21588 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

36 CFR Parts 214, 261, and 291 

RIN 0596–AC95 

Paleontological Resources 

Preservation 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA or Department) is 

implementing regulations under the 

Omnibus Public Land Management Act 

of 2009 paleontological resources 

preservation subtitle (the Act). This rule 

provides for the preservation, 

management, and protection of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands (NFS), and insures 

that these resources are available for 

current and future generations to enjoy 

as part of America’s national heritage. 

The rule addresses the management, 

collection, and curation of 

paleontological resources from NFS 

lands including management using 

scientific principles and expertise, 

collecting of resources with and without 

a permit, curation in an approved 

repository, maintaining confidentiality 

of specific locality data, and authorizing 

penalties for illegal collecting, sale, 

damaging, or otherwise altering or 

defacing paleontological resources. 

DATES: This rule is effective May 18, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Information on this final 

rule may be obtained via written request 

addressed to USDA Forest Service, 

Michael Fracasso, M&GM, 740 Simms 

Street, Golden, CO 80401. The Forest 

Service Paleontological Resources 

Preservation procedures are set out in 

Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, 

Part 291, and are available electronically 

via the World Wide Web/Internet at 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/

index.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Fracasso, Forest Service, at 

303–275–5130, or mfracasso@fs.fed.us. 

Individuals who use 

telecommunications devices for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 

Standard Time, Monday through Friday. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Paleontological Resources 

Preservation subtitle of the Omnibus 

Public Land Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa to aaa–11 (the Act), requires the 

USDA and the U.S. Department of the 

Interior (DOI) to issue implementation 

regulations. In accordance with 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa–1, these regulations 

would serve to manage and protect 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands using scientific 

principles and expertise. 

In FY 1999, the Interior 

Appropriations Subcommittee requested 

that the DOI, the Forest Service, and the 

Smithsonian Institution prepare a report 

on fossil resource management on 

public lands (see S. Rep. 105–227, at 60 

(1998)). The request directed the 

agencies to analyze (1) the need for a 

unified Federal policy for the collection, 

storage, and preservation of fossils; (2) 

the need for standards that would 

maximize the availability of fossils for 

scientific study; and (3) the 

effectiveness of current methods for 

storing and preserving fossils collected 

from public lands. During the course of 

preparing the report, the agencies held 

a public meeting and gathered public 

input. The DOI report to Congress, 

‘‘Assessment of Fossil Management of 

Federal and Indian Lands,’’ was 

published in May 2000. The 

Paleontological Resources Preservation 

Act (PRPA) was introduced in the 107th 

Congress after the report was released. 

The PRPA was modeled after the 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act 

(ARPA) and emphasized the 

recommendations and guiding 

principles in the May 2000 report. The 

legislation was re-introduced in 

subsequent Congresses through the 

111th Congress when it was combined 

with other natural resources legislation 

in an omnibus bill that became law on 

March 30, 2009 (the Act). 

The Act requires that implementation 

be coordinated between the Secretaries 

of Agriculture and Interior (Secretaries) 

(16 U.S.C. 470aaa–1). Accordingly, the 

USDA and the DOI formed an 

interagency coordination team (ICT) in 

April 2009 to draft the proposed 

regulations. Members of the ICT 

included program leads for 

paleontology, archaeology, and 

regulatory specialists from the Forest 

Service, DOI Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), National Park 

Service (NPS), Bureau of Reclamation 

(BOR), and Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS). 

Response to Comments 

The Paleontological Resources 

Preservation proposed rule was 

published in the Federal Register on 

May 23, 2013 (78 FR 30810), for a 60- 

day comment period, ending July 22, 

2013. The Forest Service (Agency) 

received 177 responses, consisting of 

letters, emails, and Web-based 

submittals. Of those, 131 were original 

responses, and the remaining 46 

responses were organized response 

campaign (form) letters. Comments were 

received from the public (almost equally 

distributed among professional 

academic paleontologists, consultants, 

and students in higher education, and 

amateur collectors and individuals that 

did not identify an affiliation), 

paleontological repository institutions, 

and government and/or quasigovernment agencies. 

Public comment on the proposed rule 

addressed a range of topics, but focused 

on the following areas: Opposition to 

formal establishment of restrictions and/ 

or operating conditions placed on casual 

collection of common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources, 

confidentiality of specific locations of 

paleontological resources, requirements 

associated with permits to collect 

paleontological resources, and operating 

standards for approved repository 

institutions housing paleontological 

resources from National Forest System 

lands. However, most provisions 

receiving critical comments are 

statutory requirements per the Act. 

The following is a description of 

specific comments received on the 

proposed rule, responses to comments, 

and changes made in response to 

comments. Each comment received 

consideration in the development of the 

final rule. In the responses to comments 

that follow, the term ‘‘the Act’’ refers to 

the provisions for Paleontological 

Resources Preservation as stated in the 

Omnibus Public Land Act of 2009 (Pub. 

L. 111–011, Title VI, Subtitle D, Sec. 

6310). 

General Comments 

The Department received the 

following comments not specifically 

tied to a particular section of the 2013 

proposed rule. 

Comment: Paleontological Resource 

Preservation regulations and the Act. 

Respondents expressed appreciation of 

the Forest Service’s efforts in 

developing regulations to implement the 

Act. Respondents welcomed that the 

regulations provide clarification of 

stipulations in the Act, and expressed 

support for the intentions of the Act and 

their implementation in the regulations 

to provide for preservation, 

management, and protection of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands. 

Response: The Act stipulates that the 

Secretary of Agriculture shall issue such 

regulations as are appropriate to carry 

out the provisions of the Act, as soon as 

practical after the date of enactment of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21589 

the Act. The Department agrees with the 

respondents that these regulations 

appropriately implement the Act by 

providing clarification of stipulations in 

the Act that ensure the preservation, 

management, and protection of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System (NFS) lands using 

scientific principles and expertise. 

Comment: Regulations establish 

uniform and comprehensive rules for 

paleontological resource management. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the regulations represent a needed 

advance in development of a 

comprehensive and uniform Agencywide framework for the management 

and conservation of paleontological 

resources on National Forest System 

lands. One respondent expressed the 

view that the regulations lay the 

groundwork for greater roles in research 

and resource management by Agency 

paleontologists who are positioned to 

facilitate permitted research, with the 

goal of preservation and carefully 

managed use of paleontological 

resources. Such managed use would 

ensure that the public’s property 

remains properly tracked, documented, 

overseen, and managed by professionals 

for the benefit of science. One 

respondent suggested that the 

regulations concerning permitting are a 

welcome improvement. 

Response: The Department 

acknowledges that the Act and the 

regulations establish uniform, Agencywide requirements for casual collecting, 

permitted collecting, and management 

of collections of paleontological 

resources from NFS lands for the first 

time. The Department encourages 

appropriate uses of paleontological 

resources, and expects that users of 

paleontological resources would be 

encouraged by the knowledge that 

uniform standards now exist for casual 

collecting, permitted collection, and 

management of collections of 

paleontological resources that will be 

applied consistently across the Agency. 

Prior to these regulations, the use of 

paleontological resources was largely 

subject to local administrative unit 

policy, and variability in policy between 

administrative units was a source of 

confusion and discouragement to some 

users. 

Comment: Management of 

paleontological resources using 

scientific principles and expertise. 

Respondents expressed appreciation 

that the regulations recognize that 

paleontological resources are scientific 

resources, and that management 

decisions concerning such resources 

must be made using scientific principles 

and expertise. 

Response: The Department 

acknowledges the appreciation 

expressed by respondents for its role in 

development of these regulations that 

establish a solid foundation for the 

management of paleontological 

resources on NFS lands using scientific 

principles and expertise. Such informed 

management is fundamental to the 

preservation of paleontological 

resources that comprise a nonrenewable 

and irreplaceable part of America’s 

natural heritage. Paleontological 

resources on NFS lands are part of the 

public trust. The Act and these 

regulations would ensure that 

scientifically important specimens 

remain Federal property in the public 

realm, and that ownership of such 

resources is not transferred to any single 

individual wherein access to the 

resource and associated information 

may become unavailable to the public. 

Comment: Regulations will deter loss 

of paleontological resources related to 

unrestricted collection. Respondents 

claim to have witnessed potential theft 

and/or vandalism of paleontological 

resources while in the field and 

significant damage to and destruction of 

paleontological resources caused by 

hand tools used during collection. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

they are appreciative of and support the 

Department’s efforts in formulating 

these regulations to manage, preserve 

and safeguard the Nation’s fossil 

resources and associated scientific 

information located on National Forest 

System lands. 

Response: The Department 

appreciates the concern expressed by 

the respondents regarding observed 

destruction of paleontological resources 

on NFS lands. The Department expects 

that provisions for casual collecting and 

permitted collection of paleontological 

resources as established in the 

regulations would promote the 

appropriate use of such resources. 

Conversely, provisions for enforcement 

and penalties as established in the 

regulations would be expected to deter 

resource loss attributed to inappropriate 

collection, vandalism, and/or theft, as 

described by the respondents. 

Comment: Additional Agency 

paleontologists are needed to administer 

regulations. One respondent expressed 

the view that additional Agency 

paleontologists are needed to administer 

the regulations, particularly with 

respect to paleontological resource 

permitting. 

Response: The Forest Service employs 

paleontology specialists who will be 

involved in administration of the 

regulations. The issue of paleontology 

specialist staffing levels within the 

Agency is beyond the scope of the 

regulations. 

Comment: Regulations should not 

place restrictions on access or use of 

public lands. One respondent expressed 

the view that regulations should not 

place any restrictions on access or use 

of public lands. 

Response: The Forest Service is 

accorded the authority to manage NFS 

lands against depredations and to make 

rules and regulations to regulate 

occupancy and use in accordance with 

the Organic Act of 1897. The 

Paleontological Resources Preservation 

Act of 2009 stipulates that the Secretary 

of Agriculture shall issue such 

regulations as are appropriate to carry 

out the provisions of the Act, as soon as 

practical after the date of enactment of 

the Act. Consequently, the development 

of these regulations is required by the 

Act. The Act and the regulations 

explicitly establish a legal basis for the 

activity of casual collecting of 

paleontological resources for the first 

time. The Act was enacted, and these 

regulations have been developed to 

preserve paleontological resources for 

current and future generations, because 

paleontological resources are 

nonrenewable and are an irreplaceable 

part of America’s natural heritage. 

Paleontological resources on NFS lands 

are part of the public trust. The Act and 

these regulations would ensure, in part, 

that scientifically important specimens 

remain Federal property in the public 

realm, and that ownership of such 

resources is not transferred to any single 

individual wherein access to the 

resource and associated information 

may become unavailable to the public. 

Comment: Proposed regulations 

concerning collection by amateurs are 

detrimental to the advancement of 

paleontological science. Several 

respondents expressed the view that 

regulation of collection of 

paleontological resources by amateurs 

on National Forest System lands is 

counter-productive to the advancement 

of paleontological science, and that such 

regulation does not recognize the 

important role of citizen-scientists in 

the advancement of paleontological 

science. Respondents suggested that 

paleontological discoveries made by 

amateurs on public lands have 

contributed greatly to the science of 

paleontology, and that noteworthy 

amateur contributions to paleontology 

have been formally recognized by the 

paleontological profession through 

vehicles such as the Strimple Award 

offered by the Paleontological Society. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

there are many more amateur collectors 

than professional research collectors, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21590 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

and that many amateur collectors act as 

proxy collectors for researchers. 

Respondents suggested that amateurs 

will stop or reduce collecting in 

response to restrictions, resulting in a 

reduced flow of collection-based 

knowledge from amateurs to the 

scientific community. One respondent 

suggested that amateurs would continue 

to collect, but would keep their 

collecting sites and collections secret. 

Respondents suggested that many 

private amateur paleontological 

collections are ultimately donated to 

researchers, public institutions such as 

museums and schools, and individuals 

such as children with an interest in 

paleontology. 

Response: The Department 

acknowledges the historical and 

continued roles that amateurs and/or 

citizen scientists have played in the 

advancement of paleontological science 

and the promotion of interest in 

paleontology in non-professional 

members of the public, including 

children and students in public 

education settings. The Department 

does not consider that these regulations 

would restrict collecting by amateurs, or 

such contributions as described above 

resulting from amateur collections. 

Rather, the Act and the regulations 

explicitly establish a legal basis for the 

activity of casual collecting of 

paleontological resources for the first 

time. Individuals who wish to collect 

paleontological resources in a manner 

beyond the scope of conditions 

established for casual collection are not 

precluded from doing so under the 

regulations; however, a permit would be 

required. Collection by amateurs acting 

as proxies for researchers would be 

considered research collection; such 

collection is not precluded under the 

regulations; however, a permit would be 

required. The Department expects that 

an informed and law-abiding collecting 

public would be aware of conditions for 

casual collecting as established in the 

regulation and would elect to legally 

collect by adhering to those conditions. 

Ethical amateur collectors practicing 

casual collection in accordance with 

established conditions, or permitted 

collection if such collection is beyond 

the scope of casual collection, would 

have no cause to keep collecting sites 

and collections secret from the Agency 

under the regulations. 

Comment: Restrictions on collection 

of paleontological resources by 

amateurs are not necessary. 

Respondents have expressed the view 

that the proposed regulations represent 

an infringement of the public’s right to 

collect fossils. One respondent 

expressed the view that existing laws 

and regulations are sufficient to protect 

paleontological resources without the 

imposition of new regulations. One 

respondent questioned from what harm 

are paleontological resources being 

protected by the proposed restrictions 

on collection, and another respondent 

suggested that such restrictions are not 

in the best interests of society because 

collection does not detrimentally affect 

public lands. Respondents have also 

suggested that the proposed restrictions 

on collection will not protect 

paleontological resources, because 

fossils that are not collected are 

eventually destroyed by natural 

processes of weathering and erosion and 

are ultimately lost to the public and to 

science. Respondents expressed the 

view that resource impacts resulting 

from amateur collection are negligible 

with respect to permitted activities such 

as logging, mining, and grazing. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the regulations would encourage 

enforcement resulting from collection of 

specimens that would otherwise be lost 

to erosion, and that the regulations 

would criminalize commonplace 

collecting activities of amateurs and 

well-intentioned scientists. 

Response: The Act stipulates that the 

Secretary of Agriculture shall issue such 

regulations as are appropriate to carry 

out the provisions of the Act, as soon as 

practical after the date of enactment of 

the Act. Consequently, the development 

of these regulations is required by the 

Act and must be consistent with the 

Act. The Act and the regulations 

explicitly establish a legal basis for the 

activity of casual collecting of 

paleontological resources for the first 

time. The Act was enacted and these 

regulations have been developed to 

preserve paleontological resources for 

current and future generations because 

paleontological resources are 

nonrenewable and are an irreplaceable 

part of America’s natural heritage. 

Paleontological resources that are 

damaged or lost because of theft, 

vandalism, and/or inappropriate 

method of collection cannot be replaced 

or renewed and are lost forever. 

Paleontological resources on NFS lands 

are part of the public trust. The Act and 

these regulations would ensure that 

scientifically important specimens 

remain Federal property in the public 

realm, and that ownership of such 

resources is not transferred to any single 

individual wherein access to the 

resource and associated information 

may become unavailable to the public. 

The regulations do not prevent 

collection of paleontological resources 

that might otherwise be destroyed by 

weathering or erosion, but they do 

establish conditions for such collection. 

Other surface disturbing activities as 

specified by the respondents require 

authorization from the Forest Service; 

casual collecting of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources does not. Such authorizations 

generally require a formal assessment 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) in which potential 

impacts associated with the activity are 

disclosed and potential mitigation of 

such impacts may be proposed. Because 

casual collecting does not require an 

authorization or other Agency decision, 

conditions are established for casual 

collection to ensure that surface 

disturbance related to such collection is 

negligible and does not exceed any 

threshold that would otherwise trigger 

the need for a NEPA assessment of the 

activity. The Department does not 

expect that the regulations would 

criminalize commonplace collecting 

activities. Rather, the Department 

expects that an informed and lawabiding collecting public would be 

aware of conditions for casual collecting 

as established in regulation and would 

elect to legally collect by adhering to 

those conditions. The Department could 

consider the intent and degree of noncompliance regarding regulated 

collecting activities in decisions 

regarding potential enforcement. 

Comment: Restrictions on amateur 

collection are counter-productive to the 

goal of educating the public concerning 

paleontological resources. Respondents 

have expressed the view that amateur 

collection of fossils by children and 

students serves as a gateway to 

continued interest and education in 

paleontology and science in general, 

and that such interest results in the will 

to conserve such resources and to 

contribute private funds toward 

supporting paleontological research. 

Respondents have suggested that 

restrictions on amateur collection will 

serve as a disincentive for such 

collection and result in loss of interest 

and further pursuit of knowledge in 

paleontology and science. One 

respondent expressed the view that the 

scientific usefulness of common fossils 

is limited, but that their educational 

value for amateur collectors is high. 

Another respondent suggested that 

display of amateur collections in homes 

stimulates interest in paleontology 

among visitors. One respondent 

expressed the view that the 

development of paleontological 

expertise or education by 

nonprofessional, avocational advanced 

amateurs requires substantial collection 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21591 

experience which cannot be obtained if 

unnecessary restrictions are imposed on 

collection by amateur, avocational, and/ 

or paraprofessional paleontologists. 

Response: The Department 

acknowledges the value of fossils in 

stimulating interest and continued 

education in science among children 

and students, and that paleontology is 

often viewed as a ‘‘gateway’’ to science 

education. The Act and the regulations 

explicitly establish a legal basis for the 

activity of casual collecting of 

paleontological resources for the first 

time. The Department expects that 

casual collectors, including children 

and students, would be encouraged by 

the knowledge that uniform standards 

now exist for casual collecting that will 

be applied consistently across the 

Agency. The respondents’ suggestion 

that conditions established for casual 

collecting would serve as a disincentive 

for collection and result in loss of 

interest and further pursuit of 

knowledge in paleontology and science 

are conjectural and not substantiated. 

Individuals who wish to develop 

paleontological expertise or education 

by collecting paleontological resources 

in a manner beyond the scope of 

conditions established for casual 

collection are not precluded from doing 

so under the regulations; however, a 

permit would be required. 

Comment: Restrictions on amateur 

collection of paleontological resources 

will reduce their recreational value. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

amateur collection of fossils is an 

enjoyable family activity, and that 

restrictions on amateur collection will 

reduce the opportunity for the public to 

use and enjoy National Forest System 

lands with respect to fossil collecting. 

One respondent suggested that the 

scientific usefulness of common fossils 

is limited, but that their recreational 

value for amateur collectors is high. 

Response: The Department 

acknowledges the recreational value 

placed on fossils by casual and amateur 

collectors. The Act and the regulations 

explicitly establish a legal basis for the 

activity of casual collecting of 

paleontological resources for the first 

time. The Department encourages 

appropriate uses of paleontological 

resources, and expects that recreational 

users of paleontological resources 

would be encouraged by the knowledge 

that uniform standards now exist for 

casual collecting that will be applied 

consistently across the Agency. The 

Department does not consider that 

conditions associated with casual 

collecting would reduce their 

recreational value. Individuals who 

wish to collect paleontological resources 

for recreational purposes in a manner 

beyond the scope of conditions 

established for casual collection are not 

precluded from doing so under the 

regulations; however, a permit would be 

required. 

Comment: Regulations do not 

distinguish among diverse types of 

paleontological resources. Respondents 

expressed the view that the regulations 

treat all paleontological resources the 

same, whereas common invertebrate 

and plant fossils merit fewer restrictions 

on collection than do vertebrate fossils 

and uncommon invertebrate and plant 

fossils. Respondents suggested that 

common invertebrate and plant fossils 

may exist in numbers of tens of 

thousands to hundreds of thousands at 

any given location, and that most such 

specimens would be lost to erosion if 

not collected. One respondent expressed 

the view that the apparent rarity of 

certain fossils often reflects the 

availability of access to collecting areas, 

rather than actual rarity of specimens. 

Response: The Act and the regulations 

do distinguish among diverse types of 

paleontological resources, and such 

distinctions are reflected by establishing 

casual collecting as an activity that is 

limited to common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources. 

Collection of other paleontological 

resources, and collection of common 

invertebrate and plant fossils for 

research purposes, requires a permit 

which may be considered a higher level 

of restriction. Collection of common 

invertebrate and plant fossils outside 

the scope of conditions established for 

casual collecting is not precluded under 

the regulations; however, a permit 

would be required. 

Comment: Regulations should foster 

collection of paleontological resources. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

the regulations be written to foster the 

collection of paleontological resources 

by all members of the public and that 

paleontological resources be shared by 

placing them into public and private 

institutions for purposes of publication 

and preservation. 

Response: The Act and the regulations 

as written establish uniform, Agencywide requirements for casual collecting 

and permitted collecting for the first 

time. The Department encourages 

appropriate uses of paleontological 

resources by all members of the public, 

and expects that users of paleontological 

resources would be encouraged by the 

knowledge that uniform standards to be 

applied consistently across the Agency 

now exist for casual collecting and 

permitted collection of paleontological 

resources. The regulations establish that 

paleontological resources collected 

under a permit must be deposited in an 

approved repository where they will be 

preserved for the public and made 

available for scientific research and 

public education. 

Comment: Roles of permittee and 

repository not differentiated. One 

respondent expressed the view that the 

regulations misunderstand the 

difference in roles of the permittee and 

repository. 

Response: The regulations do not 

misunderstand the difference in roles of 

a permit holder and a repository, 

although such distinction may not have 

been expressed clearly in certain areas 

of the proposed regulations. 

Respondents identified several specific 

areas in the proposed regulations where 

such differences were unclear, and the 

Department has modified the language 

in those areas, as appropriate, in these 

final regulations to provide clarity 

regarding the respective roles of a 

permit holder and a repository. 

Comment: New funding sources for 

paleontological resource studies. One 

respondent suggested that the effort 

expended in drafting these regulations 

be leveraged to develop new funding 

sources for the scientific study of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

development of new funding sources for 

scientific study of paleontological 

resources on National Forest System 

lands would be beneficial. However, it 

is beyond the scope of these regulations 

to address funding of research on 

paleontological resources. 

Comment: Clarity of language and 

intent in regulations. One respondent 

expressed the view that it is imperative 

that clarity of regulatory language reflect 

clarity in intent of the regulations. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

clarity of regulatory language should 

reflect clarity of intent of the 

regulations. The Department has strived 

to provide such clarity in these final 

regulations, reflecting consideration of 

public comments on the proposed 

regulations that suggested areas that 

would benefit from additional 

discussion. 

Comment: Request for consultation 

with rule writers. Two respondents 

requested an opportunity to meet with 

rule writers to discuss their concerns 

prior to drafting of the final rule. 

Response: The procedure followed by 

the Department in soliciting public 

comment following Federal Register 

publication of the proposed regulations 

is in accordance with the requirements 

established in the Uniform Procedure 

Act. The comments received during the 

designated 60-day public comment 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21592 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

1S. 2727: 148 Cong. Rec. S. 6708–6709 (2002) 

(Statement of Sen. Akaka); S. 546: S. Rep. 108–93 

(2003); S. 263: S. Rep. 109–36 (2005); S. 320: 153 

Cong. Rec. S. 691–693 (2007) (Statement of Sen. 

Akaka) and S. Rep. 110–18 (2007); H.R. 554: H. Rep. 

110–670, Part 1; and S. 22: 155 Cong. Rec. S. 426 

(2009) (Statement of Sen. Akaka). 

period were appropriately considered 

by the Department during development 

of the final regulations. The Department 

elected not to consult with particular 

individuals and/or organizations 

outside of the formal public comment 

period in order to avoid the appearance 

of providing privileged access to and 

influence on the rule-making process by 

certain interested parties and not others. 

Comment: Availability of fossils for 

scientific study would diminish under 

regulations. One respondent expressed 

the view that the regulations do not 

provide standards to maximize the 

availability of fossils for scientific study, 

but rather the availability of fossils for 

scientific study would be diminished 

under the regulations. 

Response: Although a permit would 

now be uniformly required for 

collection of paleontological resources 

for scientific study (that is, research), 

the Department does not consider this 

requirement would diminish the 

availability of fossils for such scientific 

study. Individuals with eligibility and 

qualifications commensurate with the 

nature of the proposed research are 

encouraged to apply for permits to 

collect paleontological resources for 

scientific study. The Department 

expects that researchers would be 

encouraged by the knowledge that 

uniform standards to be applied 

consistently across the Agency now 

exist for permitted collection of 

paleontological resources. 

Comment: Natural Resources 

Conservation Service should be a 

cooperating agency. One respondent 

expressed the view that the Natural 

Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 

should be designated a cooperating 

agency with respect to the regulations. 

Response: The designation of the 

NRCS as a cooperating agency with 

respect to administration of these 

regulations is beyond the scope of these 

regulations. The Act applies to Federal 

land, specifically land controlled or 

administered by the Secretary of the 

Interior, except Indian land; or NFS 

lands controlled or administered by the 

Secretary of Agriculture. NRCS does not 

manage Federal land, and consequently 

the Act and these regulations do not 

apply to NRCS. 

Comment: Public comment period 

should be extended. Respondents 

expressed the view that the public 

comment period for the draft regulations 

occurred during the summer field 

collection season, and that the public 

comment period should be extended by 

90 days to ensure adequate feedback by 

interested parties. 

Response: Federal Register 

publication of the proposed regulations 

was outreached to a number of 

identified stakeholder organizations at 

the time of publication. Notice was 

provided of the publication date and the 

60-day public comment period, which 

partially overlapped what respondents 

have referred to as the summer field 

collection season. However, the 

Department considers that few, if any, 

individuals spend 60 consecutive days 

performing field work, and that the 60- 

day comment period afforded ample 

opportunity for interested parties to 

provide comment before or after 

engaging in field activities. Onehundred-seventy-seven (177) 

respondents provided comments during 

the comment period, and the comments 

were nearly evenly distributed between 

academic paleontologists and casual or 

amateur collectors. The majority of 

comments were concentrated among 

several well-defined areas of the 

proposed regulations. Given the number 

of comments received from an affected 

community of relatively small overall 

size, the demographics of the 

respondents, and the focus of comments 

on certain areas, the Department 

considers that areas of public concern in 

the proposed regulations have been 

appropriately identified, and that 

interested parties had the opportunity to 

provide public comment and those that 

wished to provide comment did so. 

Moreover, those respondents who 

requested a comment period extension 

did also provide comment on the body 

of the proposed regulations during the 

designated comment period. 

Accordingly, the Department elected not 

to extend the public comment period. 

Section by Section Explanation of the 

Final Rule 

The following section-by-section 

response to the comments on the 

proposed rule explains the approach 

taken in the development of the final 

rule to National Forest System 

paleontological resources preservation. 

Part 291—Paleontological Resources 

Preservation 

This part contains regulations on the 

management, protection, and 

preservation of paleontological 

resources on National Forest System 

lands using scientific principles and 

expertise, including the collection of 

paleontological resources with and 

without a permit, curation of 

paleontological resources in approved 

repositories, confidentiality of 

paleontological locality information, 

and criminal and civil penalties. 

Section 291.1 Purpose 

These final regulations provide for the 

preservation, management, and 

protection of paleontological resources 

on National Forest System (NFS) lands. 

Legislative history 1 of the Act 

demonstrates that it was enacted to 

preserve these resources for current and 

future generations because 

paleontological resources are 

nonrenewable and are an irreplaceable 

part of America’s natural heritage. 

This section clarifies that the 

Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) will 

manage and protect paleontological 

resources on NFS lands using scientific 

principles and expertise. This section 

clarifies that science, rather than other 

values, will be the primary management 

tool for paleontological resources on 

NFS lands. These regulations provide 

for the coordinated management of 

paleontological resources and promote 

research, public education, and public 

awareness. 

Section 291.1—Response to Comments 

Comment: Who are fossils being saved 

for? One respondent expressed the view 

that clarification should be provided 

regarding who the regulations are saving 

fossils for. 

Response: The Act was enacted and 

these regulations have been developed 

to preserve paleontological resources for 

current and future generations because 

paleontological resources are 

nonrenewable and are an irreplaceable 

part of America’s natural heritage. 

Paleontological resources that are 

damaged or lost because of theft, 

vandalism, and/or inappropriate 

method of collection cannot be replaced 

or renewed and are lost forever. 

Paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands are part of the 

public trust. The Act and these 

regulations would ensure that 

scientifically important specimens 

remain Federal property in the public 

realm, and that ownership of such 

resources is not transferred to any single 

individual wherein access to the 

resource and associated information 

may become unavailable to the public. 

Comment: Regulations replace 

management using scientific principles 

and expertise by bureaucracy. Two 

respondents suggested that the 

imposition of regulations concerning 

paleontological resources adds 

unnecessary policing and bureaucracy 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21593 

administered by nonscientists, which is 

contrary to the management of such 

resources using scientific principles and 

expertise as stipulated in the Act. 

Response: The Act stipulates that the 

Secretary of Agriculture shall issue such 

regulations as are appropriate to carry 

out the provisions of the Act, as soon as 

practical after the date of enactment of 

the Act. Consequently, the development 

of these regulations is necessitated by 

the Act. Collection of paleontological 

resources under appropriate 

authorizations as established in the 

regulations will facilitate inventory and 

monitoring of such resources as called 

for in the Act, and such inventory and 

monitoring will provide the knowledge 

base that is necessary for the 

management of paleontological 

resources using scientific principles and 

expertise, as stipulated in the Act. The 

Forest Service employs paleontology 

specialists who will be involved in 

administration of the regulations. 

Comment: Restrictions on casual 

collection do not encourage uses as 

stated. Two respondents expressed the 

view that conditions established for 

casual collecting do not encourage the 

scientific, educational, and casual 

collection of paleontological resources 

as stated. 

Response: The Act stipulates that 

casual collecting of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources is subject to conditions 

regarding personal use, reasonable 

amount, use of non-powered hand tools, 

and negligible disturbance. These 

regulations define and clarify these 

conditions. Collection of paleontological 

resources for scientific and educational 

uses would generally require a permit. 

The Act and the regulations establish 

uniform, Agency-wide requirements for 

casual collecting and permitted 

collecting for the first time. The 

Department encourages appropriate uses 

of paleontological resources, and 

expects that users of paleontological 

resources would be encouraged by the 

knowledge that uniform standards to be 

applied consistently across the Agency 

now exist for casual collecting and 

permitted collection of paleontological 

resources. Prior to these regulations, use 

of paleontological resources was largely 

subject to local administrative unit 

policy, and variability in policy between 

administrative units was a source of 

confusion and discouragement to some 

users. 

Section 291.2 Authorities 

Section 291.2 cites the Paleontological 

Resources Preservation subtitle of the 

Omnibus Public Land Management Act 

(the Act) under which the proposed 

regulations are promulgated. 

Section 291.3 Exceptions 

Section 291.3 addresses the scope of 

these regulations, based on 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–10. 

Section 291.3(a) and (b) states that 

these regulations would not invalidate, 

modify, or impose any additional 

restrictions or permitting requirements 

for activities permitted under the 

general mining laws, the mineral or 

geothermal leasing laws, laws providing 

for minerals materials disposal, or laws 

and authorities relating to reclamation 

and multiple uses of National Forest 

System lands. The USDA would 

continue to use other applicable laws 

and regulations as the authority for such 

restrictions or requirements. The USDA 

would be authorized to cite the Act or 

these final regulations as needed for the 

protection of paleontological resources 

when planning, managing, regulating, or 

permitting various activities on National 

Forest System land covered by the Act. 

Section 291.3(c) states that Indian 

lands, as defined in these regulations, 

are exempt from the scope of these 

regulations. 

Section 291.3(e) states that the final 

regulations would not apply to, or 

require a permit for, casual collecting of 

a rock, mineral, or fossil that is not 

protected under the Act and these final 

regulations. Such rocks, minerals, and 

fossils are covered by other laws, 

regulations, and policies. 

Section 291.3(f) states that these final 

regulations would not affect any land 

other than National Forest System lands 

or affect the lawful recovery, collection, 

or sale of paleontological resources from 

land other than National Forest System 

lands. 

Section 291.3(g) states that members 

of the general public do not obtain any 

rights or privileges from the Act or the 

final regulations and cannot sue the U.S. 

Government to enforce its provisions. 

Section 291.3—Response to Comments 

Comment: Reconnaissance collection 

and exemption from regulation. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

reconnaissance collection, which was 

recommended by that respondent for 

definition elsewhere in the regulations, 

be listed as exempted from regulation. 

Response: Reconnaissance collection 

as proposed and defined elsewhere by 

the respondent is considered research 

collection. Collection of paleontological 

resources for research purposes requires 

a permit and is not exempt from these 

regulations. 

Comment: Reference to collecting a 

rock, mineral, or fossil should use the 

plural form. Two respondents expressed 

the view that the phrase ‘‘collecting of 

a rock, mineral, or invertebrate or plant 

fossil’’ should be changed to ‘‘collecting 

of rocks, minerals, or invertebrate or 

plant fossils’’. One respondent 

suggested that the word ‘‘invertebrate’’ 

in the cited passage should be changed 

to non-vertebrate to clarify the range of 

fossils that the passage references. 

Response: The language in the 

Exceptions section of the regulations 

that references rock, mineral, or 

invertebrate or plant fossil restates the 

language of the Savings Provisions 

section of the Act, and would not be 

appropriate to modify. This applies to 

both comments by respondents. 

Comment: Reference rocks and 

minerals separate from invertebrate and 

plant fossils. Two respondents 

expressed the view that reference to 

rocks and minerals in the context of 

exceptions should be separate from 

invertebrate and plant fossils, in order 

to clarify that rocks and minerals are not 

included in the regulations, whereas 

casual collecting of invertebrate and 

plant fossils does not require a permit. 

Response: The language in the 

Exceptions section of the regulations 

that references rock, mineral, or 

invertebrate or plant fossil restates the 

language of the Savings Provisions 

section of the Act, and would not be 

appropriate to modify. The referenced 

passage collectively refers to rocks and 

minerals, which are not paleontological 

resources and, therefore, not subject to 

the Act or the regulations. The 

referenced passage also refers to those 

invertebrate and plant fossils that are 

not subject to the Act or these 

regulations because they are already 

regulated under another authority listed 

previously in the Savings Provisions 

and Exceptions sections. An example is 

petrified wood, which is regulated 

under the Mineral Materials Act even 

though it is a plant fossil. 

Comment: Exception for non-profit 

and educational organizations. One 

respondent suggested that non-profit 

organizations, informal research 

organizations, and educational 

organizations which have primary 

organizational goals of education and 

exploration of the natural world be 

exempted from the regulations. 

Response: The Act and the regulations 

do not provide for exclusion of selected 

groups or classes of individuals from 

compliance with the requirements as 

established in the Act and regulations. 

Comment: Federal protection for 

private paleontological resources in 

connected actions. One respondent 

expressed the view that protection of 

paleontological resources under the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21594 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

regulations be expanded to include 

fossils on private lands in connected 

actions wherein projects encompassing 

the private lands receive Federal 

funding. 

Response: The issue of protections 

afforded to fossils on private lands in 

the context of federally funded 

connected actions is beyond the scope 

of these regulations. The requirements 

of the Act and these regulations pertain 

only to paleontological resources that 

are present on National Forest System 

lands controlled or administered by the 

Secretary of Agriculture. 

Section 291.4 Preservation of Existing 

Authorities 

Section 291.4 is based on 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–10(5). This section preserves the 

Forest Service’s existing legal and 

regulatory authorities for managing and 

protecting paleontological resources in 

addition to protecting such resources 

under the Act or these final regulations. 

Section 291.5 Definitions 

Section 291.5 contains the definitions 

and terms as defined in the Act or used 

in these final regulations. This section 

includes six terms defined by 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa: Casual collecting, Federal land, 

Indian land, paleontological resource, 

Secretary, and State. In addition, this 

section defines the terms common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources, reasonable amount, and 

negligible disturbance. 16 U.S.C. 470aaa 

required the Secretary to define those 

terms in the implementing regulations. 

Lastly, this section defines terms used 

in the final regulations that may not be 

broadly understood or that may be 

defined differently elsewhere, in order 

to clarify their meaning for these final 

regulations. 

1. The term Act means Title VI, 

Subtitle D of the Omnibus Public Land 

Management Act on Paleontological 

Resources Preservation (16 U.S.C. 

470aaa through 470aaa-11). 

2. The term associated records 

delineates the types of information that 

are required by 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–4 to be 

deposited in an approved repository. 

