52712 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

results in the collection of significantly 

more data than with the current MRE 

instrument? Would it be appropriate for 

operators to only provide miners with a 

portion of the data captured by the 

CPDM or to post the data for a period 

less than 31 days? Please be specific 

with your response, including your 

rationale. 

D. Education and Training 

It is vital that persons designated by 

the mine operator to perform dust 

sampling functions and miners be 

properly educated and trained to assure 

the integrity and credibility of the 

sampling process. To be effective, these 

persons must be fully cognizant of the 

nature of the health hazards in the 

working environment and possess a 

level of competence in the proper use, 

operation and maintenance of sampling 

equipment, and an awareness of the 

limitations of available protective 

measures. The required level of 

competence would be dictated by the 

complexity inherent in the operation of 

the particular CPDM and the degree to 

which oversight of sampling integrity is 

to be assumed by mine operators using 

the CPDMs. MSHA requests comments 

on suggested elements for a training 

program on using and maintaining a 

CPDM. Please be specific in your 

response, addressing the quality, 

quantity, and types of training, and the 

qualifications and certifications that 

should be required. 

1. What training should miners 

receive if required to wear a CPDM? 

What type of training would be 

necessary to assure that the miner 

understands how the device works, 

what information it provides, and how 

that information should be used to 

reduce miners’ exposure to respirable 

dust? How often should miners be 

required to receive this training? 

2. What qualifications should be 

required before an individual is 

permitted to operate and maintain a 

CPDM? How should an individual be 

required to demonstrate proficiency 

before being permitted to operate and 

maintain a CPDM? 

3. Which mine personnel should 

oversee CPDM usage, download 

exposure information, and interpret 

data? What type of qualifications/ 

certifications should these personnel be 

required to have? 

E. Benefits and Costs 

Because of the changing mining 

environment, more timely feedback on 

current respirable dust conditions in the 

workplace should significantly enhance 

miner health protection. Benefits would 

include the ability to immediately 

identify hazardous dust conditions that 

cause debilitating and potentially fatal 

coal workers’ pneumoconiosis or ‘‘black 

lung’’ disease, and to reduce or 

eliminate the risk of overexposure and 

the potential for illness and premature 

death, thereby avoiding the attendant 

costs to employers, miners and their 

families, and society. 

MSHA requests comment on the 

following questions concerning the 

benefits and costs of the CPDM: 

1. What would be the benefits of using 

CPDMs in a comprehensive and 

effective compliance strategy? Note that 

benefits might differ depending upon 

which compliance strategy is selected. 

2. What costs would be associated 

with using CPDMs? Please be specific as 

to every component, such as, initial 

outlay, maintenance, and training. 

3. What would be the advantages, 

disadvantages, and relative costs of 

different methods of using CPDMs? 

4. Would the use of CPDMs affect 

small mines differently than large 

mines, and if so, how? 

5. What incentives, if any, should 

MSHA consider to promote effective use 

of CPDMs in coal mines? 

6. What actions, if any, should MSHA 

take to encourage coal mining industry 

acceptance of the CPDM technology, 

stimulate economic market forces for 

more competitive pricing of CPDM 

devices, and promote innovation in 

respirable dust monitoring technology? 

Dated: October 7, 2009. 

Gregory R. Wagner, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Mine 

Safety and Health Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–24665 Filed 10–13–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

36 CFR Part 242 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 100 

[Docket No. FWS–R7–SM–2009–0052] 

[70101–1261–0000L6] 

RIN 1018–AW77 

Subsistence Management Regulations 

for Public Lands in Alaska, Subpart B; 

Special Actions 

AGENCIES: Forest Service, Agriculture; 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Forest Service 

and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, are 

proposing to amend the regulations that 

manage take of wildlife and fish in 

Alaska for subsistence purposes to 

clarify them. In particular, we want to 

clarify the Federal Subsistence Board’s 

process of accepting and addressing 

special action requests, along with the 

role of the Regional Advisory Councils 

in the special action process. We would 

also update public notice requirements 

to bring them into line with the 

practices of the digital age and 

accommodate a new biennial regulatory 

cycle. 

DATES: Public meeting: The Federal 

Subsistence Board will hold a public 

meeting on January 12, 2010, to receive 

comments on this proposed rule. See 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific 

information on the public meeting. 

