83 FR 8959 - Transporting Bows and Crossbows Across National Park System Units

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 42 (March 2, 2018)

Page Range		8959-8961
FR Document		2018-04247
The National Park Service proposes to allow individuals to carry or possess a bow or crossbow within the National Park System when accessing otherwise inaccessible lands or waters contiguous to a park area when other means of access are otherwise impracticable or impossible.
Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 42 (Friday, March 2, 2018)
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8959-8961]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04247]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 2

[NPS-WASO-24836; PPWOVPADU0/PPMPRLE1Y.Y00000]
RIN 1024-AE44


Transporting Bows and Crossbows Across National Park System Units

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The National Park Service proposes to allow individuals to 
carry or possess a bow or crossbow within the National Park System when 
accessing otherwise inaccessible lands or waters contiguous to a park 
area when other means of access are otherwise impracticable or 
impossible.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule and the notice of determination 
must be received by 11:59 p.m. EST on May 1, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Regulation Identifier 
Number (RIN) 1024-AE44, by either of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail or hand deliver to: NPS Regulations Program Office; 
1849 C Street NW, MS-2472, Washington, DC 20240.
     Instructions: Comments will not be accepted by fax, email, 
or in any way other than those specified above. All submissions 
received must include the words ``National Park Service'' or ``NPS'' 
and must include the docket number or RIN (1024-AE44) for this 
rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
     Docket: For access to the docket to read background 
documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jay Calhoun, NPS Regulations Program,

[[Page 8960]]

1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20240. Phone: (202) 513-7112. Email: 
waso_regulations@nps.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    National Park Service (NPS) regulations at 36 CFR 2.4(b)(3) allow 
bows and crossbows that are not ready for immediate use to be possessed 
by individuals in NPS-administered areas within a mechanical mode of 
conveyance. This provides regulatory relief for transient individuals 
passing through park areas in vehicles and other forms of mechanical 
transport. This proposed rule would extend this relief to individuals 
transporting bows and crossbows on foot or horseback when accessing 
otherwise inaccessible lands or waters contiguous to a park area when 
other means of access are otherwise impracticable or impossible. 
Possessing bows and crossbows in this manner would be subject to 
applicable state laws and would not be allowed if the individual is 
otherwise prohibited by law from possessing a bow or crossbow.
    This rule would recognize and address the difficulties faced by 
some individuals attempting to access private property or other lands 
and waters adjacent to NPS-administered areas. In some cases, the use 
of mechanical transport to access these adjacent lands and waters is 
impracticable. As a result, individuals must traverse NPS areas on foot 
or horseback to reach these lands and waters but under existing 
regulations cannot do so with bows and crossbows without first 
obtaining a permit from the park Superintendent. This rule would remove 
the permit requirement in order to carry or possess bows or crossbows 
for this purpose. This rule would not change the regulations in 36 CFR 
part 2 governing the use of a bow or crossbow in park areas.

Compliance With Other Laws, Executive Orders and Department Policy

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget will review 
all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
has determined that this rule is not significant.
    Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of Executive Order 
12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system 
to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, 
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory 
ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory 
approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of 
choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, 
and consistent with regulatory objectives. Executive Order 13563 
emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available 
science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public 
participation and an open exchange of ideas. The NPS has developed this 
rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs (Executive Order 
13771)

    This rule is an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action because, once 
finalized, it would impose less than zero costs by removing a 
regulatory permit requirement that imposes unnecessary costs upon 
individuals seeking to safely access remote lands and waters. The costs 
associated with the requirement to obtain a permit before transporting 
a bow or crossbow across NPS lands or waters outside of a mechanical 
conveyance would be eliminated.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This rule 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.). This certification is based on information 
contained in the economic analyses found in the report entitled 
``Benefit-Cost and Regulatory Flexibility Analyses: Cost-Benefit and 
Regulatory Flexibility Analyses:
    Transporting Bows and Crossbows Across National Park System Units'' 
that is available to the public upon request.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    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

    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. It addresses public 
use of national park lands, and imposes no requirements on other 
agencies or governments. 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)

    This rule does not effect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have takings implications under Executive Order 12630. A takings 
implication assessment is not required.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, the rule 
does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the 
preparation of a Federalism summary impact statement. This proposed 
rule only affects use of federally-administered lands and waters. It 
has no outside effects on other areas. A Federalism summary impact 
statement is not required.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

    This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988. 
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 and Department 
Policy)

    The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its 
government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes through a 
commitment to consultation with Indian Tribes and recognition of their 
right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. The NPS has evaluated 
this rule under the criteria in Executive Order 13175 and under the 
Department's tribal consultation policy and has determined that tribal 
consultation is not required because the rule will have no substantial 
direct effect on federally recognized Indian tribes.

[[Page 8961]]

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and 
a submission to the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act is not required. The NPS may not conduct or sponsor and 
you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless 
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act

    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 (NEPA) is not 
required because the NPS intends to categorically exclude this rule 
under 516 DM 12.5(A)(10). This rule will modify existing NPS 
regulations in a manner that does not increase public use to the extent 
of compromising the nature and character of the National Park System or 
causing physical damage to it. The rule will not conflict with adjacent 
ownerships or lands 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 NEPA.

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 in not 
required.

Clarity of This Rule

    The NPS is required by Executive Orders 12866 (section 1(b)(12)) 
and 12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule the NPS publishes must:
    (a) Be logically organized;
    (b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (c) Use common, everyday words and 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 the NPS has not met these requirements, send the 
NPS comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To 
better help the NPS revise the rule, your comments should be as 
specific as possible. For example, you should identify the numbers of 
the sections or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or 
sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables 
would be useful, etc.

Public Participation

    It is the policy of the Department of the Interior, whenever 
practicable, to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the 
rulemaking process. Accordingly, interested persons may submit written 
comments regarding this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in 
the ADDRESSES section of this document.

Public Availability of Comments

    Before including your address, phone number, email 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 the NPS in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, the NPS cannot guarantee that it will 
be able to do so.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7

    National parks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service 
proposes to amend 36 CFR part 2 as set forth below:

PART 2--RESOURCE PROTECTION, PUBLIC USE AND RECREATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, 320102.

0
2. Amend Sec.  2.4 as follows:
0
a. Redesignate paragraph (b)(3) as paragraph (b)(3)(i).
0
b. Add paragraph (b)(3)(ii).
0
c. Revise paragraph (e) introductory text.
    The addition and revision to read as follows:


Sec.  2.4  Weapons, traps and nets.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) An individual may carry or possess an unloaded bow or crossbow 
when accessing otherwise inaccessible lands or waters contiguous to a 
park area when other means of access are otherwise impracticable or 
impossible if:
    (A) The individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from 
possessing the bow or crossbow; and
    (B) The possession of the bow or crossbow is in compliance with the 
law of the State in which the park area is located.
    (e) The superintendent may issue a permit to carry or possess a 
weapon that is not otherwise authorized, a trap, or a net under the 
following circumstances:
* * * * *

Jason Larrabee,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, 
Exercising the Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and 
Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2018-04247 Filed 3-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4310-EJ-P
8960 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2018 / Proposed Rules

1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC and to use the best, most innovative, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
20240. Phone: (202) 513–7112. Email: and least burdensome tools for This rule does not impose an
waso_regulations@nps.gov. achieving regulatory ends. The unfunded mandate on State, local, or
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: executive order directs agencies to tribal governments or the private sector
consider regulatory approaches that of more than $100 million per year. The
Background reduce burdens and maintain flexibility rule does not have a significant or
National Park Service (NPS) and freedom of choice for the public unique effect on State, local or tribal
regulations at 36 CFR 2.4(b)(3) allow where these approaches are relevant, governments or the private sector. It
bows and crossbows that are not ready feasible, and consistent with regulatory addresses public use of national park
for immediate use to be possessed by objectives. Executive Order 13563 lands, and imposes no requirements on
individuals in NPS-administered areas emphasizes further that regulations other agencies or governments. A
within a mechanical mode of must be based on the best available statement containing the information
conveyance. This provides regulatory science and that the rulemaking process required by the Unfunded Mandates
relief for transient individuals passing must allow for public participation and Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not
through park areas in vehicles and other an open exchange of ideas. The NPS has required.
forms of mechanical transport. This developed this rule in a manner
proposed rule would extend this relief consistent with these requirements. Takings (Executive Order 12630)
to individuals transporting bows and This rule does not effect a taking of
Reducing Regulation and Controlling
crossbows on foot or horseback when private property or otherwise have
Regulatory Costs (Executive Order
accessing otherwise inaccessible lands takings implications under Executive
13771)
or waters contiguous to a park area Order 12630. A takings implication
when other means of access are This rule is an E.O. 13771 assessment is not required.
otherwise impracticable or impossible. deregulatory action because, once Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
Possessing bows and crossbows in this finalized, it would impose less than zero
manner would be subject to applicable costs by removing a regulatory permit Under the criteria in section 1 of
state laws and would not be allowed if requirement that imposes unnecessary Executive Order 13132, the rule does
the individual is otherwise prohibited costs upon individuals seeking to safely not have sufficient federalism
by law from possessing a bow or access remote lands and waters. The implications to warrant the preparation
crossbow. costs associated with the requirement to of a Federalism summary impact
This rule would recognize and obtain a permit before transporting a statement. This proposed rule only
address the difficulties faced by some bow or crossbow across NPS lands or affects use of federally-administered
individuals attempting to access private waters outside of a mechanical lands and waters. It has no outside
property or other lands and waters conveyance would be eliminated. effects on other areas. A Federalism
adjacent to NPS-administered areas. In summary impact statement is not
some cases, the use of mechanical Regulatory Flexibility Act required.
transport to access these adjacent lands This rule will not have a significant Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order
and waters is impracticable. As a result, economic effect on a substantial number 12988)
individuals must traverse NPS areas on of small entities under the Regulatory
foot or horseback to reach these lands This rule complies with the
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). requirements of Executive Order 12988.
and waters but under existing This certification is based on
regulations cannot do so with bows and This rule:
information contained in the economic (a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a)
crossbows without first obtaining a analyses found in the report entitled requiring that all regulations be
permit from the park Superintendent. ‘‘Benefit-Cost and Regulatory Flexibility reviewed to eliminate errors and
This rule would remove the permit Analyses: Cost-Benefit and Regulatory ambiguity and be written to minimize
requirement in order to carry or possess Flexibility Analyses: litigation; and
bows or crossbows for this purpose. (b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2)
Transporting Bows and Crossbows
This rule would not change the requiring that all regulations be written
Across National Park System Units’’ that
regulations in 36 CFR part 2 governing in clear language and contain clear legal
is available to the public upon request.
the use of a bow or crossbow in park standards.
areas. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act Consultation With Indian Tribes
Compliance With Other Laws, (Executive Order 13175 and
Executive Orders and Department This rule is not a major rule under 5 Department Policy)
Policy U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. The Department of the Interior strives
Regulatory Planning and Review to strengthen its government-to-
(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) This rule:
government relationship with Indian
(a) Does not have an annual effect on Tribes through a commitment to
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the economy of $100 million or more. consultation with Indian Tribes and
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs in the Office of Management and (b) Will not cause a major increase in recognition of their right to self-
Budget will review all significant rules. costs or prices for consumers, governance and tribal sovereignty. The
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

The Office of Information and individual industries, Federal, State, or NPS has evaluated this rule under the
Regulatory Affairs has determined that local government agencies, or criteria in Executive Order 13175 and
this rule is not significant. geographic regions. under the Department’s tribal
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the (c) Does not have significant adverse consultation policy and has determined
principles of Executive Order 12866 effects on competition, employment, that tribal consultation is not required
while calling for improvements in the investment, productivity, innovation, or because the rule will have no
nation’s regulatory system to promote the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to substantial direct effect on federally
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, compete with foreign-based enterprises. recognized Indian tribes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:47 Mar 01, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02MRP1.SGM 02MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2018 / Proposed Rules 8961

Paperwork Reduction Act sentences are too long, the sections (e) The superintendent may issue a
This rule does not contain where you feel lists or tables would be permit to carry or possess a weapon that
information collection requirements, useful, etc. is not otherwise authorized, a trap, or a
and a submission to the Office of net under the following circumstances:
Public Participation
Management and Budget under the * * * * *
It is the policy of the Department of
Paperwork Reduction Act is not Jason Larrabee,
the Interior, whenever practicable, to
required. The NPS may not conduct or
afford the public an opportunity to Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish
sponsor and you are not required to and Wildlife and Parks, Exercising the
participate in the rulemaking process.
respond to a collection of information Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish
Accordingly, interested persons may
unless it displays a currently valid OMB submit written comments regarding this and Wildlife and Parks.
control number. proposed rule by one of the methods [FR Doc. 2018–04247 Filed 3–1–18; 8:45 am]
National Environmental Policy Act listed in the ADDRESSES section of this BILLING CODE 4310–EJ–P

This rule does not constitute a major document.
Federal action significantly affecting the Public Availability of Comments
quality of the human environment. A ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Before including your address, phone AGENCY
detailed statement under the National number, email address, or other
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 personal identifying information in your 40 CFR Part 52
(NEPA) is not required because the NPS comment, you should be aware that
intends to categorically exclude this [EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0436; FRL–9974–
your entire comment—including your 69—Region 1]
rule under 516 DM 12.5(A)(10). This personal identifying information—may
rule will modify existing NPS be made publicly available at any time.
regulations in a manner that does not Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island;
While you can ask the NPS in your Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection
increase public use to the extent of comment to withhold your personal
compromising the nature and character and Maintenance Program; Reopening
identifying information from public of Comment Period
of the National Park System or causing review, the NPS cannot guarantee that it
physical damage to it. The rule will not will be able to do so. AGENCY: Environmental Protection
conflict with adjacent ownerships or Agency (EPA).
lands uses, or cause a nuisance to List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7 ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the
adjacent owners or occupants. We have National parks, Reporting and public comment period.
also determined that the rule does not recordkeeping requirements.
involve any of the extraordinary In consideration of the foregoing, the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 National Park Service proposes to Agency (EPA) is reopening the public
that would require further analysis amend 36 CFR part 2 as set forth below: comment period for the proposed
under NEPA. approval of Rhode Island’s enhanced
PART 2—RESOURCE PROTECTION, motor vehicle inspection and
Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive maintenance program State
PUBLIC USE AND RECREATION
Order 13211) Implementation Plan (SIP) revision. The
This rule is not a significant energy ■ 1. The authority citation for part 2 proposed rule published in the Federal
action under the definition in Executive continues to read as follows: Register on November 14, 2017. Written
Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, comments on the proposed rule were to
Effects in not required. 320102. be submitted to EPA on or before
Clarity of This Rule ■ 2. Amend § 2.4 as follows: December 14, 2017. The purpose of this
■ a. Redesignate paragraph (b)(3) as document is to reopen the comment
The NPS is required by Executive period for an additional 30 days. This
paragraph (b)(3)(i).
Orders 12866 (section 1(b)(12)) and ■ b. Add paragraph (b)(3)(ii). extension of the comment period is
12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 ■ c. Revise paragraph (e) introductory provided to allow the public additional
(section 1(a)), and by the Presidential text. time to provide comment on the
Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write The addition and revision to read as November 14, 2017 proposed rule.
all rules in plain language. This means follows: DATES: Written comments must be
that each rule the NPS publishes must: received on or before April 2, 2018.
(a) Be logically organized; § 2.4 Weapons, traps and nets.
(b) Use the active voice to address ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
* * * * *
readers directly; (b) * * * identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
(c) Use common, everyday words and (3) * * * OAR–2009–0436 at www.regulations.
clear language rather than jargon; (ii) An individual may carry or gov, or via email to garcia.ariel@
(d) Be divided into short sections and possess an unloaded bow or crossbow epa.gov. For comments submitted at
sentences; and when accessing otherwise inaccessible Regulations.gov, follow the online
(e) Use lists and tables wherever lands or waters contiguous to a park instructions for submitting comments.
possible. area when other means of access are Once submitted, comments cannot be
If you feel that the NPS has not met otherwise impracticable or impossible edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

these requirements, send the NPS if: For either manner of submission, the
comments by one of the methods listed (A) The individual is not otherwise EPA may publish any comment received
in the ADDRESSES section. To better help prohibited by law from possessing the to its public docket. Do not submit
the NPS revise the rule, your comments bow or crossbow; and electronically any information you
should be as specific as possible. For (B) The possession of the bow or consider to be Confidential Business
example, you should identify the crossbow is in compliance with the law Information (CBI) or other information
numbers of the sections or paragraphs of the State in which the park area is whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
that you find unclear, which sections or located. Multimedia submissions (audio, video,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:47 Mar 01, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02MRP1.SGM 02MRP1
Document Created: 2018-03-01 23:56:09
Document Modified: 2018-03-01 23:56:09
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Proposed rule.
Dates		Comments on the proposed rule and the notice of determination must be received by 11:59 p.m. EST on May 1, 2018.
Contact		Jay Calhoun, NPS Regulations Program, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20240. Phone: (202) 513-7112. Email: [email protected]
FR Citation		83 FR 8959
RIN Number		1024-AE44
83 FR 8959 - Transporting Bows and Crossbows Across National Park System Units

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORNational Park Service

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 42 (March 2, 2018)

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
