Special Regulation: Areas of the National Park System, National Capital Region, 57-62 [2010-33071]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules
scoring keys. Disclosure of the
individual item responses and scoring
keys will compromise the objectivity
and fairness of the test as well as the
validity of future tests resulting in the
Department being unable to use the
testing battery as an individual
assessment tool.
Dated: December 21, 2010.
Morgan F. Park,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2010–33030 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 7
RIN 1024–AD89
Special Regulation: Areas of the
National Park System, National Capital
Region
National Park Service, Interior.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The National Park Service
(NPS) proposes to amend the
regulations on demonstrations and
special events for the National Capital
Region. This proposed rule would revise
the definition of ‘‘demonstration’’ as
well as specify the conditions under
which solicitation of gifts, money,
goods, or services could occur.
DATES: Comments must be received by
March 4, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit your
comments, identified by Regulatory
Information Number 1024–AD89, by
any of the following methods:
—Federal rulemaking portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
—Mail or hand delivery: National Park
Service, Regional Director, Division of
Park Programs, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW.,
Room 128, Washington, DC 20242.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robbin Owen, Chief, Division of Park
Programs, National Park Service,
National Capital Region, 1100 Ohio
Drive, SW., Room 128, Washington, DC
20242. Telephone: (202) 619–7225. Fax:
(202) 401–2430.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
Background
Revise the Definition of ‘‘Demonstration’’
This proposed rule would revise the
definition of demonstration at 36 CFR
7.96 (g)(1)(i) by eliminating the term
‘‘intent or propensity’’ where it appears
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:10 Dec 30, 2010
Jkt 223001
in the definition and replace it with the
term ‘‘reasonably likely.’’ In Boardley v.
Department of the Interior, 605 F. Supp.
2d 8 (D.D.C. 2009) the United States
District Court for the District of
Columbia commented on the
demonstration definition for the
National Capital Region under 36 CFR
7.96 (g)(1)(i). The Court commented the
definition could raise problems, because
it allowed NPS officials to restrict
speech based on their determination
that a person intended to draw a crowd
with their conduct. Such a
determination could easily rest on
impermissible grounds, such as an
official’s perception that certain
expression is controversial or
inappropriate, which would be a
content-based decision, impermissible
under the First Amendment. While the
NPS has not applied the regulation in
such an impermissible manner, and has
since issued a clarifying memorandum
to preclude such a determination, this
proposed rule would revise the
definition of demonstration to minimize
any possibility of a decision based on
impermissible grounds.
Amendment of the Solicitation
Regulation
This proposed rule also would amend
the provision regarding soliciting, in
order to be consistent with the United
States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia decision in ISKCON of
Potomac v. Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949 (DC
Cir. 1995).
In ISKCON of Potomac, the Court of
Appeals held that the NPS’s regulatory
ban of soliciting, which the NPS
traditionally construed as applying only
to the in-person solicitation of
immediate donations, was not ‘‘narrowly
tailored.’’ The Court recognized that:
* * *[t]he conduct of a special event
within a small, well-defined permit area will
have some effect on the ambiance of the Mall.
But we cannot see how allowing in-person
solicitations within the permit area will add
to whatever adverse impact will result from
the special event itself. The effects of
solicitation will be confined to the permit
area, and those who wish to escape them may
simply steer clear of the authorized
demonstration or special event. 61 F.3d at
956.
The Court also said:
Our holding allows only those individuals
or groups participating in an authorized
demonstration or special event to solicit
donations within the confines of a restricted
permit area such as that assigned to ISKCON.
It does not require the NPS to let rampant
panhandling go unchecked. 61 F.3d at 956.
Following the ISKCON of Potomac
decision, as an interim measure, the
NPS posted a notice at its Washington,
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57
DC, National Capital Region Division of
Park Programs permit office as well as
in the Superintendent’s Compendium of
regulations for the National Mall and
Memorial Parks, stating that soliciting
would be allowed if it occurred within
the confines of a permit area as part of
a permitted ongoing activity. The
soliciting regulation itself, however, also
must be amended.
Consistent with ISKCON of Potomac,
this proposed amendment would allow
individuals or groups who are
participating in a permitted
demonstration or special event to solicit
donations within the confines of a
restricted permit area. Such soliciting is
authorized only when provided for in a
permit. Groups seeking to solicit
donations as part of a demonstration or
special event will need to describe the
activities in their permit application.
This proposed rule also formalizes the
long-standing view that soliciting is
limited to the in-person soliciting of
immediate donations.
This proposed rule deals with
soliciting and not sales. Any attempt to
offer or sell items, whether directly or
by the use of deceit, is governed by the
NPS sales regulation, at 36 CFR 7.96 (k),
which limits items to be sold on park
lands to books, newspapers, leaflets,
pamphlets, buttons, and bumper
stickers. As the NPS explained it its
prefatory statement to its sales
regulation, at 60 FR 17648 (1995),
* * * restricted merchandise cannot be
‘‘given away’’ and a ‘‘donation accepted’’ or
one item ‘‘given away’’ in return for the
purchase of another item; such transactions
amount to sales.
Finally, it has been the NPS’s longstanding application of its regulations
that demonstrations and special events,
whether under permit or not, are not
allowed in the restricted areas at 36 CFR
7.96 (g)(3)(ii). To better ensure that
everyone fully understands that
demonstrations and special events, with
or without a permit, are not allowed in
these restricted areas, NPS proposes to
amend its introductory sentence to
clearly indicate that no demonstrations
or special events are allowed in the
designated restricted areas.
Compliance with Other Laws, Executive
Orders, and Department Policy
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Order 12866)
This document is not a significant
rule and the Office of Management and
Budget, (OMB), has not reviewed this
rule under Executive Order 12866.
(1) This rule will not have an effect of
$100 million or more on the economy.
It will not adversely affect in a material
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
58
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules
way the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local,
or Tribal governments or communities.
(2) This rule will not create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency. The rule only effects
management and operations of National
Park Service areas within the National
Capital Region.
(3) This rule does not alter the
budgetary effects of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights
or obligations of their recipients.
(4) This rule does not raise novel legal
or policy issues. The rule modifies
existing NPS regulations to be
consistent with recent Federal Court
decisions.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Department of the Interior
certifies that this document will not
have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
The rule expands opportunities for
individuals and organizations to solicit
funds, goods or services associated with
a special event for which a permit has
been issued. Other organizations with
interest in the rule will not be effected
economically.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule:
a. Does not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more.
b. Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions.
c. Does not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This rule does not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector
of more than $100 million per year. The
rule does not have a significant or
unique effect on State, local, or Tribal
governments or the private sector. A
statement containing the information
required by the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act, (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not
required.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:10 Dec 30, 2010
Jkt 223001
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
Under the criteria in Executive Order
12630, this rule does not have
significant takings implications. It
pertains specifically to operation and
management of locations within the
NPS–National Capital Region. A takings
implication assessment is not required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
In accordance with Executive Order
13132, the rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of summary impact
statement. A Federalism summary
impact statement is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order
12988)
This rule complies with the
requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a)
requiring that all regulations be
reviewed to eliminate errors and
ambiguity and be written to minimize
litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2)
requiring that all regulations be written
in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribes
(Executive Order 13175)
Under the criteria in Executive Order
13175, we have evaluated this rule and
determined that it has no potential
effects on federally recognized Indian
Tribes. The rule only applies to
management and operation of NPS areas
within the National Capital Region.
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The Office of Management and Budget
has approved the information
collections in this rule and has assigned
control number 1024–0021, expiring on
November 30, 2013. We estimate the
burden associated with this information
collection to be 3⁄4 hour. The
information collection activities are
necessary for the public to obtain
benefits in the form of special park use
permits.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
This rule does not constitute a major
Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment. A
detailed statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is not
required because the rule is covered by
a categorical exclusion. We have
determined that the proposed rule is
categorically excluded under 516 DM
12.5 A (10) insofar as it is a modification
of existing NPS regulations that does not
increase public use to the extent of
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
compromising the nature and character
of the area or causing physical damage
to it. Further, the rule will not result in
the introduction of incompatible uses
which might compromise the nature
and characteristics of the area or cause
physical damage to it. Finally, the rule
will not cause conflict with adjacent
ownerships or land uses, or cause a
nuisance to adjacent owners or
occupants.
We have also determined that the rule
does not involve any of the
extraordinary circumstances listed in 43
CFR 46.215 that would require further
analysis under the National
Environmental Policy Act.
