Proposed Rule

9152

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules

substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because a
determination of attainment is an action
that affects the status of a geographical
area and does not impose any new
regulatory requirements on tribes,
impact any existing sources of air
pollution on tribal lands, nor impair the
maintenance of Fine Particulate national
ambient air quality standards in tribal
lands.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter.

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: January 30, 2014.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2014–03314 Filed 2–14–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:22 Feb 14, 2014

Jkt 232001

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. FWS–R9–MB–2012–0098;
FF09M21200–134–FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018–AZ19

Migratory Bird Hunting and Permits;
Regulations for Managing Harvest of
Light Goose Populations
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:

We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
reduce the information collection
requirements for participants in the
light goose conservation order, which
authorizes methods of take to increase
harvest of certain populations of light
geese in the Atlantic, Central, and
Mississippi Flyways, and to reduce the
burden on State and tribal wildlife
agencies that are required to submit
annual light goose harvest reports to the
Service. We are taking this action to
eliminate information collection and
reporting requirements that we believe
to be unnecessary. This action would
relieve requirements on certain
individuals, States, and tribes.
DATES: The comment period for this
proposed rule closes April 21, 2014.
Comments on the Information
Collection Aspects of this Proposal:
Comments on the information collection
aspects of this proposed rule will be
considered if received by March 20,
2014.
SUMMARY:

ADDRESSES:

Written Comments on this Proposal:
You may submit comments only by
either one of the following two methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on Docket FWS–R9–MB–2012–0098.
• U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attention: FWS–
R9–MB–2012–0098; Division of Policy
and Directives Management; U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service; 4401 North Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA
22203–1610. We will post all comments
on http://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us
(see the Public Comments section below
for more information).
We will not accept emailed or faxed
comments. We will post all comments
on http://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

(see the Public Comments section below
for more information).
Comments on the Information
Collection Aspects of this Proposal:
Send comments specific to the
information collection aspects of this
proposed rule to the Desk Officer for the
Department of the Interior at OMB–
OIRA at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or OIRA_
[email protected] (email).
Please provide a copy of your comments
to the Service Information Collection
Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS 2042–PDM, 4401
North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA
22203 (mail) or [email protected]
(email). Please include ‘‘1018–0103’’ in
the subject line of your comments. You
may review the Information Collection
Request online at http://
www.reginfo.gov. Follow the
instructions to review Department of the
Interior collections under review by
OMB.
Document Availability: You may
obtain a copy of the final environmental
impact statement (EIS) from our Web
site at: http://www.fws.gov/
migratorybirds/currentbirdissues/
management/snowgse/tblcont.html, or
by requesting one from the Division of
Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax
Drive, MBSP–4107, Arlington, VA
22203–1610.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Kelley at 612–713–5409.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Greater
snow geese, lesser snow geese, and
Ross’s geese are referred to as ‘‘light’’
geese due to the light coloration of the
white-phase plumage morph, as
opposed to true ‘‘dark’’ geese such as
the white-fronted or Canada goose. We
include both plumage variations of
lesser snow geese (white, or ‘‘snow’’ and
dark, or ‘‘blue’’) under the designation
light geese. Dark phase Ross’s geese
exist but are uncommon.
Various populations of light geese
have undergone rapid growth during the
past 30 years, and have become
seriously injurious to their habitat,
habitat important to other migratory
birds, and agricultural interests. We
believe that several of these populations
have exceeded the long-term carrying
capacity of their breeding and/or
migration habitats and must be reduced.
In 1999, we implemented regulations
that authorized new methods of take
and created a conservation order to
increase harvest of certain populations
of light geese in the Central and
Mississippi Flyways (64 FR 7507;
February 16, 1999). In 2008, we
prepared an environmental impact
statement and record of decision to

