[Federal Register: May 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 98)]
[Notices]
[Page 29288-29294]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22my06-20]
[[Page 29288]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
RIN 0596-AB93
Forest Service Outdoor Recreation Accessibility Guidelines and
Integration of Direction on Accessibility Into Forest Service Manual
2330
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of final directive.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service is issuing a final directive as an
amendment to Forest Service Manual 2330, Publicly Managed Recreation
Opportunities to ensure that new or reconstructed developed outdoor
recreation areas on National Forest System lands are developed to
maximize accessibility, while recognizing and protecting the unique
characteristics of the natural setting. The amendment guides Forest
Service employees regarding compliance with the Forest Service Outdoor
Recreation Accessibility Guidelines (FSORAG). The amendment directs
that new or reconstructed outdoor developed recreation areas in the
National Forest System, including campgrounds, picnic areas, beach
access routes, and outdoor recreation access routes, comply with these
agency guidelines and applicable Federal accessibility laws,
regulations, and guidelines. The FSORAG is linked to and referenced in
this amendment.
The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
(Access Board) is preparing to publish for public notice and comment
proposed accessibility guidelines for outdoor developed areas that
would apply to Federal agencies subject to the Architectural Barriers
Act. When the Access Board finalizes its accessibility guidelines for
outdoor developed areas, the Forest Service will revise the FSORAG to
incorporate the Access Board's standards where those provisions are a
higher standard, as supplemented by the Forest Service. The
supplementation will ensure the agency's application of equivalent or
higher guidelines and universal design, as well as consistent use of
agency terminology and processes.
DATES: This final amendment is effective May 22, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The full text of the final amendment to FSM 2330 is
available electronically on the World Wide Web at http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives.
The administrative record for this final amendment is
available for inspection and copying at the office of the Director,
Recreation and Heritage Resources Staff, USDA Forest Service, 4th Floor
Central, Sidney R. Yates Federal Building, 1400 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except holidays. Those wishing to inspect the administrative record are
encouraged to call Janet Zeller at (202) 205-9597 beforehand to
facilitate access to the building.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janet Zeller, Recreation and Heritage
Resources Staff, USDA Forest Service, (202) 205-9597.
1. Background
Although the Forest Service is committed to ensuring accessibility
of agency facilities and programs to serve all employees and visitors,
as well as complying with the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA)
and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, agency accessibility
requirements for outdoor developed recreation areas have not been
integrated into the Forest Service Directives System.
The ABA requires facilities that are designed, constructed,
altered, or leased by, for, or on behalf of a Federal agency to be
accessible, as well as those funded in whole or in part by a Federal
agency. To emphasize the need for accessibility guidelines for outdoor
recreation areas, in 1993 the Forest Service developed Universal Access
to Outdoor Recreation: A Design Guide. This guidebook blended
accessibility into the recreation opportunity spectrum, ranging from
urban areas in full compliance with the Uniform Federal Accessibility
Standards, the ABA accessibility standards in place at that time, to
primitive and wilderness areas.
The Access Board is the federal agency responsible for issuing
accessibility guidelines for newly constructed and altered facilities
subject to the ABA. The Forest Service served on the Access Board's
Regulatory Negotiation Committee on Outdoor Developed Areas (Reg Neg
Committee). In 1999, the Reg Neg Committee completed draft
accessibility guidelines for outdoor recreation facilities and trails.
However, the Access Board was not able to complete the rulemaking
process for the guidelines at that time.
While awaiting completion of the rulemaking process for those
guidelines, the Forest Service determined that it needed accessibility
guidelines that would comply with the public notice and comment process
for Forest Service directives pursuant to 36 CFR part 216. These
guidelines, which are based on the Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines, meet the agency's need to integrate accessibility into the
development of outdoor recreation facilities and trails. The Forest
Service's guidelines incorporate universal design and agency
terminology and processes and in some respects establish higher
accessibility standards than the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
The Forest Service's guidelines are in two parts, the FSORAG and the
Forest Service Trail Accessibility Guidelines (FSTAG), both of which
are available at http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility
.
The Forest Service is issuing an amendment to Forest Service Manual
(FSM) 2330, ``Publicly Managed Recreation Opportunities,'' to require
compliance with the FSORAG. The Forest Service published this policy
for public notice and comment as a proposed amendment. Since this
policy has been subjected to public notice and comment through
publication in the Federal Register, the agency has decided to issue
the final policy as an amendment to the FSM.