Public comments: We must receive 

written comments on this proposed rule 

by January 12, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Public meeting: The Federal 

Subsistence Board public meeting will 

be held at the Coast International Inn in 

Anchorage, Alaska. See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION for specific information on 

the public meeting. 

Public comments: You may submit 

comments by one of the following 

methods: 

• Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In the Search 

Documents box, enter FWS–R7–SM– 

2009–0052, which is the docket number 

for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search 

panel on the left side of the screen, 

under the Document Type heading, 

click on the Proposed Rules link to 

locate this document. You may submit 

a comment by clicking on ‘‘Send a 

Comment or Submission.’’ 

• By hard copy: U.S. mail or handdelivery to: USFWS, Office of 

Subsistence Management, 1011 East 

Tudor Road, MS 121, Attn: Theo 

Matuskowitz, Anchorage, AK 99503– 

6199; or hand-delivery to the Designated 

Federal Official attending the Federal 

Subsistence Board public meeting in 

Anchorage. 

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 Review Process section below for 

more information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions specific to National Forest 

System lands, contact Calvin H. Casipit, 

Regional Subsistence Program Leader, 

USDA, Forest Service, Alaska Region; 

(907) 586–7918. For questions regarding 

Department of the Interior lands, contact 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 52713 

Peter J. Probasco, Office of Subsistence 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; (907) 786–3888. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Under Title VIII of the Alaska 

National Interest Lands Conservation 

Act (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111–3126), 

the Secretary of the Interior and the 

Secretary of Agriculture (Secretaries) 

jointly implement the Federal 

Subsistence Management Program. This 

program grants a preference for 

subsistence uses of fish and wildlife 

resources on Federal public lands and 

waters in Alaska to rural residents. The 

Secretaries first published regulations to 

carry out this program in the Federal 

Register on May 29, 1992 (57 FR 22940), 

but the regulations have been amended 

numerous times since then. Because this 

program is a joint effort between Interior 

and Agriculture, these regulations are 

located in two titles of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR): Title 36, 

‘‘Parks, Forests, and Public Property,’’ 

and Title 50, ‘‘Wildlife and Fisheries,’’ 

at 36 CFR 242.1–28 and 50 CFR 100.1– 

28, respectively. The regulations contain 

subparts as follows: Subpart A, General 

Provisions; Subpart B, Program 

Structure; Subpart C, Board 

Determinations; and Subpart D, 

Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife. 

Consistent with subpart B of these 

regulations, the Departments established 

a Federal Subsistence Board to 

administer the Federal Subsistence 

Management Program. The Board is 

made up of: 

• A Chair appointed by the Secretary 

of the Interior with concurrence of the 

Secretary of Agriculture; 

•The Alaska Regional Director, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service; 

•The Alaska Regional Director, U.S. 

National Park Service; 

•The Alaska State Director, U.S. 

Bureau of Land Management; 

•The Alaska Regional Director, U.S. 

Bureau of Indian Affairs; and 

•The Alaska Regional Forester, U.S. 

Forest Service. 

Through the Board, these agencies 

participate in the development of 

regulations for subparts A, B, and C, 

which set forth the basic program, and 

the subpart D regulations, which, among 

other things, set forth specific harvest 

seasons and limits. 

In administering the program, the 

Secretaries divided Alaska into 10 

subsistence resource regions, each of 

which is represented by a regional 

council. The regional councils provide a 

forum for rural residents with personal 

knowledge of local conditions and 

resource requirements to have a 

meaningful role in the subsistence 

management of fish and wildlife on 

Federal public lands in Alaska. The 

regional council members represent 

varied geographical, cultural, and user 

diversity within each region. 

Proposed Regulatory Changes 

Members of the regional councils, 

agency representatives, and the public 

have expressed concern to the Federal 

Subsistence Board that 36 CFR 242.19 

and 50 CFR 100.19, respectively, need 

to be revised in a manner that provides 

more clarity to, and thereby increases 

understanding of, the Board’s process of 

accepting and addressing special action 

requests. Special actions are actions that 

the Board takes to modify the hunting 

or fishing regulations on public lands to 

ensure the continued viability of a fish 

or wildlife population or for other 

reasons. These actions may include 

closing, opening, or adjusting the 

seasons; modifying the harvest limits; or 

modifying the methods and means of 

harvest for subsistence uses of fish and 

wildlife. 

