Maximum Term for Outfitter and Guide Special Use Permits on National Forest System Lands, 19727-19730 [05-7488]
Download as PDF
19727
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 70, No. 71
Thursday, April 14, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Proposal by Alpha Calcit Arizona,
Limited, To Operate a Marble Mine;
Coronado National Forest, Douglas
Ranger District, Cochise County, AZ
Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Cancellation of notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, hereby
cancels a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) for the proposed
operation of a marble mine by Alpha
Calcit Arizona, Limited. The NOI was
published in the Federal Register on
January 27, 2003 (Vol. 68, No. 17, FR
3856–3858). Preparation of this EIS is
being terminated because there is
presently insufficient data and
information to characterize the mineral
deposit in terms of quality and quantity
and to sufficiently evaluate the
proposed Plan of Operation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Teresa Ann Ciapusci, Program Leader,
Ecosystem Management and Planning,
Coronado National Forest, 300 West
Congress Street, Tucson, AZ 85701,
(520) 388–8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August
31, 2001, the project proponent, Alpha
Calcit Arizona, Limited, submitted a
Plan of Operation to the Coronado
National Forest requesting approval,
under the Mining Law of 1872, to
reopen, expand, and operate an existing,
non-operational marble quarry on the
Tapia-Bliss mining claims in the
Dragoon Mountain Range of
southeastern Arizona. The Forest
Service subsequently published a Notice
of Intent to prepare an environmental
impact statement (EIS) to evaluate the
proposal on January 27, 2003 (68 FR
3856–3858).
In general, the Plan of Operation
proposed the (1) expansion of the
SUMMARY:
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:36 Apr 13, 2005
Jkt 205001
existing quarry to obtain 100,000 short
tons of marble, limestone, and related
products annually for a period of 20
years; (2) construction of a crushing
facility on private land approximately
2300 feet north of the center of the
mine; (3) use of blasting material and
heavy equipment to transport the
product to the crushing facility; (4)
construction of approximately 0.5 mile
of new road to access the top of the
exposed Escabrosa Limestone Formation
and top bench of the mine; and (5)
reconstruction (widening to about 30
feet) of approximately 0.5 mile of
existing access road from the Forest
boundary to the mine. Because new
road construction would be located in
an area designated by the Forest Service
as an Inventoried Roadless Area (http:/
/roadless.fs.fed.us/states/az/coro.pdf),
the project may be subject to regulations
in Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations
294.12, and policy direction in Interim
Directive Forest Service Manual 1925.
Abel M. Camarena,
Deputy Regional Forester, Southwestern
Region.
[FR Doc. 05–7480 Filed 4–13–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Mendocino Resource Advisory
Committee
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Mendocino County
Resource Advisory Committee will meet
April 29, 2005, (RAC), in Willits,
California. Agenda items to be covered
include: (1) Approval of minutes, (2)
Public comment, (3) Sub-committees (4)
Discussion/Approval of projects (5)
Matters before the group-discussion/
action (6) Next agenda and meeting
date.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
April 29, 2005 from 9 a.m. to 12 noon.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Mendocino County Museum,
located at 400 E. Commercial St.,
Willits, California.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roberta Hurt, Committee Coordinator,
USDA, Mendocino National Forest,
Covelo Ranger District, 78150 Covelo
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Road, Covelo CA 95428. (707) 983–
8503; e-mail, rhurt@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
meeting is open to the public. Persons
who wish to bring matters to the
attention of the committee may file
written statements with the Committee
staff by April 15, 2005. Public
comments will have the opportunity to
address the committee at the meeting.
Dated: April 6, 2005.
Blaine Baker,
Designated Federal Official.
[FR Doc. 05–7457 Filed 4–13–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
RIN 0596–AC23
Maximum Term for Outfitter and Guide
Special Use Permits on National Forest
System Lands
Forest Service, USDA.
Final directive.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Forest Service is revising
direction governing special use permits
for outfitting and guiding conducted on
National Forest System lands by
increasing the maximum term for these
permits from five to ten years. The
revised directive would provide for
greater business continuity for outfitters
and guides who furnish services to
visitors on National Forest System lands
and would make the Forest Service’s
policy on the maximum permit term for
outfitting and guiding permits
consistent with the policy of the
National Park Service and the Bureau of
Land Management.
