Home

Department of Interior Wants To Destroy Records of Oil & Gas Leasing, Mining, Wells, Timber Sales and Much More

4 Comments

Public submission

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Federal agencies don’t keep most of their records forever. At some point, they’re legally allowed to destroy the majority of them.

But when? And which records? That’s up to the agency and the National Archives (with some input from the public, at least in theory).

In an overlooked process that’s been going on for decades, agencies create a “Request for Records Disposition Authority” that gives details about the documents, then proposes when they can be destroyed (e.g., three years after the end of the fiscal year, 50 years after they’re no longer needed, etc.). Occasionally, agencies propose keeping some documents permanently, which means eventually transferring them to the National Archives.

The National Archives & Records Administration (NARA) then “appraises” the agency’s Request for Records Disposition Authority, almost always giving the greenlight.

Around this point, the agency’s request and NARA’s appraisal are announced in the Federal Register. They are not published in the Register, nor are they posted to the Register website (including Regulations.gov). Their existence is simply noted.

Dept. of the Interior is asking for permission to destroy records about oil and gas leases, mining, dams, wells, timber sales, marine conservation, fishing, endangered species, non-endangered species, critical habitats, land acquisition, wild horses & burros and lots more. It’s also wanting to permanently retain a smaller subset of documents in each category, which will be transferred to the National Archives, where they will become harder to access via FOIA.

This is crucial stuff. In the months, years, and decades ahead, if you get “records destroyed” responses, or a vague “no records” response, from NPS, BLM, FWS, BIA, etc., this could be the root cause.

Comment period has been extended to Nov. 23, 2018   READ MORE HERE↓

More

BLM Fails to File for Temporary Closure and is Powerless to Keep Public Away from Round-Ups

6 Comments

Live Link:  Straight from the Horses Heart

Exclusive News from SFTHH Chief Investigative Reporter, Lisa LeBlanc 

BLM breaks law by posting closings without filing

“Editor’s Note:  Lisa is the wonderful individual who has been the source, fuel and inspiration for many of the articles that have appeared, here, on Straight from the Horse’s Heart.  Over the past several weeks, Lisa has been in contact with me over the most critical and important issue of the BLM restricting access to our own public lands while they stampede, harass and bring undo harm and stress to our wild horses.  Lisa has uncovered yet another unlawful flaw in the way the “shoot from the hip” BLM operates and it is now time that YOU, the tax paying public knows the truth.  It is also time for Lisa to report in her own words, her most important findings. More

USDA – New laws for meat packers

Leave a comment

USDA

The proposed rule is available from the Grain Inspection, Packers & Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) as www by clicking on “Federal Register.”
 Source: usda.com

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture plans to begin rulemaking next week that very well could lead to “the most aggressive” remodeling of the Packers & Stockyards Act (PSA) since it was created in 1921.

The rule will be published on June 22 and will be directed toward making sure that the marketplace is fair and transparent and rewards contract growers and livestock producers for investment, labor and producing high-quality livestock and poultry, Vilsack said during a teleconference with trade reporters.
The rule, which is required by the 2008 Farm Bill and by the PSA itself, will provide a 60-day comment period.
Much of the rule addresses the consolidation and integration of production that Vilsack implicated has damaged the vibrancy of farming and rural communities.
Vilsack emphasized that the changes proposed in the rule are designed to protect producers and would prohibit packers from engaging in practices that USDA believes are anticompetitive if not collusive, such as favoring certain-sized producers and packer-to-packer buying.
In particular, the proposed rule will require that contracts be publicly available so producers entering into contracts can determine if they’re receiving terms that are consistent across substrates such as a region or an industry itself or fundamentally different from contracts offered other parties.
Vilsack said the issues that the rule addresses are not so much about demand and supply but for whom demand and supply “is working.” He said it’s about level playing fields so those who “work hard have a shot at success.”
He also emphasized that there are “a number of great companies” in the livestock packing and poultry industry “that do the right thing,” and the rule won’t really change how they conduct business. It’s the companies that don’t “play by the rules” that will be affected, he said.

%d bloggers like this: