Determination of Substantial Overriding Public Interest for Extending Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 53817-53820 [E8-21613]
Download as PDF
53817
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 73, No. 181
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Office of the Secretary
Privacy Act of 1974; Abolish System of
Records
Office of the Secretary, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of abolishment of
Department of Agriculture System of
Records, USDA/FS–12 Incident
Management and Prescribed Fire
Qualification and Experience Records.
AGENCY:
The records formerly
maintained in the Privacy Act System of
Records, USDA/FS–12 Incident
Management and Prescribed Fire
Qualification and Experience Records
are now maintained in another Privacy
Act System of Records USDA/BLM–40
Incident Qualification and Certification
System (IQCS). Therefore, this system is
being abolished and removed from the
inventory of USDA Systems of Records
in accordance with the Privacy Act of
1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.
DATES: This notice is effective on
September 17, 2008.
ADDRESSES: For additional information
contact the Director of Fire and Aviation
Management, Forest Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., Mailstop
1107, Washington, DC 20250–1107.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom
Harbour, Director of Fire and Aviation
Management, Forest Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, telephone:
(202) 205–1483.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as
amended, requires that each agency
publish a notice of the existence and
character of each new or altered ‘‘system
of records.’’ 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(5). This
notice identifies a Forest Service System
of Records that is no longer in use,
USDA/FS–12 Incident Management and
Prescribed Fire Qualification and
Experience Records. The records which
were formerly maintained in this system
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 Sep 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
are now maintained in another Privacy
Act System of Records, USDA/BLM–40
Incident and Certification System
(IQCS); as published in the Federal
Register on February 6, 2008. The
System of Records, USDA/FS–12,
Incident Management and Prescribed
Fire Qualification and Experience
Records is abolished as absolute and no
longer used, and it is removed from the
inventory of the USDA System of
Records.
Dated: September 3, 2008.
Edward T. Schafer,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–21726 Filed 9–16–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Determination of Substantial
Overriding Public Interest for
Extending Certain Timber Sale
Contracts
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of Determination of
Substantial Overriding Public Interest.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 472a(c) of
the National Forest Management Act of
1976 (NFMA), and the authority
delegated at 7 CFR 2.20, the Under
Secretary of Agriculture for Natural
Resources and Environment has
determined that the substantial
overriding public interest (SOPI)
justifies the use of market-related
contract term adjustments (MRCTA) to
extend beyond 10 years, certain existing
green timber sale contracts tied to
Softwood Lumber index #0811 and
Hardwood Lumber index #0812 that
were awarded prior to January 1, 2007.
This SOPI determination is based on the
sustained drastic reduction in softwood
lumber prices since 2004 and the more
recent hardwood lumber decline.
DATES: The determination was made on
September 10, 2008 by the Under
Secretary of Agriculture for Natural
Resources and Environment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lathrop Smith, Forest Management
Staff, (202) 205–0858 or Richard
Fitzgerald, Forest Management Staff
(202) 205–1753; 1400 Independence
Ave., SW., Mailstop 1103, Washington,
DC 20250–1103.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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.
Background
Section 472a(c) of NFMA provides, in
part, as follows:
Unless there is a finding by the Secretary
of Agriculture that better utilization of the
various forest resources (consistent with the
provisions of the Multiple-Use, SustainedYield Act of 1960) will result, sales contracts
shall be for a period not to exceed 10 years:
Provided, That such period may be adjusted
at the discretion of the Secretary to provide
additional time due to time delays caused by
an act of an agent of the United States or by
other circumstances beyond the control of
the purchaser.1
Although the Forest Service generally
does not allow the extension of timber
sale contracts beyond 10 years, the
Secretary of Agriculture may extend
such contracts beyond 10 years if he
determines doing so will result in the
better utilization of the various forest
resources. However, the Secretary ‘‘shall
not extend any contract period with an
original term of 2 years or more unless
he finds (A) that the purchaser has
diligently performed in accordance with
an approved plan of operation or (B)
that the substantial overriding public
interest justifies the extension.’’ 2
The Under Secretary of Agriculture
for Natural Resources and Environment
has determined that a healthy timber
industry infrastructure results in the
better utilization of the various forest
resources. The grant of additional
MRCTA time to purchasers eligible for
relief under this SOPI is intended to
help maintain that infrastructure by
preventing timber sale purchasers from
defaulting on their contracts, closing
their mills, and filing for bankruptcy
protection. Having numerous
economically viable timber sale
purchasers is in the substantial
overriding public interest for many
reasons, including the following: (1) It
allows the Forest Service to accomplish
land management objectives in a costeffective manner; (2) it increases
competition for National Forest System
timber sales and can result in higher
prices paid for timber; (3) it helps
1 16
U.S.C. 472a(c).
2 Id.
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
53818
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 17, 2008 / Notices
provide a continuous timber supply to
the public in accordance with the
Organic Administration Act; (4) it helps
accomplish fuels reduction projects; and
(5) it helps maintain the economic
stability of communities dependent
upon the timber industry.
