`[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 92808-92816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27555]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

36 CFR Part 261

RIN 0596-AD57


Law Enforcement; Criminal Prohibitions

AGENCY: Forest Service, Agriculture.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (Department) is revising 
the Forest Service (Forest Service or Agency)'s criminal prohibitions 
to enhance consistency of the Forest Service's law enforcement 
practices with those of State and other Federal land management 
agencies. The Department is also streamlining enforcement of the Forest 
Service's criminal prohibitions related to fire and use of vehicles on 
National Forest System roads and National Forest System trails by 
eliminating the requirement to issue an order for enforcement.

DATES: This rule is effective December 26, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gene Smithson, Deputy Director, Law 
Enforcement and Investigations, 703-605-4730 or 
[email protected]. Individuals who use telecommunications 
devices for the hearing impaired may call 711 to reach the 
Telecommunications Relay Service 24 hours a day, every day of the year, 
including holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Need

    This final rule revises certain criminal prohibitions in 36 CFR 
part 261, subpart A, to enhance consistency of the Forest Service's law 
enforcement practices with those of State and other Federal land 
management agencies. In addition, this final rule streamlines 
enforcement of some of the criminal prohibitions found in 36 CFR part 
261, subpart B, which are enforceable only through issuance of an 
order, by moving them to 36 CFR part 261, subpart A, which contains 
criminal prohibitions that are enforceable without issuance of an 
order.
    Forest Service law enforcement personnel continue to encounter a 
significant volume of violations for simple possession of controlled 
substances and drug paraphernalia. Agency law enforcement personnel 
routinely deal with under-age alcohol possession on National Forest 
System (NFS) lands. These violations pose a threat to the safety of 
visitors to NFS lands as well as to Forest Service personnel. This 
final rule enhances the Forest Service's authority to address public 
safety issues by adding prohibitions relating to controlled substances, 
drug paraphernalia, and alcoholic beverages. These new prohibitions 
enable the Forest Service to enforce more effectively violations on NFS 
lands for simple possession of controlled substances, possession of 
alcoholic beverages in violation of State law (for open containers or 
under-age drinking) and furnishing alcoholic beverages to minors. The 
final rule also authorizes the Forest Service to enforce violations for 
the possession of drug paraphernalia if prohibited by State law. These 
changes are intended to align the Forest Service's law enforcement 
practices more closely with those of State and local law enforcement 
agencies.
    Additionally, the final rule updates the prohibitions to enhance 
protection of persons visiting and working on NFS lands from theft of 
personal property and from disorderly conduct by other visitors. The 
final rule enhances enforcement of wildfire prevention prohibitions by 
moving them from 36 CFR part 261, subpart B, which requires issuance of 
an order, to 36 CFR part 261, subpart A, which does not, and by adding 
a prohibition banning exploding targets year-round. The final rule also 
makes other revisions such as updating the prohibitions relating to 
off-road vehicles and updating the penalty for violating the criminal 
prohibitions in 36 CFR part 261 consistent with current statutory law.

Summary of Comments and Responses

Overview

    On October 3, 2023, the Forest Service published a proposed rule in 
the Federal Register (88 FR 68035) proposing to revise the Forest 
Service's criminal prohibitions to enhance consistency of the Agency's 
law enforcement practices with those of State and other Federal land

[[Page 92809]]

management agencies and to streamline enforcement of the Agency's 
criminal prohibitions related to fire and use of vehicles on NFS roads 
and NFS trails by eliminating the requirement to issue an order for 
enforcement.
    The Forest Service received 41 comments during the public comment 
period. Eight were from professional and interest groups, 19 were from 
individuals, 9 were from State or local governmental entities, and 5 
were submitted anonymously. Four commenters supported the proposed 
rule, 11 conditionally supported the proposed rule, and 26 opposed the 
proposed rule. One of the commenters requested a 90-day extension of 
the comment period. Based on the detail in the comments submitted, the 
Forest Service determined that it was not necessary or appropriate to 
extend the comment period for the proposed rule.
    The comments on the proposed rule and the Department's responses 
follow.

Comments Outside the Scope of the Proposed Rule

    Comment: One commenter was concerned about the Forest Service's 
response to requests for law enforcement assistance. One commenter 
believed that a lack of law enforcement on NFS lands is a concern given 
the increase in crime, wondered why Forest Service law enforcement 
officers were not given the tools to handle violations of existing 
regulations, and expressed concern about the number of dog leash 
regulations. Another commenter recommended removing any penalties for 
those who protest commercial activities on NFS lands. Some commenters 
were concerned that the Federal courts do not have a juvenile justice 
system. Multiple commenters requested that the Forest Service increase 
funding for cooperative law enforcement agreements with State and local 
law enforcement agencies. Some commenters wanted a prohibition 
providing for protection for nude recreation. One commenter was 
concerned about recreation fees being charged under the Federal Lands 
Recreation Enhancement Act for areas on NFS lands with a development 
scale of zero. Another commenter was concerned about not using State 
courts for prosecution of prohibitions under the proposed rule.
    Response: These comments are outside the scope of the proposed 
rule, which does not address the Forest Service's response to requests 
for law enforcement assistance, enforcement of existing regulations, 
prohibitions on unleashed dogs, enforcement involving protests, the 
juvenile justice system, the staffing levels of State and local law 
enforcement agencies, funding for cooperative law enforcement 
agreements with State and local law enforcement agencies, prohibitions 
providing for protection for nude recreation, recreation fees charged 
under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, or the venue for 
prosecuting violations of prohibitions under the proposed rule.

