Assessing Fees for Excess and Unauthorized Grazing, 69303-69307 [2020-24164]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 212 / Monday, November 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves This proposed rule
involves a safety zone covering the
transit and mooring of liquefied gas
carriers that would prohibit entry
within one half mile. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph L60(a)
of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01,
Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
G. Protest Activities
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
We do not plan to hold public
meetings on this rulemaking due to
Novel Coronavirus (COVID–19)
concerns.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
■
2. Add § 165.789 to read as follows:
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
§ 165.789 Safety Zone; Christiansted
Harbor, St. Croix, USVI.
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s eRulemaking
(a) Regulated area.
(1) A moving safety zone is
established on the the waters around
liquefied gas carriers entering
Christiansted Harbor in an area one half
mile around each vessel, beginning one
mile north of the Christiansted Harbor
Lighted Buoy #1, in approximate
position 17°46′48″ N, 064°41′48″ W, and
continuing until the vessel is moored at
the Virgin Island Water and Power
Authority (WAPA) dock in approximate
position 17°45′06″ N, 064°42′50″ W.
(2) The waters around liquefied gas
carriers in a 50-yard radius around each
vessel when moored at the Virgin Island
Water and Power Authority (WAPA)
dock.
(3) A moving safety zone is
established on the waters around
liquefied gas carriers departing
Christiansted Harbor in an area one half
mile around each vessel beginning at
the Virgin Island Water and Power
Authority (WAPA) dock in approximate
position 17°45′06″ N, 064°42′50″ W
when the vessel gets underway, and
continuing until the stern passes the
Christiansted Harbor Lighted Buoy #1,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:01 Oct 30, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69303
in approximate position 17°45′48″ N,
064°41′48″ W.
All coordinates are North American
Datum 1983.
(b) Regulations.
(1) No person or vessel may enter,
transit or remain in the safety zone
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port, San Juan, Puerto Rico, or a
designated Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer. Those in safety
zones must comply with all lawful
orders or directions given to them by the
COTP or the designated Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer.
(2) Vessels encountering emergencies,
which require transit through the safety
zones, should contact the Coast Guard
patrol craft or Duty Officer on VHF
Channel 16. In the event of an
emergency, the Coast Guard patrol craft
may authorize a vessel to transit through
the safety zones with a Coast Guard
designated escort.
(3) The Captain of the Port and the
Duty Officer at Sector San Juan, Puerto
Rico, can be contacted at telephone
number 787–289–2041. The Coast
Guard Patrol Commander enforcing the
safety zones can be contacted on VHF–
FM channels 16 and 22A.
(4) Coast Guard Sector San Juan will
notify the marine community of periods
during which these safety zones will be
in effect by providing notice to mariners
in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.
(5) All persons and vessels must
comply with the instructions of onscene patrol personnel. On-scene patrol
personnel include commissioned,
warrant, or petty officers of the U.S.
Coast Guard. Coast Guard Auxiliary and
local or state officials may be present to
inform vessel operators of the
requirements of this section, and other
applicable laws.
Dated: October 23, 2020.
Gregory H. Magee,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port San Juan.
[FR Doc. 2020–23886 Filed 10–30–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 222
RIN 0596–AD45
Assessing Fees for Excess and
Unauthorized Grazing
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service (Agency), is
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
69304
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 212 / Monday, November 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
proposing to amend its existing
regulations to provide for nonmonetary
settlement when excess or unauthorized
grazing is determined to be non-willful,
a standard consistent with practices of
the Bureau of Land Management, as
recommended by the July 2016
Government Accountability Office
(GAO) in its report to the Committee on
Natural Resources, House of
Representatives, Unauthorized Grazing,
Actions Needed to Improve Tracking
and Deterrence Efforts (GAO–16–559).
DATES: To be ensured consideration,
comments must be received in writing
on or before December 2, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments
using one of the following methods:
1. Submit comments electronically by
following the instructions at the Federal
eRulemaking portal at https://
www.regulations.gov.
2. Mail: U. S. Forest Service, Director,
Forest Management, Range Management
and Vegetation Ecology, 201 14th Street
SW, Suite 3SE, Washington, DC 20250–
1124.
3. Hand Delivery/Courier: U. S. Forest
Service, Director, Forest Management,
Range Management and Vegetation
Ecology, 201 14th Street SW, Suite 3SE,
Washington, DC 20250–1124.
All comments, including all content,
will be placed in the record and will be
available for public inspection and
copying. Therefore, the Agency
recommends that commenters remove
personal information such as Social
Security Numbers, personal addresses,
telephone numbers, and email addresses
included in their comments as such
information may become easily
available to the public.
Also, please note that, due to security
concerns, postal mail delivery in
Washington, DC may be delayed.
Therefore, the Agency encourages the
public to submit comments
electronically.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Myra Black, Program Manager, Forest
Management, Range Management and
Vegetation Ecology, 202–650–7365,
myra.black@usda.gov. Individuals who
use telecommunication devices for the
deaf may call the Federal Relay Service
at 800–877–8339 between 8:00 a.m. and
8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time,
Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Forest Service is responsible for
managing National Forest System (NFS)
lands that provide forage for domestic
livestock grazing. The Forest Service’s
authority to regulate livestock grazing
comes from the Organic Administration
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Oct 30, 2020
Jkt 253001
Act of 1897, which named grazing as an
early use of lands administered by the
Forest Service. The Forest Service
managed grazing under its general
authorities until 1950, when Congress
enacted the Granger-Thye Act,
specifically authorizing the Secretary of
Agriculture to issue grazing permits on
NFS lands and other lands administered
by the U.S Department of Agriculture.