DATES: This directive is effective April
14, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The administrative record
for this final directive is available for
inspection and copying at the office of
the Director, Recreation and Heritage
Resources Staff, USDA Forest Service,
4th Floor Central, Sidney R. Yates
Federal Building, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, from
8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays. Those wishing
to inspect the administrative record are
encouraged to call Carolyn Holbrook at
(202) 205–1399 beforehand to facilitate
access to the building.
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
19728
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 71 / Thursday, April 14, 2005 / Notices
A copy of the directive (Amendment
2709.11–2005–1) is available from the
Forest Service via the World Wide Web
at https://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carolyn Holbrook, Recreation, and
Heritage Resources Staff, (202) 205–
1399.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Background and Need for the
Directive
• Supporting Small Businesses.
The Forest Service regulates
occupancy and use of National Forest
System (NFS) lands by outfitters and
guides through issuance of special use
permits. Outfitters and guides provide
the knowledge, skills, and equipment
for recreating on NFS lands to those
who might not otherwise have them, as
well as information and education to the
public about the National Forests.
Outfitters and guides thus play an
important role in meeting the Forest
Service’s recreational and educational
objectives.
Currently, special use permits for
outfitters and guides are issued for a
period of up to five years. The
maximum five-year term has been a
concern in recent years to outfitters and
guides who perceive this timeframe as
a barrier to building and maintaining a
sustainable small business. For
example, the five-year term may hamper
outfitters’ and guides’ ability to secure
financing from lenders if business
equipment cannot be fully amortized
within the permit term. The five-year
term also is not conducive to long-term
business planning. Customer service
suffers when outfitters and guides
cannot invest in needed equipment or
conduct long-term business planning.
Revising the maximum term of their
special use permit from five to ten years
will provide outfitters and guides with
the potential for greater business
continuity for planning and investing.
• Special Uses Streamlining.
This directive will decrease
administrative costs to the Forest
Service and outfitters and guides by
reducing the analysis and processing
required by more frequent permit
issuance. This practice supports the
Department’s special uses streamlining
regulations promulgated November 30,
1998, at 36 CFR part 251, subpart B (63
FR 65949).
• Interagency Consistency.
This directive will make Forest
Service policy on permit terms for
outfitters and guides consistent with the
policy of the Bureau of Land
Management, adopted on February 6,
2004 (69 FR 5702), and the National
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:36 Apr 13, 2005
Jkt 205001
Park Service as provided for in Title IV
of the National Parks Omnibus
Management Act of 1998 (16 U.S.C.
5953). Consistency in the permitting
process is important, since many
outfitters and guides operate on lands
administered by all three agencies.
2. Public Comments on the Proposed
Directive To Increase the Maximum
Term for Outfitter and Guide Special
Use Permits and the Forest Service’s
Responses
• Overview.
On August 13, 2004, the Forest
Service published a proposed directive
in the Federal Register (69 FR 50160)
asking for public comment on a
proposal to increase the maximum term
for an outfitter and guide permit from
five to ten years. Comments could be
submitted by either mail, facsimile, or
electronically. During the 60-day
comment period (ending on October 12,
2004), the agency received 46 responses.
Of those 46 responses, 8 responses were
identical, and counted as one response;
and 6 responses had two signatories,
and were handled as a single response
with two separate comments. Each
response was identified as coming from
one of the following entities:
Outfitter/Guide Permit Holder: 38
(83%).
Individual (unaffiliated or
unidentifiable): 4 (9%).
Outfitter/Guide Organization: 2 (4%).
State Government: 2 (4%).
The majority of respondents were
holders of Forest Service outfitter and
guide special use permits or were from
an outfitter and guide organization. All
40 respondents represented by this
grouping supported the directive; 30 of
these respondents recommended
additional language.
Two States that regulate outfitting and
guiding, Idaho and New Mexico,
commented on the proposed directive.
Idaho supported the directive, while
New Mexico opposed it. New Mexico is
concerned that increasing the permit
term for outfitting and guiding from five
to ten years will reduce competition in
the industry and may stifle the ability of
small businesses to engage in outfitting
and guiding.
Along with New Mexico, two
individuals opposed the proposed
directive. One believes a longer term
allows for more abuse by the permit
holder. The second believes that
commercial operators on NFS lands are
profiteers and therefore should not be
given longer periods to operate.
• Response to Comments.
Comment. Several respondents
suggested allowing for permittee
initiated administrative review after five
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
years that would allow reasonable
revisions to permit terms and conditions
deemed necessary to enable the outfitter
to make adjustments to improve service
to the outfitted public.
