Forest Service Trail Accessibility Guidelines and Integration of Direction on Accessibility Into Forest Service Manual 2350, 29294-29301 [E6-7753]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Forest Service

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 98 (Monday, May 22, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29294-29301]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7753]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

RIN 0596-AB92


Forest Service Trail Accessibility Guidelines and Integration of 
Direction on Accessibility Into Forest Service Manual 2350

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of issuance of final directive.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service is issuing a final directive as an 
amendment to Forest Service Manual 2350, Trail, River, and Similar 
Recreation Opportunities to ensure that new or altered trails designed 
for hiker/pedestrian use on National Forest System lands are developed 
to maximize accessibility for all people, including people with 
disabilities, while recognizing and protecting the unique 
characteristics of the natural setting of each trail. The amendment 
guides Forest Service employees regarding compliance with the Forest 
Service Trail Accessibility Guidelines (FSTAG) and directs that these 
trails comply with the FSTAG and applicable Federal laws, regulations, 
and guidelines. In addition, the amendment clarifies agency procedures 
and policies related to the accessibility of trails. The FSTAG is 
linked to and referenced in this amendment.
    The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board 
(Access Board) is preparing to publish for public notice and comment 
proposed accessibility guidelines for outdoor developed areas that 
would apply to Federal agencies subject to the Architectural Barriers 
Act. When the Access Board finalizes its accessibility guidelines for 
outdoor developed areas, the Forest Service will revise the FSTAG to 
incorporate the Access Board's standards where those provisions are a 
higher standard, as supplemented by the Forest Service. The 
supplementation will ensure the agency's application of equivalent or 
higher guidelines and universal design, as well as consistent use of 
agency terminology and processes.

DATES: This final directive is effective May 22, 2006.

ADDRESSES: The full text of the amendment is available electronically 
on the World Wide Web at https://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives. The 
administrative record for this final amendment 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 Janet Zeller at (202) 205-9597 beforehand to 
facilitate access to the building.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janet Zeller, Recreation and Heritage 
Resources Staff, USDA Forest Service, (202) 205-9597.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background

    Although the Forest Service is committed to ensuring accessibility 
of agency facilities and programs to serve all employees and visitors, 
as well as to comply with the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 and 
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, agency

[[Page 29295]]

accessibility requirements for outdoor recreation areas have not been 
integrated into the Forest Service Directives System. In addition, no 
accessibility guidelines have completed the rulemaking process that 
apply to the construction or alteration of trails designed hiker/
pedestrian use within the National Forest System (NFS), while 
considering the uniqueness of the setting and maximizing accessibility 
for persons with disabilities.
    In 1999, using a regulatory negotiation committee (Reg Neg 
Committee), the Access Board completed draft accessibility guidelines 
to address outdoor developed areas, including trails. However, the 
Access Board was not able to complete the rulemaking process for the 
guidelines at that time. The Forest Service determined that it needed 
accessibility guidelines for trails that would comply with the public 
notice and comment process for Forest Service directives pursuant to 36 
CFR part 216. Based on the Reg Neg Committee's draft accessibility 
guidelines, the Forest Service developed the FSTAG. Application of the 
FSTAG will ensure that the full range of trail opportunities continues 
to be provided, from primitive, long-distance trails to highly 
developed trails and popular scenic overlooks. All Interagency Trail 
Data Standards trail classes and terminology will remain unchanged. The 
FSTAG will apply only in the NFS.
    Like the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines, the FSTAG applies to 
trails designed for hiker/pedestrian use, establishes only one level of 
accessibility, and includes specific conditions for departure and 
exceptions when necessary to preserve the uniqueness of each trail or 
when application of the technical provisions would cause a change in a 
trail's setting or in the purpose or function for which a trail was 
designed. Thus, most primitive trails would not be subject to the 
FSTAG. However, the FSTAG could apply to portions of these trails where 
they pass through a more urban area. The FSTAG contains exceptions that 
would prevent accessibility from being pointlessly applied piecemeal 
throughout a trail when access between segments is not possible. In 
addition, the FSTAG requires accessibility to special features where 
possible.
    The Access Board plans to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) seeking public comment on proposed accessibility guidelines for 
outdoor developed areas. The NPRM will contain the Reg Neg Committee's 
draft accessibility guidelines and will apply to Federal agencies 
subject to the Architectural Barriers Act. The Forest Service will work 
with the Access Board and the other federal land management agencies as 
the Access Board develops final accessibility guidelines for outdoor 
developed areas. When the Access Board finalizes its accessibility 
guidelines for outdoor developed areas, the Forest Service will revise 
the FSTAG to incorporate the Access Board's standards, as supplemented 
by the Forest Service. The supplementation will ensure the agency's 
application of equivalent or higher guidelines and universal design, as 
well as consistent use of agency terminology and processes.
    In a related notice published elsewhere in this part of today's 
Federal Register, the agency is publishing notice of a final directive 
to require compliance with the Forest Service Outdoor Recreation 
Accessibility Guidelines (FSORAG), which apply to new or reconstructed 
outdoor developed recreation areas. The FSTAG and FSORAG are both 
available electronically on the World Wide Web at https://www.fs.fed.us/
recreation/programs/accessibility.
    Copies also may be obtained by writing to the USDA Forest Service, 
Attn: Accessibility Program Manager, Recreation and Heritage Resources 
Staff, Stop 1125, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-
0003.

