Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 1 of 115
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS __________________________________________ ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) __________________________________________ ) TIMBER PRODUCTS COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant ) __________________________________________) _ CLR TIMBER HOLDINGS, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) BLUE LAKE FOREST PRODUCTS, INC.,
No. 01-570C (Judge Williams)
No. 01-627C (Judge Williams)
No. 04-501C (Judge Williams)
ERRATA TO THE APPENDIX TO PLAINTIFFS' PROPOSED FINDINGS OF UNCONTROVERTED FACT 1
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 2 of 115
In replying to defendant's response to plaintiffs' proposed findings of uncontroverted fact ("PPFUF"), plaintiffs identified eight instances where the cited document found in plaintiffs' appendix ("App. Tab") either was missing pages (mostly in the case of deposition transcripts) or was not the document described in the PPFUF (e.g., when the PPFUF referenced a deposition exhibit in Scott Timber but the appendix provided the same-numbered exhibit from the Blue Lake depositions, or vice versa). For each of these instances, plaintiffs have attached the corrected documents, described below.
1. App. Tab 7, replacing Blue Lake deposition Ex. 3 with Scott Timber deposition Ex. 3, cited in PPFUF ¶ 32; 2. App. Tab 74, replacing Blue Lake deposition Ex. 65 with Scott Timber deposition Ex. 65, cited in PPFUF ¶ 58; 3. App. Tab 87, replacing Scott Timber deposition Ex. 74 with Blue Lake deposition Ex. 74, cited in PPFUF ¶ 186; 4. App. Tab 169, adding missing pages 21-22 of the S. Zike 1/4/07 deposition in Scott Timber, cited in PPFUF ¶ 122; 5. App. Tab 170, adding missing page 66 of the T. Hussey 1/4/07 deposition in Scott Timber, cited in PPFUF ¶ 65; 6. App. Tab 173, adding missing pages 10-14 of the S. Zike 8/20/07 deposition in Blue Lake, cited in PPFUF ¶ 91; 7. App. Tab 176, adding missing pages 11-26 of the R. Devlin 8/21/07 deposition in Blue Lake, cited in PPFUF ¶ 89; and
2
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 3 of 115
8. App. Tab 185, adding missing pages 7-14 and 49-51 of the R. Holthausen 9/30/07 deposition in Blue Lake, cited in PPFUF ¶¶ 14 and 49.
Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court replace the documents found at the App. Tabs listed above with the corrected versions attached hereto.
Respectfully submitted,
s/Gary G. Stevens SALTMAN & STEVENS, P.C. 1801 K Street, N.W. Suite M-110 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 452-2140 Counsel for Plaintiffs OF COUNSEL: Ruth G. Tiger Eric J. Pohlner SALTMAN & STEVENS, P.C. 1801 K Street, N.W. Suite M-110 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 452-2140 Dated: June 27, 2008
3
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 4 of 115
App. Tab 7 Corrected
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 5 of 115
A-52-1
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 6 of 115
App. Tab 74 Corrected
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 7 of 115
Survey and Manage
8/28/96
There are four questions relative to survey and manage that currently need to be answered. These questions, as well as proposed answers, are detailed in the attached paper. This handout summarizes these questions, and the factors that need to be considered in answering them.
1. When is a project implemented?
e
@
ROD requires category 2 surveys before projects are implemented possible implementation points could be NEPA decision or project start there is a need to make survey information for decision maker some field units have not completed surveys how much risk do we want to take in going ahead with activities without surveys
2. What is a ground-disturbing activity?
e e e
element of "you'll know it when you see it" many don't t ~ sthe line officer to make the call t consider scope, intensity, and needs of the species
3. Do we use fiscal year 1997 or calendar year 1997 as the implementation date for the category 2 surveys?
@
e
the ROD specifies fiscal year but the S&Gs don't specify either fiscal year or calendar year assume that fiscal year was intended because this is more conservative and follows our project planning cycle
4. We don't yet have a survey protocol for red tree voles, yet these surveys will be required starting October 1, 1996.
e
e
the survey and manage core team is meeting on September 3; they hope to produce an interim protocol then we could use Appendix J2 but this could be very conhsing to field units if a protocol is not forthcoming very soon, we will need to consider a grace period before these surveys are required consider addressing ail of in a separate letter specific to the red tree vole issue
A-528-1
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 8 of 115
Survey and Manage
Current Implementation Issues
This paper presents options for answering the current questions on how to implement the ROD survey and manage direction. Question 1: The survey and manage category 2 direction uses the year of project implementation as the point when the survey becomes a requirement. In this context, when is a project "implemented?" Proposed response: For the purpose of the ROD survey and manage direction, a project is implemented when the decision document is signed. Projects with a decision document signed on or before 9130196 do not need surveys for category 2 species prior to operations. Projects with a decision document signed after that date need to have the survey completed prior to making the project NEPA decision. ,I<&\ t $3 \*e,:
>$) /&
#
w i
Other considerations: This will result in all projects signed off on in FY '97 having surveys before the NEPA decision. There is consensus that this was the intent of the ROD. This will also result in projects being operated on in fiscal years 1997, 1998, and possibly even 1999 without surveys having been done. We have been unable to determine how many projects this might be, nor have we been able to get an estimate of the possible resource damage that could occur. However, there is strong concern on the part of FS, BLM, and USF&WS biologists that allowing any operations to proceed after 9130196 without surveys is unacceptable because it does not meet the intent of the ROD.