Response. Current Forest Service
policy allows for a holder of a special
use authorization to request an
amendment to the authorization at any
time. This amendment can contain
proposed changes to authorized
operations that would benefit the
outfitted public. The agency does not
see a need to amend current policy in
response to this comment. No changes
were made to the proposed policy in
response to this comment.
Comment. Many respondents believed
that the language in section 41.53h,
paragraph 2(a), of the proposed directive
represents a change in current agency
policy as reflected in the Outfitter and
Guide Permit Administration
Guidebook. They also believed that this
language negatively affects many
businesses that have had a downturn in
travel during the economic recession
and wars overseas and would like it
changed to allow for more flexibility in
the allocation of use.
Response. This directive does not
alter agency policy with respect to
allocation of use. Current policy in
Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 2709.11,
section 41.53h, paragraph 2(a), states:
‘‘Use may be based on the average of the
highest two years of actual use
authorized, which was actually used
during the previous five years.’’ This
directive merely changes the period of
use from ‘‘the previous five years’’ to
‘‘the previous permit term’’ to
accommodate the increase to a ten-year
term and five-year permits that exist,
but will be phased out over time. The
referenced guidebook is not agency
direction as defined at 36 CFR 200.4,
but rather a compendium of agency
direction, with examples for
administration of outfitter and guide
permits. To the extent there is any
inconsistency between the directive and
the Guidebook, the directive, which was
adopted through public notice and
comment, takes precedence over the
Guidebook, which was not.
The request to amend current
direction on allocation of use for
outfitting and guiding is outside the
scope of this directive and would
require additional public notice and
comment. The Forest Service has
discussed this issue with the outfitter
and guide industry and plans to address
this concern at a future date. No changes
were made to the proposed directive in
response to this comment.
Comment. Two respondents were
concerned that extending the permit
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 71 / Thursday, April 14, 2005 / Notices
term would prevent healthy competition
for allocation of use for outfitted and
guided hunting on NFS lands in New
Mexico and probably elsewhere. These
respondents believed that a longer
permit term would severely restrict the
ability of outfitters and guides licensed
by the State to conduct their activities
on NFS lands. One respondent
requested that the Forest Service remove
the implication in the agency’s
directives that outfitting and guiding
permits may be held for long periods
and transferred.
Response. The Forest Service
disagrees with the assertion that
competition will be severely restricted
by this directive. In 2004, almost 4,700
Forest Service outfitter and guide
special use permits were in effect,
authorizing a broad range of recreational
and educational opportunities. New
applications for outfitting and guiding
may be granted, provided the proposed
services further the mission of the
Forest Service, there is public demand
for them, and there is capacity in the
area requested. Current policy provides
that outfitter and guide permits may be
issued when (1) an increased allocation,
capacity, or public need is identified
through the forest planning process; (2)
an existing permit is revoked; (3) a
reduction of service days for an existing
holder or holders makes additional
service days available; (4) competitive
interest in an area, unit, or activity
arises where no previously authorized
use exists and where the proposed use
is compatible with objectives in land
management plans; (5) an application
has been submitted to provide outfitter
and guide services for an area or activity
that has not previously been authorized
and for which there is no competitive
interest; or (6) an existing permit
terminates. In the first four scenarios,
the agency solicits applicants by issuing
a prospectus and contacting all parties
who have expressed an interest. In the
fifth scenario, the agency documents the
determination of no competitive interest
and issues a permit to qualified
applicants (FSH 2709.11, sec. 41.53f,
para. 2). This directive does not change
this policy. In addition, outfitter and
guide businesses change ownership
regularly, thereby providing outfitting
and guiding business opportunities to
more people. There is no implication in
current policy that outfitting and
guiding permits may be held for long
periods and transferred. Under current
policy, the maximum term is five years,
and permits are not transferable (FSH
2709.11, sec. 41.53c and 41.53f). No
changes were made to the proposed
policy in response to this comment.
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:36 Apr 13, 2005
Jkt 205001
Comment. One respondent proposed
that any allocation of use for outfitting
and guiding in any State be made only
after consultation with and specific
recommendation from the State agency
that licenses outfitters and guides.
These respondents believed that to do
otherwise would run counter to the joint
authority of States and the Forest
Service to regulate outfitting and
guiding.
Response. The National Forest
Management Act (NFMA) and the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) require the Forest Service to
seek public input, including input from
State and local governments, when
making land use decisions, especially
when the Forest Service is developing a
land management plan or wilderness
management plan. Within these plans,
the agency may establish criteria and
capacities for the issuance of outfitter
and guide permits. To determine these
criteria and capacities, the agency must
confer with State agencies, such as
departments of game and fish, to
understand the effects these decisions
may have on the program of a particular
State.