MRCTA relief granted pursuant to this
SOPI must be made in accordance with
36 CFR 223.52, subject to the following
exceptions:
(a) Notwithstanding 36 CFR
223.52(c)(3), up to 4 years may be added
to a contract’s length by MRCTA;
(b) Notwithstanding 36 CFR
223.52(c)(4), the revised contract term
may exceed 10 years; and
(c) No contract subject to this SOPI
may have its termination date extended
past December 31, 2013.
Periodic payments shall be adjusted
pursuant to 36 CFR 223.52(d).
The following types of contracts are
not eligible for relief under this SOPI:
(1) Contracts the Forest Service
determines are in urgent need of
harvesting for reasons including, but not
limited to, deteriorating timber
conditions or public safety and (2)
contracts that are in breach.
To determine when there is a drastic
decline in lumber prices sufficient to
trigger a market-related contract term
addition, the Forest Service monitors
two producer price indices maintained
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS):
#0811 Softwood Lumber and #0812
Hardwood Lumber. These indices are
published monthly by the BLS, but the
Forest Service only uses the indices
from the last month of each calendar
quarter (March, June, September, and
December) to calculate when MRCTA
triggers. Because the BLS indices are not
adjusted for inflation, the Forest Service
uses a relative index adjusted for
inflation that allows comparisons to be
made over time on a constant dollar
basis. The relative index is calculated
each quarter by dividing 100 by the BLS
all commodities index for that month
and multiplying the result times the
monthly indices #0811 and #0812. All
references to BLS indices #0811 and
#0812 in this notice are to the Forest
Service’s relative index.
The current decline in the softwood
lumber index is the worst on record
going back to March 1949. After peaking
in the third quarter 2004, softwood
lumber index #0811 steadily declined so
that by the end of the second quarter
(June) 2008, it had decreased by 47
percent. Beginning with the third
quarter of 2005 and continuing through
the second quarter of 2008, there were
12 consecutive calendar quarters where
the declines were large enough to trigger
MRCTA. The only other comparable
market decline took place during the
early 1980’s, but the current decline in
the index value is worse as can be seen
in the table below.3
SOFTWOOD LUMBER INDEX
Number of
months
Decline period 4
9/78—9/82 ........................................................................
9/04—6/08 ........................................................................
After peaking in the second quarter
2003, the hardwood lumber index
steadily declined through the second
quarter 2008. During this 42-month
period, the index dropped 46.3 percent
48
45
High index
Low index
155.8
156.5
99.8
83.8
and triggered MRCTA for three
consecutive quarters (September 2005,
December 2005 and March 2006),
followed by seven quarters that did not
trigger. The hardwood lumber index has
Point drop
56.0
72.7
% Drop
35.9
46.4
Trigger
quarters
3 12
12
triggered again in the first and second
quarters of 2008. The table below
compares the current decline to that in
the early 1980s.
HARDWOOD LUMBER INDEX
Number of
months
Decline period 5
9/78–3/82 .........................................................................
12/03–6/08 .......................................................................
42
54
High index
Low index
131.7
138.8
99.6
92.5
Point drop
32.1
46.3
% drop
24.3
33.3
Trigger
quarters
37
5
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
During the decline in the early 1980s,
purchasers faced low demand,
decreased product prices and severe
competition from Canadian lumber,
which resulted in many purchasers
being unable to operate their timber sale
contracts. As a result, a large number of
purchasers were in danger of defaulting
on their contracts and possibly being
forced into bankruptcy. Such an
outcome could have had a devastating
effect on the economic health of the
timber industry, as well as communities
surrounding National Forests.
Accordingly, in 1980, 1981, and 1982,
the Forest Service determined that the
substantial overriding public interest
justified granting extensions to certain
timber sale contracts.6
However, the adverse market
conditions continued beyond 1982. In
July 1983, the President authorized the
Secretary of Agriculture, upon a finding
of substantial overriding public interest,
to grant additional extensions to certain
timber sale contracts without interest for
a maximum of 5 years beyond their
present termination dates.7 On August
18, 1983, the Chief of the Forest Service
made such a finding, and the Forest
Service published a notice of interim
policy establishing the multi-sale
extension program.8 Under this
program, total sale life could extend
beyond 10 years.9 The Forest Service
published a final policy on December 7,
3 The number of consecutive qualifying quarters
if MRCTA had been in effect at that time.
4 The decline period begins with the month the
index peaked and ends respectively (1) when the
1980s index bottomed out and (2) June 2008, which
is the last quarter with data available for the current
decline.
5 The decline period begins with the month the
index peaked and ends respectively (1) when the
1980s index bottomed out and (2) June 2008, which
is the last quarter with data available for the current
decline.
6 See Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts,
48 FR 38,862, 38,863 (Aug. 26, 1983) (describing the
SOPI determinations made in the early 1980s).
7 Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 48
FR 54,812 (Dec. 7, 1983).
8 Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 48
FR 38,862 (Aug. 26, 1983).