Information Quality Act (IQA)
In developing this rule we did not
conduct or use a study, experiment, or
survey requiring peer review under the
Information Quality Act (Pub. L. 106–
554).
Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive
Order 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy
action under the definition in Executive
Order 13211. A Statement of Energy
Effects is not required.
Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that are unclearly
written, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Public Participation
All submissions received must
include the agency name and docket
number or Regulatory Information
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.
regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules
comments received, go to https://www.
regulations.gov and enter ‘‘1024–AD89’’
in the ‘‘Keyword or ID’’ search box.
PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS,
AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK
SYSTEM
Public Availability of Comments
1. The authority citation for part 7 is
revised to read as follows:
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment including your
personal identifying information may be
made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
District of Columbia, National parks,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
National Park Service proposes to
amend 36 CFR part 7 as set forth below:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:10 Dec 30, 2010
Jkt 223001
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q),
462(k); Sec. 7.96 also issued under 36 U.S.C.
501–511, DC Code 10–137 (2001) and DC
Code 50–2201.07 (2001).
2. In § 7.96:
A. Revise paragraph (g)(1)(i);
B. Revise paragraph (g)(3)(ii)
introductory text;
C. Revise paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(D);
D. Add paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(E);
E. Remove maps following paragraph
(g)(7); and
F. Revise paragraph (h).
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
§ 7.96
National Capital Region.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Demonstrations and special
events—(1) Definitions (i) The term
‘‘demonstration’’ includes
demonstrations, picketing,
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
59
speechmaking, marching, holding vigils
or religious services and all other like
forms of conduct which involve the
communication or expression of views
or grievances, engaged in by one or
more persons, the conduct of which is
reasonably likely to draw a crowd or
onlookers. This term does not include
casual park use by visitors or tourists
that is not reasonably likely to attract a
crowd or onlookers.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(ii) Other park areas. Demonstrations
and special events are not allowed in
the following other park areas:
*
*
*
*
*
(D) The Vietnam Veterans Memorial,
except for official annual Memorial Day
and Veterans Day commemorative
ceremonies.
(E) Maps of the park areas designated
in this paragraph are as follows. The
darkened portions of the diagrams show
the areas where demonstrations or
special events are prohibited.
BILLING CODE 4312–52–P
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules
19:10 Dec 30, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
EP03JA11.012
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
60
61
BILLING CODE 4312–52–C
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:10 Dec 30, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
EP03JA11.013
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules
62
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Proposed Rules
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Soliciting under permit. (1) The inperson soliciting or demanding gifts,
money, goods or services is prohibited,
unless it occurs as part of a permit
issued for a demonstration or special
event.
(2) Persons permitted to solicit must
not:
(i) Give false or misleading
information regarding their purposes or
affiliations;
(ii) Give false or misleading
information whether any item is
available without donation.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: December 22, 2010.
Thomas L. Strickland,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010–33071 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–52–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Programs
41 CFR Parts 60–1 and 60–2
RIN 1250–ZA00
Interpretive Standards for Systemic
Compensation Discrimination and
Voluntary Guidelines for SelfEvaluation of Compensation Practices
Under Executive Order 11246; Notice
of Proposed Rescission
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY: Office of Federal Contract
Compliance Programs, Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rescission.
SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Contract
Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is
proposing to rescind two guidance
documents addressing compensation
discrimination: Interpreting
Nondiscrimination Requirements of
Executive Order 11246 with respect to
Systemic Compensation Discrimination
(Standards) and Voluntary Guidelines
for Self-Evaluation of Compensation
Practices for Compliance with Executive
Order 11246 with respect to Systemic
Compensation Discrimination
(Voluntary Guidelines). OFCCP is
proposing to rescind the Standards
which have limited OFCCP’s ability to
effectively investigate, analyze and
identify compensation discrimination.
In so doing, OFCCP will continue to
adhere to the principles of Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended
(Title VII) in investigating compensation
discrimination and will reinstitute
flexibility in its use of investigative
approaches and tools. OFCCP also
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:10 Dec 30, 2010
Jkt 223001
proposes to establish procedures for
investigating compensation
discrimination through the traditional
means of using its compliance manual,
directives and other staff guidance.