The agency disagrees that
consultation with and a
recommendation from the State agency
that licenses outfitters and guides
should be required before allocation of
use for outfitting and guiding on NFS
lands within that State. There is no
requirement for this type of consultation
and recommendation under Federal
law. The States and the Forest Service
have concurrent jurisdiction to regulate
outfitting and guiding on NFS lands.
The regulatory authority of the Forest
Service is separate and distinct from the
authority of the States. No changes were
made to the proposed policy in response
to this comment.
Comment. Respondents were
concerned that there would be less
monitoring under a longer-term permit,
and noted that monitoring occurs
infrequently.
Response. The agency disagrees with
this comment. Current policy requires
annual performance reviews, and this
directive does not change that
requirement. No changes were made to
the proposed policy in response to this
comment.
Comment. One respondent believed
that the maximum term for outfitter and
guide permits should be five years. This
respondent stated that outfitters and
guides would take lifelong permits if
they could get them.
Response. The agency disagrees with
this comment based on the reasons
provided in the section, ‘‘Background
and Need for this Directive.’’ No
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19729
changes were made to the proposed
policy in response to this comment.
3. Regulatory Requirements
• Environmental Impact.
This directive will revise national
policy governing administration of
special use permits for outfitting and
guiding. Section 31b of Forest Service
Handbook 1909.15 (57 FR 43180,
September 18, 1992) excludes from
documentation in an environmental
assessment or environmental impact
statement ‘‘rules, regulations, or policies
to establish Service-wide administrative
procedures, program processes, or
instructions.’’ The agency’s conclusion
is that this directive falls within this
category of actions and that no
extraordinary circumstances exist which
would require preparation of an
environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
• Regulatory Impact.
This directive has been reviewed
under USDA procedures and Executive
Order 12866 on regulatory planning and
review. It has been determined that this
is not a significant directive. This
directive will not have an annual effect
of $100 million or more on the
economy, nor will it adversely affect
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health and safety,
or State or local governments. This
directive will not interfere with an
action taken or planned by another
agency, nor will it raise new legal or
policy issues. Finally, this directive will
not alter the budgetary impact of
entitlement, grant, user fee, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
beneficiaries of such programs.
Accordingly, this directive is not subject
to Office of Management and Budget
review under Executive Order 12866.
Moreover, this directive has been
considered in light of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 602 et seq.). It
has been determined that this directive
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities as defined by the act because
the directive will not impose recordkeeping requirements on them; it will
not affect their competitive position in
relation to large entities; and it will not
significantly affect their cash flow,
liquidity, or ability to remain in the
market. To the contrary, the efficiencies
and consistency to be achieved by this
directive should benefit small
businesses that seek to use and occupy
NFS lands by providing the potential for
greater business continuity for outfitters
and guides and by reducing the
frequency of time-consuming and
sometimes costly processing of special
use applications. The benefits cannot be
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
19730
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 71 / Thursday, April 14, 2005 / Notices
quantified and are not likely
substantially to alter costs to small
businesses.
• No Takings Implications.
This directive has been analyzed in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
12630, and it has been determined that
the directive will not pose the risk of a
taking of private property.
• Civil Justice Reform.
This directive has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988 on civil
justice reform. If this directive were
adopted, (1) all State and local laws and
regulations that are in conflict with this
directive or that would impede its full
implementation will be preempted; (2)
no retroactive effect will be given to this
directive; and (3) it will not require
administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court challenging
its provisions.
• Federalism and Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments.
The agency has considered this
directive under the requirements of
Executive Order 13132 on federalism,
and has made an assessment that the
directive conforms with the federalism
principles set out in this executive
order; will not impose any compliance
costs on the States; and will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
the relationship between the Federal
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, the
agency has determined that no further
assessment of federalism implications is
necessary at this time.
Moreover, this directive does not have
tribal implications as defined by
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments,’’ and
therefore advance consultation with
Tribes is not required.
• Energy Effects.
This directive has been reviewed
under Executive Order 13211, entitled
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.’’ It has been
determined that this directive does not
constitute a significant energy action as
defined in the executive order.
• Unfunded Mandates.
