H.R. 184: Action Versus No Action Act

The bill, known as the Action Versus No Action Act, introduces a framework for evaluating certain forest management activities on federal lands. It specifically applies to situations where the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior must prepare environmental assessments or environmental impact statements as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Here are the key points of the bill:

Scope of Application

The provisions of this act apply when:

• The forest management activity is on lands suitable for timber production.
• The activity meets certain criteria, including:
  • Being on lands designated under the Healthy Forests Restoration Act.
  • Being developed through a collaborative process.
  • Being proposed by a resource advisory committee.
  • Being covered by a community wildfire protection plan.

Alternatives Considered

In the context of an environmental assessment or impact statement, the bill dictates that only two alternatives are evaluated:

• The proposed forest management activity itself.
• The alternative of doing nothing (no action).

No Action Alternative Details

When considering the no action alternative, the Secretary must analyze various factors, including:

• Effects on forest health.
• Potential losses of life and property.
• Diversity of habitats.
• Likelihood of wildfires.
• Risks from insects and diseases.
• Timber production outcomes.

Additionally, the implications of a decline in forest conditions under no action must be evaluated, focusing on:

• Potential losses to life and property.
• Impacts on domestic water supplies.
• Loss of wildlife habitat.
• Other social and economic considerations.

Definitions

Key terms defined in the act include:

• Collaborative process: A method by which project development is carried out in cooperation with interested stakeholders.
• Community wildfire protection plan: A plan as defined under the Healthy Forests Restoration Act.
• Resource advisory committee: A committee as defined under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act.
• Secretary concerned: Either the Secretary of Agriculture (for National Forests) or the Secretary of the Interior (for other public lands).

Conclusion of Analysis

The legislation implies a streamlined assessment process for federal forest management activities, limiting the options considered to just action and inaction in certain contexts. This aims to simplify decision-making while addressing forest health and public safety concerns.

Relevant Companies