2. Public Comments on the Proposed Interim Directive

    On February 17, 2005, the Forest Service published the proposed 
interim directive in the Federal Register (70 FR 32) for public notice 
and comment. The proposed interim directive was also posted 
electronically on the World Wide Web on the Federal Register site at 
https://www.fs.fed.us/ programs/recreation/accessibility. The Forest 
Service received 79 letters or electronic messages in response to the 
proposed interim directive. Each respondent was grouped in one of the 
following categories:

Nonprofit Organizations: 38
Businesses: 1
Federal Agencies: 6
Federal Agency Employees: 21
Individuals (unaffiliated or unidentifiable): 13

    Most respondents generally supported the FSTAG. One respondent was 
not supportive. One respondent opposed access by people with 
disabilities on Federally managed lands. Another respondent expressed 
general opposition to any improved access based on the belief that 
improved access would lead to more hunting. Many respondents commented 
on specific sections of the FSTAG. The spelling, pagination, and other 
similar nonsubstantive comments that respondents shared were 
appreciated and have been incorporated into the FSTAG.

General Comments

    Many respondents commented that the FSTAG is superior in its 
recognition of situations encountered in trail building and its 
detailed explanations, use of terminology employed by the trails 
community, and step-by-step implementation processes. All respondents 
who commented on format strongly supported separating the FSTAG from 
the FSORAG, as well as integration of the scoping and technical 
provisions in each document. Respondents appreciated the appendices 
containing the overview of the FSTAG implementation process, related 
technical provisions from the FSORAG, and provisions from the 
Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standards cited in the FSTAG.
    Comment: Many respondents expressed the need for a more user-
friendly document that details the process of applying the FSTAG.
    Response: The Forest Service Accessibility Guidebook for Outdoor 
Recreation and Trails (Guidebook) is expected to be available on the 
Forest Service's Web site by the spring of 2006 at https://
www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility. The Guidebook will 
explain the FSTAG in simple terms, with examples of how to apply the 
guidelines, helpful graphics and photographs, and design tips.
    Comment: Several respondents expressed a concern that the FSTAG 
would be changed to apply to all trails in the NFS as well as trail 
maintenance.
    Response: The Architectural Barriers Act applies only to new or 
altered facilities, elements, and constructed features and to the 
routes that connect them. Although section 504 of the Rehabilitation 
Act applies to all agency programs, it also requires that there be no 
fundamental alteration of those programs for purposes of making them 
accessible. Therefore, the scope of the FSTAG, which applies to new or 
altered trails as long as the character or experience of the trail is 
not changed, will not be broadened to include all trails in the NFS or 
trail maintenance.
    Comment: Several respondents commented on the need for supplemental 
educational materials and training opportunities for the FSTAG, both 
for Forest Service employees and trail volunteers.
    Response: The Forest Service has offered centralized training on 
the

[[Page 29296]]