3. The term Authorized Officer means 

the person or persons to whom 

authority has been delegated by the 

Secretary to take action under the Act. 

4. The term casual collecting restates 

the definition contained in 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa. To be considered casual 

collecting, the activity means all of the 

following: Collecting of a reasonable 

amount of common invertebrate or plant 

paleontological resources for noncommercial personal use, either by 

surface collection or the use of nonpowered hand tools, resulting in only 

negligible disturbance to the Earth’s 

surface and other resources. The 

Department considers that in 

establishing the term ‘‘casual 

collection’’ rather than ‘‘amateur 

collection’’ or ‘‘hobby collection’’ or 

‘‘recreational collection’’, the Act 

intended that casual collection reflect 

the commonplace meaning of ‘‘casual’’. 

The commonplace definition of casual 

includes the elements ‘‘happening by 

chance; not planned or expected’’, 

‘‘done without much thought, effort, or 

concern’’, and ‘‘occurring without 

regularity’’ (‘‘casual’’ MerriamWebster.com. 2014. http://

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/

casual (4 March 2014)). Consequently, 

the Department considers that casual 

collecting would generally be 

happenstance without intentional 

planning or preparation. Development 

of criteria for reasonable amount and 

negligible disturbance reflects, in part, 

the view of casual collecting as an 

activity that generally occurs by chance 

without planning or preparation. 

Further, the Act has established that an 

individual engaging in casual collecting 

activity in accordance with applicable 

conditions, in an area which has not 

been closed to casual collection, does 

not require a permit or other approval 

from the Department. Consequently, it is 

clear that the lack of Department 

decision space concerning such casual 

collection performed by an individual 

reflects that the Act intended that 

reasonable amount and negligible 

disturbance criteria established for 

casual collecting would be below levels 

that would otherwise require an 

evaluation under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 

Collection of amounts and/or land 

disturbance at levels that would require 

a NEPA evaluation would require a 

permit. 

5. The term collection, as used in 

§§ 291.21 through 291.26 of these final 

regulations, means paleontological 

resources and any associated records 

resulting from excavation or removal 

from National Forest System lands 

under a permit. 

6. The term common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources clarifies 

the types of paleontological resources 

that may be casually collected in 

accordance with the Act and these final 

regulations. This final definition 

incorporates the plain meaning of 

common, which means plentiful and 

not rare or unique. The final definition 

also incorporates a geographical factor 

of wide-spread distribution, which 

means that the resource is distributed 

over a relatively large geographical area. 

This final definition also clarifies that 

not all invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources are common; 

some are not common because of their 

context or other characteristics and, 

therefore, are not eligible for casual 

collection. The determination of 

whether invertebrate and plant fossils 

are common or not common will be 

made by the Authorized Officer using 

scientific principles and methods in 

accordance with § 291.9(c). 

7. The term consumptive analysis 

means the alteration, removal, or 

destruction of a paleontological 

specimen, or parts thereof, from a 

collection for scientific research. 

8. The terms curatorial services and 

curation specifies the minimal 

professional museum and archival 

standards employed in the long-term 

management and preservation of a 

collection. 

9. The term Federal land restates the 

definition contained in 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa, and means land controlled by 

the Secretary except for Indian land as 

defined in 16 U.S.C. 470aaa. 

10. The term fossil means any 

remains, traces, or imprints of 

organisms that have been fossilized or 

preserved in or on the Earth’s crust. In 

informal usage, the term fossil tends to 

be used interchangeably with the term 

paleontological resource. However, 

under 16 U.S.C. 470aaa and these final 

regulations, a fossil may not necessarily 

be a paleontological resource. Remains, 

traces, or imprints of organisms (that is, 

fossils) are only considered 

paleontological resources under the Act 

and these final regulations if they are: 

(1) Fossilized, (2) of paleontological 

interest, and (3) provide information 

about the history of life on earth. 

Therefore, paleontological resources are 

fossils that have paleontological interest 

and provide information about the 

history of life on earth. An example of 

a fossil that may not be a 

paleontological resource because it lacks 

paleontological interest and provides 

negligible information about the history 

of life on earth would be an isolated, 

unidentifiable fragment of an otherwise 

common invertebrate fossil that was 

eroded from its native geologic 

occurrence and subsequently found in a 

stream bed far from its point of origin. 

11. The term fossilized as used in the 

definition of paleontological resources 

means preserved by natural processes, 

such as burial in accumulated 

sediments, preservation in ice or amber, 

replacement by minerals, or alteration 

by chemical processes such as 

permineralization whereby minerals are 

deposited in the pore spaces of the hard 

parts of an organism’s remains. This 

definition is adapted from the definition 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21595 

of fossilization in the American 

Geological Institute’s Glossary of 

Geology (Fifth Edition, 2005, ISBN 0– 

922152–76–4). 

12. The term Indian land restates the 

definition contained in 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa. 

13. The term negligible disturbance as 

used in the definition of casual 

collecting clarifies that casual collection 

of common invertebrate and plant 

fossils may only result in little or no 

change to the land surface and have 

minimal or no effect on other resources 

such as cultural resources and protected 

or endangered species. Disturbance 

caused by powered and/or large nonpowered hand tools would exceed the 

‘‘negligible’’ threshold and would no 

longer be casual collection. 

14. The term non-commercial 

personal use as used in the definition of 

casual collecting clarifies the types of 

use allowed under casual collection, 

and means uses other than for purchase, 

sale, financial gain, or research. 

Research, in the context of these 

regulations, is considered to be a 

structured activity undertaken by 

qualified individuals with the intent to 

obtain and disseminate information via 

publication in a peer-reviewed 

professional scientific journal or 

equivalent venue, which increases the 

body of knowledge available to a 

scientific community. Common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources collected for research 

purposes is not personal use and would 

need to be authorized under a permit in 

accordance with §§ 291.13 through 

291.20. Exchange of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources among casual collectors 

would be permissible as long as such 

resources were collected in accordance 

with the Act and the final regulations. 

15. The term non-powered hand tools 

as used in the definition of casual 

collecting clarifies the types of tools that 

can be used for the casual collecting of 

common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources, and means 

small tools that can be readily carried by 

hand, such as geologic hammers, 

trowels, or sieves, but not large tools 

such as full sized-shovels or pick axes. 

Larger tools are more likely to create 

disturbance that is greater than 

‘‘negligible.’’ The tools must not be 

powered by a motor, engine, or other 

power source. 

16. The final definition of the terms 

paleontological locality, location, and 

site means a geographic area where a 

paleontological resource is found. 

Localities, locations, and sites may be as 

small as a single point on the ground or 

as large as the area of an outcrop of a 

formation in which paleontological 

resources are found. The term 

paleontological site is used 

interchangeably with paleontological 

locality or location. Site as used in the 

Act and these regulations does not mean 

an ‘‘archaeological site’’ as used in the 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act 

and its regulations. 

17. The term paleontological resource 

restates the definition contained in 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa. All remains, traces, or 

imprints of organisms are 

paleontological resources when they are 

(1) fossilized, (2) of paleontological 

interest, and (3) provide information 

about the history of life on earth. The 

term paleontological resources as used 

in the Act and these final regulations 

would not include any materials 

associated with an archaeological 

resource as defined in the 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act 

or any cultural items as defined in the 

Native American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act. 

18. The term reasonable amount as 

used in the definition of casual 

collecting quantifies the maximum 

amount of common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources that 

could be removed from National Forest 

System lands. A person may remove up 

to 100 pounds in weight per calendar 

year, not to exceed 25 pounds per day. 

Development of this reasonable amount 

criterion reflects, in part, the view of 

casual collecting as an activity that 

generally occurs by chance without 

planning or preparation. 

19. The term repository identifies the 

types of facilities into which collected 

paleontological resources would be 

deposited as required by 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–4. 

20. The term repository agreement 

means a formal written agreement 

between the Authorized Officer and an 

approved repository official containing 

the terms, conditions, and standards by 

which the repository would agree to 

provide curatorial services for 

collections. 

21. The term repository official 

identifies any officer, employee, or 

agent who is authorized by the 

repository to take certain actions on 

behalf of the repository, including the 

acceptance of collections and providing 

long-term curatorial services for 

collections. 

22. The term Secretary as used in 

these final regulations and defined in 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa means the Secretary of 

Agriculture. 

23. The term State restates the 

definition contained in 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa. 

Section 291.5—Response to Comments 

Comment: Include reference to 

mitigation actions in certain definitions. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

some definitions could benefit from 

including some aspect of 

paleontological resource mitigation 

actions. 

Response: The respondent does not 

specify which definitions could benefit 

from including discussion of mitigation 

actions pertaining to paleontological 

resources. Mitigation is not considered 

a personal use, and collection of 

paleontological resources related to 

mitigation would require a permit. The 

activity of paleontological resource 

mitigation would commonly, but not 

always, occur in the context of 

permitted surface disturbing activities 

and appropriately considered during the 

NEPA impact assessment process. 

Accordingly, reference to mitigation is 

largely beyond the scope of these 

regulations. 

Comment: Associated records. One 

respondent suggested that associated 

records be defined only as permits and 

repository agreements, and that 

documents pertaining to locations, 

collecting events, collectors, and so 

forth should not be considered 

associated records. 

Response: The Department considers 

that documents pertaining to locations, 

collecting events, collectors, and so 

forth, as listed in the regulations 

comprise associated records and would 

be regarded as such by any 

professionally managed repository 

institution. 

Comment: Authorized Officer. 

Respondents expressed the view that, in 

order to make informed decisions as 

referenced elsewhere in the regulations, 

the definition of Authorized Officer 

should reference qualifications and/or 

expertise in paleontology, including 

specific training and knowledge of 

scientific procedures and standards for 

collecting fossil resources, research 

design and scientific research, proper 

curation and storage methods and 

museum standards, and experience in 

properly disseminating scientific and 

educational information for the public 

benefit. One respondent suggested that 

requiring an Authorized Officer to 

consult with an Agency paleontologist 

would be cumbersome, resource 

intensive, and difficult to sustain. One 

respondent questioned whether or not a 

permit holder or permit issuer could be 

considered an Authorized Officer. 

Response: An Authorized Officer in 

the Forest Service is delegated the 

authority to make certain decisions 

regarding land use in many subject areas 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21596 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

in which a single individual would not 

be expected to have professional 

expertise. An Authorized Officer 

frequently consults with subject matter 

experts prior to exercising such 

decision-making authority. In this 

respect, decisions by an Authorized 

Officer relating to paleontological issues 

are no different from such decisions 

made regarding other specialized 

disciplines in the Agency. The process 

of an Authorized Officer consulting 

with subject matter experts is not 

cumbersome, but rather is standard 

procedure in the decision-making 

process. A permit authorizes a permit 

holder to perform certain activities as 

specified in the permit. However, a 

permit holder would not be considered 

an Authorized Officer, and such 

designation is restricted to Forest 

Service employees. 

Comment: Definition of casual 

collection is too restrictive. Respondents 

expressed the view that limitations on 

amounts collected and the use of nonpowered hand tools for casual collection 

are too restrictive and go beyond the 

intent of the Act, which is to protect 

paleontological resources from 

exploitation for commercial gain. 

Response: The Act stipulates that 

casual collecting is subject to conditions 

including collection of reasonable 

amounts, collection from the land 

surface or by using non-powered hand 

tools, and collection resulting in 

negligible surface disturbance. The 

regulations are consistent with these 

stipulations of the Act. Protection of 

paleontological resources from 

commercial exploitation is only one of 

many purposes of the Act, which also 

stipulates that the Secretary of 

Agriculture manage and protect such 

resources using scientific principles and 

expertise, and to develop plans for the 

inventory, monitoring, and scientific 

and educational use of such resources. 

Comment: Casual collection should 

include reconnaissance collection. 

Respondents suggested that 

reconnaissance collection for research 

be included in the definition of casual 

collection. 

Response: Reconnaissance collection 

is considered research, does not 

constitute personal use, and requires a 

permit. 

Comment: Collection of common 

plant fossils with non-powered hand 

tools should not require a permit. One 

respondent expressed the view that the 

collection of any common plant fossils 

with non-powered hand tools should 

not require a permit. 

Response: Collection of common 

plant fossils using non-powered hand 

tools could be considered casual 

collecting and not require a permit, 

providing that all other conditions 

pertaining to reasonable amount and 

negligible disturbance as established for 

casual collecting are met. A permit 

would be required if such collection is 

outside the scope of conditions 

established for casual collecting. 

Comment: Shark and fish teeth 

should be included in the definition of 

casual collection. One respondent 

suggested that the collection of shark 

and/or fish teeth from the surface of 

natural erosional exposures should be 

considered casual collection, unless the 

subject specimens are rare. 

Response: The Act and the regulations 

stipulate that casual collecting is 

restricted to common invertebrate and 

plant fossils. Shark and fish teeth are 

vertebrate fossils, and are thereby 

excluded from casual collection. 

Comment: Collection during 

educational field trip. One respondent 

suggested that clarification should be 

provided concerning whether collection 

during an educational field trip led by 

a school, university, or museum would 

be considered casual collection or 

would require a permit. 

Response: A permit under these 

regulations would not be required for 

casual collecting by individual 

participants in an educational field trip, 

provided that collections by individuals 

are for personal use, do not exceed 

individual reasonable amount limits 

and the collateral impacts to associated 

resources that may be caused by the 

group do not exceed negligible 

disturbance criteria established for 

casual collection. However, the nature 

of the trip, including number of 

participants and potential collateral 

impacts to associated resources, could 

trigger the need for a special use permit 

pertaining to group uses that is 

unrelated to paleontological collection. 

Questions pertaining to group uses 

unrelated to paleontological collection 

should be directed to special uses staff 

at the local Forest Service Field Office 

in which a field trip is planned. 

Comment: Casual collection may 

promote illegal collection. One 

respondent suggested that allowing 

casual collection would facilitate illegal 

collection for resale under the pretext of 

casual collection, resulting in the loss of 

collection locations. 

Response: The Act establishes that 

casual collecting is an activity that may 

be performed on National Forest System 

lands, providing that established 

conditions are met. The Department 

would rely largely on the ethics of an 

informed and law-abiding collecting 

public, who are aware of conditions for 

casual collecting as established in 

regulation, and elect to legally collect by 

adhering to those conditions. 

Documented intentional noncompliance 

with the conditions established for 

casual collection would subject the 

collector to enforcement action. 

Comment: Regulation of casual 

collection is impossible. One respondent 

expressed the view that monitoring and 

regulation of casual collection by 

Department personnel in the field 

would be impossible. 

Response: The Act does not require 

the direct monitoring or regulation of 

casual collecting. Because the Act and 

the regulations establish that casual 

collecting does not require a permit or 

other advance approval, the Department 

agrees that it would be nearly 

impossible to monitor or track every 

individual occurrence of casual 

collecting. In this respect, casual 

collecting is no different from other 

activities that occur on National Forest 

System lands that do not require a 

permit. The Department would rely 

largely on the ethics of an informed and 

law-abiding collecting public, who are 

aware of conditions for casual collecting 

as established in regulation, and elect to 

legally collect by adhering to those 

conditions. Moreover, the effects of 

casual collecting may be indirectly 

monitored or tracked by assessing 

cumulative impacts in known areas 

commonly used for casual collection. 

Comment: Common fossils of limited 

interest to amateur collectors. One 

respondent suggested that amateur fossil 

collectors, like many amateur mineral 

collectors, would not be interested in 

casual collection limited to common 

and abundant invertebrate and plant 

fossils because such specimens are too 

commonplace. Interest would reside 

largely in rare or uncommon varieties, 

which are excluded from casual 

collection under these regulations. 

Response: The Act and the regulations 

establish that casual collecting only 

pertains to common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources. 

Intentional collection of rare or 

uncommon specimens would require a 

permit. 

Comment: Definition of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources should be clarified. 

Respondents suggested that the 

definition of common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources requires 

more detail and clarification in order to 

avoid confusing collectors. Respondents 

also expressed the view that common 

invertebrate and plant fossils be 

explicitly excluded from the definition 

of paleontological resources and thereby 

excluded from regulation. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21597 

Response: The definition of 

paleontological resources in the Act and 

the regulations includes common 

invertebrate and plant fossils, and the 

Act explicitly references common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources in the context of casual 

collecting. Criteria for whether a 

paleontological resource would be 

considered common could reflect a 

variety of factors including, but not 

limited to, context of occurrence in a 

particular location, relative abundance, 

and extent of distribution. It is not 

practical to address in regulations each 

factor that could be pertinent to 

determination of what constitutes 

common with respect to common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources. 

Comment: Include criterion of formal 

description in definition of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources. Two respondents suggested 

that a fossil species be considered 

common if it has been formally 

described in a scientific publication and 

type specimens have been deposited in 

an appropriate repository; conversely, a 

fossil species would only be considered 

rare if it has not been described or is 

awaiting description in scientific 

publication. One respondent suggested 

that if ten or more specimens of a 

species awaiting formal description 

have been deposited in a repository, that 

species may be considered common. 

Response: Criteria for whether or not 

a paleontological resource would be 

considered common or rare could reflect 

a variety of factors including, but not 

limited to, context of occurrence in a 

particular location, relative abundance, 

and extent of distribution. The proposed 

criterion of formal taxonomic 

description has no bearing on whether 

a particular occurrence of a specimen 

might be considered common. Many 

formally described species may be 

considered rare, and conversely, many 

undescribed species could be 

considered common. Moreover, the 

process as described by the respondents 

is cumbersome and would be nearly 

impossible to implement, particularly 

with regard to tracking number of 

specimens referred to a type. This 

would be especially true for any 

described species whose types did not 

originate from National Forest System 

lands. The Department will not 

incorporate a criterion of formal species 

description in the definition of 

common. 

Comment: Clarification regarding 

paleontological resources that are 

considered to be rare. Respondents 

suggested that additional information 

should be provided concerning which 

paleontological resources are considered 

to be rare, and expressed the view that 

a list be provided concerning which 

paleontological resources are considered 

rare and which are considered common. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

the apparent rarity of certain fossils 

often reflects the availability of access to 

collecting areas, rather than actual rarity 

of specimens. Respondents suggested 

that without expert knowledge, it would 

be difficult for amateur collectors to 

determine if a specimen is rare or 

common. One respondent expressed the 

view that clarification should be 

provided regarding whether or not a 

collector would be considered in 

jeopardy under the law if a rare 

specimen was collected inadvertently. 

Respondents also expressed the view 

that an Authorized Officer should not 

determine whether or not a 

paleontological resource is rare. 

Response: Criteria for whether or not 

a paleontological resource would be 

considered common or rare could reflect 

a variety of factors including, but not 

limited to, context of occurrence in a 

particular location, relative abundance, 

and extent of distribution. 

Consequently, an assessment of 

commonness or rarity would not 

necessarily apply universally to a 

particular taxon, and is therefore not 

appropriate for determination in the 

form of a taxonomic list. It is not 

practical to address in regulations each 

factor that could be pertinent to 

determination of what constitutes 

common or rare with respect to common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources. A collector would not 

necessarily be placed in jeopardy under 

the law for inadvertent collection of a 

rare specimen during casual collection. 

The Department could consider the 

intent and degree of non-compliance 

regarding inadvertent collection of rare 

specimens regarding potential 

enforcement. The regulations establish a 

procedure wherein an Authorized 

Officer would consider a 

recommendation by a subject matter 

expert in making a determination of 

whether an invertebrate or plant 

paleontological resource is common or 

rare. 

Comment: Associations of partial 

specimens should be addressed in 

definition of common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources. One 

respondent suggested that some isolated 

parts and/or incomplete specimens of 

certain organisms may be common, but 

associated parts and/or complete 

specimens of the same organism may be 

rare. The respondent questioned 

whether such species would be 

considered common or rare under the 

regulations. 

Response: Criteria for whether or not 

a paleontological resource would be 

considered common would include 

context of occurrence in a particular 

location and could include the nature of 

preservation, such as completeness and/ 

or associations of elements of a 

specimen. Consequently, an assessment 

of common could largely reflect the 

context of a specimen, and not 

necessarily apply universally to a 

particular taxon. For example, 

concentrations of disarticulated 

columnals of a particular crinoid 

species might be considered common, 

whereas a complete and fully 

articulated specimen of the same 

species would generally be considered 

rare. Consequently, it is not practical to 

address in regulations each factor that 

could be pertinent to determination of 

what constitutes common with respect 

to common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources. 

Comment: Criterion of widespread 

distribution should be clarified. 

Respondents suggested that clarification 

should be provided concerning what 

constitutes widespread distribution. 

One respondent suggested that most 

species are defined on the basis of 

geologic horizons and localities, and 

therefore can only be considered 

abundant in local areas, rather than 

widespread areas. 

Response: The characteristic of 

widespread distribution is considered 

dependent on factors including, but not 

limited to, the paleoecology of the 

organisms in question and the 

distribution of rock outcrops in which 

they may occur. It is not practical to 

address in regulations each factor that 

could be pertinent to determination of 

what constitutes widespread 

distribution with respect to common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources. In general, a species that is 

present in rocks distributed through the 

greater extent of a given Forest Service 

administrative Region could be 

considered to have widespread 

distribution in that Region. The 

respondent’s suggestion that most 

species can only be considered 

abundant in local areas and not of 

widespread distribution is conjectural 

and not substantiated. That assertion is 

contrary to the longstanding 

paleontological and stratigraphic 

concept of index fossils, whose geologic 

utility is predicated on their having the 

key attributes of easy identification, 

abundance, narrow temporal range, and 

widespread geographic distribution. 

Comment: Intermingling of common 

and rare species. Respondents suggested 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21598 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

that in many cases common and rare 

species are intermingled, and 

questioned whether locations in which 

such intermingling occur would be 

closed to casual collection. One 

respondent suggested that amateur 

collectors often donate rare specimens 

found in such circumstances to 

museums, and that closure of such 

locations to casual collection would 

result in fewer rare species being 

collected and described. One 

respondent suggested that if locations 

containing intermingled common and 

rare species are closed to collection, 

amateur collectors would not disclose 

finding of rare species in order to avoid 

closure of such areas. One respondent 

suggested that if such areas were closed, 

opportunities for children to casually 

collect would be lost. 

Response: The respondents’ 

suggestion that common and rare 

species are intermingled in many cases 

is conjectural and not substantiated. In 

cases where intermingling is 

demonstrated, the Authorized Officer 

has the ability to close an area to casual 

collection if it is considered that rare 

paleontological resources may be placed 

at risk by inadvertent casual collection. 

The potential for casual collectors to 

inadvertently collect rare specimens and 

later donate them to repositories could 

be considered in area closure decisions. 

The existence of alternative 

opportunities for children to casually 

collect could also be considered in area 

closure decisions. The Department 

expects that ethical casual collectors 

would not withhold information 

concerning the occurrence of rare 

specimens for the purpose of avoiding 

potential area closures. 

Comment: Discovery of a new species. 

Two respondents expressed the view 

that the regulations should include 

procedures for amateur collectors to 

follow if they collect specimens that 

may be considered to represent new 

species. The respondents suggested 

specific procedures including collection 

and packaging protocols, location 

documentation, contacting professional 

paleontologists, and other related 

actions. 

Response: The Department does not 

consider that discovery of new species 

would be a commonplace occurrence in 

the context of casual collection. 

Protocols related to the documentation 

and description of new species are the 

subjects of an extensive body of 

scientific taxonomic literature, and the 

formal establishment of such protocols 

in the context of casual collecting is 

beyond the scope of the regulations. 

Specimens that could represent new 

species that were inadvertently 

collected during casual collection 

should be returned to the Forest Service 

for appropriate disposition. 

Comment: Credit to amateur 

collectors of new species. Two 

respondents suggested that the 

regulations require that amateur 

collectors who find new species be 

explicitly acknowledged in professional 

publications in which such species are 

formally described. One respondent 

suggested that a $500.00 penalty be 

assessed to authors of such papers who 

fail to acknowledge a casual collector 

who provided the specimens upon 

which a new species is described. 

Response: The Department does not 

consider that discovery of new species 

would be a commonplace occurrence in 

the context of casual collection. The 

issue of providing credit or 

acknowledgment of a collector’s 

contribution to published research is an 

ethical matter beyond the scope of the 

regulations. 

Comment: Consumptive analysis. One 

respondent suggested that the definition 

of consumptive analysis is too broad, 

and should be limited to procedures 

that would destroy an entire specimen 

or a majority of a specimen. 

Response: Consumptive analysis is 

commonly understood to mean any 

procedure that would entail irrevocable 

alteration (that is, consumption) of a 

part of a specimen for the purpose of 

acquiring information that cannot be 

obtained any other way; for example, 

removing and destroying a plug of bone 

to determine chemical composition or 

microscopic structure. Important and/or 

unique scientific information may be 

represented in a small portion of a 

specimen, independent of the entire 

specimen or majority of a specimen. 

Consequently, it would not be 

appropriate to define consumptive 

analysis only in the context of 

destruction of a complete specimen, or 

the majority of a specimen. 

Comment: Curatorial services and 

curation. One respondent suggested that 

reference to purposes for lending a 

collection be clarified by listing 

exhibition as an educational purpose. 

One respondent suggested that the 

definition of curatorial service and 

curation reference the intellectual 

services that trained scientists provide 

to collections, including management 

decisions that maximize scientific and 

educational value of the collections. 

Response: The Department considers 

that exhibition of specimens is an 

educational purpose, and does not 

require separate listing. The Department 

considers that ‘‘intellectual services’’ 

provided by trained repository staff 

scientists would be the basis for 

professional collections management 

practices and decisions employed by 

such staff, and does not require separate 

listing. 

Comment: Federal land. One 

respondent expressed the view that the 

definition of Federal land as discussed 

in the Preamble reads awkwardly and 

should be rephrased. 

Response: The Department agrees 

with the respondent’s view and has 

added the word ‘‘and’’ to read: ‘‘9. The 

term Federal land restates the definition 

contained in 16 U.S.C. 470aaa of the 

Act, and means land controlled by the 

Secretary except for Indian land as 

defined in 16 U.S.C. 470aaa.’’ 

Comment: Definition of fossil should 

include temporal component. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the definition of fossil should include a 

component of geologic time; specifically 

that organic remains and/or traces that 

post-date the Pleistocene epoch (postglacial time) not be considered as 

fossils. One respondent suggested that 

organic remains and/or traces that occur 

in archeological time frames and/or 

modern sediment deposits originating 

from catastrophic events such as floods 

or mud entrapment not be considered as 

fossils. 

Response: The existing definition of 

fossil is one that is commonly used in 

the scientific community and largely 

conforms to the definition of fossil as 

employed by the American Geological 

Institute (AGI). In addition, the existing 

definition of fossil is consistent with the 

definition of paleontological resource as 

established by the Act and the 

regulations, which does not include a 

temporal criterion. Incorporation of an 

end-Pleistocene limit to determine 

whether or not a particular specimen is 

a fossil would be arbitrary and not based 

in science. Similarly, reference to 

occurrence in an archeological time 

frame to determine whether or not a 

specimen is a fossil would also be 

arbitrary and not based in science. 

Organic remains and traces in modern 

sediments, originating from catastrophic 

events that occurred not more than 

several decades before the present, 

would generally not be considered 

fossils. 

Comment: Definition of fossil should 

be clarified regarding organic traces. 

One respondent suggested that the 

definition of fossil be clarified regarding 

whether organic traces (trace fossils) are 

considered to be fossils or sedimentary 

structures. 

Response: The definition of fossil 

clearly states that ‘‘fossil means any 

fossilized remains, traces, or imprints of 

organisms . . .’’ Consequently, trace 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21599 

fossils are considered fossils as per the 

definition. 

Comment: Definition of ‘‘fossil’’ as 

discussed in preamble overuses the 

word ‘‘paleontological’’. One 

respondent expressed the view that the 

word ‘‘paleontological’’ is overused in 

the discussion of the definition of 

‘‘fossil’’ in the preamble. The 

respondent suggested that the 

discussion would be improved by 

substituting the word ‘‘scientific’’ for 

‘‘paleontological’’ with reference to the 

term ‘‘paleontological interest’’. 

Response: The discussion of ‘‘fossil’’ 

in the preamble clarifies the distinction 

between a fossil and a paleontological 

resource, and in so doing restates the 

definition of paleontological resource as 

established in the Act and the 

regulations. That definition uses the 

term paleontological interest, rather 

than scientific interest. Because the 

referenced passage restates an 

established definition, it will not be 

changed. 

Comment: Definition of fossilized is 

too broad. One respondent suggested 

that the definition of fossilized is too 

broad, and that the definition should 

include a component of geologic age or 

other time constraint, or be deleted 

entirely. 

Response: The existing definition of 

fossilized refers to natural processes that 

would operate to transform organic 

remains, traces, or imprints into fossils. 

The definition is focused on processes 

rather than time, and processes of 

fossilization operate over a wide range 

of time scales, often of unknown extent, 

that reflect the complex interactions of 

diverse physical and chemical 

environmental variables. The existing 

definition of fossilized is consistent 

with definition of the related term 

fossilization as employed by the 

American Geological Institute (AGI), 

which likewise does not include a time 

constraint. 

Comment: Indian land. One 

respondent expressed the view that the 

regulations criminalize activities of 

young Native Americans by not 

allowing them to collect fossils for 

resale on their own lands. 

Response: The Act and the regulations 

explicitly state that Indian lands are not 

subject to the Act or the regulations. 

Fossil collecting activities by Native 

Americans on Indian lands would be 

under the jurisdiction of Tribal 

authorities. 

Comment: The definition of negligible 

disturbance is ambiguous. Respondents 

expressed the view that the definition of 

negligible disturbance is vague, 

arbitrary, subject to individual 

interpretation, and should be clarified. 

Respondents suggested that the 

definition of negligible disturbance 

include measurable limits expressed in 

volumes, amounts, and/or areas such as 

square meters, square yards, and/or 

acres. One respondent suggested a 

maximum disturbance limit of one 

square meter. One respondent suggested 

that criteria for excessive disturbance be 

defined and used in place of the 

negligible disturbance criterion. 

Response: The amount of physical 

disturbance created during casual 

collection is not the only criterion that 

would determine whether overall 

disturbance is negligible or not. Other 

factors that would relate to overall 

disturbance could include, but would 

not be limited to, location specific 

factors such as proximity to threatened 

or endangered species and/or other 

sensitive resources and visual/aesthetic 

considerations. It is not practical to 

address in regulations the entire 

spectrum of factors that could be 

pertinent to determination of what 

constitutes negligible disturbance 

related to casual collection at any 

particular location. In general, surface 

collection by hand would be inherently 

less likely to exceed negligible 

disturbance than would be collection 

involving removal of materials using 

hand tools. The Act requires that 

negligible disturbance be determined by 

the Secretary, rather than excessive 

disturbance. Moreover, for the same 

reasons as presented above, it would be 

no more practical to establish specific 

criteria for excessive disturbance in the 

regulations than it would be to establish 

such criteria for negligible disturbance. 

Comment: Negligible disturbance and 

non-powered hand tools. Two 

respondents suggested that negligible 

disturbance be defined as any 

disturbance resulting from the use of 

non-powered hand tools in casual 

collection. One respondent suggested 

that allowing only non-powered hand 

tools would place practical limits on 

amounts of material that could be 

removed without difficulty and would 

thus be self-regulating. One respondent 

suggested that employing the criterion 

of non-powered hand tools would be 

easily identifiable in the field and 

would thereby facilitate enforcement of 

the negligible disturbance criterion. 

Response: In separately specifying 

conditions of negligible disturbance and 

use of non-powered hand tools in the 

context of casual collecting, the Act 

recognizes that these criteria are 

distinct. The use of non-powered hand 

tools can result in disturbance of large 

surface areas to an extent that would be 

considered greater than negligible by 

any other objective criterion. 

Consequently, it would not be 

appropriate to define negligible 

disturbance as any disturbance that was 

created using non-powered hand tools. 

Moreover, the amount of physical 

disturbance created during casual 

collection is not the only criterion that 

would determine whether overall 

disturbance is negligible or not. Other 

factors that would relate to overall 

disturbance could include, but would 

not be limited to, location specific 

factors such as proximity to threatened 

or endangered species and/or other 

sensitive resources and visual/aesthetic 

considerations. 

Comment: Authorized Officer should 

not determine negligible disturbance. 

One respondent suggested that an 

Authorized Officer should not have the 

authority to determine whether 

disturbance is negligible or not, because 

such decisions may be subjective and/ 

or biased. 

Response: The Department considers 

that in many circumstances, what 

constitutes negligible disturbance would 

depend on the location of the activity 

and could reflect a number of specific 

factors that are unrelated to 

paleontological resources. Authorized 

Officers in the Forest Service have been 

delegated the authority to make certain 

land use decisions in the administrative 

units under their jurisdiction. For any 

given location, the Authorized Officer is 

appropriately positioned to decide, 

based on recommendations of local staff 

specialists, whether or not a particular 

level of surface disturbance would be 

considered negligible or not. 

Comment: Disturbance related to 

fossil collection is negligible compared 

to other uses. Respondents expressed 

the view that casual collection using 

only non-powered hand tools should 

not be subject to a negligible 

disturbance criterion, since surface 

disturbance as a consequence of such 

collection is negligible compared to 

surface disturbance resulting from other 

activities allowed on National Forest 

System lands such as minerals 

extraction, logging, and grazing. 

Response: The Act requires that the 

regulations define the term ‘‘negligible 

disturbance’’ in the context of casual 

collection. Contrary to casual collecting, 

other surface disturbing activities as 

specified by the respondents require 

authorization from the Forest Service. 

Such authorizations generally require a 

formal NEPA assessment in which 

potential impacts associated with the 

activity are disclosed and potential 

mitigation of such impacts may be 

proposed. Because casual collecting 

does not require an authorization or 

other Agency decision, conditions 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21600 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

established for casual collection must 

ensure that surface disturbance related 

to such collection is negligible and does 

not exceed any threshold that would 

otherwise trigger the need for a NEPA 

assessment of the activity. 

Comment: Negligible disturbance 

criterion impractical for serious amateur 

collectors. One respondent expressed 

the view that collection of good fossil 

specimens by serious amateur collectors 

often requires freshly exposing large 

areas of bedrock, which would not be 

consistent with a requirement for little 

or no change to the land surface. The 

respondent also suggested that the 

exclusion of large hand tools and/or 

powered tools would not allow 

exposure of fresh bedrock which is 

necessary for such collection. 

Response: Land disturbance to the 

extent described by the respondent 

would generally be considered greater 

than negligible, and would require a 

permit. Collection resulting in 

disturbance greater than negligible and/ 

or by using hand tools larger than 

allowed for casual collection would 

require a permit. 

Comment: Cumulative surface 

disturbance in large common collecting 

areas should be addressed. Respondents 

expressed the view that clarification 

should be provided concerning how 

criteria for negligible disturbance would 

be applied in common collection 

locations subject to casual collection by 

large numbers of collectors. 

Respondents suggested that in such 

common collecting locations, areas 

disturbed by individual collectors may 

coalesce, and areas disturbed by 

individual collectors may not be able to 

be differentiated from preexisting 

disturbed areas. 

Response: Each individual engaging 

in casual collecting in a common 

collection area would be expected to 

adhere to the negligible disturbance 

criterion. Common collecting areas in 

which cumulative surface disturbance 

levels exceed negligible could be subject 

to NEPA assessment of surface impacts. 

Such areas could be subject to closure 

to casual collecting and/or restricted to 

collecting under permit. 

Comment: Reclamation of disturbed 

areas. One respondent expressed the 

view that a collector should be allowed 

to exceed the negligible disturbance 

criterion provided that the disturbed 

area is reclaimed by the collector before 

leaving. Two respondents suggested 

adding a requirement that all areas 

disturbed by collection should be filledin and graded. One respondent 

suggested that small areas of 

disturbance should not require 

reclamation because they will be 

restored by natural processes over time. 

Response: Collection resulting in 

disturbance that exceeds a negligible 

level would require a permit. The need 

for reclamation of areas in which 

disturbance exceeds negligible levels 

would be addressed in a permit. The 

criterion of negligible disturbance in 

casual collection implies that 

disturbance would be of such limited 

extent that reclamation would not be 

necessary. 

Comment: Negligible disturbance and 

consecutive collecting trips. One 

respondent suggested that that 

clarification should be provided 

concerning how negligible disturbance 

criteria would be applied in the event of 

consecutive collecting trips made to the 

same area by an individual collector. 

