Areas of the National Park System; General Provisions, Resource Protection, Public Use and Recreation, Pets and Service Animals; Special Regulations of the National Park System, Olympic National Park, Isle Royale National Park, 21876-21882 [2014-08563]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
• National Park Service

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 75 (Friday, April 18, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21876-21882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08563]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Parts 1, 2, and 7

[NPS-WASO-REGS-12881; PXXVPAD0517.00.1]
RIN 1024-AE06


Areas of the National Park System; General Provisions, Resource 
Protection, Public Use and Recreation, Pets and Service Animals; 
Special Regulations of the National Park System, Olympic National Park, 
Isle Royale National Park

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Park Service is proposing to define and 
differentiate service animals, from pets, domestic animals, feral 
animals, livestock, and pack animals, and describe the circumstances 
under which service animals would be allowed in a park area. Special 
regulations for Olympic National Park and Isle Royale National Park 
would be amended to conform with the proposed service-wide rule.

DATES: Comments must be received by June 17, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by Regulation 
Identifier Number (RIN) 1024-AE06, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail to: A.J. North, Regulations Program, National Park 
Service, 1849 C Street NW., MS-2355, Washington, DC 20240.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and RIN for this rulemaking. All comments received will be posted 
without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 
information provided. For additional information, see the Public 
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.J. North, National Park Service 
Regulations Program, by telephone:

[[Page 21877]]

202-513-7742 or email: service_animals@nps.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

General Authority and Jurisdiction

    In the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (Organic Act) (16 
U.S.C. 1 et seq.), Congress granted the National Park Service (NPS) 
broad authority to regulate the use of areas under its jurisdiction, 
but the associated impacts must leave the ``scenery and the natural and 
historic objects and the wild life [in these areas] unimpaired for the 
enjoyment of future generations.'' Section 3 of the Organic Act 
authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the NPS, to 
``make and publish such rules and regulations as he may deem necessary 
or proper for the use and management of the parks.''
    The NPS protects park resources and visitors by regulating pets and 
other domestic animals within park areas. The regulations governing 
pets (36 CFR 2.15) were last amended in 1983. Since 1983, federal 
statutes governing accessibility for persons with disabilities, as well 
as the use of service animals, have changed significantly. In response 
to these changes, the NPS is proposing to amend its regulations to 
ensure that we provide the broadest possible accessibility to 
individuals with disabilities.
    The proposed rule would define and differentiate service animals 
from pets, domestic animals, feral animals, livestock, and pack animals 
and describe the circumstances under which service animals would be 
allowed in a park area. The rule also ensures NPS compliance with 
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794), as 
amended, and better aligns NPS regulations with the Americans with 
Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) (42 U.S.C. 12111-12117) and the 
Department of Justice (DOJ) service animal regulations (28 CFR part 35 
and 36). Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act states,

No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United 
States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be 
excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be 
subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving 
Federal financial assistance or . . . conducted by any Executive 
Agency . . . (29 U.S.C. 794)

    This law requires the NPS to provide persons with disabilities 
access to park programs, services, and facilities, and the opportunity 
to receive as close as possible the same benefits as those received by 
other visitors.
    The ADA, which does not apply to the federal government, extends a 
legal mandate similar to the coverage of Section 504 of the 
Rehabilitation Act to all state and local governments and to places of 
public accommodations and commercial facilities. Although the NPS is 
not governed by the ADA, NPS policy, as expressed in NPS Director's 
Order 42, is to align its regulations with the ADA and make 
NPS facilities, programs, and services accessible to and usable by as 
many people as possible, including those with disabilities. It is also 
NPS policy to follow, as appropriate, the DOJ regulations that 
implement title II and III of the ADA.