FSTAG and FSORAG. However, attendance revealed that cooperators and 
volunteers had difficulty meeting the travel and time constraints for 
the training. Therefore, in addition to developing the Guidebook, the 
Forest Service will offer to provide training locally when trail 
cooperators provide the opportunity at a meeting or training session. 
Because the FSTAG applies only to construction or alteration of trails, 
not to trail maintenance, the FSTAG will be used in designing, 
constructing, and altering trails. The FSTAG will not be used by 
cooperators and volunteers performing trail maintenance.
    Comment: Several respondents expressed the concern that an 
accessible trailhead or trails will allow all-terrain and other motor 
vehicles to be used on nonmotorized trails.
    Response: Nothing in the FSTAG permits the use of a motorized 
vehicle on a trail restricted to nonmotorized use. However, a person 
who uses a wheelchair as defined in 36 CFR 212.1 (70 FR 68264, November 
9, 2005) is permitted anywhere foot travel is permitted.
    To prevent use of motor vehicles in nonmotorized areas and on 
nonmotorized trails on NFS lands, gates, rocks, berms, posts, or other 
restrictive devices may be used. However, under section 504 of the 
Rehabilitation Act, people with disabilities may not be denied 
participation in an agency program open to all other people. Thus, when 
foot travel is allowed beyond a restrictive device, as at a trailhead, 
at least 32 inches of clearing width must be provided around or through 
the device to ensure that a person in a wheelchair can travel beyond 
the restriction. Thirty-two inches of clearing width has been deemed 
sufficient, since that is the minimum width required for a door under 
the Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standards. If the trail 
beyond the entry point does not meet the criteria for applicability of 
the FSTAG, there is no requirement to make the trail accessible simply 
because there is a clearing width of 32 inches at the trailhead.
    A wheelchair or mobility device, including one that is battery-
powered, is a device that is designed solely for use by a mobility-
impaired person for locomotion and that is suitable for use in an 
indoor pedestrian area. ``Designed solely for use by a mobility-
impaired person for locomotion'' means that the wheelchair was designed 
and manufactured solely for use for mobility by a person with a 
disability. Thus, ``wheelchair or mobility device'' does not include a 
motorized unit that has been retrofitted to make it useable by a person 
with a disability. ``Suitable for use in an indoor pedestrian area'' 
means useable inside a home, mall, courthouse, or other indoor 
pedestrian area.
    Comment: Several respondents questioned how the FSTAG will affect 
trail maintenance backlogs.
    Response: Since the FSTAG does not apply to trail maintenance, the 
FSTAG will not affect trail maintenance backlogs.
    Comment: Several respondents expressed concern that the FSTAG will 
require increased maintenance on trails.
    Response: Routine maintenance on a trail that is accessible is not 
required to occur more frequently solely because the trail was 
constructed in compliance with the FSTAG. Trail maintenance is 
conducted in accordance with the standards established for each trail 
based on its trail class and designed use. While accessible trails are 
likely to be within the trail classes that receive more frequent 
maintenance based on the established maintenance standards for those 
trail classes, there may be a period when a trail segment does not meet 
conditions for accessibility or availability due to normally occurring 
conditions in the outdoor environment, such as fallen branches.
