From: Subject: FR Doc E7-17827 Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 23:12:03 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/E7-17827.htm X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 FR Doc E7-17827 
[Federal Register: September 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 175)]
[Notices]              =20
[Page 51834-51837]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11se07-78]                        =20

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO 931 1220 PA]

=20
Proposed Supplementary Rule To Establish Application Fees for=20
Commercial, Competitive, and Organized Group Activity and Event Special=20
Recreation Permits

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed Supplementary rule to establish application fees for=20
Special Recreation Permits (SRP) for commercial use, competitive use,=20
and organized group activies and events.

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

SUMMARY: The Colorado State Office of the Bureau of Land Management=20
(BLM) proposes to establish a supplementary rule addressing Special=20
Recreation Permit (SRP) fees. The proposal would establish standard=20
statewide application fees for issuance of a new SRP or the transfer or=20
renewal of an SRP for commercial use, competitive use, or organized=20
group activities and events. These fees would help offset the cost of=20
processing these SRPs, and also allow field offices to keep more=20
revenues for on-the-ground work, including law enforcement, hiring=20
seasonal employees, and site improvements. Currently, there are no=20
statewide application fees. These new fees will not affect cost=20
recovery charges that begin with the first hour when the 50-hour cost=20
recovery threshold is anticipated to be exceeded. The application fees=20
proposed to go into effect on October 1, 2007, are:
     New Special Recreation Permits--$100
     Renewals (re-issuance of expiring/expired permits)--$50
     Transfers--$100
     Annual operating authorizations--No fee charged
    These fees do not apply to SRPs issued to individuals and=20
authorizing use of designated Special Areas.

DATES: You should submit your written comments on the proposed=20
supplementary rule by November 13, 2007. Comments that are received=20
after the close of the comment period or comments delivered to an=20
address other than those listed under ADDRESSES need not be considered=20
or included in the Administrative Record for the final supplementary=20
rule.

ADDRESSES:=20
    (1) You may mail comments on the proposed supplementary rules to=20
Jack Placchi, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, 2850=20
Youngfield, Lakewood, Colorado 80215;

[[Page 51835]]

    (2) You may hand deliver comments to the Bureau of Land Management=20
Colorado State Office, at the same address.
    (3) You may email your comment to jack_placchi@blm.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack Placchi, Outdoor Recreation=20
Planner, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, 2850=20
Youngfield, Lakewood, Colorado 80215 (303) 239-3832.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Procedures for Submitting Comments
II. Background
III. Procedural Matters
IV. Proposed Supplementary Rule for the BLM Colorado SRP Application=20
Fee

I. Procedures for Submitting Comments

    Comments on the proposed supplementary rule should be specific,=20
should be confined to issues pertinent to the proposals, and should=20
explain the reason for any recommended change. Where possible, comments=20
should reference the specific provision of the proposed supplementary=20
rule that is being addressed.
    BLM will have all comments, including names and addresses,=20
available for public review at the Colorado State Office in Lakewood=20
during regular business hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through=20
Friday, except holidays). Before including your address, telephone=20
number, email address, or other personal identifying information in=20
your comment, be advised that your entire comment--including your=20
personal identifying information--may be made publicly available at any=20
time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold from public=20
review your personal identifying information, we cannot guarantee that=20
we will be able to do so.

II . Background

    In general, all commercial use, competitive use, organized group=20
activities, special events, and special area use on BLM public lands=20
require a Special Recreation Permit (SRP). BLM Colorado manages over=20
800 SRPs annually for commercial use, competitive use, and organized=20
group activities and events.
    BLM Colorado is proposing to implement new application fees for the=20
issuance of new SRPs and for the transfer and renewal of existing SRPs.=20
The new administrative fees will be $100 for new permits, $50 for=20
renewal, and $100 for transfers. The average cost to existing permit=20
holders will be $10 per year, as most permits are renewed every five=20
years. This fee does not apply to SRPs issued to individuals for=20
special area use.
    A statewide application fee will make consistent the cost of=20
applying for and processing SRPs for commercial use, competitive use,=20
or organized group activities and events. Currently Colorado offices=20
have been requiring a $90 minimum use fee for new permit applications.=20
If a permit is not issued, some offices return the funds while others=20
keep the fees to offset the costs of evaluation.
    The new fees funds will augment recreation opportunities for the=20
public. Both the public and private outfitters will benefit from the=20
fee through BLM's increased law enforcement capabilities, providing=20
more funds for signing and interpretive education and for a greater BLM=20
staff field presence to control illegal operations on BLM-managed=20
public lands.
    Pursuant to 43 CFR 2932.31(d)(1)-(2) and BLM Manual H-2930-1,=20
Recreation Permit Administration at Ch. 1, III. G. 2f(1),the State=20
Director has the authority to set and adjust fees for SRPs, including=20
application fees.

III. Procedural Matters

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    The proposed supplementary rule establishing SRP application fees=20
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.=20
This proposed supplementary rule will not have an annual effect of $100=20
million or more on the economy. It will not adversely affect in a=20
material way the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the=20
environment, public health or safety, or state, local, or tribal=20
governments or communities. The proposed supplementary rule will not=20
create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action=20
taken or planned by another agency. The proposed rule does not=20
materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user=20
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of their=20
recipients; nor does it raise novel legal or policy issues. It imposes=20
minimal fees for the administration and processing of SRP applications.
    Fees have not been consistently charged for SRP applications in the=20
past. While this proposal represents a change from the past=20
administration policies, it will not be a major change in the context=20
of the Executive Order. The fees have been discussed with the Colorado=20
Outfitters Association. Additional limited consultation has also=20
occurred with current SRP holders. Information concerning the proposed=20
new fees will be available on the BLM Web site, through press releases,=20
and distributed to current SRP holders.

Clarity of the Supplementary Rules

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations=20
that are simple and easy to understand. The BLM invites comments on how=20
to make this proposed supplementary rule easier to understand,=20
including answers to questions such as the following: (1) Are the=20
requirements in the proposed supplementary rules clearly stated? (2)=20
Does the proposed supplementary rule contain technical language or=20
jargon that interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the format of the=20
proposed supplementary rule (grouping and order of sections, use of=20
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Would the=20
supplementary rule be easier to understand if it was divided into more=20
(but shorter) sections? and (5) Is the discussion of the proposed=20
supplementary rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this=20
preamble helpful to your understanding of the proposed supplementary=20
rule? If not, how could this material be more helpful in making the=20
proposed supplementary rule easier to understand?
    Please send any comments you have on the clarity of the=20
supplementary rule to the address specified in the ADDRESSES section.

National Environmental Policy Act

    BLM has found that the proposed supplementary rule is categorically=20
excluded from environmental review under section 102(2)(C) of the=20
National Environmental Policy Act, pursuant to 516 Departmental Manual=20
(DM), Chapter 2, Appendix 1. This provision of the DM excludes from=20
review under NEPA policies, directives, and regulations that are of an=20
administrative, financial, or procedural nature and whose environmental=20
effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural to lend themselves=20
to meaningful analysis and will later be subject to the NEPA process,=20
either collectively or case by case. In addition, the proposed rule=20
does not meet any of the 12 criteria for extraordinary circumstances=20
listed in 516 DM, Chapter 2, Appendix 2. Pursuant to Council on=20
Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and the environmental=20
policies and procedures of the Department of the Interior, the term=20
``categorical exclusions'' means a category of actions which do not=20
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human=20
environment and that have been found to have no such effect in

[[Page 51836]]

procedures adopted by a Federal agency and for which neither an=20
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is=20
required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Congress enacted the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), as=20
amended, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, to ensure that government regulations do not=20
unnecessarily or disproportionately burden small entities. The RFA=20
requires a regulatory flexibility analysis if a rule would have a=20
significant economic impact, either detrimental or beneficial, on a=20
substantial number of small entities. The proposed supplementary rule=20
and fees will have a minimal effect on outfitter guide business=20
entities. The average cost to existing permit holders will be $10 per=20
year, as most permits are renewed every five years.
    To determine an appropriate fee structure, the BLM interviewed BLM=20
SRP managers across Colorado. Those interviewed included recreation=20
permit and license managers of local and regional recreational=20
programs, including Arkansas Headwaters State Recreation Area, Colorado=20
Department of Regulatory Affairs, and Colorado State Parks River=20
Outfitter Licensing Program. The BLM also interviewed the Executive=20
Director of the Colorado Outfitters Association. The proposed fees are=20
a fraction of the cost of comparable application and license fees=20
across the State.
    BLM has determined under the RFA that the proposed supplementary=20
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial=20
number of small entities.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This proposed supplementary rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined=20
at 5 U.S.C. 804(2). It will not result in an annual effect on the=20
economy of $100 million or more, in a major increase in costs or prices=20
for consumers, individual industries, government agencies or regions,=20
or in significant adverse effects on competition, employment,=20
investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United=20
States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. It=20
will merely impose reasonable fees for SRP applications to offset costs=20
for processing permits.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The proposed supplementary rule does not impose an unfunded mandate=20
on state, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the=20
private sector, of more than $100 million per year; nor does the=20
proposed supplementary rule have a significant or unique effect on=20
small governments. Therefore, BLM is not required to prepare a=20
statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates=20
Reform Act at (2 U.S.C. 1532). The proposed rule will impose reasonable=20
fees for SRP applications to offset costs for processing permits. In=20
determining the proposed SRP application fees, the BLM has coordinated=20
with local, state, and Federal agencies.

Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference With=20
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights (Takings)

    The proposed supplementary rule does not have takings implications=20
and is not a government action capable of interfering with=20
constitutionally protected property rights. The proposed supplementary=20
rule would have minimal effect on private lands or property. Therefore,=20
the Department of the Interior has determined that the rule would not=20
cause a taking of private property or require preparation of a takings=20
assessment under this Executive Order.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The proposed supplementary rule would not have a substantial direct=20
effect on the states, on the relationship between the national=20
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and=20
responsibilities among the various levels of government. The proposed=20
supplementary rule would have minimal effect on state or local=20
government. As for the SRP application fee to be imposed, BLM has=20
coordinated with local, state, and Federal agencies, consulted with=20
managers of local and regional recreational programs, including=20
Arkansas Headwaters State Recreation Area, Colorado Department of=20
Regulatory Affairs, and Colorado State Parks River Outfitter Licensing=20
Program, before proposing the new fees for SRPs. Therefore, in=20
accordance with Executive Order 13132, BLM has determined that the=20
proposed supplementary rule does not have sufficient federalism=20
implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform

    Under Executive Order 12988, we have found that the proposed=20
supplementary rule would not unduly burden the judicial system and that=20
it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.

Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal=20
Governments

    In accordance with Executive Order 13175, the BLM has found that=20
the proposed supplementary rule for the BLM Colorado SRP application=20
fee does not include policies that have tribal implications.

Executive Order 13352, Facilitation of Cooperative Conservation

    In accordance with E.O. 13352, BLM has determined that this=20
proposed rule would not impede cooperative conservation; would take=20
appropriate account of and consider the interests of persons with=20
ownership or other legally recognized interests in land or other=20
natural resources; would properly accommodate local participation in=20
the Federal decision-making process; and would enhance the ability of=20
the BLM to see that Colorado BLM programs, projects, and activities are=20
consistent with protecting public health and safety.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The proposed supplementary rule does not contain information=20
collection requirements that the Office of Management and Budget must=20
approve under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et=20
seq.

Author

    The principal author of the proposed supplementary rule is Jack=20
Placchi, Outdoor Recreation Planner, Colorado State Office, Bureau of=20
Land Management.

IV. Special Recreation Permit (SRP) Application Fees--BLM Colorado=20
Proposed Supplementary Rule

    The Colorado State Office, BLM, hereby proposes a supplementary=20
rule to establish application fees for special recreation permits for=20
commercial uses, competitive uses, or organized group activities and=20
events use of BLM lands in Colorado. This supplementary rule is=20
proposed to go into effect on October 1, 2007. The fees schedule will=20
be posted in all Colorado Field and State Offices and on the Internet=20
at http://frwebga=
te.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=3DleavingFR.html&log=3Dlin=
klog&to=3Dhttp://www.co.blm.gov.

    The fees for special recreation permit applications are:
     New Special Recreation Permits--$100.
     Renewals (re-issuance of expiring/expired permits)--$50.
     Transfers--$100.
     Annual operating authorizations--No fee charged.
    These fees do not apply to SRPs issued to individuals and=20
authorizing use of designated Special Areas.

[[Page 51837]]

Authority

    The Colorado State Office, Bureau of Land Management, proposes this=20
supplementary rule under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act=20
(FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. 1740, 43 CFR 2932.31(d)(1)-(2), 8365.1-6, and BLM=20
Manual H-2930-1. Enforcement authority for this supplementary rule on=20
the public lands within Colorado is found in FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1733, and=20
in 43 CFR 8360.0-7.

Penalties

    Under section 303(a) of FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1733(a), and 43 CFR=20
8360.0-7, if you violate this supplementary rule on public lands within=20
the boundaries established in the rule, you may be tried before a=20
United States Magistrate and fined no more than $1,000 or imprisoned=20
for no more than 12 months, or both.

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

BILLING CODE 4310-GG-P