95-8599. National Capital Region Parks; Special Regulations  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 67 (Friday, April 7, 1995)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 17639-17649]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-8599]
    
    
    
    [[Page 17639]]
    
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
    
    National Park Service
    
    36 CFR Part 7
    
    RIN 1024-AC14
    
    
    National Capital Region Parks; Special Regulations
    
    AGENCY: National Park Service, Department of the Interior.
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This final rule amends the National Capital Region Parks 
    regulations to limit sales on Federal park land to books, newspapers, 
    leaflets, pamphlets, buttons and bumper stickers, and to set standards 
    for sites, stands and structures used in such sales. By this amendment, 
    the National Park Service (NPS) also rescinds a sales enforcement 
    guideline that allowed the sales of T-shirts that contained a message 
    directly related to a cause or activity. This final rule is adopted 
    because such sales have adversely impacted Federal park land in ways 
    described further below, resulting in discordant commercialism and 
    creating a ``flea market'' atmosphere in the National Parks of the 
    National Capital Region. Finally, pursuant to Public Law 103-279, the 
    NPS no longer has operating responsibilities for the John F. Kennedy 
    Center for the Performing Arts. Accordingly, this final rule removes 
    reference to the Center from the sales regulation.
    
    DATES: The final rule becomes effective May 8, 1995.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra Alley, Associate Regional 
    Director, Public Affairs and Tourism, National Capital Region, National 
    Park Service, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW., Washington, DC 20242, telephone 
    (202) 619-7223; Richard G. Robbins, Assistant Solicitor, National 
    Capital Parks, Office of the Solicitor, Department of the Interior, 
    Washington, D.C. 20240, telephone: (202) 208-4338.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        On May 18, 1994, the NPS proposed a rule that would limit sales to 
    books, newspapers, leaflets and pamphlets on park land of the National 
    Capital Region (59 FR 25855). Copies of the proposed rule have been 
    distributed to demonstration and special event applicants, posted and 
    handed out in the National Capital Region's permit office. Copies were 
    also mailed to past and current demonstration and special event 
    applicants and other interested parties. In addition, the proposed 
    regulation has also received media coverage in stories about the 
    problems caused by sales activities.
        Prior to this proposed rulemaking, the majority of applicants who 
    sought to engage in demonstrations or special events on park land 
    within the National Capital Region requested permission to engage in 
    sales activities related to their event. As detailed in the proposed 
    rule dated May 18, 1994, the National Capital Region of the NPS adopted 
    an enforcement guideline reflecting an administrative determination 
    that the term ``newspapers, leaflets, and pamphlets'' under 36 CFR 
    7.96(k) may cover certain other designated written material. 
    Specifically, under the guideline (a copy of which routinely has been 
    made available to all applicants), allowable materials have included 
    books, bumper stickers, buttons, posters and T-shirts which display a 
    message directly related to the cause or activity. The sale of patches, 
    jewelry, hats, license plates, coffee mugs, flags, records, tapes, 
    pictures, decals and lapel pins has not been permitted under the 
    enforcement guideline.
        Adverse park impacts generated by the sale of T-shirts under the 
    enforcement guideline caused the NPS to propose an amendment to the 
    sales regulation. Since then, the amount of T-shirt sales activities on 
    park land in the National Capital Region has increased significantly, 
    and the adverse impacts associated with such sales decidedly worsened.
        For example, during calendar year 1994, 4,771 permits were granted 
    for demonstrations or special events and the majority of these involved 
    requests for associated T-shirt sales. After publication of the 
    proposed regulations in May 1994, the Service received 976 T-shirt 
    applications during the remainder of 1994. In 1992, the Service 
    received 3,232 demonstration and special event applications, and, in 
    1993, there were 3,323. Through March 8, 1995, the NPS had received 
    3,092 applications, 90% of which sought T-shirt sales opportunities. 
    For the same period of 1994, the NPS had received 2,884 applications, 
    an increase of more than 200 applications.
        Application numbers alone do not tell the whole story because many 
    applications apply for multiple dates and sites. For example, on 
    February 28, 1995, the Region received 50 demonstration/special event 
    applications. All sought T-shirt sales permission. Thirty-one of these 
    applications requested single T-shirt sales locations, and 19 applied 
    for multiple locations. The total number of sites applied for in the 50 
    applications was 112.
        For the past several years, the NPS has routinely issued permits 
    for demonstrations and associated sales near the Vietnam Veterans 
    Memorial. But particularly throughout the past year, applicants have 
    sought and gained permission to sell message-bearing T-shirts for 
    repeated demonstration activities for a number of very general causes 
    such as ``conservation of the environment,'' ``to promote and broadcast 
    cultural and environmental messages,'' ``environment protection,'' 
    ``promote the salvation of the environment,'' ``Washington DC 
    statehood,'' and, ironically, ``Preserve National Parks.''
        The demonstrator/vendors sales, which began near the Vietnam 
    Veterans Memorial, have now spread throughout Washington's Monumental 
    Core. As explained in the preamble to the proposed regulation, the 
    increase in applications for demonstration/sales sites on the limited 
    amount of park land available near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial forced 
    the NPS to designate additional demonstration/sales sites. Facing ever-
    increasing numbers of applicants for sales activities, the NPS 
    designated additional sites adjacent to the popular memorials, 
    monuments and museums on the National Mall, Washington Monument grounds 
    and at the Jefferson Memorial.
        A fundamental consideration in this rulemaking is the impact of 
    sales activities on the park land of the National Capital Region. This 
    park land enjoys a rich diversity of uses. Located at the seat of the 
    Federal Government, it hosts a wide variety of demonstration 
    activities, ranging from the lone protester to hundreds of thousands of 
    participants championing and opposing all manner of causes.
        Visitors are also drawn to the great monuments of the Nation's 
    Capital--most notably, the Lincoln Memorial, Jefferson Memorial, the 
    Vietnam Veterans Memorial and the Washington Monument--which together 
    with the Capitol, the National Mall and the White House area, form 
    Washington's Monumental Core. The National Mall is an integral part of 
    the original L'Enfant Plan for the City of Washington. It is the single 
    most significant public park and open space, providing an unencumbered 
    greensward between the U.S. Capitol to the Washington Monument and the 
    Lincoln Memorial, a distance of 21 blocks. Visited by millions of 
    citizens and international travelers, the National Mall provides a 
    formal work of landscape architecture of monumental proportions and 
    provides the unifying element for the carefully placed, diverse 
    architectural symbols, [[Page 17640]] repositories and shrines of the 
    heritage of our democracy on and along its length. As part of 
    Washington's Monumental Core, it is unquestionably the most significant 
    park area in the Nation's Capital. Visitors to the National Mall are 
    drawn by its proximity to the great monuments of the Nation's Capital 
    as well as by its vistas and natural beauty. Visitors may enjoy the 
    sights and activities of Washington, or they may seek time for quiet 
    reflection in the midst of this great park.
        Flanking this core are world-recognized museums such as the 
    National Air and Space Museum, the National Museum of American History, 
    the National Museum of Natural History, the Freer Gallery, the National 
    Museum of African Art, the Arts and Industries Building, the Arthur M. 
    Sackler Gallery, the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, the West 
    and East Wings of the National Gallery of Art, and the United States 
    Botanic Garden.
        These monuments, memorials and museums, together with the 
    commanding vistas and natural beauty, draw several million visitors 
    annually. In 1994, for example, visitation at the Vietnam Veterans 
    Memorial was 1,475,044, for the Washington Monument 1,000,270, and for 
    the Jefferson Memorial 522,339. The Smithsonian's National Air and 
    Space Museum had 8,494,193 visitors, while its Museum of National 
    History had 5,756,861.
        Many other parks located throughout the National Capital Region 
    draw hundreds of thousands of visitors. They accommodate recreational 
    activities including picnics, softball, and field hockey. Park visitors 
    may enjoy the sights and activities of Washington and its environs and 
    also seek time for quiet reflection in all of these areas.
        Generally, applicants for demonstrations or special events who also 
    seek to engage in T-shirt sales submit applications in twenty-one day 
    increments (the maximum number of days authorized by NPS regulation). 
    See 36 CFR 7.96(g)(5)(iv)(B). Many applicants routinely submit 
    successive applications in twenty-one day increments for periods of 
    several months; one group submitted applications to sell T-shirts on 
    park land through the end of 1996.
        The sales that first occurred under the enforcement guideline 
    several years ago were made in the context of large scale, one-day 
    demonstrations. The sales activities, like the demonstrations, lasted 
    but a single day and the T-shirts left with the demonstrators. The 
    current T-shirt sales are far different.
        Vendors sell their wares day-in and day-out. The sales occur not 
    between organizers and participants at demonstrations, but between 
    commercial vendors seeking customers from among non-demonstrating 
    visitors at adjacent national monuments.
        The consequence of this system of administration has been the 
    proliferation of T-shirt sales throughout the park land of the National 
    Capital Region. It is now commonplace to see large quantities of T-
    shirts displayed and stored on park land at various demonstration/sales 
    sites, not only near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial where the practice 
    first arose, but also on park land the entire length of Washington's 
    Monumental Core. T-shirt stands now confront park visitors as they 
    approach many of the Nation's monuments, memorials and museums. They 
    are located at the base of the Washington Monument, in front of the 
    Jefferson Memorial, near the National Holocaust Memorial Museum, and on 
    the Mall adjacent to the Museum of Natural History, the Smithsonian 
    Castle and the Smithsonian Metro station. Increasing commercialization 
    within the sales sites has been marked by the use of life-size torso 
    mannequins and commercial clothing racks. As the Smithsonian 
    Institution observed in its comments on the proposed regulation:
    
