Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 122 / Monday, June 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 32351

§ 498.74 [Amended]

9. In § 498.74, the following changes

are made:

a. In paragraph (b)(1), ‘‘within the

stated time period’’ is revised to read

‘‘within the time period specified in

§ 498.82’’.

b. In paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and

(b)(3), ‘‘Appeals Council’’ is revised to

read ‘‘Departmental Appeals Board’’ in

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(4), ‘‘Council’’

revised to read ‘‘Board’’,

c. In paragraph (b)(2), ‘‘in a Federal

district court;’’ is revised to read ‘‘in a

United States District Court or, in the

case of a civil money penalty, in a

United States Court of Appeals;’’.

10. Section 498.90 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 498.90 Effect of Departmental Appeals

Board Decision

(a) General rule. The Board’s decision

is binding unless—

(1) The affected party has a right to

judicial review and timely files a civil

action in a United States District Court

or, in the case of a civil money penalty,

in a United States Court of Appeals; or

(2) The Board reopens and revises its

decision in accordance with § 498.102.

(b) Right to judicial review. Section

498.5 specifies the circumstances under

which an affected party has a right to

seek judicial review.

(c) Special rules: Civil money penalty.

(1) Finality of Board’s decision. When

HCFA imposes a civil money penalty,

notice of the Board’s decision (or denial

of review) is the final administrative

action that initiates the 60-day period

for seeking judicial review.

(2) Timing for collection of civil

money penalty. For SNFs and NFs, the

rules that apply are those set forth in

subpart F of part 488 of this chapter.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance;

Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital

Insurance; Program No. 93.774, Medicare—

Supplementary Medical Insurance)

Dated: May 16, 1996.

Bruce C. Vladeck,

Administrator, Health Care Financing

Administration.

[FR Doc. 96–13521 Filed 6–21–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Part 2920

[WO–350–1430–00–24 1A; Circular No.

2661]

RIN 1004–AB51

Leases, Permits, and Easements;

Effective Dates of Permit Decisions;

Appeal Procedure

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the

general lease and permit regulations of

the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

It provides that BLM general use,

occupancy, and development permit

decisions will take effect immediately if

the contemplated uses meet the

requirements for minimum impact

permits under the existing regulations.

Permits issued under such decisions

will remain in effect during the

pendency of any appeal to the Interior

Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), unless

IBLA stays the decision. The regulatory

text in the rule pertains only to

minimum impact permits. If a proposed

use does not satisfy the requirements for

a minimum impact permit under the

existing regulations (that is, if the

proposed use would conflict with BLM

plans, policies, and programs for the

affected lands, or local zoning

ordinances, or cause appreciable

damage to public lands or resources or

improvements), the requested permit

would not qualify as a minimum impact

permit and the provision adopted today

would not apply. In such a case, BLM

would not issue a permit until the

applicant meets all the requirements

contained in the existing regulations.

Appeals of permits other than minimum

impact permits are not affected by this

final rule. Similarly, appeals of BLM

lease decisions are not affected by this

rule. These appeals of BLM decisions to

issue leases and non-minimum impact

permits will continue to be governed by

the general appeal procedures of the

Department of the Interior, and the use

authorizations appealed will not take

immediate effect under this rule. The

amendments to the appeals process in

this final rule are needed to avoid

delays in BLM’s issuance of permits for

environmentally benign public land

uses.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 24, 1996.

ADDRESSES: You may send inquiries or

suggestions to: Director (350), Bureau of

Land Management, 1849 C Street, NW,

Washington, D.C. 20240.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vanessa Engle, as to the permit program,

(202) 452–7776, or Jeff Holdren, as to

the rule or the permit program, (202)

452–7779.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

II. Final Rule and Response to Comments

III. Procedural Matters

I. Background

A. Summary of the Bureau of Land

Management Permit Program

The existing regulations in 43 CFR

part 2920 contain procedures for many

types of land users to obtain

authorizations in the form of permits,

leases, and easements to use, occupy,

and develop public lands and their

resources. BLM’s statutory authority to

allow these uses is found in Section 302

of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.

1732) (FLPMA). BLM’s general authority

for issuing regulations is found in

Section 310 of FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1740).

This final rule relates only to permits

issued for uses causing minimal

environmental impacts on lands and

resources, and does not pertain to

leases, easements, or other permits.

