
disposal of the damaged timber, or if
BLM is carrying out density
management timber sales subject to the
size limits stated above. Thus, third
party scaling would generally not be
used for sales of higher-value and/or
larger diameter timber. BLM is
amending the regulations in order to
improve the efficiency of density
management timber sales where the
timber to be harvested may be
designated by prescription (a written
prescription included in the timber sale
contract). The regulations will no longer
require that BLM perform all scaling
except in the event that a timber disaster
is threatening imminent critical
resource loss, and scaling by BLM
would be inadequate to permit orderly
disposal of the damaged timber. In the
case of density management timber sales
when the quadratic mean DBH of trees
to be cut and removed is equal to or less
than 20 inches, the regulations will only
allow third party scaling by scalers or
scaling bureaus under contract to BLM.
DATES: Comments must be received,
postmarked, or electronically dated on
or before January 17, 2006. BLM will not
necessarily consider any comments
received, postmarked, or electronically
dated after the above date in making its
decision on the final rule.
ADDRESSES: Mail: Director (630), Bureau
of Land Management, Eastern States
Office, 7450 Boston Boulevard,
Springfield, Virginia 22153, Attention:
RIN 1004–AD70.
Personal or messenger delivery: 1620
L Street NW., Suite 401, Washington,
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
DC 20036. Internet e-mail:
comments_washington@blm.gov.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions about the rule,
contact Lyndon Werner at (503) 808–
6071 or Scott Lieurance at (202) 452–
0316. For procedural questions about
the rulemaking process, contact Ted
Hudson at (202) 452–5042. Persons who
use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may contact these persons
through the Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339, 24
hours a day, 7 days a week.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
information (such as: Internet address,
FAX or phone number) from public
review or from disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act, you must
state this prominently at the beginning
of your comment. BLM will honor
requests for confidentiality on a case-bycase basis to the extent allowed by law.
BLM will make available for public
inspection in their entirety all
submissions from organizations or
businesses, and from individuals
identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses.
II. Background
BLM Districts have been testing
I. Public Comment Procedures
different methods of selling timber, such
II. Background
as Designation-by-Prescription (DxP),
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
attempting to gain efficiencies,
IV. Procedural Matters
especially with a program comprised of
substantially more density management
I. Public Comment Procedures
and small logs than was historically the
Electronic Access and Filing Address
case. This testing has revealed that the
You may view an electronic version of gain in efficiency by using such
this proposed rule at BLM’s Internet
methods is lost due to the regulatory
home page: https://www.blm.gov. You
requirement that BLM personnel
may also comment via the Internet to:
conduct all the scaling if a DxP sale is
Comments_Washington@blm.gov. Please scale as opposed to lump-sum.
also include ‘‘Attention: 1004-AD70’’
Otherwise, scale DxP sales can be more
and your name and return address in
efficient in certain situations (small
your Internet message. If you do not
diameter density management).
receive a confirmation from the system
43 CFR 5422.1 states: ‘‘[a]s the general
that we have received your Internet
practice, the Bureau will sell timber on
message, contact us directly at (202)
a tree cruise basis,’’ which means lump452–5030.
sum sales. Section 5422.2(a) states:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
‘‘[s]caling by the Bureau will be used
www.regulations.gov.
from time to time for administrative
reasons.’’ Lump-sum is the default, and
Written Comments
there must be an interest-of-theWritten comments on the proposed
Government reason to conduct a scale
rule should be specific, should be
sale.
confined to issues pertinent to the
43 CFR 5422.2(b) allows third-party
proposed rule, and should explain the
scaling when all of three conditions are
reason for any recommended change.
met:
Where possible, comments should
(1) A timber disaster has occurred;
reference the specific section or
(2) A critical resource loss is
paragraph of the proposal which the
imminent; and
commenter is addressing. BLM may not
(3) Lump-sum timber measurement
necessarily consider or include in the
practices are inadequate to permit
Administrative Record for the final rule orderly disposal of the damaged timber.