*
3
; (
We considered two approaches to this question one as stated in the preferred, above. The other approach would be to require surveys prior to operations. This was unacceptable because it would result in key information not being available at the time the decision is signed. We could combine these two approaches. In this way, we could require surveys on all projects with decisiolis signed afier 9130196 or for which operations begin after a specified date (wch as after 9130196 or 3130197, for example). This would satisfy concerns about meeting the intent of the ROD, but could appear contradictory or difficult t implement. There is also a reality that some field units are behind in their surveys. This is a particular problem for BLM and FS units in southwestern Oregon. They have large amounts of habitat to survey for amphibians.
A-528-2
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 9 of 115
Question 2: The ROD directs that surveys be performed prior to "ground-disturbing activities." In this context, what is a ground-disturbing activity? Preferred response:
"Ground disturbing activity" is any disturbance of a type and intensity that could reasonably have a significant negative impact on species or the habitat that supports them. Evaluating significant negative impact includes looking at both the scope and intensity. Some activities that are clearly ground-disturbing might not have a wide enough scope to trigger a survey (placing a sign in a campground, for example). Another activity might not technically be ground disturbing, but could clearly affect habitat enough to require a survey (helicopter logging, for example). The life requirements of the species in question should also be considered. The need for a survey should be determined by both the possibility of the species being present on the project site and the possibility of the project negatively affecting its habitat. The survey and manage protocols will include some guidance on the type of activities likely to negatively affect a given species (and thus likely to meet the definition of ground disturbing for that species). Neither a staff paper or survey protocols can define exactly what a ground-disturbing activity is for every situation. It will be necessary that the line officer determine which activities are ground disturbing, based on scope and intensity of impact and the life requirements of the species 1 . 7 ~t o -I af5ected.
C "" .* i
"* (
LabA+
Question 3: Please clarify the dates for survey and manage category 2. On page 36, the ROD uses fiscal year, but on C-5 only the year is specified. Do we use fiscal year or calendar year? Preferred response:
If the ROD says fiscal year, use fiscal year. If it specifies calendar year, then use calendar year. In this case, there is a conflict between the specified year on ROD-36 and the unspecified year on C5. We believe the specific fiscal year direction should take precedence over the non-specific language on C-5. This has the benefit of being the more conservative approach. Also, it corresponds to the fiscal year cycle we use in project planning. CONSIDER LEAVING OUT THIS NEXT QUESTION ALTOGETIIER. DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF RED TREE VOLE SURVEYS IN A SEPARATE LETTER ON THAT TOPIC.
Question 4: What should we do about surveying for red tree voles? Surveys are required in
A-528-3
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 10 of 115
F 1997, but we currently don't have a draft protocol. Y
Preferred response:
13196. It is their intent at that meeting to issue e survey and manage core te interim procedures for red tree voles. Randy Hickenbottom believes it may be possible to develop an interim procedure that would require only interim protocol into the direction package on 913.
i-
d
,Q "
C
Other considerations:
In an 8/3/94 letter signed by John Lowe and Elaine Zielinski, field units are guided to draw interim survey and manage guidance from Appendix J2. This would be an alternative approach. However, for the red tree vole, Appendix J2 contains little in the way of specific management suggestions. There is a suggestion to create corridors, but this approach has already been turned down by managers. At this time, suggesting to field units to draw fiom Appendix J2 for the red tree vole could easily result in many different, confising interim management regimes. It is possible we will not have even an interim red tree vole protocol by 9130196. In that case, allow field units a six month grace period from the date of the draft red tree vole protocol. Six months after a draft protocol is issued, all projects must have been surveyed for red tree voles prior to signing the decision document.
A-528-4
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 11 of 115
App. Tab 87 Corrected
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 12 of 115
A-583-1
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 13 of 115
A-583-2
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 14 of 115
App. Tab 169 Corrected
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 15 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 16 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 17 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 18 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 19 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 20 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 21 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 22 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 23 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 24 of 115
A-1355-1
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 25 of 115
A-1355-2
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 26 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 27 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 28 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 29 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 30 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 31 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 32 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 33 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 34 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 35 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 36 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 37 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 38 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 39 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 40 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 41 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 42 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 43 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 44 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 45 of 115
App. Tab 170 Corrected
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 46 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 47 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 48 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 49 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 50 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 51 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 52 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 53 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 54 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 55 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 56 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 57 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 58 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 59 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 60 of 115
A-1388-1
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 61 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 62 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 63 of 115
App. Tab 173 Corrected
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 64 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 65 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 66 of 115
A-1444-1
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 67 of 115
A-1444-2
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 68 of 115
A-1444-3
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 69 of 115
A-1444-4
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 70 of 115
A-1444-5
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 71 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 72 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 73 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 74 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 75 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 76 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 77 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 78 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 79 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 80 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 81 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 82 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 83 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 84 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 85 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 86 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 87 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 88 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 89 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 90 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 91 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 92 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 93 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 94 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 95 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 96 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 97 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 98 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 99 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 100 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 101 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 102 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 103 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 104 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 105 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 106 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 107 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 108 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 109 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 110 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 111 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 112 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 113 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 114 of 115
Case 1:01-cv-00570-MCW
Document 201-3
Filed 06/27/2008
Page 115 of 115
Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims - federal
| File Size: | 3,700.9 kB |
| Pages: | 115 |
| Date: | June 27, 2008 |
| File Format: | |
| State: | federal |
| Category: | District |
| Author: | unknown |
| Word Count: | 3,277 Words, 19,217 Characters |
| Page Size: | Letter (8 1/2" x 11") |
| URL |
https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/963/201-3.pdf |
| Download Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims ( 3,700.9 kB) |
Preview Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims
Popular Searches
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms