Sale and Disposal of National Forest System Timber; Modification of Timber Sale Contracts in Extraordinary Conditions; Noncompetitive Sale of Timber, 59187-59190 [E7-20625]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 202 / Friday, October 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
or the waiver is otherwise terminated by
Treasury.
Dated: October 11, 2007.
Kenneth R. Papaj,
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 07–5135 Filed 10–18–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–35–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 223
RIN 0596–AB70
Sale and Disposal of National Forest
System Timber; Modification of Timber
Sale Contracts in Extraordinary
Conditions; Noncompetitive Sale of
Timber
Forest Service, USDA.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This final rule revises
regulations at Title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations, part 223, on
noncompetitive disposal of timber and
other forest products based on the
Secretary of Agriculture’s determination
that extraordinary conditions exist. A
notice with request for comment on an
interim final rule was published in the
Federal Register on June 16, 2006. The
Forest Service made appropriate
changes to the rule in response to the
public comments.
DATE: This rule is effective November
19, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The public may inspect
comments received at Office of the
Director, Forest Management Staff,
Forest Service, USDA, 201 14th Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20250. Visitors
are encouraged to call ahead to (202)
205–1496 to facilitate entry to the
building.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Forest Management Staff personnel,
Lathrop Smith (202) 205–0858, or
Richard Fitzgerald (202) 205–1753.
Individuals who use
telecommunication devices for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern
Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Background
The National Forest Management Act
(NFMA), codified in part at Title 16
U.S.C. 472a(d), requires the Secretary of
Agriculture to advertise all sales of
forest products unless the appraised
value of the sale is less than $10,000, or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Oct 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
the Secretary determines that
extraordinary conditions exist, as
defined by regulation. The requirement
to advertise sales unless extraordinary
conditions exist applies to the
substitution of timber outside a sale
contract area.
Prior to NFMA, the Government
Accountability Office (formerly the
General Accounting Office) held that
substitution of timber outside the
contract area for timber in the contract
area violated the Agency’s authority to
sell timber.1 Since the passage of
NFMA, but in the absence of a
regulation defining ‘‘extraordinary
conditions,’’ the Agriculture Board of
Contract Appeals has decided similarly
in several cases.2
Before authorizing activities on
National Forest System lands, the Forest
Service must ensure compliance with
applicable laws and regulations and
with conditions on the ground at the
time of the authorization. Even so, after
entering into timber sale contracts,
environmental changes may occur such
as the listing of a new species on the
endangered species list, or a
catastrophic event may occur, such as a
large wildfire, resulting in the need to
modify the contracts. Also, court orders
and decisions resulting from
environmental litigation may require
making changes to existing contracts
even when those contracts are not
specifically named in the litigation if
they are similar to contracts that were
named. When this occurs, it is essential
for Forest Service officials to have
flexibility to adjust management
activities and contractual arrangements
without incurring enormous financial
liability associated with unilateral
modifications or contract cancellations.
At the time a sale is sold, there is no
way to predict what future litigation or
environmental changes may occur that
will result in the sale contract needing
to be changed. Each occurrence is a
unique situation that constitutes an
extraordinary condition. The Forest
Service needs the ability to provide
replacement timber or forest products
for contracts that must be modified to
prevent environmental degradation or
resource damage, or as a result of
administrative appeals, litigation, court
orders, or catastrophic events that occur
after contract award. Thus, the Forest
Service promulgated an interim final
1 Letter to Mr. Secretary, 1973 WL 7905 (Comp.
Gen.), B–177602 (1973).
2 See Appeal of Summit Contractors, 1986 WL
19566 (AGBCA), Nos. 81–252–1, No. 83–312–1 (Jan.
8, 1986), and Appeal of Jay Rucker, 1980 WL 2345
(AGBCA) Nos. 79–211A, 79–211B (June 11, 1980).
See also, Croman Corporation v. United States, 31
Fed. Cl. 741, 746–47 (August 16, 1994).
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
59187
rule, published June 16, 2006 (71 FR
34823), on noncompetitive sale of
timber and other forest products based
on the Secretary of Agriculture’s
determination that extraordinary
conditions exist whenever a timber or
forest products contract needs to be
modified or canceled to address such
unexpected changes. This benefits the
Government by providing contracting
officers with an opportunity to avert
costly claims by providing replacement
timber or forest products from outside
the contract area when replacement
timber is not available within the
contract area. Replacement timber also
helps maintain the industry
infrastructure, which in turn will
maintain forest management options.
Response to Comments
A 60-day comment period on the
interim final rule was initiated on June
16, 2006, (71 FR 34823). Only two
respondents replied. One respondent is
an individual and the other respondent
is a timber industry association.
Comment 1: The constraints that the
value of replacement material may not
exceed the value of the material it is
replacing by more than 10% or $10,000,
whichever is less, are too restrictive and
will hamper implementation and use of
this valuable tool. On small amounts of
replacement timber, 10% may represent
a very small amount of money, and on
large volumes the $10,000 may
represent a small percentage of value. If
one or both of these numbers has some
basis in law and cannot be removed, the
only fair way to deal with this situation
is to have these be upper and lower
limits.
