May 3, 2002

The Honorable Gale A. Norton
Secretary of the Interior
U.S. Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20240

Subject:  The National Park Service's Supplemental
          Environmental Impact Statement over the Snowmobile
          Phase out in Yellowstone Park

Dear Secretary Norton:

The Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business
Administration (Advocacy) was established by Congress
pursuant to Public Law 94-305 to represent the views of
small business before Federal agencies and Congress.  One of
the primary functions of Advocacy is to measure the impacts
of Government regulation on small entities and make
recommendations for eliminating excessive or unnecessary
regulation of small entities.

On March 29, 2002, the National Park Service published a
Notice of Availability for the Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement (SEIS) on the phase-out of snowmobile use
in Yellowstone and two other national parks.(1) The SEIS
provides the information upon which the Park Service
proposes to base the decision whether to reconsider the
phase-out or not.  The SEIS also presents alternatives using
the final rule, which phases out snowmobiles, as the
baseline.

Advocacy previously filed a comment letter concerning the
final snowmobile rule on April 16, 2001.  The subject of
today's letter is to raise new questions, based on the SEIS,
about the Park Service's decision to certify the final rule,
in lieu of preparing the Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis or FRFA.  Section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA)(2) allows an Agency head to certify the rule if it
is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, but there must be a
factual basis for the decision.

The RFA certification was based on facts presented in the
FEIS, but the SEIS provides information that contradicts the
FEIS.  For example, the SEIS shows that the small entity
impacts, which were already extreme when compared with their
revenue, are even greater than had been assumed.  It also
shows that alternatives to limit the number and type of
snowmobiles in these parks, alternatives Advocacy supported,
would actually cost significantly less than the rule, which
would phase out all snowmobile use.  SEIS, Table S-2.

The RFA certification is based on the FEIS, however new
facts regarding the impact were revealed in the SEIS.  For
this reason, Advocacy recommends that the Park Service
withdraw the certification and amend it in light of the
SEIS.  If after reconsideration, the Park Service finds that
the rule will not be expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, the Agency
may certify the rule but must provide a factual basis for
the decision.  Otherwise, the Park Service must prepare a
FRFA and release it for public comment.
Sincerely,

Shawne Carter McGibbon
       for Thomas M. Sullivan
Thomas M. Sullivan
Chief Counsel for Advocacy


Austin R. Perez
Assistant Advocate

ENDNOTES

1.  See 67 Fed. Reg. 15223, for the notice.  The SEIS can be
found at www.nps.gov/grte/winteruse/intro.htm.
2,  See 5 U.S.C.  601, et. seq.