OFCCP is proposing to rescind the
Voluntary Guidelines because they are
largely unused by the Federal
Government contracting community and
have not been an effective enforcement
strategy.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before March 4, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by number 1250–ZNE, by any
of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: (202) 693–1304 (for comments
of 6 pages or fewer).
• Mail: Director, Division of Policy,
Planning, and Program Development,
Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Programs, Room N3422, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210.
Receipt of submissions will not be
acknowledged; however, the sender may
request confirmation that a submission
has been received by telephoning
OFCCP at (202) 693–0102 (voice) or
(202) 693–1337 (TTY) (these are not tollfree numbers).
All comments received, including any
personal information provided, will be
available online at https://
www.regulations.gov and for public
inspection during normal business
hours at Room C3325, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.
Individuals needing assistance to review
comments will be provided with
appropriate aids such as readers or print
magnifiers. Copies of this Notice of
Proposed Rescission will be made
available in the following formats: Large
print; Braille; electronic file on
computer disk; and audiotape. To
schedule an appointment to review the
comments and/or to obtain this Notice
of Proposed Rescission in an alternate
format, contact OFCCP at the telephone
numbers or address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Director, Division of Policy, Planning,
and Program Development, Office of
Federal Contract Compliance Programs,
200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room
N3422, Washington, DC 20210.
Telephone: (202) 693–0102 (voice) or
(202) 693–1337 (TTY).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Department of Labor’s OFCCP
enforces Executive Order 11246 which
requires Federal Government
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
contractors and subcontractors to
provide equal employment opportunity
through affirmative action and
nondiscrimination based on race, color,
national origin, religion, or sex.
Compensation discrimination is one
form of discrimination prohibited by the
Executive Order.
OFCCP enforces contractors’
compliance with this obligation
primarily by conducting compliance
evaluations. (See 41 CFR 60–1.20.)
OFCCP’s longstanding policy is to
follow Title VII principles when
conducting analyses of potential
discrimination under Executive Order
11246, including compensation
discrimination. Compensation
discrimination may occur on an
individual basis, or systemically, that is,
it is widespread in an organization due
to discriminatory compensation
systems. OFCCP traditionally has
established procedures for investigating
compensation discrimination, as well as
other forms of discrimination, through
instructions for its compliance officers
contained in the OFCCP Federal
Contract Compliance Manual (FCCM),
directives and other staff guidance
materials.
Identifying and remedying
compensation discrimination has been
an important part of OFCCP compliance
efforts for many years. Concerns about
compensation discrimination led
OFCCP in Calendar Year (CY) 2000 to
begin requiring contractors to submit
compensation data requested in the
scheduling letter at the outset of a
compliance evaluation as a matter of
course and as part of the data reported
in a new Equal Opportunity Survey,
which covered contractors were
required to submit to OFCCP. (The
Scheduling Letter was approved under
the Paperwork Reduction Act OMB NO.
1215–0072; see 65 FR 68022, 68036
(November 13, 2000) for the notice
regarding the Equal Opportunity
Survey.) In CY 2000, OFCCP also began
requiring contractors to proactively
conduct in-depth analyses of their
compensation systems to ensure that
those systems were not discriminatory.
(See 41 CFR 60–2.17(b)(3).)
OFCCP changed its approach to
investigating compensation
discrimination in 2006. On June 16,
2006, OFCCP published in the Federal
Register two final guidance documents
related to identifying compensation
discrimination under Executive Order
11246 that contained interpretations of
OFCCP regulations and Title VII
principles: Interpreting
Nondiscrimination Requirements of
Executive Order 11246 with respect to
Systemic Compensation Discrimination
E:\FR\FM\03JAP1.SGM
03JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 1 (Monday, January 3, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57-62]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-33071]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 7
RIN 1024-AD89
Special Regulation: Areas of the National Park System, National
Capital Region
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to amend the
regulations on demonstrations and special events for the National
Capital Region. This proposed rule would revise the definition of
``demonstration'' as well as specify the conditions under which
solicitation of gifts, money, goods, or services could occur.
DATES: Comments must be received by March 4, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by Regulatory
Information Number 1024-AD89, by any of the following methods:
--Federal rulemaking portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
--Mail or hand delivery: National Park Service, Regional Director,
Division of Park Programs, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW., Room 128, Washington,
DC 20242.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robbin Owen, Chief, Division of Park
Programs, National Park Service, National Capital Region, 1100 Ohio
Drive, SW., Room 128, Washington, DC 20242. Telephone: (202) 619-7225.