    Comment: Several respondents expressed concern that the Interagency 
Trail Data Standards (ITDS) designation of managed use of hiker/
pedestrian was not correct because managed use does not address the 
technical aspects of a trail's design and construction. These 
respondents believed that the ITDS designation of designed use of 
hiker/pedestrian would be more appropriate.
    Response: ``Managed use'' and ``designed use'' are terms used in 
the Interagency Trail Data Standards and the Forest Service's trail 
classification system. Managed uses of a trail are the modes of travel 
for which the trail is actively managed. The designed use of a trail is 
determined by the managed use that requires the most demanding design, 
construction, and maintenance parameters. The Forest Services agrees 
that the FSTAG should apply to trails with a designed use, rather than 
a managed use, of hiker/pedestrian because the FSTAG applies to 
construction and alteration of trails, not to management of trails. 
Accordingly, the FSTAG has been revised to provide that it applies to 
trails with a designed use of hiker/pedestrian.
    Comment: All comments on the requirement that buildings (such as 
toilets and shelters) be accessible if they are constructed in 
conjunction with a trail subject to the FSTAG were supportive.
    Response: The construction of any building is a disturbance to the 
setting. Designing a building that is appropriate to the setting and is 
accessible takes planning, but ensures that all people can use it. The 
resulting structure is large enough for any person to fit through the 
door and turn around inside while carrying a backpack. As one 
respondent stated, ``Hiking is challenge by choice. Using a toilet is 
not a choice, so it shouldn't be a challenge.''

Comments on Specific Sections of the FSTAG

    Section 7.1.1 Conditions for Departure. This section enumerates the 
conditions that would permit departure from a specific FSTAG technical 
provision for the distance those conditions impact a trail.
    Comment: Several respondents expressed a concern that the FSTAG 
would change the fundamental character of trails.
    Response: The Forest Service firmly believes that the primitive 
character of trails designed as simple footpaths must not be 
compromised. The FSTAG reflects this belief through the use of tight 
criteria for triggering the technical provisions and the use of 
conditions for departure and exceptions from the technical provisions. 
The FSTAG applies only to trails within the National Forest System that 
(1) are new or altered (an alteration to a existing trail is a change 
in the original purpose, intent, or design of a trail); (2) have a 
designed use of hiker/pedestrian under the Interagency Trail Data 
Standards and Forest Service Trail Planning and Management 
Fundamentals; and (3) connect directly to a currently accessible trail 
or to a trailhead. A trailhead is a site designed and developed by the 
Forest Service, a trail association, trail maintaining club, trail 
partners, or other cooperators to provide staging for trail use. For 
purposes of the FSTAG, the following are not trailheads: (1) Junctions 
between trails where there is no other access and (2) intersections 
where a trail crosses a road or users have developed an access point, 
but no improvements have been provided by the Forest Service, a trail 
association, a trail maintaining club, trail partners, or other 
cooperators beyond minimal signage for public safety.
    In addition, the FSTAG includes four specific conditions for 
departing from the guidelines if meeting a technical provision, such as 
trail width, would change the character or experience of the trail at a 
specific point. If one or more of those conditions exist, then