        [T]he number of vendors on the Mall increase[d] dramatically 
    especially within the last two years. Rather than occasionally 
    observing vendors associated with demonstrations or special events, 
    we note that vending near Smithsonian museums is now constant 
    activity, [and the] selling of products is done mostly by the same 
    groups.
    
    Analysis of and Response to Comments and Rationale for Final 
    Regulation
    
    A. Overview
    
        The NPS received 4,626 written comments (some accompanied by 
    photographs) regarding the proposed rule. Most were from individuals 
    not indicating a particular affiliation or interest. Of the others, 25 
    were from veterans organizations, seven from other organizations, 73 
    were from veterans or relatives of veterans, four from representatives 
    of the legal community, and one from a past Director of the NPS. The 
    Department appreciates the time and effort expended on these comments.
        606 comments supported the proposed rule as drafted. Among these 
    were four different preprinted signed letters from 170 individuals as 
    well as one petition signed by 170 individuals. Another 1,438 
    identical, unsigned letters were received bearing the names and 
    addresses of different persons purporting to support the proposed rule 
    as drafted. The organization responsible for submitting the letters has 
    requested that the NPS disregard all of these unsigned letters because 
    it failed to obtain the consent of the persons named. Accordingly, the 
    NPS has not given these unsigned letters any weight in its decision 
    making.
        2,582 comments opposed the proposed rule as drafted. Among these 
    were 2,415 identical, preprinted, signed post cards. (A sampling of 298 
    of these revealed that 43, or 14%, were duplicate submissions.) One 
    petition in opposition to the proposed rule was signed by 130 
    individuals. One comment opposed the proposed regulation as drafted 
    because it was ``exceptionally lenient and generous''; another 
    recommended an outright ban on all sales.
        There was one request for a public hearing. Given the large number 
    of responses received as well as their breadth and scope, however, the 
    NPS does not believe a public hearing would add to the range of views 
    and solutions considered.
    
    B. Comments in Support of the Proposed Rule Based Upon Degradation of 
    the Park Visitation Experience and Impact on Park Physical Environment
    
        Many of the 606 comments in support of the proposed rule agreed 
    with the NPS's assessment of the damages to park land caused by sales 
    activities. Comments frequently used words such as ``honky-tonk,'' 
    ``open air market,'' ``flea market,'' ``shopping mall,'' ``bazaar,'' 
    ``circus,'' ``carnival,'' ``eye sore,'' ``national embarrassment,'' and 
    ``disgraceful'' to describe park land being used for T-shirt and other 
    sales activities. One comment, by a professor of urban design, stated:
    
        Your characterization of the current situation at those sites as 
    having resulted in ``discordant commercialization, creating a `flea 
    market' atmosphere on park land'' resonates the feelings of all 
    concerned with the dignity and elegance of memorial statements in 
    the public domain.
    
        The Smithsonian Institution, National Park Foundation, National 
    Capital Planning Commission, Commission of Fine Arts , National Gallery 
    of Art and National Park Hospitality Association wrote in support of 
    the proposed regulation. The President of the National Park Foundation 
    stated:
    
        As a resident of the District of Columbia and someone who cares 
    about the Parks, I find the increased commercialism, especially in 
    the National Capital Region, to be exceedingly offensive * * *. 
    Visits to public land/Park land should be visits to uncluttered, 
    noncommercial areas. The law provides ways for individuals 
    representing [[Page 17641]] causes to get their messages across and 
    leave open ample opportunities for channels of communication of 
    information. It was not intended to create a supermarket for 
    clothing, hats, banners, pins, and other aggressive sales of similar 
    items which rob and deny a visitor the opportunity to see these 
    places as they were intended to be.
    
        One comment describes the area of Washington's Monumental Core as 
    an unsightly ``virtual sea of T-shirt vendors.'' Another lamented that 
    these vendors have made it difficult to enjoy the beauty of the Mall, 
    forcing park visitors to play ``dodge the vendors.''
        Sales activities on the Mall adjacent to the National Air and Space 
    Museum are particularly pronounced. Pursuant to the court's order in 
    ISKCON of Potomac, Inc. v. Ridenour, 830 F. Supp. 1, 4 (D.D.C. 1993) 
    (appeal pending), NPS regulations regarding sales and solicitation may 
    not be enforced at all in ``the area of the Mall adjacent to the Air 
    and Space Museum.'' With no regulatory enforcement mechanism possible 
    under this court order, T-shirt sales tables on park land have 
    multiplied. Displays have stretched to extraordinary lengths; e.g., 
    vendors now occupy all of both sides of a 139 foot north-south walkway 
    just north of the National Air and Space Museum.
        One comment, by a Smithsonian Institution employee, described the 
    area now as having ``shirts hung out in the breeze'' creating ``a 
    distracting visual clamor which totally destroyed the [Mall's] grand 
    design.'' Another, noting sales of T-shirts inscribed with such 
    insignia as ``Beavis and Butthead,'' asked whether it is ``the Park 
    Service's objective to turn the National Mall into a shopping mall?'' 
    Another protested:
    
        I went to enjoy the beauty of the Mall and the Museums. Instead, 
    every where I turned I saw and heard vendors, vendors, and more 
    vendors. Are we allowing our beautiful Capital to be turned into a 
    gigantic outdoor flea market?
    
        One comment, while regretting that the Boy Scouts of America itself 
    had not been allowed by the NPS to sell its memorabilia on the 
    Washington Monument grounds, nevertheless supported the proposed 
    regulation, stating ``that we have come to a sad state of affairs when 
    commercial vendors, masquerading under the guise of saving the whales 
    are allowed to exploit our National showcase park areas.''
        Former National Park Service Director James Ridenour wrote in 
    support of the proposed regulation as necessary to control ``the 
    carnival atmosphere that erodes the dignity of our national capital 
    parks and memorial.'' As to the sales occurring near the Vietnam 
    Veterans Memorial, Ridenour, a Vietnam veteran, wrote that he was:
    
        [O]ffended by the business that has continued to expand in that 
    area. These shanty businesses have become big businesses. This is 
    not some highly sacred freedom of speech issue--this is the 
    despoiling of our nation's greatest treasures and a 
    commercialization that goes beyond what previous administrations 
    ever envisioned.
    
        A number of national veterans groups, including AMVETS, Veterans of 
    Foreign Wars of the United States, Vietnam Veterans of America, Inc. 
    and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, wrote in support of the 
    proposed regulation and expressed concern that sales activities have 
    caused a commercialized condition of park land around the Vietnam 
    Veterans Memorial. (As explained more fully in the next section, 
    however, other groups, including the Friends of the Vietnam Veterans 
    Memorial, the National Alliance of Families and other local veterans 
    groups oppose the proposed regulation, complaining that it would 
    adversely impact on sales activities by vigil groups near the Vietnam 
    Veterans Memorial).
        In summary, the commenters supporting the regulation generally 
    concurred with the judgment of the NPS that the T-shirt displays and 
    hawking, occurring on a daily basis near frequently visited memorials, 
    substantially diminish and impair the park visitors' experience. In 
    addition to the general ``flea market'' atmosphere, the NPS has 
    observed that sites are occupying ever-larger areas of park land, 
    mostly located near or on walkways close to frequently visited 
    memorials. As a result, visitor circulation has been adversely 
    impacted. Sales operations have also interfered with NPS interpretative 
    programs. Some commenters complained that they have been unable to 
    photograph national landmarks without also capturing demonstration/
    sales sites in the same picture.
        The presence of money within park areas has always been a law 
    enforcement concern of the U.S. Park Police. Sales sites have already 
    experienced several criminal related offenses. Also, in an effort by 
    permittees to reserve ``premium'' sales sites adjacent to popular 
    memorials, a number of permittees have hired homeless people or have 
    even physically assaulted one another to preserve and occupy their 
    sales site locations.
        Increasing T-shirt sales activities have also brought increasing 
    pedestrian and vehicle congestion. This has resulted in damage to turf, 
    trees and shrubbery. At or near T-shirt sales sites, only mud and 
    compacted soil remain where grass once grew. Soil compaction in these 
    areas is so severe that the NPS has found no horticultural technique 
    which permits the restoration of plants without excluding all activity 
    from the injured sites for a period of several months.
    
