Proposed Supplementary Rule To Establish Application Fees for Commercial, Competitive, and Organized Group Activity and Event Special Recreation Permits, 51834-51837 [E7-17827]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
• Bureau of Land Management
• Land Management Bureau

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51834-51837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17827]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO 931 1220 PA]


Proposed Supplementary Rule To Establish Application Fees for 
Commercial, Competitive, and Organized Group Activity and Event Special 
Recreation Permits

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed Supplementary rule to establish application fees for 
Special Recreation Permits (SRP) for commercial use, competitive use, 
and organized group activies and events.

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

SUMMARY: The Colorado State Office of the Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM) proposes to establish a supplementary rule addressing Special 
Recreation Permit (SRP) fees. The proposal would establish standard 
statewide application fees for issuance of a new SRP or the transfer or 
renewal of an SRP for commercial use, competitive use, or organized 
group activities and events. These fees would help offset the cost of 
processing these SRPs, and also allow field offices to keep more 
revenues for on-the-ground work, including law enforcement, hiring 
seasonal employees, and site improvements. Currently, there are no 
statewide application fees. These new fees will not affect cost 
recovery charges that begin with the first hour when the 50-hour cost 
recovery threshold is anticipated to be exceeded. The application fees 
proposed to go into effect on October 1, 2007, are:
     New Special Recreation Permits--$100
     Renewals (re-issuance of expiring/expired permits)--$50
     Transfers--$100
     Annual operating authorizations--No fee charged
    These fees do not apply to SRPs issued to individuals and 
authorizing use of designated Special Areas.

DATES: You should submit your written comments on the proposed 
supplementary rule by November 13, 2007. Comments that are received 
after the close of the comment period or comments delivered to an 
address other than those listed under ADDRESSES need not be considered 
or included in the Administrative Record for the final supplementary 
rule.

ADDRESSES: 
    (1) You may mail comments on the proposed supplementary rules to 
Jack Placchi, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, 2850 
Youngfield, Lakewood, Colorado 80215;

[[Page 51835]]

    (2) You may hand deliver comments to the Bureau of Land Management 
Colorado State Office, at the same address.
    (3) You may email your comment to jack_placchi@blm.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack Placchi, Outdoor Recreation 
Planner, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, 2850 
Youngfield, Lakewood, Colorado 80215 (303) 239-3832.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Procedures for Submitting Comments
II. Background
III. Procedural Matters
IV. Proposed Supplementary Rule for the BLM Colorado SRP Application 
Fee

I. Procedures for Submitting Comments

    Comments on the proposed supplementary rule should be specific, 
should be confined to issues pertinent to the proposals, and should 
explain the reason for any recommended change. Where possible, comments 
should reference the specific provision of the proposed supplementary 
rule that is being addressed.
    BLM will have all comments, including names and addresses, 
available for public review at the Colorado State Office in Lakewood 
during regular business hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except holidays). Before including your address, telephone 
number, email address, or other personal identifying information in 
your comment, be advised that your entire comment--including your 
personal identifying information--may be made publicly available at any 
time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold from public 
review your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that 
we will be able to do so.

II . Background

    In general, all commercial use, competitive use, organized group 
activities, special events, and special area use on BLM public lands 
require a Special Recreation Permit (SRP). BLM Colorado manages over 
800 SRPs annually for commercial use, competitive use, and organized 
group activities and events.
    BLM Colorado is proposing to implement new application fees for the 
issuance of new SRPs and for the transfer and renewal of existing SRPs. 
The new administrative fees will be $100 for new permits, $50 for 
renewal, and $100 for transfers. The average cost to existing permit 
holders will be $10 per year, as most permits are renewed every five 
years. This fee does not apply to SRPs issued to individuals for 
special area use.
    A statewide application fee will make consistent the cost of 
applying for and processing SRPs for commercial use, competitive use, 
or organized group activities and events. Currently Colorado offices 
have been requiring a $90 minimum use fee for new permit applications. 
If a permit is not issued, some offices return the funds while others 
keep the fees to offset the costs of evaluation.
    The new fees funds will augment recreation opportunities for the 
public. Both the public and private outfitters will benefit from the 
fee through BLM's increased law enforcement capabilities, providing 
more funds for signing and interpretive education and for a greater BLM 
staff field presence to control illegal operations on BLM-managed 
public lands.
    Pursuant to 43 CFR 2932.31(d)(1)-(2) and BLM Manual H-2930-1, 
Recreation Permit Administration at Ch. 1, III. G. 2f(1),the State 
Director has the authority to set and adjust fees for SRPs, including 
application fees.

III. Procedural Matters

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    The proposed supplementary rule establishing SRP application fees 
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. 
This proposed supplementary rule will not have an annual effect of $100 
million or more on the economy. It will not adversely affect in a 
material way the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the 
environment, public health or safety, or state, local, or tribal 
governments or communities. The proposed supplementary rule will not 
create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action 
taken or planned by another agency. The proposed rule does not 
materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user 
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of their 
recipients; nor does it raise novel legal or policy issues. It imposes 
minimal fees for the administration and processing of SRP applications.
    Fees have not been consistently charged for SRP applications in the 
past. While this proposal represents a change from the past 
administration policies, it will not be a major change in the context 
of the Executive Order. The fees have been discussed with the Colorado 
Outfitters Association. Additional limited consultation has also 
occurred with current SRP holders. Information concerning the proposed 
new fees will be available on the BLM Web site, through press releases, 
and distributed to current SRP holders.

Clarity of the Supplementary Rules

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations 
that are simple and easy to understand. The BLM invites comments on how 
to make this proposed supplementary rule easier to understand, 
including answers to questions such as the following: (1) Are the 
requirements in the proposed supplementary rules clearly stated? (2) 
Does the proposed supplementary rule contain technical language or 
jargon that interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the format of the 
proposed supplementary rule (grouping and order of sections, use of 
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Would the 
supplementary rule be easier to understand if it was divided into more 
(but shorter) sections? and (5) Is the discussion of the proposed 
supplementary rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
preamble helpful to your understanding of the proposed supplementary 
rule? If not, how could this material be more helpful in making the 
proposed supplementary rule easier to understand?
    Please send any comments you have on the clarity of the 
supplementary rule to the address specified in the ADDRESSES section.

National Environmental Policy Act

    BLM has found that the proposed supplementary rule is categorically 
excluded from environmental review under section 102(2)(C) of the 
National Environmental Policy Act, pursuant to 516 Departmental Manual 
(DM), Chapter 2, Appendix 1. This provision of the DM excludes from 
review under NEPA policies, directives, and regulations that are of an 
administrative, financial, or procedural nature and whose environmental 
effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural to lend themselves 
to meaningful analysis and will later be subject to the NEPA process, 
either collectively or case by case. In addition, the proposed rule 
does not meet any of the 12 criteria for extraordinary circumstances 
listed in 516 DM, Chapter 2, Appendix 2. Pursuant to Council on 
Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and the environmental 
policies and procedures of the Department of the Interior, the term 
``categorical exclusions'' means a category of actions which do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment and that have been found to have no such effect in

[[Page 51836]]

procedures adopted by a Federal agency and for which neither an 
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is 
required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Congress enacted the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), as 
amended, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, to ensure that government regulations do not 
unnecessarily or disproportionately burden small entities. The RFA 
requires a regulatory flexibility analysis if a rule would have a 
significant economic impact, either detrimental or beneficial, on a 
substantial number of small entities. The proposed supplementary rule 
and fees will have a minimal effect on outfitter guide business 
entities. The average cost to existing permit holders will be $10 per 
year, as most permits are renewed every five years.
    To determine an appropriate fee structure, the BLM interviewed BLM 
SRP managers across Colorado. Those interviewed included recreation 
permit and license managers of local and regional recreational 
programs, including Arkansas Headwaters State Recreation Area, Colorado 
Department of Regulatory Affairs, and Colorado State Parks River 
Outfitter Licensing Program. The BLM also interviewed the Executive 
Director of the Colorado Outfitters Association. The proposed fees are 
a fraction of the cost of comparable application and license fees 
across the State.
    BLM has determined under the RFA that the proposed supplementary 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This proposed supplementary rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined 
at 5 U.S.C. 804(2). It will not result in an annual effect on the 
economy of $100 million or more, in a major increase in costs or prices 
for consumers, individual industries, government agencies or regions, 
or in significant adverse effects on competition, employment, 
investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United 
States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. It 
will merely impose reasonable fees for SRP applications to offset costs 
for processing permits.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The proposed supplementary rule does not impose an unfunded mandate 
on state, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the 
private sector, of more than $100 million per year; nor does the 
proposed supplementary rule have a significant or unique effect on 
small governments. Therefore, BLM is not required to prepare a 
statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act at (2 U.S.C. 1532). The proposed rule will impose reasonable 
fees for SRP applications to offset costs for processing permits. In 
determining the proposed SRP application fees, the BLM has coordinated 
with local, state, and Federal agencies.

Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference With 
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights (Takings)

    The proposed supplementary rule does not have takings implications 
and is not a government action capable of interfering with 
constitutionally protected property rights. The proposed supplementary 
rule would have minimal effect on private lands or property. Therefore, 
the Department of the Interior has determined that the rule would not 
cause a taking of private property or require preparation of a takings 
assessment under this Executive Order.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The proposed supplementary rule would not have a substantial direct 
effect on the states, on the relationship between the national 
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. The proposed 
supplementary rule would have minimal effect on state or local 
government. As for the SRP application fee to be imposed, BLM has 
coordinated with local, state, and Federal agencies, consulted with 
managers of local and regional recreational programs, including 
Arkansas Headwaters State Recreation Area, Colorado Department of 
Regulatory Affairs, and Colorado State Parks River Outfitter Licensing 
Program, before proposing the new fees for SRPs. Therefore, in 
accordance with Executive Order 13132, BLM has determined that the 
proposed supplementary rule does not have sufficient federalism 
implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform

    Under Executive Order 12988, we have found that the proposed 
supplementary rule would not unduly burden the judicial system and that 
it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.

Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    In accordance with Executive Order 13175, the BLM has found that 
the proposed supplementary rule for the BLM Colorado SRP application 
fee does not include policies that have tribal implications.

Executive Order 13352, Facilitation of Cooperative Conservation

    In accordance with E.O. 13352, BLM has determined that this 
proposed rule would not impede cooperative conservation; would take 
appropriate account of and consider the interests of persons with 
ownership or other legally recognized interests in land or other 
natural resources; would properly accommodate local participation in 
the Federal decision-making process; and would enhance the ability of 
the BLM to see that Colorado BLM programs, projects, and activities are 
consistent with protecting public health and safety.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The proposed supplementary rule does not contain information 
collection requirements that the Office of Management and Budget must 
approve under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.

Author

    The principal author of the proposed supplementary rule is Jack 
Placchi, Outdoor Recreation Planner, Colorado State Office, Bureau of 
Land Management.

IV. Special Recreation Permit (SRP) Application Fees--BLM Colorado 
Proposed Supplementary Rule

    The Colorado State Office, BLM, hereby proposes a supplementary 
rule to establish application fees for special recreation permits for 
commercial uses, competitive uses, or organized group activities and 
events use of BLM lands in Colorado. This supplementary rule is 
proposed to go into effect on October 1, 2007. The fees schedule will 
be posted in all Colorado Field and State Offices and on the Internet 
at https://www.co.blm.gov.
    The fees for special recreation permit applications are:
     New Special Recreation Permits--$100.
     Renewals (re-issuance of expiring/expired permits)--$50.
     Transfers--$100.
     Annual operating authorizations--No fee charged.
    These fees do not apply to SRPs issued to individuals and 
authorizing use of designated Special Areas.

[[Page 51837]]

Authority

    The Colorado State Office, Bureau of Land Management, proposes this 
supplementary rule under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
(FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. 1740, 43 CFR 2932.31(d)(1)-(2), 8365.1-6, and BLM 
Manual H-2930-1. Enforcement authority for this supplementary rule on 
the public lands within Colorado is found in FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1733, and 
in 43 CFR 8360.0-7.

Penalties

    Under section 303(a) of FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1733(a), and 43 CFR 
8360.0-7, if you violate this supplementary rule on public lands within 
the boundaries established in the rule, you may be tried before a 
United States Magistrate and fined no more than $1,000 or imprisoned 
for no more than 12 months, or both.

    Dated: May 8, 2007.
Sally Wisely,
Colorado State Director.
 [FR Doc. E7-17827 Filed 9-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-GG-P