9 Id.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 Sep 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 17, 2008 / Notices
1983.10 Current market conditions
justify a similar use of discretion.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Substantial Overriding Public Interest
Determination
The Under Secretary of Agriculture
for Natural Resources and Environment
has concluded that a viable timber
industry infrastructure results in the
better utilization of the various forest
resources. Accordingly, the Under
Secretary has determined that helping to
maintain numerous economically viable
timber sale purchasers is in the
substantial overriding public interest.
The public benefits when defaulted
timber sale contracts, mill closures, and
bankruptcies can be avoided by granting
additional contract time to purchasers.
For example, government resources that
might otherwise be spent recovering
losses can be focused elsewhere.
Further, a large pool of timber sale
purchasers allows the Forest Service to
accomplish its land management
objectives in a more cost-effective
manner by increasing competition for
National Forest System timber sales,
which can result in higher contract
prices. In addition, a large number of
timber purchasers can provide a more
continuous supply of timber to the
public in accordance with the Organic
Administration Act. The timber
industry also helps to maintain the
stability of dependent communities.
Further, the timber industry is a
valuable partner in the fight against
catastrophic fires, especially those in
urban interface areas found throughout
the western United States. In December
2003, President Bush signed the Healthy
Forests Restoration Act (HFRA), which
contains a variety of provisions that
speed up hazardous-fuel reduction and
forest-restoration projects on specific
types of federal land at risk for wildland
fires and/or insect and disease
epidemics.11 The Act also encourages
biomass removal from public and
private lands.12 Byproducts removed
during hazardous fuels reduction and
landscape restoration activities are often
utilized in certain forest products (e.g.,
timber, engineered lumber, paper, pulp
and furniture) and bio-energy and biobased products (e.g., plastics, ethanol,
and diesel). The value of these products
helps offset the Forest Service’s
10 Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 48
FR 54,812 (Dec. 7, 1983). After the housing market
decline of the 1980s, the Forest Service
promulgated 36 CFR 223.52, which provides for
market-related contract term additions in response
to adverse timber market conditions. See Sale and
Disposal of National Forest Timber; Market-related
Contract Term Adjustments, 55 Fed. Reg. 50,643
(Dec. 7, 1990).
11 16 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.
12 See e.g. 16 U.S.C. 6531.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 Sep 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
hazardous fuels removal costs, making
treatment of substantially more acreage
possible.
Maintaining a viable industry
infrastructure capable of processing
material removed during HFRA projects
is essential; it allows fuels reduction
projects to be accomplished with timber
sale contracts that return money to the
Treasury. The loss of a viable industry
in many parts of the country, including
the Southwest and the Intermountain
West, has limited the opportunities to
harvest insect and fire damaged trees.
Without a viable infrastructure, the
Forest Service would have to pay a
service contractor to perform the work.
However, when trees are harvested for
products, those products provide a
valuable commodity to the American
public and reduce the government’s cost
of removing or disposing material that
might otherwise have to be burned,
chipped, or masticated. In some market
areas where little industry infrastructure
remains, the loss of a single mill can
significantly increase the government’s
costs of fuels reductions projects.
Further, in many places, particularly in
the western states, the industry
infrastructure is already too small to
respond to urgent needs; additional mill
closures will aggravate this situation.
An example of the problems
associated with limited industry
resources is Colorado, where a
mountain pine beetle epidemic is
impacting over 1.5 million acres.
Remaining industry in Colorado is too
small to keep up with the urgent need
to reduce the fire danger posed by this
epidemic by harvesting dead and dying
trees around communities and within
municipal watersheds. In a June 4, 2008
letter to the Chief of the Forest Service,
Colorado Senator Wayne Allard stated
the following: ‘‘Providing relief on the
ten-year deadline for green sales has
become a pivotal issue this year. Under
existing policy, operators will be forced
to log green sales that are reaching their
termination dates, rather than treating
much more urgent areas. More
important, forcing them to do so during
the worst market they have ever
experienced could hasten the loss of our
last remaining infrastructure—without
which the Forest Service would be
incapable of performing its mission.’’
Considering the extraordinary market
conditions currently facing the forest
products industry, and recognizing the
need to maintain a viable forest
products industry, the Forest Service
has implemented a variety of relief
options over the past few years. For
example, in 2006 and 2007, the Forest
Service issued SOPI determinations
intended to help timber purchasers cope
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53819
with steadily declining timber
markets.13 However, the 2006 and 2007
SOPIs, like those issued from 1980–
1982, did not provide adequate relief.