The FSORAG will apply to newly constructed or altered camping
facilities, picnic areas, beach access routes, outdoor recreation
access routes, and other constructed features, including benches,
trash, recycling, and other essential containers, viewing areas at
overlooks, telescopes and periscopes, mobility device storage, pit
toilets, warming huts, and outdoor rinsing showers in the National
Forest System. The FSORAG is linked to and referenced in this
amendment.
The FSORAG maximizes the accessibility of outdoor developed
recreation areas for all people, while recognizing and protecting the
unique characteristics of the natural setting of each outdoor developed
recreation area within the National Forest System. The FSORAG
integrates the Forest Service policy of universal design to ensure the
development of programs and facilities to serve all people, to the
greatest extent possible. Universal design requires that all new or
reconstructed facilities and associated constructed features, rather
than only a certain percentage of those facilities, be accessible to
all people. Universal design provides for the integration of all people
in outdoor developed recreation areas, without separate or segregated
access for people with disabilities. In addition, the final amendment
clarifies internal agency procedures and policies related to the
accessibility of outdoor developed recreation areas, including
compliance with the FSORAG.
[[Page 29289]]
Like the proposed accessibility guidelines developed by the Reg Neg
Committee, the FSORAG establishes only one level of accessibility for
all outdoor developed recreation areas and provides for application of
conditions for departure and exceptions when necessary to preserve the
uniqueness of each recreation area and when application of the FSORAG
would cause a change in an area's setting. Compliance with the FSORAG
will not always result in facilities that are accessible to all persons
with disabilities because at some locations the natural environment
might prevent application of some of the FSORAG's technical provisions.
The Access Board plans to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) seeking public comment on proposed accessibility guidelines for
outdoor developed areas. The NPRM will contain the Reg Neg Committee's
draft guidelines and will apply to Federal agencies subject to the ABA.
The Forest Service will work with the Access Board and the other
federal land management agencies as the Access Board develops final
accessibility guidelines for outdoor developed areas. When the Access
Board finalizes its accessibility guidelines for outdoor developed
areas, the Forest Service will revise the FSORAG to incorporate the
Access Board's standards, as supplemented by the Forest Service. The
supplementation will ensure the agency's application of equivalent or
higher guidelines and universal design, as well as consistent use of
agency terminology and processes.
In a related notice published elsewhere in this part of today's
Federal Register, the agency is publishing notice of a final directive
to require compliance with the FSTAG, which will apply to trails that
are designed for hiker/pedestrian use. The FSORAG and the FSTAG are
both available electronically on the World Wide Web at http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility
.
Copies also may be obtained by writing to USDA, Forest Service,
Attn: Accessibility Program Manager, Recreation and Heritage Resources
Staff, Stop 1125, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-
0003.
2. Public Comments on the Proposed Interim Directive
On February 17, 2005, the Forest Service published the proposed
interim directive in the Federal Register (70 FR 8060) for public
notice and comment. The proposed interim directive was also posted
electronically on the World Wide Web on the Federal Register site at
http://www.fs.fed.us/programs/recreation/accessibility. The Forest
Service received 37 letters or electronic messages in response to the
proposed interim directive. Each respondent was grouped in one of the
following categories:
Business: 1
Federal Agencies: 6
Federal Agency Employees: 25
Individuals (unaffiliated or unidentifiable): 5
Most respondents supported the FSORAG. A few respondents were not
supportive. One respondent opposed access by people with disabilities
on Federally managed lands. Another respondent opposed any improved
access and was concerned that improved access would lead to more
hunting. Many respondents commented on specific sections of the FSORAG.
The agency appreciates the spelling, pagination, and other similar
nonsubstantive comments and has incorporated them into the FSORAG
posted on the Forest Service's accessibility Web page at http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility
.
General Comments
Many respondents appreciated that application of the FSORAG would
result in the natural setting being maintained. All respondents who
commented on format supported addressing outdoor developed recreation
areas in a separate document from trails, as well as integration of the
scoping and technical provisions in each document. Several respondents
also expressed appreciation for revisions in the order of the technical
provisions in the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
Comment. Most respondents supported the Forest Service's policy of
universal design. However, several respondents expressed concern that
under this policy, developed recreation areas would be forced into a
higher level of development or would all look alike, resulting in a
change to their setting.
