Forest Service Outdoor Recreation Accessibility Guidelines and Integration of Direction on Accessibility Into Forest Service Manual 2330, 29288-29294 [E6-7775]
Download as PDF
29288
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 2006 / Notices
AGENCY:
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.
ACTION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
RIN 0596–AB93
Forest Service Outdoor Recreation
Accessibility Guidelines and
Integration of Direction on
Accessibility Into Forest Service
Manual 2330
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of issuance of final
directive.
The Forest Service is issuing
a final directive as an amendment to
Forest Service Manual 2330, Publicly
Managed Recreation Opportunities to
ensure that new or reconstructed
developed outdoor recreation areas on
National Forest System lands are
developed to maximize accessibility,
while recognizing and protecting the
unique characteristics of the natural
setting. The amendment guides Forest
Service employees regarding
compliance with the Forest Service
Outdoor Recreation Accessibility
Guidelines (FSORAG). The amendment
directs that new or reconstructed
outdoor developed recreation areas in
the National Forest System, including
campgrounds, picnic areas, beach access
routes, and outdoor recreation access
routes, comply with these agency
guidelines and applicable Federal
accessibility laws, regulations, and
guidelines. The FSORAG 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
FSORAG 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 amendment is
effective May 22, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The full text of the final
amendment to FSM 2330 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
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:16 May 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
Janet Zeller, Recreation and Heritage
Resources Staff, USDA Forest Service,
(202) 205–9597.
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
complying with the Architectural
Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA) and Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
agency accessibility requirements for
outdoor developed recreation areas have
not been integrated into the Forest
Service Directives System.
The ABA requires facilities that are
designed, constructed, altered, or leased
by, for, or on behalf of a Federal agency
to be accessible, as well as those funded
in whole or in part by a Federal agency.
To emphasize the need for accessibility
guidelines for outdoor recreation areas,
in 1993 the Forest Service developed
Universal Access to Outdoor Recreation:
A Design Guide. This guidebook
blended accessibility into the recreation
opportunity spectrum, ranging from
urban areas in full compliance with the
Uniform Federal Accessibility
Standards, the ABA accessibility
standards in place at that time, to
primitive and wilderness areas.
The Access Board is the federal
agency responsible for issuing
accessibility guidelines for newly
constructed and altered facilities subject
to the ABA. The Forest Service served
on the Access Board’s Regulatory
Negotiation Committee on Outdoor
Developed Areas (Reg Neg Committee).
In 1999, the Reg Neg Committee
completed draft accessibility guidelines
for outdoor recreation facilities and
trails. However, the Access Board was
not able to complete the rulemaking
process for the guidelines at that time.
While awaiting completion of the
rulemaking process for those guidelines,
the Forest Service determined that it
needed accessibility guidelines that
would comply with the public notice
and comment process for Forest Service
directives pursuant to 36 CFR part 216.
These guidelines, which are based on
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Reg Neg Committee’s draft
guidelines, meet the agency’s need to
integrate accessibility into the
development of outdoor recreation
facilities and trails. The Forest Service’s
guidelines incorporate universal design
and agency terminology and processes
and in some respects establish higher
accessibility standards than the Reg Neg
Committee’s draft guidelines. The Forest
Service’s guidelines are in two parts, the
FSORAG and the Forest Service Trail
Accessibility Guidelines (FSTAG), both
of which are available at https://
www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/
accessibility.
The Forest Service is issuing an
amendment to Forest Service Manual
(FSM) 2330, ‘‘Publicly Managed
Recreation Opportunities,’’ to require
compliance with the FSORAG. The
Forest Service published this policy for
public notice and comment as a
proposed amendment. Since this policy
has been subjected to public notice and
comment through publication in the
Federal Register, the agency has
decided to issue the final policy as an
amendment to the FSM.
The FSORAG will apply to newly
constructed or altered camping
facilities, picnic areas, beach access
routes, outdoor recreation access routes,
and other constructed features,
including benches, trash, recycling, and
other essential containers, viewing areas
at overlooks, telescopes and periscopes,
mobility device storage, pit toilets,
warming huts, and outdoor rinsing
showers in the National Forest System.
The FSORAG is linked to and
referenced in this amendment.
The FSORAG maximizes the
accessibility of outdoor developed
recreation areas for all people, while
recognizing and protecting the unique
characteristics of the natural setting of
each outdoor developed recreation area
within the National Forest System. The
FSORAG integrates the Forest Service
policy of universal design to ensure the
development of programs and facilities
to serve all people, to the greatest extent
possible. Universal design requires that
all new or reconstructed facilities and
associated constructed features, rather
than only a certain percentage of those
facilities, be accessible to all people.
Universal design provides for the
integration of all people in outdoor
developed recreation areas, without
separate or segregated access for people
with disabilities. In addition, the final
amendment clarifies internal agency
procedures and policies related to the
accessibility of outdoor developed
recreation areas, including compliance
with the FSORAG.
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 2006 / Notices
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Like the proposed accessibility
guidelines developed by the Reg Neg
Committee, the FSORAG establishes
only one level of accessibility for all
outdoor developed recreation areas and
provides for application of conditions
for departure and exceptions when
necessary to preserve the uniqueness of
each recreation area and when
application of the FSORAG would cause
a change in an area’s setting.
Compliance with the FSORAG will not
always result in facilities that are
accessible to all persons with
disabilities because at some locations
the natural environment might prevent
application of some of the FSORAG’s
technical provisions.
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
guidelines and will apply to Federal
agencies subject to the ABA. 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
FSORAG 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 FSTAG, which will
apply to trails that are designed for
hiker/pedestrian use. The FSORAG and
the FSTAG 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 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
8060) for public notice and comment.
The proposed interim directive was also
posted electronically on the World Wide
Web on the Federal Register site at
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:16 May 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
https://www.fs.fed.us/programs/
recreation/accessibility. The Forest
Service received 37 letters or electronic
messages in response to the proposed
interim directive. Each respondent was
grouped in one of the following
categories:
Business: 1
Federal Agencies: 6
Federal Agency Employees: 25
Individuals (unaffiliated or
unidentifiable): 5
Most respondents supported the
FSORAG. A few respondents were not
supportive. One respondent opposed
access by people with disabilities on
Federally managed lands. Another
respondent opposed any improved
access and was concerned that
improved access would lead to more
hunting. Many respondents commented
on specific sections of the FSORAG. The
agency appreciates the spelling,
pagination, and other similar
nonsubstantive comments and has
incorporated them into the FSORAG
posted on the Forest Service’s
accessibility Web page at https://
www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/
accessibility.
General Comments
Many respondents appreciated that
application of the FSORAG would result
in the natural setting being maintained.
All respondents who commented on
format supported addressing outdoor
developed recreation areas in a separate
document from trails, as well as
integration of the scoping and technical
provisions in each document. Several
respondents also expressed appreciation
for revisions in the order of the
technical provisions in the Reg Neg
Committee’s draft guidelines.
Comment. Most respondents
supported the Forest Service’s policy of
universal design. However, several
respondents expressed concern that
under this policy, developed recreation
areas would be forced into a higher level
of development or would all look alike,
resulting in a change to their setting.