Response 1: The limitations were
intended to reduce potential impacts to
other purchasers while making the
purchaser of a sale that must be
modified or terminated whole.
Replacement timber from outside the
sale area will most likely come from
some other sale that would otherwise be
offered competitively on the open
market. Offering substantially more
replacement timber than the amount or
value being deleted by a unilateral
termination goes beyond making a
purchaser whole, circumvents fair and
open competition and could have
detrimental consequences to other
purchasers, the public, and Forest
Service program objectives. For the
following reasons the Forest Service
agrees that the 10% limit is unnecessary
but disagrees that the $10,000 limit is
overly restrictive.
The National Forest Management Act
(NFMA) requires advertising sales
greater than $10,000 in appraised value
unless the Secretary determines, as
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
59188
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 202 / Friday, October 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
defined by regulation, that extraordinary
conditions exist (16 U.S.C. 472a(d)). The
intent of this rule is to establish the
Secretary’s determination of
extraordinary conditions so that
replacement timber of similar quantity
and value can be obtained from outside
the sale area without advertisement,
even when its total value is greater than
$10,000. The Forest Service recognizes,
however, that exact matches with the
original contract value, quantity and
quality are unlikely and that a defined
measure of acceptable deviation is
necessary. The Forest Service believes
that providing replacement timber
volume with an appraised value of no
more than $10,000 over the original
contract value is an acceptable amount
of deviation. The premise for this is that
the original value of the timber being
replaced was established after
advertisement and the opportunity for
competitive bidding in accordance with
the advertisement and competition
requirements of NFMA and its
implementing regulations. Therefore,
only the value of replacement timber
exceeding the value of the original
timber volume being replaced was not
previously subject to advertisement and
competition requirements.
Advertisement and competition of the
excess replacement timber is not
required by NFMA or the regulations so
long as the excess value remains at or
below $10,000.
The rules at 36 CFR 223.112 require
that contract modifications must not be
done in a manner that would be
injurious to the United States. For the
reasons stated above, the Forest Service
believes that replacement timber valued
at no more than $10,000 over the
original contract value adequately
accounts for differences in contract and
replacement timber value and ensures
that contracts are not modified in a
manner that would be injurious to the
United States. Imposing the $10,000
upper limit on the value of replacement
timber establishes a reasonable and
acceptable measure of deviation,
prevents a purchaser from getting a
potential windfall, and eliminates the
need for the Forest Service to determine,
on a case-by-case basis, the level of
acceptable deviation that may result in
a modification that is not injurious to
the United States. The Forest Service
does not believe this upper limit is
overly restrictive and will retain it in
the final rule. The Forest Service agrees,
however, that the 10% limit imposed in
the interim final rule is not necessary
for determining an acceptable level of
deviation, and for that reason, it will be
eliminated from the final rule.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:04 Oct 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
The respondent suggested that if there
was an upper limit there should be a
corresponding lower limit on the value
of replacement timber. For example, if
$50,000 of replacement timber is
needed, applying the $10,000 limit
addressed above would require the
value of replacement timber to be no
less than $40,000. The Forest Service
disagrees as this would have the effect
of guaranteeing replacement timber
which is simply an alternative remedy,
when it is available, to liquidated
damages addressed in the contracts.
Although the rule provides broad
authority for authorizing replacement
timber for a variety of reasons, neither
the rule nor the contracts require the
Forest Service to provide, or the
purchaser to agree to replacement
timber. No changes are made in
response to this portion of the comment.
Comment 2: The Forest Service
should clarify the standard used to
determine what volume will be removed
from a contract because of wildfire or
similar catastrophic event.
Response 2: The reference to
catastrophic events in the interim final
rule has led to confusion with some
interpreting this to mean that the Forest
Service would replace catastrophically
damaged timber with comparable
undamaged timber. This was not the
intent. Replacement timber is only a
remedy for a contract termination or
partial termination under subsection B/
BT8.34 Contract Termination.
Replacement timber is not a remedy for
a contract termination or partial
termination under subsection B/BT8.22
Termination for Catastrophe. However,
a single sale could be terminated under
both B/BT8.22 and B/BT8.34.
For example, a fire catastrophically
damages 60% of a sale area including
several uncut units and timber between
those units. Pursuant to B/BT8.32
Modification for Catastrophe, the Forest
Service and Purchaser try, but cannot
reach agreement on a modification for
harvesting the catastrophically affected
timber, and elect termination under B/
BT8.22. The remaining 40% of the sale
was not damaged, includes ‘‘green’’
units that the purchaser wants to cut,
and pursuant to B/BT8.32 Modification
for Catastrophe the parties agree could
be logged separately from the
catastrophically damaged timber. But,
the Forest Service determines that
because of the changed conditions
caused by the fire, harvesting the
remaining green units will cause
environmental degradation and starts
the process to terminate that portion of
the contract pursuant to B/BT8.34.