[[Page 29297]]

exceptions to the technical provisions, on a case-by-case basis, are 
provided.
    By applying the guidelines, but allowing for exceptions if applying 
the guidelines would change the character or experience of a trail, 
trails that are designed to meet the full range of visitor choice will 
be available, from the paved trails at a visitor center to long-
distance, primitive footpaths. Visitors can then choose the type of 
recreation they want to pursue and the setting for that experience.
    Comment: All respondents who commented on the distinction in the 
FSORAG between developed recreation sites and general forest areas were 
supportive.
    Response: The Forest Service distinguishes in its land management 
between developed recreation sites and general forest areas. The Forest 
Service's Infrastructure database defines a developed recreation site 
as ``a discrete place containing a concentration of facilities and 
services used to provide recreation opportunities to the public and 
evidencing a significant investment in facilities and management under 
the direction of an administrative unit in the National Forest 
System.'' Developed recreation sites provide visitor convenience and 
comfort without adversely impacting natural resources. Most of the 
agency's recreational improvements are located at developed recreation 
sites.
    In contrast, general forest areas are ``all lands available for 
recreation use and outside of Wilderness, developed sites, trails and 
administrative sites. Amenities or constructed features inside general 
forest areas are primarily for resource protection rather than for 
visitor comfort.'' While some constructed features (such as picnic 
tables, fire rings, and toilet buildings) may be provided in general 
forest areas, these constructed features are usually for resource 
protection rather than visitor convenience. Any constructed features in 
general forest areas must be designed appropriately for the setting and 
must comply with the FSORAG's accessibility requirements.
    It is important to the recreating public that not all NFS lands be 
developed to the same extent, level, or intensity.
    Comment: All but one respondent who commented on the provision in 
the FSORAG exempting general forest areas from the requirement for 
outdoor recreation access routes (ORARs) supported the exemption.
    Response: The FSORAG states that ORARs are not required in general 
forest areas. In general forest areas, a path connecting associated 
constructed facilities, as well as a path connecting them to a trail, 
must comply with the technical provisions for a trail enumerated in 
section 7.0 of the FSTAG. These paths are not ORARs and are not 
required to meet the technical provisions for ORARs in the FSORAG. 
ORARs are not required in general forest areas because the resulting 
additional construction and site modification would substantially alter 
the nature of the setting.
    Comment: A number of respondents requested that ``infeasible'' be 
replaced with ``impractical'' in the fourth condition for departure.
    Response: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 
4th edition, (2000), cites ``impractical'' as the definition for 
``infeasible.'' Since the words are interchangeable and ``impractical'' 
is used more commonly, the Forest Service has changed ``would not be 
feasible'' to ``would be impractical'' in the section-by-section 
analysis for the fourth condition for departure and the fourth 
condition for departure.
    Comment: One respondent expressed concern that the second condition 
for departure in the FSTAG differs from the Reg Neg Committee's draft 
guidelines in citing inconsistency with the applicable land management 
plan as a basis for allowing utilization of an exception in the 
technical provisions.
    Response: The National Forest Management Act requires each national 
forest and national grassland to develop a land management plan. These 
plans are developed through extensive public participation and 
generally are in effect for 10 to 15 years. These plans guide forest 
management, and the Forest Service is prohibited from authorizing 
actions that are inconsistent with the plans.
    Comment: All except one respondent expressed support for inclusion 
of the Interagency Trail Data Standards (ITDS) trail classes in the 
second condition for departure.
    Response: The second condition for departure in the Reg Neg 
Committee's draft guidelines permits deviation from the guidelines 
``[w]here compliance would substantially alter the nature of the 
setting or the purpose of the facility, or portion of the facility.'' 
Trails are very different from campgrounds and picnic areas, where 
there is a high degree of development due to the nature of the use. 
Trails generally cause little change to the nature of the setting 
because trails merely traverse an area. This difference should be 
reflected in the conditions for departure that, when met, allow 
utilization of an exception to the technical provisions.
    When the first draft of the FSTAG was posted on the Forest Service 
website in late 2002, the trails community immediately requested 
clarification of the phrase the ``nature of the setting'' of the trail 
for purposes of applying the second condition for departure. The trails 
community suggested that the ITDS trail classes be added to that 
condition for departure because they take into account user 
preferences, setting, protection of sensitive resources, and other 
management activities. The ITDS trail classes match the Forest 
Service's trail classes, which range from minimally developed (Trail 
Class 1) to fully developed (Trail Class 5). There are substantial 
differences among the five trail classes. In addition, respondents 
suggested that the ITDS trail class chart and terminology be added to 
the FSTAG as a reference tool. The Forest Service agrees with these 
comments and has added trail class as a factor to consider in applying 
the second condition for departure. The agency also has added the ITDS 
trail class chart as an appendix to the FSTAG.
    If compliance with a specific technical provision of the FSTAG 
would trigger a change in the ITDS trail class, the trail designer is 
alerted to the potential for a substantial change in the setting of the 
trail if that provision is applied. A substantial change in the setting 
of the trail would constitute a condition for departure from the 
technical provisions. However, the presence of a condition for 
departure does not exempt a trail from the FSTAG. An exception is 
permitted only where one or more conditions for departure exist and an 
exception applies (see section 7.1.1). Moreover, some exceptions in the 
FSTAG provide for applicability of a technical provision with 
modifications (see, e.g., section 7.3.4, Clear Tread Width, Exception 
1, and section 7.3.7, Protruding Objects, Exception 1).
    Section 7.1.2 General Exceptions. This section contains the two 
general exceptions to applicability of the FSTAG.
    Comment: One respondent asked why there were two general exceptions 
instead of one.
    Response: The first general exception addresses four trail 
characteristics or limiting factors that may make complying with the 
technical provisions difficult or impractical. The second general 
exception addresses the reasonableness of applying the technical 
provisions when one or more conditions for departure result in 
deviations from the technical provisions for over 15 percent of the 
length of a trail. When