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1531–1538), which the President signed
into law on March 22, 1995, the agency
has assessed the effects of this directive
on State, local, and Tribal governments
and the private sector. This directive
will not compel the expenditure of $100
million or more by any State, local, or
VerDate jul<14>2003
19:36 Apr 13, 2005
Jkt 205001
Tribal government or anyone in the
private sector. Therefore, a statement
under section 202 of the act is not
required.
• Controlling Paperwork Burdens on
the Public.
This directive does not contain any
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
or other information collection
requirements as defined in 5 U.S.C. part
1320 that are not already required by
law or not already approved for use.
Any information collected from the
public as a result of this action has been
approved by the Office of Management
and Budget under control number 0596–
0082. Accordingly, the review
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and
its implementing regulations at 5 CFR
part 1320 do not apply.
Dated: March 31, 2005.
Dale N. Bosworth,
Chief.
4. Directive Changes for Outfitter and
Guides
Note: The Forest Service organizes its
directive system by alphanumeric codes and
subject headings. Only those sections of the
Forest Service Handbook that are the subject
of this notice are set out here. The intended
audience for this direction is Forest Service
employees charged with issuing and
administrating outfitter and guide special use
permits.
41.53j—Permit Terms and Conditions
1. For new applicants, authorize use
for up to one year. For holders assigned
priority use, use may be authorized for
up to ten years.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–7488 Filed 4–13–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–863]
Notice of Extension of Time Limit for
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Honey from the
People’s Republic of China
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 14, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anya Naschak or Kristina Boughton,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone; (202) 482–6375 and (202)
482–8173, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
Forest Service Handbook
2709.11–Special Uses Handbook
Chapter 40–Special Uses
Administration
*
*
*
*
*
41.53 Outfitters and Guides
*
*
*
*
*
41.53c Definitions
*
*
*
*
*
Priority Use. Authorization of use for
a period not to exceed ten years. The
amount of use is based on the holder’s
past use and performance and on land
management plan allocations. Except as
provided for in Title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations, part 251, subpart E,
authorizations providing for priority use
are subject to renewal (sec. 41.53f).
*
*
*
*
*
41.53h—Assignment and Management
of Priority Use
*
*
*
*
*
2. * * *
a. Use may be based on the average of
the highest two years of actual use
during the previous permit term.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the antidumping duty
administrative review on honey from
the People’s Republic of China on
December 27, 2004, which included a
decision to extend the final results
deadline by 30 days until May 26, 2005.
See Honey From the People’s Republic
of China: Preliminary Results, Partial
Rescission, and Extension of Final
Results of Second Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 69 FR 77184.
Extension of Time Limits for Final
Results
Pursuant to Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and section 351.213(h)(1) of the
Department’s regulations, the
Department shall issue the preliminary
results of an administrative review
within 245 days after the last day of the
anniversary month of the date of
publication of the order. The Act further
provides that the Department shall issue
the final results of review within 120
days after the date on which the notice
of the preliminary results was published
in the Federal Register. However, if the
Department determines that it is not
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 71 (Thursday, April 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19727-19730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-7488]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
RIN 0596-AC23
Maximum Term for Outfitter and Guide Special Use Permits on
National Forest System Lands
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final directive.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service is revising direction governing special use
permits for outfitting and guiding conducted on National Forest System
lands by increasing the maximum term for these permits from five to ten
years. The revised directive would provide for greater business
continuity for outfitters and guides who furnish services to visitors
on National Forest System lands and would make the Forest Service's
policy on the maximum permit term for outfitting and guiding permits
consistent with the policy of the National Park Service and the Bureau
of Land Management.
DATES: This directive is effective April 14, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The administrative record for this final directive is
available for inspection and copying at the office of the Director,
Recreation and Heritage Resources Staff, USDA Forest Service, 4th Floor
Central, Sidney R. Yates Federal Building, 1400 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except holidays. Those wishing to inspect the administrative record are
encouraged to call Carolyn Holbrook at (202) 205-1399 beforehand to
facilitate access to the building.
[[Page 19728]]
A copy of the directive (Amendment 2709.11-2005-1) is available
from the Forest Service via the World Wide Web at https://www.fs.fed.us/
im/directives.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn Holbrook, Recreation, and
Heritage Resources Staff, (202) 205-1399.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Background and Need for the Directive
Supporting Small Businesses.
The Forest Service regulates occupancy and use of National Forest
System (NFS) lands by outfitters and guides through issuance of special
use permits. Outfitters and guides provide the knowledge, skills, and
equipment for recreating on NFS lands to those who might not otherwise
have them, as well as information and education to the public about the
National Forests. Outfitters and guides thus play an important role in
meeting the Forest Service's recreational and educational objectives.