BLM authorizes only those uses that

conform to applicable law, and to BLM

plans, policies, objectives, and resource

management programs. Permits are

normally issued for short-term uses that

do not exceed 3 years. (Uses with terms

shorter than 3 years but involving

heavier impacts may require leases.)

Permits are required for activities that

disrupt normal visitor activity or other

authorized uses, or involve the

placement, storage, or use of temporary

structures or facilities, or materials or

equipment. BLM may terminate a

permit immediately for noncompliance,

or to allow another disposition or use of

the lands. Typical uses requiring

permits under these regulations are

equipment storage, beekeeping, motion

picture and advertising photography,

and scientific research. The regulations

in part 2920 do not cover specific

activities governed by other regulations

in this title, such as grazing (43 CFR part

4100), mining (parts 3700 and 3800),

mineral leasing (parts 3100, 3200, 3400,

and 3500), mineral material sales (part

3600), and timber sales (part 5400).

Also, certain activities require no

authorization, such as still photography

not intended for advertising purposes.

There is no need to apply for a permit

or lease for such activities.

Section 2920.2–2 authorizes the

issuance of permits for activities that

cause no appreciable impacts on the

public lands, their resources or
32352 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 122 / Monday, June 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

improvements. If a proposed use

qualifies for a minimum impact permit

under section 2920.2–2, BLM is not

required to publish a notice of realty

action under section 2920.4.

B. Proposed Rules

The final rule published today is a

stage of a rulemaking process that will

culminate in the comprehensive

revision of the lease and permit

regulations in 43 CFR part 2920. The

rule published today addresses only the

effective date of minimum impact land

use permits. This rule was preceded by

publication of two proposed rules, the

first proposing to revise the entire part

2920, and the second proposing to

amend the part by adding new

provisions or changing previously

proposed provisions.

The first proposed rule was published

in the Federal Register on November 21,

1990 (55 FR 48810). This proposed rule

was intended to streamline the land use

approval process by removing a category

of authorizations (easements) and

cumbersome administrative procedures.

The BLM invited public comments for

60 days, and received comments from

16 sources: 10 from offices of Federal

agencies, 2 from business entities, 1

from an association, and 3 from State

government agencies.

After the public comment period

closed, a controversy arose concerning

issuance of filming permits. Some

parties expressed concerns about

potential environmental degradation

related to commercial activities,

particularly permits for feature films.

Other parties, primarily filmmakers and

those who provide services to them,

including State and local government

agencies, objected to provisions that

allow delay when parties file

administrative appeals of film permits.

The BLM published a further

proposed rule in the Federal Register on

February 9, 1995 (60 FR 7878), which

was intended to allow more expeditious

processing and issuance of permits. It

also would have provided for immediate

implementation of certain types of

permits. The further proposed rule

designated two categories of permits:

‘‘minimum impact permits’’ and ‘‘full

permits.’’ ‘‘Minimum impact permits’’

were to be issued for activities having a

minimal impact on the public lands and

their resources. These permits were to

become effective immediately upon

execution by the BLM authorized officer

and were not to be subject to the general

stay process in 43 CFR 4.21(a). ‘‘Full

permit’’ decisions (and also lease

issuance decisions) would have

remained subject to the 43 CFR 4.21 stay

provisions. The further proposed rule

contained a set of criteria for

determining when a full permit would

be required.

The BLM sought public response in

the further proposed rule to specific

questions relating to permits and rental

schedules. Only the first question

related to appeals, and is discussed

below. The remaining questions will be

discussed when the final rule revising

part 2920 is published. The first

question read as follows:

1. Under the existing regulations, all

permits and leases are subject to a 30-day

appeal period before they become effective.

The 1990 proposed rule would make all

leases and permits effective immediately

upon issuance by the BLM authorized officer.

Under the 1995 further proposed rule, only

minimum impact permits would be effective

immediately; leases and other permits would

remain subject to the 30-day waiting period

prescribed in 43 CFR part 4. Which approach

do you think is appropriate?

The overwhelming public response to

this question urged that all permits and

leases be effective immediately. This

final rule adopts this recommendation

only as to the minimum impact permits

provided for in section 2920.2–2 of the

regulations in the 1995 and earlier

editions of 43 CFR. General land use

leases, and permits with more than

minimal effects, will remain subject to

43 CFR 4.21.

In the further proposed rule, BLM also

invited public comment on several other

provisions that were not in the original

proposed rule. The further proposed

rule would have added rental and fee

schedules for commercial filming and

photography, and would have addressed

hazardous materials, outdoor

advertising, criminal penalties, and

conforming applications to land use

planning. The BLM will resolve these

issues in its forthcoming final rule

revising part 2920.