The Forest Service permits the
occupancy and use of NFS lands by
domestic livestock through Term
Grazing Permits pursuant to 36 CFR
222.3. The regulations at 36 CFR
222.50(a) require the Agency to charge
fees ‘‘for all grazing or livestock use of
National Forest System lands, or other
lands under Forest Service control.’’
Congress asked the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to examine
what is known about the frequency and
extent of unauthorized grazing on
federal lands, and its effects, as well as
review the Bureau of Land
Management’s (BLM) and Forest
Service’s efforts to detect, deter, and
resolve unauthorized grazing. Excess
use is when livestock stray outside of
their permitted area and graze in an
unauthorized area or a permittee
intentionally overstays the permitted
grazing period. Unauthorized use is
when livestock, owned or controlled by
a non-permittee, graze on National
Forest System lands. In July 2016, GAO
issued a Report to the Committee on
Natural Resources, House of
Representatives, Unauthorized Grazing,
Actions Needed to Improve Tracking
and Deterrence Efforts (GAO–16–559).
The Report recommended that the
Forest Service amend its regulations on
range management (36 CFR part 222) to
provide an option for nonmonetary
settlement when unauthorized or excess
grazing is non-willful, in addition to the
option of following its existing
regulations at 36 CFR 222.50(a) and (h).
The GAO report also recommended that
the Forest Service record all incidents of
unauthorized grazing, including those
resolved informally. The Agency will
develop direction for implementing the
latter recommendation in the Forest
Service Manual and Handbook for
Rangeland Management at a later date.
Need for Proposed Rule
The GAO found that the frequency
and extent of unauthorized grazing on
NFS lands is largely unknown because,
according to Agency officials, the
Agency handles most incidents
informally (e.g., with a telephone call)
and does not document them. The
incidents that were recorded involved
formal action taken by the Agency
rangeland management program or law
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
enforcement staff., such as issuance of a
Notice of Non-Compliance and/or a Bill
for Collection.
The proposed rule provides the
flexibility to resolve incidents
informally without charging
unauthorized grazing penalties, while
retaining the option for monetary relief
for willful excess or unauthorized
grazing. Informal resolution involves the
permittee or non-permittee removing
the livestock following a phone call
from or face-to-face conversation with
the authorized officer. The incident
should be noted in the files as nonwillful, and the settlement would be
considered nonmonetary as no Bill for
Collection would be issued.
Informal resolution, such as a phone
call or face-to-face conversation, is an
effective way to resolve non-willful
unauthorized grazing. Amending the
Agency’s grazing regulations to provide
for the informal resolution and
nonmonetary settlement of infractions
allows the Agency to achieve the
objective of effectively and efficiently
resolving such incidents, and it
effectively addresses one of GAO’s
recommendations.
Discussion of Proposed Regulatory
Revisions
Section 36 CFR 222.50 of the current
grazing regulations describes the general
procedures for charging grazing fees for
all livestock grazing or livestock use of
National Forest System lands.
Specifically, section 222.50(h) describes
the unauthorized use rate and how it
applies to: excess number of livestock
grazing by permittees; livestock grazed
outside the permitted grazing season; or
livestock grazed under an unvalidated
permit.
The Forest Service proposes to amend
36 CFR 222 subpart C, to allow the
authorized officer to approve
nonmonetary settlement for excess or
unauthorized grazing use when the use
is non-willful. The authorized officer
may approve non-monetary settlement
for excess or unauthorized grazing use
only when certain conditions set forth
in the regulation are met.
The proposed language is consistent
with the language used by BLM to
describe non-willful grazing use. In
order to ensure that the proposed
language is clear, the Forest Service
proposes to add the definition of nonpermittee and non-willful to the
definitions section found at 36 CFR
222.1(b). In addition, the definitions
section is restated to remove numbering,
consistent with the Federal Register
Document Drafting Handbook (August
2018 Edition, Revision 1.1 dated August
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 212 / Monday, November 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
9, 2019; National Archives and Records
Administration).
The proposed language removes
reference to the fee being adjusted by
the same indexes used to adjust the
regular fee since the first sentence
already describes that the rate is
determined by establishing a base value.
In addition, the current rule language
refers to an unvalidated permit, which
describes a new permit’s status prior to
being validated. Validation occurs by
stocking the allotment for the first time
with at least ninety percent of the
permitted livestock during the first
season of grazing use under the new
permit. The proposed language removes
the reference to an unvalidated permit
and replaces it with the four most
common situations in which the Forest
Service encounters excess or
unauthorized use. Those examples of
excess and unauthorized use include
but are not limited to: excess number of
livestock grazed; livestock grazed
outside the permitted grazing season;
livestock grazed in areas not authorized
under a grazing permit and bill for
collection; or livestock grazed without a
permit.
Regulatory Certifications
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides
that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office
of Management and Budget will review
all significant rules. OIRA has
determined that this proposed rule is
not significant.