Response. The Forest Service policy on universal design is defined
in FSM 2330.5 as ``the design of programs and facilities to be usable
by all people, to the greatest extent possible, while maintaining the
natural setting, providing access to programs and facilities for all,
without separate or segregated access for people with disabilities. New
or reconstructed buildings, developed recreation sites, associated
constructed features and alterations are to comply with the
accessibility guidelines.'' Therefore, all constructed features are
required to be accessible, rather than only a certain percentage of
those facilities, with few exceptions.
In the Forest Service's accessibility guidelines, the policy of
universal design is applied by starting with the assumption that all
areas and constructed features will be accessible to the extent
provided in the guidelines. In contrast to application of universal
design to picnic tables and toilet structures, which occupy a small
area, application of universal design to camping units and their
connecting routes (called ``outdoor recreation access routes'' or
``ORARs) raises a potential concern of over-development. However, under
the FSORAG, the uniqueness of the site is preserved because departure
from the guidelines is permitted when certain conditions exist at a
site. Therefore, not all camping units and ORARs may have to meet the
guidelines. The intent of universal design is met by maximizing
accessibility while maintaining the character and experience of the
setting, given the natural constraints of a site and its level of
development.
Page 16 of the Forest Service's Built Environment Image Guide
states: ``Under the ABA and other mandates, universal design requires
complete integration of accessibility within our facilities. As with
sustainable design elements, universal design principles applied to the
site or facility from the outset seldom, if ever, have any obvious
effect on the architectural character. When skillfully executed,
universally designed facilities fit seamlessly within the natural and
social environments.''
Comment. One respondent expressed confusion concerning turning
radius, clear floor or ground space, and other technical aspects of the
guidelines.
Response. Graphics will be included in the final FSORAG and in the
Forest Service Accessibility Guidebook for Outdoor Recreation and
Trails, which will be available by the spring of 2006 at http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility.
This guidebook will
provide a clear explanation of the accessibility guidelines, with
examples of best practices and illustrative photographs, graphics, and
design tips.
Comment. One respondent requested that technical provisions for
parking lots be included in the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG covers only the developed recreation elements
that are not addressed in other accessibility guidelines. Parking lots
are already addressed in the Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility
Standards (ABAAS).
Comment. One respondent requested that the text of all ABAAS
provisions cited in the technical provisions of the
[[Page 29290]]
FSORAG be integrated into the FSORAG, rather than appearing in an
appendix.
Response. The Forest Service has decided not to accept this
recommendation because many ABAAS provisions are cited repeatedly in
the FSORAG. For example, the reference to controls (ABAAS 308 and 309)
are referenced ten times in the FSORAG and appear multiple times on the
same page in several instances. If these provisions were included each
time they were cited, the FSORAG would become unwieldy, as well as
difficult to follow. Once a designer has consulted the same ABAAS
citation several times in the FSORAG appendix, the designer should
become familiar with the ABAAS requirement and not have to reference
the appendix as frequently.
Comment. One respondent believed that the FSORAG is not needed
because there are enough laws and guidelines dealing with
accessibility, such as the Americans With Disabilities Act, Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act, the ADAAG, and the new ABAAS.
Response. The FSORAG is needed because no other accessibility
guidelines that address outdoor developed recreation areas have
completed the rulemaking process.
Comments on Specific Sections of the FSORAG
Section 1.1 Conditions for Departure. This section contains the
conditions that would permit departure from a technical provision.
Comment. All but one respondent who commented on the phrase ``or
would not be consistent with the applicable forest land and resource
management plan'' in the second condition for departure were
supportive.
Response. The National Forest Management Act requires each national
forest and national grassland to develop a land management plan. These
plans are developed through extensive public participation and
generally are in effect for 10 to 15 years. These plans guide forest
management, and the Forest Service is prohibited from authorizing
actions that are inconsistent with the plans. The language regarding
consistency with the plan was included in the second condition for
departure because of this legal constraint.
Comment. One respondent requested a definition of the character,
setting, and experience of a recreation site. This respondent also
requested a quantifiable, formula-based method to determine whether
compliance with the guidelines would result in a substantial change to
these characteristics.
Response. The Forest Service uses the Recreation Opportunity
Spectrum (ROS) to characterize a recreation site. The ROS was developed
to identify more clearly the relationships among a site's physical
characteristics and the recreation activities and experience that the
public expects at the site. More information about the ROS is available
at http://roadless.fs.fed.us/data/pdfdocs/rosguide.pdf.