Replacement timber from outside the
sale area could be considered for the
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
undamaged timber included under the
B/BT8.34 termination but not for the
damaged timber included under the B/
BT8.22 termination. Although the
catastrophic event caused the situation
leading to a decision to terminate the
undamaged portions of the sale, the
actual reason to terminate is to prevent
environmental degradation. Referencing
catastrophic events in the rule is
unnecessary and because the reference
can be misinterpreted it has been
eliminated in the final rule.
Contracts awarded prior to the April
2004 version of the Timber Sale
Contract do not contain references to
replacement timber in event of a
termination but the rule potentially
could be applied to those contracts as
well via a contract modification. The
Forest Service agrees that more
clarification of how the rule could be
applied to those contracts would help
and will do that with an amendment to
the Timber Sale Administration
Handbook FSH 2409.15. But no changes
to the rule are needed to address this
situation.
Comment 3: Offering substitute timber
outside the sale area specified in the
contract is a common sense approach to
meeting contractual obligations and
maintaining an equitable balance of risk.
Replacement timber will help maintain
the industry infrastructure which will
maintain forest management options.
Response 3: The Forest Service agrees.
No changes are made in response to this
comment.
Comment 4: The respondent opposed
the determination of ‘‘extraordinary
conditions’’ likening it to an
environmental assault emanating from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture and
suggesting that the determination is
based on the desires of lobbyists
working for the timber industry in
corrupt Washington.
Response 4: The Forest Service
disagrees that the determination of
extraordinary conditions is made based
on the desires of timber industry
lobbyists. The determination has
precedent supporting it. In 1996, the
Secretary promulgated an interim final
rule set out at 36 CFR 223.85(b), that
defined extraordinary conditions for
sales released pursuant to section
2001(k) of the 1995 Rescissions Act (61
FR 14618, April 3, 1996). The 1996 rule
has reduced claims by allowing timber
from outside the sale area specified in
the contract to be substituted, without
advertisement, on specific timber sales
in Washington and Oregon affected by
the 1995 Rescissions Act. A similar
result is anticipated with this rule. The
only impact of this determination is to
allow replacement timber or other forest
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 202 / Friday, October 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
products without advertisement. The
Forest Service may consider only such
timber or forest products for
replacement purposes for which the
agency has completed the appropriate
environmental analysis and made a
decision to authorize its harvest.
Additionally, any applicable comment,
appeal, or objection process for the
harvest must have been completed. No
changes are made in response to this
comment.
Comment 5: Respondent supported
the concept of replacement timber in
lieu of contract cancellations noting that
this will benefit the public by
encouraging on-the-ground resource
management while minimizing taxpayer
burdens associated with damage claims.
Response 5: The Forest Service agrees.
No changes are made in response to this
comment.
Comment 6: Replacement timber will
help maintain the industry
infrastructure, which will in turn
maintain forest management options.
Response 6: The Forest Service agrees.
No changes are made in response to this
comment.
Explanation of Revisions to 36 CFR Part
223, Subpart B
The interim final rule in § 223.85(c),
specified that extraordinary conditions,
as provided for in 16 U.S.C. 472a(d),
includes those conditions under which
contracts for the sale or exchange of
timber or other forest products must be
suspended, modified, or terminated
under the terms of such contracts to
prevent environmental degradation or
resource damage, or as the result of
administrative appeals, litigation, court
orders, or catastrophic events. The
reference to catastrophic events in the
interim final rule led to confusion with
some interpreting this to mean that the
Forest Service would replace
catastrophically damaged timber with
comparable undamaged timber. The
intent was to address situations where
harvesting the remaining green timber
on a catastrophically damaged sale
would result in environmental
degradation or resource damage. In
those situations, replacement timber
would be an alternative to harvesting
the remaining green timber or canceling
the contract. The intent of the rule was
not to replace catastrophically damaged
timber with undamaged timber. The
reference to catastrophically damaged
timber has been removed in this final
rule.
Section 223.85(c), of the interim final
rule specified that the value of
replacement timber or forest products
may not exceed the value of the material
it is replacing by more than 10% or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Oct 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
$10,000, whichever is less as
determined by standard Forest Service
appraisal methods. Based on comments
received on the interim final rule, and
further evaluation by the Forest Service,
the 10% limit has been removed in the
final rule.
Section 223.85(c), of the interim final
rule specified that the replacement
timber or forest products must come
from the same National Forest as the
original contract. In some cases, several
proclaimed National Forests have been
combined under one Forest Supervisor
for administration purposes. The term
National Forest in this paragraph refers
to an administrative unit headed by a
single Forest Supervisor. This
distinction has been added to the final
rule.
Regulatory Certifications
Unfunded Mandates Reform
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1531–1538), which the President signed
into law on March 22, 1995, the Agency
has assessed the effects of this rule on
State, local, and tribal governments and
the private sector. This rule does not
compel the expenditure of $100 million
or more by any State, local, or tribal
governments or anyone in the private
sector. Therefore, a statement under
section 202 of the Act is not required.