General Comments

    Comment: One commenter believed that the proposed rule could be 
beneficial to the safety of visitors to NFS lands if Forest Service law 
enforcement officers were provided sufficient training.
    Response: The Department agrees that training for Forest Service 
law enforcement officers is critical, and training will be provided on 
the final rule. In addition, Forest Service law enforcement officers 
are already familiar with the prohibitions in the final rule and have 
been enforcing several of the prohibitions included in subpart A of the 
proposed rule through orders issued under subpart B of the existing 
rule. The proposed and final rules streamline work and eliminate the 
task of issuing orders for these prohibitions for each Agency 
administrative unit and promote consistent enforcement of these 
prohibitions nationwide.
    Comment: One commenter asserted that the proposed rule would ensure 
uniformity of enforcement.
    Response: The Department agrees that the proposed and final rules 
promote consistency in law enforcement on NFS lands.
    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the proposed rule 
would lead to over-policing, would have a disparate impact on people of 
color, and would lead to pretextual encounters that violate the privacy 
of NFS visitors.
    Response: The final rule is not expected to result in 
disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority or low-income 
populations. Forest Service law enforcement officers are not exempt 
from Federal civil rights and privacy laws and Executive orders, 
including Executive Order 14074, Advancing Effective, Accountable 
Policing and Criminal Justice Practices To Enhance Public Trust and 
Public Safety, and must comply with requirements in the United States 
Constitution regarding search and seizure. In addition, the final rule 
will allow Forest Service law enforcement officers to enforce 
possession of controlled substances on NFS lands under the Forest 
Service's regulations as a Class B misdemeanor, as appropriate, rather 
than under 21 U.S.C. 844(a) as a Class A misdemeanor or felony, which 
carry harsher penalties.
    Comment: One commenter asserted that the proposed rule bypassed 
Congressional review and approval.
    Response: The Forest Service submits all final rules, including 
this final rule, to Congress in accordance with the Congressional 
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.
    Comment: Some commenters expressed concern that the proposed rule 
would adversely affect public safety. For example, one commenter 
believed that assault under State law could be charged as disorderly 
conduct under the proposed rule.
    Response: In the limited circumstances when Forest Service law 
enforcement officers qualify as peace officers under State law, they 
are acting under State law. The proposed and final rules provide for 
Forest Service enforcement of prohibitions, including the prohibition 
on disorderly conduct, as enumerated in those rules, in accordance with 
the Forest Service's statutory authority. The proposed and final rules 
enhance consistency in law enforcement on NFS lands by providing for 
enforcement of certain prohibitions without issuance of an order and 
enhance consistency of the Forest Service's law enforcement practices 
with those of State law enforcement agencies. The proposed and final 
rules promote visitor and employee safety on NFS lands by adding 
prohibitions relating to controlled substances, drug paraphernalia, and 
alcoholic beverages; enhancing protection of persons visiting and 
working on NFS lands from theft of personal property and from 
disorderly conduct by other visitors; and enhancing fire prevention on 
NFS lands.
    Comment: Some commenters were concerned the proposed rule would 
require citizens accused of even a minor offense to go through the 
Central Violations Bureau (CVB) instead of being prosecuted in a United 
States District Court. They believed that the CVB is not the 
appropriate venue for processing minor offenses because it fails to 
require behavioral programming to reduce the offenders' future threat 
to the public, and that the proposed rule would preclude Forest Service 
law enforcement officers from filing citations directly through the 
State court system, which is designed to handle citations for minor 
offenses. Another commenter expressed concern about reduced prosecution 
of violations involving small amounts of a controlled substance.
    Response: The proposed rule does not address use of the CVB, which 
is a national center that provides for

[[Page 92810]]

electronic payment of United States District Court violation notices 
issued for offenses committed on Federal property, including NFS lands. 
The proposed and final rules provide for small amounts of a controlled 
substance to be handled through issuance of a violation notice and 
prosecution before a United States magistrate judge as a Class B 
misdemeanor. Under the Agency's current regulations, violations for 
simple possession of a controlled substance on NFS lands are often not 
prosecuted because they involve small amounts that are insufficient to 
meet guidelines for prosecution under 21 U.S.C. 844(a) before a United 
States District Court judge as a Class A misdemeanor or felony.
    Comment: A commenter believed the best way to ensure law and order 
on Federal land was to work with State and local law enforcement. Other 
commenters asserted that the purposes of the proposed rule could be 
accomplished by contracting with local law enforcement agencies.
    Response: The Forest Service agrees that cooperation with State and 
local law enforcement agencies in the execution of their 
responsibilities related to NFS lands enhances protection of persons 
and property on NFS lands. Under the Cooperative Law Enforcement Act 
(16 U.S.C. 551a), the Forest Service enters into cooperative law 
enforcement agreements with State and local law enforcement agencies, 
typically a county sheriff's office, that fund State and local law 
enforcement where NFS lands and facilities account for increased 
visitor use in their State. The Forest Service continues to seek 
opportunities to expand these efforts.