Executive Order 13771
This proposed rule has been reviewed
in accordance with E.O. 13771 on
reducing regulation and controlling
regulatory costs and has been
designated as an ‘‘other action’’ for
purposes of the E.O.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Civil Rights Impact Analysis
A Civil Rights Impact Analysis (CRIA)
was conducted in accordance with
USDA Departmental Regulation (DR)
4300–4, to determine if implementation
of the proposed rules (and
accompanying rangeland management
directives) would have disproportionate
effects or adverse impacts on employees
or program beneficiaries, because of
membership in protected groups
identified in USDA DR 4300–4 and DR
5600–002, particularly women, ethnic
and racial minorities, and people with
disabilities. The proposed rules and
directives have been analyzed to ensure
compliance with USDA’s DR 4300–4,
and it is determined that no adverse
impacts on protected groups are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Oct 30, 2020
Jkt 253001
expected as a result of implementation
of the proposed rules or directives.
Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), OIRA has
designated this proposed rule as not a
major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
National Environmental Policy Act
The proposed rule would allow an
authorized officer to determine that a
nonmonetary settlement is appropriate
when excess or unauthorized livestock
use was non-willful on behalf of the
permittee or non-permittee and add
clarity to what the agency means by the
term non-willful. Agency regulations at
36 CFR 220.6(d)(2) (73 FR 43093)
exclude from documentation in an
environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement, as well
as in a decision memo, rules,
regulations, or policies to establish
Service-wide administrative procedures,
program processes, or instructions. The
revisions to § 222.50(h) and § 222.1(b)
address the penalty for non-willful
actions taken on National Forest System
land and provide a definition for a term
used in the revised language. The
proposed language removes reference to
an unvalidated permit and replaces it
with the four most common situations
that the Forest Service considers excess
or unauthorized use, which is not
intended to be an exclusive list. As the
regulation is limited to determination of
waiver of excess or unauthorized use
fees (nonmonetary settlement), no
ground disturbing activities are
implicated by these revisions. Thus, the
Agency has concluded that the
proposed rule 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 Flexibility Act Analysis
The Agency has considered the
impacts of the proposed rule on small
entities consistent with the
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as
amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Flexibility Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), and
Executive Orders 13272 (Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in
Agency Rulemaking). This proposed
rule would not have any direct effect on
small entities as defined by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The
proposed rule would not impose
recordkeeping requirements on small
entities; would not affect their
competitive position in relation to large
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69305
entities; and would not affect their cash
flow, liquidity, or ability to remain in
the market. Additionally, it reduces the
administrative burden on livestock
operators by allowing for informal
nonmonetary resolution of a situation
that would typically require an
administrative process to resolve.
Therefore, the Forest Service has
determined that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities pursuant to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Federalism
The Agency has considered the
proposed rule under the requirements of
E.O. 13132, Federalism. The Agency has
determined that the proposed rule
conforms with the federalism principles
set out in this executive order; would
not impose any compliance costs on the
states; and would not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the Federal
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, the
Agency has concluded that the
proposed rule does not have Federalism
implications.
Consultation With Tribal Governments
In accordance with Executive Order
13175, the Agency is conducting Tribal
consultation for the proposed rule. To
ensure tribal perspectives are heard and
fully considered during rulemaking, the
Agency contacted all federally
recognized Indian tribes and Alaska
Native corporations in accordance with
E.O. 13175, (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments); USDA Departmental
Regulation 1350–02 (Tribal
Consultation, Coordination and
Collaboration); and Forest Service
Handbook 1509.13, Chapter 10
(Consultation with Indian Tribes and
Alaska Native Corporations). The
Agency initiated formal consultation on
the rulemaking by contacting the Indian
tribes and Alaska Native Corporations
by mail.
No Takings Implications
The Agency has analyzed the
proposed rule in accordance with the
principles and criteria in E.O. 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights. The Agency has determined that
the proposed rule would not pose the
risk of a taking of private property.
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
69306
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 212 / Monday, November 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Energy Effects
The Agency has reviewed the
proposed rule under E.O. 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has
determined that the proposed rule
would not constitute a significant
energy action as defined in E.O. 13211.
Civil Justice Reform
The Forest Service has analyzed the
proposed rule in accordance with the
principles and criteria in E.O. 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. The Agency has
not identified any State or local laws or
regulations that conflict with this
regulation or that would impede full
implementation of this rule.
Nevertheless, if such conflicts were to
be identified, the proposed rule, if
implemented, will preempt the State or
local laws or regulations that are found
to be in conflict. However, in that case
of a conflict, (1) no retroactive effect
will be given to this final rule; and (2)
USDA will not require the use of
administrative proceedings before
parties could 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), signed into law on March
22, 1995, the Agency has assessed the
effects of the proposed rule on state,
local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. The proposed rule would
not compel the expenditure of $100
million or more by any state, local, or
Tribal government or anyone in the
private sector. Therefore, a statement
under section 202 of the Act is not
required.
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the
Public
The proposed rule does not contain
any recordkeeping 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.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 222
Grazing and Livestock Use on the
National Forest System, Mediation of
Term Grazing Permit Disputes, Grazing
Fees, Management of Wild FreeRoaming Horses and Burros.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Forest Service proposes to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:16 Oct 30, 2020
Jkt 253001
amend part 222, subparts A and C, of
Title 36 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 222—RANGE MANAGEMENT
Subpart A—Grazing and Livestock Use
on the National Forest System
1. The authority citation for part 222,
subpart A, continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 92 Stat. 1803, as amended (43
U.S.C. 1901), 85 Stat. 649, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1331–1340); sec. 1, 30 Stat. 35, as
amended (18 U.S.C. 551); sec. 32, 50 Stat.
522, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1011).
2. In § 222.1(b), revise paragraph (b) to
to read as follows:
■
§ 222.1
Authority and definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Definitions.
Allotment means a designated area of
land available for livestock grazing.
Allotment management plan means a
document that specifies the program of
action designated to reach a given set of
objectives. It is prepared in consultation
with the permittee(s) involved and:
(i) Prescribes the manner in and
extent to which livestock operations
will be conducted in order to meet the
multiple-use, sustained yield, economic,
and other needs and objectives as
determined for the lands, involved; and
(ii) Describes the type, location,
ownership, and general specifications
for the range improvements in place or
to be installed and maintained on the
lands to meet the livestock grazing and
other objectives of land management;
and
(iii) Contains such other provisions
relating to livestock grazing and other
objectives as may be prescribed by the
Chief, Forest Service, consistent with
applicable law.
Base property means land and
improvements owned and used by the
permittee for a farm or ranch operation
and specifically designated by him to
qualify for a term grazing permit.
Cancel means action taken to
permanently invalidate a term grazing
permit in whole or in part.
Grazing permit means any document
authorizing livestock to use National
Forest System or other lands under
Forest Service control for the purpose of
livestock production including:
(i) Temporary grazing permits for
grazing livestock temporarily and
without priority for reissuance.
(ii) Term permits for up to 10 years
with priority for renewal at the end of
the term.
Land subject to commercial livestock
grazing means National Forest System
lands within established allotments.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Lands within the National Forest in
the 16 contiguous western States means
lands designated as National Forest
within the boundaries of Arizona,
California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma,
Oregon, South Dakota, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming (National
Grasslands are excluded).
Livestock means animals of any kind
kept or raised for use or pleasure.
Livestock use permit means a permit
issued for not to exceed one year where
the primary use is for other than grazing
livestock.
Modify means to revise the terms and
conditions of an issued permit.
National Forest System lands means
the National Forests, National
Grasslands, Land Utilization Projects,
and other Federal lands for which the
Forest Service has administrative
jurisdiction.
Non-permittee means a person who
owns or controls livestock and does not
have a grazing permit to graze livestock
on National Forest System lands.
Non-willful means an action which is
inadvertent or accidental, and not due
to gross negligence.
On-and-off grazing permits means
permits with specific provisions on
range only part of which is National
Forest System lands or other lands
under Forest Service control.
On-the-ground expenditure means
payment of direct project costs of
implementing an improvement or
development, such as survey and
design, equipment, labor and material
(or contract) costs, and on-the-ground
supervision.
Other lands under Forest Service
control means non-Federal public and
private lands over which the Forest
Service has been given control through
lease, agreement, waiver, or otherwise.
Permittee means any person who has
been issued a grazing permit.
Permitted livestock means livestock
authorized by a written permit.
Person means any individual,
partnership, corporation, association,
organization, or other private entity, but
does not include Government Agencies.
Private land grazing permits means
permits issued to persons who control
grazing lands adjacent to National
Forest System lands and who waive
exclusive grazing use of these lands to
the United States for the full period the
permit is to be issued.
Range betterment means
rehabilitation, protection and
improvement of National Forest System
lands to arrest range deterioration and
improve forage conditions, fish and
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 212 / Monday, November 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
wildlife habitat, watershed protection,
and livestock production.
Range betterment fund means the
fund established by title IV, section
401(b)(1), of the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act of 1976. This
consists of 50 percent of all monies
received by the United States as fees for
grazing livestock on the National Forests
in the 16 contiguous western States.
Range Improvement means any
activity or program designed to improve
production of forage and includes
facilities or treatments constructed or
installed for the purpose of improving
the range resource or the management of
livestock and includes the following
types:
(i) Non-structural which are practices
and treatments undertaken to improve
range not involving construction of
improvements.
(ii) Structural which are
improvements requiring construction or
installation undertaken to improve the
range or to facilitate management or to
control distribution and movement of
livestock.
(A) Permanent means range
improvements installed or constructed
and become a part of the land such as:
Dams, ponds, pipelines, wells, fences,
trails, seeding, etc.
(B) Temporary means short-lived or
portable improvements that can be
removed such as: Troughs, pumps and
electric fences, including improvements
at authorized places of habitation such
as line camps.
Suspend means temporary
withholding of a term grazing permit
privilege, in whole or in part.
Term period means the period for
which term permits are issued, the
maximum of which is 10 years.
Transportation livestock means
livestock used as pack and saddle stock
for travel on the National Forest System.
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart C—Grazing Fees
3 The authority citation for part 222,
subpart C, continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 551; 31 U.S.C. 9701;
43 U.S.C. 1751, 1752, 1901; E.O. 12548 (51
FR 5985).