Accordingly, in May 2008, Congress
passed section 8401 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008
(Farm Bill) to provide additional
relief.14 Then, as the result of an error
in the Farm Bill that did not affect
Section 8401, the May 2008 Farm Bill
was repealed. However, on June 18,
2008, Congress reenacted the Farm Bill,
which included an identical section
8401.15 In part, section 8401 recognized
that, due to the severity of the current
market decline, many contracts had
already received the maximum MRCTA
time allowed under 36 CFR 223.52(c)(3):
‘‘No more than twice the original
contract length or 3 years, whichever is
less, shall be added to a contract’s term
by market-related contract term
addition.’’ Therefore, Congress enacted
section 8401(c), which provides as
follows:
(c) EXTENSION OF MARKET-RELATED
CONTRACT TERM ADDITION TIME LIMIT
FOR CERTAIN CONTRACTS.—
Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
upon the written request of a timber
purchaser, the Secretary may, at the sole
discretion of the Secretary, modify a timber
sale contract (including a qualifying contract)
awarded to the purchaser before January 1,
2007, to adjust the term of the contract in
accordance with the market-related contract
term addition provision in the contract and
section 223.52 of title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations, as in effect on the date of the
modification, except that the Secretary may
add no more than 4 years to the original
contract length.
Section 8401(c) changed 36 CFR
223.52(c)(3) by giving the Secretary of
Agriculture discretion to award certain
contracts with up to four years of
MRCTA to the original contract term.
However, section 8401 did not change
§ 223.52(c)(4)’s requirement that total
sale length not exceed 10 years.
Nationally, there are up to 46
contracts that are prevented from
receiving the up to 4 years of MRCTA
authorized by the Farm Bill because of
the 10-year limit on total sale length.
Nine of those contracts are scheduled to
13 See Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts;
Finding of Substantial Overriding Public Interest,
71 FR 66,160 (Nov. 13, 2006); Extension of Certain
Timber Sale Contracts; Finding of Substantial
Overriding Public Interest, 72 FR 64,991 (Nov. 19,
2007).
14 Pub. L. No. 110–234, 122 Stat. 93 (May 22,
2008). Section 8401, depending on the
circumstances, allows for the following types of
contract modifications: (1) Rate redetermination; (2)
contract cancellation; (3) index substitution; and (4)
MRCTA extension.
15 Pub. L. No. 110–246, 122 Stat. 1651 (June 18,
2008).
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
53820
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 17, 2008 / Notices
terminate before the end of 2008 and 18
have termination dates in 2009. Six of
the 46 contracts have current
termination dates of December 31, 2013
or later. Contracts with termination
dates after December 31, 2013 are not
eligible for relief under this SOPI.16
Therefore, up to 40 timber sales could
benefit from using MRCTA to extend
contract length beyond 10 years. While
this number is not large, the Secretary
of Agriculture agrees with Senator
Allard’s observation that forcing those
sales to be operated in the current
market situation could hasten the loss of
infrastructure needed by the Forest
Service to perform its mission.
Extending these sales and other sales
allows purchasers to delay harvest of
green timber while harvesting damaged
timber.
Purchasers of the 40 sales potentially
eligible for relief under this SOPI face
the same market conditions as
purchasers eligible for the additional
MRCTA time authorized by the Farm
Bill. Further, some of these green timber
sales have been delayed as a result of
the Forest Service requesting that the
purchasers harvest salvage timber
instead. Without this SOPI, many of
these purchasers may be forced to
harvest sales that are uneconomical or
may face default if their contracts can’t
be extended. An indication of the
economic problems facing existing
green sales is that over 360 applications
have been made for a rate
redetermination under the Farm Bill.
These applications show how much the
market has changed over the past few
years and that without some economic
or time-frame relief, older green timber
sales can not be harvested economically.
The 2006 and 2007 SOPI
determinations and section 8401 of the
Farm Bill provided relief options for
most National Forest System timber sale
contracts suffering under the ongoing
drastic decline in forest product
markets. The principal exceptions are
the contracts ineligible for additional
MRCTA time because of the ten-year
limit on total contract length.
Therefore, pursuant to 16 U.S.C.
472a(c) of NFMA, and the authority
delegated to me at 7 CFR 2.20, I, Mark
E. Rey, Under Secretary of Agriculture
for Natural Resources and Environment,
have determined that the substantial
overriding public interest justifies the
use of MRCTA to extend beyond 10
years certain existing green timber sale
contracts awarded prior to January 1,
2007, that are tied to Softwood Lumber
16 At this time, the softwood lumber is expected
to recover sufficiently by December 31, 2013.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 Sep 16, 2008
Jkt 214001
index #0811 and the Hardwood Lumber
index #0812.
MRCTA relief granted pursuant to this
SOPI must be made in accordance with
36 CFR 223.52, subject to the following
exceptions:
(a) Notwithstanding 36 CFR
223.52(c)(3), up to 4 years may be added
to a contract’s length by market-related
contract term addition;
(b) Notwithstanding 36 CFR
223.52(c)(4), the revised contract term
may exceed 10 years; and
(c) No contract’s termination date
shall be set past December 31, 2013.
Periodic payments shall be adjusted
pursuant to 36 CFR 223.52(d).
The following types of contracts are
not eligible for relief under this SOPI:
(1) Contracts the Forest Service
determines are in urgent need of harvest
for reasons including, but not limited to,
deteriorating timber conditions or
public safety, and (2) contracts that are
in breach.