Authority and Jurisdiction

    Comment: Some commenters expressed concern regarding assimilation 
of State law into the Forest Service's regulations.
    Response: The proposed and final rules are not assimilating State 
law under the Assimilative Crimes Act. The Assimilative Crimes Act (18 
U.S.C. 13) authorizes Federal enforcement of State criminal laws on 
Federal lands where the Federal Government has exclusive or concurrent 
legislative jurisdiction. The United States has exclusive legislative 
jurisdiction when it possesses all the authority of the State and the 
State has not reserved to itself the right to exercise any of the 
authority concurrently with the United States, with limited exceptions. 
The United States has concurrent legislative jurisdiction when the 
State has reserved to itself the right to exercise all the same 
authority concurrently with the United States.
    The United States does not have exclusive legislative jurisdiction 
over any NFS lands. The United States generally has proprietary 
jurisdiction, rather than concurrent legislative jurisdiction, over NFS 
lands in the western States, which were reserved from the public domain 
without conferring any measure of the States' authority over those 
areas. For NFS lands in the eastern States that were acquired under the 
Weeks Act (16 U.S.C. 515), the United States has concurrent legislative 
jurisdiction only for those NFS lands acquired before February 1, 1940 
(United States v. Raffield, 82 F.3d 611 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 
U.S. 933 (1996)). For NFS lands that were acquired under the Weeks Act 
after February 1, 1940, the United States does not have concurrent 
legislative jurisdiction until it formally accepts it (40 U.S.C. 255).
    However, concurrent legislative jurisdiction, or the lack of it, 
does not affect the Federal Government's broad authority when it has 
proprietary jurisdiction to regulate Federal lands under the Property 
Clause of the United States Constitution (art. IV, sec. 3, cl. 2) and 
applicable Federal statutes and regulations. In incorporating State law 
into its law enforcement regulations in 36 CFR part 261, the Forest 
Service is exercising its authority under the Property Clause and the 
Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S.C. 551), which authorize the 
Agency to promulgate regulations protecting NFS lands and to enforce 
Federal law on NFS lands.
    Consistent with this authority, the Forest Service's existing 
travel management and law enforcement regulations already incorporate 
State law. For example, the Forest Service's travel management 
regulations at 36 CFR 212.5(a)(1) incorporate and apply State traffic 
law to NFS roads, unless State traffic law conflicts with motor vehicle 
use designations established under 36 CFR part 212, subpart B, or 
Forest Service regulations at 36 CFR part 261. The Forest Service's law 
enforcement regulations at 36 CFR 261.8 prohibit certain conduct 
affecting fish and wildlife, such as hunting and fishing, to the extent 
State law is violated, and the Forest Service's law enforcement 
regulations at 36 CFR 261.15 prohibit operating any vehicle off NFS, 
State, or county roads without a valid license as required by State 
law. Forest Service regulations are Federal law. When the Forest 
Service enforces prohibitions in its regulations that incorporate State 
law, the Forest Service is enforcing Federal law, not State law.
    Comment: One commenter asserted that States would have to consent 
to the Forest Service's exercise of jurisdiction, or would have to cede 
jurisdiction, over the NFS lands in their States for the proposed rule 
to be legally promulgated. Some commenters were concerned the proposed 
rule would violate the United States Constitution and opposed the 
proposed rule based on the Forest Service's lack of jurisdiction to 
promulgate it.
    Response: The Forest Service has jurisdiction over NFS lands and 
does not have to obtain consent from States to exercise that 
jurisdiction or have States cede jurisdiction to the Forest Service for 
the proposed rule to be legally promulgated. The Forest Service has 
broad authority to regulate NFS lands under the Property Clause of the 
United States Constitution and the Organic Administration Act of 1897, 
which authorizes the Agency to promulgate regulations protecting NFS 
lands and to enforce Federal law on NFS lands. (U.S. Constitution., 
Art. IV, Sec. 3, cl. 2.)
    The delegation of this Congressional authority to the Secretary of 
Agriculture to regulate use and occupancy of NFS lands has been 
recognized for over one hundred years. See Light v. United States, 220 
U.S. 523 (1911); United States v. Grimaud, 220 U.S. 506 (1911). The 
authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate regulations 
protecting NFS lands is set forth in the Organic Administration Act of 
1897 (16 U.S.C. 551), which authorizes regulations that regulate the 
occupancy and use of the national forests and preserve them from 
destruction; states that violation of those regulations shall be 
punished by a fine or imprisonment or both; and provides that any 
person charged with a violation of those regulations may be tried and 
sentenced by any United States magistrate judge specially designated 
for that purpose by the court appointing that United States magistrate 
judge, in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as 
provided for in 18 U.S.C. 3401(b)-(e). The Forest Service's law 
enforcement regulations implementing this authority are codified at 36 
CFR part 261.
    Comment: One commenter believed the proposed rule was a direct 
attempt to bypass State law enforcement. Some commenters were concerned 
the proposed rule would usurp State statutory authority.
    Response: The proposed and final rules complement or reinforce, 
rather than bypass or usurp, State law enforcement authority. The 
Organic

[[Page 92811]]

Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S.C. 480) provides that the States do 
not lose civil or criminal jurisdiction over their citizens on NFS 
lands and may enforce State civil and criminal law on NFS lands within 
the boundaries of their States. Consistent with that principle, the 
Forest Service commonly enters into cooperative law enforcement 
agreements with State and local law enforcement agencies that fund 
State and local law enforcement where NFS lands and facilities account 
for increased visitor use in their State. Further, the proposed and 
final rules reinforce State law to the extent they incorporate it, as 
with the new prohibitions that prohibit knowingly or intentionally 
possessing drug paraphernalia in violation of State law, possessing an 
alcoholic beverage in violation of State law, and providing an 
alcoholic beverage to a minor in violation of State law.
    Comment: One commenter believed the proposed rule would establish a 
Federal enclave on all NFS lands in violation of the United States 
Constitution (art. 1, sec. 8, cl. 17); 40 U.S.C. 255 and 3112; 50 
U.S.C. 175; and the Assimilative Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. 13).
    Response: The Assimilative Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. 13) authorizes 
Federal enforcement of State criminal laws on Federal lands where the 
Federal Government has exclusive or concurrent legislative 
jurisdiction. In promulgating the final rule, the Forest Service is not 
establishing a Federal enclave subject to exclusive legislative 
jurisdiction under the Enclave Clause of the United States Constitution 
or accepting concurrent legislative jurisdiction under 40 U.S.C. 255 
and 3112 for purposes of enforcement of State criminal laws on NFS 
lands under the Assimilative Crimes Act. Rather, in promulgating the 
final rule, the Forest Service is exercising its proprietary 
jurisdiction under the Property Clause of the United States 
Constitution and the Organic Administration Act of 1897.
    The Enclave Clause of the United States Constitution provides that 
Congress has exclusive legislation over the District of Columbia and 
over all parcels of land purchased by the Federal Government with the 
consent of a State's legislature for the construction of forts, 
magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needed buildings (U.S. 
Constitution. Art. 1, Sec. 8, cl. 17).
    A Federal enclave is a parcel of land over which the United States 
has exclusive legislative jurisdiction. The United States has exclusive 
legislative jurisdiction when it possesses all the authority of the 
State, and the State has not reserved to itself the right to exercise 
any of the authority concurrently with the United States, with limited 
exceptions. The United States has concurrent legislative jurisdiction 
when the State has reserved to itself the right to exercise all the 
same authority concurrently with the United States. Title 40 of the 
United States Code, sections 255 and 3112, provide that the United 
States does not have to, but may, accept exclusive or concurrent 
legislative jurisdiction of the land it acquires from the State where 
the land is located (40 U.S.C. 255 and 3112).
    The United States does not have exclusive legislative jurisdiction, 
and generally does not have concurrent legislative jurisdiction, over 
NFS lands. The United States generally has proprietary jurisdiction 
over NFS lands in the western States, which were reserved from the 
public domain without conferring any measure of the States' authority 
over those areas. For NFS lands in the eastern States that were 
acquired under the Weeks Act (16 U.S.C. 515), the United States has 
concurrent legislative jurisdiction only for those NFS lands acquired 
before February 1, 1940 (United States v. Raffield, 82 F.3d 611 (4th 
Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 933 (1996)). For NFS lands that were 
acquired under the Weeks Act after February 1, 1940, the United States 
does not have concurrent legislative jurisdiction until it formally 
accepts it (40 U.S.C. 255 and 3112).
    However, concurrent legislative jurisdiction, or the lack of it, 
does not affect the Forest Service's broad authority under its 
proprietary jurisdiction to regulate NFS lands under the Property 
Clause of the United States Constitution (art. IV, sec. 3, cl. 2) and 
applicable Federal statutes and regulations. As stated in Kleppe v. New 
Mexico, 426 U.S. 529, 543 (1976) (citations omitted):

    Absent consent or cession, a State undoubtedly retains 
jurisdiction over federal lands within its territory, but Congress 
equally surely retains the power to enact legislation respecting 
those lands pursuant to the Property Clause.

    The Property Clause gives Congress the power to promulgate all 
needed regulations regarding Federal property. Congress has delegated 
this authority to the Secretary of Agriculture in the Organic 
Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S.C. 551). The Forest Service's law 
enforcement regulations implementing this authority in the Property 
Clause and the Organic Administration Act of 1897 are codified at 36 
CFR part 261.

Occupancy, Use, and Conduct

    Comment: Some commenters were concerned that public nudity would 
become illegal in most locations on NFS lands (1) as a result of the 
prohibition in the proposed rule on performing an act that is obscene 
or threatening when committed intentionally to cause, or recklessly to 
create a substantial risk of causing, public alarm, nuisance, jeopardy, 
or violence; and (2) as a result of the reference in the preamble to 
the proposed rule to ``indecent exposure'' as an example of such an 
act. These commenters stated that the proposed rule should explicitly 
define ``act that is obscene'' and ``indecent exposure'' and were 
concerned that those terms could be interpreted to apply to social and 
recreational nude activities.
    Response: The proposed and final rules do not revise the existing 
definition for ``publicly nude'' and the existing regulatory 
prohibition on being publicly nude on NFS lands in the Forest Service's 
law enforcement regulations. The Agency's existing law enforcement 
regulations (36 CFR 261.2) define ``publicly nude'' as being in any 
place where a person may be observed by another person and failing to 
cover with a fully opaque garment the rectal area, pubic area, or 
genitals and, in the case of a female person, failing to cover with a 
fully opaque garment both breasts below a point immediately above the 
top of the areola. The definition excludes persons under the age of 10 
years. The Forest Service's existing law enforcement regulations 
authorize the Agency to issue an order under 36 CFR 251.58(j) that 
prohibits being publicly nude in specified areas on NFS lands.
    The Department does not believe it is necessary or appropriate to 
define the phrase, ``act that is obscene,'' in the final rule. To be 
covered by the prohibition on disorderly conduct in Sec.  261.4(b), an 
act that is obscene must be committed intentionally to cause, or 
recklessly to create a substantial risk of causing, public alarm, 
nuisance, jeopardy, or violence. This context clarifies the meaning of 
the phrase, ``act that is obscene,'' and distinguishes it from social 
and recreational nude activities to the extent they are not covered by 
an order prohibiting being publicly nude. The Department also does not 
believe it is necessary or appropriate to define the term, ``indecent 
exposure,'' which is not used in the proposed and final rules and 
merely appears in the preamble to the proposed rule as an example, 
rather than as an element, of an act that is obscene or threatening 
when committed

[[Page 92812]]

intentionally to cause, or recklessly to create a substantial risk of 
causing, public alarm, nuisance, jeopardy, or violence.
    Comment: One commenter was concerned about orders not completing a 
formal process. Another commenter was concerned about the Forest 
Service's compliance with issuing orders in accordance with the John D. 
Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act (Pub. L. 116-
9, Title IV (Sportsmen's Access and Related Matters)) (Dingell Act).
    Response: The Forest Service's existing law enforcement regulations 
at 36 CFR part 261, subpart B, were published for public notice and 
comment in the Federal Register. These regulations authorize the Agency 
to issue orders that impose temporary closures or restrictions only as 
enumerated in 36 CFR part 261, subpart B, and only in specific 
locations, based on site-specific conditions. Consistent with these 
regulations, each order issued by the Forest Service describes the 
specific area, road, or trail to which it applies; specifies the times 
it applies; and states each prohibition it applies from those 
enumerated in 36 CFR part 261, subpart B, and is displayed in such 
locations and in such a manner as to reasonably bring the prohibition 
in the order to the attention of the public.
    As required by the Dingell Act and the Forest Service's 
implementing directive in Forest Service Handbook 5309.11, chapter 30, 
section 34, for temporary or permanent hunting, fishing, or 
recreational shooting orders issued under 36 CFR part 261, subpart B, 
the Forest Service provides advance notice to the public of the intent 
to issue the proposed order for public comment, and provides public 
notice and opportunity to comment on the proposed order, by completing 
the following steps: (1) coordination with the appropriate State Fish 
and Wildlife agency; (2) coordination with affected Indian Tribes, as 
appropriate; (3) publication and other dissemination of an advance 
notice of intent before publication of a notice of opportunity for 
public comment; (4) publication of a notice of opportunity for public 
comment; (5) publication of a response to comments received during the 
comment period; and (6) issuance of the final temporary or permanent 
hunting, fishing, or recreational shooting order.
    Comment: Some commenters opposed the proposed revision to 36 CFR 
261.53 that would allow for issuance of an order restricting use of an 
area, as well as closure of an area in its entirety to all uses, 
without local coordination and opposed the delegation of authority for 
this purpose.
    Response: The proposed and final rules do not change the delegation 
of the Forest Service's authority to issue orders under 36 CFR part 
261, subpart B. The Forest Service's regulations at 36 CFR 261.53 
authorize the Agency to issue orders to protect species, archaeological 
resources, scientific experiments or investigations, public health or 
safety, property, and the privacy of Tribal activities for traditional 
and cultural purposes. The Department believes having the flexibility 
to restrict use of an area, as well as close it entirely, for these 
purposes will allow the Forest Service to address these concerns in a 
more targeted manner. For maximum effectiveness and awareness, the 
Forest Service works closely with local authorities in issuing these 
types of orders.
    Comment: Some commenters opposed traffic enforcement by the Forest 
Service on State and county roads and were concerned the proposed rule 
would broaden traffic enforcement.
    Response: The proposed and final rules do not address traffic 
enforcement on State and county roads. Rather, the proposed and final 
rules address traffic enforcement on NFS roads. An NFS road is defined 
in the Forest Service's regulations to exclude a State or county road. 
An NFS road is defined as a road (1) that is wholly or partly within or 
adjacent to and serving the NFS that the Forest Service determines is 
necessary for the protection, administration, and utilization of the 
NFS and the use and development of its resources; and (2) that is not 
authorized by a legally documented right-of-way held by a State, 
county, or other local public road authority (36 CFR 212.1). The 
proposed and final rules incorporate State traffic law in 36 CFR 
261.12, which applies to NFS roads, so that State traffic law is 
enforceable as Federal traffic law on NFS roads. Specifically, the 
proposed and final rules incorporate two commonly cited violations of 
State traffic law: operating a motor vehicle without a valid license 
and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an alcoholic 
beverage or a controlled substance. The proposed and final rules also 
incorporate a catch-all prohibition that incorporates any other State 
traffic laws so that they are enforceable as Federal traffic law. These 
revisions simplify enforcement of State traffic law on NFS roads and 
enhance consistency in enforcement of State traffic law.
    Comment: Some commenters were concerned that under the proposed 
rule fighting or assault would be charged as the lesser offense of 
disorderly conduct.
    Response: Disorderly conduct is a category of offense, not the 
offense itself, for prohibitions enumerated in 36 CFR 261.4. Since June 
1981, ``engaging in fighting'' has been prohibited as disorderly 
conduct under 36 CFR 261.4(a). The disorderly conduct prohibitions in 
the proposed and final rules add threatening or other violent behavior; 
clarify the content by prohibiting making an utterance or performing an 
act that is made or performed in a manner likely to inflict injury or 
to incite an immediate breach of peace or that is obscene or 
threatening. The proposed and final rules also add a criminal intent 
element that the violator acted with the intent to cause, or recklessly 
to create a substantial risk of causing, public alarm, nuisance, 
jeopardy, or violence. Any violations of prohibitions in 36 CFR part 
261, subpart A, or in an order issued under 36 CFR part 261, subpart B, 
can be written as a mandatory appearance that requires the defendant to 
appear in Federal court, rather than simply paying a collateral fine 
through the CVB. States may also have the authority to enforce these 
types of offenses under applicable State law.
    Comment: Some commenters objected to including personal property 
crimes in the proposed rule. Several commenters did not believe that 
State and local law enforcement agencies were understaffed and 
consequently constrained in their ability to respond promptly to 
personal property crimes.
    Response: Personal property crimes such as theft have become an 
increasing problem on NFS lands. To effectively deal with this criminal 
activity, Forest Service law enforcement officers need appropriate 
tools to enforce Federal law effectively and professionally. This type 
of criminal activity may take place in remote locations in the NFS that 
are difficult to access and may not be routinely patrolled by State and 
local law enforcement agencies due to staffing constraints. By adding a 
prohibition against theft, the proposed and final rules allow Forest 
Service law enforcement officers to assist victims of these type of 
crimes and disrupt this type of criminal activity on NFS lands.
    Comment: Some commenters recommended removing the proposed 
prohibition on leaving personal property unattended for longer than 24 
hours, except in locations where longer periods have been designated, 
on the grounds that the proposed prohibition was unclear. Some 
commenters were concerned about the proposed prohibition because they 
believed that the determination of what constitutes ``abandoned 
property'' was subjective.

[[Page 92813]]

Some commenters suggested a longer timeframe for leaving personal 
property unattended to accommodate certain types of recreational 
activities.
    Response: Forest Service law enforcement personnel have encountered 
a noticeable increase in personal property, such as camping and other 
recreational equipment, being stored on NFS lands. Because the term 
``abandon'' connotes relinquishing property without an intent to 
reclaim possession, the Forest Service needs a better tool to manage 
illegally stored personal property on NFS lands. The proposed rule 
would prohibit leaving personal property unattended for longer than 24 
hours, except in locations where longer periods have been designated. 
Including a specified timeframe for leaving personal property 
unattended is an objective way to establish relinquishment of the 
property without an intent to reclaim it. In the final rule, the 
Department is extending the timeframe for leaving personal property 
unattended from 24 hours to 72 hours to accommodate certain types of 
recreational activities such as hunting, backpacking, and fishing trips 
and to be consistent with the Forest Service's regulations at 36 CFR 
262.12, which establish a 72-hour timeframe for impoundment of 
property.
    Comment: Commenters expressed concern that the proposed revisions 
to 36 CFR 261.10 governing occupancy and use would inappropriately 
expand the Forest Service's law enforcement mission with respect to 
driving under the influence and crimes affecting persons and property.
    Response: The Organic Administration Act of 1897 gives the Forest 
Service broad authority to promulgate regulations governing occupancy 
and use of NFS lands and to criminally enforce violations of those 
regulations (16 U.S.C. 551). The proposed and final rules prohibit 
constructing, placing, or maintaining a sign on NFS lands or facilities 
without an authorization; abandoning personal property on NFS lands; 
possession of alcohol by a minor or possession of an open container in 
a vehicle, where prohibited by State law; and providing an alcoholic 
beverage to a minor in violation of State law. These revisions in the 
proposed and final rules promote the Agency's mission to provide for 
resource protection and address public health and safety on NFS lands 
and complement enforcement of State law by State and local law 
enforcement agencies on NFS lands.
    Comment: Some commenters requested clarification concerning the 
proposed revision prohibiting the construction, placement, or 
maintenance of unauthorized signs on NFS lands or facilities.
    Response: Unauthorized signs inhibit the public from fully 
utilizing NFS lands and can create nuisances and hazards which can 
inhibit appropriate use of NFS resources. Existing Forest Service 
regulations at 36 CFR 261.10(a) prohibit constructing, placing, or 
maintaining certain improvements on NFS lands or facilities without a 
special use authorization, contract, approved plan of operations, or 
other written authorization when such authorization is required. Signs 
are not listed as a type of improvement that is prohibited without a 
written authorization. Accordingly, the proposed and final rules revise 
36 CFR 261.10(a) to prohibit constructing, placing, or maintaining a 
sign on NFS lands or facilities without a written authorization, such 
as a special use authorization, contract, or approved plan of 
operations.

Fireworks and Exploding Targets

    Comment: Multiple commenters believed that fireworks should be 
regulated more on NFS lands, that it was necessary to have a 
prohibition on use of fireworks and exploding targets on NFS lands, and 
that the Forest Service should strive to prevent fires on NFS lands.
    Response: The proposed and final rules enhance fire prevention on 
NFS lands by moving prohibitions relating to fire that are currently 
enforceable only through issuance of an order under 36 CFR part 261, 
subpart B, to the prohibitions in 36 CFR part 261, subpart A, which are 
generally applicable to NFS lands and enforceable without issuance of 
an order. These prohibitions ban possession or use of fireworks or 
other pyrotechnic devices on NFS lands; violation of any State law 
concerning burning or fires or any State law whose purpose is to 
prevent or restrict the spread of fire; and operation or use of any 
internal or external combustion engine without a properly installed and 
maintained spark-arresting device that meets specified requirements. In 
addition, the proposed and final rules enhance fire prevention on NFS 
lands by prohibiting the possession or use of exploding targets on NFS 
lands.

Controlled Substances and Alcoholic Beverages

    Comment: One commenter wondered how proposed prohibitions involving 
controlled substances would be enforced in States where controlled 
substances are legal.
    Response: It is a violation of Federal law for a person knowingly 
or intentionally to possess controlled substances (21 U.S.C. 844(a)). 
Forest Service law enforcement officers enforce 21 U.S.C. 844(a) on NFS 
lands, and in some circumstances off NFS lands, under the National 
Forest System Drug Control Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 559b-559g). 
Violations of 21 U.S.C. 844(a) require referral to the appropriate 
United States Attorney's Office for the filing of a complaint or 
information and prosecution before a United States District Court 
judge. In many instances, violations for simple possession of a 
controlled substance on NFS lands are not prosecuted under 21 U.S.C. 
844(a) because they involve small amounts that are insufficient to meet 
applicable prosecutorial guidelines. The proposed and final rules 
provide an alternative to proceeding under 21 U.S.C. 844(a) by adding a 
prohibition against knowingly or intentionally possessing a controlled 
substance in violation of Federal law. Under this new prohibition, 
possession of small amounts of a controlled substance can be handled 
through issuance of a violation notice by a Forest Service law 
enforcement officer and prosecution before a United States magistrate 
judge as a Class B misdemeanor. Forest Service law enforcement 
personnel can continue to refer cases involving larger amounts of 
controlled substances that meet prosecutorial guidelines to the 
appropriate United States Attorney's Office.
    Comment: Some commenters believed that violations involving 
controlled substances and alcoholic beverages should be prosecuted in 
State court and that the Forest Service should limit the scope of 
revisions to its law enforcement regulations regarding these types of 
violations. Additionally, some commenters believed that the Forest 
Service should use existing State law for enforcement of violations 
involving alcoholic beverages.
    Response: Violations of Federal law on or affecting NFS lands, 
including violations of Federal laws involving controlled substances 
and prohibitions in the Forest Service's law enforcement regulations at 
36 CFR part 261, subpart A, and orders issued under 36 CFR part 261, 
subpart B, are prosecuted in Federal court, not State court (16 U.S.C. 
551). Forest Service law enforcement officers may enforce State law in 
certain circumstances. Under 16 U.S.C. 553, Forest Service law 
enforcement officers may aid in the enforcement of State laws 
pertaining to stock, fires, and fish and game on NFS lands if 
authorized by State officials. Under 16 U.S.C. 559d(5), Forest Service 
law enforcement officers may accept designations of law

[[Page 92814]]

enforcement authority from State and local governmental agencies for 
purposes of cooperating in multi-agency investigations of violations of 
the Controlled Substances Act and other offenses committed in the 
course of or in connection with those violations. Under 16 U.S.C. 
559g(c), Forest Service law enforcement officers may accept 
designations of law enforcement authority from State and local 
governmental agencies for purposes of cooperating with those agencies 
in investigation and enforcement if it is mutually beneficial and the 
Forest Service and the cooperating agency have entered into a 
memorandum of understanding or cooperative agreement. Some State 
statutes authorize peace officers to take limited actions in response 
to violations of State law in certain circumstances. When Forest 
Service law enforcement officers qualify as peace officers under State 
law, they may enforce State law.

Changes to the Proposed Rule

    The Department is extending the timeframe for leaving personal 
property unattended from 24 hours in the proposed rule to 72 hours in 
the final rule to accommodate certain types of recreational activities 
such as hunting, backpacking, and fishing trips and to be consistent 
with the Forest Service's regulations at 36 CFR 262.12, which establish 
a 72-hour timeframe for impoundment of property.

Regulatory Certifications

Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides that the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management 
and Budget will determine whether a regulatory action is significant as 
defined by E.O. 12866 and will review significant regulatory actions. 
OIRA has determined that this final rule is not significant as defined 
by E.O. 12866. E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 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 Department has developed the final rule consistent with E.O. 13563.

Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to subtitle E of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (known as the Congressional Review Act) (5 U.S.C. 
801 et seq.), OIRA has designated this final rule as not a major rule 
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

National Environmental Policy Act

    The final rule streamlines enforcement of criminal prohibitions in 
existing regulations by providing for enforcement without issuance of 
an order and enhances consistency of the Forest Service's law 
enforcement practices with those of State and other Federal land 
management agencies. Agency regulations at 36 CFR 220.6(d)(2) exclude 
from documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental 
impact statement ``rules, regulations, or policies to establish 
service-wide administrative procedures, program processes, or 
instructions.'' The Department has concluded that this final 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 Department has considered the final rule under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 602 et seq. The final rule streamlines 
enforcement of criminal prohibitions in existing regulations by 
providing for enforcement without issuance of an order and enhances 
consistency of the Forest Service's law enforcement practices with 
those of State and other Federal land management agencies. The final 
rule will not have economic effects on small entities as defined by the 
RFA. Therefore, the Department has determined that this final rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities as defined by the RFA.

Federalism

    The Department has considered the final rule under the requirements 
of E.O. 13132, Federalism. The Department has determined that the final 
rule conforms with the federalism principles set out in this E.O.; will 
not impose any compliance costs on the States; and will 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 Department has concluded that the final rule does not have 
federalism implications.

Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, requires Federal agencies to consult and coordinate with 
Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies that have Tribal 
implications, including regulations, legislative comments or proposed 
legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have 
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the 
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian Tribes. The final rule streamlines enforcement of 
criminal prohibitions in existing regulations by providing for 
enforcement without issuance of an order and enhances consistency of 
the Forest Service's law enforcement practices with those of State and 
other Federal land management agencies. The Department has reviewed 
this final rule in accordance with the requirements of E.O. 13175 and 
has determined that this final rule will not have substantial direct 
effects on Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. 
Therefore, consultation and coordination with Indian Tribal governments 
is not required for this final rule.

Environmental Justice

    The Department has considered the final rule under the requirements 
of E.O. 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in 
Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, and E.O. 14096, 
Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to Environmental Justice for All. 
The Department has determined that the final rule is not expected to 
result in disproportionate and adverse impacts on communities with 
environmental justice concerns or the exclusion of communities with 
environmental justice concerns from meaningful involvement in 
decisionmaking.

Family Policymaking Assessment

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277), requires Federal agencies to issue a 
Family Policymaking Assessment for a rule that may affect family 
wellbeing. The final rule will have no impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, the Department 
has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking 
Assessment for the final rule.

[[Page 92815]]

Takings Implications

    The Department has analyzed the final rule in accordance with the 
principles and criteria in E.O. 12630, Governmental Actions and 
Interference with Constitutionally Protect Property Rights. The 
Department has determined that the final rule will not pose the risk of 
a taking of private property.

Energy Effects

    The Department has reviewed the final rule under E.O. 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. The Department has determined that the final rule 
will not constitute a significant energy action as defined in E.O. 
13211.

Civil Justice Reform

    The Department has analyzed the final rule in accordance with the 
principles and criteria in E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Upon 
publication of the final rule, (1) all State and local laws and 
regulations that conflict with the final rule or that impede its full 
implementation will be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be 
given to this final rule; and (3) it will not require administrative 
proceedings before parties may 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), the Department has assessed the effects of the final 
rule on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. 
The final rule will not compel the expenditure of $100 million or more, 
adjusted annually for inflation, in any 1 year by State, local, and 
Tribal governments in the aggregate or by the private sector. 
Therefore, a statement under section 202 of the Act is not required.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The final 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 261

    Law enforcement, National forests.

    Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, the 
Department is amending chapter II of title 36 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 261--PROHIBITIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 261 continues to read:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1011(f); 16 U.S.C. 460l-6d, 472, 551, 
620(f), 1133(c)-(d)(1), 1246(i).


0
2. Revise Sec.  261.1b to read as follows:


Sec.  261.1b  Penalty.

    Unless otherwise provided by law, the punishment for violation of 
any prohibition in or order issued under this part shall be 
imprisonment of not more than six months or a fine in accordance with 
the applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571 or both.

0
3. Amend Sec.  261.2 by:
0
a. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Alcoholic beverage'' 
and ``Controlled substance'';
0
b. Revising the definition for ``Developed recreation site''; and
0
c. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Exploding target'', 
``Firework'', ``Pyrotechnic device'', and ``Recreation site''.
    The additions and revision read as follows:


Sec.  261.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Alcoholic beverage means alcoholic beverage as defined by State 
law.
* * * * *
    Controlled substance means a drug or other substance, its immediate 
precursor included in schedules I, II, III, IV, or V of section 202 of 
the Controlled Substance Act (21 U.S.C. 812), or a drug or other 
substance added to these schedules under the terms of the Act.
* * * * *
    Developed recreation site has the same meaning as in chapter 50 of 
Forest Service Handbook 2309.13.
* * * * *
    Exploding target means a binary explosive consisting of two 
separate components (usually an oxidizer like ammonium nitrate and a 
fuel such as aluminum or another metal) that is designed to explode 
when struck by a bullet.
* * * * *
    Firework has the same meaning as in 27 CFR 555.11 or a successor 
regulation.
* * * * *
    Pyrotechnic device has the same meaning as the term ``articles 
pyrotechnic'' in 27 CFR 555.11 or a successor regulation.
* * * * *
    Recreation site has the same meaning as in chapter 50 of Forest 
Service Handbook 2309.13.
* * * * *

0
4. Revise Sec.  261.4 to read as follows:


Sec.  261.4  Disorderly conduct.

    The following are prohibited when committed intentionally to cause, 
or recklessly to create a substantial risk of causing, public alarm, 
nuisance, jeopardy, or violence:
    (a) Engaging in fighting or any threatening or other violent 
behavior.
    (b) Making an utterance or performing an act that is obscene or 
threatening or that is made or performed in a manner that is likely to 
inflict injury or incite an immediate breach of peace.
    (c) Making noise that is unreasonable considering the nature and 
purpose of the conduct, location, and time.

0
5. Amend Sec.  261.5 by adding paragraphs (h) through (j) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  261.5  Fire.

* * * * *
    (h) Possessing or using an exploding target or any kind of firework 
or other pyrotechnic device.
    (i) Violating any State law concerning burning or fires or any 
State law that is for the purpose of preventing or restricting the 
spread of fire.
    (j) Operating or using any internal or external combustion engine 
without a spark arresting device that is properly installed, 
maintained, and in effective working order in accordance with USDA 
Forest Service Standard 5100-1.

0
6. Amend Sec.  261.9 by adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:


Sec.  261.9  Property.

* * * * *
    (j) Damaging or removing without authorization any personal 
property that belongs to another person.

0
7. Amend Sec.  261.10 by revising paragraphs (a), (e), (o), and (p) and 
adding paragraphs (q) through (s) to read as follows:


Sec.  261.10  Occupancy and use.

* * * * *
    (a) Constructing, placing, or maintaining any kind of road, trail, 
structure, fence, enclosure, communications equipment, sign, or other 
improvement on National Forest System lands or facilities or making a 
significant surface disturbance on National Forest System lands without 
a special use authorization, contract, approved plan of operations, or 
other written authorization when that written authorization is 
required.
* * * * *
    (e) Leaving personal property unattended for longer than 72 hours, 
except in locations where longer periods have been designated.
* * * * *

[[Page 92816]]

    (o) Use or occupancy of National Forest System lands or facilities 
without a special use authorization, contract, approved plan of 
operations, or other written authorization when that written 
authorization is required.
    (p) Knowingly or intentionally possessing any controlled substance 
in violation of Federal law.
    (q) Knowingly or intentionally possessing any drug paraphernalia in 
violation of State law.
    (r) Possessing any alcoholic beverage in violation of State law.
    (s) Providing any alcoholic beverage to a minor in violation of 
State law.

0
8. Amend Sec.  261.12 by adding paragraphs (e) through (i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  261.12  National Forest System roads and trails.

* * * * *
    (e) Operating a motor vehicle without a valid license as required 
by State law.
    (f) Operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an 
alcoholic beverage or a controlled substance in violation of State law.
    (g) Operating a motor vehicle in violation of any State law other 
than those described in paragraph (e) or (f) of this section.
    (h) Operating a vehicle or motor vehicle carelessly, recklessly, or 
in a manner or at a speed that would endanger or be likely to endanger 
any person or property.
    (i) Operating a motor vehicle in violation of a posted sign or 
traffic control device.

0
9. Amend Sec.  261.15 by revising paragraphs (e) and (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  261.15  Use of vehicles off roads.

* * * * *
    (e) While under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or a 
controlled substance in violation of State law.
* * * * *
    (g) Carelessly, recklessly, or in a manner or at a speed that 
endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property.
* * * * *

0
10. Amend Sec.  261.50 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  261.50  Orders.

    (a) The Chief, each Regional Forester, each Experiment Station 
Director, the head of each administrative unit, their deputies, or 
persons acting in these positions may issue orders, consistent with 
their delegations of authority, that close or restrict the use of 
described areas by applying the prohibitions authorized in this 
subpart, individually or in combination.
    (b) The Chief, each Regional Forester, each Experiment Station 
Director, the head of each administrative unit, their deputies, or 
persons acting in these positions may issue orders, consistent with 
their delegations of authority, that close or restrict the use of any 
National Forest System road or National Forest System trail.
* * * * *

0
11. Revise Sec.  261.52 to read as follows:


Sec.  261.52  Fire.

    When provided by an order, the following are prohibited:
    (a) Building, maintaining, attending, or using a fire, campfire, or 
stove fire.
    (b) Using an explosive.
    (c) Smoking.
    (d) Smoking, except within an enclosed vehicle or building, at a 
recreation site, or while stopped in an area at least 3 feet in 
diameter that is barren or cleared of all flammable material.
    (e) Entering or being in an area.
    (f) Entering an area without any firefighting tool prescribed by 
the order.
    (g) Operating an internal combustion engine.
    (h) Welding or operating an acetylene or other torch with open 
flame.

0
12. Amend Sec.  261.53 by revising the section heading and introductory 
text to read as follows:


Sec.  261.53  Special closures or restrictions.

    When provided by an order, it is prohibited to go into or be in any 
area which is closed or restricted for the protection of:
* * * * *

0
13. Amend Sec.  261.54 by removing paragraph (f).

0
14. Amend Sec.  261.58 by revising paragraphs (b), (d), and (bb) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  261.58  Occupancy and use.

* * * * *
    (b) Entering or using a recreation site or portion thereof.
* * * * *
    (d) Occupying a recreation site with prohibited camping equipment 
prescribed by the order.
* * * * *
    (bb) Possessing an alcoholic beverage.
* * * * *

Homer Wilkes,
Under Secretary, Natural Resources and Environment.
[FR Doc. 2024-27555 Filed 11-22-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3411-15-P`