Response: The criterion of negligible 

disturbance would not be assessed 

cumulatively, but rather would be 

applied to disturbance resulting from 

each collecting event performed by an 

individual. 

Comment: Definition of noncommercial personal use is overly 

restrictive. Respondents expressed the 

view that the definition of noncommercial personal use is too 

restrictive, particularly with reference to 

exclusion of use for research. 

Respondents suggested that excluding 

research would prevent casual 

collectors from developing personal 

expertise by researching their finds, and 

that research, publication, and donation 

to museums of specimens that were 

collected by knowledgeable amateur 

collectors would be made illegal. One 

respondent suggested that clarification 

should be provided regarding whether 

or not it would be a violation if casually 

collected specimens were later donated 

to an academic institution for research. 

Respondents suggested that the term 

research be removed from the 

definition, and one respondent 

expressed the view that it is ironic for 

research to be considered a commercial 

use. 

Response: The definition of noncommercial personal use has been 

modified to further characterize 

research, which is not considered to be 

a personal use. Research, in the context 

of these regulations, is considered to be 

a structured activity undertaken by 

qualified individuals with the intent to 

obtain and disseminate information via 

publication in a peer-reviewed 

professional scientific journal or 

equivalent venue, which increases the 

body of knowledge available to a 

scientific community. In accordance 

with this characterization of research, 

casual collectors seeking to develop 

personal expertise through study of 

collected specimens would not be 

considered to be engaging in research. 

Specimens that were casually collected 

with the intent of personal use may be 

donated to a repository at a later time; 

however, collection with the intent to 

donate to a repository would not 

constitute casual collection and would 

require a permit. The Department does 

not expect this to be a commonplace 

scenario. The Department does not 

consider research to be a commercial 

use; however, research is likewise not 

considered to be a personal use and, 

therefore, requires a permit. 

Comment: Include mitigation in 

definition of non-commercial personal 

use. One respondent suggested that the 

definition of non-commercial personal 

use should specify that mitigation of 

damage or potential damage to 

paleontological resources be excluded 

from consideration as non-commercial 

personal uses. 

Response: Mitigation of damage or 

potential damage to paleontological 

resources generally occurs in the 

context of permitted projects on 

National Forest System lands. Permitted 

projects are frequently commercial in 

nature and associated paleontological 

resource mitigations are always 

managed as professional, rather than 

personal activities. Consequently, 

mitigation activities could not 

reasonably be construed as noncommercial personal use, and there is 

no need to specifically include 

discussion of mitigation in the 

definition of non-commercial personal 

use. 

Comment: Definition of noncommercial personal use should not 

reference financial gain or research. 

One respondent suggested that reference 

to financial gain and research should be 

removed from the definition of noncommercial personal use in order to be 

consistent with the discussion of casual 

collection in the context of outfitters 

and guides in the section ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities’’. 

Response: Reference by the 

respondent to the discussion of casual 

collection associated with outfitters and 

guides in the section ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities’’ is 

presented out of context, and the 

definition of non-commercial personal 

use as proposed is consistent with the 

referenced discussion. The referenced 

discussion establishes that participants 

in an outfitter/guide operation that is 

not paleontological in nature may 

individually engage in casual collection 

as an incidental activity which is not 

related to the commercial purpose of the 

permitted outfitter/guide operation, and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21601 

that the regulations would not be 

expected to negatively impact a 

permitted small entity operation that is 

not paleontological in nature. 

Commercial use and/or financial gain 

from paleontological resources are not 

allowed in accordance with the Act and 

these regulations. Research, while not 

considered commercial, is also not 

considered a personal use. 

Comment: The definition of nonpowered hand tools is too restrictive. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the definition of non-powered hand 

tools is more restrictive than stipulated 

by the Act, which does not establish a 

limit on the size of non-powered hand 

tools. Respondents suggested that large 

non-powered hand tools, including but 

not limited to full-sized pick axes, 

sledge hammers, crow bars, pry bars, 

and shovels are necessary to remove 

unconsolidated overburden and expose 

fresh bedrock containing 

paleontological resources and to extract 

paleontological resources from hard 

sedimentary rocks. Respondents 

suggested that the definition should not 

focus on tool size, but rather should 

specify that tools be used that are 

appropriate to the circumstances of the 

collecting in order to minimize damage 

to specimens. Respondents expressed 

the view that use of hand tools that are 

too small and inappropriate for 

collecting conditions will result in loss 

or damage of paleontological specimens. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

hand tools should be defined as any 

tools that are not powered by a motor, 

engine, or other mechanical power 

source, and that tool size should not be 

included in the definition. 

Response: The Department considers 

that casual collecting would generally 

be happenstance without intentional 

planning or preparation, and that use of 

large hand tools requiring two-handed 

operation would be inconsistent with 

such activity and would entail a higher 

potential for greater than negligible land 

surface disturbance. Land disturbance to 

the extent described by respondents 

would generally be considered greater 

than negligible, and would require a 

permit. Collection resulting in 

disturbance greater than negligible and/ 

or by using hand tools larger than 

allowed for casual collection would 

require a permit. 

Comment: The definition of nonpowered hand tools is arbitrary and 

vague. Respondents have expressed the 

view that the definition of non-powered 

hand tools is arbitrary, vague, and will 

create confusion. Respondents suggest 

that non-powered hand tool of any 

particular type exist in a nearly 

continuous range of sizes, and suggested 

that clarification should be provided 

concerning where the upper size limit 

would be placed in such continuous 

series, or how it would be determined 

if a tool is too large. 

Response: Generally, a non-powered 

hand tool that requires use of both 

hands to wield effectively would be 

considered too large for use in casual 

collection. The Department considers 

that casual collecting would generally 

be happenstance without intentional 

planning or preparation, and that use of 

large hand tools requiring two-handed 

operation would be inconsistent with 

such activity and would entail a higher 

potential for land surface disturbance 

greater than negligible. Use of hand 

tools larger than allowed for casual 

collection could be authorized for 

collection under a permit. 

Comment: Specification of certain 

tools. Respondents expressed the view 

that clarification should be provided 

regarding whether or not use of chisels, 

pry bars, crow bars, Marsh picks, geopicks, hoe-picks, and/or pick-axes 

would be allowed in casual collection. 

Response: The level of specificity 

requested by the respondents is not 

appropriate for regulation. Generally, a 

non-powered hand tool that requires use 

of both hands to wield effectively would 

be considered too large for use in casual 

collection. 

Comment: Permit and use of large 

hand tools. Respondents suggested the 

clarification should be provided 

regarding whether or not use of nonpowered hand tools larger than allowed 

for casual collection would be 

authorized under a permit. 

Response: Use of hand tools larger 

than allowed for casual collection could 

be authorized for collection under a 

permit. 

Comment: Restriction on use of large 

hand tools will stop casual collection. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

limiting hand tool sizes will stop casual 

collecting activities. Another 

respondent suggested that limiting use 

of large shovels and pick-axes will 

criminalize collection by children and 

volunteer collectors. 

Response: The respondents’ 

suggestions that restricting use of large 

tools in casual collecting would stop 

such activities and would criminalize 

collection by children and volunteers 

are speculative and not substantiated. 

Use of hand tools larger than allowed 

for casual collection could be 

authorized for collection under a 

permit. 

Comment: Definition of non-powered 

hand tools should not reference 

negligible disturbance. One respondent 

expressed the view that discussion of 

the definition of non-powered hand 

tools in the preamble should not 

reference negligible disturbance, 

because negligible disturbance should 

be based on the amount and nature of 

disturbance rather than the type of tool 

being used. 

Response: The actual definition of 

non-powered hand tools does not 

reference the negligible disturbance 

criterion. The preamble discussion of 

the definition of non-powered hand 

tools provides clarification that in 

developing the definition, the 

Department recognizes that larger tools 

have an inherent capacity to disturb 

larger areas to an extent greater than 

would be considered negligible. 

Comment: Paleontological localities 

that contain more than one fossil 

assemblage. One respondent suggested 

that clarification should be provided 

concerning the potential existence of 

successive geologic beds at any given 

locality, each of which may contain 

distinctly different fossil assemblages. 

The respondent questioned whether or 

not each distinct fossil assemblage 

would be considered separately in 

determining collection limits. 

Response: The reasonable amount 

limit established for casual collection is 

an absolute specified amount, and is not 

a ‘‘per locality’’ or ‘‘per bed’’ or ‘‘per 

fauna’’ limit. Amounts collected at 

different locations, from different beds, 

and/or representing distinct faunas 

would all contribute cumulatively to the 

established total reasonable amount 

annual limit. 

Comment: Definition of 

paleontological resources does not 

recognize diversity of types of fossils. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

there exist a wide variety of fossils and 

that the regulations unnecessarily 

consider all of them to be 

paleontological resources and subject to 

regulation. Respondents suggested that 

common invertebrate and plant fossils 

should be excluded from the definition 

of paleontological resources because 

they do not require the same level of 

protection as vertebrate fossils and 

cultural resources. 

Response: Paleontological resources 

are defined in the Act, and the 

regulations restate the definition 

established in the Act. The Department 

considers that the definition of 

paleontological resources in the Act and 

the regulations appropriately includes 

the diversity of fossil organisms and 

their remains, traces, and imprints. 

Common invertebrate and plant fossils 

are included in the definition of 

paleontological resources. 

Comment: Paleontological resources 

do not need to be defined or regulated. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21602 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

One respondent expressed the view that 

there is no need to define or regulate 

paleontological resources because there 

are other mechanisms in place to protect 

the few fossil sites that merit protection, 

such as designating them National Parks 

or Monuments. 

Response: Paleontological resources 

are defined in the Act, and the 

regulations restate the definition 

established in the Act. The Act 

stipulates that the Secretary of 

Agriculture shall manage and protect 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System Lands using scientific 

principles and expertise, and these 

regulations establish procedures for 

such management. The Act and these 

regulations apply to all National Forest 

System lands. 

Comment: Definition of 

paleontological resources does not 

address reproductions. One respondent 

suggested that the definition of 

paleontological resources should 

explicitly exclude reproductions, such 

as casts made from actual specimens. 

Response: The definition of 

paleontological resources refers to 

fossilized remains, traces, or imprints of 

organisms. Casts and other 

reproductions are clearly not fossilized 

remains, traces, or imprints of 

organisms, and would not be considered 

paleontological resources under the 

existing definition, and do not require 

explicit exclusion by listing them. 

Comment: Definition of 

paleontological resources is too broad 

and ambiguous. One respondent 

expressed the view that the definition of 

paleontological resources is overly 

broad and ambiguous. The respondent 

suggested that the definition appears to 

have been modeled after the 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act 

(ARPA) which covers very different 

resources, and that the definition of 

paleontological resources and the 

regulations should better reflect those 

resource differences. 

Response: The definition of 

paleontological resources in the 

regulations restates the definition in the 

Act. The Department considers that the 

definition of paleontological resources 

in the Act and the regulations 

appropriately includes the diversity of 

fossil organisms and their remains, 

traces, and imprints, and is, therefore, 

neither overly broad nor ambiguous. 

The definition is consistent with 

common use of the terms 

‘‘paleontological resources’’ and ‘‘fossil’’ 

within the scientific community. The 

respondent’s reference to that definition 

being modeled after ARPA bears no 

relevance to the adequacy and/or 

appropriateness of the definition. 

Comment: Reference to archeological 

resources should be clarified. One 

respondent expressed the opinion that 

clarification should be provided to 

indicate that fossils found in association 

with archeological resources would 

otherwise be considered paleontological 

resources when found in a nonarcheological context. 

Response: The definition of 

paleontological resources in the Act and 

in these regulations excludes fossils 

associated with archaeological 

resources. The Department does not 

consider it necessary to additionally 

state in the definition the converse case, 

that fossils not associated with 

archaeological resources would be 

considered paleontological resources. 

Comment: Definition requested for 

‘‘qualified paleontologist’’. One 

respondent suggested that a definition 

be provided for the term ‘‘qualified 

paleontologist’’. 

Response: Qualifications are 

evaluated in the context of being 

commensurate with a particular task or 

project, and do not comprise a defined 

set of universally applicable criteria. 

The term ‘‘qualified paleontologist’’ has 

been removed from these regulations 

and, therefore, does not require 

definition in this final rule. 

Comment: The definition of 

reasonable amount is overly restrictive. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the definition of reasonable amount is 

overly restrictive, arbitrary, and 

ambiguous. Respondents suggested that 

the definition does not recognize the 

variety of fossil types and their 

occurrences, and that many invertebrate 

fossils occur in countless numbers and 

would be lost by erosion if not 

collected. One respondent expressed the 

view that amount limits for the 

collection of common and abundant 

invertebrate and plant fossils are 

unnecessary, because most sites bearing 

such fossils are continually replenished 

by natural processes of erosion. One 

respondent suggested that reasonable 

amounts be eliminated because there are 

too many field variables to consider in 

establishing collection limits. 

Response: The Act requires that the 

regulations define the term reasonable 

amount in the context of casual 

collecting. In establishing a reasonable 

amount, the Department considered the 

adjective ‘‘casual’’ as used in the term 

‘‘casual collecting’’. The commonplace 

definition of casual includes the 

elements ‘‘happening by chance; not 

planned or expected’’, ‘‘done without 

much thought, effort, or concern’’, and 

‘‘occurring without regularity’’ 

(‘‘casual’’ Merriam-Webster.com. 2014. 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/

dictionary/casual (4 March 2014)). The 

Department considers that in 

establishing the term ‘‘casual 

collection’’ rather than ‘‘amateur 

collection’’ or ‘‘hobby collection’’ or 

‘‘recreational collection’’, the Act 

intended that casual collection reflect 

the commonplace meaning of ‘‘casual’’, 

and that such casual collecting would 

generally be happenstance without 

intentional planning or preparation. The 

preamble discussion of the definition of 

casual collection has been modified to 

include this clarification. Consistent 

with such unplanned collection, a 

reasonable amount would generally be 

smaller rather than larger, and would 

not reflect site-specific and complex 

factors such as rock types and other 

field variables. The Department has 

considered public comments on the 

proposed rule and has modified the 

reasonable amount definition to 

comprise a criterion of 100 pounds per 

person per calendar year, not to exceed 

25 pounds per person per day. 

Collection of amounts greater than the 

reasonable amount established for 

casual collection would require a 

permit. 

Comment: Reasonable amount limits 

will discourage recreational fossil 

collection. One respondent expressed 

the view that the specified reasonable 

amounts could be exceeded in minutes, 

and would consequently discourage 

recreational and amateur collectors from 

making long distance trips to collect. 

One respondent suggested that limits on 

reasonable amounts would reduce the 

opportunity to use casually collected 

fossils in public education to stimulate 

interest in science among children. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the specified limits on reasonable 

amount would be easy to violate 

unintentionally, and would criminalize 

casual collecting. 

Response: Collection for recreational 

and/or educational purposes of amounts 

greater than the reasonable amount 

established for casual collection is not 

precluded by the regulations, but would 

require a permit. The Department could 

consider the intent and degree of noncompliance regarding collection greater 

than the established reasonable amount 

in decisions regarding potential 

enforcement. 

Comment: Specified reasonable 

amounts will result in specimen loss by 

culling. Respondents expressed the view 

that imposing limits on reasonable 

amounts would lead to loss and/or 

destruction of specimens because 

collectors would high-grade, field-trim, 

and/or otherwise cull collected 

specimens in the field in order to meet 

specified collection limits. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21603 

Response: Collection of amounts 

greater than the reasonable amount 

established for casual collection would 

require a permit. The Department 

expects that responsible collectors 

would strive to minimize collateral 

damage to specimens resulting from 

culling and/or field-trimming. 

Discarded material would be considered 

as disturbed surface material in context 

of the negligible disturbance criterion. 

Comment: Reasonable amount limits 

will not permit adequate scientific 

sampling. One respondent expressed the 

view that specified limits on reasonable 

amounts would result in inadequate 

sampling of fossil populations and 

tainted scientific hypotheses resulting 

from such samples. One respondent 

suggested that the reasonable amount 

limits are too low to be able assess fossil 

population variation and to document 

changes of such variation across 

gradients in space and time. 

Response: Collection as described by 

the respondents for the purpose of 

obtaining sample sizes representative of 

the variation in a natural population 

would be considered research, not 

casual collection, and would require a 

permit. 

Comment: Reasonable amount should 

be what can be safely stored in a 

personal residence. Two respondents 

suggested that reasonable amount be 

defined as the volume of material that 

can be safely stored in an individual’s 

personal residence. One respondent 

suggested that reasonable amount 

should be defined as an amount of 

collected material that is capable of 

being properly transported and stored 

for future use. 

Response: The Department has 

considered public comments on the 

proposed rule and has modified the 

reasonable amount definition to 

comprise a criterion of 100 pounds per 

person per calendar year, not to exceed 

25 pounds per person per day. The 

amounts suggested by the respondents 

greatly exceed a reasonable amount 

considered in the context of casual 

collection. Collection of amounts greater 

than the reasonable amount established 

for casual collection would require a 

permit. 

Comment: Limits on reasonable 

amounts will reduce collaboration 

between amateurs and professionals. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

the specified reasonable amounts will 

have a chilling effect on long term 

collaboration between amateur 

collectors, professional paleontologists, 

and repository institutions. 

Response: The respondent’s 

suggestion that reasonable amount 

limits would reduce collaboration 

between amateur collectors, 

professional paleontologists, and 

repository institutions is conjectural and 

not substantiated. Amateur collectors 

may apply for a permit to collect 

amounts greater than the reasonable 

amount established for casual 

collection. In addition, the definition of 

reasonable amounts should not affect 

working relationships among parties 

interested in paleontological resources 

on National Forest System lands. 

Comment: Collection of larger 

quantities for donation and/or 

education. One respondent suggested 

that clarification should be provided 

concerning whether or not quantities of 

abundant resources that exceed the 

specified reasonable amount could be 

collected for donation for educational 

purposes. 

Response: Amounts greater than the 

reasonable amount limit established for 

casual collection would require a permit 

for collection. 

Comment: Development of online 

certification instructional program. One 

respondent expressed the view that it 

would be beneficial for the Department 

to develop an online instructional and/ 

or certification program providing 

guidance on collection of 

paleontological resources and 

responsible uses of the land and its 

resources. 

Response: The establishment of an 

online instructional/certification 

program as described by the respondent 

has merit as a concept, but is beyond the 

scope of these regulations. 

Comment: Reasonable amount 

criterion of not more than five 

specimens of any one kind is ambiguous 

and too restrictive. Respondents 

expressed the view that the reasonable 

amount criterion of not more than five 

specimens of any one kind is ambiguous 

and too restrictive. Respondents 

suggested that clarification should be 

provided concerning the meaning of 

‘‘kind,’’ which could be interpreted to 

correspond to taxonomic ranks ranging 

from class to species. One respondent 

expressed the view that for small 

specimens, the limit of five could be 

exceeded in a single hand sample. 

Respondents suggested that the numeric 

limit be raised to ten specimens of any 

one kind, and one respondent suggested 

that the term ‘‘kind’’ be replaced by 

‘‘morphotype’’. One respondent 

suggested that the criterion of not more 

than five specimens of any one kind be 

eliminated. 

Response: The Department has 

considered public comments on the 

proposed rule and has modified the 

reasonable amount definition to 

comprise a criterion of 100 pounds per 

person per calendar year, not to exceed 

25 pounds per person per day. The 

criterion of five specimens of any one 

kind has been eliminated. 

Comment: Reasonable amount limits 

based on volume and/or size are too 

restrictive. Respondents expressed the 

view that reasonable amount limits per 

calendar year of 25 pounds, 1-gallon 

container or less, and/or one handcarried slab are overly restrictive. 

Respondents suggested that fossils at 

many collection sites are so abundant 

that collection would have little impact, 

and those fossils that are not collected 

are destroyed by weathering. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

many well-known collecting areas look 

untouched. One respondent suggested 

that higher collection limits are 

necessary for amateurs to perform 

paleontological reconnaissance 

collecting for academic paleontologists. 

Response: The Act stipulates that the 

regulations must define reasonable 

amount with respect to casual 

collection. Although fossils may be very 

abundant at some collection sites, they 

may not be universally abundant at all 

collection locations. The Department 

has considered public comments on the 

proposed regulations and modified the 

reasonable amount definition to 

comprise a single criterion of 100 

pounds per person per calendar year. 

Paleontological reconnaissance 

collecting as described constitutes 

research, is not considered casual 

collection, and requires a permit. 

Comment: Reasonable amount limits 

should be raised. Respondents 

expressed the view that the weight limit 

of 25 pounds per calendar year be raised 

to 25 pounds per day or 100 pounds per 

day. Respondents suggested that annual 

weight limit be raised to 50 pounds or 

100 pounds or 200 pounds per year. 

One respondent suggested that the 1 

gallon by volume yearly limit be raised 

to 4 cubic feet. One respondent 

expressed the view that the handcarried slab criterion be changed to a 

100 pound weight limit per slab. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

clarification should be provided 

concerning whether the stated 

reasonable amount limits apply to 

individuals or families. 

Response: The Department has 

considered public comments on the 

proposed rule and has modified the 

reasonable amount definition to 

comprise a criterion of 100 pounds per 

person per calendar year, not to exceed 

25 pounds per person per day. 

Comment: Reasonable amount that 

can be hand carried. Two respondents 

expressed the view that the criterion 

that a slab can be no larger than what 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21604 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

can be hand-carried by a single person 

is unfair because the allowed amount 

would depend on the size and/or 

strength of an individual, rather than a 

uniform limit applied to all individuals. 

Response: The Department has 

considered public comments on the 

proposed rule and has modified the 

reasonable amount definition to 

comprise a criterion of 100 pounds per 

person per calendar year, not to exceed 

25 pounds per day. 

Comment: Reasonable amount limits 

and fossils enclosed in rock matrix. 

Respondents suggested that clarification 

should be provided regarding whether 

or not rock matrix surrounding fossils is 

included in the limits, and suggested 

that destruction of fossils would result 

from collectors attempting to field-trim 

matrix from fossils to remain under 

limits. 

Response: The reasonable amount 

limit would apply to the entire amount 

of material removed in a year, including 

fossils and any enclosing matrix. The 

Department expects that responsible 

collectors would strive to minimize 

collateral damage to specimens resulting 

from field-trimming. Discarded material 

would be considered as disturbed 

material in context of the negligible 

disturbance criterion. 

Comment: Application of criteria for 

reasonable amount limits. Respondents 

expressed the view that reasonable 

amount limits reflecting volume and/or 

weight and/or numbers of specimens 

would be inconsistent and difficult to 

apply. Respondents expressed the view 

that clarification should be provided 

regarding which criterion would apply 

in cases where a collection could be 

characterized by more than one 

criterion. One respondent suggested that 

the limit of five specimens of any one 

kind would in many cases be very easy 

to exceed in a collection that might fit 

in a 1-gallon container and/or in a slab 

weighing 25 pounds. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

multiple criteria for reasonable amount 

may be inconsistent and difficult to 

apply. Consequently the regulations 

have been modified to specify a single 

reasonable amount of 100 pounds by 

weight per person per calendar year, not 

to exceed 25 pounds per person per day. 

Comment: Tracking annual 

reasonable amount collection limits. 

Two respondents suggested that 

clarification should be provided 

concerning how annual reasonable 

amount collection limits would be 

tracked. 

Response: The Act does not require 

casual collecting to be tracked. 

However, in establishing a reasonable 

amount criterion for casual collection as 

stipulated by the Act, the Department 

expects that such reasonable amounts 

would not be exceeded by responsible 

members of the casual collecting public. 

The Department would rely largely on 

the ethics of an informed and lawabiding collecting public, who are aware 

of limits on casual collecting established 

in regulation and elect to legally collect 

within such limits. Documented 

collection of materials exceeding the 

reasonable amount without a permit 

could result in enforcement and 

penalty. 

Comment: Reasonable amount limits 

applied to individual localities. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

reasonable amount limits by weight, 

volume, and/or number of specimens be 

applied to individual collecting 

localities, in order to facilitate collection 

at more than one locality. The 

respondent also suggested that distance 

and/or separation criteria could be 

applied to further define distinct 

collecting localities. 

Response: Reasonable amount limits 

refer to absolute amounts, and are 

independent of number of collecting 

localities. Because number of collecting 

localities is not part of the definition of 

reasonable amount, there is no need to 

establish criteria to distinguish 

collection localities. 

Comment: Authorized Officer 

modification of reasonable amount 

limits or collection times. Respondents 

expressed the view that an Authorized 

Officer should not be able to modify 

reasonable amounts or establish time 

periods for collection, because such 

decisions may be arbitrary and create 

precedents that are difficult to change. 

One respondent suggested that 

clarification should be provided 

concerning whether or not an 

Authorized Officer could increase limits 

above those specified for reasonable 

amounts if conditions allowed such 

collection. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

reasonable amounts established in 

regulation should not be modified on a 

case-by-case basis, and has removed 

reference to the Authorized Officer in 

the definition of reasonable amount. 

Comment: Proposed new term and 

definition—reconnaissance collecting. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

the term ‘‘reconnaissance collecting’’ be 

introduced and defined as exploratory 

collecting by amateurs, casual 

collectors, and/or academic researchers 

without a permit for the purpose of 

determining whether or not an area 

merits future more comprehensive 

collection under permit. The respondent 

suggested that such reconnaissance 

collection be limited to hand tools, that 

disturbed surface areas not exceed 2 

square meters, that excavations deeper 

than 1⁄2 meter on slopes less than 45 

degrees must be back-filled, and that 

such collection would be performed by 

three or fewer individuals working at a 

location for 2 or fewer consecutive days. 

Response: The activity that the 

respondent has described as 

reconnaissance collecting is considered 

collection for the purpose of research 

and not for personal use, and 

consequently requires a permit. The 

described activity constitutes research 

and does not merit creation or definition 

of a new term. 

Section 291.6 Confidentiality of 

Information—General 

Paragraph 291.6(a) implements the 

confidentiality provision contained at 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–8. This provision 

constitutes a statutory exemption from 

the disclosure requirements of 5 U.S.C. 

552 (Freedom of Information Act) and 

other laws. For example, information 

about the nature and specific location of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands in an inventory 

document, scientific report, repository 

records, National Environmental Policy 

Act documents, or interpretive 

information, or information contained 

in existing Agency documents and 

records such as prior permits, may be 

withheld from disclosure or release to 

non-Agency personnel, unless the 

Authorized Officer determines in 

writing that disclosure would (1) further 

the purposes of the Act and these final 

regulations, (2) not create risk of harm 

to or theft or destruction of the resource 

or the site containing the resource, and 

(3) be in accordance with other 

applicable laws. This section would not 

limit the Forest Service’s authority to 

release information concerning the 

general location of paleontological 

resources. 

Paragraph 291.6(b) clarifies that 

certain sharing of information 

concerning the nature and specific 

location of a paleontological resource 

does not constitute a disclosure or a 

release of that information. The Forest 

Service may wish to share information 

with certain non-Agency personnel for 

scientific, educational, or resource 

management purposes, without waiving 

the statutory exemption from disclosure 

provided by the Act. In certain 

situations, the Authorized Officer may 

share this information only with 

recipients who sign a confidentiality 

agreement in which the recipient agrees 

not to share the information with 

anyone else. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21605 

Section 291.6—Response to Comments 

Comment: Conflict of confidentiality 

of information with freedom of speech. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

confidentiality provisions regarding the 

nature and specific location of a 

paleontological resource conflict with 

the constitutional right to freedom of 

speech and are contrary to 

Congressional goals and Presidential 

mandates concerning open availability 

of data obtained during federally funded 

research. 

Response: The requirement in both 

the Act and these regulations for 

confidentiality of specific locations 

balances open communication about 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands, and potential risks 

to such resources if specific locations 

are publicly disclosed. Provisions of the 

Act and these regulations regarding 

confidentiality of specific location 

information do not infringe on 

constitutional rights to freedom of 

speech. Rather, the Act and regulations 

require that confidentiality with regard 

to specific location information be 

maintained by individuals who choose 

to solicit and receive a permit from the 

Department to collect paleontological 

resources. Constitutional rights are 

subject to reasonable time, place, and 

manner restrictions; moreover, 

individuals are free to enter into 

agreements that constrain such rights if 

they choose to do so. Similar to 

constitutional rights, Congressional and 

Presidential policies concerning open 

availability of data obtained during 

federally funded research are also 

subject to reasonable time, place, and 

manner restrictions. For example, 

personally identifiable information 

obtained during the course of research 

is generally considered confidential and 

not subject to open disclosure. The 

appropriate level of specificity of 

location information that would be 

considered confidential would depend 

on the context of the occurrence, and 

the Department does not expect such 

restrictions to adversely impact 

communication of significant 

paleontological research information. 

Comment: Appropriateness of 

confidentiality of specific location for 

certain paleontological resources. 

Respondents suggested that 

confidentiality provisions regarding the 

nature and specific location of a 

paleontological resource are too 

restrictive and not warranted by the 

nature of certain paleontological 

resources. Respondents suggested that 

requiring confidentiality of specific 

locations of rare paleontological 

resources, such as most vertebrate 

fossils, may be merited. In contrast, 

most plant and invertebrate 

paleontological resources are common, 

abundant, and their locations are 

seldom threatened by over collection. 

Consequently, respondents suggested 

that the requirement for confidentiality 

of specific location should not be the 

default condition, but rather should be 

discretionary based on the sensitivity of 

the paleontological resource in question. 

Response: The regulations are 

consistent with the Act which specifies 

confidentiality of specific location 

information for paleontological 

resources, and does not distinguish 

among vertebrate, invertebrate, plant, 

common, abundant, uncommon, and/or 

rare paleontological resources. In 

addition, the regulations and the Act 

specify certain conditions under which 

specific location information may be 

disclosed. The appropriate level of 

specificity of location information that 

could be disclosed would depend on the 

context of the occurrence. 

Comment: Impedance of scientific 

research by confidentiality of 

information. Respondents expressed the 

view that confidentiality provisions 

regarding the nature and specific 

location of a paleontological resource 

will impede unrestricted 

communication of critical scientific data 

which is necessary to the practices of 

scientific verification and 

reproducibility. Respondents suggested 

that confidentiality of specific location 

data would prevent publication of 

scientific research in professional 

journals that require publication of 

locality information, would limit the 

utility of online paleontological research 

databases such as the Paleobiology 

Database, NEOTOMA, and EarthCube 

programs, and would prevent 

researchers from freely discussing 

research results with their colleagues. 

One respondent suggested that scientific 

publication of specific location 

information be exempt from the 

requirement for confidentiality. 

Response: The regulations make 

allowance for the release of location 

information to qualified researchers 

with legitimate research needs. The 

appropriate level of specificity of 

location information that would be 

considered confidential and not subject 

to release for publication in professional 

journals and/or online paleontological 

research databases would depend on the 

context of the occurrence. The 

Department does not expect such 

restrictions to adversely impact 

communication of significant 

paleontological research information. 

Rather, the Department considers that 

the demonstration of legitimate research 

needs for such information may foster 

increased communication among 

researchers and between researchers 

and the Department. A survey of the 

publication guidelines of professional 

research journals that are dedicated to, 

and/or regularly contain paleontological 

research content indicates that most 

journals do not require publication of 

specific location information Those 

journals with stated requirements for 

publication of location information 

allow exemptions for protection of 

locations which may be placed at risk 

from such publication. Online 

paleontological databases exhibit a wide 

range in the specificity of location 

information that is recorded. The open 

and unrestricted availability of such 

specific location information published 

online highlights the need for the 

Department to control access to such 

information concerning sensitive 

locations on National Forest System 

lands. The Act does not provide 

allowance for a blanket exemption from 

the confidentiality requirement in the 

case of scientific publication of specific 

location information. On a case-by-case 

basis, the need for such publication may 

be considered in any decision by the 

Department whether or not to release 

such information, and/or the 

appropriate level of specificity of such 

location information that may be 

released. 

Comment: Impracticality of written 

confidentiality agreements which can 

delay research publication. Respondents 

expressed the view that requiring 

written agreements from recipients of 

confidential information to maintain 

confidentiality of that information is 

burdensome, impractical, will impede 

informal and spontaneous verbal 

discussion and communication of 

scientific information between peer 

researchers, and may have a chilling 

effect on routine research based on 

collections containing specimens 

obtained from NFS lands. Respondents 

suggest that such restriction of open 

scientific communication may delay 

publication of research results. One 

respondent suggested that the 

requirement of written confidentiality 

agreement from recipients of 

confidential information conflicts with 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

a decision to release specific location 

information, in accordance with 

provisions of the Act and the 

regulations that would allow such 

disclosure, should not universally 

require the recipient of such 

information to sign a written 

confidentiality agreement. However, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21606 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

certain circumstances may merit such 

written agreement prior to release of 

confidential specific location 

information. The final regulatory 

language has been modified to indicate 

that a written confidentiality agreement 

may be required by the Authorized 

Officer. 

Comment: Confidentiality and data 

management. One respondent expressed 

the view that specific location data must 

remain confidential, and that 

researchers, repository institutions, and 

their curatorial staff must demonstrate 

professional expertise in the 

management of confidential data in 

order to be party to a confidentiality 

agreement and/or be considered an 

approved repository. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

parties in possession of collections for 

which specific location information is 

considered confidential should 

demonstrate professional expertise in 

the management of confidential data. 

Demonstration of professional expertise 

in this area would be addressed in a 

repository agreement and/or permit. 

Comment: Repository professional 

staff and confidentiality agreements. 

One respondent expressed the view that 

professional staff members of a 

repository institution should not be 

individually required to sign 

confidentiality agreements. 

Response: The regulations do not 

require that staff members of repository 

institutions must individually sign a 

confidentiality agreement. Rather, it is 

the responsibility of a repository to 

implement appropriate policies and 

procedures to ensure that 

confidentiality of specific location 

information is maintained as 

appropriate. 

Comment: Confidentiality agreement 

process. Respondents expressed the 

view that clarification should be 

provided concerning who in the 

Department would authorize sharing of 

information in a confidentiality 

agreement, and whether the agreement 

process would be lengthy and impede 

scientific research. 

Response: Particulars concerning the 

release of confidential specific location 

information would be addressed in a 

permit and/or repository agreement 

signed by the Authorized Officer. The 

Department considers that a party 

requesting the release of confidential 

specific location information would be 

expected to provide documentation of 

need sufficient to justify release of such 

information. The Department expects 

that the Authorized Officer will respond 

to requests for release of confidential 

specific location information in a timely 

manner. 

Comment: Administration of 

confidentiality agreement. One 

respondent suggested that clarification 

should be provided regarding whether 

Agency personnel or repository 

personnel would administer a 

confidentiality agreement, and whether 

each request to a repository for 

confidential information must be 

referred to the Agency. The respondent 

also suggested that a sample 

confidentiality agreement be provided 

for review. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the administration of a 

confidentiality requirement would be a 

shared responsibility of the parties in a 

repository agreement, since such parties 

would each have access to the subject 

information. A confidentiality and/or 

repository agreement would specify 

whether requests for confidential 

information would be referred to the 

Agency or repository staff. It is not 

appropriate to provide a sample 

confidentiality agreement in the body of 

the regulations. However, a generic 

agreement concerning nondisclosure of 

sensitive but unclassified information 

that may be referenced exists as Forest 

Service form FS–6600–5 (Rev. 12/2006). 

Comment: Unintended consequence 

of not releasing specific location 

information. One respondent expressed 

the view that confidentiality 

requirements may result in repository 

institutions being reluctant to release 

specific locality information to 

professionals performing background 

searches related to site assessment for 

proposed ground disturbing projects. 

Such withholding of specific location 

information might result in unintended 

adverse impacts to paleontological 

locations during subsequent permitted 

site disturbance activity, because their 

locations were unable to be 

documented. 

Response: Circumstances under 

which a repository might release 

confidential specific location 

information would be addressed in a 

repository agreement. Such information 

would be expected to be released to 

qualified professionals with a 

demonstrated need for such 

information. 

Comment: Loss of location 

information. Respondents suggest that 

unrestricted publication of location 

information would ensure that locations 

of paleontological sites will not be lost. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

confidential location data which is 

maintained only in Department records 

may become inaccessible or lost and 

unavailable to future researchers. 

Response: Unrestricted publication of 

specific location information would not 

protect sensitive locations, which could 

be placed at risk by such publication. 

The Department considers that specific 

location information on file is secure, 

protected by such mechanisms as 

Agency records retention policies, and 

not subject to loss. Such information 

would generally be accessible to 

qualified professionals who demonstrate 

need for the information. 

Comment: Specific location data. One 

respondent suggested that clarification 

should be provided regarding the level 

of specificity of location data that is 

considered confidential. 

Response: The level of specificity of 

location information that would be 

considered confidential would in most 

circumstances reflect the context of the 

occurrence, and would be decided on a 

case by case basis. Coordinates obtained 

from Global Positioning System (GPS) 

devices, or from other sources with a 

comparable level of accuracy would 

generally be considered too specific for 

general release and would remain 

confidential. 

Comment: Archaeological Resources 

Preservation Act (ARPA) and 

confidentiality. One respondent 

suggested that the confidentiality 

requirements in the proposed rule 

appeared to be based on the 

confidentiality provisions in ARPA, and 

that the ARPA template was designed 

for cultural resources and is not 

appropriate for paleontological 

resources. 

Response: Confidentiality of specific 

location information protects resources 

at specific locations, whether such 

resources are paleontological, 

archeological, or other resources. A 

requirement for confidentiality of 

specific location information reflects a 

common goal of resource protection. 

Consequently, observed parallels in 

regulatory requirements providing for 

such confidentiality in these regulations 

and ARPA would be expected and are 

appropriate. 

Comment: Exemptions from 

confidentiality. One respondent 

expressed the view that case-by-case 

determinations for exemptions of the 

confidentiality requirement are not 

specified in the Act. 

Response: The Act at 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa-8 and these regulations at 

section 291.6(a) specify criteria 

representing case-by-case circumstances 

that an Authorized Officer may consider 

prior to making a decision concerning 

release of protected information. 

Comment: Confidentiality requires 

closure of Federal monuments and 

parks. One respondent questioned 

whether the requirement for 

confidentiality of specific location 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21607 

information would require closure of 

Federal monuments and parks that have 

a paleontological focus. 

Response: Confidentiality provisions 

would not be considered to apply to 

sites and areas whose locations are a 

matter of common public knowledge. 

Moreover, monuments and parks that 

have been established in specific 

recognition of their paleontological 

resources generally have staff resources 

and protective policies in place to 

ensure that such resources are not at 

risk related to their high public profile. 

Section 291.7 Public Awareness and 

Education 

Section 291.7 restates the provision in 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–2 for establishing a 

public awareness and education 

program about the significance of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands. 

Section 291.8 Area Closures 

Section 291.8 implements 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–3(e) providing for restricting 

access to or closing areas to the 

collection of paleontological resources 

in order to protect paleontological or 

other resources or to provide for public 

safety. Closure of an area to noncollecting activities would continue to 

be authorized under separate authorities 

where appropriate. 

Section 291.8—Response to Comments 

Comment: Criteria for area closure. 

Respondents suggested that criteria for 

area closures be listed, and expressed 

the view that without specific criteria, 

decisions to close areas may be 

arbitrary. One respondent expressed the 

view that reference to reasons for area 

closure that are unrelated to 

paleontological resources could lead to 

arbitrary closure decisions. 

Response: Area closures would reflect 

considerations related to paleontological 

resources and/or factors unrelated to 

paleontological resources that would in 

most cases be context-specific. Because 

such factors would likely be unique for 

any given instance of area closure, it is 

not practical to provide a 

comprehensive list of criteria in these 

regulations. The Department considers 

that area closure decisions would not be 

arbitrary and would be justified on a 

case by case basis. 

Comment: Closure of area to all or 

some activities. One respondent 

expressed the view that clarification 

should be provided concerning whether 

area closures would pertain to all 

activities, or whether permitted 

collection may be allowed in closed 

areas. 

Response: Activities that may be 

allowed in closed areas would depend 

on the reason for the closure, which 

may be unrelated to paleontological 

resources. Consequently, permitted 

collection may or may not be allowed in 

an area closed to casual collection. 

Comment: Public involvement in 

closure decisions. Respondents 

expressed the view that the Act 

stipulates that plans for paleontological 

resource management emphasize, where 

possible, collaborative efforts with nonFederal partners, the scientific 

community, and the general public. 

Respondents suggest that in accordance 

with this part of the Act, the Authorized 

Officer should consult with professional 

paleontologists and casual collectors 

who are familiar with the area in 

question, and provide public notice of 

intent to close, before closing an area for 

the purpose of protecting 

paleontological resources. 

Response: Area closures are generally 

subject to National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) procedures, 

including public notice of the proposed 

action, during which members of the 

public would be notified and public 

comments on the proposed action 

would be solicited. 

Comment: Paleontological resource 

protection through National Park or 

Landmark designation. One respondent 

suggested that area closures should not 

be used to protect areas where casual 

collecting poses a risk to important 

paleontological resources. Rather, such 

areas should be protected as National 

Parks or Landmarks. 

Response: The Department considers 

an area closure appropriate to protect 

resources to which the closure applies. 

National Park and/or Landmark 

designation is a lengthy process, during 

which resources at risk might be lost. 

Area closure is a more timely and 

focused response to protect resources at 

risk. 

Section 291.9 Determination of 

Paleontological Resources 

Section 291.9 only applies to National 

Forest System lands. Because of the 

Forest Service’s multiple use mandates, 

there may be situations where a 

determination of what is or is not a 

paleontological resource would be 

necessary to avoid resource or land-use 

conflicts such as under the 1897 

Organic Act or the Multiple Use 

Sustained Yield Act. 

Section 291.9(a) states that all 

paleontological resources from National 

Forest System lands are to be managed, 

protected, and preserved under these 

final regulations, unless a determination 

is made that they are not paleontological 

resources in accordance with § 291.9(b). 

Sections 291.9(b) and 291.9(c) 

provides the Authorized Officer with a 

process to determine whether certain 

fossils should or should not be managed 

as paleontological resources as defined 

under the Act or these final regulations. 

Not all fossils are paleontological 

resources, as explained earlier in this 

preamble discussion of the term ‘‘fossil’’ 

as defined in § 291.5 of these final 

regulations. This determination would 

be based on scientific principles and 

methods, would be documented in 

writing, be prepared by a paleontologist 

with appropriate qualifications, and 

would provide the necessary framework 

to adhere to the savings provisions at 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa–10 while satisfying the 

mandate at 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–1 that 

requires management using scientific 

principles and expertise. Such 

determinations may change over time as 

new information comes to light about 

the fossil. Fossils associated with an 

archaeological resource as defined in 

the Archaeological Resources Protection 

Act or any cultural items as defined in 

the Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act are considered to 

be heritage resources and are not 

paleontological resources. 

Section 291.9(d) affirms that mineral 

resources on National Forest System 

lands, such as coal, oil, natural gas, and 

other economic minerals which are 

subject to the existing mining and 

mineral laws, are not paleontological 

resources. Petrified wood as defined at 

30 U.S.C. 611 means ‘‘agatized, 

opalized, petrified, or silicified wood or 

any material formed by the replacement 

of wood by silica or other matter,’’ and 

is a mineral material. However, in 

accordance with § 291.9(a), the 

Authorized Officer may determine that 

an occurrence of petrified wood is a 

paleontological resource and should be 

protected and preserved accordingly. 

Vertebrate fossils, including 

microvertebrate fossils, are always 

considered paleontological resources. 

Geological units, including, but not 

limited to, limestones, diatomite, and 

chalk beds that are intrinsically 

composed of fossil remains, but may be 

considered to be mineral materials or 

fossil soils, are not paleontological 

resources under the Act or these final 

regulations. 

Section 291.9—Response to Comments 

Comment: Purpose and context of 

determinations. One respondent 

suggested that clarification should be 

provided regarding the purpose of 

making paleontological resource 

determinations, and questioned whether 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21608 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

such determinations would be made in 

only specific circumstances, or whether 

making such determinations would be a 

default procedure in paleontological 

resource management. 

Response: Fossils on National Forest 

System lands are considered to be 

paleontological resources unless they 

are excluded in accordance with the 

Savings Provisions of the Act, excluded 

by listing in paragraph (d) of the section, 

or determined not to be paleontological 

resources in accordance with the 

procedures set forth in this section. 

Determinations generally would be 

performed only in context-specific 

circumstances where it may be 

necessary to clarify whether certain 

fossils are paleontological resources. 

Comment: Paleontological resource 

exclusions. One respondent suggested 

that items listed in paragraph (d) of the 

section that are not considered 

paleontological resources are 

inconsistent with the definition of 

paleontological resources in § 291.5 and 

a definition in § 291.11(c). 

Response: Paleontological resources 

are defined in the Act, and the 

definition of paleontological resources 

in § 291.5 of these regulations restates 

the definition of the Act. Section 

291.11(c) of these regulations does not 

contain a definition of paleontological 

resources. Former item 3 of the 

referenced paragraph (d) of the section 

which referred to microfossils has been 

removed as it may have been considered 

inconsistent with the definition of 

paleontological resources. The 

remaining items in paragraph (d) have 

been renumbered to reflect the removal. 

Reference to paleosols in paragraph (d) 

has also been removed to provide 

additional clarification. 

Comment: Paleontological resource 

exclusions. One respondent suggested 

that microbialites, including 

stromatolites, and non-vertebrate trace 

fossils should not be considered 

paleontological resources and should, 

therefore, be included with the list of 

items presented in paragraph (d) of the 

section. 

Response: The definition of 

paleontological resources in the Act 

includes fossilized traces and imprints 

of organisms and does not differentiate 

between vertebrate and non-vertebrate 

traces and imprints. Consequently, 

invertebrate traces, stromatolites, and 

microbialites are paleontological 

resources. 

Comment: Procedure and timeline for 

determinations. Respondents suggested 

that clarification should be provided 

regarding the procedures to be used and 

the time frame for making 

paleontological resource 

determinations. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the procedures for making 

determinations as set forth in this 

section are sufficiently detailed and 

clear, and respondents did not specify 

particular aspects of the stated 

procedures that might be considered 

unclear. Requests for determinations 

would be processed in a timely manner. 

The need for determinations would 

reflect case-specific considerations, and 

time frames for making determinations 

may reflect the complexity of such 

considerations. 

Comment: Authorized Officer 

qualifications. Two respondents 

expressed the view that the Authorized 

Officer may not have sufficient 

paleontology qualifications to make 

paleontological resource determinations 

using scientific principles and expertise. 

Response: From an administrative and 

organizational perspective, an 

Authorized Officer cannot be expected 

to have specialized expertise in every 

subject matter area in which they may 

be required to exercise decision-making 

authority. These regulations address this 

issue by specifying that a written 

recommendation for determination 

would be prepared by a paleontologist 

with expertise in the group of fossils in 

question, that such written 

recommendation would be reviewed by 

an Agency paleontologist, and that the 

Authorized Officer would consider the 

resulting recommendation of the 

Agency paleontologist in making a 

determination. 

Comment: Paleontological subject 

matter experts: One respondent 

suggested that clarification should be 

provided regarding where the 

Authorized Officer would obtain 

paleontology subject matter experts to 

provide recommendations for 

paleontological resource 

determinations. Respondents expressed 

the view that the Department lacks an 

adequate number of paleontology 

specialists, possessing sufficient breadth 

of subject matter expertise, to effectively 

review proposed determinations and 

develop written recommendations for 

determination of paleontological 

resources as may be required. 

Response: Paleontological subject 

matter experts are affiliated with a 

number of repository institutions with 

which the Forest Service maintains 

partnership agreements. Additional 

subject matter experts may be identified 

by searching recent paleontological 

publications in professional journals. 

Agency paleontologists advising the 

Authorized Officer making 

paleontological resource determinations 

are expected to have sufficient academic 

credentials to perform technical review 

of recommendations by subject matter 

experts and to present informed 

professional evaluations of such 

recommendations. 

Comment: Disposition of fossils 

pending and after determination. In the 

case of casually collected fossils which 

may be subject to paleontological 

resource determination, one respondent 

suggested that clarification should be 

provided regarding the disposition of 

the fossils pending the determination, 

and specifically questioned whether the 

collector could keep the fossil until the 

determination was made. Another 

respondent expressed the view that 

clarification should be provided 

concerning how a fossil would be 

returned to a collector after a 

determination, and if a collector could 

request return of an ‘‘uncommon’’ fossil 

if it were not actively being used in 

research. 

Response: The disposition of casually 

collected paleontological resources 

pending a determination would be a 

matter of discussion between the 

collector and the Authorized Officer. If 

specimens are held by the Agency 

pending a determination, written 

acknowledgment of the Agency’s 

possession of the specimens would be 

provided to the collector. Specimens 

determined to be common invertebrate 

and plant paleontological resources that 

were collected in accordance with 

conditions established for casual 

collection would generally be returned 

to a collector in the same manner as 

they were received by the Agency. 

Specimens that have been determined 

not to be common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources and/or 

that are found not to have been 

collected in accordance with conditions 

established for casual collection would 

not be returned to the collector. 

Comment: Microfossils and vertebrate 

fossils: One respondent suggested that 

clarification be provided regarding the 

term ‘‘microfossils’’ as used with 

reference to vertebrate fossils, and 

suggested that using the term 

‘‘microscopic vertebrate fossils’’ would 

provide such clarification. 

Response: The reference to 

microfossils has been eliminated, so 

further clarification is unnecessary. 

Section 291.10 Collecting 

Section 291.10 restates 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–3(a)(1) and (2), which directs 

that a paleontological resource may only 

be collected from National Forest 

System lands in accordance with a 

permit issued by the Authorized Officer 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21609 

under these final regulations, except for 

casual collecting. 

Section 291.10—Response to Comments 

Comment: Restrictions on collection 

and exclusive use. One respondent 

expressed the view that neither amateur 

nor scientific collection of 

paleontological resources conflict with 

the Forest Service mission, but these 

final regulations governing collection 

will result in collection and use of 

paleontological resources being limited 

to individuals with influence. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

amateur and scientific paleontological 

resource collection do not conflict with 

the Forest Service mission. The 

provisions for casual collection in the 

Act and these regulations codify, for the 

first time, the ability of the public to 

collect common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources from National 

Forest System lands without a permit, 

providing certain conditions are met. 

The requirement for a permit for 

collection that is not considered casual 

does not promote exclusivity. Anyone 

can apply for a permit to collect 

paleontological resources if they meet 

the relevant requirements of the Act and 

this regulation, 

Comment: Reference to 

‘‘paleontological resource’’ should be 

plural. One respondent suggested that 

the phrase ‘‘a paleontological resource’’ 

should be in plural here to read: 

‘‘Section 291.10 would restate Section 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–3(a)(1) and (2), which 

directs that paleontological resources 

may only be collected in accordance 

with a permit issued by the Authorized 

Officer under these proposed 

regulations, except for casual 

collecting.’’ 

Response: The Department retains the 

existing singular form of the term 

‘‘paleontological resource’’ because the 

purpose of the cited passage is to restate 

the Act, which employs the term in 

singular form. The Department also 

considers that in this case, there is no 

significant change in meaning related to 

use of the term in singular or plural 

form. 

Section 291.11 Casual Collecting on 

National Forest System Lands 

Section 291.11 restates 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–3(a)(2) that allows for casual 

collecting without a permit on certain 

National Forest System lands. Casual 

collecting, as defined in Section 291.5, 

is allowed on National Forest System 

lands where such collection is 

consistent with the laws governing the 

management of those lands and these 

final regulations. National Forest 

System lands would generally be 

considered open to casual collection 

unless otherwise closed to such casual 

collection as described in § 291.12. 

Section 291.11(d) and (e) states that the 

Authorized Officer can use the process 

in § 291.9(c) to make a determination 

that certain invertebrate or plant fossils 

are not common, and therefore, cannot 

be casually collected and must be 

collected under a permit. Section 

291.11(d) provides the Authorized 

Officer with the ability to protect 

invertebrate and plant fossils when they 

are not common. 

Section 291.11(f) clarifies that it is the 

responsibility of the collecting public to 

ensure that areas in which they are 

proposing to casually collect common 

invertebrate or plant fossils have not 

been closed to casual collection for 

reasons as described in § 291.12. 

Information regarding area closures 

would generally be available from the 

local District Office. Section 291.11(g) 

clarifies that paleontological resources 

collected from National Forest System 

lands in accordance with the casual 

collection provisions of § 291.11 cannot 

be sold. 

Section 291.11—Response to Comments 

Comment: Research does not 

constitute casual collection. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

researchers often work using personal or 

public funds and they should not be 

subject to the time-consuming and 

unnecessary bureaucracy of having to 

obtain permits for collection of 

paleontological resources. 

Response: Activities that do not meet 

the criteria applied to casual collection 

require a permit. Specimens obtained by 

casual collection must be for noncommercial, personal use. Research is 

not considered a personal use. Rather, 

research, based on the common 

definition of the term in the context of 

these regulations, is considered to be a 

structured activity undertaken by 

qualified individuals with the intent to 

obtain and disseminate information via 

publication in a peer-reviewed 

professional scientific journal or 

equivalent venue, which increases the 

body of knowledge available to a 

scientific community. Moreover, 

requirement of an authorization to 

perform research is consistent with 

existing Special Uses authorities, in 

which research and survey projects are 

generically considered to be activities 

that require a permit. 

Comment: Research reconnaissance 

collection: Respondents expressed the 

view that collection of small quantities 

of common and abundant invertebrate 

and plant fossils for research, in 

accordance with conditions and limits 

applied to casual collection, should not 

require a permit for collection. 

Respondents suggested that the term 

‘‘reconnaissance collection’’ be applied 

to such limited research collection. 

Respondents further expressed the view 

that such reconnaissance collection 

would normally occur in context of 

exploratory field surveys for the 

purpose of determining areas 

appropriate for subsequent 

comprehensive collection, which would 

then be subject to the requirement of a 

permit for research collection. One 

respondent suggested that a streamlined 

permit be developed for reconnaissance 

collection of limited quantities of 

specimens entailing only minor surface 

disturbance. 

Response: Reconnaissance collection 

as described by respondents is a 

professional scientific research activity, 

and professional scientific research 

requires authorization. Permit 

application requirements including 

description of the scope of the proposed 

activity and subsequent permit 

stipulations reflect the nature and scale 

of the proposed activity. Consequently, 

because project proposals reflect a wide 

range of complexity, and reconnaissance 

collection itself may vary in scope, there 

is no practical benefit to creating a 

separate permit for reconnaissance 

collection. 

Comment: Research collection subject 

to more regulation than casual 

collection. Respondents expressed the 

view that research collection is 

adversely singled out for permitting and 

associated higher extent of regulation 

than casual collection, thereby 

subjecting researchers to a greater 

regulatory burden than the general 

public. Respondents expressed the view 

that the increased regulation imposed 

on professional paleontologists reflects 

lack of trust and respect for researchers 

relative to amateurs. 

Response: The Act stipulates that 

casual collection without a permit is 

limited to non-commercial personal use, 

and that a permit is required for the 

collection of paleontological resources 

that is not in accordance with casual 

collection provisions. Research is not 

considered a personal use. Rather, 

research is considered to be a structured 

activity undertaken by qualified 

individuals with the intent to obtain 

and disseminate information, via 

publication in a peer-reviewed 

professional scientific journal or 

equivalent venue, which increases the 

body of knowledge available to a 

scientific community. Moreover, 

requirement of an authorization to 

perform research is consistent with 

existing Special Uses authorities, in 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21610 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

which research and survey projects are 

generically considered to be activities 

which require a permit. The 

requirement for a permit to collect 

paleontological resources for research 

purposes does not reflect lack of trust or 

respect for researchers, but rather is in 

accordance with provisions of the Act. 

Comment: Elimination of permit 

requirement for collection of common 

invertebrate and plant fossils. One 

respondent suggested that the 

requirement for a permit to collect 

paleontological resources be restricted 

to vertebrate fossils and uncommon 

invertebrate and plant fossils. 

Response: Casual collection of 

common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources without a 

permit is allowed, providing such 

collection conforms with all 

requirements applicable to casual 

collection. 

Comment: Casual collection for 

educational purposes. Respondents 

expressed the view that clarification 

should be provided regarding whether 

casual collection without a permit 

would be allowed for educational 

purposes, such as developing teaching 

collections and collecting by 

participants on educational class field 

trips. One respondent suggested that 

clarification should be provided 

regarding whether the presence of a 

professional paleontologist leading an 

academic class field trip would trigger 

the requirement to obtain a permit to 

collect. 

Response: Educational purposes may 

be considered related to personal 

education and public education. 

Collection for personal educational use 

would be allowed under casual 

collection, provided all requirements for 

casual collection are met. Collection for 

public educational use, such as use in 

dedicated earth sciences and/or 

paleontology teaching collections 

formally maintained by an academic 

institution, would not be considered a 

personal use and would require a 

permit. The qualifications of a field trip 

leader would not by themselves trigger 

the requirement for a permit to collect 

during an academic class field trip, 

provided collections by individuals are 

for personal use, do not exceed 

individual reasonable amount limits 

and the collateral impacts to associated 

resources that may be caused by the 

group do not exceed negligible 

disturbance criteria established for 

casual collection. However, the nature 

of the trip, including number of 

participants and potential collateral 

impacts to associated resources, could 

trigger the need for a special use permit 

pertaining to group uses unrelated to 

paleontological collection. Questions 

pertaining to group uses unrelated to 

paleontological collection should be 

directed to special uses staff at the local 

Forest Service Field Office in which a 

field trip is planned. 

Comment: Research on casually 

collected fossils. One respondent 

suggested that clarification be provided 

concerning whether research could be 

performed by amateurs on casually 

collected specimens, and whether 

research could be performed by 

researchers on specimens collected 

during preliminary field surveys in 

advance of obtaining a permit. 

Response: Research, in the context of 

these regulations, is considered to be a 

structured activity undertaken by 

qualified individuals with the intent to 

obtain and disseminate information, via 

scientific publication, which increases 

the body of knowledge available to a 

scientific community. If, at the time of 

collection, an amateur intended to 

perform research as described above on 

collected specimens, such collection 

must be made under permit. Specimens 

collected during preliminary field 

surveys, as described by the respondent, 

are collected in the context of intent to 

perform research and would require a 

permit for collection. 

Comment: Casual collection in 

significant locations: One respondent 

suggested that the significant scientific 

or historic context of certain 

paleontological resources and/or 

locations may warrant collection by 

permit only, even if the paleontological 

resources may otherwise be considered 

common and abundant. 

Response: The Authorized Officer has 

the ability to consider such locationspecific factors in formulating decisions 

pertaining to closing an area to casual 

collection and requiring a permit for 

collection of scientifically or historically 

significant paleontological resources 

that might otherwise be considered 

common and abundant. 

Comment: Disposition of casually 

collected paleontological resources. 

Respondents suggested that clarification 

should be provided regarding when 

paleontological resources are considered 

Federal property, particularly in the 

context of casual collection. 

Respondents also suggested that 

clarification be provided regarding 

whether casually collected 

paleontological resources may be 

donated to a repository. Respondents 

also expressed the view that 

clarification should be provided 

concerning whether the ownership title 

to collected specimens is transferred if 

specimens are donated to a repository, 

and how should title to specimens be 

documented. One respondent suggested 

that owners of casually collected fossils 

be allowed to return unwanted 

specimens to the Forest Service so that 

a suitable repository may be identified. 

Response: The Department considers 

that Federal ownership of 

paleontological resources is effectively 

severed if those resources were legally 

collected in accordance with provisions 

for casual collection. Specimens that 

were casually collected with the intent 

of personal use may be donated to a 

repository at a later time; however, 

collection with the intent to donate to 

a repository would not constitute casual 

collection and would require a permit. 

The Department does not expect this to 

be a commonplace scenario. The title of 

specimens that are legally collected in 

accordance with casual collection 

requirements is a matter to be decided 

by the parties to a transfer of ownership. 

It is the responsibility of the donating 

party to demonstrate to the receiving 

party that specimens were collected 

legally. Owners of casually collected 

specimens may attempt to return such 

specimens to the Forest Service, but the 

Forest Service is under no obligation to 

accept them. 

Comment: Monitoring of casual 

collection. One respondent suggested 

that clarification should be provided 

regarding how the Department can 

effectively monitor casual collection, 

relative to more stringent regulatory 

requirements placed on professional 

permit holders. 

Response: The Act does not stipulate 

a requirement for formal monitoring of 

casual collecting that is legally 

performed in accordance with the 

stipulated requirements. Monitoring of 

casual collection areas may be specified 

in a National Forest and/or National 

Grassland management plan or other 

management direction. The level of 

such monitoring would reflect 

management direction in that regard. 

Comment: Common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

more detailed information and publicly 

available guidance are needed 

concerning the criteria for recognition, 

and procedures for collection of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the Act and these regulations 

provide sufficient procedural direction 

regarding circumstances under which 

common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources may be 

collected in accordance with casual 

collection, or would require a permit for 

collection. Criteria for the recognition of 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources that may be considered 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21611 

common would reflect factors including 

taxonomic identification and variables 

specific to local occurrences. The 

diversity of taxa and attributes related to 

their local occurrence that would be 

considered are not practical to list in 

regulation. 

Comment: Determination of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources. Respondents expressed the 

view that the Authorized Officer should 

be required to have input from qualified 

paleontologists prior to making 

determinations of whether certain 

fossils do or do not meet the definition 

of common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources. One 

respondent further suggested that prior 

to making a determination, the 

Authorized Officer be required to 

consult with at least two academic 

paleontologists and local amateur 

paleontologists as may be available and 

having experience with the fossils in 

question. One respondent also suggested 

that reference to ‘‘Using scientific 

principles and expertise . . .’’ be 

changed to ‘‘Using sound scientific 

evaluation and expertise. . .’’ 

Response: The regulations specify that 

the Authorized Officer, prior to making 

a determination, would receive a 

recommendation prepared by a 

paleontologist with appropriate subject 

matter expertise and that such 

recommendation would be reviewed by 

an Agency paleontologist. An Agency 

paleontologist could recommend further 

consultation with additional subject 

matter experts as may be considered 

appropriate. The language cited by one 

respondent referring to ‘‘scientific 

principles and expertise’’ restates the 

language of the Act and, therefore, will 

be retained without change. 

Comment: Disposition of significant 

fossils after collection. One respondent 

expressed the view that clarification 

should be provided regarding how 

fossils that might be casually collected 

and subsequently determined not to be 

common invertebrate or plant 

paleontological resources would be 

returned to the public domain. 

Response: If an uncommon 

invertebrate or plant paleontological 

resource was inadvertently collected 

during casual collection, the location 

from which the resource was collected 

should be identified and the 

specimen(s) should be returned to a 

Forest Service office for proper 

disposition. 

Comment: Casual collection of 

common vertebrate fossils. One 

respondent suggested that an 

Authorized Officer be able to determine 

that certain vertebrate fossils from 

particular locations are common, 

unnecessary for research, and may be 

subject to casual collection. 

Response: The Act specifies that 

casual collection applies to common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources, and does not provide that an 

Authorized Officer may determine that 

certain vertebrate paleontological 

resources may be subject to casual 

collection. 

Comment: Unintentional collection of 

vertebrate fossils during casual 

collection. One respondent suggested 

the addition of language to specify that 

unintentional collection of vertebrate 

fossils which may be intermingled with 

casually collected common invertebrate 

and plant fossils is not considered a 

violation that such collected vertebrate 

fossils cannot be sold, and if determined 

to be rare, they must be deposited in a 

designated repository. 

Response: Department law 

enforcement specialists may employ 

discretion in enforcement sufficient to 

address circumstances of inadvertent 

casual collection of specimens which 

may be uncommon, not invertebrate, 

and/or not plant paleontological 

resources. Other language changes 

suggested by the respondent are already 

addressed in the regulations. 

Comment: Responsibility of collecting 

public. Respondents expressed the view 

that it is not fair for the Department to 

place the burden of responsibility on the 

public to have knowledge of whether 

areas may be open or closed to casual 

collection. Respondents suggested that 

it is the Department’s responsibility to 

provide notice to the collecting public 

of areas that are closed to casual 

collection. 

Response: The public is responsible 

for knowledge of regulations and local 

orders governing the use of National 

Forest Systems lands. It is responsibility 

of the Department to provide notice to 

the public of closed areas. Parties 

interested in casual collection of 

common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources from National 

Forest System lands are encouraged to 

contact the local administrative office 

for current information concerning 

potential access restrictions. 

Section 291.12 National Forest System 

Lands Closed to Casual Collection 

Section 291.12(a) and (b) clarifies that 

casual collecting is prohibited on 

National Forest System lands that are 

closed to casual collecting under these 

regulations, other statutes, Executive 

Orders, regulations, and land use plans. 

In addition, § 291.12(b) clarifies that 

NFS lands that were closed to casual 

collecting prior to the Act remain closed 

to casual collecting. 

Section 291.12—Response to Comments 

Comment: Closure of areas to casual 

collection. Respondents expressed the 

view that closure of areas to casual 

collection assumes that subject lands 

belong to the Forest Service and not to 

U.S. citizens, and that such closures 

would be in conflict with the right of 

the public to casually collect, as 

established in the Act. 

Response: The Act stipulates that 

access to areas may be restricted or 

closed to the collection of 

paleontological resources for cause, in 

addition to establishing the ability to 

casually collect providing certain 

conditions are met. 

Comment: Area closure decisions and 

public consultation. One respondent 

expressed the view that a decision by an 

Authorized Officer to close an area to 

casual collection should require input 

from qualified paleontologists and the 

local collecting community. 

Response: Area closure decisions are 

generally subject to National 

Environmental Policy Act public notice 

requirements, during which scoping of 

the proposed decision is performed, and 

public input is solicited as appropriate. 

Comment: Posting of areas closed to 

casual collection. One respondent 

expressed the view that area closures 

should be posted to formally give notice 

to public that they are not allowed to 

casually collect in the posted area. 

Response: Areas closed to collection 

of paleontological resources may or may 

not be posted, depending on the 

sensitivity of resources whose specific 

locations may be considered 

confidential and which may be placed 

at risk by posting areas in which they 

occur. 

Comment: Typographical error— 

statues/statutes. One respondent noted 

that the word ‘‘statues’’ as used in item 

(2) of this section should be corrected to 

‘‘statutes’’. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

this is a typographical error and it has 

been corrected. 

Section 291.13 Permits 

Section 291.13(a) restates 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–3(b)(1) through (4) which are the 

criteria for issuing permits for the 

collection of paleontological resources 

from National Forest System lands. 

Section 291.13(b) clarifies that 

issuance of a permit is within the 

discretion of the Authorized Officer. 

At present, Forest Service permits for 

paleontological resource activities such 

as scientific and/or educational 

collecting and resource inventory 

surveys are issued as special use 

authorizations. Current paleontological 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21612 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

resource permitting practices do not 

preclude development of paleontologyspecific use permits as authorized under 

the Act which would be issued and 

administered by the Forest Service 

Minerals and Geology Management 

program apart from the special uses 

program. Development of such a 

paleontology-specific permit to 

authorize collection of paleontological 

resources is associated with the 

proposed information collection which 

is described in this preamble in the 

section titled Controlling Paperwork 

Burdens on the Public. 

Section 291.13—Response to Comments 

Comment: Burdensome and overly 

restrictive requirements for permits to 

collect paleontological resources. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

permitting requirements and permitting 

are time-consuming, too restrictive, and 

comprise an unnecessary and unfunded 

bureaucracy. Respondents suggested 

that information required to obtain a 

permit is excessive, and that required 

information is irrelevant and often 

impossible to provide, particularly for 

locations of potential excavation areas 

which often cannot be specified in 

advance of actually performing 

permitted field work. Respondents 

expressed the view that the permitting 

process, including management and 

reporting requirements, is costly, cannot 

be administered in a timely manner, and 

provides no concomitant benefit to 

science. One respondent suggested that 

the permitting process limits the free 

and open exchange of scientific 

information. Another respondent 

expressed the view that the permit 

process be streamlined and simplified. 

Response: The Act stipulates that a 

permit is required to collect 

paleontological resources when such 

collection does not conform to the 

conditions established for casual 

collection. Permits, by their nature, are 

restrictive instruments and establish 

operating standards to ensure that 

proposed collection of paleontological 

resources will not result in damage or 

loss of such resources both during and 

after the process of collection. 

Information requested from an applicant 

as part of a permit application conforms 

to Department standards and procedures 

concerning information collection, and 

is used to evaluate a proposal to collect 

and to evaluate the qualifications of the 

applicant relative to their ability to 

perform the proposed collection without 

damage or loss of specimens. The 

Department has historically 

administered permits in a timely 

manner, and considers the permit 

process to be as streamlined and 

simplified as practicable commensurate 

with the intent to ensure paleontological 

resource preservation, thereby providing 

direct benefit to science. Assertions by 

respondents concerning the costliness of 

permitting and limits on the free and 

open exchange of scientific information 

are conjectural and not substantiated. 

Comment: Permits for collection of 

common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources. Respondents 

expressed the view that permits for the 

collection of common invertebrate, 

plant, and trace fossils should not be 

required. One respondent suggested that 

permits for the collection of common 

invertebrate and plant fossils would be 

too costly and would hinder research on 

such paleontological resources. 

Response: A permit would be 

required for collection of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources if such collection does not 

conform to conditions established for 

casual collection. The assertion by a 

respondent concerning the costliness of 

permitting and hindrance on research 

concerning common invertebrate and 

plant fossils is conjectural and not 

substantiated. 

Comment: Requirements for a permit 

for amateur collectors collaborating 

with researchers to collect 

paleontological resources. One 

respondent suggested that serious 

amateur collectors who collaborate with 

researchers should not be required to 

obtain permits to collect paleontological 

resources. 

Response: Any collection of 

paleontological resources that does not 

conform to the conditions established 

for casual collection requires a permit. 

If a collector is named as a field 

participant on a permit held by another 

party, a separate permit would not be 

required to collect in relation to the 

permitted project. 

Comment: Timely permit decisions. 

One respondent suggested that the 

regulations should include language 

specifying that the Agency will 

implement decisions regarding 

permitting in a timely manner. 

Response: The Forest Service intends 

to process permits in a timely manner. 

Comment: Cost estimates should be 

provided by the applicant as part of a 

permit application. One respondent 

expressed the view that non-binding 

estimates of the permit applicant’s costs 

related to a proposed action should be 

required as part of a permit application. 

The respondent suggested that many 

permit applicants do not fully 

appreciate the scope of real costs 

associated with collecting and 

subsequent curation of collections by 

repositories. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

many permit applicants and permit 

holders do not fully appreciate the 

implications of their costs related to 

proposed projects involving collection 

of paleontological resources. However, 

it is beyond the scope of these 

regulations for the Forest Service to 

require the applicant to submit project 

cost estimates. 

Comment: Specification of permitting 

for mitigation. One respondent 

suggested that the regulations should 

explicitly specify that permits are 

required for paleontological resource 

mitigation, in addition to research 

collection. 

Response: Collection for mitigation 

purposes is clearly not a personal use, 

and so would not be considered casual 

collection and would require a permit in 

accordance with the regulations. 

Consequently, the addition of language 

to the regulations that would explicitly 

specify a permit requirement for 

mitigation collection is not necessary. 

Comment: Mandatory permit 

issuance. One respondent expressed the 

view that the regulations state that 

permits must be issued to all applicants 

unless past actions preclude an 

applicant being qualified to hold a 

permit. 

Response: The Department considers 

that permits are discretionary 

instruments, and that there is no 

requirement to issue a permit that has 

been applied for. However, it is 

expected that denial of a permit would 

be for cause. 

Comment: Guidance regarding 

collection of common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

more detailed information and guidance 

should be provided regarding the 

criteria and procedures for the 

collection of common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources. 

Response: Common invertebrate and 

plant fossils may be casually collected 

or collected under permit, depending on 

the circumstances of collection. 

Information and guidance regarding 

whether casual collection is appropriate 

or whether a permit would be required 

are provided in the regulations. 

Procedures and requirements for 

obtaining a permit are discussed in the 

regulations, and additional information 

regarding permit forms and how to 

submit an application can be obtained 

from Forest Service paleontology 

program staff or from the local 

administrative unit office that would 

administer the permit. There are no 

formal procedural requirements for 

casual collection, apart from adherence 

to the stated conditions. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21613 

Comment: Permitted activities. One 

respondent suggested that the first 

sentence in the third paragraph of 

Section 291.13 as discussed in the 

Preamble, the phrase ‘‘. . . permits for 

paleontological resource activities such 

as collection and resource inventory 

surveys . . .’’ be amended to read ‘‘ . . . 

permits for paleontological resource 

activities such as scientific and/or 

educational collecting and resource 

inventory surveys . . .’’ 

Response: The Department agrees that 

the suggested language change provides 

clarification and has incorporated the 

change. 

Comment: Permits should be 

administered by professionally trained 

paleontologists. One respondent 

expressed the view that paleontology 

permits should be administered by 

professionally trained paleontologists 

employed by the Department. 

Respondent further suggested that if 

permits are administered by the 

Minerals and Geology program area, that 

they be afforded the same consideration 

as permits issued for extractive uses. 

Response: Authorizations and permits 

for paleontological resource use 

activities would generally be issued by 

local administrative units, under policy 

direction provided by Agency 

paleontologists. The Department 

considers that permits for 

paleontological resource use activities 

would be afforded similar consideration 

as authorizations for extractive uses. 

Comment: Typographical error. One 

respondent suggested that the citation to 

the Act in section 291.13(a)(4) is 

incorrect. The respondent stated that the 

existing citation which refers to ‘‘16 

U.S.C. 470aaa Sec. 6304(b)(4)’’ should 

be corrected to read ‘‘16 U.S.C. 470aaa– 

3(b)(4)’’. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

the citation is not accurate and has 

corrected the typographical error. 

Comment: Prohibition on use of 

collected materials for commercial 

purposes. Respondents expressed the 

view that some repository institutions 

create traveling exhibits and/or other 

promotional media such as tour guides, 

calendars, and brochures to generate 

revenue, which could be considered a 

commercial purpose. Respondents 

questioned whether Federal specimens 

would be precluded from use in such 

exhibits and media. Respondents also 

questioned whether or not a repository 

institution housing Federal specimens 

would be precluded from employing 

such activities, and whether or not staff 

of institutions that employed such 

activities would be excluded from 

consideration for paleontological 

permits. One respondent suggested 

deletion of the clause ‘‘. . . otherwise 

used for commercial purposes’’ from 

§ 291.13(a)(5) in order to allow the 

revenue-generating activities described 

above. 

Response: The Department considers 

that prohibitions on commercial uses 

would generally apply to sale of 

paleontological resources. The issue of 

not-for-profit institutions using 

revenues generated from traveling 

exhibits and/or other promotional 

media that utilize Federal specimens for 

purposes of supporting collections 

management would be addressed in a 

repository agreement. Staff of 

institutions that employed such 

activities would not be excluded from 

consideration for paleontological 

permits. 

Section 291.14 Application Process 

Section 291.14 sets forth the 

information that must be submitted by 

permit applicants to the Authorized 

Officer for the proposed collection of 

paleontological resources. The Forest 

Service may require additional 

information in order to support an 

application for a permit. 

Section 291.14—Response to Comments 

Comment: Information required in 

permit application should be optional. 

One respondent suggested that 

information required to be provided in 

a permit application be made optional, 

and expressed the view that 

determination of the need for a permit 

and required information to collect 

common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources for research 

purposes should be left to the discretion 

of the Authorized Officer. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the information requested in a 

permit application is the minimum 

information necessary for staff 

specialists to evaluate a project proposal 

and provide a recommendation 

regarding permit issuance. Collection of 

paleontological resources for research 

purposes would require a permit, even 

if such resources could be considered 

common. 

Comment: Each party listed on a 

permit application should include a 

resume. One respondent suggested that 

all parties listed on a permit application 

be required to submit a current resume 

as part of the permit application. 

Response: The permit applicant is 

required to submit a current resume; the 

permit applicant is responsible for 

ensuring that all other parties listed on 

the permit are qualified as appropriate 

for participation in permitted activities. 

Comment: Regional or State-wide 

paleontology permits. One respondent 

suggested that consideration be given to 

issuance of Region- and/or State-wide 

paleontology permits to allow 

unanticipated collection of 

paleontological resources on an asneeded basis. 

Response: The regulations do not 

preclude issuance of Region- and/or 

State-wide paleontology permits. 

Comment: Responsibilities of permit 

applicant and repository institution are 

not distinguished. Respondents 

suggested that the requirements for a 

permit applicant to provide verification 

of a repository institution’s agreement to 

receive a paleontological collection, and 

an acknowledgment that costs of 

curation will be borne by the applicant 

and/or repository institution confuses 

the respective responsibilities of the 

permit applicant and the repository 

institution during the permit 

application process. One respondent 

expressed the view that only collected 

paleontological resources that result in 

scientific publication be required to be 

housed in an approved repository. 

Response: The Department considers 

that it is the responsibility of a permit 

applicant to demonstrate that 

arrangements have been made with a 

repository which has agreed to accept 

materials collected under permit, and to 

demonstrate that arrangements have 

been made for financing associated costs 

of curation that do not obligate the 

Forest Service. These demonstrations by 

the permit applicant are necessary in 

advance of issuance of a permit in order 

to ensure that collected materials are 

appropriately reposited and not 

‘‘orphaned’’ after collection. The Act 

stipulates that paleontological resources 

collected under a permit be deposited in 

a repository institution, and does not 

distinguish between such resources that 

result in scientific publication and those 

that do not. 

Section 291.15 Application 

Qualifications and Eligibility 

Section 291.15(a) clarifies what 

information is needed from an applicant 

to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the 

Authorized Officer, that the applicant is 

qualified to carry out the proposed 

permitted activity. These qualifications 

are important to ensure that the 

collection would be carried out in a 

professional and responsible manner. 

Section 291.15(b) clarifies that the 

information submitted by an applicant 

must demonstrate that the proposed 

activity is eligible for a permit, in 

accordance with 16 U.S.C. 470aaa– 

3(b)(2)–(4). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21614 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

Section 291.15—Response to Comments 

Comment: Permit requirements 

should refer to permit application rather 

than applicant. One respondent 

expressed the view that qualifications 

and eligibility requirements to obtain a 

paleontology permit should refer to the 

permit application rather than the 

permit applicant, in order to facilitate 

proposals by teams rather than 

individuals. 

Response: A permit application 

would contain a project proposal and 

supporting materials provided by each 

permit applicant that demonstrate that 

the applicant(s) is/are qualified and 

eligible to obtain a permit. The 

Department considers that the 

suggestion to refer to the application 

rather than the applicant(s) is semantic 

rather than substantive, and that the 

existing statement of qualifications and 

eligibility requirements with respect to 

applicants does not discriminate against 

team proposals. 

Comment: Requirement of a graduate 

degree in paleontology is too stringent. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the requirement for a permit applicant 

to hold a graduate degree in 

paleontology or a related field is too 

stringent and discourages research and 

science. Respondents suggested that 

students in pursuit of a graduate degree 

in paleontology or related field be 

considered qualified to hold a permit. 

Respondents expressed the view that it 

would be impractical for graduate 

students to be listed on their academic 

advisors’ permits because such advisors 

may have several students working in 

different field areas at the same time 

and could not provide direct field 

supervision to each student in each 

area. Respondents suggested that the 

requirement for a graduate degree in 

paleontology will prevent self-educated 

nonprofessional, avocational, and/or 

amateur paleontologists from furthering 

their knowledge in paleontology, and 

expressed the view that permits should 

be made accessible to non-professionals 

without graduate degrees. 

Response: The specification of a 

graduate degree in paleontology or a 

related field is not the sole criterion that 

may be considered regarding an 

applicant’s qualifications. The 

regulations explicitly specify an 

alternative criterion of training and/or 

experience commensurate to the nature 

and scope of the proposed activities. 

The rule language has been slightly 

modified to clarify that training and/or 

experience need only be commensurate 

to the nature and scope of the proposed 

project. The regulations do not specify 

that a graduate student must be listed on 

an advisor’s permit. Non-professional 

paleontologists without graduate 

degrees may be qualified to obtain a 

permit providing that they can 

demonstrate training and/or experience 

commensurate with the proposed 

activity. 

Comment: Permit application by 

casual collectors. One respondent 

questioned whether or not casual (nonacademic) collectors would be eligible 

apply for a permit to collect 

paleontological resources. 

Response: Casual (non-academic) 

collectors may apply for a permit 

provided they meet eligibility 

requirements and can demonstrate 

training and/or experience 

commensurate with the proposed 

activity. 

Comment: Requirement of 

paleontological expertise is too 

restrictive. Respondents expressed the 

view that requiring a permit applicant to 

demonstrate paleontological expertise, 

or requiring permitted paleontologists to 

be present during collection of 

paleontological resources, is too 

restrictive. Such requirements would 

make it difficult for geologists without 

paleontological expertise to perform 

field research that might require 

collection of paleontological specimens 

for the detailed characterization of 

geological strata. 

Response: A permit applicant may 

possess paleontological expertise or be 

able to demonstrate training and/or 

experience commensurate with the 

nature of the proposed activity. 

Depending on the nature of the 

proposed activity, such training and/or 

experience may not require specialized 

paleontological expertise. The 

regulations do not require that a 

permitted paleontologist with 

specialized paleontological expertise be 

present during permitted activities. 

Comment: Requirement for 

experience pertaining to field work 

logistics is not necessary. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

requiring an applicant to demonstrate 

experience in logistical aspects of 

performing paleontological field work is 

unnecessary. The respondent suggested 

that ensuring proper logistical 

preparation for field work should be the 

responsibility of the applicant, not the 

Forest Service, and that the applicant 

should only be required to demonstrate 

qualifications, and be held responsible 

for, actual field collection of specimens 

and associated information. 

Response: An applicant is required to 

demonstrate experience in logistical 

aspects of field work commensurate 

with the nature of the project proposal. 

The rule language has been slightly 

modified to clarify that experience need 

only be commensurate to the nature and 

scope of the proposed project. This 

requirement ensures that specimens will 

not be lost or damaged resulting from a 

permit holder’s failure to successfully 

complete work in the field. 

Comment: Transferability of 

qualifications. Respondents suggested 

that permit applicants who have 

successfully demonstrated the 

qualifications to be issued a permit in 

one administrative unit should also be 

considered to be qualified to perform 

similar activities in other administrative 

units. 

Response: Projects may differ enough 

in nature and scope that qualifications 

demonstrated by an applicant for one 

project may not pertain to other projects 

proposed by the same applicant. Permits 

are generally administered by the local 

Forest Service office which manages the 

lands on which a proposed project is 

located. It is at the discretion of the 

permit-issuing office whether or not to 

accept an applicant’s qualifications 

which have been demonstrated 

elsewhere for other projects. 

Comment: Requirement of additional 

qualifications by the Authorized Officer 

may be arbitrary. Respondents 

expressed the view that the ability of an 

Authorized Officer to require that a 

permit applicant hold qualifications that 

are not listed in the regulations may 

result in arbitrary requirements being 

imposed and lead to non-uniform, 

inconsistent permitting criteria 

employed by the Forest Service. One 

respondent suggested that the ability of 

an Authorized Officer to require 

additional applicant qualifications be 

eliminated. 

Response: The Department recognizes 

that decisions to issue a permit may 

reflect location- and/or context-specific 

circumstances that are unrelated to the 

paleontological resource in question or 

the paleontological qualifications of an 

applicant. A decision whether or not to 

issue a permit may reflect an applicant’s 

qualifications in areas unrelated to 

paleontology that are pertinent to such 

case-specific circumstances as may 

apply. The language of the regulations 

has been slightly modified to indicate 

that additional qualifications as may be 

required would relate to context-specific 

factors associated with the proposed 

project. 

Section 291.16 Terms and Conditions 

Section 291.16(a), (b) and (c) restates 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–3 (c)(1) through (3) in 

specifying requirements for the issuance 

of a permit for the collection of 

paleontological resources. The permittee 

would acknowledge that paleontological 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21615 

resources collected from National Forest 

System lands under a permit remain 

property of the United States; that the 

paleontological resources collected, 

along with associated records, would be 

preserved for the public in an approved 

repository to be made available for 

scientific research and public education; 

and that specific locality data would be 

kept confidential. 

Section 291.16(d) through (r) 

establishes requirements to ensure that 

all permitted activities would comply 

with and further the purposes of the 

Act, these final regulations, any 

additional stipulations, and other Forest 

Service contract authorities and 

requirements. 

Section 291.16(r) provides for the 

incorporation of additional permit 

stipulations, as may be appropriate, that 

were not otherwise listed in § 291.16(a) 

through (q). Examples of such 

additional stipulations would include, 

but not be limited to, reclamation plans 

and posting of reclamation bonds. The 

addition of permit terms, conditions, or 

stipulations requiring a reclamation 

plan or bond, or both, to ensure 

reclamation of surface disturbance 

associated with paleontological resource 

collections would be at the discretion of 

the Authorized Officer under these 

regulations, and such requirements 

would be based on conditions specific 

to the authorized activity. 

Section 291.16—Response to Comments 

Comment: A valid repository 

agreement should be part of the 

permitting process. Respondents 

expressed the view that an agreement by 

a repository to house collected 

specimens should be a requirement in 

decisions to issue a permit to collect 

paleontological resources. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

a valid repository agreement should 

exist prior to issuing a permit to collect, 

and such requirement is stated in 

§ 291.14(e) regarding the permit 

application and is re-stated in 

§ 291.16(b) regarding permit terms and 

conditions. 

Comment: Permit terms and 

conditions should apply to the permit 

holder, not to the repository institution. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

permit terms and conditions should 

apply only to the permit holder and not 

to the repository institution which has 

agreed to accept collected materials. 

Respondents suggested that because the 

repository is not a signatory to a permit, 

it should not be held responsible for 

compliance with terms and conditions 

as set forth in a permit. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

permit terms and conditions apply only 

to the permit holder and not the 

repository. The language referring to the 

repository with regard to collections 

maintenance costs has been slightly 

modified to clarify that the issue of 

curation-related funding is a matter that 

may be addressed by the permit holder 

and the repository in an agreement 

separate from the permit. However, it is 

ultimately the responsibility of the 

permit holder, at the time of permit 

issuance, to demonstrate that funding is 

available to support curation of the 

specimens that would be collected 

under permit. 

Comment: Permit terms and 

conditions are too restrictive and limit 

the free exchange of scientific 

information. One respondent suggested 

that the terms and conditions of a 

permit are overly restrictive, and limit 

the free and open exchange of scientific 

information. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the respondent’s suggestion that the 

terms and conditions of a permit are 

overly restrictive and limit the free and 

open exchange of scientific information 

is conjectural and not substantiated. 

Permit terms and requirements are 

considered to be the minimum 

necessary to ensure that collected 

specimens are appropriately protected 

and preserved. 

Comment: Limits on tool size and 

amounts of materials collected under a 

permit. Respondents questioned 

whether or not collections of 

paleontological resources made under 

permit would be subject to the same 

criteria as established for casual 

collection, particularly with respect to 

limits on size of collecting tools and 

limits on weight and/or volume of 

collected materials. One respondent 

expressed the view that the regulations 

place undue limits on the volume of 

materials collected under permit. 

Response: Conditions established for 

casual collection would not apply to 

collection under permit. The nature of 

collection tools and amounts of 

collected materials would be contextspecific and established in the permit. 

Comment: Undue limits on 

exploration for new fossil-bearing 

localities under a permit. One 

respondent expressed the view that the 

regulations place undue limits on the 

ability to explore for new fossil-bearing 

localities under a permit. 

Response: The regulations do not 

address or otherwise place limits on 

exploration for new fossil-bearing 

locations while working under a permit. 

Comment: Specimens collected under 

permit should not have to be 

immediately deposited in a repository. 

Several respondents expressed the view 

that serious amateur collectors and 

researchers who are not affiliated with 

a repository be allowed to retain 

possession of collected specimens while 

they are studying or performing research 

on them. 

Response: The regulations do not 

specify a deadline for depositing 

specimens in a repository after 

collection. A time frame for timely 

transfer of collected materials by a 

permit holder to a repository would be 

specified in the permit. 

Comment: Paleontological resources 

should be preserved in perpetuity. One 

respondent suggested that reference to 

preserving paleontological resources 

that are collected under permit in an 

approved repository be amended to 

indicate that such resources will be 

preserved for perpetuity for the public 

in an approved repository. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

there is an expectation that specimens 

deposited in a repository will be 

preserved in perpetuity. However, a 

repository may not be able to provide 

written assurance that such preservation 

would be in perpetuity. Rather, the term 

of preservation would be addressed in a 

repository agreement. 

Comment: Paleontological resources 

should be made available to qualified 

individuals. One respondent expressed 

the view that reference to making 

paleontological resources deposited in a 

repository available for scientific 

research and public education should be 

amended to indicate that such resources 

be made available to qualified 

individuals for scientific research and 

public education. 

Response: The Department considers 

that paleontological resources which 

have been deposited in a repository are 

held in trust for the benefit of the 

public, and that formal restriction of 

access to such resources to qualified 

individuals is beyond the scope of the 

regulations. 

Comment: Requirement for deposit in 

a repository does not distinguish 

between fossils collected for research or 

educational purposes. Respondents 

expressed the view that fossils collected 

for educational purposes and/or 

teaching collections in academic 

departments should not be subject to 

same requirement to be deposited in a 

repository as are research collections. 

Respondents also suggested that 

common invertebrate and plant fossils 

should not be required to be deposited 

in a repository. 

Response: The definition of repository 

in the regulations allows for deposition 

of specimens collected under permit 

into teaching collections maintained by 

educational institutions. Common 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21616 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources subject to casual collection do 

not need to be deposited in a repository; 

however, common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources that are 

collected under a permit must be 

deposited in a repository. 

Comment: Release of specific locality 

data should not be restricted. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

terms and conditions of permits should 

not include restriction on release of 

specific locality data. Respondents 

suggested that permits require full and 

open disclosure of specific location 

information, with exception to full 

disclosure only in cases where collected 

specimens have a high market value 

and/or locations would be placed at risk 

by such disclosure. Respondents 

suggested that full disclosure of location 

data is necessary to provide full 

scientific value of collected specimens, 

and that separation of location 

information from specimens is 

irresponsible and may result in 

permanent loss of specific location 

information. Respondents expressed the 

view that rigid enforcement of 

confidentiality provisions would be 

onerous and jeopardize routine use of 

collections. 

Response: Confidentiality of specific 

location information is required by the 

Act, and the regulations require that 

confidentiality with regard to specific 

location information be maintained by 

individuals who choose to solicit and 

receive a permit from the Forest Service 

to collect paleontological resources. The 

Forest Service may consider the context 

of the permitted project and collection 

locations in determining the appropriate 

level of specificity of location 

information that would be considered 

confidential. The Department does not 

consider that maintaining 

confidentiality of specific locations 

requires separation of specific locality 

information from specimens. 

Respondents’ suggestion that 

enforcement of confidentiality 

provisions would be onerous and 

jeopardize routine use of collections is 

conjectural and not substantiated by 

data. Many repositories already house 

specimens, such as cultural 

archeological materials and endangered 

species, which are used in research and 

whose collection locations are 

considered confidential. 

Comment: Specific location 

information that can or cannot be 

released. One respondent suggested that 

general location information be allowed 

to be released, and expressed the view 

that clarification should be provided 

regarding the level of specificity of 

location information (that is, 

identification of State, and/or county 

and/or specific geologic unit in which 

location occurs) that could be allowed 

to be released. 

Response: The level of specificity of 

location information that would be 

considered confidential would in most 

circumstances reflect the context of the 

occurrence, and would be decided on a 

case by case basis. Coordinates obtained 

from Global Positioning System (GPS) 

devices, or from other sources with a 

comparable level of accuracy would 

generally be considered too specific for 

general release and would remain 

confidential. Criteria for determining 

the appropriate level of specificity of 

location information would relate to 

case-specific circumstances and would 

not be appropriate to list in regulations. 

Comment: Permit holder should be 

accorded responsibility to determine the 

appropriate level of specific location 

information for release. One respondent 

expressed the view that in being 

awarded a permit, a permit holder 

should be recognized by the Forest 

Service as being capable of making 

certain types of decisions without prior 

authorization, including being 

responsible for determining an 

appropriate level of specific location 

information that can be released. 

Response: The appropriate level of 

specific location information that would 

be considered for release would be 

specified in permit terms and 

conditions. A permit applicant may 

provide suggestion, with justification, 

for the appropriate level of specific 

location allowed for release in the 

permit application. 

Comment: Acknowledgment of the 

Forest Service in public 

communications resulting from 

collections. One respondent expressed 

the view that it would be difficult for a 

permit holder to comply with the 

requirement to acknowledge the Forest 

Service in public communications 

concerning collected materials after the 

collection has left the permit holder’s 

possession and has been transferred to 

a repository where other users may 

access the collection. The respondent 

also suggested that a permit holder may 

acknowledge the Forest Service in good 

faith, but that a communications 

medium may remove the citation prior 

to distribution. 

Response: The language of the 

regulations has been modified to clarify 

that a permit holder would only be 

responsible for acknowledging the 

Forest Service in public 

communications resulting from the 

permit holder’s use of collected 

materials. The Forest Service would 

consider good faith efforts by a permit 

holder to provide such 

acknowledgment, in circumstances as 

described by the respondent where lack 

of acknowledgment relates to factors 

beyond the control of the permit holder. 

Comment: Timely issuance of 

repository catalog numbers may be 

beyond control of permit holder. One 

respondent expressed the view that a 

permit holder should not be required to 

adhere to a 1-year deadline for submittal 

to the Forest Service of a list of catalog 

numbers assigned by a repository to 

collected specimens. The respondent 

suggested that repositories may not 

assign catalog numbers to specimens in 

a timely manner, and that a permit 

holder may have no direct influence 

over when catalog numbers are 

assigned. The respondent suggested that 

the requirement be changed to accession 

numbers rather than catalog numbers, 

and/or that the time frame for submittal 

of catalog numbers be flexible. 

Response: The regulations do not 

specify a 1-year deadline for submittal 

of repository-issued catalog numbers for 

specimens collected under permit. 

Rather, the regulations refer to a 

timeline, to be established in the permit, 

for submittal of a complete list of 

collected specimens and their current 

locations. Reference in the regulations 

to submittal of repository accession and 

catalog numbers in permit reports has 

been modified to clarify that submittal 

of accession and/or catalog numbers 

would be allowed, to account for 

circumstance wherein a repository may 

have assigned accession numbers to 

specimens but has not yet issued catalog 

numbers for those specimens. 

Comment: Permit application 

requirements and terms and conditions 

do not distinguish between 

responsibilities of permit holder and 

repository. One respondent expressed 

the view that requiring a permit holder 

to identify a repository institution, 

provide documentation that the 

identified repository has agreed to 

accept collected materials, and that a 

permit holder be responsible for cost of 

curatorial activities associated with 

collected specimens does not 

distinguish between the roles and 

responsibilities of the permit holder and 

the repository institution with respect to 

the permitting process, and that such 

roles and responsibilities should be 

clarified. 

Response: The Department recognizes 

that the roles and responsibilities of a 

permit holder and repository concerning 

proposed collections and subsequent 

collections management activity are 

often interrelated and difficult to 

disentangle. With regard to permitting 

and permit terms and conditions, the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21617 

Department considers that it is 

necessary for a permit applicant to 

establish in the application and for the 

Department to recognize at the time a 

permit is issued, that an appropriate 

repository has been identified, that the 

repository has agreed to accept the 

collections, and that financial 

mechanisms are in place to ensure 

continued professional management of 

the collected specimens. Because the 

permit applicant is proposing the 

collection activity, it is the applicant’s 

responsibility to provide documentation 

that identifies an appropriate repository, 

to document that the repository has 

agreed to accept the collection, and to 

document that necessary funding has 

been secured to ensure collection 

maintenance. These issues must be 

addressed in the application and/or at 

the time a permit is issued, in order to 

minimize the possibility of issuing a 

permit that results in an orphaned 

collection. 

Comment: Requirement to comply 

with tasks specified by Authorized 

Officer is too broad. One respondent 

suggested that the requirement for a 

permit holder to comply with all tasks 

required by the Authorized Officer, even 

in the event of permit expiration, 

suspension, or revocation is too broad. 

The respondent suggested that the 

word’’ tasks’’ be replaced by ‘‘terms and 

conditions’’ or ‘‘permit requirements.’’ 

Response: The Department agrees that 

reference to ‘‘tasks’’ is overly broad, and 

has replaced ‘‘tasks’’ by ‘‘permit 

requirements’’ to clarify the permit 

holder’s continued obligations in the 

event of permit expiration, suspension, 

or revocation. 

Comment: Additional permit 

conditions should not be allowed. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the provision allowing for additional 

permit stipulations, terms, and 

conditions that are not already listed is 

too broad. Respondents suggested that 

the ability to add permit requirements 

could result in requirements that are 

arbitrary and that are not based in 

science and/or regulatory standards, and 

also suggested that reclamation of 

collection sites should not be a 

universal permit requirement. 

Response: The Department requires 

the ability to establish permit terms and 

conditions that may be unrelated to 

paleontological resources, but are 

necessary to address location-specific 

conditions. The regulations do not 

specify site reclamation as a universal 

permit requirement. 

Section 291.17 Permit Reports 

Section 291.17 lists the information 

that is necessary for permittees to 

include in the reports required under a 

permit to conduct paleontological 

activities. This information is required 

in order to address 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–1 

which states that the Secretary shall 

manage paleontological resources using 

scientific principles and expertise. 

Section 291.17—Response to Comments 

Comment: Required content of reports 

should apply only to permit reports. 

Respondents noted that the permit 

report requirements as listed in § 291.17 

should apply only to permit holders and 

not to repository institutions, because a 

repository institution is not a signatory 

to a permit and should not be held 

responsible for addressing permit 

requirements. One respondent suggested 

that the term ‘‘museum agreements’’ be 

removed from the title of § 291.17 to 

clarify that the report content 

requirements listed therein pertain only 

to permit reports. 

Response: The Department agrees 

with respondents’ comments and the 

heading of § 291.17 has been changed to 

clarify that the section applies to permit 

reports and not to repositories. 

Comment: Required content of reports 

is burdensome. Respondents expressed 

the view that the required content of 

permit reports is overly comprehensive, 

burdensome, and limits the free and 

open exchange of scientific information. 

Respondents suggested that required 

items be considered optional, and that 

the phrase ‘‘as appropriate’’ be added to 

requirements concerning identification 

of potential impacts to paleontological 

resources and mitigation 

recommendations to address identified 

potential impacts. Respondents 

suggested that requirements to supply 

repository-issued accession numbers 

and catalog numbers reflect repository 

processing time and are beyond the 

control of permit holders. One 

respondent suggested that up to 2 years 

following the end of field work be 

allowed for a permit holder to supply 

required information concerning 

inventories of collected specimens and 

collection locations. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the specified report content is the 

minimum information necessary for the 

Forest Service to be able to evaluate 

work performed under permit and use 

such evaluations as the basis for 

managing its paleontological resources 

using scientific principles and expertise. 

Respondents’ suggestions that report 

content is burdensome and limits the 

open exchange of scientific information 

are conjectural and not substantiated. 

The regulations already state that all 

items listed as report content are to be 

included ‘‘as appropriate’’. The 

regulations do not specify a 1 year 

deadline for submittal of a permit 

report, including content related to 

repository-issued accession and catalog 

numbers for specimens collected under 

permit. Rather, the regulations refer to a 

timeline, to be established in the permit, 

for submittal of the permit report. 

Reference in the regulations to submittal 

of repository accession and catalog 

numbers in permit reports has been 

modified to clarify that submittal of 

accession and/or catalog numbers 

would be allowed, to account for 

circumstance wherein a repository may 

have assigned accession numbers to 

specimens but has not yet issued catalog 

numbers for those specimens. 

Section 291.18 Modification of Permits 

Section 291.18 provides the 

framework for the modification of 

permits, in accordance with 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–3(d). Examples of a permittee’ s 

request for permit modification would 

include, but would not be limited to: 

Changes to the persons listed on the 

permit, changes to the scope of work 

(including, but not limited to, 

geographic area, analysis or collecting 

techniques, or geologic strata), change of 

the designated approved repository, or 

changes to the permit timelines. 

Modification of a permit would be 

discretionary on the part of the 

Authorized Officer (see § 291.13(b)). 

Notifications regarding modifications 

would be in writing. 

Section 291.19 Suspension and 

Revocation of Permits 

Section 291.19(a) and (b) provides for 

the suspension or revocation of permits 

in accordance with 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–3 

(d)(1) and (2). Suspensions would 

address a variety of management issues 

that may or may not be due to any fault 

of the permittee. For example, the 

Authorized Officer would be able to 

suspend a permit if conditions relating 

to other resources have changed. The 

Authorized Officer would also be able to 

suspend a permit for any violation of a 

term or condition of the permit, such as 

exceeding the approved scope of work. 

A permit may also be suspended if 

permittee becomes ineligible to hold a 

permit. Examples of ineligibility 

include, but are not limited to, 

situations where the permittee is 

responsible for resource damage, if the 

approved repository is no longer 

available, or if the permittee provided 

false information to the Authorized 

Officer as part of the application for the 

permit. 

A suspended permit may be revoked 

if the permittee fails to correct the 

reason(s) for the suspension in 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21618 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

accordance with the notification by the 

Authorized Officer. Permits that are 

suspended for reasons other than the 

permittee’s conduct (for example, 

resource management closures, 

wildfires, and so forth) will not be 

revoked. Such circumstances will result 

in continued permit suspension until 

the situation is corrected, or in some 

cases, the permit may be modified. 

Section 291.20 Appeals 

Section 291.20 clarifies that a 

permittee may appeal the denial or 

revocation of a permit in accordance 

with 36 CFR part 214. Procedures for 

appealing a permit revocation or denial 

are set forth in 36 CFR part 214. 

Section 291.21 Curation of 

Paleontological Resources 

Section 291.21 clarifies that 

paleontological resources from National 

Forest System lands collected under a 

permit issued under these regulations 

must be deposited in an approved 

repository. Collections made from 

National Forest System lands before the 

effective date of these regulations would 

be covered under the terms of the 

original collection permit or agreement. 

Such instruments remain in effect and 

the collections remain Federal property. 

Repositories are encouraged to work 

with the Forest Service to ensure that 

the care of pre-existing collections meet 

the minimum requirements of these 

regulations. 

Section 291.21—Response to Comments 

Comment: Uniformity of repository 

requirements between the Departments 

of Agriculture and Interior. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

regulations concerning repositories be 

consistent between the Departments of 

Agriculture and Interior, so that 

repositories who maintain collections 

from both Departments would not have 

to implement separate standards of 

curation that would be costly and 

unnecessarily burdensome. The 

respondent suggested that the 

development of these regulations be 

suspended until versions from both the 

Departments of Agriculture and Interior 

are available for simultaneous review so 

that uniform standards may be 

established. 

Response: The Departments of 

Agriculture and Interior closely 

coordinated the drafting of requirements 

related to repositories in their respective 

regulations, and the applicable 

repository standards are in substantive 

agreement. The Department does not 

consider that a requirement for separate 

standards of curation would be imposed 

on repositories, and the regulations 

explicitly state that a repository 

approved by a Federal agency or bureau 

may be considered an approved 

repository by the Forest Service. 

Consequently, there is no need for 

simultaneous review of the respective 

regulation of the Departments of 

Agriculture and Interior regarding the 

establishment of uniform repository 

standards. 

Comment: Non-research collections. 

Respondents suggested that the 

requirement for all collections of 

paleontological resources made under 

permit to be deposited in an approved 

repository is unreasonable. Respondents 

noted that this requirement may 

preclude collections for teaching 

purposes, many of which are housed in 

academic institutions rather than 

research-oriented repository 

institutions. Respondents also suggested 

that research collections of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources be exempted from the 

requirement to be deposited in an 

approved repository. Respondents 

suggested that curation of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources is costly and will hinder 

research, and that many repositories 

will not accept collections of common 

specimens owing to curation resource 

limitations. 

Response: The definition of repository 

in the regulations allows for deposition 

of specimens collected under permit 

into teaching collections maintained by 

educational institutions. The suggestion 

that repositories may reject collections 

of common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources owing to 

resource limitations is conjectural, and 

no examples of such practice were 

offered. The regulations conform to the 

Act, which states that permitted 

collections of paleontological resources 

must be deposited in an approved 

repository, and which does not provide 

an exception for common invertebrate 

and plant paleontological resources. Use 

of specimens in research that are not 

properly curated would increase the risk 

of their loss, damage and/or 

misappropriation, all of which pose 

greater risk of hindering research than 

costs associated with appropriate 

curation of such specimens, which 

would ensure their availability to future 

researchers. 

Comment: Additional information 

should be provided for common 

paleontological resources. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

more detailed information and guidance 

should be provided concerning criteria 

and procedures for storing, preparing, 

and documenting common 

paleontological resources. 

Response: Common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources 

collected under permit would be subject 

to the same repository requirements as 

other paleontological resources 

collected under permit. Collection 

management functions such as storage, 

preparation, and documentation are the 

responsibilities of a repository, and are 

beyond the scope of the regulations to 

address. 

Section 291.22 Becoming an Approved 

Repository 

Section 291.22 states the requirements 

for becoming an approved repository. 

Section 291.22(a) states that the 

repository must meet the minimum 

standards in § 291.23 and agree to 

certain terms and conditions. Section 

291.22(b) states that the Authorized 

Officer and the repository official may 

enter into a formal curation agreement 

in accordance with § 291.26. Section 

291.22(c) explains that the repository 

must agree to periodic inventories and 

inspections as described in § 291.25. 

Section 291.22(d) clarifies that an 

Agency paleontologist in consultation 

with the repository official will make a 

determination of the content of the 

collection to be curated based on 

scientific principles and expertise. 

Section 291.22(e) explains that a 

repository that has been approved by 

one Federal agency may be considered 

approved by other Federal agencies. For 

example, a repository approved by the 

Forest Service may be considered 

approved by the Bureau of Land 

Management and vice versa. 

Section 291.22—Response to Comments 

Comment: Content of Collections. 

Respondents suggested that clarification 

should be provided concerning how the 

Authorized Officer will consult with a 

repository to determine the content of 

collections prior to their being 

deposited, and expressed the view that 

undue interference by the Authorized 

Officer may result in a repository 

declining to accept a collection. 

Respondents suggested that repositories 

generally maintain a defined scope of 

collections and that repository staff 

expertise is most appropriate to 

determine repository collection content. 

Respondents suggested that repository 

staff expertise should be relied on to 

make collection content decisions, that 

consultation with the Authorized 

Officer each time specimens are 

deposited would be burdensome, and 

that consultation with the Authorized 

Officer should be limited to 

circumstance where questions arise. 

Respondents also expressed the view 

that clarification should be provided 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21619 

regarding the disposition of specimens 

that are not appropriate for repository 

collections. 

Response: The process for 

determining the content of collections to 

be deposited in a repository institution 

will be established in a repository 

agreement. The terms of the repository 

agreement will determine the degree of 

latitude offered to the repository 

institution in determining the content of 

deposited collections, and 

circumstances that may require 

consultation with an Agency 

paleontologist regarding the content of 

permitted collections to be deposited 

will be described in the repository 

agreement. The roles of the Authorized 

Officer and agency paleontologist in 

determining the content of deposited 

collections are clarified by replacing the 

phrase ‘‘the Authorized Officer’’ with 

‘‘an Agency paleontologist’’ in 

§ 291.22(d) of the regulations. The 

manner of disposition of collected 

specimens that are not appropriate for a 

repository’s collections will be 

established in a repository agreement 

and/or through discussion with an 

Agency paleontologist. 

Comment: Release of specific locality 

data. Respondents suggested that 

clarification should be provided 

regarding the level of specificity of 

locality data to be considered 

confidential, and suggested that the 

requirement of signed confidentiality 

agreements for recipients of specific 

locality information could delay or 

impede publication of research results 

in scientific journals that require 

publication of locality information. 

Response: The level of specificity of 

location data to be considered 

confidential cannot be addressed 

appropriately in regulation, as such 

level will commonly reflect local 

considerations that are specific to the 

paleontological resource in question. 

Coordinates obtained using Global 

Positioning System (GPS) devices or 

geographic coordinates that reflect a 

comparable level of accuracy would 

generally be considered too specific. 

The suggestion that research publication 

could be delayed or impeded by the 

requirement for written confidentiality 

agreements from recipients of protected 

information is conjectural. A survey of 

publication requirements for a number 

of scientific journals that exclusively or 

commonly contain paleontology articles 

has demonstrated that most journals 

either do not require publication of 

specific location information, or make 

provision for not publishing such 

information for sensitive locations 

where public knowledge of specific 

locations presents risk to the resource. 

Section 291.23 Minimum 

Requirements of Approval of a 

Repository 

Section 291.23 states the minimum 

requirements that a repository must 

meet in order to be approved to provide 

long-term curatorial services for Federal 

paleontological collections. It is 

important to establish such 

requirements in these final regulations, 

rather than rely on standards contained 

in internal agency policy and guidance 

documents such as Department of the 

Interior Departmental Manual Part 411, 

in order to (1) promote consistency 

between the Departments, (2) eliminate 

subjectivity in approving repositories, 

and (3) provide sufficient information to 

repositories seeking to become approved 

under the Act and the final regulations. 

Section 291.23—Response to Comments 

Comment: Requirements of approval 

of a repository. One respondent stated 

that the definition of a ‘‘good 

repository’’ was not clearly stated, and 

another respondent suggested that the 

focus of this section should be on fossil 

collections and that requirements 

should include a guarantee that the 

fossil collection be treated by the 

repository as a permanently accessible 

source of scientific data. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the conditions as set forth in 

§ 291.23 of the regulations offer clear 

and sufficient detail for characterization 

of a repository that may be approved to 

house paleontological collections from 

National Forest System lands. The 

repository requirements set forth in 

these regulations reflect a focus on the 

paleontological collections and have 

been developed to ensure the long-term 

integrity of collections maintained in 

repositories. A focus on collections as 

permanently accessible sources of 

scientific data is reflected in the 

provisions of §§ 291.22(a)(iii) and 

291.24(a) of these regulations. 

Comment: Requirement for repository 

staff expertise in paleontology is 

burdensome. A respondent suggested a 

requirement for staff expertise in 

paleontology may be burdensome for 

small repository institutions 

Response: The language in § 291.23(d) 

of the regulations has been modified to 

reflect that the level of repository staff 

expertise in paleontology be appropriate 

to the nature and use of the 

paleontological collections maintained 

by that repository. 

Comment: Approval of a repository. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

clarification should be provided 

concerning whether or not approval of 

a repository is a one-time process, or if 

an approval is required for every permit 

or collection considered for deposit. 

Respondents also expressed the view 

that decisions by the Forest Service 

regarding repository approval be timely. 

Response: Following approval of a 

repository, the repository is considered 

to remain approved unless a change in 

the conditions related to approval 

warrant reevaluation. A repository 

approval and related repository 

agreement will generally require 

exchanges of information between the 

Forest Service and the repository 

institution; the Forest Service is 

committed to making repository 

approvals as timely as practicable. 

Section 291.24 Standards for Access 

and Use of Collections 

Section 291.24 of these final 

regulations provides repositories with 

consistent standards for access to and 

use of Federal collections in accordance 

with 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–3(c)(2), which 

states that paleontological resources will 

be preserved for the public in approved 

repositories and be made available for 

scientific research and public education. 

This section also addresses loans and 

reproductions, which increase the use 

and accessibility of paleontological 

resources consistent with professional 

and educational practices. 

Section 291.24(f) clarifies when 

repositories must obtain approval from 

the Authorized Officer before allowing 

certain uses that may subject the 

specimens to damage. These uses 

include certain types of reproductions 

and consumptive analysis of specimens. 

Reproductions include molding and 

casting, and computerized axial 

tomography (CAT) scans. Routine 

photographic and/or digital 

reproductions would generally not 

require individual approvals, providing 

the reproductions are not made for 

commercial purposes, and that the 

reproductions do not require transfer of 

the specimen(s) to a different facility. 

Reproductions help expand use and 

accessibility of collections for 

exhibition, research, education, and 

interpretation. Producing a mold and 

then a cast of a specimen will allow an 

exact duplicate upon which research 

and exhibition can take place without 

further damaging the original specimen. 

Section 291.24(f)(2) clarifies that the 

approved repository may only allow 

consumptive analysis of specimens if 

the Authorized Officer, in consultation 

with an Agency paleontologist, has 

determined that the potential gain in 

scientific or interpretive information 

outweighs the potential loss of the 

paleontological resource. Consumptive 

analysis would generally be limited to 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21620 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

specimens that are not unique or fragile, 

or to a sample of specimens drawn from 

a larger collection of similar specimens. 

Section 291.24—Response to Comments 

Comment: Repository standards add 

unnecessary bureaucracy and are 

inconsistent with standard museum 

collection management practices. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

requirements related to repositories add 

unnecessarily to bureaucracy, are timeconsuming to address, and are 

inconsistent with standard museum 

collection management practices. 

Respondents suggested that the Forest 

Service should collaborate with 

repositories and/or other professional 

organizations with a focus on museum 

collections management issues in 

drafting regulatory requirements 

pertinent to collections management. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

umbrella repository agreements be 

developed that clearly state the 

respective roles and responsibilities of 

the Forest Service and the repository, 

and that state how the costs associated 

with collections management are 

calculated and allocated. 

Response: The Department considers 

that collections management 

requirements set forth in the regulations 

largely reflect collections management 

policies and procedures that are 

routinely employed by professionally 

managed repository institutions. 

Repository requirements were 

developed by a team of interagency 

specialists including those familiar with 

repository operations. In accordance 

with the Administrative Procedure Act, 

the solicitation of public comments on 

these final regulations is the established 

procedure for members of the public to 

provide comments concerning 

collections management for Department 

and Agency specialists to further 

consider prior to promulgation of the 

final regulations. The Department agrees 

that repository agreements could 

address costs associated with 

collections management, and nothing in 

these regulations would prevent 

repository agreements from addressing 

such costs. 

Comment: Distinguishing 

responsibilities of repository and permit 

holder. Two respondents expressed the 

view that § 291.24 does not effectively 

distinguish between the respective 

responsibilities of the repository and the 

permit holder, who may not be affiliated 

with the repository. Respondents 

specifically note that repositories cannot 

be held responsible for collections 

which have not yet been deposited by 

permit holders. 

Response: Section 291.16(f) of the 

regulations states that the permit holder 

is responsible for all work conducted 

under the permit; this should be 

understood to mean permitted work 

prior to depositing collected specimens 

in a repository institution. The 

regulations do not state that a repository 

is responsible for collected specimens 

prior to transfer of those specimens by 

the permit holder to the repository. A 

repository would not be considered 

responsible for collected specimens 

until after such specimens have been 

accessioned into the repository’s 

collections. 

Comment: Decision-making by 

approved repository. Respondents 

expressed the view that § 291.24 of 

these final regulations contains 

provisions that are not addressed in the 

Act and which place undue 

administrative burdens on repository 

institutions. Respondents also suggest 

that approval of a repository institution 

in accordance with §§ 291.22 and 

291.23 demonstrates the responsible 

stewardship of that institution. 

Consequently, the qualified repository 

professional staff should have the 

authority to make decisions concerning 

reproductions and consumptive 

analyses based on institutional policies 

and professional standards, without 

requiring written approval from the 

Authorized Officer. 

Response: Regulations may impose 

conditions that are considered necessary 

to implement provisions of the Act, 

even if such provisions were not 

explicitly specified in the Act. The 

Department considers that the 

repository conditions set forth in 

§ 291.24 of the regulations are industrystandard best management practices 

already employed by most 

professionally-managed repository 

institutions. Forest Service specimens in 

repository collections remain Federal 

property, for which the Forest Service 

Authorized Officer is held ultimately 

accountable. The level of decisionmaking authority deferred to the 

repository in administering Forest 

Service paleontological specimens will 

be established in a repository 

agreement, and will reflect the degree of 

responsible stewardship demonstrated 

by the repository institution. 

Comment: Role of private institutions. 

One respondent suggested that 

clarification should be provided 

regarding the role of private institutions 

or companies with respect to standards 

for access and use of collections. 

Response: These regulations do not 

distinguish between roles that may be 

played by public or private institutions 

with respect to standards for access and 

use of collections. Standards in the 

regulations apply equally to all 

institutions. 

Comment: Providing access to specific 

locality data. Respondents expressed 

the view that clarification should be 

provided concerning how to administer 

requests by users for specific locality 

information, and expressed concern that 

separating locality data from specimens 

to ensure confidentiality is bad practice 

and reduces scientific usefulness of 

specimens. 

Response: The Department does not 

consider that maintaining 

confidentiality of specific locations 

requires separation of specific locality 

information from specimens in 

repository collections. The repository 

institution is responsible for 

maintaining an appropriate level of 

confidentiality of specific locations of 

specimens. These regulations do not 

stipulate specific collections-based 

practices or procedures to ensure 

confidentiality; rather, the employment 

of specific practices or procedures as 

appropriate to maintain confidentiality 

is at the discretion of the repository 

institution. 

Comment: Administration of 

confidentiality agreement. Respondents 

suggested that clarification should be 

provided regarding whether the Forest 

Service or the repository would 

administer confidentiality agreements, 

and suggested that repositories be 

explicitly allowed to share locality 

information with holders of Forest 

Service permits for mitigation projects. 

Response: The Department considers 

that administration of confidentiality 

provisions is a shared responsibility of 

the Forest Service and the repository, 

and that administrative details would be 

addressed in a repository agreement. 

Institutional responsibilities in 

communicating confidential location 

information would be addressed in the 

repository agreement. The Department 

considers that entities with a 

demonstrated legitimate need to obtain 

confidential location information would 

generally be granted access to such 

information, and that consultation 

between the Forest Service and the 

repository should resolve any issues 

that may arise. 

Comment: Responsibility for loaned 

specimens. Respondents expressed the 

view that clarification should be 

provided regarding whether a repository 

may require a borrowing institution to 

provide insurance for loaned specimens. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

the repository of origin cannot be held 

responsible for loaned specimens, and 

that the borrowing institution must be 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21621 

responsible for loaned specimens during 

the loan period. 

Response: A requirement to insure 

loaned specimens is a matter to be 

decided between the institutions that 

are parties to a loan, in accordance with 

the loan policies of the institutions. The 

Department considers that the parent 

repository for Federal paleontological 

specimens bears responsibility for the 

stewardship of those specimens, even if 

they have been loaned to another 

institution. 

Comment: Records of collections use. 

Respondents suggest that tracking the 

use of Department collections separately 

from other collections will be 

burdensome, and that repositories 

should not be required to track 

collections uses apart from common 

practices in documenting loans, 

exhibition usage, and requiring citation 

in scientific research publications. 

Response: The regulations do require 

tracking the scientific and educational 

uses of collections from National Forest 

System lands, but they do not require 

them to be tracked separately from other 

repository collections. The Department 

considers that tracking of collections 

use is an industry standard procedure 

for professionally-managed repository 

institutions, and that the ability to 

document such uses of Department 

specimens and/or collections would be 

a subset of more comprehensive 

collections management practices 

already employed by repositories. 

Comment: Repository fees. 

Respondents suggested that clarification 

should be provided regarding whether 

repositories may charge fees to permit 

holders for the curation of deposited 

collections, and whether the Forest 

Service would provide financial support 

for curation of collections obtained 

under permit. 

Response: The issue of charging fees 

to permit holders for the curation of 

collections from National Forest System 

lands is a matter to be decided between 

the permit holder and the repository 

institution. The issue of Forest Service 

assistance provided for curation of 

collections would be addressed in a 

repository agreement; generally, the 

Department can not commit to or 

guarantee financial support for 

collections. 

Comment: Written approval for 

reproduction. Respondents expressed 

the view that the requirement for 

written approval from the Authorized 

Officer for reproductions is 

burdensome, because the listed types of 

reproductions are routine practices, are 

non-destructive, and pose little physical 

risk to specimens. Respondents further 

suggested that decisions regarding 

making reproductions are more 

appropriately made by qualified 

repository professional staff with firsthand knowledge of specimen condition, 

rather than by the Authorized Officer 

who may not possess the expertise 

required to evaluate requests for 

reproductions based on their scientific 

merit. One respondent suggested that 

the Authorized Officer be required to 

consult a professional paleontologist 

regarding approvals for reproductions, 

and another respondent suggested that 

approvals should not be withheld by the 

Authorized Officer for non-scientific 

reasons. 

Response: Particulars concerning the 

need for written approvals from the 

Authorized Officer for a repository to 

make reproductions would be addressed 

in a repository agreement. Routine 

photographic and/or digital 

reproductions would generally not 

require individual approvals, providing 

the reproductions are not performed for 

commercial purposes and do not require 

transfer of the specimen(s) to a different 

facility The rule language has been 

clarified to reflect this. Generally, 

methods of reproduction that would 

require extensive physical manipulation 

of a specimen, transfer of a specimen to 

a different facility and/or that could 

reasonably be considered to pose risk of 

damage to a specimen would require 

approval. The rule language has been 

clarified to reflect that required 

approvals from the Authorized Officer 

would be issued in consultation with an 

Agency paleontologist. The Department 

does not expect that approvals for 

reproductions would be withheld for 

reasons unrelated to risk of potential 

specimen damage. 

Comment: Reproductions governed by 

established practices and procedures. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

repository institutions generally have 

established practices and procedures 

governing reproductions, that requiring 

written approval from the Authorized 

Officer for reproductions results only in 

increased procedural burden, and that 

the requirement for written approval 

should be waived for institutions that 

have established practices and 

procedures governing reproductions. 

Another respondent suggested that 

requests for reproductions are often 

made by visiting researchers, and that it 

would be impractical to respond to such 

requests during the time of the visit. 

Respondents expressed the view that 

specimen reproductions are valuable in 

research, education, and exhibition, and 

that the burden of requesting written 

approval for reproductions would 

impede making reproductions and 

would consequently hinder their use in 

research, education, and exhibition. 

Response: Particulars concerning the 

need for written approvals from the 

Authorized Officer for a repository to 

make reproductions would be addressed 

in a repository agreement. A repository 

agreement may or may not recognize 

that established repository practices and 

procedures are sufficient to guide 

decisions concerning reproductions. 

Researchers should be aware of the 

potential need for written approval for 

non-routine reproductions, and requests 

for such approvals should be made in 

advance of research visits in order to 

ensure sufficient time to evaluate the 

request prior to visits. Written approval 

protocols prior to performing 

procedures that pose risk of damage to 

a specimen from National Forest System 

lands would not generally differ from 

such protocols that would be employed 

if the specimen were privately owned 

and on loan to a repository. The 

Department agrees that reproductions 

are valuable in research, education, and 

exhibition, and does not consider that 

requiring approvals in certain cases 

prior to making reproductions would 

substantially hinder the making, or use 

of reproductions. 

Comment: Presumptive approval of 

reproduction in repository agreement. 

One respondent suggested that 

reproduction of specimens should be 

presumptively approved in repository 

agreements, or alternatively, that 

repository agreements should set forth 

those conditions under which written 

approval for reproduction would be 

required. This would reduce the burden 

of requiring written approval for each 

instance of proposed specimen 

reproduction. 

Response: Particulars concerning the 

need for written approvals from the 

Authorized Officer for a repository to 

make reproductions would be addressed 

in a repository agreement. A repository 

agreement may or may not recognize 

that established repository practices and 

procedures are sufficient to guide 

decisions concerning reproductions. In 

some cases, a separate written approval 

for each instance of proposed specimen 

reproduction might be necessary. 

Comment: Appeal for denial of 

reproduction. One respondent 

questioned whether there is a process to 

appeal a denial by the Authorized 

Officer of approval for reproduction. 

Response: The regulations do not 

establish a process for the appeal of a 

decision by the Authorized Officer to 

deny approval for reproduction. 

Comment: 3–D rendering. One 

respondent expressed the view that 

clarification should be provided 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21622 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

concerning the meaning of the phrase 

‘‘three-dimensional [3–D] rendering.’’ 

Response: The phrase ‘‘threedimensional [3–D] rendering’’ has been 

removed to add clarity to the 

requirement for approval of 

reproductions. 

Comment: Revenue from 

reproductions. One respondent 

suggested that specimen reproductions 

may be sold, and that funds obtained 

from such sales be used to defray the 

costs related to curation of collections. 

Another respondent suggested that 

proceeds from sales of reproductions be 

restricted to specified uses including 

emergency field collection of threatened 

paleontological collections on Federal 

lands, laboratory preparation of Federal 

collections, curation of Federal 

paleontological collections, care and 

storage of Federal paleontological 

collections, and any other purposes that 

are mutually agreed to by the parties in 

writing. 

Response: The issue of using revenues 

generated from sales of reproductions to 

support curation of collections and 

other specified uses would be addressed 

in a repository agreement. 

Comment: Consumptive analysis 

governed by established practices and 

procedures. Respondents expressed the 

view that repository institutions 

generally have established practices and 

procedures governing consumptive 

analysis, and that the requirement for 

written approval should be waived for 

institutions that have established 

practices and procedures governing 

consumptive analysis. Respondents 

further suggested that decisions 

regarding consumptive analyses are 

more appropriately made by qualified 

repository professional staff with firsthand knowledge of specimen 

significance, rather than by the 

Authorized Officer who may not possess 

the expertise required to evaluate 

requests for consumptive analyses based 

on their scientific merit. Respondents 

expressed the view that consumptive 

analyses provide scientific data 

regarding geochemistry and microscopic 

structure of specimens that would be 

otherwise unavailable, and that such 

data are necessary for isotope analyses 

and studies of growth and development, 

ancient biomolecule recovery, and 

paleobiomechanics. Respondents 

expressed the view that denial of 

approval by the Authorized Officer for 

consumptive analysis would have a 

chilling effect on such research. 

Response: Particulars concerning the 

need for written approvals from the 

Authorized Officer for a repository to 

perform consumptive analyses would be 

addressed in a repository agreement. A 

repository agreement may or may not 

recognize that established repository 

practices and procedures are sufficient 

to guide decisions concerning 

consumptive analyses. The Department 

agrees that consumptive analyses 

provide scientific data that are difficult 

to obtain by other means. The 

Department considers that most welljustified requests for approval to 

perform consumptive analyses would be 

supported, and that denial of approval 

for cause would generally be infrequent 

and not have an overall chilling effect 

on research. 

Comment: Presumptive approval of 

consumptive analysis in repository 

agreement. One respondent suggested 

that consumptive analysis of specimens 

should be presumptively approved in 

repository agreements, or alternatively, 

that repository agreements should set 

forth those conditions under which 

written approval for consumptive 

analysis would be required. This would 

reduce the burden of requiring written 

approval for each instance of proposed 

consumptive analysis. 

Response: Particulars concerning the 

need for written approvals from the 

Authorized Officer for a repository to 

perform consumptive analyses would be 

addressed in a repository agreement. A 

repository agreement may or may not 

recognize that established repository 

practices and procedures are sufficient 

to guide decisions concerning 

consumptive analyses. 

Comment: Restrictions only apply to 

existing technologies. One respondent 

suggested that the proposed restrictions 

on consumptive analysis are overly 

detailed and only reflect existing 

technologies 

Response: The regulations do not 

specify technologies, existing or 

otherwise, with respect to consumptive 

analyses. 

Comment: Consumptive analysis of 

common invertebrate and plant fossils. 

One respondent suggested that written 

approval should not be required for 

consumptive analysis of common 

invertebrate and plant fossils. 

Response: Common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources that are 

collected under a permit are subject to 

the same requirements pertaining to 

consumptive analyses as are any other 

paleontological specimens collected 

under permit. Particulars concerning the 

need for written approvals from the 

Authorized Officer for a repository to 

perform consumptive analyses on 

common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources would be 

addressed in a repository agreement. 

Comment: Consumptive analysis of 

unique specimens. One respondent 

suggested that reference to specimens as 

unique should be clarified because 

every specimen can be considered 

unique. 

Response: The term ‘‘unique 

specimen’’ as used herein refers to any 

specimen that possesses one or more 

attributes that offer singular scientific 

information that is not present in other 

known and otherwise similar 

specimens. 

Comment: General limitation of 

consumptive analysis. One respondent 

suggested that, as employed in the 

Preamble discussion, the phrase ‘‘ . . . 

consumptive analysis would generally 

be limited. . .’’ should be modified by 

replacing ‘‘generally’’ by ‘‘may’’ to help 

reduce instances of apparent arbitrary 

denials. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the suggested change in wording 

results in a meaning that is largely 

equivalent to the original passage, so the 

original wording is retained. The 

Department considers that denials of 

approval for consumptive analyses 

would not be arbitrary, but rather would 

be for cause related to irreversible 

adverse effects of such analyses on 

specimens that are not commensurate 

with gain in scientific knowledge 

provided by such analyses. 

Section 291.25 Conducting Inspections 

and Inventories of Collections 

Section 291.25 clarifies the 

responsibilities of the Authorized 

Officer and the repository for 

inspections and inventories of Federal 

paleontological collections as required 

by the Federal Property and 

Administrative Services Act (40 U.S.C. 

541 et seq.) and its implementing 

regulations (41 CFR parts 101 and 102) 

and guidance which require periodic 

inspections. The responsibilities of the 

repositories for the stewardship of 

Federal paleontological collections is 

clarified by citing these authorities in 

these final regulations. It is important 

for repositories to know that after a 

Federal paleontological collection is 

placed in an approved repository, the 

Authorized Officer still retains the 

ultimate responsibility to ensure that 

the collection is adequately accounted 

for and maintained on behalf of the 

Federal government. 

Section 291.25—Response to Comments 

Comment: Reference to Federal 

Property and Administrative Services 

Act. Respondents suggest that reference 

to the Federal Property and 

Administrative Services Act and its 

implementing regulations is not 

appropriate, because that act and 

implementing regulations concern 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21623 

Federal property, and are not specific to 

natural history collections in recognized 

repositories. 

Response: Paleontological resources 

collected under permit from National 

Forest System lands remain Federal 

property as stated in the Act, and 

statutory and regulatory authorities 

pertaining to Federal property apply to 

such paleontological resources. 

Comment: Inventories and 

inspections distinct from routine 

collections management and inventory 

processes. Respondents suggested that 

clarification should be provided 

regarding whether the required 

inventories and inspections would be 

separate from routine collections 

management and inventory processes 

carried out by repository institutions. 

Respondents also expressed the view 

that clarification should be provided 

regarding whether it is the 

responsibility of the institution or the 

Authorized Officer to perform the 

inventories and inspections, if they are 

required to be separate from such 

operations routinely performed by the 

institution. 

Response: Inventories and inspections 

as specified in the regulations would 

not be required to be separate or distinct 

from routine collections management 

and inventory processes, providing that 

the requested information can be 

produced for collections from National 

Forest System lands. The party, or 

parties, responsible for conducting such 

inventories and/or inspections would be 

specified in a repository agreement. 

Comment: Notification of request for 

inventory or inspection. Two 

respondents suggested that clarification 

should be provided concerning the 

process by which a repository would be 

notified of a request to perform an 

inspection or inventory. 

Response: The method of notification 

of a request to perform an inspection 

and/or inventory would be specified in 

a repository agreement. 

Comment: Cost of inventories and 

inspections. Respondents suggested that 

the cost associated with inventories and 

inspections is an unfunded mandate 

and does not benefit the repository 

institution. Respondents suggest that 

there is no clear distinction between 

whether the repository or the permit 

holder, who may not be affiliated with 

the repository, is responsible for costs 

associated with such inventories and 

inspections, and suggest that 

§§ 291.14(e) and 291.16(p) are 

inconsistent regarding whether the 

repository or the permit holder are 

responsible for bearing such costs. 

Response: Inventories and/or 

inspections of collections from National 

Forest System lands would not 

necessarily differ from routine 

collections management processes that 

are already employed by professionally 

managed repository institutions. 

Consequently, such inventories and/or 

inspections would not necessarily result 

in expenses in excess of those already 

accrued by a repository that routinely 

employs such management processes. 

The Department does not distinguish 

between whether a permit holder or a 

repository, or both, are responsible for 

costs associated with collections 

management processes, and either or 

both parties may assume funding 

responsibilities. The allocation of 

funding for collections management 

activities is a matter to be decided 

between the repository and permit 

holder, and should be determined prior 

to a repository agreeing to accept a 

collection. Language in § 291.16(p) has 

been modified to clarify that a permit 

holder, repository, or both may share 

responsibility for expenses related to 

collections management. 

Section 291.26 Repository Agreements 

Section 291.26(a) clarifies that the 

Authorized Officer may, on behalf of the 

Agency, enter into agreements with 

approved repositories. Such agreements 

would define curation responsibilities 

of the approved repositories and 

promote consistency in collections 

management. 

Section 291.26(b) specifies the terms 

and conditions that would be included 

in a repository agreement, as 

appropriate. These terms and conditions 

are consistent with those that are 

required for repository agreements for 

Federal archeological resource 

collections at 36 CFR part 79, but have 

been modified to be relevant for 

paleontological collections. It is 

important to include these terms and 

conditions in these final regulations to 

ensure consistency between the 

Departments, to provide adequate notice 

to current and potential repositories, 

and to provide standard treatment of 

paleontological resources originating 

from lands controlled or administered 

by the Agency. 

Section 291.26(b)(8) protects the 

confidentiality of specific 

paleontological locality data in 

collections. 

Section 291.26—Response to Comments 

Comment: Distinguishing 

responsibilities of repository and permit 

holder. Two respondents expressed the 

view that § 291.26 does not effectively 

distinguish between the respective 

responsibilities of the repository and the 

permit holder, who may not be affiliated 

with the repository. Respondents 

specifically note that repositories cannot 

be held responsible for collections 

which have not yet been deposited by 

permit holders. 

Response: Section 291.26 refers to 

repository agreements and does not 

reference permit holders. The 

regulations do not state that a repository 

is responsible for collected specimens 

prior to transfer of those specimens by 

the permit holder to the repository. A 

repository would not be considered 

responsible for collected specimens 

until after such specimens have been 

accessioned into the repository’s 

collections. 

Comment: Shared responsibility and 

funding. Respondents suggest that a 

repository agreement should reflect a 

partnership between the Forest Service 

and the repository regarding 

preservation and care for collections, 

and that the agreement should contain 

provision for Forest Service funding to 

support the expense associated with 

managing and maintaining Federal 

collections. Respondents suggest that as 

currently written, the collections 

management provisions of the 

regulations require additional repository 

staff and resources and consequently 

place additional financial burdens on 

repositories that are not concomitant 

with benefit to science and would 

impede research on National Forest 

System lands. One respondent 

suggested that many repositories have 

traditionally provided such collections 

management services on a pro bono 

basis to the mutual benefit of the Forest 

Service and repository, and that the 

final regulation of such services is not 

necessary. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

a repository agreement reflects a 

partnership between the Forest Service 

and a repository institution that ensures 

appropriate management of collections 

from National Forest System lands. 

However, the Forest Service can not 

commit to or guarantee financial 

support for collections management. 

The Department considers that 

collections management requirements 

set forth in the regulations largely reflect 

collections management policies and 

procedures that are routinely employed 

by professionally managed repository 

institutions. Consequently, such 

stipulations would not require 

additional repository staffing and/or 

resources and associated financial 

burden. The Department considers that 

collections management provisions that 

ensure appropriate management of 

collections from National Forest System 

lands will ensure future availability of 

those collection for research and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21624 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

educational uses that benefit science. 

Such collections management 

provisions would not necessarily result 

in expenses in excess of those already 

accrued by a repository that routinely 

employs such management practices. 

The Department recognizes that many 

repositories have traditionally provided 

curatorial services at no cost in the prior 

absence of regulations. The 

establishment of regulations reflecting 

collections management policies and 

procedures that are routinely employed 

by professionally managed repository 

institutions for the purpose of ensuring 

the longevity of collections from 

National Forest System lands should not 

jeopardize existing relationships 

between the Forest Service and 

repository institutions. 

Comment: Repository agreement 

optional. One respondent suggested that 

repository agreements should be 

optional rather than required, and that 

such agreements should not result in 

unfair administrative burdens placed on 

the repository. 

Response: The Authorized Officer is 

not required by these regulations or the 

Act to enter into an agreement with a 

repository. A repository agreement 

would formalize that a repository is 

considered approved by the Forest 

Service, and would establish standards 

of collections management that would 

ensure appropriate care and resulting 

longevity of collections from National 

Forest System lands. Such collections 

management standards would be largely 

consistent with such policies and 

procedures as are routinely employed 

by professionally managed repository 

institutions, and would not be expected 

to increase or place unfair 

administrative burdens on repositories. 

Comment: Provision of publications 

burdensome. One respondent suggested 

that requirements for repositories to 

track publications resulting from 

collections use and to provide copies of 

such publications to the Forest Service 

are burdensome, and also questioned 

the source of funds required to perform 

these functions. 

Response: The Department agrees that 

the proposed requirements for a 

repository to track and provide copies of 

publications by researchers that are not 

affiliated with the repository is 

burdensome. Such requirements have 

been removed from the regulations. 

Section 291.27 Prohibited Acts 

Section 291.27(a) restates the 

prohibited acts contained in 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–5(a). 

Section 291.27(b) implements the 

false labeling prohibition contained in 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–5 (b). The Authorized 

Officer would have discretion to 

consider whether false labeling was 

inadvertent in evaluating whether to 

seek penalties for instances of false 

labeling. 

Section 291.27—Response to Comments 

Comment: Prohibited Acts. A 

respondent suggested that enforcement 

of the regulations would cost millions of 

dollars not currently available, and 

another respondent expressed the view 

that the Agency should communicate 

the regulations widely to the collecting 

public, since the burden should not be 

on the public to be aware of the 

regulations or what constitutes civil and 

criminal violations. 

Response: The suggestion that 

enforcement of the regulations will cost 

millions of dollars is conjectural. Given 

resource limitations, enforcement of any 

regulations is often prioritized and the 

Department anticipates that 

enforcement of these regulations will be 

encompassed within its existing 

enforcement program without 

expenditure of additional monetary 

resources. The Department agrees that 

communication of the regulations to the 

public is an important outreach effort. 

Publication in the Federal Register is 

one part of this outreach. However, 

ultimately it is the responsibility of the 

public to be aware of the rules and 

regulations pertaining to use of public 

lands. 

Section 291.28 Civil Penalty 

Section 291.28 provides that a person 

who violates any prohibition contained 

in these final regulations or in a permit 

issued under these final regulations may 

be assessed a penalty by the Authorized 

Officer, after the person is given notice 

and opportunity for a hearing with 

respect to the violation. For purposes of 

these final regulations, each violation is 

considered a separate offense. 

The civil penalty provisions in the 

final regulations were modeled after the 

civil penalty regulations promulgated 

pursuant to the Archaeological 

Resources Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 

470aa–mm. 

Section 291.29 Amount of Civil 

Penalty 

Section 291.29(a) sets forth the factors 

to be used by the Authorized Officer in 

determining the amount of the penalty, 

including the scientific or fair market 

value, whichever is greater, of the 

paleontological resource involved; the 

cost of response to and restoration and 

repair of the resource and the 

paleontological site involved; and other 

factors considered relevant by the 

Authorized Officer in the written 

response submitted under § 291.30. 

Section 291.29(b) also clarifies that 

repeated violations could result in the 

doubling of the penalties. Such 

doubling may occur only after a 

conviction or an otherwise proven 

violation. Section 291.29(c) provides 

that the amount of any penalty assessed 

under this Section for any one violation 

would not exceed an amount equal to 

double the cost of response to and 

restoration and repair of resources and 

paleontological site damage plus double 

the scientific or fair market value of 

resources destroyed or not recovered, in 

accordance with 16 U.S.C. 470aaa– 

6(a)(3) and (4). This paragraph is 

intended to ensure that response costs 

may be included in the determination of 

penalty amounts. Section 291.29(d) 

provides that scientific and fair market 

values and the cost of response to and 

restoration and repair of the resource 

and the paleontological site involved are 

to be determined as described under 

§§ 291.37, 291.38, and 291.39. 

Section 291.29—Response to Comments 

Comment: Maximum amount of civil 

penalty. One respondent suggested that 

since most violations would be expected 

to result in only minor disruptions to 

topsoil, the maximum amount of civil 

penalty be capped at $50 or an amount 

equal to the cost of response to and 

restoration and repair of resources and 

paleontological site damage plus the 

scientific or fair market value of 

resources destroyed or not recovered. 

Response: The suggestion that that 

most violations would result in only 

minor disruptions to topsoil is 

conjectural. The Act has established 

limitations to civil penalty amounts and 

factors to be considered in the 

determination of civil penalty amounts, 

and the final regulations conform to the 

provisions of the Act. A $50 cap is not 

consistent with provisions of the Act, 

and the Department reserves the right to 

impose non-trivial penalty amounts in 

order to recover costs associated with an 

enforcement action, including land 

surface and resource restoration, and 

also to deter future violations. 

Comment: Fair market or commercial 

value. Two respondents raised potential 

concerns regarding the determination of 

fair market or commercial value of 

paleontological resources. One concern 

is that many paleontological resources 

may not have fair market or commercial 

value, and the other concern is that 

using fair market or commercial values 

in penalty assessment may convey the 

misleading perception that the Agency 

views paleontological resources as 

marketable commodities. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21625 

Response: The Department agrees that 

many paleontological resources may not 

have established fair market or 

commercial value. However, fair market 

or commercial value is only one tool in 

assessment of penalties associated with 

violations, and it should be considered 

where such values can be determined. 

The Department agrees that from the 

regulatory perspective, paleontological 

resources that originate from National 

Forest System lands are not marketable 

commodities, and should not be viewed 

as such. However, the Department has 

no jurisdiction over fossils that are 

collected from private lands which have 

been variously considered as marketable 

commodities, among other perspectives. 

In such cases where a fair market or 

commercial value is associated with 

particular fossils, the Department 

believes that it is appropriate to 

consider such values in assessing 

penalties for violations which occur on 

National Forest System lands. 

Section 291.30 Civil Penalty Process 

Section 470aaa–6(a) of the Act 

requires that any person assessed a 

penalty under the Act be given notice 

and opportunity for a hearing with 

respect to the violation. Section 291.30 

would describe the process by which a 

civil penalty notice of violation is 

served on the person or party believed 

to be subject to a civil penalty, and the 

deadline and options for the person or 

party served with the notice to respond. 

Section 291.30(a) describes the contents 

of the civil penalty notice of violation 

that would be served on the person 

believed to be subject to a civil penalty, 

including a statement of facts in regard 

to the violation, the legal citation of that 

part of the Act or regulations that was 

violated, the amount of the proposed 

penalty, and the notice of the right to a 

hearing or judicial relief of the final 

administrative decision. This paragraph 

requires delivery by certified mail 

(return receipt requested) of these 

documents, rather than personal 

delivery as allowed by other regulations, 

in order to simplify compliance with the 

timeline required by this section. 

Section 291.30(b) explains that the 

recipient of the notice of violation has 

45 calendar days to respond in 

accordance with this section. Section 

291.30(c) describes the procedures 

which the Authorized Officer would use 

to assess the final amount of the 

penalty. Section 291.30(d) describes the 

factors that the Authorized Officer may 

consider in offering to modify or remit 

a penalty. Section 291.30(e) explains 

that after the Authorized Officer has 

determined the final amount of the civil 

penalty, a written notice of the assessed 

amount would be served to the recipient 

of the notice of violation. The notice of 

assessment would be served by some 

type of verifiable delivery, such as by 

certified mail, return receipt requested. 

Section 291.30(f) explains the 

procedures of how the recipient of a 

notice of violation or a notice of 

assessment would file for a hearing. A 

request for a hearing must be in writing, 

must include a copy of the notice, and 

must be sent by certified mail, return 

receipt requested. The request for a 

hearing must be filed within 45 calendar 

days of the mailing of the notice and 

failure to file a request within the 

timeframe would be considered a 

waiver of the right to a hearing. Section 

291.30(g) explains what constitutes the 

final administrative decision of the civil 

penalty amount. Under a notice of 

violation, the final administrative 

decision is when the recipient agrees to 

the amount of the proposed civil 

penalty. Under a notice of assessment, 

when a recipient has not requested a 

hearing within the 45 calendar day 

timeframe, the amount of the civil 

penalty in the notice of assessment is 

the final administrative decision. Under 

a notice of assessment, when a recipient 

has filed a timely request for a hearing, 

the decision resulting from the hearing 

is the final administrative decision. 

Section 291.30(h) explains that the 

person who has been assessed a civil 

penalty has 45 calendar days after the 

final administrative decision is issued to 

make the payment unless a timely 

request was filed with the U.S. District 

Court as provided in § 291.32. Section 

291.30(i) explains that assessment of a 

civil penalty under this section is not 

deemed a waiver of the right for the 

Federal government to pursue other 

available legal or administrative 

remedies. 

Section 291.30—Response to Comments 

Comment: Civil penalty process and 

penalty relief. One respondent felt that 

individuals being assessed civil 

penalties should not be afforded penalty 

relief by providing information that 

would assist in the detection, 

prevention, or prosecution of violations. 

Response: Paleontological resource 

theft or destruction, or both, has been 

documented to occur on National Forest 

System lands. However, due to the often 

vast and isolated nature of National 

Forest System lands and limited Forest 

Service staff field presence, it is difficult 

for Forest Service staff to detect and 

respond to such illegal activities at the 

time that they occur. Consequently, 

standard law enforcement tools such as 

penalty relief serve as important and 

necessary incentives for the public to 

report knowledge of such illegal 

activities that may otherwise be 

undetected by Forest Service staff. 

Section 291.31 Civil Penalties Hearing 

Procedures 

Title 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–6(c) requires 

that hearings for civil penalty 

proceedings be conducted in accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 554 of the Administrative 

Procedures Act (APA). Section 291.31 

describes the procedures by which civil 

penalty hearings shall be conducted. 

Section 291.31(a) explains that the 

recipient of a notice of violation or 

assessment may file a written request for 

a hearing in the office specified in the 

notice. The recipient would need to 

enclose a copy of the notice with the 

request. The person requesting a hearing 

would be able to state their preference 

as to the place and date for a hearing, 

but any such requested locations must 

be situated within the United States and 

be reasonable to be considered. In all 

cases, the Agency will retain discretion 

to decide the location of the hearing. 

Section 291.31(b) explains that upon 

receipt of the request for a hearing, the 

hearing office would assign an 

administrative law judge. Notification of 

the assignment of the judge would be 

given to all the parties involved, and 

from then on, all documentation for the 

proceedings must be filed with the 

administrative law judge and copies 

sent to the other party. Section 291.31(c) 

contains the procedures for appearances 

and practice before the administrative 

law judge. This paragraph addresses the 

appearance by the respondent, that is, 

the recipient of the notice who has filed 

for a hearing, either in person, by 

representative, or by legal counsel. If the 

respondent or their representative fails 

to appear, the administrative law judge 

would determine if the failure to appear 

is without good cause. A failure to 

appear without good cause would be 

considered a waiver of the respondent’s 

right to a hearing and the respondent’s 

consent to the decision made at the 

hearing by the administrative law judge. 

Section 291.31(d) provides the details of 

the administration and the outcome of 

the hearing. This paragraph declares 

that the administrative law judge has 

the authority of law to preside over the 

parties and the proceeding and to make 

decisions in accordance with the APA. 

This paragraph explains what 

constitutes the final record for the 

proceedings and for the decision made 

by the administrative law judge for the 

final assessment of the civil penalty, 

declares that the administrative law 

judge’s decision is the final 

administrative decision of the Agency, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21626 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

and is effective 30 calendar days after 

the date of the decision. 

Section 291.32 Petition for Judicial 

Review; Collection of Unpaid 

Assessments 

Title 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–6(b)(1) 

provides for petitions to the U.S. District 

Court for judicial review of decisions of 

a final assessment of civil penalties. 

Section 291.32(a) provides notice to the 

public about this right by restating the 

Act’s provisions regarding judicial 

review of the final Agency decision 

assessing a penalty under §§ 291.28 

through 291.31, and describe the court’s 

standard of review of the final Agency 

decision. The respondent would have 

30 calendar days from the date the 

Agency decision was issued to file the 

petition. Section 291.32(b) clarifies the 

provisions in 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–6(b)(2) 

that address the failure to pay a penalty 

assessed under §§ 291.28 through 

291.31. Failure to pay an assessed 

penalty within 30 calendar days of the 

issuance of the final Agency decision 

would be considered a debt to the U.S. 

Government; the Secretary would be 

authorized to request the Attorney 

General to institute a civil action to 

collect the penalty, and the court would 

prohibit review of the validity, amount, 

and appropriateness of such penalty. If 

the Secretary does not institute a civil 

action, the Agency would be able to 

recover the assessed penalties by using 

other available collection methods such 

as Treasury offset. 

Section 291.33 Use of Recovered 

Amounts 

Section 291.33 implements the 

authority conveyed in 16 U.S.C. 470aaa– 

6(d) for the Agency to use collected 

penalties or restitution for certain 

purposes without further authorization 

or appropriations. This final regulation 

allows the Authorized Officer to use 

collected penalties or restitution 

without further appropriation to protect, 

restore, or repair the paleontological 

resources and sites that were the subject 

of the action, and to protect, monitor, 

and study the resources and sites, and/ 

or provide educational materials to the 

public about paleontological resources 

and sites, and/or provide for the 

payment of rewards. These categories 

are not listed in priority order. 

Section 291.33—Response to Comments 

Comment: Use of penalty fees for 

research. One respondent suggested that 

collected penalties be used to support 

paleontological research. 

Response: The Act states that 

collected civil penalties may only be 

used to protect, restore, or repair, or to 

protect, monitor, and study sites which 

were the subject of the action; or to 

provide educational materials to the 

public about paleontological resources 

and sites; or to provide payment of 

rewards. These final regulations 

conform to the Act regarding use of 

recovered amounts, and so the use of 

collected penalties to support 

paleontological research is already 

allowed, subject to the limitation that 

such research be performed on sites that 

are the focus of enforcement action. 

Section 291.34 Criminal Penalties 

Paragraph 291.34(a) restates the 

penalties provided for by 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–5(c). This section does not 

preclude the Forest Service from using 

other laws or regulations in addition to 

or in lieu of the Act as the basis for 

charging violators. Violations of the 

prohibitions in the Act and in the 

regulations would be subject to criminal 

as well as civil penalties. 

Section 291.34(b) clarifies that the 

determination of the values and the cost 

of response, restoration, and repair 

would be determined in accordance 

with §§ 291.37, 291.38, and 291.39. 

Section 291.35 Multiple Offenses 

Section 291.35 restates the penalties 

for multiple offenses provided for by 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa–5(d). This section 

clarifies that in the case of a second or 

subsequent violation by the same 

person, the amount of the penalty 

assessed may be doubled. Such 

doubling may occur only after a 

conviction or an otherwise proven 

violation. 

Section 291.35—Response to Comments 

Comment: Multiple offenses. One 

respondent suggested that assessed 

penalty amounts increase 

proportionately with number of 

violations by the same person. 

Response: The Act states that in the 

case of second or subsequent violations 

by the same person, the amount of the 

penalty assessed may be doubled. The 

Act does not make provision for 

proportionate penalties in cases of 

multiple offenses by the same person, 

and the final regulations are consistent 

with the Act. 

Section 291.36 General Exception 

Section 291.36 restates the exemption 

of 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–5(e) for any person 

with respect to any paleontological 

resource which was in the lawful 

possession of such person prior to the 

date of enactment of the Act. 

Section 291.37 Scientific or 

Paleontological Value 

Section 291.37 specifies the factors 

and costs that may be considered in 

determining the scientific value of a 

paleontological resource, and clarifies 

that the terms scientific value as used in 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–6(a)(2) and 

paleontological value as used in 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa–5(c) are the same value 

and are interchangeable for the purposes 

of these final regulations. Costs such as 

the preparation of a research design 

would be based on what it would have 

cost, prior to the violation, to conduct 

this research appropriately and in a way 

that would preserve the scientific and 

educational value of the paleontological 

resource. The calculation of this value 

using these types of costs would be the 

best method to reflect the loss of 

contextual information related to the 

locality, stratigraphy and geology of the 

paleontological resource while it was 

still in-situ. 

Section 291.37—Response to Comments 

Comment: Include ‘‘locality’’ in 

preamble discussion of scientific or 

paleontological value. One respondent 

expressed the view that the word 

locality should be inserted in the 

preamble discussion of scientific or 

paleontological value, as follows: ‘‘The 

calculation of this value using these 

types of costs would be the best method 

to reflect the loss of contextual 

information related to the locality, 

stratigraphy, and geology of the 

paleontological resource while it was 

still in-situ.’’ 

Response: The Department agrees that 

the suggested addition provides 

clarification regarding the nature of lost 

contextual information, and has added 

the word ‘‘locality’’ as proposed to the 

preamble discussion. 

Section 291.38 Fair Market or 

Commercial Value 

Section 291.38 specifies the factors 

and costs to be included in determining 

the fair market value of a 

paleontological resource, and would 

clarify that the terms fair market value 

as used in 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–6(a)(2) and 

commercial value as used in 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–5(c) are the same value and are 

interchangeable for the purposes of 

these final regulations. Fair market 

value of paleontological resources 

would be established through the 

standard professional methods of using 

comparable sales information, 

advertisements for comparable 

resources, appraisals, pricing of 

comparable resources, and/or other 

information, regardless of whether or 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21627 

not such information, advertisements, 

appraisals, or pricing would be from 

legal or illegal markets. For example, the 

information, advertisements, appraisals 

or pricing that would be used to 

establish fair market value could come 

from paleontological resources 

excavated legally or illegally from State, 

private, non-Federal lands, or from 

paleontological resources excavated 

illegally from Federal lands. In cases 

where there would be no comparable 

fair market value, the value of the 

paleontological resources would be 

determined by scientific value or the 

cost of response, restoration, and repair. 

Section 291.38—Response to Comments 

Comment: Fair market or commercial 

value. One respondent suggested that in 

the second sentence of § 291.38 as 

discussed in the Preamble, the first ‘‘or’’ 

should be replaced with ‘‘and/or’’ to 

read: ‘‘. . . pricing of comparable 

resources, and/or other information, 

. . . ’’ 

Response: The Department agrees that 

the proposed change adds clarification 

and has incorporated that change in the 

Preamble and the Final Rule. 

Section 291.39 Cost of Response, 

Restoration and Repair 

Section 291.39 clarifies that, for 

purposes of these regulations, the cost of 

response, restoration, and repair of 

paleontological resources involved in a 

violation would be the sum of the costs 

incurred for response, investigation, 

assessment, emergency restoration or 

repair work, plus those costs projected 

to be necessary to complete restoration 

and repair. 

Section 291.39—Response to Comments 

Comment: Cost of Response, 

Restoration, and Repair. One 

respondent suggested that in the first 

sentence of § 291.39, The word ‘‘plus’’ 

should be replaced with ‘‘and’’ to read: 

‘‘. . . be the sum of the costs incurred 

for response, investigation, assessment, 

emergency restoration or repair work, 

and those costs projected to be 

necessary to complete restoration . . .’’. 

Response: The Department considers 

that the proposed change is equivalent 

in meaning to the original language, and 

has elected to retain the original 

language. 

Section 291.40 Rewards 

Section 291.40 provides that rewards 

would be determined and paid at the 

discretion of the Authorized Officer (see 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–7(a)). This section 

does not preclude agencies using other 

authorities and fund sources such as 

State funds to offer rewards for 

information that may lead to a 

conviction or finding. 

Section 291.40—Response to Comments 

Comment: Rewards. One respondent 

felt that rewards from penalties 

collected should not be offered to 

individuals furnishing information 

leading to finding of civil violation or 

criminal conviction. 

Response: Paleontological resource 

theft or destruction, or both, has been 

documented to occur on National Forest 

System lands. However, due to the often 

vast and isolated nature of National 

Forest System lands and limited Forest 

Service staff field presence, it is difficult 

for Forest Service staff to detect and 

respond to such illegal activities at the 

time that they occur. Consequently, 

standard law enforcement tools such as 

rewards serve as important and 

necessary incentives for the public to 

report knowledge of such illegal 

activities. Moreover, the Act stipulates 

that rewards as described in these 

regulations be made available. 

Section 291.41 Forfeiture 

Section 470aaa–7(b) of the Act 

provides for the forfeiture of 

paleontological resources for violations 

under 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–5 or aaa–6. 

However, the Act did not provide the 

procedures for conducting either the 

criminal or the civil forfeiture of these 

resources. Forfeiture regulations and 

proceedings are very complex; therefore, 

rather than developing new forfeiture 

regulations that are only applicable to 

paleontological resources, this section 

proposes to use agreements with other 

agencies to conduct forfeiture 

proceedings as required by Civil Asset 

Forfeiture Reform Act (18 U.S.C. 983) or 

other applicable forfeiture statutes. 

Section 291.41(a) explains that all 

paleontological resources found in 

possession of a person with respect to 

a violation of §§ 291.28 through 291.36 

of these final regulations are subject to 

forfeiture proceedings in accordance 

with the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform 

Act or other applicable forfeiture 

regulations. The Department is 

authorized to enter into cooperative 

agreements with other agencies that 

have forfeiture regulations in place for 

the initiation of forfeiture actions. 

Section 291.41(b) explains that the 

Federal government holds seized 

resources until the case is adjudicated, 

and would provide for the transfer of 

administration of seized paleontological 

resources. However, before 

paleontological resources seized in a 

criminal or civil case can be transferred 

administratively, the proceedings under 

§ 291.41(a) must be followed. Once the 

resources are deemed to be forfeited, 

their administration may be transferred 

to an institution in accordance with 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa–7(c). Such transfer would 

not mean that the Federal government is 

transferring ownership; it would only be 

transferring administration of the 

resources. 

Amendments to Title 36 Code of Federal 

Regulation Part 261—Prohibitions, 

Sections 261.2 (Definitions) and 261.9 

(Property) 

The definition of paleontological 

resource contained in § 261.2 would be 

removed because it is inconsistent with 

the term paleontological resource as 

defined in 16 U.S.C. 470aaa and in 

§ 291.5 of these final regulations. 

Section 261.9(i) would be removed 

because it is inconsistent with 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–5 and § 291.27(a)(3) of these 

final regulations, which prohibit the 

sale or purchase of paleontological 

resources from National Forest System 

lands. 

Regulatory Certifications 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under USDA procedures and Executive 

Order (E.O.) 12866 on regulatory 

planning and review. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

determined that this final rule is not 

significant for purposes of E.O. 12866. 

This final rule would not have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy, nor would it adversely 

affect productivity, competition, jobs, 

the environment, public health and 

safety, or State and local governments. 

This final rule would not interfere with 

any action taken or planned by another 

agency, nor would it raise new legal or 

policy issues. Finally, this final rule 

would not alter the budgetary impact of 

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 

programs or the rights and obligations of 

beneficiaries of such programs. 

Accordingly, this final rule is not 

subject to OMB review under E.O. 

12866. 

Proper Consideration of Small Entities 

The final rule has also been 

considered in light of Executive Order 

13272 regarding proper consideration of 

small entities and the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), which amended the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). The final rule for 

Paleontological Resources Preservation 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities as defined by E.O. 13272 and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21628 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

the SBREFA, based on the following 

considerations: 

The final rule would not impose 

additional restrictions or permitting 

requirements, beyond what is already 

practiced or required under existing 

regulations, that would invalidate, 

modify, or adversely affect the ability to 

conduct current or future activities (for 

example, mining, timber harvesting, 

grazing, recreation) on National Forest 

System lands as permitted under 

applicable laws other than the Act. The 

final rule would prohibit collection of 

paleontological resources for 

commercial purposes; however, this 

prohibition is consistent with past and 

current Agency practices (as guided by 

broad provisions in the Organic 

Administration Act of 1897 and the 

American Antiquities Act of 1906) on 

National Forest System lands and is, 

therefore, not a new restriction. Special 

use authorization for commercial 

collection of paleontological resources 

is permitted under 36 CFR 261.9(i); 

however, the Agency is aware of only 

one special use permit in the past that 

involved sale of paleontological 

resources, and that permit was not 

renewed. The final rule includes 

removal of 36 CFR 261.9(i) as a 

conforming change necessitated by the 

Act, which does not allow the collection 

of paleontological resources for 

commercial purposes. Casual collection 

of paleontological resources, as defined 

in the Act, by customers of some special 

use permit holders (for example, 

outfitters and guides) is currently 

allowed under specific conditions, and 

the final rule would continue to allow 

this activity as long as the activity is 

consistent with the conditions for casual 

collection as set forth in the final rule. 

The final rule would encourage 

scientific and educational use of 

paleontological resources by preserving 

the resources, promoting public 

awareness, and allowing for casual 

collection, thereby helping to maintain 

opportunities for small non-profit 

organizations to benefit from continued 

access to these resources on National 

Forest System lands. These final 

regulations provide for permitted 

collection of vertebrate and other 

paleontological resources not subject to 

the casual collection exemption, 

consistent with past Forest Service 

practices, thereby maintaining 

opportunities for organizations (for 

example, academic, paleontological 

resource assessment contractors) to 

collect paleontological resources for 

non-commercial research and 

paleontological resource assessment 

purposes. 

It is not possible to specifically 

identify the population of small entities 

that may be involved with activities that 

may include casual collection of 

paleontological resources on NFS lands 

because there is no Forest Service 

special use code to track this activity. 

The minimum requirements on small 

entities imposed by this final rule 

associated with authorization by permit 

to collect paleontological resources are 

necessary to protect the public interest 

and federal property, not 

administratively burdensome or costly 

to meet, and are within the capabilities 

of small entities to perform. The final 

rule would not materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, user 

fees, loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of program participants. It 

does not compel the expenditure of 

$100 million or more by any State, local, 

or Tribal government, or anyone in the 

private sector. Under these 

circumstances, the Forest Service has 

determined that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Based on the evidence presented above, 

a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 

required for this rule. 

Environmental Impact 

The Forest Service has determined 

that this final rule falls under the 

categorical exclusion provided in Forest 

Service regulations on National 

Environmental Policy Act procedures. 

Such procedures exclude from 

documentation in an environmental 

assessment or impact statement ‘‘rules, 

regulations, or policies to establish 

service wide administrative procedures, 

program processes, or instructions’’ 36 

CFR 220.6(d)(2); 73 FR 43084 (July 24, 

2008). This final rule outlines the 

programmatic implementation of the 

Act, and as such, has no direct effect on 

Forest Service decisions for land 

management activities. 

Unfunded Mandates 

Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 

1531–1538), which the President signed 

into law on March 22, 1995, the Forest 

Service has assessed the effects of this 

final rule on State, local, and Tribal 

governments and the private sector. 

This final rule would not compel the 

expenditure of $100 million or more by 

any State, local, or Tribal governments, 

or anyone in the private sector. 

Therefore, a statement under section 

202 of that act is not required. 

No Takings Implementations 

This final rule has been analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

12630. It has been determined that this 

rule would not pose the risk of a taking 

of constitutionally protected private 

property. It implements new regulations 

that would reflect the new statutory 

authority for managing, preserving, and 

protecting paleontological resources on 

National Forest System lands and that 

reflect prior policies, procedures, and 

practices for the collection and curation 

of paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands. 

Federalism 

The Forest Service has considered 

this final rule under the requirements of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and 

has determined that the final rule 

conforms with the federalism principles 

set out in this E.O. The final rule would 

not impose any compliance costs on the 

States other than those imposed by 

statute, and would not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. The final rule 

would not apply to paleontological 

resources managed by States or local 

governments or State or local 

governmental entities. Therefore, the 

Forest Service has determined that no 

further assessment of federalism 

implications is necessary. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. The Forest Service has 

not identified any State or local laws or 

regulations that are in conflict with this 

final rule or that would impede full 

implementation of this final rule. 

Nevertheless, in the event that such a 

conflict was to be identified, the 

proposed rule would preempt the State 

or local laws or regulations found to be 

in conflict. However, in that case, no 

retroactive effect would be given to this 

rule, and the Forest Service would not 

require the use of administrative 

proceedings before parties could file 

suit in court challenging its provisions. 

Consultation and Coordination With 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 13175 of 

November 6, 2000, Consultation and 

Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments. It has been determined 

that this final rule would not have 

Tribal implications as defined by E.O. 

13175, and therefore, advance 

consultation with Tribes is not required. 

Nonetheless, Tribal consultation was 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21629 

initiated on March 7, 2011. Tribal 

consultation was accomplished through 

local and regional consultation 

processes in coordination with the 

Washington Office of the Forest Service. 

Input from three Tribes was received 

during the initial 120-day period, and 

Tribal comments were considered in 

preparing the proposed rule prior to 

Federal Register Notice on May 23, 

2013 and formal solicitation of public 

comment. Consultation continued 

during the 60-day public comment 

period for the proposed rule. No 

additional comments from Tribes were 

received. 

Energy Effects 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 13211 of May 18, 

2001, Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. It has been 

determined that this final rule does not 

constitute a significant energy action as 

defined in the Executive Order. 

Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the 

Public 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35], the Forest Service 

requested approval of a new information 

collection. The proposed information 

collection was published at 77 FR 

31298, May 25, 2012. The information 

collection was approved in January 

2014, and has been incorporated into 

0596–0082, Special Uses 

Administration. 

Title: Paleontological Resources 

Preservation. 

OMB Number: 0596–0082. 

Expiration Date of Approval: 3 years 

from approval date. 

Type of Request: New information 

collection. 

Abstract: The purpose of the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation 

final rule is to establish regulations to 

implement a paleontological resources 

preservation program on National Forest 

System lands in which paleontological 

resources are managed and protected 

using scientific principles and expertise, 

in accordance with the Act. The Act at 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–3 and 4 authorizes the 

Secretary to issue permits for the 

collection of paleontological resources 

from public lands and enter into 

agreements with approved repositories. 

The information required by this final 

rule is necessary to issue permits, enter 

into agreements, and identify the 

repository institutions which house and 

curate paleontological resources that are 

collected under permit and which 

remain Federal property. The 

information requirements will be used 

to help the Forest Service in the 

following areas: 

(1) To determine that the applicant is 

qualified and eligible to receive a permit 

under the final rule, 

(2) To determine if a proposal to 

collect paleontological resources meets 

the qualifications established in the law 

and regulations, 

(3) To evaluate the impacts of a 

proposal in order to comply with 

environmental laws, 

(4) To describe and document the 

scientific and geological context from 

which paleontological resources were 

collected, 

(5) To identify and inventory 

paleontological resources that have been 

collected, and 

(6) To ensure that paleontological 

resources that have been collected, 

which remain Federal property, are 

properly curated in an approved 

repository. 

Qualified applicants are the only 

entities eligible to be issued 

paleontological resource collection 

permits, and are, therefore, the only 

entities from which information will be 

collected. 

The information would be collected 

from respondents in the form of a 

permit application, and a report on 

authorized activities following 

completion of the permitted project. 

Permit applications are anticipated to 

require an average of 5.5 hours to 

complete, and permit reports are 

anticipated to require an average of 13 

hours to complete, based on a limited 

survey of current permit holders. The 

information collection required for a 

paleontological resource collection 

permit application and report of 

permitted activity under this final rule 

was submitted to OMB as a new 

collection. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

50. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 2. 

Estimated Number of Total Annual 

Responses: 100. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 925 hours. 

Comments: Comments were invited 

on: 

(1) Whether the final collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) The accuracy of the Agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; 

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and 

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on those 

who are to respond, including the use 

of appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

List of Subjects 

36 CFR Part 214 

Appeals. 

36 CFR Part 261 

Law enforcement, National forests. 

36 CFR Part 291 

Casual collecting, Collection, 

Confidentiality, Curation, Education, 

Fair market value, Fossil, Geology, 

Museums, National forests, Natural 

resources, Paleontological resources, 

Paleontology, Penalties, Permits, 

Prohibited acts, Prohibitions, Public 

awareness, Public education, Public 

lands, Recreation, Recreation areas, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Repository, Research, 

Scientific value. 

Therefore, for the reasons set forth in 

the preamble, the Forest Service amends 

chapter II of title 36 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 214—POSTDECISIONAL 

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PROCESS 

FOR OCCUPANCY OR USE OF 

NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS 

AND RESOURCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 214 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1011(f); 16 U.S.C. 472, 

551. 

■ 2. In § 214.4, add paragraph (e) to read 

as follows: 

§ 214.4 Decisions that are appealable. 

* * * * * 

(e) Paleontological resources. An 

authorization or permit issued under the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation 

Act of 2009 and 36 CFR part 291 for 

collection of paleontological resources. 

PART 261—PROHIBITIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 261 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1011(f); 16 U.S.C. 460l– 

6d, 472, 551, 620(f), 1133(c)–(d)(1), 1246(i). 

§ 261.2 [Amended] 

■ 4. In § 261.2, remove the definition for 

Paleontological resource. 

§ 261.9 [Amended] 

■ 5. In § 261.9, remove paragraph (i) and 

redesignate paragraph (j) as paragraph 

(i). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21630 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 6. Add part 291 to read as follows: 

PART 291—PALEONTOLOGICAL 

RESOURCES PRESERVATION 

Sec. 

291.1 Purpose. 

291.2 Authorities. 

291.3 Exceptions. 

291.4 Preservation of existing authorities. 

291.5 Definitions. 

291.6 Confidentiality of information— 

general. 

291.7 Public awareness and education. 

291.8 Area closures. 

291.9 Determination of paleontological 

resources. 

291.10 Collecting. 

291.11 Casual collecting on National Forest 

System lands. 

291.12 National Forest System lands closed 

to casual collection. 

291.13 Permits. 

291.14 Application process. 

291.15 Application qualifications and 

eligibility. 

291.16 Terms and conditions. 

291.17 Permit reports. 

291.18 Modification or cancellation of 

permits. 

291.19 Suspension and revocation of 

permits. 

291.20 Appeals. 

291.21 Curation of paleontological 

resources. 

291.22 Becoming an approved repository. 

291.23 Minimum requirements of approval 

of a repository. 

291.24 Standards for access and use of 

collections. 

291.25 Conducting inspections and 

inventories of collections. 

291.26 Repository agreements. 

291.27 Prohibited acts. 

291.28 Civil penalty. 

291.29 Amount of civil penalty. 

291.30 Civil penalty process. 

291.31 Civil penalties hearing procedures. 

291.32 Petition for judicial review; 

collection of unpaid assessments. 

291.33 Use of recovered amounts. 

291.34 Criminal penalties. 

291.35 Multiple offenses. 

291.36 General exception. 

291.37 Scientific or paleontological value. 

291.38 Fair market or commercial value. 

291.39 Cost of response, restoration, and 

repair. 

291.40 Rewards. 

291.41 Forfeiture. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 470aaa through 

470aaa–11. 

§ 291.1 Purpose. 

(a) The regulations in this part 

implement provisions of the 

Paleontological Resources Preservation 

Act, 16 U.S.C. 470aaa through 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–11 (hereinafter referred to as the 

Act), which provides for the 

preservation, management, and 

protection of paleontological resources 

on National Forest System lands and 

encourages the scientific, educational 

and where appropriate, the casual 

collection of these resources. 

Paleontological resources are 

nonrenewable, and are an accessible 

and irreplaceable part of America’s 

natural heritage. 

(b) The Secretary shall manage, 

protect, and preserve paleontological 

resources on National Forest System 

lands using scientific principles and 

expertise. These regulations provide for 

coordinated management of 

paleontological resources and encourage 

scientific and educational use by 

promoting public awareness, providing 

for collection under permit, setting 

curation standards, establishing civil 

and criminal penalties, clarifying that 

paleontological resources cannot be 

collected from National Forest System 

lands for commercial purposes, and by 

allowing the casual collection of some 

of these resources on certain lands and 

under specific conditions. 

(c) To the extent possible, the 

Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary of the Interior will coordinate 

in the implementation of the Act. 

§ 291.2 Authorities. 

The regulations in this part are 

promulgated pursuant to the Omnibus 

Public Lands Act, Title VI, subtitle D on 

Paleontological Resources Preservation, 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa through 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa–11, which requires the Secretary 

to issue such regulations as are 

appropriate to carry out the Act. 

§ 291.3 Exceptions. 

The regulations in this part do not: 

(a) Invalidate, modify, or impose any 

additional restrictions or permitting 

requirements on any activities permitted 

at any time under the general mining 

laws, the mineral or geothermal leasing 

laws, laws providing for mineral 

materials disposal, or laws providing for 

the management or regulation of the 

activities authorized by the 

aforementioned laws including but not 

limited to the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701–1784), 

the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 

1201–1358), and the Organic 

Administration Act (16 U.S.C. 478, 482, 

551); 

(b) Invalidate, modify, or impose any 

additional restrictions or permitting 

requirements on any activities permitted 

at any time under existing laws and 

authorities relating to reclamation and 

multiple uses of National Forest System 

lands; 

(c) Apply to Indian lands; 

(d) Apply to any materials associated 

with an archaeological resource (site), as 

defined in 16 U.S.C. 470, or any cultural 

items defined in 16 U.S.C. 30001; 

(e) Apply to, or require a permit for, 

casual collecting of a rock, mineral, or 

invertebrate or plant fossil that is not 

protected under the Act; 

(f) Affect any land other than National 

Forest System lands, or affect the lawful 

recovery, collection, or sale of 

paleontological resources from land 

other than National Forest System 

lands; or 

(g) Create any right, privilege, benefit, 

or entitlement for any person who is not 

an officer or employee of the United 

States acting in that capacity. No person 

who is not an officer or employee of the 

United States acting in that capacity 

shall have standing to file any civil 

action in a court of the United States to 

enforce any provision or amendment 

made by this part. 

§ 291.4 Preservation of existing 

authorities. 

The regulations in this part do not 

alter or diminish the authority of the 

Forest Service under any other law to 

manage, preserve, and protect 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands in addition to the 

protection provided under the Act or 

this part. 

§ 291.5 Definitions. 

Act means Title VI, Subtitle D of the 

Omnibus Public Land Management Act 

on Paleontological Resources 

Preservation (16 U.S.C. 470aaa through 

470aaa-11). 

Associated records means original 

records (or copies thereof) that 

document the efforts to locate, evaluate, 

record, study, preserve, or recover 

paleontological resources, including but 

not limited to paper and electronic 

documents such as: 

(1) Primary records relating to the 

identification, evaluation, 

documentation, study, preservation, 

context, or recovery of a paleontological 

resource, regardless of format; 

(2) Public records including, but not 

limited to, land status records, agency 

reports, publications, court documents, 

agreements; and 

(3) Administrative records and reports 

generated by the permitting process and 

pertaining to the survey, excavation, or 

other study of the resource. 

Authorized Officer means the person 

or persons to whom authority has been 

delegated by the Secretary to take action 

under the Act. 

Casual collecting means the collecting 

of a reasonable amount of common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources for non-commercial personal 

use, either by surface collection or the 

use of non-powered hand tools, 

resulting in only negligible disturbance 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21631 

to the Earth’s surface and other 

resources. 

Collection means all paleontological 

resources resulting from excavation or 

removal from National Forest System 

lands as well as any associated records 

resulting from excavation or removal 

from National Forest System lands 

under a permit. 

Common invertebrate and plant 

paleontological resources are 

invertebrate or plant fossils that are of 

ordinary occurrence and wide-spread 

distribution. Not all invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources are 

common. 

Consumptive analysis means the 

alteration, removal, or destruction of a 

paleontological specimen, or parts 

thereof, from a collection for scientific 

research. 

Curatorial services and curation mean 

those activities pertinent to management 

and preservation of a collection over the 

long term according to professional 

museum and archival practices, 

including at a minimum: 

(1) Accessioning, cataloging, labeling, 

and inventorying a collection; 

(2) Identifying, evaluating, and 

documenting a collection; 

(3) Storing and maintaining a 

collection using appropriate methods 

and containers, and under appropriate 

environmental conditions and physical 

security controls; 

(4) Periodically inspecting a 

collection and taking such actions as 

may be necessary to preserve it; 

(5) Providing access and facilities to 

study a collection; 

(6) Handling, cleaning, sorting, and 

stabilizing a collection in such a manner 

as to preserve it; and 

(7) Lending a collection, or parts 

thereof, for scientific, educational or 

preservation purposes. 

Federal land means land controlled or 

administered by the Secretary except for 

Indian land as defined in 16 U.S.C. 

470aaa. 

Fossil means any fossilized remains, 

traces, or imprints of organisms, 

preserved in or on the Earth’s crust. 

Fossilized means preserved by natural 

processes, including, but not limited to 

burial in accumulated sediments, 

preservation in ice or amber, or 

replacement by minerals, or alteration 

by chemical processes such as 

permineralization whereby minerals are 

deposited in the pore spaces of the hard 

parts of an organism’s remains, which 

may or may not alter the original 

organic content. 

Indian land means land of Indian 

tribes, or Indian individuals, which are 

either held in trust by the United States 

or subject to a restriction against 

alienation imposed by the United States. 

National Forest System lands means 

those lands in a nationally significant 

system of federally owned units of 

forest, range, and related lands 

consisting of national forests, purchase 

units, national grasslands, land 

utilization project areas, experimental 

forest areas, experimental range areas, 

designated experimental areas, other 

land areas, water areas, and interests in 

lands that are administered by the 

Forest Service, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, or designated for 

administration through the Forest 

Service. As used herein, the term 

‘‘National Forest System lands’’ refers to 

Federal land controlled or administered 

by the Secretary of Agriculture. 

Negligible disturbance means little or 

no change to the surface of the land and 

causing minimal or no effect on other 

resources. The Authorized Officer has 

discretion to determine what constitutes 

negligible disturbance. 

Non-commercial personal use means 

uses other than for purchase, sale, 

financial gain, or research. Research, in 

the context of these regulations, is 

considered to be a structured activity 

undertaken by qualified individuals 

with the intent to obtain and 

disseminate information via publication 

in a peer-reviewed professional 

scientific journal or equivalent venue, 

which increases the body of knowledge 

available to a scientific community. 

Non-powered hand tools mean small 

tools that do not use or are not operated 

by a motor, engine, or other power 

source. These tools are limited to small 

tools that can be easily carried by hand 

such as geologic hammers, trowels, or 

sieves, but not large tools such as fullsized shovels or pick axes. 

Paleontological locality, location, and 

site mean a geographic area where a 

paleontological resource is found. 

Localities, locations, and sites may be 

relatively large or small. 

Paleontological resource means any 

fossilized remains, traces, or imprints of 

organisms, preserved in or on the earth’s 

crust, that are of paleontological 

interest, and that provide information 

about the history of life on earth. The 

term does not include: 

(1) Any materials associated with an 

archaeological resource (as defined in 

section 3(1) of the Archaeological 

Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 

U.S.C. 470bb(1)); or 

(2) Any cultural item (as defined in 

section 2 of the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act (25 

U.S.C. 3001)). 

Paleontological site is used 

interchangeably with paleontological 

locality or location, but is never 

intended to be synonymous with 

‘‘archaeological site.’’ 

Reasonable amount means a 

maximum per calendar year of onehundred pounds by weight, not to 

exceed twenty-five pounds per day. 

Repository means a facility, such as a 

museum, paleontological research 

center, laboratory, or an educational or 

storage facility managed by a university, 

college, museum, other educational or 

scientific institution, or a Federal, State 

or local government agency that is 

capable of providing professional 

curatorial services on a long-term basis. 

Repository agreement means a formal 

written agreement between the 

Authorized Officer and the repository 

official in which the parties agree on 

how the repository will provide 

curatorial services for collections. 

Repository official means any officer, 

employee, or agent officially 

representing the repository that is 

providing curatorial services for a 

collection that is subject to this part. 

Secretary means the Secretary of 

Agriculture with respect to National 

Forest System lands controlled or 

administered by the Secretary of 

Agriculture. 

State means the 50 States, the District 

of Columbia, the Commonwealth of 

Puerto Rico, and any other territory or 

possession of the United States. 

§ 291.6 Confidentiality of information— 

general. 

(a) Information concerning the nature 

and specific location of a 

paleontological resource is exempt from 

disclosure under the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), 

unless the Authorized Officer has made 

a written determination that disclosure 

would: 

(1) Further the purposes of the Act 

and this part; 

(2) Not create risk of harm to or theft 

or destruction of the resource or the site 

containing the resource; and 

(3) Be in accordance with other 

applicable laws. 

(b) Sharing protected information 

does not constitute a disclosure. The 

Authorized Officer may share 

information concerning the nature and 

specific location of a paleontological 

resource with non-Agency personnel for 

scientific, educational, or resource 

management purposes. A recipient of 

such information may be required to 

sign a confidentiality agreement in 

which the recipient agrees not to share 

the information with anyone not 

authorized to receive the information. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21632 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 291.7 Public awareness and education. 

The Chief of the Forest Service will 

establish a program to increase public 

awareness about the significance of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands. 

§ 291.8 Area closures. 

(a) In order to protect paleontological 

or other resources or to provide for 

public safety, the Authorized Officer 

may restrict access to or close areas to 

the collection of paleontological 

resources. 

(b) The regulations in this part do not 

preclude the use of other authorities 

that provide for area closures. 

§ 291.9 Determination of paleontological 

resources. 

(a) All paleontological resources on 

National Forest System lands will be 

managed, protected, and preserved in 

accordance with the regulations in this 

part unless the Authorized Officer 

determines that such resources are not 

paleontological resources in accordance 

with paragraph (b) of this section. 

(b) Using scientific principles and 

expertise, the Authorized Officer may 

determine that certain paleontological 

resources do or do not meet the 

definition of ‘‘paleontological resource’’ 

as set forth in these regulations, and 

therefore, whether or not such resources 

are covered by the Act or this Part. 

(c) Determinations as described in 

paragraph (b) of this section are subject 

to the following conditions: 

(1) A recommendation for 

determination must be in writing and be 

prepared by a paleontologist with 

demonstrated subject matter expertise in 

the specific group of paleontological 

resources under consideration. 

(2) An Agency paleontologist will 

review the basis for the determination 

and make a recommendation to the 

Authorized Officer concerning the 

determination. 

(3) The Authorized Officer will make 

the final determination based upon the 

recommendation of an Agency 

paleontologist and will ensure that the 

basis for the determination is 

documented, and that the determination 

is made available to the public. 

(4) Any determination made pursuant 

to this section will in no way affect the 

Authorized Officer’s obligations under 

the Act or other applicable laws or 

regulations to manage, protect, or 

preserve all paleontological resources. 

(d) On National Forest System lands, 

the following are not paleontological 

resources for purposes of the Act or this 

part: 

(1) Mineral resources, including coal, 

oil, natural gas, and other economic 

minerals that are subject to the existing 

mining and mineral laws; 

(2) Petrified wood as defined at 30 

U.S.C. 611 and managed under 36 CFR 

228.62 unless determined under 

paragraph (b) of this section to be a 

paleontological resource; 

(3) Geological units, including, but 

not limited to, limestones, diatomites, 

and chalk beds). 

§ 291.10 Collecting. 

A paleontological resource may only 

be collected from National Forest 

System lands in accordance with the 

casual collecting provisions in §§ 291.11 

and 291.12, or in accordance with a 

permit issued by the Authorized Officer 

as identified in § 291.13. 

§ 291.11 Casual collecting on National 

Forest System lands. 

(a) Casual collecting is allowed 

without a permit on National Forest 

System lands where such collection is 

consistent with the laws governing the 

management of those lands, the land 

management plans, and where the lands 

in question are not closed to casual 

collection. 

(b) National Forest System lands are 

open to casual collection unless 

otherwise closed, as described in 

§ 291.12. 

(c) Research activities do not 

constitute casual collection, and 

therefore, research involving the 

collecting of common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources requires 

a permit. 

(d) Using scientific principles and 

expertise, the Authorized Officer may 

determine that certain invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources do or do 

not meet the definition of ‘‘common 

invertebrate and plant paleontological 

resources’’ as set forth in these 

regulations, and thus, whether such 

resources can be casually collected or 

must be collected under permit. 

(e) Determinations as described above 

in paragraph (d) of this section are 

subject to the conditions as stated in 

§ 291.9(c)(1) through (4). 

(f) It is the responsibility of the 

collecting public to ensure that they are 

casually collecting in an area that is 

open to casual collection, and that the 

materials they collect are subject to 

casual collection. 

(g) Paleontological resources collected 

on National Forest System lands, 

including common invertebrate and 

plant paleontological resources subject 

to casual collecting, cannot be sold. Sale 

of these paleontological resources is a 

violation of 16 U.S.C. 470aaa–5(a)(3) 

and § 291.27(a)(3) and may subject the 

violator to civil and criminal penalties. 

§ 291.12 National Forest System lands 

closed to casual collection. 

(a) Casual collecting is not allowed in: 

(1) National Monuments within the 

National Forest System; and 

(2) Other National Forest System 

lands closed to casual collecting in 

accordance with this Part, other statutes, 

executive orders, regulations, or land 

use plans. 

(b) Existing closures of certain areas to 

casual collecting, authorized under 

separate authority, remain closed under 

these regulations. 

§ 291.13 Permits. 

(a) The Authorized Officer may issue 

a permit for the collection of a 

paleontological resource pursuant to an 

application if the Authorized Officer 

determines that: 

(1) The applicant is qualified to carry 

out the permitted activity; 

(2) The permitted activity is 

undertaken for the purpose of furthering 

paleontological knowledge; 

(3) The permitted activity is 

consistent with any management plan 

applicable to the National Forest System 

lands concerned; and 

(4) The proposed methods of 

collection will not threaten significant 

natural or cultural resources pursuant to 

16 U.S.C. 470aaa–3(b)(4). 

(5) Collected materials will not be 

sold or otherwise used for commercial 

purposes. 

(b) Permits may be issued at the 

Authorized Officer’s discretion to 

applicants that provide a complete 

application, as provided in § 291.14, 

and meet qualification and eligibility 

requirements in § 291.15. 

§ 291.14 Application process. 

Applicants for permits must provide 

the following records and information to 

the Authorized Officer in support of an 

application. 

(a) The name, titles, academic or 

professional affiliations, and business 

contact information of the applicant and 

all persons who would be named on the 

permit; 

(b) The applicant’s current resume, 

curriculum vita, or other documents 

that support an applicant’s 

qualifications; 

(c) A detailed scope of work or 

research plan for the proposed activity. 

This must include maps, field methods, 

associated records, estimated time and 

duration of field season, proposed field 

party size, and specific information 

regarding storage, stabilization, and 

curatorial arrangements for collected 

specimens and data; 

(d) Information regarding previous or 

currently held Federal paleontological 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21633 

permits including the issuing agency, 

permit number, and name of the 

Authorized Officer; 

(e) Identification of a proposed 

repository for collected specimens, 

including written verification that the 

proposed repository agrees to receive 

the collection of paleontological 

resources and associated records and 

acknowledges that all costs will be 

borne by the applicant and/or approved 

repository, unless otherwise addressed 

in a separate written document; and 

(f) Other records or information 

identified by the Authorized Officer as 

necessary to support an application for 

a permit. 

§ 291.15 Application qualifications and 

eligibility. 

(a) Qualified applicant. The 

information submitted by applicants 

under § 291.14 must demonstrate 

qualifications for carrying out the 

proposed activities, as follows: 

(1) The applicant has a graduate 

degree in paleontology or a related field 

of study with a major emphasis in 

paleontology from an accredited 

institution, or can demonstrate training 

and/or experience commensurate to the 

nature and scope of the proposed 

activities; and 

(2) The applicant has experience in 

collecting, analyzing, summarizing, and 

reporting paleontological data and 

experience in planning, equipping, 

staffing, organizing, and supervising 

field crews on projects commensurate to 

the type, nature and scope of work 

proposed in the application; and 

(3) The applicant meets any 

additional qualifications as may be 

required by the Authorized Officer that 

are considered necessary to undertake 

the proposed project in the context of 

the project location. 

(b) Eligibility. The information 

submitted by applicants under § 291.14 

must demonstrate that the proposed 

work is eligible for a permit in 

accordance with § 291.13(a)(2) through 

(4). 

§ 291.16 Terms and conditions. 

The collection of paleontological 

resources pursuant to a permit must be 

conducted in accordance with the 

following terms and conditions: 

(a) All paleontological resources that 

are collected from National Forest 

System lands under permit will remain 

the property of the United States. 

(b) The collection will be preserved in 

an approved repository to be made 

available for scientific research and 

public education. 

(c) Specific locality data will not be 

released by the permittee or repository 

unless authorized in accordance with 

§ 291.6. 

(d) The permittee recognizes that the 

area within the scope of the permit may 

be subject to other authorized uses. 

(e) The permittee must conform to all 

applicable Federal, State, and local 

laws. 

(f) The permittee must assume 

responsibility for all work conducted 

under the permit and the actions of all 

persons conducting this work. 

(g) The permit cannot be transferred. 

(h) The permittee cannot modify the 

permit without the approval of the 

Authorized Officer. 

(i) The permittee must comply with 

all timelines established in the permit, 

and must request modification of the 

permit if those timelines cannot be met. 

(j) The permittee or other persons 

named on the permit must be on site at 

all times when field work is in progress 

and will have a copy of the signed 

permit on hand. 

(k) The permittee will comply with 

any vehicle or access restrictions, safety 

or environmental restrictions, or local 

safety conditions or restrictions. 

(l) The permittee will report 

suspected resource damage or theft of 

paleontological or other resources to the 

Authorized Officer in a timely manner 

after learning of such damage or theft. 

(m) The permittee will acknowledge 

the Forest Service in any report, 

publication, paper, news article, film, 

television program, or other media 

resulting from the permittee’s work 

performed under the permit. 

(n) The permittee will comply with 

the timeline established in the permit 

for providing a complete list to the 

Authorized Officer of specimens 

collected and the current location of the 

specimens. 

(o) The permittee will provide 

scheduled reports to the Authorized 

Officer within the timeline established 

in the permit 

(p) The permittee and/or approved 

repository will be responsible for all 

costs for the proposed activity, 

including fieldwork and collections 

maintenance, unless otherwise 

addressed in a separate written 

document 

(q) The permittee will comply with 

the permit terms and conditions 

established by the Authorized Officer, 

even in the event of permit expiration, 

suspension, or revocation. 

(r) Additional stipulations, terms, and 

conditions as required by the 

Authorized Officer and/or the Agency 

may be appended. 

§ 291.17 Permit reports. 

Permit reports must contain the 

following information as appropriate: 

(a) Permittee(s)’ name, title, 

affiliation, and professional contact 

information; 

(b) Permit number; 

(c) Date of report; 

(d) Project name, number, or 

reference; 

(e) Description of project, 

methodology, or summary of research 

scope of work; 

(f) Dates of field work; 

(g) Name(s) of people who performed 

field work; 

(h) Description of work performed or 

accomplished and a summary of results 

and discoveries; 

(i) Summary of regional or local 

geology and/or paleontology including 

context, geography, stratigraphy, and 

geological unit; 

(j) Identification of potential impacts 

to paleontological resources by 

proposed land use action; 

(k) Mitigation recommendations to 

address potential paleontological 

resource impacts; 

(l) Relevant literature citations; 

(m) Relevant associated records, 

including anything that aids in 

explaining, clarifying, or understanding 

the findings; 

(n) Listing of collected paleontological 

resources, including field numbers and 

field identifications that are referenced 

to specific localities; 

(o) Repository name, identifying 

acronym, and address; 

(p) Repository official name, title, and 

contact information; 

(q) Approved repository accession 

and/or catalog number(s); 

(r) Assigned locality numbers; 

(s) Administrative area (State, county, 

ranger district, forest, and so forth); 

(t) Map name, source, size, edition, 

projection, datum, and/or other 

mapping information; 

(u) Geographic location, survey data, 

and/or related metadata; 

(v) Paleontological taxa collected, 

observed, or in a repository; 

(w) Resource identifications, 

condition, location, and quantity; and 

(x) Recommendations or information 

for the approved repository regarding 

the condition or care of collected 

resources or associated records. 

§ 291.18 Modification or cancellation of 

permits. 

The Authorized Officer may modify a 

permit, consistent with applicable laws 

and policies, when: 

(a) The Authorized Officer determines 

that there are management, 

administrative, or safety reasons to 

modify a permit; or 

(b) A permittee requests a 

modification in writing. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21634 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 291.19 Suspension and revocation of 

permits. 

(a) The Authorized Officer may 

suspend or revoke a permit issued 

under this section; 

(1) For resource, safety or other 

management considerations; or 

(2) When there is a violation of term 

or condition of a permit issued under 

this section. 

(b) The permit shall be revoked if any 

person working under the authority of 

the permit is convicted of a violation 

under section 16 U.S.C. 470aaa 6306 or 

is assessed a civil penalty under 16 

U.S.C. 470aaa 6307. 

(c) Suspensions, modifications, and 

revocations shall be administered in 

accordance with the procedures set 

forth in 36 CFR part 214. 

§ 291.20 Appeals. 

A permittee may appeal the denial or 

revocation of a permit in accordance 

with 36 CFR part 214. Pending the 

appeal, the decision of the Authorized 

Officer remains in effect unless 

determined otherwise in accordance 

with 36 CFR part 214, subpart C. 

§ 291.21 Curation of paleontological 

resources. 

Collections from National Forest 

System lands made under a permit 

issued according to this Part will be 

deposited in an approved repository. 

The curation of paleontological 

resources collected from National Forest 

System lands before the effective date of 

these regulations is covered under the 

terms of the original collection permit 

and/or agreement. Such collections 

remain Federal property unless 

otherwise transferred or disposed of in 

a Forest Service agreement. 

§ 291.22 Becoming an approved 

repository. 

(a) A repository identified during the 

permit application process in § 291.14 

must be approved to receive collections 

by the Authorized Officer as follows: 

(1) A repository must meet the 

minimum requirements in § 291.23 in 

order to be approved. 

(2) A repository must agree in writing 

that collections: 

(i) Remain the property of the Federal 

government; 

(ii) Will be preserved for the public in 

accordance with § 291.24; 

(iii) Will be made available for 

scientific research and public education; 

and 

(iv) That specific locality data will not 

be released except in accordance with 

§ 291.6. 

(b) The Authorized Officer and the 

repository official may enter into a 

formal agreement that explains the 

responsibilities of the parties for the 

curation of the collection in accordance 

with § 291.26. 

(c) The repository must agree in 

writing to periodic inventory and 

inspection of the collections as 

described in § 291.25. 

(d) Prior to depositing the collection, 

an Agency paleontologist in 

consultation with the repository official 

will determine the content of the 

collection to be curated based on 

scientific principles and expertise. A 

copy of the final catalog will be 

provided by the repository to the 

Authorized Officer. 

(e) A repository approved by a Federal 

agency or bureau may be considered an 

approved repository by the Forest 

Service. 

§ 291.23 Minimum requirements of 

approval of a repository. 

The Authorized Officer will 

determine whether a facility should be 

an approved repository based on 

whether the repository has: 

(a) The capability to provide adequate 

curatorial services as defined in § 291.5; 

(b) A scope of collections statement or 

similar policy that identifies 

paleontological resources as part of its 

scope of collections; 

(c) A current collections management 

plan, including but not limited to 

policies for documentation, loans, and 

access; and 

(d) Staff with primary responsibility 

for managing and preserving the 

collections that have training or 

experience in the curation of 

paleontological resources at levels 

appropriate to the nature and use of the 

paleontological collections maintained 

by that repository. 

§ 291.24 Standards for access and use of 

collections. 

(a) The repository will make 

collections available for scientific 

research and public education or as 

otherwise provided in a repository 

agreement. 

(b) The repository may provide access 

to specific locality data and associated 

records when consistent with an 

approval under § 291.22 or an 

agreement under § 291.26. 

(c) The repository may loan 

specimens after entering into a signed 

loan agreement with the borrowing 

institution. The loan agreement must 

specify the terms and conditions of the 

loan and that the repository is 

responsible for care and maintenance of 

the loaned specimens. 

(d) The repository must maintain 

administrative records of all scientific 

and educational uses of the collection. 

(e) The repository may charge 

reasonable fees to cover costs for access 

to and use of collections, including 

handling, packing, shipping, and 

insuring paleontological resources, 

photocopying associated records and 

other occasional costs not associated 

with ongoing curatorial services. 

(f) The following uses of the 

collection will require written approval 

from the Authorized Officer, in 

consultation with an Agency 

paleontologist, unless specified in the 

approval in § 291.22 or an agreement 

under § 291.26: 

(1) Prior to reproducing a 

paleontological resource, the repository 

will notify and obtain approval from the 

Authorized Officer. Reproductions 

include, but are not limited to, molding 

and casting, and computerized axial 

tomography (CAT) scans. Routine 

photographic and/or digital 

reproductions would not require 

individual approvals, providing the 

reproductions are not made for 

commercial purposes, and that the 

reproductions do not require transfer of 

the specimen(s) to a different facility. 

(2) The repository may only allow 

consumptive analysis of specimens if 

the Authorized Officer has determined, 

in consultation with an Agency 

paleontologist, that the potential gain in 

scientific or interpretive information 

outweighs the potential loss of the 

paleontological resource and provides 

the repository with written 

authorization for such use. 

§ 291.25 Conducting inspections and 

inventories of collections. 

(a) The repository and the Authorized 

Officer must ensure that inspections and 

inventories of collections are in 

accordance with the Federal Property 

and Administrative Services Act (40 

U.S.C. 541 et seq.), its implementing 

regulations (41 CFR parts 101 and 102), 

any Agency-specific regulations on the 

management of Federal property, and 

any Agency-specific statutes and 

regulations on the management of 

museum collections. 

(b) The frequency and methods for 

conducting and documenting 

inspections and inventories will be 

appropriate to the nature and content of 

the collection. 

(c) When two or more Federal 

agencies deposit collections in the same 

repository, they may enter into an 

interagency agreement consistent with 

the Single Audit Act (31 U.S.C. 75) for 

inspections and inventories. 

§ 291.26 Repository agreements. 

(a) The Authorized Officer may enter 

into an agreement with Federal and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21635 

non-Federal repositories regarding the 

curation of paleontological resources 

and their associated records. 

(b) An agreement will contain the 

following, as appropriate, including but 

not limited to: 

(1) A statement (updated as necessary) 

that identifies the collection or group of 

collections provided to the repository; 

(2) A statement that identifies the 

Federal ownership and the Agency that 

administers the collection; 

(3) A statement of work to be 

performed by the repository; 

(4) A statement of the responsibilities 

of the Authorized Officer and the 

repository official for the long-term care 

of the collection; 

(5) A statement that collections are 

available for scientific and educational 

uses consistent with § 291.22; 

(6) Any special procedures and 

restrictions for curatorial services and 

collection management, including loans; 

(7) Provisions for consumptive 

analyses of paleontological specimens; 

(8) Any special procedures and/or 

restrictions on the disclosure of specific 

locality data; 

(9) A statement that all proceeds 

derived from any use of the collections 

will be used for their support; 

(10) A statement that all exhibits, 

publications, and studies of Federal 

specimens by repository staff and/or 

repository research affiliates will credit 

the Agency that administers the 

collection; 

(11) Specification of the frequency 

and methods for periodic inventories; 

(12) A statement that accession, 

catalog, and inventory information will 

be made available to the Authorized 

Officer or their staff 

(13) A statement that no employee of 

the repository will sell or financially 

encumber the collection; 

(14) A statement that, in the event the 

repository can no longer provide care 

for a collection under the terms of the 

agreement, the repository official will 

notify the Authorized Officer in writing; 

(15) A statement that the terminating 

party is responsible for the transfer of 

collections to another approved 

repository, including costs; 

(16) The term of the repository 

agreement and procedures for 

modification, cancellation, suspension, 

extension, and termination of the 

agreement; and 

(17) Any additional terms and 

conditions as needed. 

§ 291.27 Prohibited acts. 

(a) A person may not: 

(1) Excavate, remove, damage, or 

otherwise alter or deface or attempt to 

excavate, remove, damage, or otherwise 

alter or deface any paleontological 

resources located on National Forest 

System lands unless such activity is 

conducted in accordance with the Act 

and this part; 

(2) Exchange, transport, export, 

receive, or offer to exchange, transport, 

export, or receive any paleontological 

resource if the person knew or should 

have known such resource to have been 

excavated or removed from National 

Forest System lands in violation of any 

provisions, rule, regulation, law, 

ordinance, or permit in effect under 

Federal law, including the Act and this 

part; or 

(3) Sell or purchase or offer to sell or 

purchase any paleontological resource if 

the person knew or should have known 

such resource to have been excavated, 

removed, sold, purchased, exchanged, 

transported, or received from National 

Forest System lands. 

(b) A person may not make or submit 

any false record, account, or label for, or 

any false identification of, any 

paleontological resource excavated or 

removed from National Forest System 

lands. 

§ 291.28 Civil penalty. 

(a) A person who violates any 

prohibition contained in this Part or 

permit issued under this Part may be 

assessed a penalty by the Authorized 

Officer after the person is given notice 

and opportunity for a hearing with 

respect to the violation, as provided in 

§§ 291.30 and 291.31. 

(b) Each violation is considered a 

separate offense. 

§ 291.29 Amount of civil penalty. 

(a) Determination of civil penalty 

amount. The amount of such penalty 

assessed under § 291.28 shall be 

determined by taking into account: 

(1) The scientific or fair market value, 

whichever is greater, of the 

paleontological resource involved, as 

determined by the Authorized Officer, 

and 

(2) The cost of response to and 

restoration and repair of the resource 

and the paleontological site involved, 

and 

(3) Any other factors under §§ 291.37 

through 291.39 considered relevant by 

the Authorized Officer in assessing the 

penalty. 

(b) Multiple offenses. In the case of 

subsequent or repeated violations by the 

same person, the amount of a penalty 

assessed under § 291.28(a) may be 

doubled. 

(c) Maximum amount of penalty. The 

amount of any penalty assessed for any 

one violation shall not exceed an 

amount equal to double the cost of 

response to, and restoration and repair 

of resources and paleontological site 

damage plus double the scientific or fair 

market value of resources destroyed or 

not recovered. 

(d) Determination of scientific and 

fair market values and cost of response 

to, and restoration and repair. Scientific 

and fair market values and the cost of 

response to, and restoration and repair 

are determined as described in 

§§ 291.37 through 291.39. 

§ 291.30 Civil penalty process. 

(a) Notice of violation. The 

Authorized Officer shall serve a notice 

of violation by certified mail (return 

receipt requested) or other type of 

verifiable delivery upon any person 

believed to be subject to a civil penalty. 

The Authorized Officer shall include in 

the notice: 

(1) A concise statement of the facts 

believed to show a violation; 

(2) A specific reference to the 

section(s) of this part or to a permit 

issued pursuant to this part allegedly 

violated; 

(3) The penalty proposed; 

(4) Notification of the right to request 

a hearing in accordance with paragraph 

(f) of this section. The notice shall also 

inform the person of the right to seek 

judicial review of any final 

administrative decision assessing a civil 

penalty. 

(b) Response to notice of violation. 

The person served with a notice of 

violation shall have 45 calendar days 

from the date of mailing in which to 

respond. During this time the person 

may: 

(1) Accept the proposed penalty, 

either in writing or by payment. 

Acceptance of the proposed penalty will 

be deemed a waiver of the right to 

request a hearing as described in 

paragraph (f) in this section. 

(2) Seek informal discussions with the 

Authorized Officer; 

(3) File a written response. This 

written response must be filed with the 

Authorized Officer within 45 calendar 

days of the date of mailing of the notice 

of violation, and must be signed by the 

person served with the notice of 

violation. If the person is a corporation, 

the written response must be signed by 

an officer authorized to sign such 

documents. The written response will 

set forth in full the legal or factual basis 

for the requested relief. 

(4) Request a hearing in accordance 

with paragraph (f) of this section. 

(c) Assessment of penalty. (1) The 

Authorized Officer shall assess a civil 

penalty upon completion of the 45 

calendar day response period, informal 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21636 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

discussions, or review of the written 

response, whichever is later. 

(2) The Authorized Officer shall take 

into consideration all available 

information, including information 

provided under paragraph (b) of this 

section or furnished upon further 

request by the Authorized Officer. 

(3) If the facts warrant a conclusion 

that no violation has occurred, the 

Authorized Officer shall notify the 

person served with the notice of 

violation that no violation has occurred 

and no penalty will be assessed. 

(4) Where the facts warrant a 

conclusion that a violation has 

occurred, the Authorized Officer shall 

determine a penalty amount in 

accordance with § 291.29. 

(d) Penalty modification and 

remittance. The Authorized Officer may 

offer to modify or remit the penalty. 

Modification or remittance may be 

based upon any or all of the following 

factors: 

(1) Agreement by the person being 

assessed a civil penalty to return to the 

Authorized Officer paleontological 

resources removed from National Forest 

System lands; 

(2) Agreement by the person being 

assessed a civil penalty to assist the 

Authorized Officer in activity to 

preserve, restore, or otherwise 

contribute to the protection and study of 

paleontological resources on National 

Forest System lands; 

(3) Agreement by the person being 

assessed a civil penalty to provide 

information which will assist in the 

detection, prevention, or prosecution of 

violations of the Act or this part; 

(4) Determination that the person 

being assessed a civil penalty did not 

willfully commit the violation; 

(5) Determination of other mitigating 

circumstances appropriate to 

consideration in reaching a fair and 

expeditious assessment. 

(e) Notice of assessment. The 

Authorized Officer shall serve a written 

notice of assessment upon the person 

served with a notice of violation. The 

notice of assessment establishes the 

penalty amount assessed by the 

Authorized Officer and is served by 

certified mail (return receipt requested), 

or other type of verifiable delivery. The 

Authorized Officer shall include in the 

notice of assessment: 

(1) The facts and conclusions from 

which it was determined that a violation 

did occur; 

(2) The basis for determining the 

penalty amount assessed and/or any 

offer to mitigate or remit the penalty; 

and 

(3) Notification of the right to request 

a hearing, including the procedures to 

be followed, and to seek judicial review 

of any final administrative decision 

assessing a civil penalty. 

(f) Hearings. (1) Except where the 

right to request a hearing is deemed to 

have been waived as provided in 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the 

person served with a notice of 

assessment may file a written request for 

a hearing with the hearing office 

specified in the notice. The person shall 

enclose with the request for hearing a 

copy of the notice of assessment, and 

shall deliver the request for hearing by 

certified mail (return receipt requested), 

as specified in the notice of assessment. 

(2) Failure to deliver a written request 

for a hearing within 45 calendar days of 

the date of mailing of the notice of 

assessment shall be deemed a waiver of 

the right to a hearing. 

(3) Any hearing conducted pursuant 

to this section shall be held in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 554. In any 

such hearing, the amount of civil 

penalty assessed shall be determined in 

accordance with §§ 291.28 through 

291.33, and shall not be limited by the 

amount assessed by the Authorized 

Officer under § 291.29(a) or any offer of 

mitigation or remission made by the 

Authorized Officer. 

(g) Final administrative decision. (1) 

Where the person served with a notice 

of violation has accepted the penalty 

pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this 

section, the notice of violation shall 

constitute the final administrative 

decision; 

(2) Where the person served with a 

notice of assessment has not requested 

a hearing within 45 calendar days of the 

date of mailing of the notice of 

assessment, the notice of assessment 

shall constitute the final administrative 

decision; 

(3) Where the person served with a 

notice of assessment has filed a timely 

request for a hearing, the decision 

resulting from the hearing shall 

constitute the final administrative 

decision. 

(h) Payment of penalty. The person 

assessed a civil penalty shall have 45 

calendar days from the date of issuance 

of the final administrative decision in 

which to make full payment of the 

penalty assessed, unless a timely 

request for appeal has been filed with a 

U.S. District Court as provided in 

§ 291.32. 

(i) Other remedies not waived. 

Assessment of a penalty under this 

section shall not be deemed a waiver of 

the right to pursue other available legal 

or administrative remedies. 

§ 291.31 Civil penalties hearing 

procedures. 

(a) Requests for hearings. Any person 

wishing to request a hearing on a notice 

of assessment of civil penalty may file 

a written dated request for a hearing 

with the hearing office specified in the 

notice. The person shall enclose a copy 

of the notice of violation and the notice 

of assessment. The request shall state 

the relief sought, the basis for 

challenging the facts used for assessing 

the penalty, and the person’s preference 

as to the place and date for a hearing. 

A copy of the request shall be served 

upon the USDA Office of the General 

Counsel by certified mail, at the 

addresses specified in the notice of 

assessment. Hearings shall be conducted 

in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 554. 

(b) Commencement of hearing 

procedures. Upon receipt of a request 

for a hearing, the hearing office shall 

assign an administrative law judge to 

the case. Notice of assignment shall be 

given promptly to the parties, and 

thereafter, all pleadings, papers, and 

other documents in the proceeding shall 

be filed directly with the administrative 

law judge, with copies served on the 

opposing party. 

(c) Appearance and practice. (1) The 

respondent may appear in person, by 

representative, or by counsel, and may 

participate fully in the proceedings. If 

respondent fails to appear and the 

administrative law judge determines 

such failure is without good cause, the 

administrative law judge may, in his/her 

discretion, determine that such failure 

shall constitute a waiver of the right to 

a hearing and consent to the making of 

a decision on the record made at the 

hearing. 

(2) Departmental counsel shall 

represent the Agency in the 

proceedings. Upon notice to the 

Authorized Officer of the assignment of 

an administrative law judge to the case, 

said counsel shall enter his/her 

appearance on behalf of the Agency and 

shall file all petitions and 

correspondence exchanges by the 

Agency and the respondent which shall 

become part of the hearing record. 

Thereafter, service upon the Agency 

shall be made to Departmental counsel. 

(d) Hearing administration. (1) The 

administrative law judge shall have all 

powers accorded by law and necessary 

to preside over the parties and the 

proceedings and to make decisions in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 554 through 

557. 

(2) The transcript of testimony; the 

exhibits; and all papers, documents and 

requests filed in the proceedings shall 

constitute the record for decision. The 

administrative law judge shall render a 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 21637 

written decision upon the record, which 

shall set forth his/her findings of fact 

and conclusions of law, and the reasons 

and basis therefore, and an assessment 

of a penalty, if any. 

(3) The administrative law judge’s 

decision shall become effective 30 

calendar days from the date of this 

decision. 

§ 291.32 Petition for judicial review; 

collection of unpaid assessments. 

(a) Judicial review. Any person against 

whom a final administrative decision is 

issued assessing a penalty may file a 

petition for judicial review of the 

decision in the U.S. District Court for 

the District of Columbia or in the 

district in which the violation is alleged 

to have occurred within the 30 calendar 

day period beginning on the date the 

decision was issued. Upon notice of 

such filing, the Secretary shall promptly 

file such a certified copy of the record 

on which the decision was issued. The 

court shall hear the action on the record 

made before the Secretary and shall 

sustain the action if it is supported by 

substantial evidence on the record 

considered as a whole. Judicial review 

is limited by the requirement to exhaust 

administrative remedies under 7 U.S.C. 

6912(e). 

(b) Failure to pay. Failure to pay a 

penalty assessed is a debt to the U.S. 

Government. If any person fails to pay 

a penalty within 30 calendar days after 

the final administrative decision and the 

person has not filed a petition for 

judicial review of the decision in 

accordance with paragraph (a) of this 

section; or after a court in an action 

brought in paragraph (a) of this section 

has entered a final judgment upholding 

the assessment of the penalty, the 

Secretary may request the Attorney 

General to institute a civil action in a 

district court of the United States for 

any district in which the person if 

found, resides, or transacts business, to 

collect the penalty (plus interest at 

currently prevailing rates from the date 

of the final decision or the date of the 

final judgment, as the case may be). The 

district court shall have jurisdiction to 

hear and decide any such action. In 

such action, the validity, amount, and 

appropriateness of such penalty shall 

not be subject to review. Any person 

who fails to pay on a timely basis the 

amount of an assessment of a civil 

penalty shall be required to pay, in 

addition to such amount and interest, 

attorney’s fees and costs for collection 

proceedings. This section does not 

preclude the use of other collection 

methods such as Treasury offset, where 

appropriate. 

§ 291.33 Use of recovered amounts. 

Penalties and/or restitution collected 

shall be available to the Authorized 

Officer and without further 

appropriation may be used only as 

follows: 

(a) To protect, restore, or repair the 

paleontological resources and sites 

which were the subject of the action, 

and to protect, monitor, and study the 

resources and sites; and/or 

(b) To provide educational materials 

to the public about paleontological 

resources, sites, and their protection; 

and/or 

(c) To provide for the payment of 

rewards as provided in § 291.40. 

§ 291.34 Criminal penalties. 

(a) A person who knowingly violates 

or counsels, procures, solicits, or 

employs another person to violate 

§ 291.27 shall, upon conviction, be fined 

in accordance with Title 18, United 

States Code, or imprisoned not more 

than 5 years, or both; but if the sum of 

the commercial and paleontological 

value of the paleontological resources 

involved and the cost of restoration and 

repair of such resources does not exceed 

$500, such person shall be fined in 

accordance with Title 18, United States 

Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 

years, or both. 

(b) Paleontological and commercial 

values and the cost of restoration and 

repair are determined under §§ 291.37 

through 291.39. 

§ 291.35 Multiple offenses. 

In the case of subsequent or repeat 

violations by the same person, the 

amount of the monetary penalty 

assessed may be doubled. 

§ 291.36 General exception. 

The provisions in §§ 291.28 through 

291.35 do not apply to any person with 

respect to any paleontological resource 

which was in the lawful possession of 

such person prior to the date of 

enactment of the Act. 

§ 291.37 Scientific or paleontological 

value. 

The scientific value of any 

paleontological resource involved in a 

violation of the prohibitions contained 

in this part or conditions of a permit 

issued pursuant to this Part shall be the 

value of the information associated with 

the paleontological resource. The term 

‘‘scientific value’’ can be used 

interchangeably with the term 

‘‘paleontological value.’’ This value 

shall be determined in terms of the costs 

of the retrieval of the scientific and 

educational information which would 

have been obtainable prior to the 

violation. These costs may include, but 

need not be limited to, the cost of 

preparing a research design, conducting 

field work, carrying out laboratory 

analysis, and preparing reports or 

educational materials or displays as 

would be necessary to realize the 

information potential. 

§ 291.38 Fair market or commercial value. 

The fair market value of any 

paleontological resource involved in a 

violation of the prohibitions contained 

in this part or conditions of a permit 

issued pursuant to this part shall be the 

commercial value of the resources, 

determined using the condition of the 

paleontological resource prior to the 

violation, to the extent that its prior 

condition can be ascertained. The term 

‘‘fair market value’’ can be used 

interchangeably with the term 

‘‘commercial value.’’ Fair market value 

of paleontological resources can be 

established through the use of 

comparable sales or pricing information, 

advertisements for comparable 

resources, appraisals, and/or other 

information on legal or illegal markets. 

§ 291.39 Cost of response, restoration, 

and repair. 

The cost of response, restoration, and 

repair of paleontological resources 

involved in a violation of prohibitions 

contained in this part or conditions of 

a permit issued pursuant to this part, 

shall be the sum of the costs incurred 

for response, investigation, assessment, 

emergency restoration, or repair work, 

plus those costs projected to be 

necessary to complete restoration and 

repair, which may include but need not 

be limited to the costs of: 

(a) Reconstruction of the 

paleontological resource; 

(b) Stabilization and/or salvage of the 

paleontological resource; 

(c) Ground contour reconstruction 

and surface stabilization; 

(d) Research necessary to carry out 

reconstruction or stabilization; 

(e) Physical barriers or other 

protective devices or signs, necessitated 

by the disturbance of the 

paleontological resource, to protect it 

from further disturbance; 

(f) Examination and analysis of the 

paleontological resource including 

recording remaining paleontological 

information, where necessitated by 

disturbance, in order to salvage 

remaining values which cannot be 

otherwise conserved; 

(g) Storage, preparation, and curation; 

(h) Site monitoring; and 

(i) Preparation of reports relating to 

any of the above activities. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
21638 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 291.40 Rewards. 

(a) The Authorized Officer may, at his 

or her discretion, pay from penalties 

collected under §§ 291.28 through 

291.36, or from appropriated funds, an 

amount up to half of the penalties 

collected to any person who furnishes 

information which leads to a finding of 

the civil violation(s) or to the criminal 

conviction(s). 

(b) If several persons provided the 

information, the amount may be divided 

at the discretion of the Authorized 

Officer among the persons. 

(c) No officer or employee of the 

United States or of any State or local 

government who furnishes information 

or renders service in the performance of 

their official duties shall be eligible for 

payment. 

§ 291.41 Forfeiture. 

(a) Forfeiture. All paleontological 

resources with respect to which a 

violation under §§ 291.28 through 

291.36 occurred and which are in the 

possession of any person, are subject to 

forfeiture proceedings. All forfeitures 

will be initiated pursuant to cooperative 

agreements with agencies having law 

enforcement authority and forfeiture 

regulations in place. 

(b) Transfer of administration of 

forfeited resources. The administration 

of forfeited resources may be transferred 

to Federal or non-Federal institutions to 

be used for scientific or educational 

purposes, in furtherance of the purposes 

of the Act. 

Dated: March 11, 2015. 

Robert Bonnie, 

Under Secretary, Natural Resources and 

Environment. 

[FR Doc. 2015–08483 Filed 4–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3411–15–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3