History of Service Animal Regulation in the Parks

    NPS regulations first addressed the predecessor to service animals 
in 1966, when the existing rule at 36 CFR 2.8(b) prohibiting pets in 
``public eating places, food stores and on designated swimming 
beaches'' was revised to include an exception for ``Seeing Eye dogs'' 
(31 FR 16650). This exception was expanded in 1983 to encompass ``guide 
dogs accompanying visually impaired persons or hearing ear dogs 
accompanying hearing-impaired persons'' (48 FR 30252). Because these 
dogs provide direct services for persons with disabilities, they are 
not considered pets under NPS regulations. Accordingly, guide dogs and 
hearing ear dogs have been allowed to enter park areas where pets are 
prohibited.
    In 1991, after the passage of the ADA, the DOJ expanded the 
definition of service animals to include ``any guide dog, signal dog, 
or other animal trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of 
an individual with a disability'' (56 FR 35544). After the DOJ 
broadened the definition of service animal, a number of parks began 
receiving requests from the public to bring a variety of service 
animals into the parks, including, but not limited to: dogs, cats, 
horses, primates, goats, birds, rodents, and reptiles. Over the years, 
this has resulted in some confusion within the NPS, because the 
regulations at 36 CFR 2.15(a)(1) recognize only guide dogs and hearing 
ear dogs as exceptions to the prohibitions on pets in certain public 
areas. These requests have also caused park personnel to voice concerns 
regarding threats to wildlife if other species of animals were allowed 
into areas where pets are prohibited.

NPS Interim Guidance on Service Animals

    On September 5, 2002, the NPS Director issued a Memorandum 
providing interim guidance on the use of service animals in units of 
the National Park System while the NPS began the process of amending 
its regulations to adopt the broader range of service animal as 
specified in the 1991 DOJ regulations (28 CFR 36.104). According to the 
Memorandum, service animals were not to be considered pets, and in 
general, when accompanying a person with a disability (as defined by 
Federal law and DOJ regulations), service animals were to be allowed 
wherever visitors were allowed. Due to the concern for visitor safety 
and wildlife protection, park superintendents retained authority to 
close an area to the use of service animals if it was determined that 
the service animal posed a threat to the health or safety of people or 
wildlife. The NPS immediately implemented the interim guidance. 
However, park superintendents continue to express concerns regarding 
the appropriateness of allowing certain types of animals declared to be 
service animals in parks.

DOJ Revised ADA Regulations

    On September 15, 2010, the DOJ published revised regulations 
implementing title II and III of the ADA, including a new definition of 
service animal that limits service animals to dogs. Under the revised 
DOJ regulations, a service animal is defined as ``any dog that is 
individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an 
individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, 
psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability.'' (28 CFR 35.104 
and 36.104). The revised definition states that other species of 
animals are not service animals.
    The DOJ revised regulations also state that ``[t]he work or tasks 
performed by a service animal must be directly related to the 
individual's disability.'' (28 CFR 35.104 and 36.104). Examples of the 
appropriate work of service animals include, but are not limited to, 
assisting individuals who are blind with navigation, alerting 
individuals who are deaf to the presence of sounds, pulling a 
wheelchair, alerting individuals to the presence of allergens or the 
onset of a seizure, retrieving items, and providing physical support 
and assistance to individuals with mobility disabilities. The DOJ 
regulations state that, ``[t]he crime deterrent effects of an animal's 
presence and the provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, 
or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of 
this definition.''
    According to the DOJ regulations, a public entity may require an 
individual with a disability to remove a service