4. In § 222.50, revise paragraph (h) to
read as follows:
■
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 222.50
General Procedures
*
*
*
*
*
(h) The excess and unauthorized
grazing use rate will be determined by
establishing a base value without giving
consideration for those contributions
normally made by the permittee under
terms of the grazing permit. This rate is
charged for unauthorized forage or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:01 Oct 30, 2020
Jkt 253001
forage in excess of authorized use and
is separate from any penalties that may
be assessed for a violation of a
prohibition issued under 36 CFR part
261 or from an administrative permit
action. This rate will apply, but not be
limited to the following circumstances:
Excess number of livestock grazed;
livestock grazed outside the permitted
grazing season; livestock grazed in areas
not authorized under a grazing permit
and a bill for collection; or livestock
grazed without a permit. The authorized
officer may approve nonmonetary
settlement for excess or unauthorized
grazing use only when all of the
following conditions are satisfied:
(1) The excess or unauthorized use
was non-willful on behalf of the
permittee or non-permittee;
(2) The forage consumed by the excess
or unauthorized use is not significant;
(3) National Forest System lands have
not been damaged significantly by the
excess or unauthorized use; and
(4) Nonmonetary settlement is in the
interest of the United States.
*
*
*
*
*
Angela Coleman,
Acting Associate Chief, USDA Forest Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–24164 Filed 10–30–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 152
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0701; FRL–10009–24]
RIN 2070–AK56
Pesticides; Proposal To Add Chitosan
to the List of Active Ingredients
Permitted in Exempted Minimum Risk
Pesticide Products
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to add the
substance commonly referred to as
chitosan (also known by its chemical
name: poly-D-glucosamine) (CAS Reg.
No. 9012–76–4) to the list of active
ingredients allowed in minimum risk
pesticide products exempt from
registration and other requirements of
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Tidal Vision
Products, LLC submitted a petition to
EPA requesting that chitosan be added
to both the lists of active and inert
ingredients allowed in exempted
minimum risk pesticide products. At
this time, EPA is deferring a decision on
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69307
whether to add chitosan to the list of
allowable inert ingredients.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 4, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by the docket identification
(ID) number EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0701,
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments. Do not submit electronically
any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
Please note that due to the public
health emergency the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room
was closed to public visitors on March
31, 2020. Our EPA/DC staff will
continue to provide customer service
via email, phone, and webform. For
further information on EPA/DC services,
docket contact information and the
current status of the EPA/DC and
Reading Room, please visit https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anne Overstreet, Deputy Director,
Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention
Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; main
telephone number: (703) 305–7090;
email address: BPPDFRNotices@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you manufacture,
distribute, sell, or use minimum risk
pesticide products. Minimum risk
pesticide products are exempt from
registration and other FIFRA
requirements and are described in 40
CFR 152.25(f). The following list of
North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Pesticide and other agricultural
chemical manufacturers (NAICS codes
325320 and 325311), as well as other
manufacturers in similar industries such
as animal feed (NAICS code 311119),
cosmetics (NAICS code 325620), and
E:\FR\FM\02NOP1.SGM
02NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 212 (Monday, November 2, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69303-69307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24164]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 222
RIN 0596-AD45
Assessing Fees for Excess and Unauthorized Grazing
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Agency),
is
[[Page 69304]]
proposing to amend its existing regulations to provide for nonmonetary
settlement when excess or unauthorized grazing is determined to be non-
willful, a standard consistent with practices of the Bureau of Land
Management, as recommended by the July 2016 Government Accountability
Office (GAO) in its report to the Committee on Natural Resources, House
of Representatives, Unauthorized Grazing, Actions Needed to Improve
Tracking and Deterrence Efforts (GAO-16-559).
DATES: To be ensured consideration, comments must be received in
writing on or before December 2, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments using one of the following methods:
1. Submit comments electronically by following the instructions at
the Federal eRulemaking portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
2. Mail: U. S. Forest Service, Director, Forest Management, Range
Management and Vegetation Ecology, 201 14th Street SW, Suite 3SE,
Washington, DC 20250-1124.
3. Hand Delivery/Courier: U. S. Forest Service, Director, Forest
Management, Range Management and Vegetation Ecology, 201 14th Street
SW, Suite 3SE, Washington, DC 20250-1124.
All comments, including all content, will be placed in the record
and will be available for public inspection and copying. Therefore, the
Agency recommends that commenters remove personal information such as
Social Security Numbers, personal addresses, telephone numbers, and
email addresses included in their comments as such information may
become easily available to the public.
Also, please note that, due to security concerns, postal mail
delivery in Washington, DC may be delayed. Therefore, the Agency
encourages the public to submit comments electronically.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myra Black, Program Manager, Forest
Management, Range Management and Vegetation Ecology, 202-650-7365,
[email protected]. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for
the deaf may call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339 between
8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Forest Service is responsible for managing National Forest
System (NFS) lands that provide forage for domestic livestock grazing.
The Forest Service's authority to regulate livestock grazing comes from
the Organic Administration Act of 1897, which named grazing as an early
use of lands administered by the Forest Service. The Forest Service
managed grazing under its general authorities until 1950, when Congress
enacted the Granger-Thye Act, specifically authorizing the Secretary of
Agriculture to issue grazing permits on NFS lands and other lands
administered by the U.S Department of Agriculture. The Forest Service
permits the occupancy and use of NFS lands by domestic livestock
through Term Grazing Permits pursuant to 36 CFR 222.3. The regulations
at 36 CFR 222.50(a) require the Agency to charge fees ``for all grazing
or livestock use of National Forest System lands, or other lands under
Forest Service control.''