Response. The Forest Service policy
on universal design is defined in FSM
2330.5 as ‘‘the design of programs and
facilities to be usable by all people, to
the greatest extent possible, while
maintaining the natural setting,
providing access to programs and
facilities for all, without separate or
segregated access for people with
disabilities. New or reconstructed
buildings, developed recreation sites,
associated constructed features and
alterations are to comply with the
accessibility guidelines.’’ Therefore, all
constructed features are required to be
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29289
accessible, rather than only a certain
percentage of those facilities, with few
exceptions.
In the Forest Service’s accessibility
guidelines, the policy of universal
design is applied by starting with the
assumption that all areas and
constructed features will be accessible
to the extent provided in the guidelines.
In contrast to application of universal
design to picnic tables and toilet
structures, which occupy a small area,
application of universal design to
camping units and their connecting
routes (called ‘‘outdoor recreation
access routes’’ or ‘‘ORARs) raises a
potential concern of over-development.
However, under the FSORAG, the
uniqueness of the site is preserved
because departure from the guidelines is
permitted when certain conditions exist
at a site. Therefore, not all camping
units and ORARs may have to meet the
guidelines. The intent of universal
design is met by maximizing
accessibility while maintaining the
character and experience of the setting,
given the natural constraints of a site
and its level of development.
Page 16 of the Forest Service’s Built
Environment Image Guide states:
‘‘Under the ABA and other mandates,
universal design requires complete
integration of accessibility within our
facilities. As with sustainable design
elements, universal design principles
applied to the site or facility from the
outset seldom, if ever, have any obvious
effect on the architectural character.
When skillfully executed, universally
designed facilities fit seamlessly within
the natural and social environments.’’
Comment. One respondent expressed
confusion concerning turning radius,
clear floor or ground space, and other
technical aspects of the guidelines.
Response. Graphics will be included
in the final FSORAG and in the Forest
Service Accessibility Guidebook for
Outdoor Recreation and Trails, which
will be available by the spring of 2006
at https://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/
programs/accessibility. This guidebook
will provide a clear explanation of the
accessibility guidelines, with examples
of best practices and illustrative
photographs, graphics, and design tips.
Comment. One respondent requested
that technical provisions for parking lots
be included in the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG covers only
the developed recreation elements that
are not addressed in other accessibility
guidelines. Parking lots are already
addressed in the Architectural Barriers
Act Accessibility Standards (ABAAS).
Comment. One respondent requested
that the text of all ABAAS provisions
cited in the technical provisions of the
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
29290
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 2006 / Notices
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
FSORAG be integrated into the
FSORAG, rather than appearing in an
appendix.
Response. The Forest Service has
decided not to accept this
recommendation because many ABAAS
provisions are cited repeatedly in the
FSORAG. For example, the reference to
controls (ABAAS 308 and 309) are
referenced ten times in the FSORAG
and appear multiple times on the same
page in several instances. If these
provisions were included each time
they were cited, the FSORAG would
become unwieldy, as well as difficult to
follow. Once a designer has consulted
the same ABAAS citation several times
in the FSORAG appendix, the designer
should become familiar with the
ABAAS requirement and not have to
reference the appendix as frequently.
Comment. One respondent believed
that the FSORAG is not needed because
there are enough laws and guidelines
dealing with accessibility, such as the
Americans With Disabilities Act,
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act,
the ADAAG, and the new ABAAS.
Response. The FSORAG is needed
because no other accessibility
guidelines that address outdoor
developed recreation areas have
completed the rulemaking process.
Comments on Specific Sections of the
FSORAG
Section 1.1 Conditions for
Departure. This section contains the
conditions that would permit departure
from a technical provision.
Comment. All but one respondent
who commented on the phrase ‘‘or
would not be consistent with the
applicable forest land and resource
management plan’’ in the second
condition for departure were
supportive.
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. The language regarding
consistency with the plan was included
in the second condition for departure
because of this legal constraint.
Comment. One respondent requested
a definition of the character, setting, and
experience of a recreation site. This
respondent also requested a
quantifiable, formula-based method to
determine whether compliance with the
guidelines would result in a substantial
change to these characteristics.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:16 May 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
Response. The Forest Service uses the
Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS)
to characterize a recreation site. The
ROS was developed to identify more
clearly the relationships among a site’s
physical characteristics and the
recreation activities and experience that
the public expects at the site. More
information about the ROS is available
at https://roadless.fs.fed.us/data/
pdfdocs/rosguide.pdf.
Determination of a substantial change
to the characteristics of a site from
compliance with the FSORAG cannot be
standardized or quantified because the
determination will vary greatly
depending on the specific
circumstances and because recreational
experience is perception-based.
‘‘Managing for recreation requires
different kinds of data and management
concepts than does most other activities.
While recreation must have a physical
base of land or water, the product—
recreation experience—is a personal or
social phenomenon. Although the
management is resource based, the
actual recreational activities are a result
of people, their perceptions, wants, and
behavior’’ (Final Report of the
Committee of Scientists for
Implementation of Section 6 of the
National Forest Management Act of
1976, February 22, 1979, 44 FR 26628,
May 4, 1979). Since people’s
expectations differ depending on the
setting, it is impossible to quantify
change, for example, by saying that
removing a certain number of trees per
acre constitutes substantial change.
The ROS assists landscape architects
and recreation managers in evaluating
all the factors that affect recreational
experiences, including changes to the
setting. For example, far more change
can occur at a developed site before the
effect would be substantial than at a site
that has never been developed.
Similarly, the surface at a site that has
been worn down from heavy use may
need to be hardened to accommodate
the public’s desire to recreate there and
to protect the surrounding environment,
and a significant amount of change may
occur without substantially affecting the
setting. However, at a site with a worndown surface that is located in an
environmentally sensitive area, the
threshold of substantial change may be
lower, and different measures may need
to be taken, such as precluding public
use of parts of the site or site
rehabilitation instead of hardening. Any
design solution needs to consider the
full range of managerial and
environmental needs.
Comment. One respondent requested
a definition for ‘‘significant natural
feature.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Response. A significant natural
feature generally has some special
meaning and is held in some esteem in
its locale. That meaning may be based
on its uniqueness, rarity, beauty,
historical significance, or other factors.
The FSORAG includes a discussion of
significant natural features. A
significant natural feature may include
a large rock, outcrop, tree, or body of
water that would block or interfere with
or would directly or indirectly be
altered or destroyed by construction of
the outdoor recreation facility or
element at that point. Significant natural
features also could include areas
protected under Federal or State laws,
such as areas with threatened or
endangered species or wetlands that
could be threatened or destroyed by full
compliance with the technical
provisions in the FSORAG or areas
where compliance would, directly or
indirectly, substantially harm natural
habitat or vegetation.
Significant cultural features include
areas such as archaeological sites,
sacred lands, burial grounds and
cemeteries, and tribal protected sites.
Significant historical features include
properties listed or eligible for listing in
the National Register of Historic Places
and other places of recognized historic
value. Significant religious features
include tribal sacred sites and other
properties held sacred by an organized
religion.