E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM

18FEP1

9153

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

revise the regulations to include the
Atlantic Flyway (73 FR 65926;
November 5, 2008). The regulations at
§ 21.60 of title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) include information
collection and reporting requirements,
which we discuss below, for the
conservation order for light geese.
Past changes to the light goose harvest
regulations at 50 CFR 21.60 addressed
two areas. The first authorized the use
of two new hunting methods, electronic
calls and unplugged shotguns, to
harvest light geese during normal
hunting season frameworks. New
methods of take were allowed during a
light-goose-only hunting season when
all other waterfowl and crane hunting
seasons, excluding falconry, are closed.
Authorization of new methods of take
during light-goose-only seasons was
allowed only during normal hunting
season framework dates (September 1 to
March 10), except as provided in 50
CFR part 21, as described below.
Individual States and tribes were
authorized to determine the exact dates
such tools could be used. Persons
utilizing new methods of take during
light goose hunting seasons were
required to possess a Federal migratory
bird hunting stamp, to be registered
under the Harvest Information Program,
and to be in compliance with any
additional State or tribal license and
stamp requirements pertaining to
hunting waterfowl.
The second area revised subpart E of
50 CFR part 21 for the management of
overabundant light goose populations.
Under this subpart, we established a
conservation order specifically for the
control and management of light geese.
Under the authority of this regulation,
States and tribes could initiate
aggressive harvest management
strategies with the intent to increase
light goose harvest without having to
obtain an individual permit, which
significantly reduced the administrative
burden on State, tribal and Federal
governments. This regulation enabled
States and tribes, as a management tool,
to use hunters to harvest light geese, by
shooting in a hunting manner, inside or
outside of the regular migratory bird
hunting season framework dates of
September 1 and March 10. Although a

conservation order could be
implemented at any time, we believe the
greatest value of this regulation is the
provision of a mechanism to increase
harvest of light geese beyond March 10,
the latest possible closing date for
traditional migratory bird hunting
seasons. This provision is especially
effective in increasing harvest in midlatitude and northern States during
spring migration. The conservation
order is not a hunting season, and
implementation of such a regulation
should not be construed as opening, reopening, or extending any open hunting
season contrary to any regulations
promulgated under section 3 of the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C.
703–712).
Conditions under the conservation
order require that participating States
and tribes inform participants acting
under the authority of the conservation
order of the conditions that apply to the
regulation. In order to minimize or
avoid take of nontarget species, States
and tribes may implement this action
only when all waterfowl (including light
goose) and crane hunting seasons,
excluding falconry, are closed. In
addition to authorizing electronic calls
and unplugged shotguns, the
conservation order does not impose
daily bag limits for light geese and
allows shooting hours for light geese to
end one-half hour after sunset.
Under the regulations at 50 CFR
21.60, States and tribes must keep
annual records of activities carried out
under the authority of the conservation
order. We required the reported
information to help us to assess the
effectiveness of light geese population
control methods and strategies, and to
assess whether or not additional
population control methods are needed.
We believe that sufficient information
has been collected since 2000 to allow
us to properly evaluate the effectiveness
of new methods of take for harvesting
light geese. While we are not proposing
to eliminate all of the information
collection requirements of the
conservation order, we believe that the
requirements can be simplified, thus
reducing the burden on individuals
participating in the conservation order,
who must provide information to State

wildlife agencies, and on State and
Tribal wildlife agencies, which are
required to submit annual light goose
harvest reports to the Service. Currently,
50 CFR 21.60(f)(8) requires States and
tribes to keep annual records of the
following activities carried out under
the authority of the light goose
conservation order:
(i) The number of persons
participating in the conservation order;
(ii) The number of days people
participated in the conservation order;
(iii) The number of persons who
pursued light geese with the aid of a
shotgun capable of holding more than
three shells;
(iv) The number of persons who
pursued light geese with the aid of an
electronic call;
(v) The number of persons who
pursued light geese during the period
one-half hour after sunset;
(vi) The total number of light geese
shot and retrieved during the
conservation order;
(vii) The number of light geese taken
with the aid of an electronic call;
(viii) The number of light geese taken
with the fourth, fifth, or sixth shotgun
shell;
(ix) The number of light geese taken
during the period one-half hour after
sunset; and
(x) The number of light geese shot but
not retrieved.
During 2000–2011, an average of
52,672 hunters in the Central and
Mississippi Flyways (combined) spent
250,079 days afield each year during
conservation order periods (Table 1). An
average of 3,815 hunters in the Atlantic
Flyway spent 13,424 days afield during
conservation order periods each year
from 2009–2011. The annual average
harvest of light geese during the
conservation order harvest was 697,367
birds in the Central and Mississippi
Flyways (combined), and 39,100 birds
in the Atlantic Flyway. Half of all
conservation order participants chose to
utilize electronic calls (51%) and
unplugged shotguns (50%), whereas
only 28% chose to pursue light geese
during the period one-half hour after
sunset.

