LISTSERV - IOWA-TOPICS Archives - LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Approved-By:  [log in to unmask]
Message-ID:  <[log in to unmask]>
Date:         Tue, 17 Aug 1999 12:33:31 EDT
Reply-To: Fed-Forests <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: Fed-Forests <[log in to unmask]>
From: David Orr <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      USFS Stewardship Contracting (pt. 2)
To: [log in to unmask]

(...Continued:)


Proposed Criteria

    To measure whether the new authorities have achieved the desired
results, four categories of criteria will be considered by the different
monitoring and evaluation (ME) groups. These categories are: (1)
Biophysical critiera, (2) economic criteria, (3) social criteria, and (4)
administrative criteria.
    Within each category, some of the criteria call for compiling
numerical or descriptive data, while other criteria require that some
aspect of a pilot project's performance be assessed. As noted earlier, to
assure compliance with FACA requirements, the local Data Inventory Teams
will consider only the criteria calling for numerical or descriptive
responses. Within this constraint, and recognizing that there may be
certain questions that may be relevant in some, but not all, situations,
it is proposed that all teams be free to entertain questions beyond those
listed. In all instances, however, the criteria that are listed, as a
minimum, would be addressed by the designated groups. In addition to
addressing the criteria set-forth, the local Data Inventory Teams will be
encouraged to establish photo points that will record the condition of
the landscape, before, during, and after project implementation.
    Criteria for the Local Data Inventory Teams. The local Data Inventory
Teams will answer, at a minimum, the 16 criteria listed in this section.
Additional criteria may be added, but they must be of an objective,
factual nature.

    Biophysical Criteria will include:

[[Page 44688]]

    (1) The stated purpose and need for the project.
    (2) The project objectives.
    (3) The land management treatments being applied. All treatments
applied in connection with a particular are to be considered, including:
the mileage of road maintained or obliterated; the mileage of trails
maintained or obliterated; the acreage of soil and water improvement; the
acreage of terrestrial habitat restored or enhanced; the mileage of
stream habitat restored or enhanced; the acreage of
fuels management by mechanical means and/or prescribed burning; the
acreage treated to decrease insect, disease, or fire risks, and/or to
enhance forest health; and the acreage of noxious and/or exotic weed
control. For each treatment that is applied, the local Data Inventory
teams with gather data on the accomplishments realized to date using
regular appropriations, the exchange of goods for services, or retained
receipts.

    Economic Criteria will include:
    (4) The total project costs, and the breakdown of these costs into
the following categories: formal project planning and NEPA (including
citizen/public involvement in the process); sale/contract preparation;
sale/contract administration; citizen involvement (during project
implementation); monitoring, evaluation & reporting (including citizen
involvement in this process); and other (to be specified).
    (5) The funding of project implementation, and the breakdown of this
funding into the following categories: exchange of goods for services;
retained receipts; regular appropriations; cooperator contributions
(cash); cooperator contributions (materials or in-kind services); and
other funding sources (to be specified). For
appropriated funds, the local Data Inventory teams will show the amounts
provided from each of the Forest Service's recognized fund codes.
    (6) The types and amounts of forest products produced, including:
sawtimber; pulpwood; posts and poles; and different types of special
forest products (ferns, pine boughs, pine straw, mushrooms, etc.). In all
instances, product amounts will be expressed in terms of commonly
recognized units.
    (7) The total project receipts, and the proportion of these receipts
attributable to: timber products; special forest products; and other
products (to be specified).
    (8) The disposition of the project receipts, showing the amounts:
returned to Treasury; exchanged for services; retained and reinvested; or
distributed in some other manner (to be specified).
    (9) The manner in which the pilot changed employment or
entrepreneurial opportunities in the local community.
    (10) The special skills required of a contractor for the project.
    (11) The difficulties encountered in hiring contractors with the
needed skills.
    (12) The average wage paid in connection with the project and whether
this wage rate represented woods a worker, service contract, or
Davis-Bacon wage rate.
    (13) The duration of the contract for this project and whether the
contract period was longer or shorter than what is common with
conventional timber sale or service contract projects.

    Social Criteria will include:
    (14) The individuals and/or groups (other than the Forest Service)
who collaborated in planning, implementing, or monitoring the project,
and the manner in which they were selected.
    (15) The roles that each collaborator performed.

    Administrative Criteria will include:
    (16) The new processes and/or procedures that were used in connection
with the project. The possibilities to be considered include: awarding of
contracts on a ``best value'' basis (specify how  ``best value'' was
determined); designation by prescription; end results contracting;
exchange of goods for services; retention of receipts; use of an
appraisal method other than standard procedures (method to be specified);
offering sales (appraised value of over $10,000) without advertisement;
using state foresters as federal agents; using service contracts of over
5 years duration; using contract logging with subsequent sale of the cut
products; or using some other new process or procedure (to be specified).
    Criteria for the Local Assessment and Evaluation Teams. The local
Assessment and Evaluation teams will use the evidence compiled by the
local Data Inventory teams to, as a minimum, address the 14 criteria that
follow. The Assessment and Evaluation teams may consider any additional
criteria that they deem relevant.

    Biophysical Criteria will include:
    (1) An assessment as to whether the stated purposes and needs for the
project were fulfilled and the basis for the conclusion.
    (2) An assessment as to whether the resource management objectives
of the project were realized and an explanation for the conclusion.
    (3) An assessment as to whether the Forest Service was able to do a
better job of ecosystem management by giving a single contractor the
responsibility for a ``bundled group'' of resource work activities (e.g.,
timber extraction, watershed restoration, habitat improvement, and road
obliteration) on the project area and an explanation of the conclusion.

    Economic Criteria will include:
    (4) An assessment as to whether employment opportunities for local
communities were enhanced as a result of the project and the basis for
the conclusion.
    (5) An assessment as to whether the prevailing wage rate in the local
community was enhanced as a result of the project and the basis for the
conclusion.

    Social Criteria will include:
    (6) An assessment as to whether the dynamics of the collaborative
process permitted all interested parties to participate and the basis for
the conclusion.
    (7) An assessment as to whether and how collaboration facilitated
planning, implementing, and monitoring for the project.

    Administrative Criteria will include:
    (8) An assessment as to whether difficulties were experienced in
interpreting or implementing the Section 347 authorities.
    (9) An assessment as to whether the project planning and
implementation timelines were being met and what contributed to that
outcome.
    (10) An assessment as to how the new processes and/or procedures that
were tested in this project compare to the Forest Service's conventional
timber sale or service contract authorities. As appropriate, in making
that determination, the teams will consider the following performance
variable: attractiveness to potential bidders; fairness to potential
bidders; implications for the Forest Service's ability to maintain
accountability for the treatments being applied and the forest products
being removed; implications for the Forest Service's ability to implement
ecosystem management projects efficiently and effectively; implications
for the Forest Service's ability to successfully manage small diameter,
under-utilized material; the ease of administration; the agency's ability
to help meet the needs of rural, resource dependent communities; and
their performance with regard to any other indicators deemed to be
relevant.
    (11) An assessment as to how useful the new, tested authorities were
overall and the team's recommendations for applying the authorities more
broadly.
    (12) An assessment as to what other legislative, regulatory, or
administrative changes would have helped make the project more effective.

[[Page 44689]]

    (13) An assessment as to what type of contractual non-compliance
problems occurred, if any, and how expeditiously they were resolved.
    (14) A recommendation as to what should be done differently on
another pilot project.
    Criteria for the National Advisory Committee. The National Advisory
Committee will be required to address the following nine criteria. Some
of the criteria are the same as those asked at the local level. Where
this is the case, the duplication is deliberate and reflects the belief
that these criteria have relevancy at both levels. The national team
members, like their local counterparts, will be free to address other
criteria that they deem to be relevant; however, it is worth noting
that their ability to do so may be constrained by the nature of the data
compiled locally.
    Biophysical Criteria will include: Based on the collective experience
of the pilot projects;
    (1) A determination as to whether the stated purposes and needs for
the projects were fulfilled and an explanation for the conclusion.
    (2) A determination as to whether the resource management objectives
of the projects were realized and the basis for the conclusion.
    (3) An assessment as to whether the Forest Service was able to do a
better job of ecosystem management by giving a single contractor the
responsibility for a ``bundled group'' of resource work activities (e.g.,
timber extraction, watershed restoration, habitat improvement, and road
obliteration) on the project area and an explanation for the conclusion.
    Economic Criteria will include: Based on the collective experience of
the pilots:
    (4) A determination as to whether any of the new processes and
procedures that were tested appear to represent effective ways to create
new or enhance existing employment or entrepreneurial opportunities in
local communities.
    (5) A determination of what administrative costs were incurred at the
regional and national levels in order to carry out the stewardship pilots.
    Social Criteria will include: Based on the collective experience of
the pilots:
    (6) An assessment as to what steps were taken to ensure that regional
and/or national publics were not excluded or placed at a disadvantage in
the collaborative process, and a determination of whether the steps taken
were effective.
    (7) A determination as to the potential for stewardship contracting
to improve the quality of life within local resource-dependent
communities (jobs, environmental conditions, economic infrastructure,
etc.).
    Administrative Criteria will include: Based on the collective
experience of the pilots:
    (8) An assessment as to what difficulties were experienced in
interpreting or implementing the Section 347 authorities.
    (9) An assessment as to how the new processes and/or procedures that
were tested compare to the Forest Service's conventional timber sale or
service contract authorities. As appropriate, in making these
determinations, the committee will consider the following performance
variables: attractiveness to potential bidders; fairness to potential
bidders; implications for the Forest Service's ability to maintain
accountability for the treatments being applied and the forest products
being removed; implications for the Forest Service's ability to implement
ecosystem management projects efficiently and effectively; implications
for the Forest Service's ability to successfully manage small diameter,
under-utilized material; ease of administration; ability to help meet the
needs of rural, resource dependent communities; and any other indicators
deemed to be relevant.
    Lastly, the National Advisory Committee will make a recommendation
for which of the new authorities that were tested appear to warrant
broader application on a permanent basis.

    Dated: August 10, 1999.
Phil Janik,
Acting Chief.
[FR Doc. 99-21247 Filed 8-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M

-----------------------------------------------------------------
To get off the CONS-WPST-FORESTS-FED-FORUM list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]