    C. Comments in Opposition to the Proposed Rule
    
        Of the 2,582 comments opposed to the proposed rule, all but five 
    focused solely on the sales activities on park land around the Vietnam 
    Veterans Memorial. 2,415 preprinted postcards were submitted opposing 
    the proposed regulation on the ground that it would:
    
        [R]emove the best opportunity I have to publicly show my support 
    for the organizations and causes represented near the Memorial. 
    Further, the presence of these groups and the sale of all of their 
    products is beneficial to the visitors * * *. (emphasis in 
    original).
    
        Forty-six comments voiced concern that if the proposed regulation 
    is implemented, one demonstration vigil now under permit near the 
    Vietnam Veterans Memorial would be forced to ``close down.'' In his 
    comment, the Executive Director of this particular demonstration 
    described the proposed regulation as aimed specifically against his 
    vigil; specifically:
    
        [A] smoke screen designed to conceal the Park Service's real 
    agenda[,] which is part of a long term political effort to remove 
    the POW/MIA activists from the area near the Vietnam Veterans 
    Memorial. It is the result of the combined efforts of career 
    bureaucrats, who can't stand the thought of a handful of veterans, 
    activists, and POW/MIA family members using the First Amendment to 
    raise enough funds through the sale of POW/MIA related T-shirts to 
    continue opposing a failed U.S. government POW/MIA policy.
    
        The proposed rule is content neutral and is not intended to harass, 
    much less ``close down,'' any demonstration. In proposing the 
    regulation, the National Park Service recognizes the important function 
    park land serves for the ``purposes of assembly, communicating thought 
    between citizens, and discussing public questions.'' Hague v. CIO, 307 
    U.S. 496, 516 (1939). The rule is designed to regulate the time, place, 
    and manner of sales activities to protect the parks and the visitor 
    experience without seriously interfering with the achievement of those 
    essential purposes.
        This same commenter challenged the accuracy of NPS's assertion, in 
    the preamble to the proposed rule, that one demonstrator ``had gross 
    earnings of $1,849,683 from the sale of all T-shirts [[Page 17642]] in 
    1989-91.'' See 59 FR 25857. This quotation was taken directly from the 
    Court's order in Hart v. Sampley, Civil No. 91-3068 (D.D.C. December 
    10, 1992).
        An attorney commenting on behalf of several nonprofit organizations 
    accused the NPS of ``deliberately seeking to create a condition on the 
    Mall whereby it can justify a complete ban on the sale [of] message-
    bearing merchandise.'' The NPS rejects this characterization. It has 
    not created the adverse consequences caused by sales activities on park 
    land in order to justify sales restrictions. Rather, as detailed in the 
    proposed sales regulation, it has permitted groups and individuals to 
    sell message-bearing T-shirts, but that fact was not widely known until 
    fairly recently. When the NPS sought public comment on the proposed 
    sales regulations, more persons and groups became aware of the rules. 
    The current proliferation of sales applicants is likely to be simply 
    indicative of the actual number of persons and groups who would like to 
    sell T-shirts on National Capital Parks land.
        The NPS has attempted to fairly and even handedly process 
    applications for demonstration/sales activities on park land in 
    accordance with current regulations and guidelines. The applications 
    requesting use of park land, and the permits authorizing such use, are 
    a matter of public record and review. Persons who identify themselves 
    as merely interested in selling T-shirts with no cause related to a 
    demonstration have been turned away. The NPS has also attempted to 
    fairly and even handedly monitor permittees' compliance with the terms 
    of their permits at their demonstration/sales sites. The NPS proposed 
    to amend its sales regulation because of the adverse consequences 
    caused by some of the sales activities under the sales enforcement 
    guideline.
        The balance of the other comments that focused on sales activities 
    near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial did not challenge the NPS's 
    motivation, but opposed the proposed rule because it would adversely 
    impact veterans groups' ability to raise money for their cause. One 
    commenter, from a Vietnam veterans organization, wrote that:
    
        In seven years of experience at the [Vietnam Veterans] Memorial, 
    the Friends have concluded that the presence of t-shirt and other 
    sales plays a significant role in the experience for tens of 
    thousands of visitors. Guestbooks which have been maintained near 
    the Memorial by the FVVM show overwhelmingly that the presence of 
    our group has been positive.
    
        While the NPS does not question the sincerity of this commenter's 
    assertion that its presence on park land contributes positively to the 
    park visitor experience, only two of the 5,716 entries in the 
    commenter's guestbooks expressed views on sales activities. One wrote 
    of her appreciation for the opportunity to buy items near the Memorial, 
    but the other wrote: ``This merchandise is out of place and degrades 
    the dignity of this shrine.''
        The Friends also submitted a ``Vietnam Veterans Memorial 
    Attitudinal Study.'' The study, prepared by a marketing research 
    consultant, consisted of interviews of 329 visitors who were 
    ``randomly-intercepted in the area of the [Vietnam Veterans] Memorial'' 
    over a three-day period. Contrary to the commenter's assertion that 
    sales play a ``significant role'' in the visitor experience at the 
    Vietnam Veterans Memorial, the study shows more than two-thirds of the 
    respondents did not stop at any demonstration/sales location. Moreover, 
    the study focused solely on the park land adjacent to the Vietnam 
    Veterans Memorial, while the NPS is concerned with the negative impact 
    of sales activities on park land throughout the National Capital Region 
    and cannot legitimately distinguish between T-shirt sales in one area 
    or one cause and such sales in another area or for another cause.
        One demonstrator who participated in the first vigil or ``booth'' 
    near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in 1987 commented that he was 
    closing down his own operation in part because he ``did not have the 
    manpower or the money to pay someone to stay in the parking lot of the 
    NCR building overnight so that we could be `first in line' when the 
    permit office opened and turn in 14 or so permits applications every 
    day.'' He opposed the proposed rule, however, ``because the [Vietnam 
    Veterans Memorial] Wall is unique * * * [and] vendors should stay at 
    least until the healing of all Vietnam Veterans is complete.'' He 
    believed that vendors help provide a ``chance to talk with a fellow 
    veteran to let out your feelings, to rid oneself of the hurt, and to 
    find out about other veteran related programs, organizations and 
    problems.'' Under the new regulation, demonstrators will remain free to 
    talk with the visiting veterans and provide oral or written information 
    regarding veteran-related programs, organizations and problems. The 
    only difference is that they cannot sell T-shirts at the same time.
        Finally, one commenter indicated that the NPS should not be 
    worrying about T-shirt and other sales because ``this money is 
    certainly being used for a wonderful and well needed cause.'' The role 
    of T-shirt sales in financing demonstration activity is considered in 
    the next section.
    
    D. Commenters' Objections on Constitutional Grounds
    
        Some commenters argued that if demonstrators could not sell such 
    merchandise they would be unable to finance their demonstration 
    activities. The American Civil Liberties Union for the National Capital 
    Area (ACLU), wrote that T-shirts, buttons or lapel pins worn on a 
    person are an integral and prominent part of demonstrations because 
    they ``are unusually cheap and convenient forms of communication that 
    convey distinct messages because they connect the message with the 
    speaker.''
    