TABLE 1—LIGHT GOOSE CONSERVATION ORDER HUNTER NUMBERS, DAYS SPENT AFIELD, LIGHT GOOSE HARVEST, AND
HARVEST BY VARIOUS METHODS OF TAKE
Light goose harvest by method of take
Number of
hunters

Geographic area

Central and Mississippi flyways
combined, 2000 2011 ..............

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:22 Feb 14, 2014

Jkt 232001

52,672

PO 00000

Days afield

250,079

Frm 00036

Fmt 4702

Light goose
harvest

Electronic
calls
(%)

697,367

Sfmt 4702

Unplugged
shotguns
(%)

275,074 (39.4)

E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM

185,881 (26.7)

18FEP1

Shooting 1⁄2
hour after sunset
(%)
91,558 (13.1)

9154

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—LIGHT GOOSE CONSERVATION ORDER HUNTER NUMBERS, DAYS SPENT AFIELD, LIGHT GOOSE HARVEST, AND
HARVEST BY VARIOUS METHODS OF TAKE—Continued
Light goose harvest by method of take
Number of
hunters

Geographic area

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Atlantic Flyway, 2009 2011 .........

3,815

As shown in Table 1, above,
electronic calls were used to take
approximately 40% of the light geese
during the conservation order in the 3
Flyways. Unplugged shotguns were
used to take nearly 27% of the light
goose harvest in the Central and
Mississippi Flyways (combined), but
only about 16% in the Atlantic Flyway.
Just under 13% of light geese were
harvested in the period one-half hour
after sunset, compared to the other
methods of take. However, it should be
noted that two or more methods of take
can be utilized simultaneously while
pursuing light geese during the
conservation order.
These results indicate that the new
methods of take authorized during the
conservation order have been successful
in increasing harvest of light geese in
the United States. Although some
methods appear to be utilized more by
hunters than others, we believe that no
changes are needed to the conservation
order’s authorized methods of take.
However, we believe that we no longer
need to require States and tribes to
collect detailed information on methods
of take used to harvest light geese.
Public comments from Flyway Councils
received during our last renewal of the
information collection requirements (see
76 FR 66952; October 28, 2011)
indicated that Councils wanted a
discontinuation of collection of
information on methods of take as well.
Therefore, we propose to revise 50 CFR
21.60(f)(8) to require that States and
tribes to keep annual records of only the
following activities carried out under
the authority of the light goose
conservation order:
(i) The number of persons
participating in the conservation order;
(ii) The number of days people
participated in the conservation order;
(iii) The number of light geese shot
and retrieved during the conservation
order;
(vii) The number of light geese shot
but not retrieved.
This level of information collection
would continue to allow us to monitor
the efficacy of our efforts to increase the
harvest of light goose populations that
have been deemed overabundant.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:22 Feb 14, 2014

Jkt 232001

Days afield

Light goose
harvest

13,424

Electronic
calls
(%)

39,100

15,830 (40.5)

During our last information collection
renewal (see 76 FR 66952; October 28,
2011), the Flyway Councils also
commented that the burden of
collection of such information should be
transferred to the Service from the
States. While we agree that having the
Service collect such information would
provide uniformity in survey sampling,
budgetary constraints currently prevent
us from initiating new harvest survey
efforts for light geese.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review—
Executive Order 12866 and 13563
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant
rules. OIRA has determined that this
rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the
principles of E.O. 12866 while calling
for improvements in the nation’s
regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty,
and to use the best, most innovative,
and least burdensome tools for
achieving regulatory ends. The
executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes
further that regulations must be based
on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed
this rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L.
104–121)), whenever an agency is
required to publish a notice of
rulemaking for any proposed or final
rule, it must prepare and make available
for public comment a regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the
effect of the rule on small businesses,

PO 00000

Frm 00037

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

Unplugged
shotguns
(%)
6,096 (15.6)

Shooting 1⁄2
hour after sunset
(%)
4,558 (11.7)

small organizations, and small
government jurisdictions. However, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required
if the head of an agency certifies the rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide the statement of the
factual basis for certifying that a rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed regulation
change would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, so a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required.
This proposed rule would reduce the
information collection requirements for
participants in the light goose
conservation order and reduce the
burden on State and tribal wildlife
agencies that are required to submit
annual light goose harvest reports to the
Service. It would have no impact on
economic activities already associated
with the light goose conservation order
itself, and therefore would not have an
economic effect (benefit) on any small
entities.
This is not a major rule under the
SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804 (2)). It would not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
a. This rule would not have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more.
b. This rule would not cause a major
increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries,
Federal, State, Tribal, or local
government agencies, or geographic
regions.
c. This rule would not have
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or the ability
of U.S.-based enterprises to compete
with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.), we have determined the following:
a. This rule would not affect small
governments. A small government
agency plan is not required.

