General Information Summary for Cost Recovery           

           g

23 February 2006

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Forest Service is adopting final regulations at 36 CFR 251.58 that will require applicants for and holders of special use authorizations to pay a fee for processing their special use applications and monitoring compliance with their associated special use authorizations.  The regulations allow the Forest Service to exercise its statutory authority to recover the agency’s administrative costs for providing these services, which benefit identifiable recipients.  A draft of the agency’s proposed cost recovery regulations was published in the Federal Register for notice and comment in November 1999 (64 FR 66342).  Out of about 30,000 entities that hold a special use authorization, the Forest Service received only 602 comments, mostly from individuals and small business entities that have never been exposed to cost recovery.

The most significant impacts will be those who will be required to pay cost recovery fees for the first time. Several changes have been made in the final rule to lessen its financial impacts on the impacted parties.  On the other hand, the benefits of customer standards and timely responses are expected to exceed the economic impacts.  

The Forest Service’s cost recovery regulations are consistent with those of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for its right-of-way and special recreation permit programs, which are comparable to the Forest Service’s special use program.  BLM has been collecting cost recovery fees for more than 20 years.

BACKGROUND

The Forest Service manages more than 72,000 permits, leases, and easements that authorize more than 180 types of special uses of National Forest System (NFS) lands.  Some of the more common types of special uses are communications facilities, road rights-of-way, telephone, power and fiberoptic lines, resorts, ski areas, outfitting and guiding activities, and recreation residences.  The Forest Service annually processes applications and issues authorizations for thousands of new or recurring special uses.

Processing applications for new uses and reauthorizing existing uses often can become time-consuming and expensive for the Forest Service and applicants and holders of authorizations.  With limited appropriations and staffing, it is increasingly difficult for the Forest Service to provide timely review of special use applications.  The agency also has found it increasingly difficult to ensure that construction and operation of facilities are in compliance with the terms and conditions of special use authorizations.  The result is a growing backlog of applications for new uses and a growing number of expired authorizations for existing uses.  

KEY MESSAGES AND TALKING POINTS

1.	Cost recovery fees benefit special use applicants and holders, the agency, and the general public.

Special Use Authorization Applicant

•	Cost recovery regulations establish a customer service standard that will improve the processing of special use applications and the monitoring of special use authorizations.

•	Applicants for and holders of special use authorizations will benefit from having additional resources to fund a more skilled and efficient workforce and from establishing enhanced customer service and program management.

•	The cost recovery regulations provide a dispute resolution process.

The agency

•	Implementing these regulations will allow the agency to focus more time and expertise on special uses and to more effectively meet the needs and expectations of applicants for and holders of special use authorizations.  

•	The additional funds realized from cost recovery will enhance the agency’s ability to decrease the backlog of expired authorizations, reducing the potential liability of the United States associated with uses that continue on NFS lands under expired authorizations.

The general public

•	Taxpayers will benefit in having some processing and monitoring costs paid for by the recipients of those services rather than with appropriated funds.  

•	NFS lands and resources will benefit from the agency’s enhanced ability to issue new authorizations with conditions that eliminate environmental impacts for uses that continue under expired authorizations.  

2.	New cost recovery regulations will affect some applicants and holders of special use authorizations  

•	Many applicants for or holders of special use authorizations will be affected by these regulations, unless their applications or authorizations are exempt from cost recovery fees under the rule.

•	Holders of facilities or services that are already authorized on NFS lands will continue to operate without the imposition of cost recovery fees, until the authorization for those facilities or service terminates or the holder proposes a new or modified use.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Q1:  What is the rationale for cost recovery fees?

The agency receives some 6,000 applications for special use authorizations each year. Each application is subject to some environmental analysis—a costly, time-consuming process.  

In 1999, the agency received congressional direction in Public Law 106-113 to “develop and implement a pilot program for the purpose of enhancing Forest Service administration of rights-of-way and other land uses.”   The outcome is to have more expeditious approval of special use authorizations.

Additionally, two audits of agency’s operations recommended that the agency (a) operate its special uses program in a more businesslike manner, and (b) develop regulations to exercise statutory authorities to recover from applicants and holders the agency’s costs to process special use applications and monitor compliance with special use authorizations.  

Q2:  Is cost recovery unique to the Forest Service?

No.  For more than 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management has collected cost recovery fees from applicants for and holders of authorizations to use public lands.  BLM has revised the cost recovery fees it assesses and collects for special recreation permits and right-of-way applications and authorizations.  The Forest Service cost recovery regulations are consistent with those BLM revisions.  

Q3:  Are the Forest Service’s cost recovery regulations consistent with those of BLM?

Yes.  The Forest Service and BLM use identical fee schedules and rates for processing and monitoring minor category cases, and apply the same principles in assessing, processing, and monitoring fees for major category cases.  

Q4:  What are some of the benefits of cost recovery regulations?

First, they will improve customer service in processing special use applications and monitoring special use authorizations.  The agency will have additional resources to fund a more skilled and efficient workforce to meet the needs and expectations of applicants for and holders of special use authorizations.  

Second, the agency can spend appropriated funds that were being used to process applications or monitor authorizations to address other special use management objectives.  The additional funds realized from cost recovery will enhance the agency’s ability to decrease the backlog of expired authorizations, which will reduce the potential liability of the United States associated with uses that continue on NFS lands under an expired authorization.  

Third, taxpayers will benefit in having at least some agency processing and monitoring costs, which are benefiting identifiable recipients and not the public at large, paid for by the recipients of those services rather than with appropriated funds. 

Q5:  What will the Forest Service do with the fees collected?

The agency is authorized to retain and spend the cost recovery fees it collects for processing special use applications and monitoring compliance with special use authorizations.  

All cost recovery funds will remain at the local agency offices that collect them and will be used for processing applications or monitoring authorizations.  

Q6:  I already pay a land use fee for my special use authorization.   Why should I also pay cost recovery fees?

Cost recovery fees are assessed to cover the administrative costs incurred by the Forest Service to process a special use application or monitor compliance with a special use authorization.  

Cost recovery fees are entirely separate from fees charged for use and occupancy of NFS lands.  Land use fees are charged to the holder of a special use authorization based on the market value of the use and occupancy of NFS lands.  

Q7:  I pay federal taxes.  Shouldn’t my taxes pay for processing and monitoring costs?

No.  The rule and its underlying authority identify those recipients who receive services and benefits from a Federal agency beyond those received by the public, should generally be charged for those services and benefits.

Q8:  Who must pay cost recovery fees? 

Cost recovery fees apply to applicants for or holders of special use authorizations, unless their applications or authorizations are exempt from cost recovery fees under the rule.  

Monitoring fees will apply to authorizations issued or amended on or after the effective date of the rule.

Q9:  Who is exempt from cost recovery fees?

Exemptions include the following:

•	Special use applications or authorizations that require 1 hour or less for the agency to process or monitor.
•	Applications or authorizations for recreation special uses that require 50 hours or less for the agency to process or monitor.
•	Applications or authorizations for noncommercial group use.

Q10:  How will cost recovery fees be determined?

Determination will be based on an estimate of the number of hours Forest Service personnel will spend on work necessary for processing an application and monitoring an authorization.  That estimate will be applied to the corresponding category and rate in the appropriate processing or monitoring fee schedule.

Q11:  Can an applicant or a holder dispute a cost recovery fee?

 Yes.  Applicants and holders may submit a written request for substitution of an alternative fee category or alternative estimated cost to the immediate supervisor of the authorized officer who made the initial determination.