Regular commercial density
comments which BLM receives after the
close of the comment period (See DATES) management sales obviously do not
meet these conditions. The definition of
or comments delivered to an address
third-party scaling found in 43 CFR
other than those listed above (See
5400.0–5 is ‘‘the measurement of logs by
ADDRESSES).
Comments, including names, street
a scaling organization, other than a
addresses, and other contact
Government agency, approved by the
information of respondents, will be
Bureau.’’ This includes the nonavailable for public review at 1620 L
governmental Scaling Bureaus that
Street, NW., Room 401, Washington,
normally contract with purchasers to
DC, during regular business hours (7:45
scale in mill yards. BLM does contract
a.m. to 4:15 p.m.), Monday through
with these Scaling Bureaus to scale for
Friday, except Federal holidays.
administrative check scales.
Historically, BLM timber sales,
Individual respondents may request
particularly in western Oregon, were
confidentiality. If you wish to request
clearcuts of high-value large timber. Log
that BLM consider withholding your
accountability was the principal reason
name, street address, and other contact
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:59 Nov 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69715
for the aforementioned regulations
limiting scale sales and third-party
scaling. These provisions are intended
to minimize the potential for log theft.
Today’s sale program, however, has a
considerable component of density
management sales in lower-value,
smaller-log situations that meet one or
more of the following objectives:
Growth enhancement, habitat
restoration, or fuels/fire hazard
reduction. Density management sales
are timber sales intended to accomplish
these objectives by removing smaller
trees and understory that may inhibit
growth or forest health or contribute to
fuel buildup. In addition, density
management sales intended to enhance
wildlife habitat may remove some
dominant and co-dominant trees in the
forest stand to enhance biological
diversity. Smaller logs cannot be
efficiently and effectively truck scaled.
Scaling in the mill yards as trucks are
unloaded is faster and more accurate.
BLM does not intend a major shift to
scale sales for density management.
Rather, we seek to have a multifaceted
‘‘tool kit’’ of sale method options in
order to maintain as cost effective a
program as possible. It is not in the best
interest of the Government to scale all
density management sales. In certain
cases, the costs of administering a lumpsum sale are less than costs of
conducting scaling, making the lumpsum sale the preferred in-the-interest-ofthe-Government option.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would add one
sentence to section 5422.2 on scale
sales: ‘‘BLM may also order third party
scaling, only by scalers or scaling
bureaus under contract to BLM, for the
scaling of density management timber
sales when the quadratic mean diameter
of the trees to be cut and removed is
equal to or less than 20 inches.’’ (The
quadratic mean diameter is a measure
used by foresters as an index of the size
of trees in a stand. According to the
Dictionary of Forestry, the quadratic
mean diameter is the diameter of the
tree corresponding to the tree of mean
basal area. Basal area is the crosssectional area of a tree measured at
breast height. The basal area of a tree
with DBH equal to the quadratic mean
diameter is equal to the mean basal area
of the stand.) This will enable us to
conduct density management sales
while taking advantage of the improved
economies that third party scaling may
provide, such as by allowing scaling in
the mill yards as trucks are unloaded,
which is faster and more accurate.
For the sake of clarity, we also
propose to divide section 5422.2(b) into
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
69716
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
three paragraphs, the second of which
would comprise this new provision.
Paragraph (b)(1) would consist of the
first sentence of existing paragraph (b),
which covers the disaster situation in
which third party scaling is allowed,
and paragraph (b)(3) would consist of
the second sentence of existing
paragraph (b), which requires that third
party scaling must follow BLM
standards in use for timber depletion
computations, so that we can make sure
that sales conform with sustained yield
principles. Redesignated paragraph
(b)(1) would also be amended editorially
to read in active voice. Neither
paragraph (b)(1) nor (b)(3) would
contain substantive changes.
IV. Procedural Matters
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review
This proposed rule is not a significant
regulatory action and is not subject to
review by Office of Management and
Budget under Executive Order 12866.