Currently, special use permits for outfitters and guides are issued
for a period of up to five years. The maximum five-year term has been a
concern in recent years to outfitters and guides who perceive this
timeframe as a barrier to building and maintaining a sustainable small
business. For example, the five-year term may hamper outfitters' and
guides' ability to secure financing from lenders if business equipment
cannot be fully amortized within the permit term. The five-year term
also is not conducive to long-term business planning. Customer service
suffers when outfitters and guides cannot invest in needed equipment or
conduct long-term business planning. Revising the maximum term of their
special use permit from five to ten years will provide outfitters and
guides with the potential for greater business continuity for planning
and investing.
Special Uses Streamlining.
This directive will decrease administrative costs to the Forest
Service and outfitters and guides by reducing the analysis and
processing required by more frequent permit issuance. This practice
supports the Department's special uses streamlining regulations
promulgated November 30, 1998, at 36 CFR part 251, subpart B (63 FR
65949).
Interagency Consistency.
This directive will make Forest Service policy on permit terms for
outfitters and guides consistent with the policy of the Bureau of Land
Management, adopted on February 6, 2004 (69 FR 5702), and the National
Park Service as provided for in Title IV of the National Parks Omnibus
Management Act of 1998 (16 U.S.C. 5953). Consistency in the permitting
process is important, since many outfitters and guides operate on lands
administered by all three agencies.
2. Public Comments on the Proposed Directive To Increase the Maximum
Term for Outfitter and Guide Special Use Permits and the Forest
Service's Responses
Overview.
On August 13, 2004, the Forest Service published a proposed
directive in the Federal Register (69 FR 50160) asking for public
comment on a proposal to increase the maximum term for an outfitter and
guide permit from five to ten years. Comments could be submitted by
either mail, facsimile, or electronically. During the 60-day comment
period (ending on October 12, 2004), the agency received 46 responses.
Of those 46 responses, 8 responses were identical, and counted as one
response; and 6 responses had two signatories, and were handled as a
single response with two separate comments. Each response was
identified as coming from one of the following entities:
Outfitter/Guide Permit Holder: 38 (83%).
Individual (unaffiliated or unidentifiable): 4 (9%).
Outfitter/Guide Organization: 2 (4%).
State Government: 2 (4%).
The majority of respondents were holders of Forest Service
outfitter and guide special use permits or were from an outfitter and
guide organization. All 40 respondents represented by this grouping
supported the directive; 30 of these respondents recommended additional
language.
Two States that regulate outfitting and guiding, Idaho and New
Mexico, commented on the proposed directive. Idaho supported the
directive, while New Mexico opposed it. New Mexico is concerned that
increasing the permit term for outfitting and guiding from five to ten
years will reduce competition in the industry and may stifle the
ability of small businesses to engage in outfitting and guiding.
Along with New Mexico, two individuals opposed the proposed
directive. One believes a longer term allows for more abuse by the
permit holder. The second believes that commercial operators on NFS
lands are profiteers and therefore should not be given longer periods
to operate.
Response to Comments.
Comment. Several respondents suggested allowing for permittee
initiated administrative review after five years that would allow
reasonable revisions to permit terms and conditions deemed necessary to
enable the outfitter to make adjustments to improve service to the
outfitted public.
Response. Current Forest Service policy allows for a holder of a
special use authorization to request an amendment to the authorization
at any time. This amendment can contain proposed changes to authorized
operations that would benefit the outfitted public. The agency does not
see a need to amend current policy in response to this comment. No
changes were made to the proposed policy in response to this comment.
Comment. Many respondents believed that the language in section
41.53h, paragraph 2(a), of the proposed directive represents a change
in current agency policy as reflected in the Outfitter and Guide Permit
Administration Guidebook. They also believed that this language
negatively affects many businesses that have had a downturn in travel
during the economic recession and wars overseas and would like it
changed to allow for more flexibility in the allocation of use.
Response. This directive does not alter agency policy with respect
to allocation of use. Current policy in Forest Service Handbook (FSH)
2709.11, section 41.53h, paragraph 2(a), states: ``Use may be based on
the average of the highest two years of actual use authorized, which
was actually used during the previous five years.'' This directive
merely changes the period of use from ``the previous five years'' to
``the previous permit term'' to accommodate the increase to a ten-year
term and five-year permits that exist, but will be phased out over
time. The referenced guidebook is not agency direction as defined at 36
CFR 200.4, but rather a compendium of agency direction, with examples
for administration of outfitter and guide permits. To the extent there
is any inconsistency between the directive and the Guidebook, the
directive, which was adopted through public notice and comment, takes
precedence over the Guidebook, which was not.