    1. T-Shirts Versus Other Forms of Communication
    
        After careful consideration, the NPS has concluded that the basic 
    problem of commercialization and attendant adverse impacts on park 
    values is caused by T-shirt sales. It has also concluded that the 
    problem cannot be abated by other than a ban on such sales on park 
    land.
        The NPS acknowledges that lines must be drawn in deciding the types 
    of such merchandise that may be sold on park land in connection with 
    demonstrations, to allow both demonstrators and park visitors an 
    opportunity to use park land and still preserve the park values 
    operative in the area. In general, the NPS wants to permit the maximum 
    amount of communicative conduct that is consistent with the protection 
    of the core park values in the area. It recognizes that a total ban on 
    all sales in connection with demonstrations would arguably be most 
    protective of the parks, and that a credible legal argument might be 
    made for such a resolution. But the NPS desires to accommodate the sale 
    of message-bearing materials in connection with demonstrations to the 
    extent it does not unreasonably impinge on other park values.
        By rescinding its enforcement guideline and amending 36 CFR 7.96(k) 
    so as to permit only the sales of books, newspapers, leaflets, 
    pamphlets, buttons and bumper stickers, the NPS believes park 
    resources, the visitor experience, and the desirability of free 
    expression will all be protected and enhanced.
        The NPS has found that the sale of traditional written material in 
    the form of newspapers, leaflets and pamphlets has not presented the 
    problems that the sale of T-shirts and of other 
    [[Page 17643]] merchandise has caused. The NPS also believes books 
    constitute a larger and logical variant of the newspapers, leaflets and 
    pamphlets that are currently permitted.
        The NPS has also, upon reexamination since the proposed regulation 
    was published, concluded that buttons and bumper stickers should be 
    permitted to be sold in connection with demonstrations. The sales of 
    these items have not caused the same problems of commercialization and 
    negative effects on other park values as those caused by T-shirt sales. 
    Accordingly, the NPS has decided to continue to allow the sale of 
    buttons and bumper stickers on park land.
        While the Service has decided to prohibit T-shirt sales on park 
    land, it will of course not restrict or otherwise regulate the wearing 
    of communicative T-shirts. More generally, persons and groups remain 
    free to express their views on park land, in long-standing 
    demonstration vigils as well as shorter-term demonstrations. They may 
    continue to use park land to speak, display signs and banners, march, 
    hold vigils, sell and distribute literature, communicative buttons and 
    bumper stickers, and otherwise communicate their views. At the same 
    time, non-demonstrating visitors will still be able to come to the 
    parks to pursue communicative, inspirational, educational and 
    recreational activities.
        For these reasons, the NPS believes that compliance with the sales 
    regulation will not place an unreasonable limitation on First Amendment 
    activity. A wide range of permissible activities remains available to 
    persons who wish to engage in demonstrations and associated sales 
    activities. Ample alternative avenues of communication are preserved. 
    Demonstrators will still be able to sell other merchandise either on 
    property within the District of Columbia's jurisdiction or through the 
    books, newspapers, leaflets, and pamphlets sold or distributed on park 
    land. These areas under District of Columbia jurisdiction are 
    convenient to park visitors and are located adjacent to Washington's 
    Monumental Core. Constitution and Independence Avenues east of 15th 
    Street, NW and all of the north-south streets north of Constitution 
    Avenue and south of Independence Avenue are controlled by the District 
    of Columbia. For many years, demonstration groups have used these areas 
    to sell items not permitted to be sold on NPS areas. Further, the vast 
    majority of park visitors must pass these District streets and 
    sidewalks on their way to the NPS areas.
        Finally, in this connection, the NPS is concerned that if it 
    continues to allow sales of T-shirts, it will face ever more difficult 
    line-drawing decisions. Even with T-shirt sales now permitted, the NPS 
    continues to receive requests for permission to sell other types of 
    merchandise, such as coffee mugs, sweat shirts, hats, patches, jewelry, 
    flags, records, audio tapes, video tapes, pictures, and decals--all 
    complete with self-described ``First Amendment messages'' affixed to 
    each item. Some demonstrator/vendor applicants argue that a First 
    Amendment message is implicit in the merchandise itself. For example, 
    in the past one demonstration group, advocating the protection of 
    endangered rain forests, requested permission to sell candy on park 
    land and argued that the candy possessed communicative protection 
    because its ingredients came from the ecologically sound harvesting of 
    nuts from rain forests. Others have urged the NPS to permit the sale of 
    audio tapes. In addition to posing the same impacts as T-shirts, NPS 
    personnel would need recorders to determine whether the tape related to 
    the demonstration and visitors would need a like machine to determine 
    what message was being expressed.
        Plainly, a line has to be drawn somewhere if the National Capital 
    Parks are not to be wholly given over to merchandising with a 
    connection to free expression. The NPS believes an appropriate line is 
    reflected in these regulations.
    2. T-Shirt Sales as Underwriting the Expenses of First Amendment 
    Expression
        The NPS acknowledges the possibility that T-shirt sales on park 
    land improves the financial ability of some demonstrators to engage in 
    demonstration activities. Nevertheless, the NPS does not believe that 
    the First Amendment requires it, as a general rule, to facilitate fund 
    raising by groups or individuals seeking to express their views. Such 
    facilitative conduct is, rather, protected by the First Amendment 
    ``only insofar as its restriction imposes burdens on expression 
    itself.'' White House Vigil for the ERA Comm. v. Clark, 746 F.2d 1518, 
    1540 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
        One commenter suggested, as a partial alternative to a sales ban, 
    that the NPS ``require all vendors to put on public display a quarterly 
    Statement of Accounts, as well as yearly Statement of Earnings, stating 
    where all the money taken in goes.'' The NPS questions whether it could 
    legally require demonstrators to publicly display how much money they 
    receive or how it is spent. Cf. Riley v. National Fed'n of the Blind, 
    487 U.S. 781 (1988). In any event, such an approach does not address 
    the impacts on the parks and the visitor experience that have given 
    rise to this rulemaking.
    3. Off-Park, Nearby Locations for T-Shirt Sales
        The park land which comprises Washington's Monumental Core, and 
    nearly all other park land in the National Capital Region, is located 
    adjacent to other public property under the jurisdiction of the 
    District of Columbia or the states of Maryland and Virginia. These 
    other governments, particularly the District of Columbia, have 
    generally allowed persons and groups to sell items on sidewalks and 
    along streets in these areas that are prohibited from sale on park 
    land. The NPS does not and is not proposing to regulate such sales or 
    any other sales of merchandise on property outside its jurisdiction. As 
    explained earlier, these areas provide an opportunity for demonstration 
    groups to sell items in close proximity to park areas.
    4. Other Alternatives
        Commenters suggested several alternatives to the proposed 
    regulation, including allowing only certain types of groups to sell 
    items, more narrowly defining what constitutes message-related T-
    shirts, and restricting the placement and/or types of structures 
    vendors could use. For example, while the ACLU agreed in its comments 
    that ``the Constitution does not require the National Mall to be turned 
    into a flea market,'' it contended that the NPS must first adopt 
    restrictions regarding vendors' structures and against ``purely 
    commercial vendors with a tenuous facade,'' before considering a sales 
    restriction. It also stated that ``only if narrower measures are tried 
    and do not succeed will the consideration of broader measures be 
    appropriate.''
        As explained in more detail in what follows, the NPS has strived 
    hard to arrive at a solution that protects park values and the visitor 
    experience while minimizing any burdens on communicative conduct. It 
    has carefully considered, and in some cases tried, the kinds of 
    alternatives suggested. Some of the alternatives the NPS has tried 
    include: Discussing whether an applicant would voluntarily limit the 
    number of sites; imposing site size restrictions; requiring that sites 
    be attended at all times; confiscating unattended structures; imposing 
    safety standards on site equipment; requiring sanitation measures, 
    including placement of receptacles; rotating site [[Page 17644]] areas; 
    and seeding and sodding of areas. These measures have fallen short of 
    providing adequate protection to park values in the area. Its extensive 
    experience in managing park land and its consideration of the comments 
    on this proposed regulation have led the NPS to conclude that no 
    alternatives exist that would adequately abate or ameliorate the 
    problems caused by sales activities.
        The basic problem is a pronounced commercialization of National 
    Capital Park land with its unique monuments and memorials attracting 
    millions of visitors annually. These sales activities on park land 
    threaten to destroy that distinctive atmosphere. T-shirt sales 
    activities, which include intense competition among permittees to get 
    the attention and money of park visitors, have had a profoundly 
    negative impact on the park experience. T-shirt sales have introduced a 
    relatively constant, intrusive and intimidating air to what was 
    previously, for the most part, a relatively peaceful, inspirational, 
    and contemplative scene. Vibrant and spirited demonstration speech 
    conduct sometimes found in the National Capital Parks is more episodic 
    and has not created such a constant negative impact.
        Several Justices of the Supreme Court have recognized the 
    difference between more typical demonstration conduct and sales 
    activities. In United States v. Kokinda, 479 U.S. 720 (1990), Justice 
    O'Connor recently stated:
    
        [C]onfrontation by a person asking for money disrupts passage 
    and is more intrusive and intimidating than an encounter with a 
    person giving out information. One need not ponder the contents of a 
    leaflet or pamphlet in order mechanically to take it out of 
    someone's hand, but one must listen, comprehend, decide and act in 
    order to respond to a solicitation. Solicitors can achieve their 
    goal only by ``stopping [passersby] momentarily or for longer 
    periods as money is given or exchanged for literature'' or other 
    items.
    
        Id., at 724 (plurality opinion)(quoting Heffron v. International 
    Soc'y for Krishna Consciousness, 452 U.S. 640, at 653 (1981)); see also 
    id. at 738-39 (Kennedy, J., concurring in judgment).
        a. Limiting T-shirt sales to nonprofit or other particular kinds of 
    groups. Some commenters suggested that only certain types of groups 
    should be allowed to continue to sell message-bearing merchandise. The 
    commenters have widely differing views, however, as to what type of 
    groups should qualify. One comment suggested the NPS allow sales only 
    by ``real Vietnam Veterans' organizations that have had displays at the 
    Wall for years.'' Another comment called for the NPS to ``cull the for-
    profit business concessions, yet maintain the integrity of those who 
    truly hold vigils in exercise of their 1st Amendment rights.'' The 
    sponsors of one ethnic celebration, agreeing that only a limited range 
    of merchandise sales should be allowed on park land ``to prevent it 
    [sic] being destroyed by vendors,'' suggested that only organizations 
    who hold ``large demonstration/cultural activities'' should be allowed 
    to engage in sales. A local non-profit track and field organization, 
    while ``sympathetic with the overall goals of preserving the non-
    commercial character of NPS lands,'' nevertheless asked that it be 
    allowed to collect fees and distribute T-shirts to participants who 
    race on park land. Another local running club asked for a similar 
    exception.
        Another commenter advocated that only tax-exempt nonprofit 
    organizations who provide supporting documentation should be allowed to 
    engage in sales activities. The comment, from an attorney representing 
    several nonprofit organizations who have been permitted to sell 
    message-bearing T-shirts, complained that ``commercial vendors were 
    (and are) permitted to sell souvenir merchandise on the Mall. These 
    vendors are not tax-exempt; nor do their activities have a 
    noncommercial purpose. Rather, their only purpose is to make money for 
    the proprietors * * *.'' (emphasis in original).
        The NPS's decision to grant a permit to use park land does not turn 
    on the organizational or tax status of the applicant. NPS regulations 
    do not provide for inquiries into an applicant's tax status or how 
    proceeds may be dispersed. Nor do such inquiries form any part of the 
    basis in approving permits. While one commenter did cite an example of 
    such an inquiry by the NPS in a national park in California, the NPS 
    has determined that the California park unit had done so erroneously.
        In fashioning a solution to the problems caused by T-shirt sales in 
    the National Capital Parks, the NPS believes it cannot carve out 
    special exceptions for any category of group. Just as it would be 
    impermissible to preclude all but long-standing ``real Vietnam Veterans 
    organizations,'' it would likewise be improper to preclude all but tax-
    exempt nonprofit groups. To allow only certain types of groups to 
    engage in sales would disenfranchise individuals and unincorporated 
    groups completely. Other organizations not qualified by circumstance or 
    choice for tax-exempt status, such as for-profit corporations and labor 
    unions, would be likewise excluded. More generally, such an approach 
    would rest access to park land for sales upon the manner in which a 
    group seeks to organize itself legally. Such a matter ought not be of 
    central concern to the NPS.
        The adverse impacts upon park land are the same, irrespective of 
    the nature of the demonstrator/vendor's tax status. In short, the NPS 
    believes it would be unreasonable to require citizens concerned about 
    current issues to incorporate and gain tax-exempt status in order to 
    engage in demonstration/sales activities within the parks. Such a 
    requirement is unrelated to the protection of park resources and would 
    unreasonably discriminate against a wide range of individuals and 
    groups. Moreover, a large number of the demonstrator/vendors currently 
    using park land for T-shirt sales activities are in fact tax-exempt 
    organizations. Despite their tax status, the impact on the park is 
    unacceptable.
        b. Limiting T-shirt sales to very short-term demonstrations. The 
    ACLU commented that ``persons applying for permits for short-term 
    demonstrations [should] be given permission to sell demonstration-
    related communicative materials from portable card tables that, as in 
    the past, will 'le[ave] with the demonstrators.''' The NPS's experience 
    is that this type of restriction, while conceptually attractive, is 
    practically impossible to implement. The majority of groups and 
    individuals selling T-shirts as a part of their activity seek to do so 
    for long periods of time. The NPS has found, on several occasions, the 
    same group signing up under different names and individual sponsors for 
    successive weeks. This ``gaming'' of the permit system results in a 
    long-term demonstration by successive short-term individuals or causes.
        The NPS does not believe it may reasonably or practically limit a 
    group or individual to demonstrations lasting only one week or day or 
    so per year. By regulation, applications to use park land are generally 
    limited to 21-day increments. They may be extended for additional 21-
    day increments, subject only to being ``bumped'' if another applicant 
    submits an application for the same park site and the park area does 
    not reasonably permit multiple occupancy. If the park site does not 
    permit multiple occupancy, the NPS is obligated to propose an 
    alternative park site for the use of the second applicant. 36 CFR 
    7.96(g)(4)(iii)(A).
        This system is grounded in the NPS's belief that, in general, if 
    park land is not being utilized for an ongoing activity, it is 
    available to groups for First Amendment conduct. To turn down a group 
    because they have exhausted their ``allotted'' days of speech would fly 
    in [[Page 17645]] the face of that principle. Moreover, the NPS has 
    neither the expertise nor the manpower to develop the investigative and 
    enforcement staff to avoid the inevitable ``gaming'' that would result 
    as groups and individuals tried to obtain access for additional days 
    and sites.
        c. Adopting standards for the message's relationship to the 
    merchandise being sold. Some commenters suggested that the NPS impose 
    ``merchandise standards'' to ensure, in the words of one commenter, 
    that T-shirts being sold contain ``a religious, philosophical, 
    political, or ideological message that is inextricably intertwined with 
    the Permittee's nonprofit purposes and activities.'' This commenter 
    continued:
    
        Many vendors sell purely commercial or souvenir T-shirts that do 
    not contain any message whatsoever. Other vendors take an otherwise 
    commercial or souvenir T-shirt, stamp a small logo on it, or the 
    phrase Washington, DC, and sell that item, although the message is 
    barely visible and/or lacks intellectual content * * *.
    
        Except where a court order (now on appeal) has prohibited it from 
    doing so on the Mall near the National Air and Space Museum, the NPS 
    has for many years prohibited demonstrator/permittees from selling T-
    shirts that lack any message related to the permittee's cause or 
    activity. It monitors demonstration/sales sites to ensure compliance. 
    If warnings to violators are not immediately heeded, citation and 
    revocation of the permit occur. Between July 6, 1994 and August 13, 
    1994, for example, the U.S. Park Police revoked twelve permits for 
    violating the requirement that T-shirts have a message related to the 
    permittee's cause. Even with this limitation, sales activities have 
    continued to proliferate to the detriment of the parks and the 
    visitors' experience within the parks. The limitation itself raises 
    troublesome questions; e.g., should the NPS set standards as to how 
    large or permanent or sophisticated the message on the T-shirt must be? 
    How direct must be its relationship with the cause being demonstrated 
    for? How strongly must participants hold their views?
        Many T-shirts being sold on park land by permittees appear 
    identical to the T-shirts sold by District of Columbia street vendors, 
    except for the presence of an added message. The message often consists 
    of something as cryptic as ``Preserve our Natural Environment'' or ``DC 
    Statehood.'' The comment from the Smithsonian Institution notes that:
    
        [A] vendor of wildlife T-shirts from a folding table was the 
    only visible `demonstration' engaged in by an alleged environmental 
    group. Other than the name of the group in small letters on the T-
    shirt depicting wild animals, the salesman knew nothing about the 
    group or its activities and was unable and/or unwilling to discuss 
    with a visitor whether the proceeds of the T-shirt sales were being 
    dedicated to a non-profit purpose.
    
        In describing demonstration/sales activities on the Mall, the 
    Washington Post on July 6, 1994, reported:
    
        The guise of a demonstration at some of the new stands is pretty 
    thin. Vendors have used a rubber stamp to mark souvenir T-shirts and 
    sweat shirts with ``D.C Statehood'' or ``Save the Environment.''
        Among those selling shirts marked with an inked stamp this week 
    was Merlyn Eda, of Fort Washington. She sat beneath a sign that 
    advocated statehood for the District, and her permit said she was 
    demonstrating for making the District a state, but she said she 
    wasn't much interested in the issue.
        ``It's a reason to be out here,'' she said as she straightened 
    stacks of shirts showing the Capitol. ``I'd like a better cause, and 
    I'm thinking about one.''
        Susan Griffin, chairwoman of the D.C. Statehood Party, said 
    neither the party nor the Citizens for a New Columbia have 
    sanctioned the sale of T-shirts to promote their cause.
        A man who would only identify himself as Isac was selling T-
    shirts with pictures of the monuments and the stamped message for 
    the environment.
        He said that he didn't know anything about environmental issues 
    and he was working as a salesman on the Mall eight hours a day in 
    exchange for free room and board.
        The number of vendors setting up stands in close proximity of 
    each other has set off a price war along the walkway on the Mall 
    where seven sellers, most with identical designs, vie for customers.
        Christopher Sullivan, a volunteer for Earth Friends, Inc. said 
    his group initiated the price reductions because it is concerned not 
    about making money but about promoting environmental awareness.
        ``It looks like hell around here,'' Sullivan said. ``I feel my 
    rights as a legitimate demonstrator have been violated because of 
    these other stands.''
    
        As this comment suggests, many customers of T-shirt vendors may be 
    deceived as to whether they are genuinely supporting a ``cause'' by 
    their purchase. One permittee, purporting to ``educate the general 
    public about the importance of environmental protection,'' has sold T-
    shirts which depict a cow jumping over the Capitol and which bear a 
    ``First Amendment message,'' ink-stamped and barely discernible (and in 
    at least one case upside down): ``PRESERVE NATIONAL PARKS Earth 
    Friends.'' Two other permittees have sold identical cow T shirts, 
    although with different ``First Amendment messages'': one an ink- 
    stamped ``DC FOR STATEHOOD, WASHINGTON DC,'' another with ``PRESERVE 
    THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.'' A demonstrator/vendor was overheard advising 
    one park visitor not to be concerned with the ``message,'' because the 
    ink stamp would ``wash out in the first washing.''
        Since the Washington Post article appeared, the NPS has noticed 
    that most, but not all, of the ``First Amendment messages'' are no 
    longer ink-stamped, but silk-screened. Though many of these message 
    activities lack sophistication, verve or impact, the NPS is rightly 
    extremely uncomfortable basing its decisions regarding access to park 
    land upon the quality or sincerity of a person's message or belief. 
    Once the NPS has satisfied itself that there is some nexus between the 
    cause and the message, it has felt that no further inquiry is 
    legitimate or warranted. In the circumstances, enforcement of this 
    requirement has not lessened the negative impacts from those sales 
    activities significantly, if at all. In these circumstances, the NPS 
    has concluded that the best solution is to steer clear of these 
    delicate questions of regulating the message, by instead going at the 
    heart of the commercialization issue, which is T-shirt sales.
        d. Restricting structures and other sales facilities. Some 
    commenters advocated restricting the structures from which permittees 
    sell their items. One suggested that trailers and ``ostentatious 
    booths'' be banned, that only booths which could be set up within 
    twenty minutes be allowed, and that they be removed after 7 p.m. except 
    for important Federal holidays. The ACLU commented that it could ``see 
    no reason to prohibit the sale of communicative materials when it is 
    done without the aid of stands or structures.'' It suggested that, 
    ``since the perceived problem arises from the use of long-term, semi-
    permanent structures, we believe such structures are the appropriate 
    focus of regulation,'' including ``their number, size, location, 
    appearance, and duration of placement.''
        The attorney representing nonprofit organizations likewise 
    suggested that the NPS impose signage restrictions, with merchandise 
    being displayed on table tops only in a neat and orderly fashion, not 
    exceeding two feet in height. He also suggested that umbrellas, chairs, 
    and other decorative devices employed to amplify the presentation of 
    the permittee's message be permitted only in connection with the sale 
    of message-bearing merchandise, that structures, such as merchandise 
    display racks, be prohibited and that all other materials, such as 
    inventory, storage boxes, transport devices, and the like, be 
    [[Page 17646]] required to be stored underneath the table.
        The NPS has seriously considered these suggestions. As the ACLU 
    noted, the NPS is quite familiar with the regulation of structures. In 
    the National Capital Region, for example, the Service has found it 
    necessary to ban structures from Lafayette Park and the White House 
    sidewalk in order to address security and aesthetic concerns.
        Based on its years of experience in managing the Federal park land 
    and dealing with a full range of sales activities, the NPS does not 
    believe that size or structure restrictions adequately address the 
    problems caused by T-shirt sales activities on park land. As explained 
    further below, the NPS already regulates the size of sales areas 
    permitted to each permittee. The problems of commercialization and 
    attendant adverse impacts are caused by the T-shirt sales themselves 
    and the sheer number of demonstration/vendors interested in engaging in 
    such sales activities. Moreover, an outright ban on structures for 
    sales activities would likely create a mobile and potentially even more 
    intrusive commercialization of park land and degradation of the visitor 
    experience. In short, seeking to control the size of structures and 
    area to be used by each permittee would not directly address the 
    commercialization and attendant adverse impacts.
        The NPS has long required demonstration vendors to conform to 
    restrictions on site dimensions. Near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 
    the NPS has restricted vendors to sites 6 feet by 15 feet. This area 
    permits the storage of substantial amounts of written materials on 
    site. If additional written material is needed, it can be brought to 
    the site as needed. Further, this size both maximizes the numbers of 
    sites as well as allows each permittee sufficient space to present his 
    or her message to the visiting public. In response to the dramatic 
    increase of demonstration T-shirt sales activities on Washington's 
    Monumental Core, the NPS has established the same size dimensions for 
    sales sites in that area as well.
        These restrictions alone have not proven adequate to address the 
    problems sought to be ameliorated by this regulation. However, the NPS 
    has decided that the site dimension standard is important and ought to 
    be included in the regulation. A restriction on the size of structures 
    within such sales sites is also adopted. Accordingly, the final 
    regulation incorporates permissible dimensions of sales sites, stands 
    and structures used in sales. Specifically, the final regulation limits 
    sales sites to dimensions of 6 feet wide by 15 feet long by 6 feet 
    high. Within a site, tables will be limited to one per site, no larger 
    than 2\1/2\ feet by 8 feet or 4 feet by 4 feet.
        The NPS reviewed the demonstration sales sites currently under 
    permit. Demonstration/sales stands and structures generally consist of 
    tables with dimensions of 2\1/2\ feet by 8 feet or, less frequently, 
    dimensions of 4 feet by 4 feet. Both sizes have fully afforded 
    permittees the ability to present their message as well as display 
    their materials. The tables and associated sales activities were 
    generally able to be fully accommodated within dimensions of 6 feet by 
    15 feet. In fact, the NPS has been imposing the particular sales site 
    limitation since September 1994.
        The NPS believes that a height restriction on tables and their 
    appendages is also warranted. It has determined that a height 
    restriction of 6 feet on sales sites will allow groups to display and 
    sell printed materials while reducing the commercial atmosphere on park 
    land.
        e. Zoning the park land to set aside particular areas for sale 
    activities. Some commenters suggested that the NPS permit T-shirt sales 
    only in certain park areas, preferably located away from the historic 
    monuments and memorials. One commenter suggested that the NPS should 
    design and construct a limited number of lightweight portable booths 
    ``in the vicinity of the Memorial, but out of the main flow of the 
    tourist traffic.''
        Its extensive experience in administering permits has convinced the 
    NPS that it could not designate an adequate amount of park land to 
    handle the number of applicants who have been and will likely seek to 
    engage in T-shirt sales activities without creating the same adverse 
    impacts now being felt. On park land adjacent to the Vietnam Veterans 
    Memorial, for example, the NPS has been unsuccessful in limiting fixed 
    portions of park land for demonstration/vendors. Each of the 
    applicants, whose numbers are steadily increasing, demands access to 
    park visitors near the Memorial. With existing sites already under 
    permit, the NPS has been forced to permit the additional applicants to 
    use other available park land.
        Demonstration activities near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial are 
    typically limited to issues related to the war and its casualties. The 
    remainder of the Monumental Core, including the Mall, has been 
    described as ``the Nation's front yard,'' and as such has traditionally 
    been the focal point of demonstrations on a full range of issues and 
    causes--both domestic and international. Having been unsuccessful in 
    designating limited areas around the Vietnam Veterans Memorial for 
    demonstration/vendor activities, the NPS does not believe it possible 
    to designate limited areas within the Monumental Core.
        The statistics bear out this conclusion. In November 1994, for 
    example, notwithstanding cold weather and a decrease in park visitors, 
    the NPS had to designate 260 sites in the Monumental Core, along with 
    23 sites near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, to accommodate those who 
    sought demonstration/sales permits. With the advent of better weather 
    and an increase in park visitors, the NPS expects many more 
    applications this spring. In fact, through March 8, 1995, the National 
    Capital Region received 3,092 applications for demonstrations and 
    special events. Ninety percent (90%) of these seek permission to vend 
    T-shirts in the Monumental Core area. By way of comparison, during this 
    same period in 1994, the Region received 2,884 demonstration and 
    special event permit requests, an increase of over 200 applications.
        The proliferation of T-shirt sales among demonstrator/vendors has 
    led the NPS to conclude that it would be impossible to reasonably 
    accommodate the demand for demonstration/sales of T-shirts within any 
    limited ``sales zones.'' If a zoning system were attempted, either the 
    NPS would have to devise some method or standards to choose among 
    applicants or designate ever-expanding sales zones. Furthermore, the 
    current first-come, first-served system would not likely result in a 
    fair distribution of very scarce sites and would require a much more 
    intensely managed system.
        As noted earlier, applications for 21-day T-shirt demonstration/
    sales permits are now routinely being submitted a full year in advance 
    and are ever-growing in number. If ``sales zones'' were so limited as 
    to reduce the adverse impacts on National Capital Parks to more 
    acceptable levels, only a very limited number of applicants would be 
    able to engage in such sales activities. In these circumstances, the 
    NPS believes that allowing all applicants to engage in demonstration/
    sales activities that do not involve T-shirt sales ultimately imposes 
    less restriction on free expression, as well as being fairer and better 
    for the National Capital Parks and their visitors, than to allow a 
    small number of applicants to engage in T-shirt sales on limited 
    amounts of designated park land.
        The NPS is mindful that it has not fared well in the courts in 
    imposing numerical restrictions on demonstrators. [[Page 17647]] In A 
    Quaker Action Group v. Morton, 516 F.2d 717 (D.C. Cir. 1975), for 
    example, the court struck down the NPS's attempt to limit a 
    demonstration in the seven-acre Lafayette Park, a small fraction of the 
    acreage of the Monumental Core, to 500 people. The court found it had a 
    carrying capacity allowing up to 50,000 people to engage in 
    demonstrations at any one time.
        More importantly, the NPS believes that a ``sales zones'' scheme 
    would not satisfactorily control the adverse impact on the parks. The 
    NPS's experience at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial shows that, even when 
    sales are confined to a designated area, unacceptable impacts on park 
    values result.
        Defining the precise location of park areas to be set aside for 
    such activity would also be difficult. Permittees engaging in 
    demonstration/sales activities do not congregate at any single locale, 
    but spread out to locations adjacent to popular park features to 
    maximize their visitor exposure. The NPS would continue to be faced 
    with requests for designated sales zones adjacent to most, if not all, 
    of the monuments, memorials, and museums.
        Even with the creation of even a modest number of zones scattered 
    throughout areas of the National Mall, the NPS and the nation would 
    effectively lose those areas completely and permanently to commercial 
    activities. The experience of the last year or so suggests that 
    competition for those limited zones would be intense. The zones would 
    likely be occupied 365 days a year, effectively removing them from park 
    use. Not only would perpetual ``mini-bazaars'' be created, but the 
    physical impact would create scars that would not heal.
        For all of these reasons, based on its experience in managing the 
    Federal park land and dealing with a full range of sales activities, 
    the NPS does not believe that the designation of sales zones is a 
    viable or adequate alternative.
    
    D. T-Shirt Sales and the Activities of the Authorized Concessioner for 
    the National Mall
    
        The NPS's concessioner for the National Mall commented in support 
    of the proposed regulation, stating that ``the large number of 
    commercial vendors operating on the National Mall * * * are disrupting 
    the historical, aesthetic, and traditional values of our National 
    Capital parks.'' The comment also advised that the concessioner was 
    experiencing an adverse economic impact in lost sales due to 
    demonstrator/vendors. Some of the concessioner's employees also 
    submitted comments expressing concern that sales by demonstrator/
    vendors could threaten their jobs.
        While the NPS agrees with the concessioner about the adverse 
    aesthetic impact caused by sales on Federal park land, the alleged 
    adverse financial impact on the concessioner and its employees has 
    played no role in the NPS's decision on the sales regulation.
        Two comments opposed to the proposed rule described the activities 
    of the NPS's concessioner on the National Mall as an ``unsightly, 
    inappropriate, and unwelcomed [sic] commercial intrusion,'' and 
    concluded that ``any commercialization of the Mall that has occurred is 
    as much attributable to the NPS as to any specific First Amendment 
    activity.'' One of these commenters stated:
    
        I personally observed dozens of licensed mobile ice cream and 
    popcorn vendors on all parts of the Mall. In one particular 
    instance, Earth Friends was ordered to move its location across from 
    the Museum of Natural History [because] their presence at that 
    location was purportedly causing pedestrian traffic congestion. Yet, 
    the same location was quickly occupied by an ice cream vendor that 
    attracts twice as many people as did Earth Friend's T-shirt sales.
        Additionally, I note that the Park Service maintains (or 
    authorizes) two permanent refreshment stands on the Mall that sell a 
    variety of products, including beer, and several souvenir booths 
    that sell film, maps, books, and other souvenir products. In 
    addition to the merry-go-round, I observed permanent, unsightly 
    refreshment stands directly in front of the Air and Space Museum, 
    the American History Museum, and the Natural History Museum. These 
    refreshment facilities attracted far greater crowds, and pedestrian 
    congestion, than any of the T-shirt operations that I observed.
    
        This description is incomplete and partially incorrect. Most of the 
    vendors mentioned are not on park land. Rather, they are located on the 
    grounds of the Smithsonian Institution or on streets under the 
    jurisdiction of the District of Columbia. The NPS has not licensed 
    popcorn vendors on the Mall.
        The NPS regulates concession activities on park land with a 
    principal objective of precluding unwarranted commercialization and 
    adverse impacts on park land. The relevant guidance from Congress, the 
    Concessions Policy Act of 1965, 16 U.S.C. 20, is:
    
        [T]hat the preservation of park values requires that such public 
    accommodations, facilities, and services as have to be provided 
    within those areas should be provided only under carefully 
    controlled safeguards against unregulated and indiscriminate use, so 
    that heavy visitation will not unduly impair these values and so 
    that development of such facilities can best be limited to locations 
    where the least damage to park values will be caused. It is the 
    policy of the Congress that such development shall be limited to 
    those that are necessary and appropriate for public use and 
    enjoyment of the national park area in which they are located and 
    that are consistent to the highest practicable degree with the 
    preservation and conservation of the areas.
    
        Consistent with this mandate, the NPS maintains concession activity 
    on the federal park land of the National Capital Region under carefully 
    designed safeguards. Concessions are limited only to those facilities 
    and services necessary and appropriate for the convenience of the 
    public. They are carefully designed, sited, and otherwise controlled so 
    as to cause the least damage to park values and the park experience.
        To serve the millions of visitors to park land between the Lincoln 
    Memorial and the east end of the National Mall, the NPS's concessioner 
    operates nine food and five retail operations from fixed locations. 
    During the peak visitation period, from April through September, these 
    fixed facilities are supplemented by fourteen ice cream carts that 
    operate on the National Mall. The temporary and fixed facilities were 
    designed to be the minimum size and number needed to serve only the 
    immediate needs of the park visitors already drawn to the area. They 
    are carefully located in areas capable of withstanding the attendant 
    impact; many are confined within buildings. The NPS regularly inspects 
    them to maintain requisite standards of physical appearance and 
    operations. The NPS also controls the nature, type, quality, and price 
    of items offered for sale by the concessioner to the park visitor. It 
    routinely evaluates the concessioner's quality of services, requires 
    insurance and indemnification, charges a franchise fee, and annually 
    reviews its financial records. None of these controls has ever been 
    applied to demonstration/vendors, and the NPS believes at least some, 
    if not all, would be inappropriate to impose on persons or groups 
    expressing First Amendment rights.
        While some commenters compared concessions accommodations with 
    demonstration/sales booths, none suggested that the NPS impose on 
    permittees the same conditions it has imposed on its concessioner. In 
    any event, for the reasons expressed earlier, the NPS believes that it 
    would be a very delicate matter at best, and more likely inappropriate, 
    for it to try to impose such conditions on the exercise of free 
    expression attendant to demonstration/vendors. More broadly, comparing 
    the purpose and regulation of concessions designed to meet the needs of 
    park visitors with sales activities associated [[Page 17648]] with 
    demonstrations is like comparing apples and oranges.
        The NPS concedes that it sometimes encounters unauthorized food and 
    ice cream vendors on the Mall. It devotes considerable enforcement 
    efforts against such illegal activities. It regularly monitors park 
    land for unauthorized vendors, and when it detects them, it either 
    warns them or cites them and orders them to leave park land 
    immediately. Between July 6, 1994 and August 13, 1994, for example, the 
    U.S. Park Police issued seventeen citations against unauthorized food 
    or beverage vendors found on the Mall.
        The proliferation of demonstration/vendors of T-shirts in the last 
    few years has complicated this enforcement problem significantly. As 
    the Smithsonian Institution comment noted:
    
        [M]any illegal [that is, non-permit-holding] vendors, encouraged 
    by potential profits and perhaps hoping to get lost among the 
    increased number of vendors on the Mall, are joining their permit 
    holding counterparts in increasing numbers. We have seen many more 
    illegal ice cream and food vendors, vendors of key chains, hats, 
    umbrellas, and even a photographer who takes visitor pictures with 
    cardboard cut-outs of celebrities on parkland.
    
        The NPS remains committed to eliminating illegal vendors as well as 
    addressing the unacceptable impacts by the demonstrator/vendors.
    
    E. Other Matters Addressed in the Final Regulation
    
        In its comments, the Smithsonian Institution expressed concern that 
    the language of the proposed sales regulation might create some 
    misunderstanding as to what would be allowed to be sold on park land, 
    with or without a permit. The NPS obviously desires to prevent any such 
    misunderstandings, and therefore reaffirms its intention that only 
    books, newspapers, leaflets, pamphlets, buttons and bumper stickers may 
    be sold under the revised sales regulations. Attempts to offer or sell 
    items, whether directly or by the use of an artifice, other than books, 
    newspapers, leaflets, pamphlets, buttons and bumper stickers on park 
    land are prohibited. For example, restricted merchandise cannot be 
    ``given away'' and a ``donation accepted'' or one item ``given away'' 
    in return for the purchase of another item; such transactions amount to 
    sales. To prevent any misunderstanding, the NPS has changed the 
    language that appeared in the proposed sales regulation.
        Finally, in the draft regulations, the NPS had proposed to make two 
    minor numbering corrections in 36 CFR 7.96(k)(3)(vii), (ix) due to the 
    redesignation of paragraph (k) (57 FR 4574). Pursuant to Public Law 
    103-279, the NPS no longer has operating responsibilities for the John 
    F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. As a result, the minor 
    numbering corrections suggested in the proposed rule are no longer 
    necessary. Instead, the final rule removes reference to the Center by 
    eliminating 36 CFR 7.96(k)(3).
    3. Summary/Conclusion
        For all of the foregoing reasons, the NPS believes that the display 
    and hawking of T-shirts, clothing and similar items in connection with 
    authorized demonstrations has had an unacceptable impact on the 
    National Capital Parks and the visitor experience. Its extensive 
    experience in monitoring sales activities permitted under the current 
    sales enforcement guideline has led the NPS to the firm conclusion that 
    those activities have brought discordant and excessive commercialism to 
    federal park land. Such sales have degraded aesthetic values, visitor 
    circulation and contemplation, interpretive programs and historic 
    scenes and have inhibited the conservation of park property. It also 
    believes that no reasonable alternative is available to the action here 
    announced. Therefore, the NPS believes it is necessary to rescind the 
    enforcement guideline and to amend the sales regulation to limit 
    permissible sales to books, newspapers, leaflets, pamphlets, buttons 
    and bumper stickers.
        In the considered judgment of the NPS, other measures have been 
    found inadequate to the problem and do not provide a satisfactory level 
    of protection for park value resources in the areas. When such sales 
    activities have so negatively impacted park land and the park visitor, 
    by turning the National Mall, the ``Nation's front yard,'' into a flea 
    market, the NPS believes it is obligated to abate the problems caused 
    by such sales activities.
        The NPS believes that limiting sales activities to newspapers, 
    leaflets, pamphlets, books, buttons and bumper stickers is a reasonable 
    time, place, and manner restriction. The restriction is clearly 
    content-neutral in that it applies irrespective of the nature of the 
    message presented. It leaves open ample alternative channels for 
    communication of the information. It also preserves the integrity of 
    park resources and provides for the public enjoyment of our national 
    parks while leaving park resources unimpaired for future generations. 
    As such, it constitutes a restriction which is ``narrowly tailored to 
    serve a significant government interest.''
    
    Drafting Information
    
        The following persons participated in the writing of this rule: 
    John D. Leshy, Solicitor, Richard G. Robbins and Randolph J. Myers, 
    Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of the Interior.
    
    Compliance with Other Laws
    
        This rule was reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The Department 
    of the Interior determined that this document will not have a 
    significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities 
    under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 USC 601 et seq.) because 
    general sales are already prohibited in this area, and individuals and 
    groups seeking to sell as a part of a demonstration or special event 
    are free to sell prohibited merchandise on adjacent non NPS lands.
        The NPS has determined that this proposed rulemaking will not have 
    a significant effect on the quality of the human environment, health 
    and safety because it is not expected to:
        (a) Increase public use to the extent of compromising the nature 
    and character of the area or causing physical damage to it;
        (b) Introduce incompatible uses that compromise the nature and 
    character of the area or causing physical damage to it;
        (c) Conflict with adjacent ownerships or land uses; or
        (d) Cause a nuisance to adjacent owners or occupants.
        Based on this determination, and in accord with the procedural 
    requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and by 
    Departmental guidelines in 516 DM 6 (49 FR 21438), neither an 
    Environmental Assessment (EA) nor an Environmental Impact Statement 
    (EIS) has been prepared.
        This final 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.
        The NPS has reviewed this final rule as directed by Executive Order 
    12630 and has determined that the regulation does not have taking 
    implications.
        The Department of the Interior has certified to the Office of 
    Management and Budget that this final rule meets the applicable 
    standards provided in section 2(a) and 2(b)(2) of Executive Order 
    12778.
    
    List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7
    
        National parks; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    
        In consideration of the foregoing, 36 CFR Chapter I is amended as 
    follows: [[Page 17649]] 
    
    PART 7--SPECIAL REGULATIONS, AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM
    
        1. The authority citation for part 7 continues to read as follows:
    
        Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q), 462(k); Sec. 7.96 also 
    issued under D.C. Code 8-137 (1981) and D.C. Code 40-721 (1981).
    
        2. Section 7.96 is amended by revising paragraph (k)(2) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 7.96  National Capital Region Parks.
    
    * * * * *
        (k) * * *
        (1) * * *
        (2) No merchandise may be sold during the conduct of special events 
    or demonstrations except for books, newspapers, leaflets, pamphlets, 
    buttons and bumper stickers. A permit is required for the sale or 
    distribution of permitted merchandise when done with the aid of a stand 
    or structure. Such stand or structure may consist of one table per 
    site, which may be no larger than 2\1/2\ feet by 8 feet or 4 feet by 4 
    feet. The dimensions of a sales site may not exceed 6 feet wide by 15 
    feet long by 6 feet high. With or without a permit, such sale or 
    distribution is prohibited in the following areas:
    * * * * *
        3. Section 7.96 paragraph (k)(3) is removed.
        4. Section 7.96 paragraph (k)(4) is redesignated as paragraph 
    (k)(3).
    
        Dated: March 14, 1995.
    George T. Frampton, Jr.,
    Assistant Secretary, Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
    [FR Doc. 95-8599 Filed 4-6-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
5/8/1995
Published:
04/07/1995
Department:
National Park Service
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
95-8599
Dates:
The final rule becomes effective May 8, 1995.
Pages:
17639-17649 (11 pages)
RINs:
1024-AC14
PDF File:
95-8599.pdf
CFR: (1)
36 CFR 7.96