The proposed rule will not have an
effect of $100 million or more on the
economy. The average cost of contract
scaling is approximately $1.50 per
thousand board feet. The approximate
average annual number of sales
contracts over the past several years that
would qualify for third party scaling
under the proposed rule has been ten
sales. The new provision would enable
BLM to prepare and administer certain
contracts (that otherwise qualify to be
sold as a scale sale) more efficiently,
saving approximately $90,000 per year.
These savings are not directly passed
onto purchasers. There may be a slight
saving to a purchaser of a scale sale over
a lump sum sale due to their not having
to conduct pre-sale measures of the sale
volume to the same intensity.
For the same reasons, the proposed
rule will not adversely affect in a
material way the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local,
or tribal governments or communities.
The rule would impose no requirements
on any governmental entities.
The proposed rule will not create a
serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency. The
approach in the proposed rule is similar
to that of the Forest Service in using
third-party scaling.
The proposed rule does not alter the
budgetary effects of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the right
or obligations of their recipients, having
no effect on any of these matters; nor do
they raise novel legal or policy issues.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:59 Nov 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
Clarity of the Regulations
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Executive Order 12866 requires each
agency to write regulations that are
simple and easy to understand. We
invite your comments on how to make
these proposed regulations easier to
understand, including answers to
questions such as the following:
1. Are the requirements in the
proposed regulations clearly stated?
2. Do the proposed regulations
contain technical language or jargon that
interferes with their clarity?
3. Does the format of the proposed
regulations (grouping and order of
sections, use of headings, paragraphing,
etc.) aid or reduce their clarity?
4. Would the regulations be easier to
understand if they were divided into
more (but shorter) sections? (A
‘‘section’’ appears in bold type and is
preceded by the symbol ‘‘§’’ and a
numbered heading, for example
‘‘§ 5422.2 Scale sales.’’)
5. Is the description of the proposed
regulations in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this preamble
helpful in understanding the proposed
regulations? How could this description
be more helpful in making the proposed
regulations easier to understand?
Please send any comments you have
on the clarity of the regulations to the
address specified in the ADDRESSES
section.
Congress enacted the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, 5
U.S.C. 601–612, to ensure that
Government regulations do not
unnecessarily or disproportionately
burden small entities. The RFA requires
a regulatory flexibility analysis if a rule
would have a significant economic
impact, either detrimental or beneficial,
on a substantial number of small
entities. The proposed rule would likely
provide additional business
opportunities to scalers and scaling
bureaus, which are mostly if not all
small entities. The average cost of
contract scaling is approximately $1.50
per thousand board feet. The
approximate average annual number of
sales contracts over the past several
years that would qualify for third party
scaling under the proposed rule has
been ten sales. The new provision
would enable BLM to prepare and
administer certain contracts (that
otherwise qualify to be sold as a scale
sale) more efficiently, saving
approximately $90,000 per year. These
savings are not directly passed onto the
purchasers. There may be a slight saving
to a purchaser of a scale sale over a
lump sum sale due to their not having
to conduct pre-sale measures of the sale
volume to the same intensity. Therefore,
BLM has determined under the RFA
that this proposed rule would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
National Environmental Policy Act
BLM has determined that this
proposed rule authorizing certain timber
cuts to be scaled by BLM-approved third
parties is a regulation of an
administrative and financial nature.
Therefore, it is categorically excluded
from environmental review under
section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act, pursuant to
516 Departmental Manual (DM),
Chapter 2, Appendix 1. In addition, the
proposed rule does not meet any of the
10 criteria for exceptions to categorical
exclusions listed in 516 DM, Chapter 2,
Appendix 2. Pursuant to Council on
Environmental Quality regulations (40
CFR 1508.4) and the environmental
policies and procedures of the
Department of the Interior, the term
‘‘categorical exclusions’’ means a
category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment and that have been found
to have no such effect in procedures
adopted by a Federal agency and for
which neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental
impact statement is required.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This proposed rule is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined at 5 U.S.C. 804(2). That
is, it would not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more; it
would not result in major cost or price
increases for consumers, industries,
government agencies, or regions; and it
would not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
It would merely allow BLM to contract
out a management step in timber
volume measurement for some types of
timber sales to non-governmental
entities that can operate more efficiently
than the Bureau.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
These proposed regulations do not
impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments or the
private sector, in the aggregate, of $100
million or more per year; nor do these
proposed regulations have a significant
or unique effect on State, local, or tribal
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
governments. The rule would impose no
requirements on any of these entities.
We have already shown, in the previous
paragraphs of this section of the
preamble, that the change proposed in
this rule would not have effects
approaching $100 million per year on
the private sector. Therefore, BLM is not
required to prepare a statement
containing the information required by
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights (Takings)
The proposed rule is not a
government action capable of interfering
with constitutionally protected property
rights. The rule would allow BLM to
contract out one step in the timber
volume measurement process, and
would not provide for the taking or
reduction in value of, or any other effect
on any private property. Therefore, the
Department of the Interior has
determined that the rule would not
cause a taking of private property or
require further discussion of takings
implications under this Executive
Order.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The proposed rule will not have a
substantial direct effect 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. It would not apply
to states or local governments or state or
local governmental entities. Therefore,
in accordance with Executive Order
13132, BLM has determined that this
proposed rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant
preparation of a federalism assessment.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform
Under Executive Order 12988, the
Office of the Solicitor has determined
that this proposed rule would not
unduly burden the judicial system and
that it meets the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order
13175, we have found that this
proposed rule does not include policies
that have Tribal implications. There are
no substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:59 Nov 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
There will be some small economic
benefit to scalers and scaling bureaus,
and therefore to any American Indians
that may be employed by or otherwise
financially connected to such entities.
There are, however, no policy
implications that require consultation
with Indian Tribes.
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
In accordance with Executive Order
13211, BLM has determined that the
proposed rule will not have substantial
direct effects on the energy supply,
distribution, or use, including a shortfall
in supply or price increase. The rule
does not relate to energy supply,
distribution, or use in any respect.
Executive Order 13352, Facilitation of
Cooperative Conservation
In accordance with Executive Order
13352, BLM has determined that this
proposed rule is purely administrative
and does not affect cooperative
conservation. This proposed rule takes
appropriate account of and considers
the interests of persons with ownership
or other legally recognized interests in
land or other natural resources because
it does not interfere with such interests.
The proposed rule solely affects a
Federal responsibility not involving
state or local participation, and has no
impact on public health and safety.
Paperwork Reduction Act
These proposed regulations do not
contain information collection
requirements that the Office of
Management and Budget must approve
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
69717
Dated: November 3, 2005.
Chad Calvert,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Land and
Minerals Management.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in
the preamble and under the authorities
stated below, BLM proposes to amend
43 CFR part 5420 as set forth below:
PART 5420—PREPARATION FOR
SALE
1. The authority citation for part 5420
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 61 Stat. 681, as amended, 69
Stat. 367; Sec. 5, 50 Stat. 875; 30 U.S.C. 601
et seq.; 43 U.S.C. 1181e.
Subpart 5422—Volume Measurements
2. Amend section 5422.2 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 5422.2
Scale sales.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) (1) BLM may order third party
scaling after determining that all of the
following factors exist:
(i) A timber disaster has occurred;
(ii) A critical resource loss is
imminent; and
(iii) Measurement practices listed in
§ 5422.1 and paragraph (a) of this
section are inadequate to permit orderly
disposal of the damaged timber.
(2) BLM may also order third party
scaling, only by scalers or scaling
bureaus under contract to BLM, for the
scaling of density management timber
sales when the quadratic mean diameter
of the trees to be cut and removed is
equal to or less than 20 inches.
(3) Third party scaling volumes must
be capable of being equated to BLM
standards in use for timber depletion
computations, to insure conformance
with sustained yield principles.