Fax: (202) 401-2430.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Revise the Definition of ``Demonstration''
This proposed rule would revise the definition of demonstration at
36 CFR 7.96 (g)(1)(i) by eliminating the term ``intent or propensity''
where it appears in the definition and replace it with the term
``reasonably likely.'' In Boardley v. Department of the Interior, 605
F. Supp. 2d 8 (D.D.C. 2009) the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia commented on the demonstration definition for the
National Capital Region under 36 CFR 7.96 (g)(1)(i). The Court
commented the definition could raise problems, because it allowed NPS
officials to restrict speech based on their determination that a person
intended to draw a crowd with their conduct. Such a determination could
easily rest on impermissible grounds, such as an official's perception
that certain expression is controversial or inappropriate, which would
be a content-based decision, impermissible under the First Amendment.
While the NPS has not applied the regulation in such an impermissible
manner, and has since issued a clarifying memorandum to preclude such a
determination, this proposed rule would revise the definition of
demonstration to minimize any possibility of a decision based on
impermissible grounds.
Amendment of the Solicitation Regulation
This proposed rule also would amend the provision regarding
soliciting, in order to be consistent with the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia decision in ISKCON of Potomac v.
Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949 (DC Cir. 1995).
In ISKCON of Potomac, the Court of Appeals held that the NPS's
regulatory ban of soliciting, which the NPS traditionally construed as
applying only to the in-person solicitation of immediate donations, was
not ``narrowly tailored.'' The Court recognized that:
* * *[t]he conduct of a special event within a small, well-
defined permit area will have some effect on the ambiance of the
Mall. But we cannot see how allowing in-person solicitations within
the permit area will add to whatever adverse impact will result from
the special event itself. The effects of solicitation will be
confined to the permit area, and those who wish to escape them may
simply steer clear of the authorized demonstration or special event.
61 F.3d at 956.
The Court also said:
Our holding allows only those individuals or groups
participating in an authorized demonstration or special event to
solicit donations within the confines of a restricted permit area
such as that assigned to ISKCON. It does not require the NPS to let
rampant panhandling go unchecked. 61 F.3d at 956.
Following the ISKCON of Potomac decision, as an interim measure,
the NPS posted a notice at its Washington, DC, National Capital Region
Division of Park Programs permit office as well as in the
Superintendent's Compendium of regulations for the National Mall and
Memorial Parks, stating that soliciting would be allowed if it occurred
within the confines of a permit area as part of a permitted ongoing
activity. The soliciting regulation itself, however, also must be
amended.
Consistent with ISKCON of Potomac, this proposed amendment would
allow individuals or groups who are participating in a permitted
demonstration or special event to solicit donations within the confines
of a restricted permit area. Such soliciting is authorized only when
provided for in a permit. Groups seeking to solicit donations as part
of a demonstration or special event will need to describe the
activities in their permit application.
This proposed rule also formalizes the long-standing view that
soliciting is limited to the in-person soliciting of immediate
donations.
This proposed rule deals with soliciting and not sales. Any attempt
to offer or sell items, whether directly or by the use of deceit, is
governed by the NPS sales regulation, at 36 CFR 7.96 (k), which limits
items to be sold on park lands to books, newspapers, leaflets,
pamphlets, buttons, and bumper stickers. As the NPS explained it its
prefatory statement to its sales regulation, at 60 FR 17648 (1995),
* * * restricted merchandise cannot be ``given away'' and a
``donation accepted'' or one item ``given away'' in return for the
purchase of another item; such transactions amount to sales.
Finally, it has been the NPS's long-standing application of its
regulations that demonstrations and special events, whether under
permit or not, are not allowed in the restricted areas at 36 CFR 7.96
(g)(3)(ii). To better ensure that everyone fully understands that
demonstrations and special events, with or without a permit, are not
allowed in these restricted areas, NPS proposes to amend its
introductory sentence to clearly indicate that no demonstrations or
special events are allowed in the designated restricted areas.
Compliance with Other Laws, Executive Orders, and Department Policy
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)
This document is not a significant rule and the Office of
Management and Budget, (OMB), has not reviewed this rule under
Executive Order 12866.
(1) This rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on
the economy. It will not adversely affect in a material
[[Page 58]]
way the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities.