Regulatory Impact
This rule has been reviewed under
USDA procedures and Executive Order
12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as amended by E.O. 13422 on January
23, 2007. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has determined that this
is not a significant rule. This rule will
not have an annual effect of $100
million or more on the economy nor
adversely affect productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, nor State or local
governments. This rule will not interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency nor raise new legal or
policy issues. Finally, this action will
not alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients of such programs.
Accordingly, this rule is not subject to
OMB review under Executive Order
12866.
Moreover, this rule has been
considered in light of Executive Order
13272 regarding proper consideration of
small entities and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA), which amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). A final regulatory flexibility
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
59189
assessment has been made and it has
been determined that this action will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
as defined by SBREFA. The rule has no
adverse or special impacts on small
business, small not-for-profit
organizations, or small units of the
Government because it imposes no
additional requirements on the affected
public.
Environmental Impact
Section 31.12 of Forest Service
Handbook 1909.15 (57 FR 43180,
September 18, 1992) excludes from
documentation in an environmental
assessment or impact statement ‘‘rules,
regulations, or policies to establish
Servicewide administrative procedures,
program processes, or instructions.’’ The
Agency’s assessment is that this rule
falls within this category of actions and
that no extraordinary circumstances
exist, and therefore, the preparation of
an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement for this
rule is not required.
No Takings Implications
This rule has been analyzed in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
12360, and it has been determined that
the rule will not pose the risk of a taking
of private property, as the rule is limited
to the establishment of administrative
procedures.
Civil Justice Reform
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. After adoption of this rule, (1)
all State and local laws and regulations
that conflict with this rule or that would
impede full implementation of this rule
will be preempted; (2) no retroactive
effect will be given to this rule; and (3)
this rule would not require the use of
administrative proceedings before
parties could file suit in court
challenging its provisions.
Federalism
The Agency has considered this rule
under the requirements of Executive
Order 13132, Federalism. The Agency
has made an assessment that the rule
conforms with the federalism principles
set out in this Executive order; would
not impose any compliance costs on the
States; and would 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.
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
59190
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 202 / Friday, October 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications as defined by Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. Therefore, advance
consultation with Tribes is not required.
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the
Public
This rule does not require any record
keeping or reporting requirements or
other information collection
requirements as defined in 5 CFR part
1320 not already approved for use and,
therefore, imposes no additional
paperwork burden on the public.
Accordingly, the review provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) and
implementing regulations at 5 CFR part
1320 do not apply.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 223
Administrative practice and
procedures, Forests and forest products,
Exports, Government contracts, National
forests, Reporting and record keeping
requirements.
I For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Forest Service is
amending part 223 of title 36 of the
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 223—SALE AND DISPOSAL OF
NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM TIMBER
1. The authority citation for part 223
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 90 Stat. 2958, 16 U.S.C. 472a; 98
Stat. 2213, 16 U.S.C. 618, 104 Stat. 714–726,
16 U.S.C. 620–620j, unless otherwise noted.
Subpart B—Timber Sale Contracts
2. Revise § 223.85(c) to read as
follows:
I
§ 223.85
Noncompetitive sale of timber.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Extraordinary conditions, as
provided for in 16 U.S.C. 472a(d),
includes those conditions under which
contracts for the sale or exchange of
timber or other forest products must be
suspended, modified, or terminated
under the terms of such contracts to
prevent environmental degradation or
resource damage, or as the result of
administrative appeals, litigation, or
court orders. Notwithstanding the
provisions of paragraph (a) of this
section or any other regulation in this
part, when such extraordinary
conditions exist on sales not addressed
in paragraph (b) of this section, the
Secretary of Agriculture may allow
forest officers to, without advertisement,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Oct 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
modify those contracts by substituting
timber or other forest products from
outside the contract area specified in the
contract for timber or forest products
within the area specified in the contract.
When such extraordinary conditions
exist, the Forest Service and the
purchaser shall make good faith efforts
to identify replacement timber or forest
products of similar volume, quality,
value, access, and topography. When
replacement timber or forest products
agreeable to both parties is identified,
the contract will be modified to reflect
the changes associated with the
substitution, including a rate
redetermination. Concurrently, both
parties will sign an agreement waiving
any future claims for damages
associated with the deleted timber or
forest products, except those
specifically provided for under the
contract up to the time of the
modification. If the Forest Service and
the purchaser cannot reach agreement
on satisfactory replacement timber or
forest products, or the proper value of
such material, either party may opt to
end the search. Replacement timber or
forest products must come from the
same National Forest as the original
contract. The term National Forest in
this paragraph refers to an
administrative unit headed by a single
Forest Supervisor. Only timber or forest
products for which a decision
authorizing its harvest has been made
and for which any applicable appeals or
objection process has been completed
may be considered for replacement
pursuant to this paragraph. The value of
replacement timber or forest products
may not exceed the value of the material
it is replacing by more than $10,000, as
determined by standard Forest Service
appraisal methods.
Dated: October 12, 2007.
Mark Rey,
Under Secretary, Natural Resources and
Environment.