[FR Doc. 05–22779 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–84–P
Author
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
The principal authors of this
proposed rule are Kenny McDaniel,
Manager, Gunnison Field Office,
Colorado, Scott Lieurance, Forester—
Senior Specialist, Washington Office,
and Lyndon Werner, Forester, Oregon
State Office, assisted by Ted Hudson,
Senior Regulatory Specialist,
Washington Office, Bureau of Land
Management.
Fish and Wildlife Service
List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 5420
Forests and forest products,
Government contracts, Public lands,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018–AU23
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Distinct Population
Segment of the California Tiger
Salamander in Sonoma County
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 221 (Thursday, November 17, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69714-69717]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22779]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 5420
[WO-270-1820-00-24 1A]
RIN 1004-AD70
Preparation for Sale
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposes to amend its
regulations on preparation for timber sales to allow third party
scaling on density management sales with an upper limit on the
quadratic mean diameter at breast height (DBH) of the trees to be
harvested of 20 inches. Third party scaling would be limited to the
situations described in the amended provision, that is, if a timber
disaster has occurred and a critical resource loss is imminent, and
tree cruising and BLM scaling are inadequate to permit orderly disposal
of the damaged timber, or if BLM is carrying out density management
timber sales subject to the size limits stated above. Thus, third party
scaling would generally not be used for sales of higher-value and/or
larger diameter timber. BLM is amending the regulations in order to
improve the efficiency of density management timber sales where the
timber to be harvested may be designated by prescription (a written
prescription included in the timber sale contract). The regulations
will no longer require that BLM perform all scaling except in the event
that a timber disaster is threatening imminent critical resource loss,
and scaling by BLM would be inadequate to permit orderly disposal of
the damaged timber. In the case of density management timber sales when
the quadratic mean DBH of trees to be cut and removed is equal to or
less than 20 inches, the regulations will only allow third party
scaling by scalers or scaling bureaus under contract to BLM.
DATES: Comments must be received, postmarked, or electronically dated
on or before January 17, 2006. BLM will not necessarily consider any
comments received, postmarked, or electronically dated after the above
date in making its decision on the final rule.
ADDRESSES: Mail: Director (630), Bureau of Land Management, Eastern
States Office, 7450 Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 22153,
Attention: RIN 1004-AD70.
Personal or messenger delivery: 1620 L Street NW., Suite 401,
Washington,
[[Page 69715]]
DC 20036. Internet e-mail: comments_washington@blm.gov.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions about the
rule, contact Lyndon Werner at (503) 808-6071 or Scott Lieurance at
(202) 452-0316. For procedural questions about the rulemaking process,
contact Ted Hudson at (202) 452-5042. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may contact these persons
through the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339,
24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Comment Procedures
II. Background
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
IV. Procedural Matters
I. Public Comment Procedures
Electronic Access and Filing Address
You may view an electronic version of this proposed rule at BLM's
Internet home page: https://www.blm.gov. You may also comment via the
Internet to: Comments--Washington@blm.gov. Please also include
``Attention: 1004-AD70'' and your name and return address in your
Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the system
that we have received your Internet message, contact us directly at
(202) 452-5030.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Written Comments
Written comments on the proposed rule should be specific, should be
confined to issues pertinent to the proposed rule, and should explain
the reason for any recommended change. Where possible, comments should
reference the specific section or paragraph of the proposal which the
commenter is addressing. BLM may not necessarily consider or include in
the Administrative Record for the final rule comments which BLM
receives after the close of the comment period (See DATES) or comments
delivered to an address other than those listed above (See ADDRESSES).
Comments, including names, street addresses, and other contact
information of respondents, will be available for public review at 1620
L Street, NW., Room 401, Washington, DC, during regular business hours
(7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.), Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. Individual respondents may request confidentiality. If you
wish to request that BLM consider withholding your name, street
address, and other contact information (such as: Internet address, FAX
or phone number) from public review or from disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act, you must state this prominently at the
beginning of your comment. BLM will honor requests for confidentiality
on a case-by-case basis to the extent allowed by law. BLM will make
available for public inspection in their entirety all submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or
businesses.