Determination of a substantial change to the characteristics of a
site from compliance with the FSORAG cannot be standardized or
quantified because the determination will vary greatly depending on the
specific circumstances and because recreational experience is
perception-based. ``Managing for recreation requires different kinds of
data and management concepts than does most other activities. While
recreation must have a physical base of land or water, the product--
recreation experience--is a personal or social phenomenon. Although the
management is resource based, the actual recreational activities are a
result of people, their perceptions, wants, and behavior'' (Final
Report of the Committee of Scientists for Implementation of Section 6
of the National Forest Management Act of 1976, February 22, 1979, 44 FR
26628, May 4, 1979). Since people's expectations differ depending on
the setting, it is impossible to quantify change, for example, by
saying that removing a certain number of trees per acre constitutes
substantial change.
The ROS assists landscape architects and recreation managers in
evaluating all the factors that affect recreational experiences,
including changes to the setting. For example, far more change can
occur at a developed site before the effect would be substantial than
at a site that has never been developed. Similarly, the surface at a
site that has been worn down from heavy use may need to be hardened to
accommodate the public's desire to recreate there and to protect the
surrounding environment, and a significant amount of change may occur
without substantially affecting the setting. However, at a site with a
worn-down surface that is located in an environmentally sensitive area,
the threshold of substantial change may be lower, and different
measures may need to be taken, such as precluding public use of parts
of the site or site rehabilitation instead of hardening. Any design
solution needs to consider the full range of managerial and
environmental needs.
Comment. One respondent requested a definition for ``significant
natural feature.''
Response. A significant natural feature generally has some special
meaning and is held in some esteem in its locale. That meaning may be
based on its uniqueness, rarity, beauty, historical significance, or
other factors. The FSORAG includes a discussion of significant natural
features. A significant natural feature may include a large rock,
outcrop, tree, or body of water that would block or interfere with or
would directly or indirectly be altered or destroyed by construction of
the outdoor recreation facility or element at that point. Significant
natural features also could include areas protected under Federal or
State laws, such as areas with threatened or endangered species or
wetlands that could be threatened or destroyed by full compliance with
the technical provisions in the FSORAG or areas where compliance would,
directly or indirectly, substantially harm natural habitat or
vegetation.
Significant cultural features include areas such as archaeological
sites, sacred lands, burial grounds and cemeteries, and tribal
protected sites. Significant historical features include properties
listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places and other places of recognized historic value. Significant
religious features include tribal sacred sites and other properties
held sacred by an organized religion.
Comment. One respondent requested a definition for ``significant
harm.''
Response. The FSORAG and the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines
utilize the term ``substantial harm,'' not ``significant harm.'' The
term ``substantial harm'' is used in the guidelines in conjunction with
the term ``significant feature'' in the first condition for departing
from the technical provisions. Therefore, this measure of the substance
of the change and the harm that change would cause is not to be taken
lightly. In this context, to cause ``substantial harm,'' the proposed
change would have to have a considerable negative effect on the feature
that has been identified as ``significant'' in that locale.
Comment. A number of respondents requested that ``infeasible'' be
replaced with ``impractical'' in the fourth condition for departure.
Response. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language,
4th edition (2000), cites ``impractical'' as the definition for
``infeasible.'' Since the words are interchangeable and ``impractical''
is used more commonly, the Forest Service has changed ``would not be
feasible'' to ``would be impractical'' in the section-by-section
[[Page 29291]]
analysis for the fourth condition for departure and in the fourth
condition for departure.
Section 1.2 Definitions. This section includes definitions of terms
used in the FSORAG, including terminology used by the Forest Service.
Camp Living Area and Parking Spur
Comment. All respondents who commented on the terminology used to
designate specific areas within a camping unit supported the use of
that terminology.
Response. For clarity, the FSORAG distinguishes between a camp
living area and a parking spur. A parking spur is divided into a
vehicle parking area and a driveway, each of which has its own
technical provisions. This differentiation allows the designer to
integrate a parking spur into the terrain. In many cases, designers
need the flexibility to work with each component separately to
accommodate a camp living area near a parking spur in a way that
respects the lay of the land. In some cases, the camp living space may
not be located immediately next to the parking spur because the terrain
will not permit it.
Developed Recreation Site and General Forest Area
Comment. All respondents who commented on the distinction between a
developed recreation site and a general forest area were supportive.