[[Page 21878]]

animal from the premises if: (a) The animal is out of control and the 
animal's handler does not take effective action to control it; or (b) 
the animal is not housebroken (28 CFR 35.136(b)). If a service animal 
is excluded for these reasons, the public entity must give the 
individual with the disability the opportunity to participate in the 
service, program, or activity without having the service animal on the 
premises (28 CFR 35.136(c)).
    The DOJ revised regulations also include a provision that requires 
covered entities to make reasonable modifications to policies, 
practices, or procedures to permit the use of a miniature horse by a 
person with a disability if the miniature horse has been individually 
trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of the individual 
with a disability. Although the miniature horse is not included in the 
DOJ's definition of service animal (which is limited to dogs), 
miniature horses can be trained in ways similar to dogs to provide a 
wide array of services to their handlers, such as guiding individuals 
who are blind or have low vision, pulling wheelchairs, providing 
stability and balance for individuals with disabilities that impair the 
ability to walk, and supplying leverage that enables a person with a 
mobility disability to get up after a fall. Miniature horses may also 
serve as viable alternatives to dogs for individuals with allergies, or 
for those whose religious beliefs preclude the use of dogs. Miniature 
horses commonly are sized similar to a large dog at heights of 24 to 34 
inches measured to the shoulders and generally weigh between 70 and 100 
pounds. However, because miniature horses can vary in size and be 
larger and less flexible than dogs, the revised DOJ regulations allow 
entities to exclude miniature horses if the presence of the animal 
results in a fundamental alteration to the nature of the programs, 
activities, or services provided.

Proposed Rule

    Although the NPS is not a regulated entity under the ADA, the NPS 
intends to allow qualified individuals with disabilities to bring 
working service animals and miniature horses to the parks in the manner 
as provided for in the DOJ title II and III regulations governing 
service animals. Consistent with DOJ regulations, the proposed rule 
would define a service animal as a dog that is individually trained to 
do work or perform tasks for persons with disabilities. Other species 
of animals, whether wild or domestic, trained or untrained, would not 
be considered service animals. The work or tasks a service animal is 
trained to perform must be directly related to the person's disability. 
A dog utilized solely for comfort or emotional support would not be 
considered a service animal and would be subject to the regulations 
governing pets.

Revision of NPS Regulations at 36 CFR 1.4

    Section 1.4 would be amended to add the terms disability and 
service animal and to modify the term pet. These definitions would 
distinguish pets used primarily for companionship from service animals 
trained to assist a person with a disability.
    The term domestic animal would be added and defined to mean an 
animal tamed to live in the human environment. The term feral animal 
would be added and defined to mean a domestic animal that is existing 
in a wild or untamed state. The definition of pack animal would be 
revised and would no longer be limited to ``horses, burros, mules, or 
other hoofed animals.'' The existing language may unnecessarily exclude 
consideration of certain types of pack animals that do not have proper 
hooves, including alpacas, llamas, and camels. Instead, the term pack 
animal would mean a domestic animal designated as a pack animal by the 
superintendent. This gives the superintendent the authority to adjust 
rules about the use of particular pack animals after considering the 
impact from this use on the park environment. The definition of the 
term livestock would be added to distinguish farm animals utilized for 
agricultural use from pets, service animals, and pack animals.
    Amending Sec.  1.4 to differentiate pets, service animals, pack 
animals, and livestock from each other would clarify the regulations 
governing domestic animals in the National Park System. For example, if 
a visitor wishes to bring a goat into a park, the park would first look 
to the purpose or function of the goat. If the goat would be used to 
transport equipment on designated routes, and the superintendent has 
designated goats as pack animals, the goat would be considered a pack 
animal subject to 36 CFR 2.16. If the goat was being used primarily for 
the production of milk, it would be livestock subject to 36 CFR 2.60. 
If the goat was tamed to live in the human environment as a 
domesticated animal and not being used as a pack animal or livestock, 
the goat would be considered a pet subject to 36 CFR 2.15. Because the 
goat is not a dog trained to do work for the benefit of a person with a 
disability, the goat could not be a service animal and thus would not 
be allowed in areas of the park where pets, livestock, or pack animals 
are prohibited.