E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM

18FEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules
b. This rule would not produce a
Federal mandate. It is not a significant
regulatory action.
Takings

are expected to result from the proposed
regulations change.
Civil Justice Reform

This proposed rule does not contain
a provision for taking of private
property. In accordance with Executive
Order 12630, a takings implication
assessment is not required.

In accordance with Executive Order
12988, the Office of the Solicitor has
determined that the rule does not
unduly burden the judicial system and
meets the requirements of sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of the Order.

Federalism

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

This proposed rule does not have
sufficient Federalism effects to warrant
preparation of a federalism impact
summary statement under Executive
Order 13132. It would not interfere with
any State’s ability to manage itself or its
funds. No significant economic impacts

The Office of Management and Budget
has approved the current information
collection requirements in 50 CFR Part
21 and assigned OMB Control Number
1018–0103, which expires January 31,
2015. This proposal revises the
information collection requirements,

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Activity/requirement

Annual No. of
respondents

Total annual
responses

9155

and OMB approval is required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). We may not
conduct or sponsor and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
OMB Control Number: 1018–0103.
Title: Conservation Order for Light
Geese, 50 CFR 21.60.
Service Form Number(s): None.
Type of Request: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Description of Respondents: State and
tribal governments; individuals who
participate in the conservation order.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: Annually.
Completion time per response

Total annual burden hours

States—collect information, maintain records, prepare annual
report.
Participants—provide information to States .............................

39

39

45 hours ...........................................

1,755

21,538

21,538

8 minutes ..........................................

2,872

Total ...................................................................................

21,577

21,577

......................................................

4,627

Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden
Cost: $78,000, primarily for State and
tribal overhead costs (materials,
printing, postage, etc.)
We expect a maximum of 39 States
and tribes to participate under the
authority of the conservation order each
year it is available. States and tribes
must keep records of activities carried
out under the authority of the
conservation order. We believe that this
recordkeeping requirement is necessary
to ensure that those individuals carrying
out control activities are authorized to
do so. The States and tribes must submit
an annual report summarizing the
activities conducted under the
conservation order. Reported
information helps us to assess the
effectiveness of light geese population
control methods and strategies, and
assess whether or not additional
population control methods are needed.
However, we believe that the number of
elements in the information collection
requirement can be reduced while
maintaining a core of elements that
allow us to monitor the number of
participants in the conservation order
and resulting harvest of birds. We
propose that 50 CFR 21.60(f)(8) be
revised to require that information be
collected only on the number of:
• Persons participating in the
conservation order;
• Days people participated in the
conservation order;

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:22 Feb 14, 2014

Jkt 232001

• Light geese shot and retrieved
during the conservation order; and
• Light geese shot but not retrieved.
Each State and tribe determines how
they collect data from participants.
Though there is no common form or
method, the States and tribes have
shared their forms and there is
commonality. Some States require
participants to obtain a permit to
participate in the conservation order,
others do not. Post-harvest survey
questions and questionnaire delivery
methods differ among States and tribes.
States measure harvest and hunter
activity through the use of mail
questionnaires, phone surveys, hunter
diaries, online data entry, and so forth.
Differences also exist within similar
survey types, such as the proportion of
participants surveyed and the type and
number of followup contacts.
As part of our continuing efforts to
reduce paperwork and respondent
burdens, we invite the public and other
Federal agencies to comment on any
aspect of the reporting burden
associated with this proposed
information collection. We specifically
invite comments concerning:
• Whether or not the collection of
information is necessary, including
whether or not the information will
have practical utility;
• The accuracy of our estimate of the
burden for this collection of
information;

PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and
• Ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents.
Send comments specific to the
information collection aspects of this
proposed rule to the Desk Officer for the
Department of the Interior at OMB–
OIRA at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or OIRA_
[email protected] (email).
Please provide a copy of your comments
to the Service Information Collection
Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS 2042–PDM, 4401
N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203
(mail) or [email protected] (email).
Please include ‘‘1018–0103’’ in the
subject line of your comments. See the
DATES and ADDRESSES sections for
specific instructions.
Public Comments
The Department of the Interior’s
policy is, whenever practicable, to
afford the public an opportunity to
participate in the rulemaking process.
Accordingly, we invite interested
persons to submit written comments,
suggestions, or recommendations
regarding the proposed regulations.
Before promulgation of final regulations
for managing harvest of light goose
populations, we will take into
consideration all comments we receive.
Such comments, and any additional
information we receive, may lead to

E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM

18FEP1

9156

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 32 / Tuesday, February 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

final regulations that differ from these
proposals.
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in the
ADDRESSES section. We will not accept
comments sent by email or fax or to an
address not listed in the ADDRESSES
section. Finally, we will not consider
hand-delivered comments that we do
not receive, or mailed comments that
are not postmarked, by the date
specified in the DATES section.
We will post all comments in their
entirety—including your personal
identifying information—on http://
www.regulations.gov. Before including
your address, phone number, email
address, or other personal identifying
information in your comment, you
should be aware that your entire
comment—including your personal
identifying information—may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you can ask us in your comment to
withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on http://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Division of Migratory Bird
Management, Room 4107, 4501 North
Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203.
For each series of proposed
rulemakings, we will establish specific
comment periods. We will consider, but
possibly may not respond in detail to,
each comment. As in the past, we will
summarize all comments we receive
during the comment period and respond
to them after the closing date in any
final rule.

availability of a Final EIS on light goose
management on July 13, 2007 (72 FR
38577), and we published the same on
July 18, 2007 (72 FR 39439), followed by
a 30-day public review period. The EPA
reviewed the Final EIS and stated that
they did not identify any environmental
concerns with our preferred alternative,
and that the document provided
adequate documentation of the potential
environmental impacts. The EPA
assigned a rating of Lack of Objection to
the Final EIS. The Final EIS is available
to the public at the location indicated
under the ADDRESSES caption.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531–1543; 87 Stat. 884)
provides that ‘‘Each Federal agency
shall, in consultation with and with the
assistance of the Secretary, insure that
any action authorized, funded, or
carried out . . . is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
any endangered species or threatened
species or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of [critical] habitat
. . .’’ We previously completed section
7 consultation under the ESA for the
rule that authorized the light goose
regulations (73 FR 65926). This
proposed rule would only affect
information collection and reporting
requirements, and we have determined
that a section 7 consultation is not
necessary.

National Environmental Policy Act

Energy Effects—Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 requires
agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain
actions. This rule is not a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 13211, and
would not adversely affect energy
supplies, distribution, or use. This
action is not a significant energy action,
so no Statement of Energy Effects is
required.

In compliance with the requirements
of section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the
Council on Environmental Quality’s
regulations for implementing NEPA (40
CFR 1500–1508), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) published the

Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), E.O.
13175, and 512 DM 2, we have

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:22 Feb 14, 2014

Jkt 232001

PO 00000

Frm 00039

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 9990

determined that this rule has very little
effect on Federally recognized Indian
tribes. This proposal would reduce the
information collection and reporting
requirements associated with the light
goose conservation order, but we expect
this reduction would have very little
effect on tribes due to low participation
rates.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 21
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Wildlife.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, we hereby propose to amend
part 21, of subchapter B, chapter I, title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
PART 21—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 21
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703–712.

2. Amend § 21.60 by:
a. Revising paragraphs (f)(8)(i) through
(f)(8)(iv) to read as follows; and
■ b. Removing paragraphs (f)(8)(v)
through (f)(8)(x).
■
■

§ 21.60

Conservation order for light geese.

*

*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(8) States and tribes must keep annual
records of activities carried out under
the authority of the conservation order.
Specifically, information must be
collected on:
(i) The number of persons
participating in the conservation order;
(ii) The number of days people
participated in the conservation order;
(iii) The number of light geese shot
and retrieved during the conservation
order; and
(iv) The number of light geese shot
but not retrieved.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: November 22, 2013.
Michael Bean,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2014–03446 Filed 2–14–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM

18FEP1