[[Page 29298]]

either of these two exceptions applies, the trail would not need to 
comply with the technical provisions beyond a certain point. However, 
since these exceptions address different situations, they are not 
interchangeable nor can they be combined. The loss of either one would 
result in different coverage of the technical provisions.
    Comment: Several respondents requested that direction be added to 
the FSTAG concerning the impact or cumulative effects of applying the 
technical provisions and resulting change to the user experience and 
physical characteristics of the trail.
    Response: The second general exception addresses the reasonableness 
of applying the technical provisions if deviations from the provisions 
occur on over 15 percent of the length of a trail due to conditions for 
departure. This situation could result in trails that have a few 
segments that comply with all the technical provisions interspersed 
with segments that do not comply with one or more provisions. The 
second exception provides a means of quantifying the cumulative effect 
of many deviations from the guidelines on the overall trail experience. 
The overview of the FSTAG implementation process in Appendix A of the 
FSTAG can be used when laying out the flag line on a trail to tally the 
segments of the trail where one ore more conditions for departure 
result in deviations from the technical provisions. If one or more 
conditions for departure result in deviations from the technical 
provisions for over 15 percent of the length of the trail, then the 
second general exception does not require compliance with the technical 
provisions beyond a certain point.
    Comment: The third limiting factor in the first general exception 
allows for deviation from all the technical provisions (provided one or 
more conditions for departure exist) when the minimum trail width is 18 
inches or less for a distance of at least 20 feet. These narrow 
segments of trail are referred to as ``pinch points.'' One respondent 
believed that no one with a disability would be able to get through an 
18-inch-wide pinch point, even if it extended a short distance.
    Response: A person with a disability may be able to get over or 
around a pinch point that extends for a short distance. However, if a 
pinch point extends for a long distance, it is less likely that the 
pinch point can be negotiated successfully. The Reg Neg Committee 
established the limit of over 20 feet for a nonnegotiable pinch point. 
The Reg Neg Committee also determined the minimum width of that pinch 
point to be 12 inches. The Forest Service increased the minimum width 
of a nonnegotiable pinch point to 18 inches in the FSTAG because any 
passageway with no possibility of a detour, such as a path along the 
side of a cliff, that is narrower than 18 inches should not be 
considered passable.
    Comment: The fourth limiting factor in the first general exception 
allows for deviation from all the technical provisions (provided one or 
more conditions for departure exist) when a trail obstacle of at least 
30 inches in height extends across the full width of the trail. One 
respondent suggested that the minimum height of 30 inches in this 
limiting factor be reduced to 10 to 12 inches.
    Response: The Reg Neg Committee established the minimum height of 
30 inches in the fourth limiting factor because a trail obstacle at 
that height would be extremely difficult for a person with a mobility 
impairment to navigate. At a height of 10 to 12 inches, a person with a 
disability could maneuver over the obstacle, albeit with considerable 
effort.
    Section 7.1.3 Documentation. This section addresses the requirement 
for documentation of a determination that the FSTAG does not apply to a 
trail.
    Comment: Respondents shared both support and concern regarding the 
requirement to document a decision that the FSTAG does not apply to 
construction or alteration of a trail that is designed for hiker/
pedestrian use.
    Response: Often when trail managers leave their positions, they 
take with them the institutional knowledge and memory for a particular 
project. Therefore, the Forest Service needs to require documentation 
of a determination that the FSTAG does not apply to construction or 
alteration of a trail that is designed for hiker/pedestrian use. If a 
determination is made that the FSTAG does not apply to the entire trail 
or cannot be met on portions of the trail, a brief statement must be 
written and retained in the project file enumerating the rationale for 
that determination, which conditions for departure and exceptions 
apply, the date of the determination, and the name of the individuals 
who made the determination. There is no standard format for this 
documentation; each administrative unit may develop its own format to 
meet its specific needs. This documentation need not be lengthy; one 
page should be sufficient. This documentation will show that 
applicability of the FSTAG was considered at the onset of the project 
and that a good-faith effort was made to consider accessibility.
    Section 7.2 Definitions. This section includes definitions of terms 
used in the FSTAG.
Alteration
    Comment: All respondents who commented on terminology supported the 
definition of the term ``alteration.''
    Response: The definition for alteration is taken from page 5 of the 
Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines (1999 Committee Report), which 
distinguish maintenance from alteration: ``This type of work 
[maintenance] is not an alteration; it does not change the original 
purpose, intent, or design of the trail.'' Accordingly, the FSTAG 
defines ``alteration'' as ``a change in the original purpose, intent, 
or design of a trail.''
Trail Terminus and Trail Segment
    Comment: Several respondents requested that definitions for ``trail 
terminus'' and ``trail segment'' be added to the FSTAG.
    Response: The Forest Service agrees. Both definitions now appear in 
section 7.2 of the FSTAG. A trail terminus is defined as ``the 
beginning or ending point of a trail or trail segment, where the trail 
assessment or trail work begins or ends.'' A trail segment is defined 
as ``the portion of a trail being planned, evaluated, or constructed.''
Trailhead
    Comment: Several respondents expressed confusion concerning the two 
definitions for ``trailhead,'' i.e., the definitions for ``designated 
trailhead'' and ``developed trailhead.'' Respondents requested that the 
definitions be clarified so that a dirt road crossing a trail where 
there is no developed parking area or other facilities would not be 
considered a trailhead.
    Response: The Forest Service agrees that clarification and 
consolidation of these definitions are needed. The two definitions have 
been revised and combined to reflect the definition for a trailhead in 
the Recreation and Heritage Resources Integrated Business Systems and 
the level of development required to constitute a trailhead. In 
addition, the definition now specifies what is not a trailhead. The 
resulting single definition for a trailhead is: ``A site designed and 
developed by the Forest Service, a trail association, a trail 
maintaining club, trail partners, or other cooperators to provide 
staging for trail use. For purposes of the FSTAG the following are not 
trailheads:
     Junctions between trails where there is no other access.

[[Page 29299]]

