Opinion ID: 3050627
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Shall be limited to areas:

Text: (2) Condition Classes 2 or 3 in Fire Regime Groups I, II, or III, outside the wildland-urban interface; b. Shall be identified through a collaborative framework as described in “A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and Environment 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan”; c. Shall be conducted consistent with agency and Departmental procedures and applicable land and resource management plans; d. Shall not be conducted in wilderness areas or impair the suitability of wilderness study areas for preservation as wilderness; and SIERRA CLUB v. BOSWORTH 15935 the Fuels CE requires a project file and decision memo, consisting of a description of the categorically excluded project, the reasons for invoking the CE, a finding that no extraordinary circumstances exist, and a description of the public involvement. Id. The Fuels CE calls for projects to be identified and prioritized under the Secretary of the Interior and the United States Department of Agriculture’s (“USDA”) “10-Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan.”2 67 Fed. Reg. at 77042. The 10-Year Plan calls for collaboration at the local, tribal, State and Federal levels, with the amount of collaboration to be “consistent with the complexity of land ownership patterns, resource management issues, and the number of interested stakeholders.” Id. The Fuels CE was preceded by another significant change to the Forest Service Handbook, the addition of language in the extraordinary circumstances section which permits an action to proceed under a CE even when a listed resource condition exists.3 Clarification of Extraordinary Circumstances e. Shall not include the use of herbicides or pesticides or the construction of new permanent roads or other new permanent infrastructure; and may include the sale of vegetative material if the primary purpose of the activity is hazardous fuels reduction. Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, ch. 30, § 31.2 (10) (2004). 2 The 10-Year Plan was developed in response to Congress’s direction in October 2000 that the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior develop a ten-year strategy for implementing the National Fire Plan, and to do so in collaboration with the states most affected by fire. See Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2001, 106 Pub. L. No. 291, 114 Stat. 922, 1008-1010 (Oct. 11, 2000) (requesting agencies to prepare a strategic plan detailing their plans to use the nearly $1 billion appropriated to address wildland fire danger, and to investigate the possibility of expedited NEPA compliance procedures). 3 The previous Forest Service Handbook, adopted in 1992, required that “a proposed action may be categorically excluded from documentation in 15936 SIERRA CLUB v. BOSWORTH for Categories of Actions Excluded From Documentation in an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement, 67 Fed. Reg. 54622, 54627 (Aug. 23, 2002). Old Forest Service guidance stated that examples of extraordinary circumstances included, but were not limited to, the presence of the following factors: steep slopes or highly erosive soils; threatened and endangered species or their critical habitat; flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds; Congressionally designated areas, such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or National Recreation Areas; inventoried roadless areas; Research Natural Areas; and Native American religious or cultural sites, archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas. FSH § 1909.15, ch. 30, § 31.2 (2) (1992); see also Dep’t of Agric., National Environmental Policy Act; Revised Policy and Procedures, 57 Fed. Reg. 43180, 43208 (Sept. 18, 1992). Now, however, these factors are “resource conditions that should be considered” to determine whether extraordinary circumstances exist, but do not require any particular result. FSH § 1909.15, ch. 30, § 30.3 (2) (2007). The new Handbook grants the Forest Service discretion to determine when an extraordinary circumstance exists, because it provides that “the mere presence of one or more of these resource conditions does not preclude use of categorical exclusions.” Id. Whereas the old Handbook called for production of an EA when one of these conditions was present, the new guidelines call for a preliminary analysis to determine whether there exists “a cause-effect relationship between a proposed action and the potential effect on these resource conditions and [ ] if an environmental impact statement (EIS) or environmental assessment (EA) only if the proposed action . . . [i]s within a category listed in sec. 31.1b or 31.2; and there are no extraordinary circumstances related to the proposed action.” Forest Service Handbook § 1909.15.30.3(2) (1992); see also Dep’t of Agric., National Environmental Policy Act; Revised Policy and Procedures, 57 Fed. Reg. 43180, 43208 (Sept. 18, 1992). SIERRA CLUB v. BOSWORTH 15937 such a relationship exists, the degree of the potential effect of a proposed action on these resource conditions.” Id. The Forest Service developed the new “extraordinary circumstances” provision in response to “[p]ublic and employee confusion” and court decisions which had interpreted the previous rules to require preparation of an EIS whenever any condition was present. See 67 Fed. Reg. at 54623-24; see also Jones v. Gordon, 792 F.2d 821, 828 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding that because the elements of the extraordinary circumstances provision were in the disjunctive, “if any of the elements is present, the Service must prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement”).