The BLM received approximately 800

comments on the further proposed rule

from the filming and photography

industries, State and local government

agencies, individuals and

environmental organizations. The great

majority of the public comments

opposed the further proposed rule as

overly complex, specific, and

burdensome.

II. Final Rule and Response to

Comments

New section 2920.0–9

This section explains the information

collection requirements contained in

part 2920, and is added in the final rule

to comply with the publication

requirements of the Code of Federal

Regulations. The material in this section

appeared in the 1995 and earlier

editions of 43 CFR as a ‘‘Note’’ at the

beginning of Group 2900, and in the

preamble to the original proposed rule

published on November 21, 1990. This

material must appear in the regulation

text.

Amended section 2920.2–2 Minimum

impact permits.

New paragraph 2920.2–2(b) is added

to cover appeals of minimum impact

permit decisions. Appeals were

provided for in subpart 2924 in the 1990

proposed rule. In the further proposed

rule, part 2920 was reorganized so that

section 2921.8 pertained to appeals.

Designation of the appeals section in the

rule adopted today is dictated by the

organization of part 2920 as presently

constituted. Existing section 2920.2 is

an umbrella heading addressing publicinitiated land use proposals. Existing

section 2920.2–2 allows the issuance of

minimum impact permits in appropriate

circumstances. New paragraph 2920.2–

2(b) covers appeals of decisions on these

permits and makes it clear that its

provisions pertain only to minimum

impact permits issued under section

2920.2–2. This final rule does not affect

appeals of penalties for unauthorized

use and appeals of determinations that

land use proposals do not conform to

approved land use plans. New

paragraph 2920.2–2(b) may be

renumbered and amended when a

comprehensive final rule revising part

2920 is published.

The final rule published today

provides that all BLM permit decisions

made under section 2920.2–2 will be

effective immediately and remain in

effect during the time allowed for filing

an administrative appeal to the IBLA.

Section 2920.2–2 applies only to land

uses that have minimum impacts on the

public lands and resources. To meet this

standard, the use must be in

conformance with BLM resource

management plans or other plans for the

particular lands affected, and with BLM

policies and programs. The use must

also conform with local zoning

ordinances and all other legal

requirements, including the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The permitted use

must not cause appreciable damage or

disturbance to public lands, their

resources or improvements. The BLM

will not grant a permit under section

2920.2–2 if the permit proposal fails to

meet any one of these requirements.

Lease applications, and permit

proposals that do not meet the

minimum impact standards stated in

section 2920.2–2, are not effective

immediately upon issuance. For

example, if BLM finds that the proposed
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 122 / Monday, June 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 32353

use does not conform to resource

management plans, or local zoning,

BLM does not authorize the use until

the procedures contained in the

remainder of part 2920 have been

followed and until the applicant meets

its requirements.

Based on its recent experience in

administering the film permit program,

the BLM expects that the great majority

of permits issued under part 2920 will

meet the standards set forth in section

2920.2–2, and that problems arising

during the consideration of these

permits will be resolved by consultation

among BLM, the applicant, and other

interested persons. In some instances, a

person may wish to appeal and seek a

stay of BLM’s decision to issue a permit

under section 2920.2–2 until the appeal

is resolved. When the appeal is filed,

the procedures in 43 CFR 4.21(b) will be

applicable. However, the permit issued

will remain in effect until IBLA grants

a stay.

Most respondents addressing the date

a permit would become effective in the

further proposed rule wanted all

permits to be made effective

immediately and to remain in effect

while an administrative appeal is

pending. Respondents emphasized the

need to rely on the discretion of local

BLM managers to gather data and make

an informed decision, while complying

with the National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et

seq.), and other environmental laws. As

stated earlier, BLM anticipates that,

under the final rule, most permits will

meet the requirements for minimum

impact permits in section 2920.2–2(a),

and will be issued in full force and

effect under section 2920.2–2(b).

One respondent suggested that the

rule should provide appellants the

option of petitioning the State Director

for a stay, before appealing to IBLA, to

allow a more expeditious remedy. The

BLM has not adopted this suggestion in

the final rule because it would create an

unnecessarily cumbersome and

burdensome bureaucratic step in the

permit appeal process.