Response. The Forest Service distinguishes in its management
between developed recreation sites and general forest areas. The Forest
Service's Infrastructure database defines a developed site as ``a
discrete place containing a concentration of facilities and services
used to provide recreation opportunities to the public and evidencing a
significant investment in facilities and management under the direction
of an administrative unit in the National Forest System.'' Developed
recreation sites provide visitor convenience and comfort while
protecting natural resources. Most of the agency's recreational
improvements are located at developed recreation sites.
The Forest Service defines general forest areas as ``all lands
available for recreation use and outside of Wilderness, developed
sites, trails and administrative sites. Amenities or constructed
features inside general forest areas are primarily for resource
protection rather than for visitor comfort.'' While some constructed
features (such as picnic tables, fire rings, and toilet buildings) may
be provided in general forest areas, these constructed features are
usually for resource protection rather than visitor convenience. Any
constructed features in general forest areas must be designed
appropriately for the setting and must comply with the FSORAG's
accessibility requirements.
It is important to the recreating public that not all National
Forest System lands be developed to the same extent, level, or
intensity.
The FSORAG requires that any constructed feature (such as a picnic
table, fire ring, or bench) in a general forest area meet the
applicable technical provisions. However, a connection to an ORAR is
not required in general forest areas to ensure that these areas are not
developed beyond what is desirable from managers' and visitors'
perspectives. As a result, accessibility is maximized within the
constraints of the outdoor environment, without requiring a fundamental
change in the nature of the program.
Section 2.0 Outdoor Recreation Access Routes (ORARs). This section
of the FSORAG includes the technical specifications for the pathways
that connect constructed features in a picnic or camping area or at a
trailhead.
Comment. All respondents who commented on this provision supported
the exception for slope, which is permitted for alterations only, not
new construction. One respondent recommended that the same exception
for slope permitted in alteration of ORARs should also be permitted in
alteration of beach access routes.
Response. Due to the terrain where a campground or picnic area was
constructed, it may not be possible to meet the running slope
requirements of an ORAR during alteration of the site without
substantially changing the natural setting. Therefore, exceptions to
slope requirements for alteration of ORARs are necessary.
The FSORAG permits exceptions to slope requirements only when an
area is being reconstructed or altered. These exceptions are not
permitted in new construction because selection of the most appropriate
site is part of the new construction process.
While a campground may have been constructed some years ago at a
location that would not now be considered appropriate because of its
terrain, the location of a beach is generally determined by the best
location for accessing the water. Therefore, exceptions to slope
requirements for alteration of beach access routes are not appropriate.
Comment. All except one respondent who commented on the provision
exempting general forest areas from the requirement for ORARs supported
the exception.
Response. The FSORAG states that ORARs are not required in general
forest areas. In general forest areas, a path connecting associated
constructed facilities, as well as a path connecting them to a trail,
must comply with the technical provisions for a trail enumerated in
section 7.0 of the FSTAG. These paths are not ORARs and are not
required to meet the technical provisions for ORARs in the FSORAG.
ORARs are not required in general forest areas because the resulting
additional construction and site modification would substantially alter
the nature of the setting.
While some constructed features (such as picnic tables, fire rings,
and toilet buildings) may be provided in general forest areas, these
constructed features are usually for resource protection rather than
visitor convenience. Any constructed features in general forest areas
must be designed appropriately for the setting and must comply with the
FSORAG so that the facilities can be used by persons with a disability.
Comment. Two respondents believed that handrails on ORARs are not
appropriate in a recreation setting.
Response. The agency agrees. References to handrails on ORARs have
been deleted from the FSORAG, just as handrails on ORARs are not
included in the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
Comment. One respondent believed that because all picnic tables in
a picnic area must be accessible, each picnic table would have to be
located along an ORAR, which would result in numerous pathways through
picnic areas. One respondent believed that the Reg Neg Committee's
draft guidelines would require fewer picnic tables to be located along
an ORAR than the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG does not require all picnic tables to be
located along an ORAR. Rather, the FSORAG requires that 20 percent of
all picnic tables at a site be located along an ORAR. This requirement
yields the same density of picnic tables located along ORARs as the Reg
Neg Committee's draft guidelines. The Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines require that 50 percent of all picnic tables at a site, but
no fewer than two, be accessible, and that 40 percent of these
accessible picnic tables be located along an ORAR. The FSORAG
requirement of 20 percent of 100 percent of the picnic tables at a site
equates to the requirement in the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines
of 40 percent of 50 percent of the picnic
[[Page 29292]]
tables at a site. For example, under the FSORAG, if a site has 8 picnic
tables, 8 x .20 or 1.6 (rounded up to 2) of them must be located along
an ORAR. Under the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines, if a site has
8 picnic tables, 8 x .50 or 4 must be accessible, and 4 x .40 or 1.6
(rounded up to 2) of those 4 must be located along an ORAR.