     Intersections where a trail crosses a road or users have 
developed an access point, but no improvements have been provided by 
the Forest Service, a trail association, a trail maintaining club, 
trail partners, or other cooperators beyond minimal signage for public 
safety.''
    Section 7.3.1 Trail Grade and Cross Slope. This section includes 
the technical requirements for trail grade and cross slope.
    Comment: Several respondents requested more specific guidance on 
the distance between points of measurement when determining trail 
grade, cross slope, and other trail features.
    Response: The distance between points of measurement has not been 
specified because it will vary greatly depending on the area being 
evaluated for construction or alteration of a trail. When laying out 
the flag line for construction or alteration of a trail, the trail 
designer can best determine how frequently measurements need to be made 
to obtain the needed level of detail, depending on the terrain, changes 
in soil type, and other trail characteristics. Appendix A of the FSTAG 
contains an overview of the FSTAG implementation process that may be 
used when laying out flag line for construction or alteration of a 
trail.
    Section 7.3.2 Resting Interval. This section includes the technical 
specifications for a resting interval, where one is required.
    No comments were received on this section.
    Section 7.3.3 Surface. This section includes the technical 
requirements for trail surface.
    Comment: All respondents who commented on the method for evaluating 
a firm and stable surface in the FSTAG expressed strong support for the 
practicality of the method.
    Response: While the Forest Service supports the scientific approach 
to the evaluation of a firm and stable surface, the agency also 
recognizes that the expense of the equipment required for that approach 
may be prohibitive. Therefore, trail designers must have a mental tool 
to use to evaluate trail surface.
    Comment: Several respondents expressed concern that a firm and 
stable surface may not remain that way in all weather conditions.
    Response: The FSTAG recognizes that various types of weather can 
have a significant effect on trail surface. Page 19 of the FSTAG 
states: ``Surface firmness should be determined and documented during 
the planning process for the primary seasons for which a trail is 
managed, under normally occurring weather conditions.'' If it is not 
clear what those seasons are, the determination of surface firmness may 
be based on the primary seasons for which similar trails in the area 
are managed.
    Comment: One respondent recommended adding to the examples of types 
of actions that constitute maintenance the hardening of trail surfaces 
under certain conditions, such as installation of a boardwalk in an 
area that has become wet. The respondent believed that this addition 
was needed to clarify that this type of work would not trigger 
application of the FSTAG.
    Response: The agency does not believe that this change is 
necessary. The FSTAG specifically states that it applies only to trails 
within the National Forest System that (1) are new or altered (an 
alteration is a change in the original purpose, intent, or design of a 
trail; (2) have a designed use of hiker/pedestrian under the ITDS and 
Forest Service Trail Planning and Management Fundamentals; and (3) 
connect directly to a currently accessible trail or to a trailhead. 
Constructing a boardwalk over a wet area of a trail would not 
constitute construction or alteration of a trail. Therefore, this type 
of work would not trigger the FSTAG.
    Section 7.3.4 Tread Width. This section includes the technical 
requirements for tread width.
    Comment: Several respondents were confused about the terms 
``minimum tread width'' and ``minimum trail width.''
    Response: The tread width is the width of a constructed trail. The 
minimum tread width is the width of the useable part of the tread width 
(i.e., that is not blocked by obstructions) at the narrowest point on a 
trail. The tread width does not include usable area adjacent to the 
constructed trail tread.
    The trail width is the width of the trail tread and the adjacent 
useable area. The minimum trail width is the width of the trail tread 
and the adjacent useable area at the narrowest point on a trail. An 
example of minimum trail width is where there is a rock outcropping on 
both sides of a trail that narrows the width of the trail tread as well 
as the adjacent useable area, and there is no way around the 
obstruction.
    Clear tread width is the width of the useable trail tread and 
adjacent usable surface.
    Comment: All except one respondent expressed support for the 
FSTAG's approach to trail bridges, boardwalks, and puncheon.
    Response: In accordance with the Forest Service Trail Planning and 
Management Fundamentals, trail bridges, boardwalks, and puncheon are 
constructed features of a trail and part of the trail tread. Therefore, 
they must be constructed in accordance with the width and other 
features of a trail. Thus, if a segment of a trail designed for hiker/
pedestrian use is subject to the FSTAG's technical provisions, the 
trail bridges, boardwalks, and puncheon on that trail segment are also 
subject to those provisions.
    Section 7.3.5 Passing Space. This section includes the technical 
specifications for passing space, where it is required.
    No comments were received on this section.
    Section 7.3.6 Tread Obstacles. This section includes the technical 
specifications for allowable tread obstacles.
    No comments were received on this section.
    Section 7.3.7 Protruding Objects. This section includes the 
technical requirements for clear headroom on a trail.
    Comment: All respondents who commented on protruding objects 
supported the exception to the requirement for clear headroom or a 
warning barrier.
    Response: The FSTAG requires that if the vertical clearance of a 
trail is reduced to less than 80 inches because of a condition for 
departure, a barrier to warn people who are blind or visually impaired 
must be provided. However, the FSTAG also recognizes that in the 
outdoor recreation environment there are some areas, such as pathways 
through caves or specific types of trees, where the natural environment 
precludes both 80 inches of clear headroom and placement of a warning 
barrier. Therefore, the FSTAG allows an exception to these requirements 
where a condition for departure prevents providing 80 inches of clear 
headroom and installation of a warning barrier without changing the 
character of the setting.
    Section 7.3.8 Openings. This section includes the technical 
specifications for allowable openings in the trail tread.
    No comments were received on this section.
    Section 7.3.9 Edge Protection. This section includes the technical 
requirements for the height of edge protection provided along trail 
tread.
    Comment: All respondents who commented on the use of edge 
protection strongly agreed with the approach taken in the FSTAG that it 
should not be required for trails or tent pads and platforms.

