FR 2025-01089

The Federal Register document outlines proposed revisions by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to its information collection processes concerning special use permits for activities on national wildlife refuges. These revisions aim to better align with the Paperwork Reduction Act by reducing the applicant burden and enhancing the clarity and efficiency of the permitting process.

General Summary

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is revising its forms used to collect information necessary for issuing special use permits. One major change is the introduction of a simplified application, Form 3-1383-EZ, designed to ease the process for individuals engaging in common non-commercial activities, such as recreational berry picking. This form is expected to reduce the complexity faced by applicants using the standard forms. Additionally, revisions include updates to existing forms like Form 3-1383-C to better capture activity specifics by removing rarely used options and improving question phrasing. Public commentary on these proposed changes is open until February 18, 2025.

Significant Issues or Concerns

There are a few notable issues within the document. Primarily, the complexity of legal references and jargon may pose a challenge for the general public to fully comprehend the changes without specialized knowledge. Regarding the new simplified form, while intended to make the application process less daunting, there might be ambiguity about when to use this form compared to the more detailed standard application. Such confusion could lead to improper filing, potentially delaying the application process.

Another concern is the lack of detailed justification regarding the $100 fee for commercial activity applications. While this cost might be standard, without clear transparency on how these funds are used or why they are necessary, applicants might view these fees as burdensome or unwarranted.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, the introduction of a more straightforward application process can positively impact the public by reducing the time and frustration associated with applying for permits. Simplified procedures mean that more individuals who wish to enjoy wildlife refuges responsibly can do so without wading through unnecessarily complex bureaucracy.

However, the inclusion of fees and the possible need for understanding multiple forms could deter some individuals, particularly those from lower economic backgrounds or less familiar with bureaucratic processes, from engaging in activities on refuge land.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For individuals and households, the changes present a mixed bag; while some may appreciate the streamlined process, others might struggle with understanding which form to use. Businesses and commercial entities, particularly those engaged in activities like event hosting or commercial filming, may benefit from clearer clarification and categorization of permits, but they also face continued financial obligations due to the application fees.

State, local, or tribal governments, on the other hand, might find the revised forms beneficial in ensuring compliance and monitoring the activities conducted on wildlife refuge lands more easily and efficiently.

In conclusion, while these changes aim to simplify and enhance the clarity of the permitting process, it is essential for the Service to ensure adequate public education and transparent communication to avoid possible misunderstandings or perceived inequities.

The document discusses activities related to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's proposed revisions to the collection of information for the National Wildlife Refuge Special Use Permit Applications and Reports. A significant aspect of this document pertains to the financial implications of these permits.

The total estimated nonhour burden cost associated with these applications is $370,100, primarily derived from a $100 fee for each application submitted by individuals and private sector respondents specifically for commercial use activities. This fee structure indicates a systematic approach to offset the administrative costs associated with processing these applications. However, the document does not provide a clear breakdown or justification for these fees, leaving the methodology behind the fee determination somewhat ambiguous.

Given the document's aim to gather public input and optimize information collection, the current fee structure might benefit from a more explicit public explanation. This would enhance transparency concerning the appropriation of the $100 application fee and address any concerns regarding its necessity or potential wastefulness.

Additionally, while the introduction of the new simplified application form, Form 3-1383-EZ, aims to ease the application process for non-commercial activities, there is no direct mention of how this form might impact the fees associated with submitting this form as opposed to the standard commercial forms. Identifying whether this simplified form could potentially reduce the financial burden on applicants would be beneficial.

Thus, although the document outlines the basic financial expectations related to these permits, it would be helpful for those affected to have a clearer understanding of the basis for the fees and any potential differences in financial obligations created by the new, simplified application process.