[FR Doc. E7–20625 Filed 10–18–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 51, 60, 72, 78, 96, and 97
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0012; FRL–8483–7]
RIN 2060–A033
Revisions to Definition of
Cogeneration Unit in Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), CAIR Federal
Implementation Plans, Clean Air
Mercury Rule (CAMR); and Technical
Corrections to CAIR, CAIR FIPs,
CAMR, and Acid Rain Program Rules
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), CAIR Federal Implementation
Plans (FIPs), and Clean Air Mercury
Rule (CAMR) each include an
exemption for cogeneration units that
meet certain criteria. In light of
information concerning biomass-fired
cogeneration units that may not qualify
for the exemption due to their particular
combination of fuel and technical
design characteristics, EPA is changing
the cogeneration unit definition in
CAIR, the CAIR model cap-and-trade
rules, the CAIR FIPs, CAMR, and the
CAMR model cap-and-trade rule.
Specifically, EPA is revising the
calculation methodology for the
efficiency standard in the cogeneration
unit definition to exclude energy input
from biomass making it more likely that
units co-firing biomass will be able to
meet the efficiency standard and qualify
for exemption. Because this change will
only affect a small number of relatively
low emitting units, it will have little
effect on the projected emissions
reductions and the environmental
benefits of these rules. If EPA finalizes
the proposed CAMR Federal Plan, it
intends to make the definitions in that
rule conform to the CAMR model capand-trade rule and thus, with today’s
action. This action also clarifies the
term ‘‘total energy input’’ used in the
efficiency calculation and makes minor
technical corrections to CAIR, the CAIR
FIPs, CAMR, and the Acid Rain Program
rules.
DATES: The final rule is effective on
November 19, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0012. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 202 (Friday, October 19, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59187-59190]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-20625]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 223
RIN 0596-AB70
Sale and Disposal of National Forest System Timber; Modification
of Timber Sale Contracts in Extraordinary Conditions; Noncompetitive
Sale of Timber
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule revises regulations at Title 36, Code of
Federal Regulations, part 223, on noncompetitive disposal of timber and
other forest products based on the Secretary of Agriculture's
determination that extraordinary conditions exist. A notice with
request for comment on an interim final rule was published in the
Federal Register on June 16, 2006. The Forest Service made appropriate
changes to the rule in response to the public comments.
DATE: This rule is effective November 19, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The public may inspect comments received at Office of the
Director, Forest Management Staff, Forest Service, USDA, 201 14th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20250. Visitors are encouraged to call
ahead to (202) 205-1496 to facilitate entry to the building.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Forest Management Staff personnel,
Lathrop Smith (202) 205-0858, or Richard Fitzgerald (202) 205-1753.
Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD)
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through
Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Forest Management Act (NFMA), codified in part at
Title 16 U.S.C. 472a(d), requires the Secretary of Agriculture to
advertise all sales of forest products unless the appraised value of
the sale is less than $10,000, or the Secretary determines that
extraordinary conditions exist, as defined by regulation. The
requirement to advertise sales unless extraordinary conditions exist
applies to the substitution of timber outside a sale contract area.
Prior to NFMA, the Government Accountability Office (formerly the
General Accounting Office) held that substitution of timber outside the
contract area for timber in the contract area violated the Agency's
authority to sell timber.\1\ Since the passage of NFMA, but in the
absence of a regulation defining ``extraordinary conditions,'' the
Agriculture Board of Contract Appeals has decided similarly in several
cases.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Letter to Mr. Secretary, 1973 WL 7905 (Comp. Gen.), B-177602
(1973).
\2\ See Appeal of Summit Contractors, 1986 WL 19566 (AGBCA),
Nos. 81-252-1, No. 83-312-1 (Jan. 8, 1986), and Appeal of Jay
Rucker, 1980 WL 2345 (AGBCA) Nos. 79-211A, 79-211B (June 11, 1980).
See also, Croman Corporation v. United States, 31 Fed. Cl. 741, 746-
47 (August 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before authorizing activities on National Forest System lands, the
Forest Service must ensure compliance with applicable laws and
regulations and with conditions on the ground at the time of the
authorization. Even so, after entering into timber sale contracts,
environmental changes may occur such as the listing of a new species on
the endangered species list, or a catastrophic event may occur, such as
a large wildfire, resulting in the need to modify the contracts. Also,
court orders and decisions resulting from environmental litigation may
require making changes to existing contracts even when those contracts
are not specifically named in the litigation if they are similar to
contracts that were named. When this occurs, it is essential for Forest
Service officials to have flexibility to adjust management activities
and contractual arrangements without incurring enormous financial
liability associated with unilateral modifications or contract
cancellations.
At the time a sale is sold, there is no way to predict what future
litigation or environmental changes may occur that will result in the
sale contract needing to be changed. Each occurrence is a unique
situation that constitutes an extraordinary condition. The Forest
Service needs the ability to provide replacement timber or forest
products for contracts that must be modified to prevent environmental
degradation or resource damage, or as a result of administrative
appeals, litigation, court orders, or catastrophic events that occur
after contract award. Thus, the Forest Service promulgated an interim
final rule, published June 16, 2006 (71 FR 34823), on noncompetitive
sale of timber and other forest products based on the Secretary of
Agriculture's determination that extraordinary conditions exist
whenever a timber or forest products contract needs to be modified or
canceled to address such unexpected changes. This benefits the
Government by providing contracting officers with an opportunity to
avert costly claims by providing replacement timber or forest products
from outside the contract area when replacement timber is not available
within the contract area. Replacement timber also helps maintain the
industry infrastructure, which in turn will maintain forest management
options.