Finally, an editorial amendment is

made in section 2920.2–2 as it appeared

in the 1995 and earlier editions of 43

CFR. This section is redesignated as

paragraph (a) in the rule published

today. Because ‘‘permit’’ is defined as

an authorization in section 2920.0–5,

the word ‘‘authorization’’ in the phrase

‘‘permit for a land use authorization’’ is

redundant and has been removed in this

final rule.

III. Procedural Matters

The principal author of this final rule

is Jeff Holdren of the Use Authorization

Team, BLM, Washington, DC.

The BLM has determined in an

environmental analysis that this final

rule does not constitute a major Federal

action significantly affecting the quality

of the human environment, and that no

detailed statement pursuant to section

102(2)(C) of the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)) is required. The rule merely

simplifies and streamlines the permit

process for uses found to have

minimum environmental impact. Under

this rule, all applications for permits or

leases remain subject to environmental

analysis, and if an environmental

impact statement is necessary,

minimum impact permits will not be

issued.

This rule was not subject to review by

the Office of Management and Budget

under Executive Order 12866.

The rule will have little effect on costs

or prices for consumers, nor will there

be a need for increasing Federal, State,

or local agency budget or personnel

requirements. By promulgating

regulations that merely streamline the

permit issuance process, the rule will

result in little or no change in revenue

for the United States, although

improved efficiency should reduce

administrative costs. Any revenue

changes realized would not have a

measurable impact on the economy and

would not approach $100 million

annually. The rule will have no other

expected economic effects and contain

no increased costs to the United States

or users of the public lands.

For the same reasons, the Department

has determined under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that

the rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The rule favors

no demographic group, and imposes no

direct or indirect costs on small entities.

It merely expedites the process of

issuing permits.

Because the rule will result in no

taking of private property and no

impairment of property rights, the

Department certifies that this rule does

not represent a governmental action

capable of interference with

constitutionally protected property

rights, as required by Executive Order

12630.

BLM has determined that this rule is

not significant under the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, because

it will not result in the expenditure by

State, local, and tribal governments, in

the aggregate, or by the private sector, of

$100 million or more in any one year,

as stated above.

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by the Office of

Management and Budget under 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq..

List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 2920

Public lands, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 5, 1996.

Sylvia V. Baca,

Acting Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

Under the authority of Sections 102,

302, 303, 304, and 310 of the Federal

Land Policy and Management Act of

1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701, 1732, 1733, 1734

and 1740) part 2920, Group 2900,

Subchapter B, Chapter II of the Code of

Federal Regulations, is amended as

follows:

PART 2920—LEASES, PERMITS AND

EASEMENTS

1. The Note at the beginning of Group

2900 is removed.

2. The authority citation for part 2920

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1740.

3. Section 2920.0–9 is added to read

as follows:

§ 2920.0–9 Information collection.

(a) The information collection

requirements contained in Part 2920

have been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget under 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and assigned

clearance number 1004–0009. The BLM

will use the information in considering

land use proposals and applications.

You must respond to obtain a benefit

under Section 302 of the Federal Land

Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43

U.S.C. 1732).

(b) Public reporting burden for this

information is estimated to average 7.43

hours, including the time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data

sources, gathering and maintaining the

data needed, and completing and

reviewing the collection of information.

Send comments regarding this burden

estimate or any other aspect of this

collection of information, including

suggestions for reducing the burden, to

the Information Collection Clearance

Officer, Bureau of Land Management

(DW–101), Building 50, Denver Federal

Center, P.O. Box 25047, Denver,

Colorado 80225, and to the Office of

Management and Budget, Paperwork

Reduction Project, 1004–0009,

Washington, D.C. 20503.

4. Section 2920.2–2 is amended by

redesignating the existing text as
32354 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 122 / Monday, June 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

paragraph (a), by removing the word

‘‘authorization’’ from paragraph (a), and

by adding paragraph (b) to read as

follows:

§ 2920.2–2 Minimum impact permits.

* * * * *

(b) Permit decisions made under

paragraph (a) of this section take effect

immediately upon execution, and

remain in effect during the period of

time specified in the decision to issue

the permit. Any person whose interest

is adversely affected by a decision to

grant or deny a permit under paragraph

(a) of this section may appeal to the

Board of Land Appeals under part 4 of

this title. However, decisions and

permits issued under paragraph (a) of

this section will remain in effect until

stayed.