To be considered for additional
MRCTA time under this SOPI, eligible
purchasers must make a written request
to the Contracting Officer. The timber
purchaser must also agree to release the
United States from all liability resulting
from (1) any relief provided by this
SOPI, and (2) a decision by the Forest
Service not to provide relief under this
SOPI.
Dated: September 10, 2008.
Mark Rey,
Under Secretary, NRE.
[FR Doc. E8–21613 Filed 9–16–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Forest Certification and Its
Implications for America’s National
Forests
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice; request for comment.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service is
seeking comments on forest certification
and its implications for America’s
national forests. This Federal Register
notice is to serve as a formal public
solicitation of views on the question of
National Forest System certification and
its implications, if national forest lands
were to become certified under one or
both of the two major certification
systems being used in the United States.
The U.S. Forest Service, which manages
193 million acres, or approximately
eight percent of the nation’s land,
believes that it is important to better
understand the implications of third-
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
party certification of National Forest
System (NFS) lands and, in 2005, began
exploring independent, third party
certification as a potential option. To
this end, the Forest Service initiated the
National Forest Certification Study,
which resulted in the report, ‘‘National
Forest Certification Study: An
Evaluation of the Application of Forest
Stewardship Council (FSC) and
Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI)
Standards on Five National Forests.’’
This report documents the study in
which third-party auditors evaluated
current forest management practices on
five national forest units using the
existing certification standards of two
certification programs, Sustainable
Forestry Initiative (SFI) and Forest
Stewardship Council (FSC).
Recognizing that the Forest Service
has not decided whether it will seek
certification, public outreach and
discussion is requested to obtain public
and stakeholder views on the National
Forest Certification Study and its
associated report, as well as the
potential implications of NFS
certification in general before
determining how to proceed.
In addition to comments on the
National Forest Certification Study, the
Forest Service is particularly interested
in public views on the following
questions:
1. What are your general views on the
implications of independent, third party
certification of NFS lands?
2. Would certification improve the
management of national forests?
3. Could certification make it more
difficult to achieve national forest
management goals?
4. What questions would certification
be able to answer, and what needs
would it be able to meet, on national
forest lands?
5. Are there key questions or needs
that certification would be unable or
poorly suited to address?
6. Would independent, third party
certification be an appropriate or
effective tool, given the unique role of
national forests? Or, because of that
unique role, would certification be
particularly inappropriate or
ineffective?
Detailed information about the NFS
Certification Study is available on the
following Web site: https://
www.fs.fed.us/projects/
forestcertification/index.shtml.
DATES: Comments must be received, in
writing, on or before November 17,
2008. Comments received after that date
will be considered to the extent
praticable.
ADDRESSES: Comments concerning this
notice should be addressed to Doug
E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM
17SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53817-53820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21613]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Determination of Substantial Overriding Public Interest for
Extending Certain Timber Sale Contracts
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of Determination of Substantial Overriding Public
Interest.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 472a(c) of the National Forest Management
Act of 1976 (NFMA), and the authority delegated at 7 CFR 2.20, the
Under Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and Environment
has determined that the substantial overriding public interest (SOPI)
justifies the use of market-related contract term adjustments (MRCTA)
to extend beyond 10 years, certain existing green timber sale contracts
tied to Softwood Lumber index 0811 and Hardwood Lumber index
0812 that were awarded prior to January 1, 2007. This SOPI
determination is based on the sustained drastic reduction in softwood
lumber prices since 2004 and the more recent hardwood lumber decline.
DATES: The determination was made on September 10, 2008 by the Under
Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and Environment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lathrop Smith, Forest Management
Staff, (202) 205-0858 or Richard Fitzgerald, Forest Management Staff
(202) 205-1753; 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Mailstop 1103, Washington,
DC 20250-1103.
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.
Background
Section 472a(c) of NFMA provides, in part, as follows:
Unless there is a finding by the Secretary of Agriculture that
better utilization of the various forest resources (consistent with
the provisions of the Multiple-Use, Sustained-Yield Act of 1960)
will result, sales contracts shall be for a period not to exceed 10
years: Provided, That such period may be adjusted at the discretion
of the Secretary to provide additional time due to time delays
caused by an act of an agent of the United States or by other
circumstances beyond the control of the purchaser.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 472a(c).
Although the Forest Service generally does not allow the extension
of timber sale contracts beyond 10 years, the Secretary of Agriculture
may extend such contracts beyond 10 years if he determines doing so
will result in the better utilization of the various forest resources.
However, the Secretary ``shall not extend any contract period with an
original term of 2 years or more unless he finds (A) that the purchaser
has diligently performed in accordance with an approved plan of
operation or (B) that the substantial overriding public interest
justifies the extension.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Under Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and
Environment has determined that a healthy timber industry
infrastructure results in the better utilization of the various forest
resources. The grant of additional MRCTA time to purchasers eligible
for relief under this SOPI is intended to help maintain that
infrastructure by preventing timber sale purchasers from defaulting on
their contracts, closing their mills, and filing for bankruptcy
protection. Having numerous economically viable timber sale purchasers
is in the substantial overriding public interest for many reasons,
including the following: (1) It allows the Forest Service to accomplish
land management objectives in a cost-effective manner; (2) it increases
competition for National Forest System timber sales and can result in
higher prices paid for timber; (3) it helps
[[Page 53818]]
provide a continuous timber supply to the public in accordance with the
Organic Administration Act; (4) it helps accomplish fuels reduction
projects; and (5) it helps maintain the economic stability of
communities dependent upon the timber industry.