Response to Comments
A 60-day comment period on the interim final rule was initiated on
June 16, 2006, (71 FR 34823). Only two respondents replied. One
respondent is an individual and the other respondent is a timber
industry association.
Comment 1: The constraints that the value of replacement material
may not exceed the value of the material it is replacing by more than
10% or $10,000, whichever is less, are too restrictive and will hamper
implementation and use of this valuable tool. On small amounts of
replacement timber, 10% may represent a very small amount of money, and
on large volumes the $10,000 may represent a small percentage of value.
If one or both of these numbers has some basis in law and cannot be
removed, the only fair way to deal with this situation is to have these
be upper and lower limits.
Response 1: The limitations were intended to reduce potential
impacts to other purchasers while making the purchaser of a sale that
must be modified or terminated whole. Replacement timber from outside
the sale area will most likely come from some other sale that would
otherwise be offered competitively on the open market. Offering
substantially more replacement timber than the amount or value being
deleted by a unilateral termination goes beyond making a purchaser
whole, circumvents fair and open competition and could have detrimental
consequences to other purchasers, the public, and Forest Service
program objectives. For the following reasons the Forest Service agrees
that the 10% limit is unnecessary but disagrees that the $10,000 limit
is overly restrictive.
The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) requires advertising
sales greater than $10,000 in appraised value unless the Secretary
determines, as
[[Page 59188]]
defined by regulation, that extraordinary conditions exist (16 U.S.C.
472a(d)). The intent of this rule is to establish the Secretary's
determination of extraordinary conditions so that replacement timber of
similar quantity and value can be obtained from outside the sale area
without advertisement, even when its total value is greater than
$10,000. The Forest Service recognizes, however, that exact matches
with the original contract value, quantity and quality are unlikely and
that a defined measure of acceptable deviation is necessary. The Forest
Service believes that providing replacement timber volume with an
appraised value of no more than $10,000 over the original contract
value is an acceptable amount of deviation. The premise for this is
that the original value of the timber being replaced was established
after advertisement and the opportunity for competitive bidding in
accordance with the advertisement and competition requirements of NFMA
and its implementing regulations. Therefore, only the value of
replacement timber exceeding the value of the original timber volume
being replaced was not previously subject to advertisement and
competition requirements. Advertisement and competition of the excess
replacement timber is not required by NFMA or the regulations so long
as the excess value remains at or below $10,000.
The rules at 36 CFR 223.112 require that contract modifications
must not be done in a manner that would be injurious to the United
States. For the reasons stated above, the Forest Service believes that
replacement timber valued at no more than $10,000 over the original
contract value adequately accounts for differences in contract and
replacement timber value and ensures that contracts are not modified in
a manner that would be injurious to the United States. Imposing the
$10,000 upper limit on the value of replacement timber establishes a
reasonable and acceptable measure of deviation, prevents a purchaser
from getting a potential windfall, and eliminates the need for the
Forest Service to determine, on a case-by-case basis, the level of
acceptable deviation that may result in a modification that is not
injurious to the United States. The Forest Service does not believe
this upper limit is overly restrictive and will retain it in the final
rule. The Forest Service agrees, however, that the 10% limit imposed in
the interim final rule is not necessary for determining an acceptable
level of deviation, and for that reason, it will be eliminated from the
final rule.
The respondent suggested that if there was an upper limit there
should be a corresponding lower limit on the value of replacement
timber. For example, if $50,000 of replacement timber is needed,
applying the $10,000 limit addressed above would require the value of
replacement timber to be no less than $40,000. The Forest Service
disagrees as this would have the effect of guaranteeing replacement
timber which is simply an alternative remedy, when it is available, to
liquidated damages addressed in the contracts. Although the rule
provides broad authority for authorizing replacement timber for a
variety of reasons, neither the rule nor the contracts require the
Forest Service to provide, or the purchaser to agree to replacement
timber. No changes are made in response to this portion of the comment.
Comment 2: The Forest Service should clarify the standard used to
determine what volume will be removed from a contract because of
wildfire or similar catastrophic event.
Response 2: The reference to catastrophic events in the interim
final rule has led to confusion with some interpreting this to mean
that the Forest Service would replace catastrophically damaged timber
with comparable undamaged timber. This was not the intent. Replacement
timber is only a remedy for a contract termination or partial
termination under subsection B/BT8.34 Contract Termination. Replacement
timber is not a remedy for a contract termination or partial
termination under subsection B/BT8.22 Termination for Catastrophe.
However, a single sale could be terminated under both B/BT8.22 and B/
BT8.34.