(2) This rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency. The rule
only effects management and operations of National Park Service areas
within the National Capital Region.
(3) This rule does not alter the budgetary effects of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of
their recipients.
(4) This rule does not raise novel legal or policy issues. The rule
modifies existing NPS regulations to be consistent with recent Federal
Court decisions.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Department of the Interior certifies that this document will
not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
The rule expands opportunities for individuals and organizations to
solicit funds, goods or services associated with a special event for
which a permit has been issued. Other organizations with interest in
the rule will not be effected economically.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more.
b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions.
c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State,
local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. A statement
containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act, (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this rule does not
have significant takings implications. It pertains specifically to
operation and management of locations within the NPS-National Capital
Region. A takings implication assessment is not required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of
summary impact statement. A Federalism summary impact statement is not
required.
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all
regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be
written to minimize litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribes (Executive Order 13175)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated this
rule and determined that it has no potential effects on federally
recognized Indian Tribes. The rule only applies to management and
operation of NPS areas within the National Capital Region.
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information
collections in this rule and has assigned control number 1024-0021,
expiring on November 30, 2013. We estimate the burden associated with
this information collection to be \3/4\ hour. The information
collection activities are necessary for the public to obtain benefits
in the form of special park use permits.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is not required
because the rule is covered by a categorical exclusion. We have
determined that the proposed rule is categorically excluded under 516
DM 12.5 A (10) insofar as it is a modification of existing NPS
regulations that does not increase public use to the extent of
compromising the nature and character of the area or causing physical
damage to it. Further, the rule will not result in the introduction of
incompatible uses which might compromise the nature and characteristics
of the area or cause physical damage to it. Finally, the rule will not
cause conflict with adjacent ownerships or land uses, or cause a
nuisance to adjacent owners or occupants.
We have also determined that the rule does not involve any of the
extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 that would require
further analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act.
Information Quality Act (IQA)
In developing this rule we did not conduct or use a study,
experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554).
Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive Order 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition
in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not
required.
Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
Public Participation
All submissions received must include the agency name and docket
number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. All
comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
[[Page 59]]
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and enter ``1024-
AD89'' in the ``Keyword or ID'' search box.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment including your personal identifying
information may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7
District of Columbia, National parks, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service
proposes to amend 36 CFR part 7 as set forth below:
PART 7--SPECIAL REGULATIONS, AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM
1. The authority citation for part 7 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q), 462(k); Sec. 7.96 also
issued under 36 U.S.C. 501-511, DC Code 10-137 (2001) and DC Code
50-2201.07 (2001).
2. In Sec. 7.96:
A. Revise paragraph (g)(1)(i);
B. Revise paragraph (g)(3)(ii) introductory text;
C. Revise paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(D);
D. Add paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(E);
E. Remove maps following paragraph (g)(7); and
F. Revise paragraph (h).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 7.96 National Capital Region.
* * * * *
(g) Demonstrations and special events--(1) Definitions (i) The term
``demonstration'' includes demonstrations, picketing, speechmaking,
marching, holding vigils or religious services and all other like forms
of conduct which involve the communication or expression of views or
grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which is
reasonably likely to draw a crowd or onlookers. This term does not
include casual park use by visitors or tourists that is not reasonably
likely to attract a crowd or onlookers.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) Other park areas. Demonstrations and special events are not
allowed in the following other park areas:
* * * * *
(D) The Vietnam Veterans Memorial, except for official annual
Memorial Day and Veterans Day commemorative ceremonies.
(E) Maps of the park areas designated in this paragraph are as
follows. The darkened portions of the diagrams show the areas where
demonstrations or special events are prohibited.
BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
[[Page 60]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP03JA11.012
[[Page 61]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP03JA11.013
BILLING CODE 4312-52-C
[[Page 62]]
* * * * *
(h) Soliciting under permit. (1) The in-person soliciting or
demanding gifts, money, goods or services is prohibited, unless it
occurs as part of a permit issued for a demonstration or special event.
(2) Persons permitted to solicit must not:
(i) Give false or misleading information regarding their purposes
or affiliations;
(ii) Give false or misleading information whether any item is
available without donation.
* * * * *
Dated: December 22, 2010.
Thomas L. Strickland,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010-33071 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-52-P