Section 2.7 Protruding Objects. This section includes the
requirements for clear headroom on a trail.
Comment. All respondents who commented on protruding objects
supported the exception to the requirement for clear headroom or a
warning barrier.
Response. The FSORAG provides an exception to the requirement for
80 inches of clear headroom if a warning barrier is installed. However,
on a narrow pathway through a cave or through certain types of trees,
such as the walkway through the historic cherry trees around the Tidal
Basin in Washington, DC, conditions may make it impossible to place a
warning barrier and permit passage. In those types of situations, the
FSORAG permits an exception to the requirement for 80 inches of clear
headroom and installation of a warning barrier. This exception must be
retained to address unusual situations in the natural environment.
Section 3.0 Beach Access Routes. This section includes technical
specifications for pedestrian routes that access beaches.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 4.0 Constructed Features for Developed Picnic Areas. This
section includes technical specifications for picnic units in developed
recreation areas.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 5.1 Parking Spurs. This section includes technical
specifications for parking spurs in camping units.
Comment. All respondents who commented on the distinction between a
camping unit and a parking spur and the further breakdown of a parking
spur into parking and driveway areas were supportive of those
distinctions.
Response. The FSORAG identifies two typical components of a camping
unit: (1) A camp living area and (2) a parking spur. A parking spur is
further divided into a vehicle parking area and a driveway. These
distinct components are identified to facilitate application of the
scoping requirements and to integrate parking spurs into camping units
in an environmentally sensitive manner that maximizes accessibility.
Comment. Many respondents agreed that the width of an accessible
parking spur may have an impact on the natural setting.
Response. The FSORAG requires the same number of 20-foot-wide
parking areas for recreational vehicles that are required under the Reg
Neg Committee's draft guidelines. The rest of the parking spurs in a
campground must be 16 feet wide, where that width would not
substantially change the nature of the setting. If that width is not
feasible because of the presence of a condition for departure, the
width may be reduced to13 feet. If the 13-foot width would not be
possible without substantially changing the nature of the setting, the
parking spur is exempt from the technical provisions.
This technical provision provides the flexibility to design
accessible parking spurs, while taking into account varying terrain.
This flexibility in design results in facilities that are not only
universally usable, but also respectful of the natural environment,
which is a primary reason people recreate outdoors.
Unlike the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines, the FSORAG
includes technical provisions for parking spur driveways. Because
parking spur driveways are not required to be as wide as parking spurs
at the end of the driveways that are adjacent to the living area,
parking spur driveways have less visual impact on the natural setting
than parking spurs. The FSORAG takes this difference into account, thus
maximizing accessibility while ensuring the best environmental fit on
the ground.
Comment. Several respondents thought the parking chart in Figure
5.1 of the February 2005 draft of the FSORAG was confusing.
Response. The Forest Service agrees. That chart has been removed
from the FSORAG. The only parking chart that appears in the current
version of the FSORAG addresses the minimum number of 20-foot-wide
parking spurs for recreational vehicles that is required. The FSORAG
requires the same percentage of 20-foot-wide parking spurs for
recreational vehicles as the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines.
Section 5.2 Tent pads and platforms. This section includes the
technical specifications for tent pads and platforms.
Comment. All respondents who commented on this provision supported
the flexibility in the FSORAG to determine whether edge protection
should be required.
Response. The FSORAG states that edge protection, where provided,
is to be at least 3 inches high, whereas the Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines require that all tent platforms have 3-inch edge protection.
The FSORAG allows the designer to determine where edge protection
should be provided for safety and where edge protection is not needed
due to the design or location of a tent platform or absence of a drop-
off that would preclude access. Thus, the FSORAG requires edge
protection only where it is necessary.
Comment. All respondents who commented on the tent pad and platform
provisions supported them as they appear in the FSORAG.
Response. The FSORAG requires that at least 20 percent of the tent
pads or platforms provided at a developed recreation site meet the
FSORAG's technical provisions and be connected to an ORAR. The FSORAG
requires 5 percent of the tent pads or platforms in a general forest
area to meet the technical provisions, but does not require connection
to an ORAR in a general forest area. This difference in scoping and the
requirement for connection to an ORAR reflects the differences between
developed recreation sites and general forest areas. The agency agrees
with the respondent who stated that this distinction gives the designer
a realistic and reasonable ability to comply with accessibility
requirements. Where an area's natural terrain permits, 100 percent of
the tent pads or platforms may be accessible and connected to an ORAR.
Section 5.3 Fire Rings. This section includes the technical
specifications for fire rings.
Comment. All except one respondent who commented on this section
supported the exception in general forest areas to the requirement for
the height of the fire-building surface. The dissenting respondent
suggested that rock circles in general forest areas be piled higher and
that soil be added inside the rocks to achieve the height required for
the fire-building surface at developed recreation sites.
Response. To permit the use of a circle of rocks or other low-
profile campfires in remote or wilderness settings, the FSORAG provides
an exception in general forest areas to the height of the fire-building
surface if one or more conditions for departure exist. Without this
exception, the fire-building surface in a fire ring would have to be at
least 9 inches above the ground, which could have a substantial
negative impact in a wilderness setting. The Forest Service is not
accepting the suggestion to provide for rock circles in general forest
areas to be piled higher and for soil to be added inside the rocks to
achieve a 9-inch height for the fire-
[[Page 29293]]
building surface because the agency is concerned about the safety of
such a structure.
Comment. Several respondents expressed concern that the design for
accessible fire rings is unsightly and therefore unpopular.
Response. The primary accessibility requirement for fire rings is
that the fire-building surface be at least 9 inches above the ground.
This requirement does not preclude fire ring designs that are
innovative, attractive, and appropriate in developed recreation
settings. Fifteen years ago, the most common fire ring design that
supposedly was accessible looked like a barrel. Today the most common
accessible fire ring design is not unattractive. Designers can be
creative and check other sources for appropriate designs that fit the
developed recreation setting and that are accessible.
Section 5.4 Wood Stoves and Fireplaces. This section includes
technical specifications for wood stoves and fireplaces at developed
recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 5.5 Utilities. This section includes technical
specifications for utilities at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 5.6 Utility Sinks. This section includes technical
specifications for utility sinks at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.1 Benches. This section includes technical specifications
for benches at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.2 Trash and Recycling Containers. This section includes
technical specifications for trash and recycling containers.
Comment. One respondent recommended that bear-proof storage
containers be addressed in the FSORAG because none with accessible
controls are readily available.
Response. The Forest Service agrees. The phrase, ``other essential
containers'' has been added to the heading and text of section 6.2.
``Other essential containers'' includes trash, recycling, food storage,
and other animal-resistant containers.
Section 6.3 Viewing Areas at Overlooks. This section includes
technical specifications for viewing areas at overlooks.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.4 Telescopes and Periscopes. This section includes
technical specifications for telescopes and periscopes.
Comment. All respondents who commented on this section supported
the provision that does not appear in the Reg Neg Committee's draft
guidelines for telescopes and periscopes.
Response. Unlike the Reg Neg Committee's draft guidelines, the
FSORAG requires maneuvering space at each accessible telescope and
periscope. Maneuvering space is needed to ensure that telescopes and
periscopes are accessible to a person who uses a wheelchair.
Section 6.5 Mobility Device Storage. This section includes
technical specifications for storage facilities for mobility devices at
developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.6 Pit Toilets. This section includes technical
specifications for pit toilets.
Comment. All except one respondent who commented on this section
supported the specifications in the FSORAG, including the exception to
the requirement for a level entrance into a pit toilet. One respondent
believed that there should never be an exception to the requirement for
a level entrance to a pit toilet, regardless of the difficulties
presented by the structure or location of a pit toilet's waste disposal
system.
Response. The FSORAG requires that the clear floor or ground space
adjacent to a pit toilet comply with ABAAS requirements for toilets.
The FSORAG clarifies that pit toilets are permitted only in general
forest areas and that privacy screens rather than walls are commonly
used for pit toilets in remote areas. To address safety concerns, the
agency clarified the FSORAG to provide that grab bars are to be
installed only on walls that will withstand 250 pounds of force, in
accordance with ABAAS. In addition, the FSORAG now specifies the
orientation of the riser inside the pit toilet structure to maximize
accessibility of the toilet's interior. These additions will ensure
that pit toilets are designed and installed to be accessible for people
with disabilities.
The FSORAG permits exceptions to the requirement for a level
entrance into a pit toilet. Providing for exceptions is necessary
because some pit toilet floors have to be located above the ground due
to operation and maintenance requirements of the toilet's waste
disposal system. Where the entrance cannot be located at ground level,
a trail or ramp, if feasible, must be provided from the ground to the
entrance. Where a trail or ramp is not feasible and no other
alternative is possible because of the presence of one or more
conditions for departure, transfer steps meeting specifications similar
to those for play areas in Chapter 10 of ABAAS may be provided. These
exceptions allow trail planners and facility designers to work with an
area's topography and other physical characteristics, rather than
forcing planners and designers to alter the natural setting
unreasonably.
Section 6.7 Warming Huts. This section includes technical
specifications for warming huts at developed recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
Section 6.8 Outdoor Rinsing Showers. This section includes
technical specifications for outdoor rinsing showers at developed
recreation sites.
No comments were received on this section.
3. Regulatory Certifications
Environmental Impact
Section 31.12, paragraph 2, of Forest Service Handbook (FSH)
1909.15 (67 FR 54622, August 23, 2002) excludes from documentation in
an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement ``rules,
regulations, or policies to establish Service-wide administrative
procedures, program processes, or instructions.'' The agency concludes
that this amendment falls within this category of actions and that no
extraordinary circumstances exist which would require preparation of an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.
Regulatory Impact
This amendment has been reviewed under USDA procedures and
Executive Order 12866 on regulatory planning and review. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that the amendment is
significant because of its relationship to the accessibility guidelines
to be established by the Access Board. Accordingly, this amendment has
been reviewed by OMB pursuant to Executive Order 12866. A cost and
benefits analysis of this action was developed and is available at
http://www.fs.fed.us/programs/recreation/accessibility. The remaining
portions of the proposed amendment, which addressed other aspects of
the agency's accessibility program not related to the accessibility
guidelines, were not deemed significant by OMB and were issued as a
final interim directive on July 13, 2005.
Moreover, this amendment has been considered in light of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 602 et seq.). It
[[Page 29294]]
has been determined that this amendment will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by
the act because the amendment will not impose record-keeping
requirements on them; it will not affect their competitive position in
relation to large entities; and it will not affect their cash flow,
liquidity, or ability to remain in the market. The amendment will
establish accessibility guidelines that will apply internally to the
Forest Service and that will have no direct effect on small businesses.
No small businesses have been awarded contracts for construction or
reconstruction of recreation facilities covered by these accessibility
guidelines.
No Takings Implications
This amendment has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 12630. It has been determined
that this amendment does not pose the risk of a taking of private
property.
Civil Justice Reform
This amendment has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988 on
civil justice reform. After adoption of this amendment, (1) All State
and local laws and regulations that conflict with this amendment or
that impede its full implementation will be preempted; (2) no
retroactive effect will be given to this amendment; and (3) it will not
require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in
court challenging its provisions.
Unfunded Mandates
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2
U.S.C. 1531-1538), which the President signed into law on March 22,
1995, the agency has assessed the effects of this amendment on State,
local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. This amendment
will not compel the expenditure of $100 million or more by any State,
local, or Tribal government or anyone in the private sector. Therefore,
a statement under section 202 of the act is not required.
Federalism and Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
The agency has considered this amendment under the requirements of
Executive Order 13132 on federalism and has determined that the
amendment conforms with the federalism principles set out in this
Executive Order; will not impose any compliance costs on the States;
and will not have substantial direct effects on the States, the
relationship between the Federal government and the States, or the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Therefore, the agency has determined that no further
assessment of federalism implications is necessary.
Moreover, this amendment does not have Tribal implications as
defined by Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments,'' and therefore advance consultation with
Tribes is not required.
Energy Effects
This amendment 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
amendment does not constitute a significant energy action as defined in
the Executive Order.
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public
This amendment does not contain any record-keeping or reporting
requirements or other information collection requirements as defined in
5 CFR part 1320 that are not already required by law or not already
approved for use. Accordingly, the review provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 do not apply.
Dated: April 10, 2006
Dale N. Bosworth,
Chief, Forest Service.
[FR Doc. E6-7775 Filed 5-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P