Congress asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to
examine what is known about the frequency and extent of unauthorized
grazing on federal lands, and its effects, as well as review the Bureau
of Land Management's (BLM) and Forest Service's efforts to detect,
deter, and resolve unauthorized grazing. Excess use is when livestock
stray outside of their permitted area and graze in an unauthorized area
or a permittee intentionally overstays the permitted grazing period.
Unauthorized use is when livestock, owned or controlled by a non-
permittee, graze on National Forest System lands. In July 2016, GAO
issued a Report to the Committee on Natural Resources, House of
Representatives, Unauthorized Grazing, Actions Needed to Improve
Tracking and Deterrence Efforts (GAO-16-559). The Report recommended
that the Forest Service amend its regulations on range management (36
CFR part 222) to provide an option for nonmonetary settlement when
unauthorized or excess grazing is non-willful, in addition to the
option of following its existing regulations at 36 CFR 222.50(a) and
(h). The GAO report also recommended that the Forest Service record all
incidents of unauthorized grazing, including those resolved informally.
The Agency will develop direction for implementing the latter
recommendation in the Forest Service Manual and Handbook for Rangeland
Management at a later date.
Need for Proposed Rule
The GAO found that the frequency and extent of unauthorized grazing
on NFS lands is largely unknown because, according to Agency officials,
the Agency handles most incidents informally (e.g., with a telephone
call) and does not document them. The incidents that were recorded
involved formal action taken by the Agency rangeland management program
or law enforcement staff., such as issuance of a Notice of Non-
Compliance and/or a Bill for Collection.
The proposed rule provides the flexibility to resolve incidents
informally without charging unauthorized grazing penalties, while
retaining the option for monetary relief for willful excess or
unauthorized grazing. Informal resolution involves the permittee or
non-permittee removing the livestock following a phone call from or
face-to-face conversation with the authorized officer. The incident
should be noted in the files as non-willful, and the settlement would
be considered nonmonetary as no Bill for Collection would be issued.
Informal resolution, such as a phone call or face-to-face
conversation, is an effective way to resolve non-willful unauthorized
grazing. Amending the Agency's grazing regulations to provide for the
informal resolution and nonmonetary settlement of infractions allows
the Agency to achieve the objective of effectively and efficiently
resolving such incidents, and it effectively addresses one of GAO's
recommendations.
Discussion of Proposed Regulatory Revisions
Section 36 CFR 222.50 of the current grazing regulations describes
the general procedures for charging grazing fees for all livestock
grazing or livestock use of National Forest System lands. Specifically,
section 222.50(h) describes the unauthorized use rate and how it
applies to: excess number of livestock grazing by permittees; livestock
grazed outside the permitted grazing season; or livestock grazed under
an unvalidated permit.
The Forest Service proposes to amend 36 CFR 222 subpart C, to allow
the authorized officer to approve nonmonetary settlement for excess or
unauthorized grazing use when the use is non-willful. The authorized
officer may approve non-monetary settlement for excess or unauthorized
grazing use only when certain conditions set forth in the regulation
are met.
The proposed language is consistent with the language used by BLM
to describe non-willful grazing use. In order to ensure that the
proposed language is clear, the Forest Service proposes to add the
definition of non-permittee and non-willful to the definitions section
found at 36 CFR 222.1(b). In addition, the definitions section is
restated to remove numbering, consistent with the Federal Register
Document Drafting Handbook (August 2018 Edition, Revision 1.1 dated
August
[[Page 69305]]
9, 2019; National Archives and Records Administration).
The proposed language removes reference to the fee being adjusted
by the same indexes used to adjust the regular fee since the first
sentence already describes that the rate is determined by establishing
a base value. In addition, the current rule language refers to an
unvalidated permit, which describes a new permit's status prior to
being validated. Validation occurs by stocking the allotment for the
first time with at least ninety percent of the permitted livestock
during the first season of grazing use under the new permit. The
proposed language removes the reference to an unvalidated permit and
replaces it with the four most common situations in which the Forest
Service encounters excess or unauthorized use. Those examples of excess
and unauthorized use include but are not limited to: excess number of
livestock grazed; livestock grazed outside the permitted grazing
season; livestock grazed in areas not authorized under a grazing permit
and bill for collection; or livestock grazed without a permit.
Regulatory Certifications
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides that the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management
and Budget will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that
this proposed rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13771
This proposed rule has been reviewed in accordance with E.O. 13771
on reducing regulation and controlling regulatory costs and has been
designated as an ``other action'' for purposes of the E.O.
Civil Rights Impact Analysis
A Civil Rights Impact Analysis (CRIA) was conducted in accordance
with USDA Departmental Regulation (DR) 4300-4, to determine if
implementation of the proposed rules (and accompanying rangeland
management directives) would have disproportionate effects or adverse
impacts on employees or program beneficiaries, because of membership in
protected groups identified in USDA DR 4300-4 and DR 5600-002,
particularly women, ethnic and racial minorities, and people with
disabilities. The proposed rules and directives have been analyzed to
ensure compliance with USDA's DR 4300-4, and it is determined that no
adverse impacts on protected groups are expected as a result of
implementation of the proposed rules or directives.
Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
OIRA has designated this proposed rule as not a major rule as defined
by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
National Environmental Policy Act
The proposed rule would allow an authorized officer to determine
that a nonmonetary settlement is appropriate when excess or
unauthorized livestock use was non-willful on behalf of the permittee
or non-permittee and add clarity to what the agency means by the term
non-willful. Agency regulations at 36 CFR 220.6(d)(2) (73 FR 43093)
exclude from documentation in an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement, as well as in a decision memo, rules,
regulations, or policies to establish Service-wide administrative
procedures, program processes, or instructions. The revisions to Sec.
222.50(h) and Sec. 222.1(b) address the penalty for non-willful
actions taken on National Forest System land and provide a definition
for a term used in the revised language. The proposed language removes
reference to an unvalidated permit and replaces it with the four most
common situations that the Forest Service considers excess or
unauthorized use, which is not intended to be an exclusive list. As the
regulation is limited to determination of waiver of excess or
unauthorized use fees (nonmonetary settlement), no ground disturbing
activities are implicated by these revisions. Thus, the Agency has
concluded that the proposed rule 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 Flexibility Act Analysis
The Agency has considered the impacts of the proposed rule on small
entities consistent with the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory
Flexibility Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), and Executive
Orders 13272 (Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency
Rulemaking). This proposed rule would not have any direct effect on
small entities as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The
proposed rule would not impose recordkeeping requirements on small
entities; would not affect their competitive position in relation to
large entities; and would not affect their cash flow, liquidity, or
ability to remain in the market. Additionally, it reduces the
administrative burden on livestock operators by allowing for informal
nonmonetary resolution of a situation that would typically require an
administrative process to resolve. Therefore, the Forest Service has
determined that this proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities pursuant to
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Federalism
The Agency has considered the proposed rule under the requirements
of E.O. 13132, Federalism. The Agency has determined that the proposed
rule conforms with the federalism principles set out in this executive
order; would not impose any compliance costs on the states; and would
not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship
between the Federal government and the states, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Therefore, the Agency has concluded that the proposed rule does not
have Federalism implications.
Consultation With Tribal Governments
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, the Agency is conducting
Tribal consultation for the proposed rule. To ensure tribal
perspectives are heard and fully considered during rulemaking, the
Agency contacted all federally recognized Indian tribes and Alaska
Native corporations in accordance with E.O. 13175, (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments); USDA Departmental
Regulation 1350-02 (Tribal Consultation, Coordination and
Collaboration); and Forest Service Handbook 1509.13, Chapter 10
(Consultation with Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations). The
Agency initiated formal consultation on the rulemaking by contacting
the Indian tribes and Alaska Native Corporations by mail.
No Takings Implications
The Agency has analyzed the proposed rule in accordance with the
principles and criteria in E.O. 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. The
Agency has determined that the proposed rule would not pose the risk of
a taking of private property.
[[Page 69306]]
Energy Effects
The Agency has reviewed the proposed rule under E.O. 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has determined that the proposed rule
would not constitute a significant energy action as defined in E.O.
13211.
Civil Justice Reform
The Forest Service has analyzed the proposed rule in accordance
with the principles and criteria in E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform.
The Agency has not identified any State or local laws or regulations
that conflict with this regulation or that would impede full
implementation of this rule. Nevertheless, if such conflicts were to be
identified, the proposed rule, if implemented, will preempt the State
or local laws or regulations that are found to be in conflict. However,
in that case of a conflict, (1) no retroactive effect will be given to
this final rule; and (2) USDA will not require the use of
administrative proceedings before parties could 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), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the Agency has
assessed the effects of the proposed rule on state, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. The proposed rule would not compel
the expenditure of $100 million or more by any state, local, or Tribal
government or anyone in the private sector. Therefore, a statement
under section 202 of the Act is not required.
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public
The proposed rule does not contain any recordkeeping 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.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 222
Grazing and Livestock Use on the National Forest System, Mediation
of Term Grazing Permit Disputes, Grazing Fees, Management of Wild Free-
Roaming Horses and Burros.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Forest Service
proposes to amend part 222, subparts A and C, of Title 36 of the Code
of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 222--RANGE MANAGEMENT
Subpart A--Grazing and Livestock Use on the National Forest System
0
1. The authority citation for part 222, subpart A, continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 92 Stat. 1803, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1901), 85 Stat.
649, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1331-1340); sec. 1, 30 Stat. 35, as
amended (18 U.S.C. 551); sec. 32, 50 Stat. 522, as amended (7 U.S.C.
1011).
0
2. In Sec. 222.1(b), revise paragraph (b) to to read as follows:
Sec. 222.1 Authority and definitions.
* * * * *
(b) Definitions.
Allotment means a designated area of land available for livestock
grazing.
Allotment management plan means a document that specifies the
program of action designated to reach a given set of objectives. It is
prepared in consultation with the permittee(s) involved and:
(i) Prescribes the manner in and extent to which livestock
operations will be conducted in order to meet the multiple-use,
sustained yield, economic, and other needs and objectives as determined
for the lands, involved; and
(ii) Describes the type, location, ownership, and general
specifications for the range improvements in place or to be installed
and maintained on the lands to meet the livestock grazing and other
objectives of land management; and
(iii) Contains such other provisions relating to livestock grazing
and other objectives as may be prescribed by the Chief, Forest Service,
consistent with applicable law.
Base property means land and improvements owned and used by the
permittee for a farm or ranch operation and specifically designated by
him to qualify for a term grazing permit.
Cancel means action taken to permanently invalidate a term grazing
permit in whole or in part.
Grazing permit means any document authorizing livestock to use
National Forest System or other lands under Forest Service control for
the purpose of livestock production including:
(i) Temporary grazing permits for grazing livestock temporarily and
without priority for reissuance.
(ii) Term permits for up to 10 years with priority for renewal at
the end of the term.
Land subject to commercial livestock grazing means National Forest
System lands within established allotments.
Lands within the National Forest in the 16 contiguous western
States means lands designated as National Forest within the boundaries
of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska,
Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming (National Grasslands are excluded).
Livestock means animals of any kind kept or raised for use or
pleasure.
Livestock use permit means a permit issued for not to exceed one
year where the primary use is for other than grazing livestock.
Modify means to revise the terms and conditions of an issued
permit.
National Forest System lands means the National Forests, National
Grasslands, Land Utilization Projects, and other Federal lands for
which the Forest Service has administrative jurisdiction.
Non-permittee means a person who owns or controls livestock and
does not have a grazing permit to graze livestock on National Forest
System lands.
Non-willful means an action which is inadvertent or accidental, and
not due to gross negligence.
On-and-off grazing permits means permits with specific provisions
on range only part of which is National Forest System lands or other
lands under Forest Service control.
On-the-ground expenditure means payment of direct project costs of
implementing an improvement or development, such as survey and design,
equipment, labor and material (or contract) costs, and on-the-ground
supervision.
Other lands under Forest Service control means non-Federal public
and private lands over which the Forest Service has been given control
through lease, agreement, waiver, or otherwise.
Permittee means any person who has been issued a grazing permit.
Permitted livestock means livestock authorized by a written permit.
Person means any individual, partnership, corporation, association,
organization, or other private entity, but does not include Government
Agencies.
Private land grazing permits means permits issued to persons who
control grazing lands adjacent to National Forest System lands and who
waive exclusive grazing use of these lands to the United States for the
full period the permit is to be issued.
Range betterment means rehabilitation, protection and improvement
of National Forest System lands to arrest range deterioration and
improve forage conditions, fish and
[[Page 69307]]
wildlife habitat, watershed protection, and livestock production.
Range betterment fund means the fund established by title IV,
section 401(b)(1), of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of
1976. This consists of 50 percent of all monies received by the United
States as fees for grazing livestock on the National Forests in the 16
contiguous western States.
Range Improvement means any activity or program designed to improve
production of forage and includes facilities or treatments constructed
or installed for the purpose of improving the range resource or the
management of livestock and includes the following types:
(i) Non-structural which are practices and treatments undertaken to
improve range not involving construction of improvements.
(ii) Structural which are improvements requiring construction or
installation undertaken to improve the range or to facilitate
management or to control distribution and movement of livestock.
(A) Permanent means range improvements installed or constructed and
become a part of the land such as: Dams, ponds, pipelines, wells,
fences, trails, seeding, etc.
(B) Temporary means short-lived or portable improvements that can
be removed such as: Troughs, pumps and electric fences, including
improvements at authorized places of habitation such as line camps.
Suspend means temporary withholding of a term grazing permit
privilege, in whole or in part.
Term period means the period for which term permits are issued, the
maximum of which is 10 years.
Transportation livestock means livestock used as pack and saddle
stock for travel on the National Forest System.
* * * * *
Subpart C--Grazing Fees
0
3 The authority citation for part 222, subpart C, continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 551; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1751, 1752,
1901; E.O. 12548 (51 FR 5985).
0
4. In Sec. 222.50, revise paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 222.50 General Procedures
* * * * *
(h) The excess and unauthorized grazing use rate will be determined
by establishing a base value without giving consideration for those
contributions normally made by the permittee under terms of the grazing
permit. This rate is charged for unauthorized forage or forage in
excess of authorized use and is separate from any penalties that may be
assessed for a violation of a prohibition issued under 36 CFR part 261
or from an administrative permit action. This rate will apply, but not
be limited to the following circumstances: Excess number of livestock
grazed; livestock grazed outside the permitted grazing season;
livestock grazed in areas not authorized under a grazing permit and a
bill for collection; or livestock grazed without a permit. The
authorized officer may approve nonmonetary settlement for excess or
unauthorized grazing use only when all of the following conditions are
satisfied:
(1) The excess or unauthorized use was non-willful on behalf of the
permittee or non-permittee;
(2) The forage consumed by the excess or unauthorized use is not
significant;
(3) National Forest System lands have not been damaged
significantly by the excess or unauthorized use; and
(4) Nonmonetary settlement is in the interest of the United States.
* * * * *
Angela Coleman,
Acting Associate Chief, USDA Forest Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-24164 Filed 10-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411-15-P