II. Background
BLM Districts have been testing different methods of selling
timber, such as Designation-by-Prescription (DxP), attempting to gain
efficiencies, especially with a program comprised of substantially more
density management and small logs than was historically the case. This
testing has revealed that the gain in efficiency by using such methods
is lost due to the regulatory requirement that BLM personnel conduct
all the scaling if a DxP sale is scale as opposed to lump-sum.
Otherwise, scale DxP sales can be more efficient in certain situations
(small diameter density management).
43 CFR 5422.1 states: ``[a]s the general practice, the Bureau will
sell timber on a tree cruise basis,'' which means lump-sum sales.
Section 5422.2(a) states: ``[s]caling by the Bureau will be used from
time to time for administrative reasons.'' Lump-sum is the default, and
there must be an interest-of-the-Government reason to conduct a scale
sale.
43 CFR 5422.2(b) allows third-party scaling when all of three
conditions are met:
(1) A timber disaster has occurred;
(2) A critical resource loss is imminent; and
(3) Lump-sum timber measurement practices are inadequate to permit
orderly disposal of the damaged timber.
Regular commercial density management sales obviously do not meet
these conditions. The definition of third-party scaling found in 43 CFR
5400.0-5 is ``the measurement of logs by a scaling organization, other
than a Government agency, approved by the Bureau.'' This includes the
non-governmental Scaling Bureaus that normally contract with purchasers
to scale in mill yards. BLM does contract with these Scaling Bureaus to
scale for administrative check scales.
Historically, BLM timber sales, particularly in western Oregon,
were clearcuts of high-value large timber. Log accountability was the
principal reason for the aforementioned regulations limiting scale
sales and third-party scaling. These provisions are intended to
minimize the potential for log theft.
Today's sale program, however, has a considerable component of
density management sales in lower-value, smaller-log situations that
meet one or more of the following objectives: Growth enhancement,
habitat restoration, or fuels/fire hazard reduction. Density management
sales are timber sales intended to accomplish these objectives by
removing smaller trees and understory that may inhibit growth or forest
health or contribute to fuel buildup. In addition, density management
sales intended to enhance wildlife habitat may remove some dominant and
co-dominant trees in the forest stand to enhance biological diversity.
Smaller logs cannot be efficiently and effectively truck scaled.
Scaling in the mill yards as trucks are unloaded is faster and more
accurate.
BLM does not intend a major shift to scale sales for density
management. Rather, we seek to have a multifaceted ``tool kit'' of sale
method options in order to maintain as cost effective a program as
possible. It is not in the best interest of the Government to scale all
density management sales. In certain cases, the costs of administering
a lump-sum sale are less than costs of conducting scaling, making the
lump-sum sale the preferred in-the-interest-of-the-Government option.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would add one sentence to section 5422.2 on scale
sales: ``BLM may also order third party scaling, only by scalers or
scaling bureaus under contract to BLM, for the scaling of density
management timber sales when the quadratic mean diameter of the trees
to be cut and removed is equal to or less than 20 inches.'' (The
quadratic mean diameter is a measure used by foresters as an index of
the size of trees in a stand. According to the Dictionary of Forestry,
the quadratic mean diameter is the diameter of the tree corresponding
to the tree of mean basal area. Basal area is the cross-sectional area
of a tree measured at breast height. The basal area of a tree with DBH
equal to the quadratic mean diameter is equal to the mean basal area of
the stand.) This will enable us to conduct density management sales
while taking advantage of the improved economies that third party
scaling may provide, such as by allowing scaling in the mill yards as
trucks are unloaded, which is faster and more accurate.