The request to amend current direction on allocation of use for
outfitting and guiding is outside the scope of this directive and would
require additional public notice and comment. The Forest Service has
discussed this issue with the outfitter and guide industry and plans to
address this concern at a future date. No changes were made to the
proposed directive in response to this comment.
Comment. Two respondents were concerned that extending the permit
[[Page 19729]]
term would prevent healthy competition for allocation of use for
outfitted and guided hunting on NFS lands in New Mexico and probably
elsewhere. These respondents believed that a longer permit term would
severely restrict the ability of outfitters and guides licensed by the
State to conduct their activities on NFS lands. One respondent
requested that the Forest Service remove the implication in the
agency's directives that outfitting and guiding permits may be held for
long periods and transferred.
Response. The Forest Service disagrees with the assertion that
competition will be severely restricted by this directive. In 2004,
almost 4,700 Forest Service outfitter and guide special use permits
were in effect, authorizing a broad range of recreational and
educational opportunities. New applications for outfitting and guiding
may be granted, provided the proposed services further the mission of
the Forest Service, there is public demand for them, and there is
capacity in the area requested. Current policy provides that outfitter
and guide permits may be issued when (1) an increased allocation,
capacity, or public need is identified through the forest planning
process; (2) an existing permit is revoked; (3) a reduction of service
days for an existing holder or holders makes additional service days
available; (4) competitive interest in an area, unit, or activity
arises where no previously authorized use exists and where the proposed
use is compatible with objectives in land management plans; (5) an
application has been submitted to provide outfitter and guide services
for an area or activity that has not previously been authorized and for
which there is no competitive interest; or (6) an existing permit
terminates. In the first four scenarios, the agency solicits applicants
by issuing a prospectus and contacting all parties who have expressed
an interest. In the fifth scenario, the agency documents the
determination of no competitive interest and issues a permit to
qualified applicants (FSH 2709.11, sec. 41.53f, para. 2). This
directive does not change this policy. In addition, outfitter and guide
businesses change ownership regularly, thereby providing outfitting and
guiding business opportunities to more people. There is no implication
in current policy that outfitting and guiding permits may be held for
long periods and transferred. Under current policy, the maximum term is
five years, and permits are not transferable (FSH 2709.11, sec. 41.53c
and 41.53f). No changes were made to the proposed policy in response to
this comment.
Comment. One respondent proposed that any allocation of use for
outfitting and guiding in any State be made only after consultation
with and specific recommendation from the State agency that licenses
outfitters and guides. These respondents believed that to do otherwise
would run counter to the joint authority of States and the Forest
Service to regulate outfitting and guiding.
Response. The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) and the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) require the Forest Service to
seek public input, including input from State and local governments,
when making land use decisions, especially when the Forest Service is
developing a land management plan or wilderness management plan. Within
these plans, the agency may establish criteria and capacities for the
issuance of outfitter and guide permits. To determine these criteria
and capacities, the agency must confer with State agencies, such as
departments of game and fish, to understand the effects these decisions
may have on the program of a particular State.
The agency disagrees that consultation with and a recommendation
from the State agency that licenses outfitters and guides should be
required before allocation of use for outfitting and guiding on NFS
lands within that State. There is no requirement for this type of
consultation and recommendation under Federal law. The States and the
Forest Service have concurrent jurisdiction to regulate outfitting and
guiding on NFS lands. The regulatory authority of the Forest Service is
separate and distinct from the authority of the States. No changes were
made to the proposed policy in response to this comment.
Comment. Respondents were concerned that there would be less
monitoring under a longer-term permit, and noted that monitoring occurs
infrequently.
Response. The agency disagrees with this comment. Current policy
requires annual performance reviews, and this directive does not change
that requirement. No changes were made to the proposed policy in
response to this comment.
Comment. One respondent believed that the maximum term for
outfitter and guide permits should be five years. This respondent
stated that outfitters and guides would take lifelong permits if they
could get them.
Response. The agency disagrees with this comment based on the
reasons provided in the section, ``Background and Need for this
Directive.'' No changes were made to the proposed policy in response to
this comment.
3. Regulatory Requirements
Environmental Impact.