Comment. One respondent requested
a definition for ‘‘significant harm.’’
Response. The FSORAG and the Reg
Neg Committee’s draft guidelines utilize
the term ‘‘substantial harm,’’ not
‘‘significant harm.’’ The term
‘‘substantial harm’’ is used in the
guidelines in conjunction with the term
‘‘significant feature’’ in the first
condition for departing from the
technical provisions. Therefore, this
measure of the substance of the change
and the harm that change would cause
is not to be taken lightly. In this context,
to cause ‘‘substantial harm,’’ the
proposed change would have to have a
considerable negative effect on the
feature that has been identified as
‘‘significant’’ in that locale.
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
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 2006 / Notices
analysis for the fourth condition for
departure and in the fourth condition
for departure.
Section 1.2 Definitions. This section
includes definitions of terms used in the
FSORAG, including terminology used
by the Forest Service.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Camp Living Area and Parking Spur
Comment. All respondents who
commented on the terminology used to
designate specific areas within a
camping unit supported the use of that
terminology.
Response. For clarity, the FSORAG
distinguishes between a camp living
area and a parking spur. A parking spur
is divided into a vehicle parking area
and a driveway, each of which has its
own technical provisions. This
differentiation allows the designer to
integrate a parking spur into the terrain.
In many cases, designers need the
flexibility to work with each component
separately to accommodate a camp
living area near a parking spur in a way
that respects the lay of the land. In some
cases, the camp living space may not be
located immediately next to the parking
spur because the terrain will not permit
it.
Developed Recreation Site and General
Forest Area
Comment. All respondents who
commented on the distinction between
a developed recreation site and a
general forest area were supportive.
Response. The Forest Service
distinguishes in its management
between developed recreation sites and
general forest areas. The Forest Service’s
Infrastructure database defines a
developed 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 while
protecting natural resources. Most of the
agency’s recreational improvements are
located at developed recreation sites.
The Forest Service defines general
forest areas as ‘‘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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:16 May 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 National Forest System
lands be developed to the same extent,
level, or intensity.
The FSORAG requires that any
constructed feature (such as a picnic
table, fire ring, or bench) in a general
forest area meet the applicable technical
provisions. However, a connection to an
ORAR is not required in general forest
areas to ensure that these areas are not
developed beyond what is desirable
from managers’ and visitors’
perspectives. As a result, accessibility is
maximized within the constraints of the
outdoor environment, without requiring
a fundamental change in the nature of
the program.
Section 2.0 Outdoor Recreation
Access Routes (ORARs). This section of
the FSORAG includes the technical
specifications for the pathways that
connect constructed features in a picnic
or camping area or at a trailhead.
Comment. All respondents who
commented on this provision supported
the exception for slope, which is
permitted for alterations only, not new
construction. One respondent
recommended that the same exception
for slope permitted in alteration of
ORARs should also be permitted in
alteration of beach access routes.
Response. Due to the terrain where a
campground or picnic area was
constructed, it may not be possible to
meet the running slope requirements of
an ORAR during alteration of the site
without substantially changing the
natural setting. Therefore, exceptions to
slope requirements for alteration of
ORARs are necessary.
The FSORAG permits exceptions to
slope requirements only when an area is
being reconstructed or altered. These
exceptions are not permitted in new
construction because selection of the
most appropriate site is part of the new
construction process.
While a campground may have been
constructed some years ago at a location
that would not now be considered
appropriate because of its terrain, the
location of a beach is generally
determined by the best location for
accessing the water. Therefore,
exceptions to slope requirements for
alteration of beach access routes are not
appropriate.
Comment. All except one respondent
who commented on the provision
exempting general forest areas from the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29291
requirement for ORARs supported the
exception.
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.
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 so that the
facilities can be used by persons with a
disability.
Comment. Two respondents believed
that handrails on ORARs are not
appropriate in a recreation setting.
Response. The agency agrees.
References to handrails on ORARs have
been deleted from the FSORAG, just as
handrails on ORARs are not included in
the Reg Neg Committee’s draft
guidelines.
Comment. One respondent believed
that because all picnic tables in a picnic
area must be accessible, each picnic
table would have to be located along an
ORAR, which would result in numerous
pathways through picnic areas. One
respondent believed that the Reg Neg
Committee’s draft guidelines would
require fewer picnic tables to be located
along an ORAR than the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG does not
require all picnic tables to be located
along an ORAR. Rather, the FSORAG
requires that 20 percent of all picnic
tables at a site be located along an
ORAR. This requirement yields the
same density of picnic tables located
along ORARs as the Reg Neg
Committee’s draft guidelines. The Reg
Neg Committee’s draft guidelines
require that 50 percent of all picnic
tables at a site, but no fewer than two,
be accessible, and that 40 percent of
these accessible picnic tables be located
along an ORAR. The FSORAG
requirement of 20 percent of 100
percent of the picnic tables at a site
equates to the requirement in the Reg
Neg Committee’s draft guidelines of 40
percent of 50 percent of the picnic
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
29292
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 2006 / Notices
tables at a site. For example, under the
FSORAG, if a site has 8 picnic tables, 8
× .20 or 1.6 (rounded up to 2) of them
must be located along an ORAR. Under
the Reg Neg Committee’s draft
guidelines, if a site has 8 picnic tables,
8 × .50 or 4 must be accessible, and 4
× .40 or 1.6 (rounded up to 2) of those
4 must be located along an ORAR.
Section 2.7 Protruding Objects. This
section includes the 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 FSORAG provides an
exception to the requirement for 80
inches of clear headroom if a warning
barrier is installed. However, on a
narrow pathway through a cave or
through certain types of trees, such as
the walkway through the historic cherry
trees around the Tidal Basin in
Washington, DC, conditions may make
it impossible to place a warning barrier
and permit passage. In those types of
situations, the FSORAG permits an
exception to the requirement for 80
inches of clear headroom and
installation of a warning barrier. This
exception must be retained to address
unusual situations in the natural
environment.
Section 3.0 Beach Access Routes.
This section includes technical
specifications for pedestrian routes that
access beaches.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 4.0 Constructed Features for
Developed Picnic Areas. This section
includes technical specifications for
picnic units in developed recreation
areas.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 5.1 Parking Spurs. This
section includes technical specifications
for parking spurs in camping units.
Comment. All respondents who
commented on the distinction between
a camping unit and a parking spur and
the further breakdown of a parking spur
into parking and driveway areas were
supportive of those distinctions.
Response. The FSORAG identifies
two typical components of a camping
unit: (1) A camp living area and (2) a
parking spur. A parking spur is further
divided into a vehicle parking area and
a driveway. These distinct components
are identified to facilitate application of
the scoping requirements and to
integrate parking spurs into camping
units in an environmentally sensitive
manner that maximizes accessibility.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:16 May 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
Comment. Many respondents agreed
that the width of an accessible parking
spur may have an impact on the natural
setting.
Response. The FSORAG requires the
same number of 20-foot-wide parking
areas for recreational vehicles that are
required under the Reg Neg Committee’s
draft guidelines. The rest of the parking
spurs in a campground must be 16 feet
wide, where that width would not
substantially change the nature of the
setting. If that width is not feasible
because of the presence of a condition
for departure, the width may be reduced
to13 feet. If the 13-foot width would not
be possible without substantially
changing the nature of the setting, the
parking spur is exempt from the
technical provisions.
This technical provision provides the
flexibility to design accessible parking
spurs, while taking into account varying
terrain. This flexibility in design results
in facilities that are not only universally
usable, but also respectful of the natural
environment, which is a primary reason
people recreate outdoors.
Unlike the Reg Neg Committee’s draft
guidelines, the FSORAG includes
technical provisions for parking spur
driveways. Because parking spur
driveways are not required to be as wide
as parking spurs at the end of the
driveways that are adjacent to the living
area, parking spur driveways have less
visual impact on the natural setting than
parking spurs. The FSORAG takes this
difference into account, thus
maximizing accessibility while ensuring
the best environmental fit on the
ground.
Comment. Several respondents
thought the parking chart in Figure 5.1
of the February 2005 draft of the
FSORAG was confusing.
Response. The Forest Service agrees.
That chart has been removed from the
FSORAG. The only parking chart that
appears in the current version of the
FSORAG addresses the minimum
number of 20-foot-wide parking spurs
for recreational vehicles that is required.
The FSORAG requires the same
percentage of 20-foot-wide parking
spurs for recreational vehicles as the
Reg Neg Committee’s draft guidelines.
Section 5.2 Tent pads and
platforms. This section includes the
technical specifications for tent pads
and platforms.
Comment. All respondents who
commented on this provision supported
the flexibility in the FSORAG to
determine whether edge protection
should be required.
Response. The FSORAG states that
edge protection, where provided, is to
be at least 3 inches high, whereas the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Reg Neg Committee’s draft guidelines
require that all tent platforms have 3inch edge protection. The FSORAG
allows the designer to determine where
edge protection should be provided for
safety and where edge protection is not
needed due to the design or location of
a tent platform or absence of a drop-off
that would preclude access. Thus, the
FSORAG requires edge protection only
where it is necessary.
Comment. All respondents who
commented on the tent pad and
platform provisions supported them as
they appear in the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG requires that
at least 20 percent of the tent pads or
platforms provided at a developed
recreation site meet the FSORAG’s
technical provisions and be connected
to an ORAR. The FSORAG requires 5
percent of the tent pads or platforms in
a general forest area to meet the
technical provisions, but does not
require connection to an ORAR in a
general forest area. This difference in
scoping and the requirement for
connection to an ORAR reflects the
differences between developed
recreation sites and general forest areas.
The agency agrees with the respondent
who stated that this distinction gives the
designer a realistic and reasonable
ability to comply with accessibility
requirements. Where an area’s natural
terrain permits, 100 percent of the tent
pads or platforms may be accessible and
connected to an ORAR.
Section 5.3 Fire Rings. This section
includes the technical specifications for
fire rings.
Comment. All except one respondent
who commented on this section
supported the exception in general
forest areas to the requirement for the
height of the fire-building surface. The
dissenting respondent suggested that
rock circles in general forest areas be
piled higher and that soil be added
inside the rocks to achieve the height
required for the fire-building surface at
developed recreation sites.
Response. To permit the use of a
circle of rocks or other low-profile
campfires in remote or wilderness
settings, the FSORAG provides an
exception in general forest areas to the
height of the fire-building surface if one
or more conditions for departure exist.
Without this exception, the fire-building
surface in a fire ring would have to be
at least 9 inches above the ground,
which could have a substantial negative
impact in a wilderness setting. The
Forest Service is not accepting the
suggestion to provide for rock circles in
general forest areas to be piled higher
and for soil to be added inside the rocks
to achieve a 9-inch height for the fire-
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 2006 / Notices
building surface because the agency is
concerned about the safety of such a
structure.
Comment. Several respondents
expressed concern that the design for
accessible fire rings is unsightly and
therefore unpopular.
Response. The primary accessibility
requirement for fire rings is that the firebuilding surface be at least 9 inches
above the ground. This requirement
does not preclude fire ring designs that
are innovative, attractive, and
appropriate in developed recreation
settings. Fifteen years ago, the most
common fire ring design that
supposedly was accessible looked like a
barrel. Today the most common
accessible fire ring design is not
unattractive. Designers can be creative
and check other sources for appropriate
designs that fit the developed recreation
setting and that are accessible.
Section 5.4 Wood Stoves and
Fireplaces. This section includes
technical specifications for wood stoves
and fireplaces at developed recreation
sites.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 5.5 Utilities. This section
includes technical specifications for
utilities at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 5.6 Utility Sinks. This
section includes technical specifications
for utility sinks at developed recreation
sites.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 6.1 Benches. This section
includes technical specifications for
benches at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 6.2 Trash and Recycling
Containers. This section includes
technical specifications for trash and
recycling containers.
Comment. One respondent
recommended that bear-proof storage
containers be addressed in the FSORAG
because none with accessible controls
are readily available.
Response. The Forest Service agrees.
The phrase, ‘‘other essential containers’’
has been added to the heading and text
of section 6.2. ‘‘Other essential
containers’’ includes trash, recycling,
food storage, and other animal-resistant
containers.
Section 6.3 Viewing Areas at
Overlooks. This section includes
technical specifications for viewing
areas at overlooks.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 6.4 Telescopes and
Periscopes. This section includes
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:16 May 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
technical specifications for telescopes
and periscopes.
Comment. All respondents who
commented on this section supported
the provision that does not appear in the
Reg Neg Committee’s draft guidelines
for telescopes and periscopes.
Response. Unlike the Reg Neg
Committee’s draft guidelines, the
FSORAG requires maneuvering space at
each accessible telescope and periscope.
Maneuvering space is needed to ensure
that telescopes and periscopes are
accessible to a person who uses a
wheelchair.
Section 6.5 Mobility Device Storage.
This section includes technical
specifications for storage facilities for
mobility devices at developed recreation
sites.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 6.6 Pit Toilets. This section
includes technical specifications for pit
toilets.
Comment. All except one respondent
who commented on this section
supported the specifications in the
FSORAG, including the exception to the
requirement for a level entrance into a
pit toilet. One respondent believed that
there should never be an exception to
the requirement for a level entrance to
a pit toilet, regardless of the difficulties
presented by the structure or location of
a pit toilet’s waste disposal system.
Response. The FSORAG requires that
the clear floor or ground space adjacent
to a pit toilet comply with ABAAS
requirements for toilets. The FSORAG
clarifies that pit toilets are permitted
only in general forest areas and that
privacy screens rather than walls are
commonly used for pit toilets in remote
areas. To address safety concerns, the
agency clarified the FSORAG to provide
that grab bars are to be installed only on
walls that will withstand 250 pounds of
force, in accordance with ABAAS. In
addition, the FSORAG now specifies the
orientation of the riser inside the pit
toilet structure to maximize accessibility
of the toilet’s interior. These additions
will ensure that pit toilets are designed
and installed to be accessible for people
with disabilities.
The FSORAG permits exceptions to
the requirement for a level entrance into
a pit toilet. Providing for exceptions is
necessary because some pit toilet floors
have to be located above the ground due
to operation and maintenance
requirements of the toilet’s waste
disposal system. Where the entrance
cannot be located at ground level, a trail
or ramp, if feasible, must be provided
from the ground to the entrance. Where
a trail or ramp is not feasible and no
other alternative is possible because of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29293
the presence of one or more conditions
for departure, transfer steps meeting
specifications similar to those for play
areas in Chapter 10 of ABAAS may be
provided. These exceptions allow trail
planners and facility designers to work
with an area’s topography and other
physical characteristics, rather than
forcing planners and designers to alter
the natural setting unreasonably.
Section 6.7 Warming Huts. This
section includes technical specifications
for warming huts at developed
recreation sites.
No comments were received on this
section.
Section 6.8 Outdoor Rinsing
Showers. This section includes
technical specifications for outdoor
rinsing showers at developed recreation
sites.
No comments were received on this
section.
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
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
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
29294
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 98 / Monday, May 22, 2006 / Notices
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. It has been 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.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
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 determined 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:16 May 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
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
its implementing regulations at 5 CFR
part 1320 do not apply.
Dated: April 10, 2006
Dale N. Bosworth,
Chief, Forest Service.
[FR Doc. E6–7775 Filed 5–19–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
RIN 0596–AB92
Forest Service Trail Accessibility
Guidelines and Integration of Direction
on Accessibility Into Forest Service
Manual 2350
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of issuance of final
directive.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 98 (Monday, May 22, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29288-29294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7775]
[[Page 29288]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
RIN 0596-AB93
Forest Service Outdoor Recreation Accessibility Guidelines and
Integration of Direction on Accessibility Into Forest Service Manual
2330
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 2330, Publicly Managed Recreation
Opportunities to ensure that new or reconstructed developed outdoor
recreation areas on National Forest System lands are developed to
maximize accessibility, while recognizing and protecting the unique
characteristics of the natural setting. The amendment guides Forest
Service employees regarding compliance with the Forest Service Outdoor
Recreation Accessibility Guidelines (FSORAG). The amendment directs
that new or reconstructed outdoor developed recreation areas in the
National Forest System, including campgrounds, picnic areas, beach
access routes, and outdoor recreation access routes, comply with these
agency guidelines and applicable Federal accessibility laws,
regulations, and guidelines. The FSORAG 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 FSORAG 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 amendment is effective May 22, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The full text of the final amendment to FSM 2330 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.
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 complying with the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA)
and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, agency accessibility
requirements for outdoor developed recreation areas have not been
integrated into the Forest Service Directives System.
The ABA requires facilities that are designed, constructed,
altered, or leased by, for, or on behalf of a Federal agency to be
accessible, as well as those funded in whole or in part by a Federal
agency. To emphasize the need for accessibility guidelines for outdoor
recreation areas, in 1993 the Forest Service developed Universal Access
to Outdoor Recreation: A Design Guide. This guidebook blended
accessibility into the recreation opportunity spectrum, ranging from
urban areas in full compliance with the Uniform Federal Accessibility
Standards, the ABA accessibility standards in place at that time, to
primitive and wilderness areas.
The Access Board is the federal agency responsible for issuing
accessibility guidelines for newly constructed and altered facilities
subject to the ABA. The Forest Service served on the Access Board's
Regulatory Negotiation Committee on Outdoor Developed Areas (Reg Neg
Committee). In 1999, the Reg Neg Committee completed draft
accessibility guidelines for outdoor recreation facilities and trails.
However, the Access Board was not able to complete the rulemaking
process for the guidelines at that time.
While awaiting completion of the rulemaking process for those
guidelines, the Forest Service determined that it needed accessibility
guidelines that would comply with the public notice and comment process
for Forest Service directives pursuant to 36 CFR part 216. These
guidelines, which are based on the Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines, meet the agency's need to integrate accessibility into the
development of outdoor recreation facilities and trails. The Forest
Service's guidelines incorporate universal design and agency
terminology and processes and in some respects establish higher
accessibility standards than the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
The Forest Service's guidelines are in two parts, the FSORAG and the
Forest Service Trail Accessibility Guidelines (FSTAG), both of which
are available at https://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/
accessibility.
The Forest Service is issuing an amendment to Forest Service Manual
(FSM) 2330, ``Publicly Managed Recreation Opportunities,'' to require
compliance with the FSORAG. The Forest Service published this policy
for public notice and comment as a proposed amendment. Since this
policy has been subjected to public notice and comment through
publication in the Federal Register, the agency has decided to issue
the final policy as an amendment to the FSM.
The FSORAG will apply to newly constructed or altered camping
facilities, picnic areas, beach access routes, outdoor recreation
access routes, and other constructed features, including benches,
trash, recycling, and other essential containers, viewing areas at
overlooks, telescopes and periscopes, mobility device storage, pit
toilets, warming huts, and outdoor rinsing showers in the National
Forest System. The FSORAG is linked to and referenced in this
amendment.
The FSORAG maximizes the accessibility of outdoor developed
recreation areas for all people, while recognizing and protecting the
unique characteristics of the natural setting of each outdoor developed
recreation area within the National Forest System. The FSORAG
integrates the Forest Service policy of universal design to ensure the
development of programs and facilities to serve all people, to the
greatest extent possible. Universal design requires that all new or
reconstructed facilities and associated constructed features, rather
than only a certain percentage of those facilities, be accessible to
all people. Universal design provides for the integration of all people
in outdoor developed recreation areas, without separate or segregated
access for people with disabilities. In addition, the final amendment
clarifies internal agency procedures and policies related to the
accessibility of outdoor developed recreation areas, including
compliance with the FSORAG.
[[Page 29289]]
Like the proposed accessibility guidelines developed by the Reg Neg
Committee, the FSORAG establishes only one level of accessibility for
all outdoor developed recreation areas and provides for application of
conditions for departure and exceptions when necessary to preserve the
uniqueness of each recreation area and when application of the FSORAG
would cause a change in an area's setting. Compliance with the FSORAG
will not always result in facilities that are accessible to all persons
with disabilities because at some locations the natural environment
might prevent application of some of the FSORAG's technical provisions.
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 guidelines and will apply to Federal agencies subject to the ABA.
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 FSORAG 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 FSTAG, which will apply to trails that
are designed for hiker/pedestrian use. The FSORAG and the FSTAG 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 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 8060) 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 37 letters or electronic messages in response to the
proposed interim directive. Each respondent was grouped in one of the
following categories:
Business: 1
Federal Agencies: 6
Federal Agency Employees: 25
Individuals (unaffiliated or unidentifiable): 5
Most respondents supported the FSORAG. A few respondents were not
supportive. One respondent opposed access by people with disabilities
on Federally managed lands. Another respondent opposed any improved
access and was concerned that improved access would lead to more
hunting. Many respondents commented on specific sections of the FSORAG.
The agency appreciates the spelling, pagination, and other similar
nonsubstantive comments and has incorporated them into the FSORAG
posted on the Forest Service's accessibility Web page at https://
www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility.
General Comments
Many respondents appreciated that application of the FSORAG would
result in the natural setting being maintained. All respondents who
commented on format supported addressing outdoor developed recreation
areas in a separate document from trails, as well as integration of the
scoping and technical provisions in each document. Several respondents
also expressed appreciation for revisions in the order of the technical
provisions in the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
Comment. Most respondents supported the Forest Service's policy of
universal design. However, several respondents expressed concern that
under this policy, developed recreation areas would be forced into a
higher level of development or would all look alike, resulting in a
change to their setting.
Response. The Forest Service policy on universal design is defined
in FSM 2330.5 as ``the design of programs and facilities to be usable
by all people, to the greatest extent possible, while maintaining the
natural setting, providing access to programs and facilities for all,
without separate or segregated access for people with disabilities. New
or reconstructed buildings, developed recreation sites, associated
constructed features and alterations are to comply with the
accessibility guidelines.'' Therefore, all constructed features are
required to be accessible, rather than only a certain percentage of
those facilities, with few exceptions.
In the Forest Service's accessibility guidelines, the policy of
universal design is applied by starting with the assumption that all
areas and constructed features will be accessible to the extent
provided in the guidelines. In contrast to application of universal
design to picnic tables and toilet structures, which occupy a small
area, application of universal design to camping units and their
connecting routes (called ``outdoor recreation access routes'' or
``ORARs) raises a potential concern of over-development. However, under
the FSORAG, the uniqueness of the site is preserved because departure
from the guidelines is permitted when certain conditions exist at a
site. Therefore, not all camping units and ORARs may have to meet the
guidelines. The intent of universal design is met by maximizing
accessibility while maintaining the character and experience of the
setting, given the natural constraints of a site and its level of
development.
Page 16 of the Forest Service's Built Environment Image Guide
states: ``Under the ABA and other mandates, universal design requires
complete integration of accessibility within our facilities. As with
sustainable design elements, universal design principles applied to the
site or facility from the outset seldom, if ever, have any obvious
effect on the architectural character. When skillfully executed,
universally designed facilities fit seamlessly within the natural and
social environments.''
Comment. One respondent expressed confusion concerning turning
radius, clear floor or ground space, and other technical aspects of the
guidelines.
Response. Graphics will be included in the final FSORAG and in the
Forest Service Accessibility Guidebook for Outdoor Recreation and
Trails, which will be available by the spring of 2006 at https://
www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility. This guidebook will
provide a clear explanation of the accessibility guidelines, with
examples of best practices and illustrative photographs, graphics, and
design tips.
Comment. One respondent requested that technical provisions for
parking lots be included in the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG covers only the developed recreation elements
that are not addressed in other accessibility guidelines. Parking lots
are already addressed in the Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility
Standards (ABAAS).
Comment. One respondent requested that the text of all ABAAS
provisions cited in the technical provisions of the
[[Page 29290]]
FSORAG be integrated into the FSORAG, rather than appearing in an
appendix.
Response. The Forest Service has decided not to accept this
recommendation because many ABAAS provisions are cited repeatedly in
the FSORAG. For example, the reference to controls (ABAAS 308 and 309)
are referenced ten times in the FSORAG and appear multiple times on the
same page in several instances. If these provisions were included each
time they were cited, the FSORAG would become unwieldy, as well as
difficult to follow. Once a designer has consulted the same ABAAS
citation several times in the FSORAG appendix, the designer should
become familiar with the ABAAS requirement and not have to reference
the appendix as frequently.
Comment. One respondent believed that the FSORAG is not needed
because there are enough laws and guidelines dealing with
accessibility, such as the Americans With Disabilities Act, Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act, the ADAAG, and the new ABAAS.
Response. The FSORAG is needed because no other accessibility
guidelines that address outdoor developed recreation areas have
completed the rulemaking process.
Comments on Specific Sections of the FSORAG
Section 1.1 Conditions for Departure. This section contains the
conditions that would permit departure from a technical provision.
Comment. All but one respondent who commented on the phrase ``or
would not be consistent with the applicable forest land and resource
management plan'' in the second condition for departure were
supportive.
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. The language regarding
consistency with the plan was included in the second condition for
departure because of this legal constraint.
Comment. One respondent requested a definition of the character,
setting, and experience of a recreation site. This respondent also
requested a quantifiable, formula-based method to determine whether
compliance with the guidelines would result in a substantial change to
these characteristics.
Response. The Forest Service uses the Recreation Opportunity
Spectrum (ROS) to characterize a recreation site. The ROS was developed
to identify more clearly the relationships among a site's physical
characteristics and the recreation activities and experience that the
public expects at the site. More information about the ROS is available
at https://roadless.fs.fed.us/data/pdfdocs/rosguide.pdf.
Determination of a substantial change to the characteristics of a
site from compliance with the FSORAG cannot be standardized or
quantified because the determination will vary greatly depending on the
specific circumstances and because recreational experience is
perception-based. ``Managing for recreation requires different kinds of
data and management concepts than does most other activities. While
recreation must have a physical base of land or water, the product--
recreation experience--is a personal or social phenomenon. Although the
management is resource based, the actual recreational activities are a
result of people, their perceptions, wants, and behavior'' (Final
Report of the Committee of Scientists for Implementation of Section 6
of the National Forest Management Act of 1976, February 22, 1979, 44 FR
26628, May 4, 1979). Since people's expectations differ depending on
the setting, it is impossible to quantify change, for example, by
saying that removing a certain number of trees per acre constitutes
substantial change.
The ROS assists landscape architects and recreation managers in
evaluating all the factors that affect recreational experiences,
including changes to the setting. For example, far more change can
occur at a developed site before the effect would be substantial than
at a site that has never been developed. Similarly, the surface at a
site that has been worn down from heavy use may need to be hardened to
accommodate the public's desire to recreate there and to protect the
surrounding environment, and a significant amount of change may occur
without substantially affecting the setting. However, at a site with a
worn-down surface that is located in an environmentally sensitive area,
the threshold of substantial change may be lower, and different
measures may need to be taken, such as precluding public use of parts
of the site or site rehabilitation instead of hardening. Any design
solution needs to consider the full range of managerial and
environmental needs.
Comment. One respondent requested a definition for ``significant
natural feature.''
Response. A significant natural feature generally has some special
meaning and is held in some esteem in its locale. That meaning may be
based on its uniqueness, rarity, beauty, historical significance, or
other factors. The FSORAG includes a discussion of significant natural
features. A significant natural feature may include a large rock,
outcrop, tree, or body of water that would block or interfere with or
would directly or indirectly be altered or destroyed by construction of
the outdoor recreation facility or element at that point. Significant
natural features also could include areas protected under Federal or
State laws, such as areas with threatened or endangered species or
wetlands that could be threatened or destroyed by full compliance with
the technical provisions in the FSORAG or areas where compliance would,
directly or indirectly, substantially harm natural habitat or
vegetation.
Significant cultural features include areas such as archaeological
sites, sacred lands, burial grounds and cemeteries, and tribal
protected sites. Significant historical features include properties
listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places and other places of recognized historic value. Significant
religious features include tribal sacred sites and other properties
held sacred by an organized religion.
Comment. One respondent requested a definition for ``significant
harm.''
Response. The FSORAG and the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines
utilize the term ``substantial harm,'' not ``significant harm.'' The
term ``substantial harm'' is used in the guidelines in conjunction with
the term ``significant feature'' in the first condition for departing
from the technical provisions. Therefore, this measure of the substance
of the change and the harm that change would cause is not to be taken
lightly. In this context, to cause ``substantial harm,'' the proposed
change would have to have a considerable negative effect on the feature
that has been identified as ``significant'' in that locale.
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
[[Page 29291]]
analysis for the fourth condition for departure and in the fourth
condition for departure.
Section 1.2 Definitions. This section includes definitions of terms
used in the FSORAG, including terminology used by the Forest Service.
Camp Living Area and Parking Spur
Comment. All respondents who commented on the terminology used to
designate specific areas within a camping unit supported the use of
that terminology.
Response. For clarity, the FSORAG distinguishes between a camp
living area and a parking spur. A parking spur is divided into a
vehicle parking area and a driveway, each of which has its own
technical provisions. This differentiation allows the designer to
integrate a parking spur into the terrain. In many cases, designers
need the flexibility to work with each component separately to
accommodate a camp living area near a parking spur in a way that
respects the lay of the land. In some cases, the camp living space may
not be located immediately next to the parking spur because the terrain
will not permit it.
Developed Recreation Site and General Forest Area
Comment. All respondents who commented on the distinction between a
developed recreation site and a general forest area were supportive.
Response. The Forest Service distinguishes in its management
between developed recreation sites and general forest areas. The Forest
Service's Infrastructure database defines a developed 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 while
protecting natural resources. Most of the agency's recreational
improvements are located at developed recreation sites.
The Forest Service defines general forest areas as ``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 National
Forest System lands be developed to the same extent, level, or
intensity.
The FSORAG requires that any constructed feature (such as a picnic
table, fire ring, or bench) in a general forest area meet the
applicable technical provisions. However, a connection to an ORAR is
not required in general forest areas to ensure that these areas are not
developed beyond what is desirable from managers' and visitors'
perspectives. As a result, accessibility is maximized within the
constraints of the outdoor environment, without requiring a fundamental
change in the nature of the program.
Section 2.0 Outdoor Recreation Access Routes (ORARs). This section
of the FSORAG includes the technical specifications for the pathways
that connect constructed features in a picnic or camping area or at a
trailhead.
Comment. All respondents who commented on this provision supported
the exception for slope, which is permitted for alterations only, not
new construction. One respondent recommended that the same exception
for slope permitted in alteration of ORARs should also be permitted in
alteration of beach access routes.
Response. Due to the terrain where a campground or picnic area was
constructed, it may not be possible to meet the running slope
requirements of an ORAR during alteration of the site without
substantially changing the natural setting. Therefore, exceptions to
slope requirements for alteration of ORARs are necessary.
The FSORAG permits exceptions to slope requirements only when an
area is being reconstructed or altered. These exceptions are not
permitted in new construction because selection of the most appropriate
site is part of the new construction process.
While a campground may have been constructed some years ago at a
location that would not now be considered appropriate because of its
terrain, the location of a beach is generally determined by the best
location for accessing the water. Therefore, exceptions to slope
requirements for alteration of beach access routes are not appropriate.
Comment. All except one respondent who commented on the provision
exempting general forest areas from the requirement for ORARs supported
the exception.
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.
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 so that the facilities can be used by persons with a disability.
Comment. Two respondents believed that handrails on ORARs are not
appropriate in a recreation setting.
Response. The agency agrees. References to handrails on ORARs have
been deleted from the FSORAG, just as handrails on ORARs are not
included in the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
Comment. One respondent believed that because all picnic tables in
a picnic area must be accessible, each picnic table would have to be
located along an ORAR, which would result in numerous pathways through
picnic areas. One respondent believed that the Reg Neg Committee's
draft guidelines would require fewer picnic tables to be located along
an ORAR than the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG does not require all picnic tables to be
located along an ORAR. Rather, the FSORAG requires that 20 percent of
all picnic tables at a site be located along an ORAR. This requirement
yields the same density of picnic tables located along ORARs as the Reg
Neg Committee's draft guidelines. The Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines require that 50 percent of all picnic tables at a site, but
no fewer than two, be accessible, and that 40 percent of these
accessible picnic tables be located along an ORAR. The FSORAG
requirement of 20 percent of 100 percent of the picnic tables at a site
equates to the requirement in the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines
of 40 percent of 50 percent of the picnic
[[Page 29292]]
tables at a site. For example, under the FSORAG, if a site has 8 picnic
tables, 8 x .20 or 1.6 (rounded up to 2) of them must be located along
an ORAR. Under the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines, if a site has
8 picnic tables, 8 x .50 or 4 must be accessible, and 4 x .40 or 1.6
(rounded up to 2) of those 4 must be located along an ORAR.
Section 2.7 Protruding Objects. This section includes the
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 FSORAG provides an exception to the requirement for
80 inches of clear headroom if a warning barrier is installed. However,
on a narrow pathway through a cave or through certain types of trees,
such as the walkway through the historic cherry trees around the Tidal
Basin in Washington, DC, conditions may make it impossible to place a
warning barrier and permit passage. In those types of situations, the
FSORAG permits an exception to the requirement for 80 inches of clear
headroom and installation of a warning barrier. This exception must be
retained to address unusual situations in the natural environment.
Section 3.0 Beach Access Routes. This section includes technical
specifications for pedestrian routes that access beaches.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 4.0 Constructed Features for Developed Picnic Areas. This
section includes technical specifications for picnic units in developed
recreation areas.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 5.1 Parking Spurs. This section includes technical
specifications for parking spurs in camping units.
Comment. All respondents who commented on the distinction between a
camping unit and a parking spur and the further breakdown of a parking
spur into parking and driveway areas were supportive of those
distinctions.
Response. The FSORAG identifies two typical components of a camping
unit: (1) A camp living area and (2) a parking spur. A parking spur is
further divided into a vehicle parking area and a driveway. These
distinct components are identified to facilitate application of the
scoping requirements and to integrate parking spurs into camping units
in an environmentally sensitive manner that maximizes accessibility.
Comment. Many respondents agreed that the width of an accessible
parking spur may have an impact on the natural setting.
Response. The FSORAG requires the same number of 20-foot-wide
parking areas for recreational vehicles that are required under the Reg
Neg Committee's draft guidelines. The rest of the parking spurs in a
campground must be 16 feet wide, where that width would not
substantially change the nature of the setting. If that width is not
feasible because of the presence of a condition for departure, the
width may be reduced to13 feet. If the 13-foot width would not be
possible without substantially changing the nature of the setting, the
parking spur is exempt from the technical provisions.
This technical provision provides the flexibility to design
accessible parking spurs, while taking into account varying terrain.
This flexibility in design results in facilities that are not only
universally usable, but also respectful of the natural environment,
which is a primary reason people recreate outdoors.
Unlike the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines, the FSORAG
includes technical provisions for parking spur driveways. Because
parking spur driveways are not required to be as wide as parking spurs
at the end of the driveways that are adjacent to the living area,
parking spur driveways have less visual impact on the natural setting
than parking spurs. The FSORAG takes this difference into account, thus
maximizing accessibility while ensuring the best environmental fit on
the ground.
Comment. Several respondents thought the parking chart in Figure
5.1 of the February 2005 draft of the FSORAG was confusing.
Response. The Forest Service agrees. That chart has been removed
from the FSORAG. The only parking chart that appears in the current
version of the FSORAG addresses the minimum number of 20-foot-wide
parking spurs for recreational vehicles that is required. The FSORAG
requires the same percentage of 20-foot-wide parking spurs for
recreational vehicles as the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
Section 5.2 Tent pads and platforms. This section includes the
technical specifications for tent pads and platforms.
Comment. All respondents who commented on this provision supported
the flexibility in the FSORAG to determine whether edge protection
should be required.
Response. The FSORAG states that edge protection, where provided,
is to be at least 3 inches high, whereas the Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines require that all tent platforms have 3-inch edge protection.
The FSORAG allows the designer to determine where edge protection
should be provided for safety and where edge protection is not needed
due to the design or location of a tent platform or absence of a drop-
off that would preclude access. Thus, the FSORAG requires edge
protection only where it is necessary.
Comment. All respondents who commented on the tent pad and platform
provisions supported them as they appear in the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG requires that at least 20 percent of the tent
pads or platforms provided at a developed recreation site meet the
FSORAG's technical provisions and be connected to an ORAR. The FSORAG
requires 5 percent of the tent pads or platforms in a general forest
area to meet the technical provisions, but does not require connection
to an ORAR in a general forest area. This difference in scoping and the
requirement for connection to an ORAR reflects the differences between
developed recreation sites and general forest areas. The agency agrees
with the respondent who stated that this distinction gives the designer
a realistic and reasonable ability to comply with accessibility
requirements. Where an area's natural terrain permits, 100 percent of
the tent pads or platforms may be accessible and connected to an ORAR.
Section 5.3 Fire Rings. This section includes the technical
specifications for fire rings.
Comment. All except one respondent who commented on this section
supported the exception in general forest areas to the requirement for
the height of the fire-building surface. The dissenting respondent
suggested that rock circles in general forest areas be piled higher and
that soil be added inside the rocks to achieve the height required for
the fire-building surface at developed recreation sites.
Response. To permit the use of a circle of rocks or other low-
profile campfires in remote or wilderness settings, the FSORAG provides
an exception in general forest areas to the height of the fire-building
surface if one or more conditions for departure exist. Without this
exception, the fire-building surface in a fire ring would have to be at
least 9 inches above the ground, which could have a substantial
negative impact in a wilderness setting. The Forest Service is not
accepting the suggestion to provide for rock circles in general forest
areas to be piled higher and for soil to be added inside the rocks to
achieve a 9-inch height for the fire-
[[Page 29293]]
building surface because the agency is concerned about the safety of
such a structure.
Comment. Several respondents expressed concern that the design for
accessible fire rings is unsightly and therefore unpopular.
Response. The primary accessibility requirement for fire rings is
that the fire-building surface be at least 9 inches above the ground.
This requirement does not preclude fire ring designs that are
innovative, attractive, and appropriate in developed recreation
settings. Fifteen years ago, the most common fire ring design that
supposedly was accessible looked like a barrel. Today the most common
accessible fire ring design is not unattractive. Designers can be
creative and check other sources for appropriate designs that fit the
developed recreation setting and that are accessible.
Section 5.4 Wood Stoves and Fireplaces. This section includes
technical specifications for wood stoves and fireplaces at developed
recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 5.5 Utilities. This section includes technical
specifications for utilities at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 5.6 Utility Sinks. This section includes technical
specifications for utility sinks at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.1 Benches. This section includes technical specifications
for benches at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.2 Trash and Recycling Containers. This section includes
technical specifications for trash and recycling containers.
Comment. One respondent recommended that bear-proof storage
containers be addressed in the FSORAG because none with accessible
controls are readily available.
Response. The Forest Service agrees. The phrase, ``other essential
containers'' has been added to the heading and text of section 6.2.
``Other essential containers'' includes trash, recycling, food storage,
and other animal-resistant containers.
Section 6.3 Viewing Areas at Overlooks. This section includes
technical specifications for viewing areas at overlooks.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.4 Telescopes and Periscopes. This section includes
technical specifications for telescopes and periscopes.
Comment. All respondents who commented on this section supported
the provision that does not appear in the Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines for telescopes and periscopes.
Response. Unlike the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines, the
FSORAG requires maneuvering space at each accessible telescope and
periscope. Maneuvering space is needed to ensure that telescopes and
periscopes are accessible to a person who uses a wheelchair.
Section 6.5 Mobility Device Storage. This section includes
technical specifications for storage facilities for mobility devices at
developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.6 Pit Toilets. This section includes technical
specifications for pit toilets.
Comment. All except one respondent who commented on this section
supported the specifications in the FSORAG, including the exception to
the requirement for a level entrance into a pit toilet. One respondent
believed that there should never be an exception to the requirement for
a level entrance to a pit toilet, regardless of the difficulties
presented by the structure or location of a pit toilet's waste disposal
system.
Response. The FSORAG requires that the clear floor or ground space
adjacent to a pit toilet comply with ABAAS requirements for toilets.
The FSORAG clarifies that pit toilets are permitted only in general
forest areas and that privacy screens rather than walls are commonly
used for pit toilets in remote areas. To address safety concerns, the
agency clarified the FSORAG to provide that grab bars are to be
installed only on walls that will withstand 250 pounds of force, in
accordance with ABAAS. In addition, the FSORAG now specifies the
orientation of the riser inside the pit toilet structure to maximize
accessibility of the toilet's interior. These additions will ensure
that pit toilets are designed and installed to be accessible for people
with disabilities.
The FSORAG permits exceptions to the requirement for a level
entrance into a pit toilet. Providing for exceptions is necessary
because some pit toilet floors have to be located above the ground due
to operation and maintenance requirements of the toilet's waste
disposal system. Where the entrance cannot be located at ground level,
a trail or ramp, if feasible, must be provided from the ground to the
entrance. Where a trail or ramp is not feasible and no other
alternative is possible because of the presence of one or more
conditions for departure, transfer steps meeting specifications similar
to those for play areas in Chapter 10 of ABAAS may be provided. These
exceptions allow trail planners and facility designers to work with an
area's topography and other physical characteristics, rather than
forcing planners and designers to alter the natural setting
unreasonably.
Section 6.7 Warming Huts. This section includes technical
specifications for warming huts at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.8 Outdoor Rinsing Showers. This section includes
technical specifications for outdoor rinsing showers at developed
recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
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 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
[[Page 29294]]
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. It has been 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 determined 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 its implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.
Dated: April 10, 2006
Dale N. Bosworth,
Chief, Forest Service.
[FR Doc. E6-7775 Filed 5-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P