For the sake of clarity, we also propose to divide section
5422.2(b) into
[[Page 69716]]
three paragraphs, the second of which would comprise this new
provision. Paragraph (b)(1) would consist of the first sentence of
existing paragraph (b), which covers the disaster situation in which
third party scaling is allowed, and paragraph (b)(3) would consist of
the second sentence of existing paragraph (b), which requires that
third party scaling must follow BLM standards in use for timber
depletion computations, so that we can make sure that sales conform
with sustained yield principles. Redesignated paragraph (b)(1) would
also be amended editorially to read in active voice. Neither paragraph
(b)(1) nor (b)(3) would contain substantive changes.
IV. Procedural Matters
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action and is
not subject to review by Office of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866. The proposed rule will not have an effect of
$100 million or more on the economy. The average cost of contract
scaling is approximately $1.50 per thousand board feet. The approximate
average annual number of sales contracts over the past several years
that would qualify for third party scaling under the proposed rule has
been ten sales. The new provision would enable BLM to prepare and
administer certain contracts (that otherwise qualify to be sold as a
scale sale) more efficiently, saving approximately $90,000 per year.
These savings are not directly passed onto purchasers. There may be a
slight saving to a purchaser of a scale sale over a lump sum sale due
to their not having to conduct pre-sale measures of the sale volume to
the same intensity.
For the same reasons, the proposed rule will not adversely affect
in a material way the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities. The rule would impose no requirements on
any governmental entities.
The proposed rule will not create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.
The approach in the proposed rule is similar to that of the Forest
Service in using third-party scaling.
The proposed rule does not alter the budgetary effects of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the right or
obligations of their recipients, having no effect on any of these
matters; nor do they raise novel legal or policy issues.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations
that are simple and easy to understand. We invite your comments on how
to make these proposed regulations easier to understand, including
answers to questions such as the following:
1. Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly stated?
2. Do the proposed regulations contain technical language or jargon
that interferes with their clarity?
3. Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and order
of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce their
clarity?
4. Would the regulations be easier to understand if they were
divided into more (but shorter) sections? (A ``section'' appears in
bold type and is preceded by the symbol ``Sec. '' and a numbered
heading, for example ``Sec. 5422.2 Scale sales.'')
5. Is the description of the proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble helpful in
understanding the proposed regulations? How could this description be
more helpful in making the proposed regulations easier to understand?
Please send any comments you have on the clarity of the regulations
to the address specified in the ADDRESSES section.
National Environmental Policy Act
BLM has determined that this proposed rule authorizing certain
timber cuts to be scaled by BLM-approved third parties is a regulation
of an administrative and financial nature. Therefore, it is
categorically excluded from environmental review under section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act, pursuant to 516
Departmental Manual (DM), Chapter 2, Appendix 1. In addition, the
proposed rule does not meet any of the 10 criteria for exceptions to
categorical exclusions listed in 516 DM, Chapter 2, Appendix 2.
Pursuant to Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR
1508.4) and the environmental policies and procedures of the Department
of the Interior, the term ``categorical exclusions'' means a category
of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment and that have been found to have no
such effect in procedures adopted by a Federal agency and for which
neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Congress enacted the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, to ensure that Government regulations do not
unnecessarily or disproportionately burden small entities. The RFA
requires a regulatory flexibility analysis if a rule would have a
significant economic impact, either detrimental or beneficial, on a
substantial number of small entities. The proposed rule would likely
provide additional business opportunities to scalers and scaling
bureaus, which are mostly if not all small entities. The average cost
of contract scaling is approximately $1.50 per thousand board feet. The
approximate average annual number of sales contracts over the past
several years that would qualify for third party scaling under the
proposed rule has been ten sales. The new provision would enable BLM to
prepare and administer certain contracts (that otherwise qualify to be
sold as a scale sale) more efficiently, saving approximately $90,000
per year. These savings are not directly passed onto the purchasers.
There may be a slight saving to a purchaser of a scale sale over a lump
sum sale due to their not having to conduct pre-sale measures of the
sale volume to the same intensity. Therefore, BLM has determined under
the RFA that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This proposed rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined at 5 U.S.C.
