View Rule

The rulemaking would repeal 36 CFR 294 subpart B, which established prohibitions on road construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting in inventoried roadless areas on National Forest System lands. With the repeal, management requirements for inventoried roadless areas would be guided by individual land management plans. This rulemaking is in accordance with Executive Order 14153, Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential , section 3(c), which directs the Secretary of Agriculture to reinstate the 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule (85 FR 68688). By removing the nationwide roadless standard under the 2001 Roadless Rule, a Tongass National Forest exemption under the 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule is no longer needed.

Statement of Need:

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is proposing this rule to establish a more effective and efficient administrative framework for managing the National Forest System’s (NFS) inventoried roadless areas (IRAs). The current 2001 Roadless Rule established a single, nationwide set of prohibitions on road construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting in IRAs. The Department believes that this "one-size-fits-all" approach is no longer appropriate given changing resource conditions and shifts in policy priorities.

The promulgation of this rule will:

1. Address Evolving Conditions and Policy Priorities: Resource conditions within and adjacent to NFS lands have dramatically changed since 2001, including the expansion of the wildland-urban interface, growing impacts of extreme wildfire, drought, and insect and disease infestations. Management flexibility is required for the Agency to achieve its multiple-use conservation mission, including wildfire suppression and fuel reduction treatments.
2. Align with National Directives: This action is being proposed in accordance with Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens. It also responds to Executive Order 14153, Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential, which directs the Secretary of Agriculture to reinstate the 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule (the effect of which is achieved by rescinding the nationwide rule).
3. Restore Local Management Flexibility: Rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule would return discretion for local land managers to tailor management, as appropriate, to local land conditions. Conservation and management of roadless area characteristics can be more effectively achieved through the robust public process and site-specific analysis inherent in the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) forest planning framework. This approach addresses longstanding administrative and policy challenges that have created uncertainty since 2001.
4. Enable Economic Development: The rule aims to enable job creation and economic development in rural America through responsible timber production and promotion of direct and indirect forest-related jobs.

Summary of the Legal Basis:

The Secretary of Agriculture has broad authority to protect and administer the National Forest System (NFS) through regulation. The legal basis for this rulemaking stems primarily from:

• The Organic Administration Act of 1897 (Organic Act): This Act provides the Secretary with the authority to issue rules and regulations to "regulate the occupancy and use of the forests and to preserve them from destruction".
• The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 (MUSYA): This Act mandates the Forest Service to manage NFS lands for multiple uses and sustained yield of renewable surface resources to meet the needs of the American people.
• The National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA): This statute requires the Forest Service to prepare comprehensive land and resource management plans (forest plans) for each NFS unit. The decision to rescind the national prohibition is an exercise of the Secretary’s discretion to determine the proper uses within any area.

This proposed rule is an exercise of the Secretary of Agriculture’s discretion to determine the most appropriate administrative process for balancing competing values and uses in IRAs.

Alternatives:

The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) being prepared to analyze this proposal will evaluate the effects of the proposed action and a reasonable range of alternatives. The alternatives generally include:

1. Proposed Action (Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule): The USDA proposes to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (36 CFR Subpart B), including its application to the Tongass National Forest, while maintaining the state-specific roadless conservation rules for Idaho (36 CFR Subpart C) and Colorado (36 CFR Subpart D). This action would remove the nationwide prohibitions on road construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting on IRAs, returning decision-making authority to local land managers guided by existing Forest-level land management plans.
2. No Action Alternative: This alternative would retain the 2001 Roadless Rule in its current form. This maintains the designation of 9,368,000 acres of IRAs on the Tongass (as established in 2001) and continues the prohibitions on timber harvest and road construction/reconstruction nationwide, with limited exceptions. The No Action Alternative serves as the baseline condition for comparison.
3. Other Alternatives for Roadless Area Conservation: The EIS will study alternatives for roadless area conservation on NFS lands, including the Tongass National Forest, in the context of multiple-use management.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits:

The benefits and costs associated with rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule are largely programmatic and are generally described qualitatively.

Anticipated Benefits:

• Increased Management Flexibility: Provides local land managers the flexibility needed to respond to changing local conditions, such as reducing the risk of uncharacteristic wildfire effects and addressing insect and disease infestations.
• Economic Opportunity: Potentially expands the land base available for timber harvest and offers greater flexibility in locating and designing timber sales. This improved flexibility could improve the Forest Service’s ability to offer economic sales that contribute to rural economies.
• Infrastructure and Development: Benefits for the transportation, infrastructure, and mineral development sectors are anticipated due to the rescission of prohibitions on road building.
• Local Decision-making: Returns decision-making authority to the local forest level, potentially enhancing local collaboration and aligning management with regional goals.

Anticipated Costs:

• Loss of Roadless Values: Increased development (road construction/reconstruction and timber harvest) resulting from the proposed rule could adversely affect the scenic beauty of roadless areas, water quality, fisheries, wildlife, and associated recreation opportunities. Road construction, reconstruction, and timber harvest pose the greatest risks of altering and fragmenting natural landscapes.
• Increased Administrative Costs: The proposed rule may result in increased administrative costs related to the necessary maintenance of any new roads constructed.
• Distributional Effects: While the overall change in resource availability across most regions is expected to be small, effects may be more pronounced in specific regions (e.g., Alaska).

Risks:

The programmatic nature of this rulemaking means that specific on-the-ground risks are difficult to quantify, but potential risks include:

1. Environmental Degradation: The primary risk is the loss of the ecological and social values afforded by IRAs, such as high quality or undisturbed soil, water, and air; sources of public drinking water; diversity of plant and animal communities; and habitat for sensitive species.
2. Increased Public Controversy and Litigation: The rule is expected to generate significant public interest, including strong opposition from some state and local governments, Tribal communities, and environmental groups concerned about diminished protections. There is ongoing litigation related to roadless areas, particularly concerning the Tongass National Forest. Rescinding the rule may exacerbate controversy by replacing national uniformity with varying, localized management approaches.
3. Impacts on Subsistence Uses (Tongass Context): In the context of the Tongass, removing the 2001 Roadless Rule protections increases the risk of adverse effects to subsistence uses due to increased competition for resources or impacts on resource distribution and abundance, particularly deer habitat. 
4. Compliance and Consultation Risk: Although the agency maintains commitment to consultation, the rulemaking must ensure compliance with requirements such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation), as programmatic rules affecting vast areas carry inherent risk regarding potential effects on threatened and endangered species or Tribal interests.