MRCTA relief granted pursuant to this SOPI must be made in
accordance with 36 CFR 223.52, subject to the following exceptions:
(a) Notwithstanding 36 CFR 223.52(c)(3), up to 4 years may be added
to a contract's length by MRCTA;
(b) Notwithstanding 36 CFR 223.52(c)(4), the revised contract term
may exceed 10 years; and
(c) No contract subject to this SOPI may have its termination date
extended past December 31, 2013.
Periodic payments shall be adjusted pursuant to 36 CFR 223.52(d).
The following types of contracts are not eligible for relief under
this SOPI: (1) Contracts the Forest Service determines are in urgent
need of harvesting for reasons including, but not limited to,
deteriorating timber conditions or public safety and (2) contracts that
are in breach.
To determine when there is a drastic decline in lumber prices
sufficient to trigger a market-related contract term addition, the
Forest Service monitors two producer price indices maintained by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS): 0811 Softwood Lumber and
0812 Hardwood Lumber. These indices are published monthly by
the BLS, but the Forest Service only uses the indices from the last
month of each calendar quarter (March, June, September, and December)
to calculate when MRCTA triggers. Because the BLS indices are not
adjusted for inflation, the Forest Service uses a relative index
adjusted for inflation that allows comparisons to be made over time on
a constant dollar basis. The relative index is calculated each quarter
by dividing 100 by the BLS all commodities index for that month and
multiplying the result times the monthly indices 0811 and
0812. All references to BLS indices 0811 and
0812 in this notice are to the Forest Service's relative
index.
The current decline in the softwood lumber index is the worst on
record going back to March 1949. After peaking in the third quarter
2004, softwood lumber index 0811 steadily declined so that by
the end of the second quarter (June) 2008, it had decreased by 47
percent. Beginning with the third quarter of 2005 and continuing
through the second quarter of 2008, there were 12 consecutive calendar
quarters where the declines were large enough to trigger MRCTA. The
only other comparable market decline took place during the early
1980's, but the current decline in the index value is worse as can be
seen in the table below.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The number of consecutive qualifying quarters if MRCTA had
been in effect at that time.
\4\ The decline period begins with the month the index peaked
and ends respectively (1) when the 1980s index bottomed out and (2)
June 2008, which is the last quarter with data available for the
current decline.
Softwood Lumber Index
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Trigger
Decline period \4\ months High index Low index Point drop % Drop quarters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9/78--9/82........................ 48 155.8 99.8 56.0 35.9 \3\ 12
9/04--6/08........................ 45 156.5 83.8 72.7 46.4 12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After peaking in the second quarter 2003, the hardwood lumber index
steadily declined through the second quarter 2008. During this 42-month
period, the index dropped 46.3 percent and triggered MRCTA for three
consecutive quarters (September 2005, December 2005 and March 2006),
followed by seven quarters that did not trigger. The hardwood lumber
index has triggered again in the first and second quarters of 2008. The
table below compares the current decline to that in the early 1980s.
Hardwood Lumber Index
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Trigger
Decline period \5\ months High index Low index Point drop % drop quarters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9/78-3/82......................... 42 131.7 99.6 32.1 24.3 \3\ 7
12/03-6/08........................ 54 138.8 92.5 46.3 33.3 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the decline in the early 1980s, purchasers faced low demand,
decreased product prices and severe competition from Canadian lumber,
which resulted in many purchasers being unable to operate their timber
sale contracts. As a result, a large number of purchasers were in
danger of defaulting on their contracts and possibly being forced into
bankruptcy. Such an outcome could have had a devastating effect on the
economic health of the timber industry, as well as communities
surrounding National Forests. Accordingly, in 1980, 1981, and 1982, the
Forest Service determined that the substantial overriding public
interest justified granting extensions to certain timber sale
contracts.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The decline period begins with the month the index peaked
and ends respectively (1) when the 1980s index bottomed out and (2)
June 2008, which is the last quarter with data available for the
current decline.
\6\ See Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 48 FR
38,862, 38,863 (Aug. 26, 1983) (describing the SOPI determinations
made in the early 1980s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the adverse market conditions continued beyond 1982. In
July 1983, the President authorized the Secretary of Agriculture, upon
a finding of substantial overriding public interest, to grant
additional extensions to certain timber sale contracts without interest
for a maximum of 5 years beyond their present termination dates.\7\ On
August 18, 1983, the Chief of the Forest Service made such a finding,
and the Forest Service published a notice of interim policy
establishing the multi-sale extension program.\8\ Under this program,
total sale life could extend beyond 10 years.\9\ The Forest Service
published a final policy on December 7,
[[Page 53819]]
1983.\10\ Current market conditions justify a similar use of
discretion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 48 FR 54,812
(Dec. 7, 1983).
