(b) Develop procedures to ensure the 

 fullest practicable provision of timely 

 public information and understanding of 

 Federal plans and programs with envi- 

 ronmental impact in order to obtain the 

 views of interested parties. These proce- 

 dures shall include, whenever appropri- 

 ate, provision for public hearings, and 

 shall provide the public with relevant in- 

 formation, including information on al- 

 ternative courses of action. Federal agen- 

 cies shall also encourage State and local 

 agencies to adopt similar procedures for 

 informing the public concerning their 

 activities affecting the quality of the en- 

 vironment. 



(c) Insure that information regarding 

 existing or potential environmental prob- 

 lems and control methods developed as 

 part of research, development, demon- 

 stration, test, or evaluation activities is 

 made available to Federal agencies, 

 States, counties, municipalities, institu- 

 tions, and other entities, as appropriate. 



(e) Engage in exchange of data and re- 

 search results, and cooperate with agen- 

 cies or other governments to foster the 

 purposes of the Act. 



(f) Proceed, in coordination with other 

 agencies, with actions required by sec- 

 tion 102 of the Act. 



In reporting on his interpretation of these 

 provisions, Dean A. Gardner, Attorney in 

 Charge, Office of the General Counsel 

 (U.S.D.A., Ogden, Utah), stated that he felt 

 that the "degree of public involvement in 

 reaching a decision is more a matter of com- 

 plying with the recent statutory policy and di- 

 rectives of the National Environmental Policy 

 Act and the public information regulations 

 than it is a question of judicial considera- 

 tions." He further states his opinion that it is 

 the primary responsibility of the resource 

 manager, beyond any specific considerations 

 of public involvement, "to carry out an ade- 

 quate investigation . . . and that the manage- 

 ment decisions should be based upon a dem- 

 onstrable record of reviewing the alternatives 



and an alternative which is supported by sub- 

 stantial evidence." 68 



The second point to be considered is the 

 application of a policy statement by Secretary 

 of Agriculture Hardin (July 24, 1971), in im- 

 plementation of the Administrative Proce- 

 dures Act and the recommendation of the Ad- 

 ministrative Conference. The statement calls 

 for public participation in rulemaking relating 

 to public property, with certain exceptions: 



The exemptions permitted from such require- 

 ments where an agency finds for good cause 

 that compliance would be impracticable, un- 

 necessary or contrary to the public interest will 

 be used sparingly, that is, only when there is a 

 substantial basis therefor. Where such a finding 

 is made, the finding and a statement of the rea- 

 sons therefor will be published with the rule. 69 



The definition of the term "rulemaking" 

 for the purposes of the act is given to mean 

 "agency process for formulating, amending, 

 or repealing a rule." In turn the definition of 

 the term "rule" is "the whole or a part of an 

 agency statement of general or particular ap- 

 plicability and future effect designed to im- 

 plement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy 

 or describing the organization, procedure, or 

 practice requirements of an agency . . . ." 



If this definition is taken at its face value, 

 every alteration in the Forest Service Manual 

 would have to be subject to public hearings, 

 to say nothing of every multiple use plan or 

 action proposal. For example, such efforts of 

 the Forest Service as the newly formulated 

 and very forward-looking inventory plans 

 would have to be subject to public hearings, 

 because they are certainly designed to imple- 

 ment law and policy. This interpretation may 

 not be correct, however. The Secretary spe- 

 cifically refers, as quoted above, to the ex- 

 emptions granted to agencies (contained in 

 the act at 5 U.S.C. 553, section b, part A), to 

 the effect that the subsection does not apply 

 "to interpretative rules, general statements of 

 policy, or rules of agency organization, proce- 

 dure or practice." The kinds of changes that 



Personal communication, January 12, 1972. 



69 Federal Register, Vol. 36, No. 143 (Saturday, 

 July 24, 1971), p. 13804. Applies to Administrative 

 Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 553. 



53 