804(2). That is, it would not have an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million or more; it would not result in major cost or price
increases for consumers, industries, government agencies, or regions;
and it would not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. It
would merely allow BLM to contract out a management step in timber
volume measurement for some types of timber sales to non-governmental
entities that can operate more efficiently than the Bureau.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
These proposed regulations do not impose an unfunded mandate on
State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector, in the
aggregate, of $100 million or more per year; nor do these proposed
regulations have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or
tribal
[[Page 69717]]
governments. The rule would impose no requirements on any of these
entities. We have already shown, in the previous paragraphs of this
section of the preamble, that the change proposed in this rule would
not have effects approaching $100 million per year on the private
sector. Therefore, BLM is not required to prepare a statement
containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights (Takings)
The proposed rule is not a government action capable of interfering
with constitutionally protected property rights. The rule would allow
BLM to contract out one step in the timber volume measurement process,
and would not provide for the taking or reduction in value of, or any
other effect on any private property. Therefore, the Department of the
Interior has determined that the rule would not cause a taking of
private property or require further discussion of takings implications
under this Executive Order.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The proposed rule will not have a substantial direct effect 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. It would not apply to states or local
governments or state or local governmental entities. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 13132, BLM has determined that this
proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant preparation of a federalism assessment.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform
Under Executive Order 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has
determined that this proposed rule would not unduly burden the judicial
system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order.
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have found that this
proposed rule does not include policies that have Tribal implications.
There are no substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes,
on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes. There will be some small economic
benefit to scalers and scaling bureaus, and therefore to any American
Indians that may be employed by or otherwise financially connected to
such entities. There are, however, no policy implications that require
consultation with Indian Tribes.
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
In accordance with Executive Order 13211, BLM has determined that
the proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on the
energy supply, distribution, or use, including a shortfall in supply or
price increase. The rule does not relate to energy supply,
distribution, or use in any respect.
Executive Order 13352, Facilitation of Cooperative Conservation
In accordance with Executive Order 13352, BLM has determined that
this proposed rule is purely administrative and does not affect
cooperative conservation. This proposed rule takes appropriate account
of and considers the interests of persons with ownership or other
legally recognized interests in land or other natural resources because
it does not interfere with such interests. The proposed rule solely
affects a Federal responsibility not involving state or local
participation, and has no impact on public health and safety.
Paperwork Reduction Act
These proposed regulations do not contain information collection
requirements that the Office of Management and Budget must approve
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Author
The principal authors of this proposed rule are Kenny McDaniel,
Manager, Gunnison Field Office, Colorado, Scott Lieurance, Forester--
Senior Specialist, Washington Office, and Lyndon Werner, Forester,
Oregon State Office, assisted by Ted Hudson, Senior Regulatory
Specialist, Washington Office, Bureau of Land Management.
List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 5420
Forests and forest products, Government contracts, Public lands,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 3, 2005.
Chad Calvert,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble and under the
authorities stated below, BLM proposes to amend 43 CFR part 5420 as set
forth below:
PART 5420--PREPARATION FOR SALE
1. The authority citation for part 5420 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 61 Stat. 681, as amended, 69 Stat. 367; Sec. 5, 50
Stat. 875; 30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.; 43 U.S.C. 1181e.
Subpart 5422--Volume Measurements
2. Amend section 5422.2 by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 5422.2 Scale sales.
* * * * *
(b) (1) BLM may order third party scaling after determining that
all of the following factors exist:
(i) A timber disaster has occurred;
(ii) A critical resource loss is imminent; and
(iii) Measurement practices listed in Sec. 5422.1 and paragraph
(a) of this section are inadequate to permit orderly disposal of the
damaged timber.
(2) BLM may also order third party scaling, only by scalers or
scaling bureaus under contract to BLM, for the scaling of density
management timber sales when the quadratic mean diameter of the trees
to be cut and removed is equal to or less than 20 inches.
(3) Third party scaling volumes must be capable of being equated to
BLM standards in use for timber depletion computations, to insure
conformance with sustained yield principles.
[FR Doc. 05-22779 Filed 11-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-84-P