 Snep Assignment SUMMARY
CURRENT PAGE: 
 
|
|
Case study workshops were held to assess the accuracy of the experts at the county
level, working with community experts (Sam Doak and Jonathan Kusel): April 3, 1995,
Portola; April 4, 1995, Sierraville; April 5, 1995, Quincy; April 7, 1995, Graeagle;
April 12, 1995, Chester; and April 20, 1995, Greenville. Social assessment workshops were held at the county level (Sam Doak and Jonathan Kusel):
FACA
SNEP is excluded from the regulatory actions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
of 1988 because it was initiated by congressional action and is conducted as a report
to Congress. This assertion was challenged in a lawsuit, California Forestry Association v. U.S. Forest Service,
which charged that SNEP was in violation of FACA. District Court Judge Charles Richey
concluded in his decision of December 22, 1995, that SNEP did not violate FACA. In
arriving at its decision, the court discerned that the congressional intent for SNEP
made clear that the project would report to Congress and that both the Forest Service
and SNEP subsequently conducted the project in a manner consistent with this interpretation.
The fact that SNEP was initiated to provide information and analysis, not a plan for proposed management action, was considered by the court a distinction without
a difference, because the Forest Service plans would likely derive, at least in part,
from SNEPs report. Judge Richey ruled not only that FACA did not apply to SNEP but
also that the Forest Service may use SNEPs final report without fear of violating FACA. |
