Opposes rescissionA0 noneSubstance 6/24Posted October 6, 2026 On Regulations.gov
Scored directly — The comment's whole text was scored on its own.
Scorecard
Each dimension is scored 0–3; the eight sum to the substance score out of 24.
Specific placeNames a specific location — from a region down to an exact creek, trail, road, or map reference.
Local knowledgeDraws on a first-hand connection to the place — visits, sustained activity, occupation, or a professional role.
EA analysisEngages the agency's environmental analysis directly.
Analytical gapIdentifies something the analysis fails to address.
EvidenceBacks claims with specific facts, data, or research.
RequestMakes a specific, actionable request of the agency.
AlternativeProposes a different course of action.
LegalCites statutes, regulations, or legal obligations.
How hard it is to set aside
A0 none: Counted, not answered.
Still open to the agency
Alternative already eliminatedThe agency says it considered and eliminated the alternative the comment proposes, with a reason. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Already addressedThe agency says its analysis already covers the point. Defeated when the comment cites the law itself: there is no analysis to cite against a statutory claim.
Deferred to a later decisionThe agency says the point belongs to a later, site-specific decision. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Misreads the proposalThe agency says the comment misunderstands what is proposed. Defeated when the comment engages the proposal or a named place directly.
Not requiredThe agency says the analysis the comment asks for is not required. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
Preference notedThe agency notes the comment as a statement of preference and takes no action on it. Cannot be defeated from the comment text alone.
No cause and effect shownThe agency says the comment asserts a harm without showing how the action causes it. Defeated when the comment shows the mechanism.
Outside the scopeThe agency says the comment asks about a different action. Defeated when the comment is specific and tied to this proposal.
Certified not substantiveThe agency certifies the comment raises nothing substantive. Defeated when the comment alleges illegality, which is substantive by the definition the certification runs on.
I am firmly against the repeal of the Roadless Rule. I live in Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, surrounded by Roadless Areas. The water in my tap comes from the North River reservoir, in the watershed of Little River Roadless Area. Clean water matters to me. In Appalachia, more than 80 percent of wildfires are human caused; nationwide, 90 percent of wildfire ignitions occur within half a mile of roads. Clean air matters to me. Keeping large tracts of the George Washington & Jefferson National Forest roadless protects them from careless human activity that can pollute streams and spark wildfires. In addition, current funding for the Forest Service is inadequate to maintain all the existing roads to intended safety, service, and environmental standards to permit efficient and safe use. The current estimate of the agency wide maintenance backlog, or “deferred maintenance”, was over $8.6 billion in FY2023. The effects of rescinding the Roadless Rule would be fiscally irresponsible, environmentally dangerous, and negatively impact neighboring communities, like mine. Please keep the Roadless Rule in place.