[FR Doc. 96–15994 Filed 6–21–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–84–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Parts 27 and 28

Transportation for Individuals With

Disabilities—Correction of

Organizational References

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Transportation proposes to amend its

rules to reflect a statutory change in the

name of the Department’s transit agency

from the Urban Mass Transportation

Administration (UMTA) to the Federal

Transit Administration (FTA).

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective

July 24, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant

General Counsel for Regulation and

Enforcement, Department of

Transportation, 400 7th Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20590. (202) 366–9306

(voice); (202)755–7687(TDD).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In his

Regulatory Reinvention Initiative

Memorandum of March 4, 1995,

President Clinton directed Federal

agencies to conduct a page-by-page

review of all their regulations and to

‘‘eliminate or revise those that are

outdated or otherwise in need of

reform.’’ In response to that directive,

the Department has undertaken a review

of its regulations as contained in 49 CFR

Parts 27 and 28. This rule is a result of

those efforts. Pursuant to the name

change mandated by Title III—Federal

Transit Act Amendments of 1991, of the

Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991 (P.L. 102–240),

the words ‘‘Urban Mass Transportation

Administration’’ are changed to the

words ‘‘Federal Transit Administration’’

in every instance in which those words

appear; and the letters ‘‘UMTA’’ are

changed to the letters ‘‘FTA’’ in every

instance in which those letters appear.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory

Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This rule is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866. It has not been

reviewed by the Office of Management

and Budget under that order. It is not

significant under the regulatory policies

and procedures of the Department of

Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040,

February 26, 1979). Because this rule is

editorial in nature, it involves no costs

and no economic evaluation has been

prepared.

In accordance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, the Department has

evaluated the effects of this action on

small entities. Based upon this

evaluation, the Department certifies that

the amendment will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

These amendments have been

analyzed in accordance with the

principles and criteria contained in

Executive Order 12612. The Department

has determined that the amendments do

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment. The

amendments will not have a substantial

direct effect on the States, on the

relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government.

National Environmental Policy Act

The Department has also analyzed the

amendments for the purpose of the

National Environmental Policy Act. The

amendments will not have any

significant impact on the quality of the

human environment.

Paperwork Reduction Act

There are no reporting or

recordkeeping requirements associated

with the amendments.

Notice and Opportunity for Public

Comment Unnecessary

Under the Administrative Procedure

Act (5 U.S.C. section 553), the

Department determines that notice and

an opportunity for public comment are

unnecessary and contrary to the public

interest. The amendments made in this

document are ministerial and will have

no substantive impact.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 27

Administrative practice and

procedure, Airports, Civil rights,

Highways and roads, Individuals with

disabilities, Mass transit, Railroads,

Reports and recordkeeping

requirements.

49 CFR Part 28

Administrative practice and

procedure, Civil rights, Equal

employment opportunity, Federal

buildings and facilities, Individuals

with disabilities, Mass transit,

Railroads, Reports and recordkeeping

requirements.

PART 27—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 27 is

revised to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 504 of the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794);

secs. 16(a) and 16(d) of the Federal Transit

Laws (49 U.S.C. Chapter 5301 et seq.); sec.

165(b) of the Federal-aid Highway Act of

1973 (49 U.S.C. 142nt.); the Americans with

Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101–

12213; and 49 U.S.C. 322).

§ 27.5 Definitions [Amended]

2. In the definition of ‘‘Head of

Operating Administration’’ in § 27.5,

remove the words ‘‘Urban Mass

Transportation Administration,’’ and in

their place, add the words ‘‘Federal

Transit Administration’’.

§ 27.19 Compliance with Americans with

Disabilities Act requirements and FTA

policy—[Amended]

3. The heading of § 27.19 is revised to

read as set forth above.

4. In § 27.19(b), remove the word

‘‘UMTA,’’ and add, in its place, the

word ‘‘FTA’’; remove the words ‘‘Urban

Mass Transportation Administration,’’

and add, in their place, the words

‘‘Federal Transit Administration.’’

PART 28—[AMENDED]

5. The authority citation for Part 28

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 794.

§ 28.103 Definitions [Amended]

6. In § 28.103, paragraph (g) of the

difinition of ‘‘Departmental Element’’,

remove the words ‘‘Urban Mass

Transportation Administration

(UMTA),’’ and in their place, add the

words ‘‘Federal Transit Administration

(FTA).’’