Revision of NPS Regulations at 36 CFR 2.15

    Service animals would be allowed in all NPS areas accessible to the 
public or employees except in those circumstances where the 
superintendent determines the presence of a service animal in a 
specific area would pose a threat to the health or safety of people or 
wildlife. In this case, the superintendent may impose additional 
conditions or restrictions or close the area to service animals. If the 
need for conditions or closures arises, the superintendent must prepare 
a written determination based on objective evidence of the threat that 
explains why a less restrictive measure will not suffice. If an area is 
closed to service animals, then that area must also be closed to pets.
    After consultation with the U.S. Public Health Service's Wildlife 
Health Branch on the serious potential for disease transmission between 
service animals and wildlife, the NPS has determined that a 
superintendent may use this authority to require individuals wishing to 
bring a service animal into an area where the service animal is likely 
to pose a threat to the health of wildlife to demonstrate proof of the 
service animal's current vaccinations for diseases such as, but not 
limited to, rabies, distemper, parvovirus, and adenovirus, and proof of 
current treatment for intestinal parasites and heart worms. A 
superintendent may also require similar proof for miniature horses, 
such as, but not limited to, demonstration of a rabies vaccine and 
negative Coggins test for equine infectious anemia. An individual could 
demonstrate proof by showing a copy of a veterinarian bill for the 
required vaccines and treatments, a state-issued rabies tag, and/or a 
state health certificate, provided that the state vaccination 
requirements for the state health certificate mirror those established 
by the superintendent.
    To protect park resources and the safety of visitors, the proposed 
rule would subject the use of service animals to certain standard rules 
that also govern pets. Service animals may not be left unattended, may 
not make unreasonable noise or exhibit aggressive behavior, and 
handlers must comply with excrement disposal conditions established by 
the superintendent. Service animals must be under control at all times 
while in the park. Acceptable means of restraint would include a 
harness, leash, or tether.

[[Page 21879]]

However, the NPS acknowledges that in some instances, a disability may 
limit a person's ability to exert physical control of a service animal. 
Further, some devices may interfere with the service animal's safe, 
effective performance of its work or tasks. In these cases, voice 
commands, signals, or other effective means would be required to 
control the service animal while it is performing its work or tasks.

Law Enforcement and Emergency Service Dogs

    The proposed rule would retain the current exception authorizing 
dog use by law enforcement officers and also allows a park 
superintendent to authorize dog use for search or recovery operations.

Service Animals in Training

    Service animals in training are not yet trained, and thus do not 
meet the legal definition of service animal. To protect park resources 
and the safety of park visitors, the rule would restrict the use of 
service animals in training to areas that are also open to pets.

Miniature Horses

    Miniature horses are not included in the DOJ definition of service 
animal, but they were included in the authorizing section of the DOJ 
regulations for service animals. The DOJ regulations require that an 
entity shall make ``reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or 
procedures to permit the use of a miniature horse by an individual with 
a disability if the miniature horse has been individually trained to do 
work or perform tasks for the benefit of the individual with a 
disability.'' (28 CFR 35.136(i)(1) and 36.302(c)(9)(i)). Under this 
proposed rule, the superintendent may permit the use of a miniature 
horse by an individual with a disability in accordance with the 
assessment factors outlined in the DOJ regulations at 28 CFR 
35.136(i)(2) and 36.302(c)(9)(ii). The use of miniature horses would be 
subject to the same requirements that govern the use of service 
animals.

Proposed Revisions to 36 CFR 7.28 and 7.38

    Two units of the National Park System, Olympic National Park and 
Isle Royale National Park have park-specific special regulations that 
use the term ``guide dog.'' Olympic National Park is proposing to drop 
its current regulation on dogs and cats in favor of regulating where 
visitors may take these animals and service animals under the proposed 
service-wide rule.
    Isle Royale National Park is an isolated island whose wilderness 
ecology is defined through predator-prey systems. There, concerns that 
nonnative mammals (and in particular those which might be brought as 
pets) could alter those systems by transmitting disease to the wild 
canids of the park (the Eastern Timber Wolf and the Red Fox), led to a 
regulatory prohibition. (42 FR 21777). That prohibition excepted 
``guide dogs accompanying the blind.'' Isle Royale is proposing to 
retain the general prohibition on mammals and to replace the guide dog 
exception with the proposed service-wide definition and Sec.  2.15(b) 
provision for service animals.