For example, a fire catastrophically damages 60% of a sale area
including several uncut units and timber between those units. Pursuant
to B/BT8.32 Modification for Catastrophe, the Forest Service and
Purchaser try, but cannot reach agreement on a modification for
harvesting the catastrophically affected timber, and elect termination
under B/BT8.22. The remaining 40% of the sale was not damaged, includes
``green'' units that the purchaser wants to cut, and pursuant to B/
BT8.32 Modification for Catastrophe the parties agree could be logged
separately from the catastrophically damaged timber. But, the Forest
Service determines that because of the changed conditions caused by the
fire, harvesting the remaining green units will cause environmental
degradation and starts the process to terminate that portion of the
contract pursuant to B/BT8.34. Replacement timber from outside the sale
area could be considered for the undamaged timber included under the B/
BT8.34 termination but not for the damaged timber included under the B/
BT8.22 termination. Although the catastrophic event caused the
situation leading to a decision to terminate the undamaged portions of
the sale, the actual reason to terminate is to prevent environmental
degradation. Referencing catastrophic events in the rule is unnecessary
and because the reference can be misinterpreted it has been eliminated
in the final rule.
Contracts awarded prior to the April 2004 version of the Timber
Sale Contract do not contain references to replacement timber in event
of a termination but the rule potentially could be applied to those
contracts as well via a contract modification. The Forest Service
agrees that more clarification of how the rule could be applied to
those contracts would help and will do that with an amendment to the
Timber Sale Administration Handbook FSH 2409.15. But no changes to the
rule are needed to address this situation.
Comment 3: Offering substitute timber outside the sale area
specified in the contract is a common sense approach to meeting
contractual obligations and maintaining an equitable balance of risk.
Replacement timber will help maintain the industry infrastructure which
will maintain forest management options.
Response 3: The Forest Service agrees. No changes are made in
response to this comment.
Comment 4: The respondent opposed the determination of
``extraordinary conditions'' likening it to an environmental assault
emanating from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and suggesting that
the determination is based on the desires of lobbyists working for the
timber industry in corrupt Washington.
Response 4: The Forest Service disagrees that the determination of
extraordinary conditions is made based on the desires of timber
industry lobbyists. The determination has precedent supporting it. In
1996, the Secretary promulgated an interim final rule set out at 36 CFR
223.85(b), that defined extraordinary conditions for sales released
pursuant to section 2001(k) of the 1995 Rescissions Act (61 FR 14618,
April 3, 1996). The 1996 rule has reduced claims by allowing timber
from outside the sale area specified in the contract to be substituted,
without advertisement, on specific timber sales in Washington and
Oregon affected by the 1995 Rescissions Act. A similar result is
anticipated with this rule. The only impact of this determination is to
allow replacement timber or other forest
[[Page 59189]]
products without advertisement. The Forest Service may consider only
such timber or forest products for replacement purposes for which the
agency has completed the appropriate environmental analysis and made a
decision to authorize its harvest. Additionally, any applicable
comment, appeal, or objection process for the harvest must have been
completed. No changes are made in response to this comment.
Comment 5: Respondent supported the concept of replacement timber
in lieu of contract cancellations noting that this will benefit the
public by encouraging on-the-ground resource management while
minimizing taxpayer burdens associated with damage claims.
Response 5: The Forest Service agrees. No changes are made in
response to this comment.
Comment 6: Replacement timber will help maintain the industry
infrastructure, which will in turn maintain forest management options.
Response 6: The Forest Service agrees. No changes are made in
response to this comment.
Explanation of Revisions to 36 CFR Part 223, Subpart B
The interim final rule in Sec. 223.85(c), specified that
extraordinary conditions, as provided for in 16 U.S.C. 472a(d),
includes those conditions under which contracts for the sale or
exchange of timber or other forest products must be suspended,
modified, or terminated under the terms of such contracts to prevent
environmental degradation or resource damage, or as the result of
administrative appeals, litigation, court orders, or catastrophic
events. The reference to catastrophic events in the interim final rule
led to confusion with some interpreting this to mean that the Forest
Service would replace catastrophically damaged timber with comparable
undamaged timber. The intent was to address situations where harvesting
the remaining green timber on a catastrophically damaged sale would
result in environmental degradation or resource damage. In those
situations, replacement timber would be an alternative to harvesting
the remaining green timber or canceling the contract. The intent of the
rule was not to replace catastrophically damaged timber with undamaged
timber. The reference to catastrophically damaged timber has been
removed in this final rule.
Section 223.85(c), of the interim final rule specified that the
value of replacement timber or forest products may not exceed the value
of the material it is replacing by more than 10% or $10,000, whichever
is less as determined by standard Forest Service appraisal methods.
Based on comments received on the interim final rule, and further
evaluation by the Forest Service, the 10% limit has been removed in the
final rule.
Section 223.85(c), of the interim final rule specified that the
replacement timber or forest products must come from the same National
Forest as the original contract. In some cases, several proclaimed
National Forests have been combined under one Forest Supervisor for
administration purposes. The term National Forest in this paragraph
refers to an administrative unit headed by a single Forest Supervisor.
This distinction has been added to the final rule.