[[Page 29300]]

    Response: Under the FSTAG, edge protection, where provided, must be 
at least 3 inches high. However, edge protection is not required. The 
trail designer determines where edge protection should be provided for 
safety and where it should be eliminated because it would preclude full 
access. The FSTAG also provides for flexibility in determining the use 
of edge protection because of concerns regarding accessibility of 
trails and tent pads and platforms in general forest areas adjacent to 
trails.
    Section 7.3.10 Signs. This section requires posting information 
signs at the trailhead of new or altered trails and trail segments that 
fall into Trail Class 4 or 5 and trails that have been evaluated for 
accessibility.
    Comment: All respondents strongly supported the requirement to post 
information signs at the trailhead of new or altered trails and trail 
segments that fall into Trail Class 4 or 5 and trails that have been 
evaluated for accessibility. One respondent recommended that the 
requirements for information signs be extended to all trails.
    Response: The Forest Service strongly supports providing trail 
information that is useful to all visitors. Providing information about 
the typical and maximum trail grade, typical and maximum cross slope, 
typical and minimum tread width, surface type and firmness, and 
obstacles helps visitors choose their own hiking experience. While it 
would be desirable to post this information at the trailhead of all 
trails, the Forest Service cannot require this type of signage at this 
time.
    Appendices. The appendices provide additional information to assist 
trail designers and managers in determining when and how to apply the 
FSTAG.
    Comment: Several respondents requested inclusion in the FSTAG of 
the ITDS and Forest Service trail class chart and related information.
    Response: In response to these requests, the Forest Service has 
added the ITDS and Forest Service trail class chart and related 
information as an appendix to the FSTAG.

3. Regulatory Certifications

Environmental Impact

    Section 31.12, paragraph 2, of Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 
1909.15 (67 FR 54622, August 23, 2002) 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 concludes 
that this amendment 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 amendment has been reviewed under USDA procedures and 
Executive Order 12866 on regulatory planning and review. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that the accessibility 
guidelines portion of the amendment is significant because of its 
relationship to the accessibility guidelines to be established by the 
Access Board. Accordingly, this amendment has been reviewed by OMB 
pursuant to Executive Order 12866. A cost and benefits analysis of this 
action was developed and is available at https://www.fs.fed.us/programs/
recreation/accessibility. The remaining portions of the proposed 
amendment, which addressed other aspects of the agency's accessibility 
program not related to the accessibility guidelines, were not deemed 
significant by OMB and were issued as a final interim directive on July 
13, 2005.
    Moreover, this amendment has been considered in light of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 602 et seq.). It has been 
determined that this amendment will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by the act 
because the amendment will not impose record-keeping requirements on 
them; it will not affect their competitive position in relation to 
large entities; and it will not affect their cash flow, liquidity, or 
ability to remain in the market. The amendment will establish 
accessibility guidelines that will apply internally to the Forest 
Service and that will have no direct effect on small businesses. No 
small businesses have been awarded contracts for construction or 
reconstruction of recreation facilities covered by these accessibility 
guidelines.

No Takings Implications

    This amendment has been analyzed in accordance with the principles 
and criteria contained in Executive Order 12630. The agency has 
determined that this amendment does not pose the risk of a taking of 
private property.

Civil Justice Reform

    This amendment has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988 on 
civil justice reform. After adoption of this amendment, (1) all State 
and local laws and regulations that conflict with this amendment or 
that impede its full implementation will be preempted; (2) no 
retroactive effect will be given to this amendment; and (3) it will not 
require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in 
court challenging its provisions.

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 amendment on State, 
local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. This amendment 
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.

Federalism and Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    The agency has considered this amendment under the requirements of 
Executive Order 13132 on federalism and has made an assessment that the 
amendment 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 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.
    Moreover, this amendment does not have Tribal implications as 
defined by Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments,'' and therefore advance consultation with 
Tribes is not required.

Energy Effects

    This amendment has been reviewed under Executive Order 13211 of May 
18, 2001, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.'' It has been determined that this 
amendment does not constitute a significant energy action as defined in 
the Executive Order.

Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public

    This amendment does not contain any record-keeping or reporting 
requirements or other information collection requirements as defined in 
5 CFR part 1320 that are not already required by law or not already 
approved for use. Accordingly, the review provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and

[[Page 29301]]

its implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.

    Dated: April 10, 2006.
Dale N. Bosworth,
Chief, Forest Service.
 [FR Doc. E6-7753 Filed 5-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P