Compliance With Other Laws, Executive Orders, and Department Policy

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget will 
review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not 
significant.
    Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of Executive Order 
12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system 
to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, 
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory 
ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory 
approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of 
choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, 
and consistent with regulatory objectives. Executive Order 13563 
emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available 
science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public 
participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this 
rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This rule will not have a significant economic effect on a 
substantial number of small entities under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.)

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the SBREFA. 
This rule:
    (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more.
    (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government 
agencies, or geographic regions.
    (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 
tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per 
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector. It addresses public 
use of national park lands, and imposes no requirements on other 
agencies or governments. A statement containing the information 
required by the UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

    This rule does not affect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630. A takings 
implication assessment is not required.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, the rule 
does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the 
preparation of a Federalism summary impact statement. This proposed 
rule only affects use of NPS administered lands and waters. It has no 
outside effects on other areas. A Federalism summary impact statement 
is not required.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

    This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988. 
Specifically, this rule:
    (a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all 
regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be 
written to minimize litigation; and
    (b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all 
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal 
standards.

Consultation With Indian Tribes (Executive Order 13175 and Department 
Policy)

    The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its 
government-to-government relationship with Indian tribes through a 
commitment to consultation with Indian tribes and recognition of their 
right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this 
rule under the

[[Page 21880]]

Department's consultation policy and under the criteria in Executive 
Order 13175 and have determined that it has no substantial direct 
effects on federally recognized Indian tribes and that consultation 
under the Department's tribal consultation policy is not required.

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

    This rule does not contain information collection requirements. The 
Paperwork Reduction Act's implementing regulations define 
``information'' as ``statement or estimate of fact or opinion, 
regardless of form or format, whether in numerical, graphic, or 
narrative form, and whether oral or maintained on paper, electronic or 
other media.'' 5 CFR 1320.3(h). However, ``information'' does not 
include ``facts or opinions obtained through direct observation by an 
employee or agent of the sponsoring agency or through nonstandardized 
oral communication in connection with such direct observations.'' 5 CFR 
1320.3(h)(3) (italics added). In the proposed rule, an authorized 
person may need to determine a number of facts, such as the tasks that 
a service animal is able to perform (2.15(b)(1)(i), 2.15(b)(3)(iii)); 
the type, size, and weight of the animal (2.15(d)(i)(A)); and whether 
the animal is housebroken. These facts will be determined by the 
authorized person via direct observation of the animal. Because these 
facts are obtained through direct observation, they are not considered 
information for the purposes of the PRA, and a submission to the Office 
of Management and Budget under the PRA is not required. We may not 
conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection 
of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly 
affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement 
under the NEPA of 1969 is not required because the rule is covered by a 
categorical exclusion. This rule is excluded from the requirement to 
prepare a detailed statement because it is a regulation of 
administrative, legal, and technical nature (43 CFR 46.210(i)). We have 
also determined that the rule does not involve any of the extraordinary 
circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 that would require further 
analysis under NEPA.

Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive Order 13211)

    This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition 
in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects in not 
required.

Clarity of This Rule

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 (section 1(b)(12)) and 
12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)) and by the Presidential Memorandum of June 
1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This means that each 
rule we publish must:
    (a) Be logically organized;
    (b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To 
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as 
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections 
or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or sentences are 
too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, 
etc.
    Drafting Information: The primary author of this rule is C. Rose 
Wilkinson, National Park Service, Regulations and Special Park Uses, 
Washington, DC.

Public Participation

    It is the policy of the Department of the Interior, whenever 
practicable, to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the 
rulemaking process. Accordingly, interested persons may submit written 
comments regarding this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in 
the ADDRESSES section. All comments must be received by midnight of the 
close of the comment period. Bulk comments in any format (hard copy or 
electronic) submitted on behalf of others will not be accepted.

