92808 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

081°42′01′′ W (NAD 83), from surface to 

bottom, during the time of enforcement 

described in paragraph (d) of this 

section. 

(b) Definition. As used in this section, 

‘‘on-scene representative’’ of the Captain 

of the Port Eastern Great Lakes (COTP) 

is any Coast Guard commissioned, 

warrant or petty officer who has been 

designated by the COTP to act on the 

COTP’s behalf. The on-scene 

representative may be on a Coast Guard 

vessel, other designated craft, or on 

shore and communicating with vessels 

via VHF–FM radio or loudhailer. 

(c) Regulations. In addition to the 

general RNA regulations in § 165.13, the 

following regulations apply to the RNA 

described in paragraph (a) of this 

section. 

(1) A vessel transiting through the 

RNA must make a direct passage. No 

vessel may stop, moor, anchor or loiter 

within the RNA at any time unless it is 

engaged or intending to engage in 

construction work discussed in the RNA 

or are able to maintain a safe distance 

from the construction barges. All 

movement within the RNA is subject to 

a ‘‘Slow-No Wake’’ speed limit. No 

vessel may produce a wake or attain 

speeds greater than 5 knots unless a 

higher minimum speed is necessary to 

maintain bare steerageway. 

(2) The operator of any vessel 

transiting in the RNA must comply with 

all lawful directions given to them by 

the Captain of the Port Eastern Great 

Lakes (COTP) or the COTP’s on-scene 

representative. 

(3) The inland navigation rules in 33 

CFR chapter I, subchapter E remain in 

effect within the RNA and must be 

followed at all times. 

(4) No vessel may navigate within 10 

feet of the construction barges during 

the Enforcement Periods. 

(d) Enforcement periods. (a) This 

section is enforceable during the 

following periods: 

(1) December 2, 2024 through January 

31, 2025; 7:00 a.m. each Tuesday 

through 7:00 a.m. each Thursday. 

(2) February 3, 2025 through February 

28, 2025; No transit restrictions required 

due to lack of anticipated vessel traffic. 

(3) March 3, 2025 through March 28, 

2025; 8:00 a.m. though 4:00 p.m. each 

Monday through Friday. 

(4) March 31, 2025 through Jul 11, 

2025; 7:00 a.m. each Tuesday through 

7:00 a.m. each Thursday. 

(b) If the COTP determines this 

section need not be enforced during 

these times on a given day, marine 

broadcast notices to mariners will be 

used to announce the specific periods 

when this section will not be subject to 

enforcement. For information on radio 

stations broadcasting BNMs, see 33 CFR 

72.01–25 and check the latest Local 

Notice to Mariners (LNM) for Coast 

Guard District 9 on https://www.navcen.

uscg.gov. 

Dated: November 20, 2024. 

J.P. Hickey, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Ninth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2024–27557 Filed 11–22–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

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 Wilmer.Smithson@

usda.gov. 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
92810 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 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 

§ 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
92812 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 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 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
92814 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 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 

■ 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). 

■ 2. Revise § 261.1b to read as follows: 

§ 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. 

■ 3. Amend § 261.2 by: 

■ a. Adding in alphabetical order 

definitions for ‘‘Alcoholic beverage’’ 

and ‘‘Controlled substance’’; 

■ b. Revising the definition for 

‘‘Developed recreation site’’; and 

■ c. Adding in alphabetical order 

definitions for ‘‘Exploding target’’, 

‘‘Firework’’, ‘‘Pyrotechnic device’’, and 

‘‘Recreation site’’. 

The additions and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 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. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Revise § 261.4 to read as follows: 

§ 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. 

■ 5. Amend § 261.5 by adding 

paragraphs (h) through (j) to read as 

follows: 

§ 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. 

■ 6. Amend § 261.9 by adding paragraph 

(j) to read as follows: 

§ 261.9 Property. 

* * * * * 

(j) Damaging or removing without 

authorization any personal property that 

belongs to another person. 

■ 7. Amend § 261.10 by revising 

paragraphs (a), (e), (o), and (p) and 

adding paragraphs (q) through (s) to 

read as follows: 

§ 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. 

* * * * * 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES
92816 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

(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. 

■ 8. Amend § 261.12 by adding 

paragraphs (e) through (i) to read as 

follows: 

§ 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. 

■ 9. Amend § 261.15 by revising 

paragraphs (e) and (g) to read as follows: 

§ 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. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 261.50 by revising 

paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: 

§ 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. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Revise § 261.52 to read as follows: 

§ 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. 

■ 12. Amend § 261.53 by revising the 

section heading and introductory text to 

read as follows: 

§ 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: 

* * * * * 

■ 13. Amend § 261.54 by removing 

paragraph (f). 

■ 14. Amend § 261.58 by revising 

paragraphs (b), (d), and (bb) to read as 

follows: 

§ 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 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2024–0540; FRL–12405– 

01–R7] 

Finding of Failure To Attain and 

Reclassification of the Missouri 

Portion of the St. Louis Nonattainment 

Area as Serious for the 2015 Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is determining that the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis, MOIL bi-State nonattainment area failed to 

attain the 2015 ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by the 

applicable attainment date. The effect of 

failing to attain by the applicable 

attainment date is that the area will be 

reclassified by operation of law to 

‘‘Serious’’ nonattainment for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS on December 31, 2024, 

the effective date of this final rule. This 

action fulfills the EPA’s obligation 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA) to 

determine whether ozone 

nonattainment areas attained the 

NAAQS by the attainment date and to 

publish a document in the Federal 

Register identifying each area that is 

determined as having failed to attain 

and identifying the reclassification. The 

corresponding action for the Illinois 

portion of the St. Louis, MO-IL bi-State 

area is being taken separately. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

December 31, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R07–OAR–2024–0540. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available through https://

www.regulations.gov or please contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wendy Vit, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7 Office, Air and 

Radiation Division, 11201 Renner 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with RULES