This directive will revise national policy governing administration
of special use permits for outfitting and guiding. Section 31b of
Forest Service Handbook 1909.15 (57 FR 43180, September 18, 1992)
excludes from documentation in an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement ``rules, regulations, or policies to
establish Service-wide administrative procedures, program processes, or
instructions.'' The agency's conclusion is that this directive falls
within this category of actions and that no extraordinary circumstances
exist which would require preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
Regulatory Impact.
This directive has been reviewed under USDA procedures and
Executive Order 12866 on regulatory planning and review. It has been
determined that this is not a significant directive. This directive
will not have an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy,
nor will it adversely affect productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health and safety, or State or local governments.
This directive will not interfere with an action taken or planned by
another agency, nor will it raise new legal or policy issues. Finally,
this directive will not alter the budgetary impact of entitlement,
grant, user fee, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of
beneficiaries of such programs. Accordingly, this directive is not
subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order
12866.
Moreover, this directive has been considered in light of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 602 et seq.). It has been
determined that this directive will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by the act
because the directive will not impose record-keeping requirements on
them; it will not affect their competitive position in relation to
large entities; and it will not significantly affect their cash flow,
liquidity, or ability to remain in the market. To the contrary, the
efficiencies and consistency to be achieved by this directive should
benefit small businesses that seek to use and occupy NFS lands by
providing the potential for greater business continuity for outfitters
and guides and by reducing the frequency of time-consuming and
sometimes costly processing of special use applications. The benefits
cannot be
[[Page 19730]]
quantified and are not likely substantially to alter costs to small
businesses.
No Takings Implications.
This directive has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 12630, and it has been
determined that the directive will not pose the risk of a taking of
private property.
Civil Justice Reform.
This directive has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988 on
civil justice reform. If this directive were adopted, (1) all State and
local laws and regulations that are in conflict with this directive or
that would impede its full implementation will be preempted; (2) no
retroactive effect will be given to this directive; and (3) it will not
require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in
court challenging its provisions.
Federalism and Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments.
The agency has considered this directive under the requirements of
Executive Order 13132 on federalism, and has made an assessment that
the directive conforms with the federalism principles set out in this
executive order; will not impose any compliance costs on the States;
and will not have substantial direct effects on the States, the
relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Therefore, the agency has determined that no further
assessment of federalism implications is necessary at this time.
Moreover, this directive does not have tribal implications as
defined by Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments,'' and therefore advance
consultation with Tribes is not required.
Energy Effects.
This directive has been reviewed under Executive Order 13211,
entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.'' It has been determined that this
directive does not constitute a significant energy action as defined in
the executive order.
Unfunded Mandates.
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2
U.S.C. 1531-1538), which the President signed into law on March 22,
1995, the agency has assessed the effects of this directive on State,
local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. This directive
will not compel the expenditure of $100 million or more by any State,
local, or Tribal government or anyone in the private sector. Therefore,
a statement under section 202 of the act is not required.
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public.
This directive does not contain any recordkeeping or reporting
requirements or other information collection requirements as defined in
5 U.S.C. part 1320 that are not already required by law or not already
approved for use. Any information collected from the public as a result
of this action has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget
under control number 0596-0082. Accordingly, the review provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.
Dated: March 31, 2005.
Dale N. Bosworth,
Chief.
4. Directive Changes for Outfitter and Guides
Note: The Forest Service organizes its directive system by
alphanumeric codes and subject headings. Only those sections of the
Forest Service Handbook that are the subject of this notice are set
out here. The intended audience for this direction is Forest Service
employees charged with issuing and administrating outfitter and
guide special use permits.
Forest Service Handbook
2709.11-Special Uses Handbook
Chapter 40-Special Uses Administration
* * * * *
41.53 Outfitters and Guides
* * * * *
41.53c Definitions
* * * * *
Priority Use. Authorization of use for a period not to exceed ten
years. The amount of use is based on the holder's past use and
performance and on land management plan allocations. Except as provided
for in Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, part 251, subpart E,
authorizations providing for priority use are subject to renewal (sec.
41.53f).
* * * * *
41.53h--Assignment and Management of Priority Use
* * * * *
2. * * *
a. Use may be based on the average of the highest two years of
actual use during the previous permit term.
* * * * *
41.53j--Permit Terms and Conditions
1. For new applicants, authorize use for up to one year. For
holders assigned priority use, use may be authorized for up to ten
years.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-7488 Filed 4-13-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P