Public Availability of Comments

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

List of Subjects

36 CFR Part 1

    National parks, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Signs and symbols.

36 CFR Part 2

    Environmental protection, National parks, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

36 CFR Part 7

    National parks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service 
proposes to amend 36 CFR Parts 1, 2, and 7 as set forth below:

PART 1--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
1. Revise the authority citation for Part 1 to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460 1-6a(e), 462(k); DC Code 10-
137 (2001), 50-2201 (2001).
0
2. In Sec.  1.4 amend paragraph (a) by:
0
A. Adding the terms ``Disability'', ``Domestic animal'', ``Feral 
animal'', ``Livestock'', and ``Service animal''
0
B. Revising the terms ``Pack animal'' and ``Pet''
    The additions and revisions to read as follows:


Sec.  1.4  What terms do I need to know?

    (a) * * *
    Disability means a physical or mental impairment that substantially 
limits one or more of the major life activities of an individual.
* * * * *
    Domestic animal means an animal that has been tamed to live in the 
human environment.
* * * * *
    Feral animal means a domestic animal that is existing in a wild or 
untamed state.
* * * * *
    Livestock means any domestic animal raised for the production of 
food or other agricultural-based consumer products.
* * * * *
    Pack animal means any domestic animal designated as a pack animal 
by the superintendent and used to transport people or equipment on 
designated routes.
* * * * *
    Pet means any domestic animal that is not a service animal, pack 
animal, or livestock.
* * * * *
    Service animal means any dog that has been individually trained to 
do

[[Page 21881]]

work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a 
disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, 
or other mental disability. Other species of animals, whether wild or 
domestic, trained or untrained, are not service animals for purposes of 
this definition.
* * * * *

PART 2--RESOURCE PROTECTION, PUBLIC USE AND RECREATION

0
3. The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9(a), 462(k).

0
4. Revise Sec.  2.15 to read as follows:


Sec.  2.15  Pets and service animals.