Regulatory Certifications
Unfunded Mandates Reform
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2
U.S.C. 1531-1538), which the President signed into law on March 22,
1995, the Agency has assessed the effects of this rule on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private sector. This rule does not
compel the expenditure of $100 million or more by any State, local, or
tribal governments or anyone in the private sector. Therefore, a
statement under section 202 of the Act is not required.
Regulatory Impact
This rule has been reviewed under USDA procedures and Executive
Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as amended by E.O. 13422
on January 23, 2007. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
determined that this is not a significant rule. This rule will not have
an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy nor adversely
affect productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health
or safety, nor State or local governments. This rule will not interfere
with an action taken or planned by another agency nor raise new legal
or policy issues. Finally, this action will not alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
rights and obligations of recipients of such programs. Accordingly,
this rule is not subject to OMB review under Executive Order 12866.
Moreover, this rule has been considered in light of Executive Order
13272 regarding proper consideration of small entities and the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), which
amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). A final
regulatory flexibility assessment has been made and it has been
determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities as defined by SBREFA. The
rule has no adverse or special impacts on small business, small not-
for-profit organizations, or small units of the Government because it
imposes no additional requirements on the affected public.
Environmental Impact
Section 31.12 of Forest Service Handbook 1909.15 (57 FR 43180,
September 18, 1992) excludes from documentation in an environmental
assessment or impact statement ``rules, regulations, or policies to
establish Servicewide administrative procedures, program processes, or
instructions.'' The Agency's assessment is that this rule falls within
this category of actions and that no extraordinary circumstances exist,
and therefore, the preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement for this rule is not required.
No Takings Implications
This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12360, and it has been determined
that the rule will not pose the risk of a taking of private property,
as the rule is limited to the establishment of administrative
procedures.
Civil Justice Reform
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. After adoption of this rule, (1) all State and local
laws and regulations that conflict with this rule or that would impede
full implementation of this rule will be preempted; (2) no retroactive
effect will be given to this rule; and (3) this rule would not require
the use of administrative proceedings before parties could file suit in
court challenging its provisions.
Federalism
The Agency has considered this rule under the requirements of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The Agency has made an assessment
that the rule conforms with the federalism principles set out in this
Executive order; would not impose any compliance costs on the States;
and would 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.
[[Page 59190]]
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications as defined by Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. Therefore, advance consultation with Tribes is not
required.
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public
This rule does not require any record keeping or reporting
requirements or other information collection requirements as defined in
5 CFR part 1320 not already approved for use and, therefore, imposes no
additional paperwork burden on the public. Accordingly, the review
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et
seq.) and implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 223
Administrative practice and procedures, Forests and forest
products, Exports, Government contracts, National forests, Reporting
and record keeping requirements.
0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Forest Service is
amending part 223 of title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 223--SALE AND DISPOSAL OF NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM TIMBER
0
1. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 90 Stat. 2958, 16 U.S.C. 472a; 98 Stat. 2213, 16
U.S.C. 618, 104 Stat. 714-726, 16 U.S.C. 620-620j, unless otherwise
noted.
Subpart B--Timber Sale Contracts
0
2. Revise Sec. 223.85(c) to read as follows:
Sec. 223.85 Noncompetitive sale of timber.
* * * * *
(c) Extraordinary conditions, as provided for in 16 U.S.C. 472a(d),
includes those conditions under which contracts for the sale or
exchange of timber or other forest products must be suspended,
modified, or terminated under the terms of such contracts to prevent
environmental degradation or resource damage, or as the result of
administrative appeals, litigation, or court orders. Notwithstanding
the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section or any other regulation
in this part, when such extraordinary conditions exist on sales not
addressed in paragraph (b) of this section, the Secretary of
Agriculture may allow forest officers to, without advertisement, modify
those contracts by substituting timber or other forest products from
outside the contract area specified in the contract for timber or
forest products within the area specified in the contract. When such
extraordinary conditions exist, the Forest Service and the purchaser
shall make good faith efforts to identify replacement timber or forest
products of similar volume, quality, value, access, and topography.
When replacement timber or forest products agreeable to both parties is
identified, the contract will be modified to reflect the changes
associated with the substitution, including a rate redetermination.
Concurrently, both parties will sign an agreement waiving any future
claims for damages associated with the deleted timber or forest
products, except those specifically provided for under the contract up
to the time of the modification. If the Forest Service and the
purchaser cannot reach agreement on satisfactory replacement timber or
forest products, or the proper value of such material, either party may
opt to end the search. Replacement timber or forest products must come
from the same National Forest as the original contract. The term
National Forest in this paragraph refers to an administrative unit
headed by a single Forest Supervisor. Only timber or forest products
for which a decision authorizing its harvest has been made and for
which any applicable appeals or objection process has been completed
may be considered for replacement pursuant to this paragraph. The value
of replacement timber or forest products may not exceed the value of
the material it is replacing by more than $10,000, as determined by
standard Forest Service appraisal methods.
Dated: October 12, 2007.
Mark Rey,
Under Secretary, Natural Resources and Environment.
[FR Doc. E7-20625 Filed 10-18-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P