\8\ Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 48 FR 38,862
(Aug. 26, 1983).
\9\ Id.
\10\ Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts, 48 FR 54,812
(Dec. 7, 1983). After the housing market decline of the 1980s, the
Forest Service promulgated 36 CFR 223.52, which provides for market-
related contract term additions in response to adverse timber market
conditions. See Sale and Disposal of National Forest Timber; Market-
related Contract Term Adjustments, 55 Fed. Reg. 50,643 (Dec. 7,
1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Substantial Overriding Public Interest Determination
The Under Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and
Environment has concluded that a viable timber industry infrastructure
results in the better utilization of the various forest resources.
Accordingly, the Under Secretary has determined that helping to
maintain numerous economically viable timber sale purchasers is in the
substantial overriding public interest.
The public benefits when defaulted timber sale contracts, mill
closures, and bankruptcies can be avoided by granting additional
contract time to purchasers. For example, government resources that
might otherwise be spent recovering losses can be focused elsewhere.
Further, a large pool of timber sale purchasers allows the Forest
Service to accomplish its land management objectives in a more cost-
effective manner by increasing competition for National Forest System
timber sales, which can result in higher contract prices. In addition,
a large number of timber purchasers can provide a more continuous
supply of timber to the public in accordance with the Organic
Administration Act. The timber industry also helps to maintain the
stability of dependent communities.
Further, the timber industry is a valuable partner in the fight
against catastrophic fires, especially those in urban interface areas
found throughout the western United States. In December 2003, President
Bush signed the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA), which contains
a variety of provisions that speed up hazardous-fuel reduction and
forest-restoration projects on specific types of federal land at risk
for wildland fires and/or insect and disease epidemics.\11\ The Act
also encourages biomass removal from public and private lands.\12\
Byproducts removed during hazardous fuels reduction and landscape
restoration activities are often utilized in certain forest products
(e.g., timber, engineered lumber, paper, pulp and furniture) and bio-
energy and bio-based products (e.g., plastics, ethanol, and diesel).
The value of these products helps offset the Forest Service's hazardous
fuels removal costs, making treatment of substantially more acreage
possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 16 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.
\12\ See e.g. 16 U.S.C. 6531.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintaining a viable industry infrastructure capable of processing
material removed during HFRA projects is essential; it allows fuels
reduction projects to be accomplished with timber sale contracts that
return money to the Treasury. The loss of a viable industry in many
parts of the country, including the Southwest and the Intermountain
West, has limited the opportunities to harvest insect and fire damaged
trees. Without a viable infrastructure, the Forest Service would have
to pay a service contractor to perform the work. However, when trees
are harvested for products, those products provide a valuable commodity
to the American public and reduce the government's cost of removing or
disposing material that might otherwise have to be burned, chipped, or
masticated. In some market areas where little industry infrastructure
remains, the loss of a single mill can significantly increase the
government's costs of fuels reductions projects. Further, in many
places, particularly in the western states, the industry infrastructure
is already too small to respond to urgent needs; additional mill
closures will aggravate this situation.
An example of the problems associated with limited industry
resources is Colorado, where a mountain pine beetle epidemic is
impacting over 1.5 million acres. Remaining industry in Colorado is too
small to keep up with the urgent need to reduce the fire danger posed
by this epidemic by harvesting dead and dying trees around communities
and within municipal watersheds. In a June 4, 2008 letter to the Chief
of the Forest Service, Colorado Senator Wayne Allard stated the
following: ``Providing relief on the ten-year deadline for green sales
has become a pivotal issue this year. Under existing policy, operators
will be forced to log green sales that are reaching their termination
dates, rather than treating much more urgent areas. More important,
forcing them to do so during the worst market they have ever
experienced could hasten the loss of our last remaining
infrastructure--without which the Forest Service would be incapable of
performing its mission.''
Considering the extraordinary market conditions currently facing
the forest products industry, and recognizing the need to maintain a
viable forest products industry, the Forest Service has implemented a
variety of relief options over the past few years. For example, in 2006
and 2007, the Forest Service issued SOPI determinations intended to
help timber purchasers cope with steadily declining timber markets.\13\
However, the 2006 and 2007 SOPIs, like those issued from 1980-1982, did
not provide adequate relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts; Finding of
Substantial Overriding Public Interest, 71 FR 66,160 (Nov. 13,
2006); Extension of Certain Timber Sale Contracts; Finding of
Substantial Overriding Public Interest, 72 FR 64,991 (Nov. 19,
2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, in May 2008, Congress passed section 8401 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Farm Bill) to provide additional
relief.\14\ Then, as the result of an error in the Farm Bill that did
not affect Section 8401, the May 2008 Farm Bill was repealed. However,
on June 18, 2008, Congress reenacted the Farm Bill, which included an
identical section 8401.\15\ In part, section 8401 recognized that, due
to the severity of the current market decline, many contracts had
already received the maximum MRCTA time allowed under 36 CFR
223.52(c)(3): ``No more than twice the original contract length or 3
years, whichever is less, shall be added to a contract's term by
market-related contract term addition.'' Therefore, Congress enacted
section 8401(c), which provides as follows:
\14\ Pub. L. No. 110-234, 122 Stat. 93 (May 22, 2008). Section
8401, depending on the circumstances, allows for the following types
of contract modifications: (1) Rate redetermination; (2) contract
cancellation; (3) index substitution; and (4) MRCTA extension.
\15\ Pub. L. No. 110-246, 122 Stat. 1651 (June 18, 2008).
(c) EXTENSION OF MARKET-RELATED CONTRACT TERM ADDITION TIME
LIMIT FOR CERTAIN CONTRACTS.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, upon the written request of a timber purchaser, the Secretary
may, at the sole discretion of the Secretary, modify a timber sale
contract (including a qualifying contract) awarded to the purchaser
before January 1, 2007, to adjust the term of the contract in
accordance with the market-related contract term addition provision
in the contract and section 223.52 of title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations, as in effect on the date of the modification, except
that the Secretary may add no more than 4 years to the original
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
contract length.
Section 8401(c) changed 36 CFR 223.52(c)(3) by giving the Secretary
of Agriculture discretion to award certain contracts with up to four
years of MRCTA to the original contract term. However, section 8401 did
not change Sec. 223.52(c)(4)'s requirement that total sale length not
exceed 10 years.
Nationally, there are up to 46 contracts that are prevented from
receiving the up to 4 years of MRCTA authorized by the Farm Bill
because of the 10-year limit on total sale length. Nine of those
contracts are scheduled to
[[Page 53820]]
terminate before the end of 2008 and 18 have termination dates in 2009.
Six of the 46 contracts have current termination dates of December 31,
2013 or later. Contracts with termination dates after December 31, 2013
are not eligible for relief under this SOPI.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ At this time, the softwood lumber is expected to recover
sufficiently by December 31, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, up to 40 timber sales could benefit from using MRCTA to
extend contract length beyond 10 years. While this number is not large,
the Secretary of Agriculture agrees with Senator Allard's observation
that forcing those sales to be operated in the current market situation
could hasten the loss of infrastructure needed by the Forest Service to
perform its mission. Extending these sales and other sales allows
purchasers to delay harvest of green timber while harvesting damaged
timber.
Purchasers of the 40 sales potentially eligible for relief under
this SOPI face the same market conditions as purchasers eligible for
the additional MRCTA time authorized by the Farm Bill. Further, some of
these green timber sales have been delayed as a result of the Forest
Service requesting that the purchasers harvest salvage timber instead.
Without this SOPI, many of these purchasers may be forced to harvest
sales that are uneconomical or may face default if their contracts
can't be extended. An indication of the economic problems facing
existing green sales is that over 360 applications have been made for a
rate redetermination under the Farm Bill. These applications show how
much the market has changed over the past few years and that without
some economic or time-frame relief, older green timber sales can not be
harvested economically.
The 2006 and 2007 SOPI determinations and section 8401 of the Farm
Bill provided relief options for most National Forest System timber
sale contracts suffering under the ongoing drastic decline in forest
product markets. The principal exceptions are the contracts ineligible
for additional MRCTA time because of the ten-year limit on total
contract length.
Therefore, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 472a(c) of NFMA, and the authority
delegated to me at 7 CFR 2.20, I, Mark E. Rey, Under Secretary of
Agriculture for Natural Resources and Environment, have determined that
the substantial overriding public interest justifies the use of MRCTA
to extend beyond 10 years certain existing green timber sale contracts
awarded prior to January 1, 2007, that are tied to Softwood Lumber
index 0811 and the Hardwood Lumber index 0812.
MRCTA relief granted pursuant to this SOPI must be made in
accordance with 36 CFR 223.52, subject to the following exceptions:
(a) Notwithstanding 36 CFR 223.52(c)(3), up to 4 years may be added
to a contract's length by market-related contract term addition;
(b) Notwithstanding 36 CFR 223.52(c)(4), the revised contract term
may exceed 10 years; and
(c) No contract's termination date shall be set past December 31,
2013. Periodic payments shall be adjusted pursuant to 36 CFR 223.52(d).
The following types of contracts are not eligible for relief under
this SOPI: (1) Contracts the Forest Service determines are in urgent
need of harvest for reasons including, but not limited to,
deteriorating timber conditions or public safety, and (2) contracts
that are in breach.
To be considered for additional MRCTA time under this SOPI,
eligible purchasers must make a written request to the Contracting
Officer. The timber purchaser must also agree to release the United
States from all liability resulting from (1) any relief provided by
this SOPI, and (2) a decision by the Forest Service not to provide
relief under this SOPI.
Dated: September 10, 2008.
Mark Rey,
Under Secretary, NRE.
[FR Doc. E8-21613 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P