    (a) Pets. (1) Pets are not allowed in public buildings, public 
transportation vehicles, any location designated as a swimming beach, 
or any area the superintendent has closed to the possession of pets.
    (2) Pets must be crated, caged, restrained with a leash no longer 
than six feet in length, or otherwise physically confined at all times.
    (3) The following are prohibited: (i) Leaving an unattended pet 
tied to an object, except in designated areas or under conditions which 
may be established by the superintendent;
    (ii) Allowing a pet to exhibit aggressive behavior or make noise 
such as barking or howling that is unreasonable considering location, 
time of day or night, impact on park users and other relevant factors, 
or that frightens wildlife; or
    (iii) Failing to comply with pet excrement disposal conditions 
which may be established by the superintendent.
    (4) Pets may be kept by residents of park areas consistent with the 
provisions of this section and in accordance with conditions which may 
be established by the superintendent.
    (5) In park areas where hunting is allowed, dogs may be used in 
support of these activities in accordance with applicable Federal and 
State laws and in accordance with conditions which may be established 
by the superintendent.
    (6) This paragraph does not apply to the use of dogs by authorized 
Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers, or emergency 
personnel authorized by the superintendent.
    (b) Service animals. (1) A service animal may accompany an 
individual with a disability in a park area where members of the public 
are allowed or may accompany an employee with a disability in a park 
area where employees are allowed.
    (i) The work or tasks the service animal is trained to perform must 
be directly related to the individual's disability. In making this 
determination, an authorized person may observe the animal and ask if 
the animal is required because of a disability and what work or task 
the animal has been trained to perform. Authorized persons must not ask 
about the nature or extent of a person's disability, nor may they 
require documentation of the disability or proof that the animal has 
been certified, trained, or licensed as a service animal.
    (ii) The crime-deterrent effects of an animal's presence and the 
provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship 
do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this provision.
    (2) A service animal must be controlled at all times with a 
harness, leash, or other tether, unless the restraint device would 
interfere with the service animal's safe, effective performance of work 
or tasks or the individual's disability prevents using these devices. 
In those cases, the disabled individual must be able to recall the 
service animal to his or her side promptly using voice, signals, or 
other effective means of control. This must be demonstrated when 
requested by an authorized person.
    (3) An individual may be asked to remove a service animal from an 
area closed to pets if:
    (i) The animal is out of control and the animal's handler does not 
take effective action to control it;
    (ii) The animal is not housebroken; or
    (iii) It is not readily apparent and the individual with a 
disability is unwilling or unable to articulate or demonstrate the work 
or task the animal has been trained to perform, consistent with 
paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
    (4) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)(3) of this section also apply 
to the use of a service animal.
    (5) Upon determining that the use of service animals in a specific 
area poses a threat to the health or safety of people or wildlife, the 
superintendent may require proof of current vaccinations, impose 
additional conditions or restrictions, or close the area to service 
animals. Any area closed to service animals must be closed to pets. In 
determining whether the use of service animals poses a threat under 
this paragraph, the superintendent must:
    (i) Make a written determination based on objective evidence 
evaluating the nature, probability, duration, and severity of the 
threat; and
    (ii) Explain in the written determination why less restrictive 
measures will not suffice.
    (c) Service animals in training. Service animals in training are 
regulated as pets under the conditions in paragraph (a) of this 
section.
    (d) Miniature horses. (1) The superintendent may allow the use of a 
miniature horse by an individual with a disability if the miniature 
horse has been trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of 
the individual with a disability and after observing and assessing the 
following factors:
    (i) The type, size, and weight of the miniature horse and whether 
the facility can accommodate these features;
    (ii) Whether the handler has sufficient control of the miniature 
horse;
    (iii) Whether the miniature horse is housebroken; and
    (iv) Whether the miniature horse's presence in a specific facility 
compromises legitimate safety requirements that are necessary for safe 
operation.
    (2) If authorized by the superintendent, miniature horses are 
regulated in the same manner as service animals under the conditions in 
paragraph (b)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (e) Animals running at large. (1) Domestic or feral animals running 
at large may be impounded, and the owner of a domestic animal may be 
charged reasonable fees for kennel or boarding costs, feed, 
veterinarian fees, transportation costs, and disposal. An impounded 
animal may be put up for adoption or otherwise disposed of after being 
held for 72 hours from the time the owner was notified of capture or 72 
hours from the time of capture if the owner is unknown.
    (2) Domestic or feral animals running at large and observed by an 
authorized person in the act of killing, injuring, or molesting humans 
or domestic animals or taking wildlife may be destroyed if necessary 
for public safety or protection of wildlife, domestic animals, 
including livestock, or other park resources.
    (3) This paragraph (e) does not apply to livestock, which are 
governed by Sec.  2.60 of this chapter.
    (f) Violating a closure, condition, or restriction established by 
the superintendent under this section is prohibited.

PART 7--SPECIAL REGULATIONS, AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

0
5. The authority for Part 7 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 462(k); Sec. 7.96 also issued 
under 36 U.S.C. 501-511, DC Code 10-137 (2001) and DC Code 50-
2201.07 (2001).


[[Page 21882]]


0
6. In Sec.  7.28, remove and reserve paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  7.28  Olympic National Park.

* * * * *
    (c) [Reserved]
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec.  7.38 revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  7.38  Isle Royale National Park.

* * * * *
    (c) Mammals. Dogs, cats, and other mammals may not be brought into 
or possessed in the park area, except for service animals under Sec.  
2.15(b) of this chapter.

    Dated: March 14, 2014.
Michael Bean,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, for Fish and Wildlife and 
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2014-08563 Filed 4-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-EJ-P