The problem with the lack of clarity 

in the regulations became particularly 

apparent during oral argument in the 

case of Ninilchik Traditional Council v. 

Fleagle, when the presiding judge 

struggled to interpret the procedural 

mechanisms described in the regulation 

and criticized it for being unclear. More 

recently, we have recognized the need 

to modify § __.19 to account for the 

programmatic shift to a biennial 

regulatory cycle. 

The primary purposes of these 

proposed modifications are to: 

(1) Improve clarity with respect to the 

Board’s process of accepting and 

addressing special action requests; 

(2) update public notice requirements 

to bring them into line with the 

practices of the digital age; 

(3) bring clarity to the role of the 

regional councils with respect to special 

action requests; and 

(4) accommodate the biennial 

regulatory cycle, which was 

implemented in 2008 (73 FR 35726; 

June 24, 2008). Additionally, we 

propose to revise § ___.10(d) and 

§ ___.18(a) to correspond with the 

proposed changes in § ___.19. 

While these proposed regulatory 

revisions will result in no direct change 

to subsistence uses, the changes should 

help all Alaska residents to better 

understand the process by which 

special action requests are accepted or 

rejected by the Board. 

Public Review Process—Public Meeting 

and Comments 

The Secretaries, through the Federal 

Subsistence Board, will receive 

comments on this proposed rule during 

a public meeting to be held at the Coast 

International Inn in Anchorage on 

January 12, 2010, starting at 8:30 a.m. 

You may provide oral testimony before 

the Board at that time. The council 

chairs, or their designated 

representatives, will present their 

respective councils’ comments at the 

Board meeting. The Board will then 

review all comments received and 

forward its recommendations to the 

Secretaries for final action. 

We will publish notice of the date, 

time, and meeting location in local and 

statewide newspapers prior to this 

meeting. The location and date may 

change based on weather or local 

circumstances. The amount of work on 

the Board’s agenda will determine the 

length of the meeting. 

Public Comment Procedures 

To ensure that any final action 

resulting from this proposed rule will be 

as accurate and as effective as possible, 

we request that you send relevant 

information for our consideration. The 

comments that will be most useful and 

likely to influence our decisions are 

those that you support by quantitative 

information or studies and those that 

include citations to, and analyses of, the 

applicable laws and regulations. Please 

make your comments as specific as 

possible and explain the bases for them. 

In addition, please include sufficient 

information with your comments to 

allow us to authenticate any scientific or 

commercial data you include. 

You must submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed above in 

the ADDRESSES section. If you submit a 

comment via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

comment—including any personal 

identifying information, such as your 

address, telephone number, or e-mail 

address—will be posted on the Web site. 

Please note that comments submitted to 

this Web site are not immediately 

viewable. When you submit a comment, 

the system receives it immediately. 

However, the comment will not be 

publicly viewable until we post it, 

which might not occur until several 

days after submission. 

If you mail or hand-carry a hardcopy 

comment directly to us that includes 

personal information, you may request 

at the top of your document that we 

withhold this information from public 

review. However, we cannot guarantee 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
52714 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

that we will be able to do so. To ensure 

that the electronic docket for this 

rulemaking is complete and all 

comments we receive are publicly 

available, we will post all hardcopy 

comments on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

In addition, comments and materials 

we receive, as well as supporting 

documentation used in preparing this 

proposed rule, will be available for 

public inspection in two ways: 

(1) You can view them on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In the Keyword 

box, enter FWS–R7–SM–2009–0052, 

which is the docket number for this 

rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel 

on the left side of the screen, select the 

type of documents you want to view 

under the Document Type heading. 

(2) You can make an appointment, 

during normal business hours, to view 

the comments and materials in person at 

the Office of Subsistence Management, 

1011 East Tudor Road, MS 121, 

Anchorage, AK 99503–6199. 

Public Availability of Comments 

As stated above in more detail, before 

including your address, phone number, 

e-mail 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. 

Tribal Consultation and Comment 

As expressed in Executive Order 

13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments,’’ the 

Federal officials that have been 

delegated authority by the Secretaries 

are committed to honoring the unique 

government-to-government political 

relationship that exists between the 

Federal Government and Federally 

Recognized Indian tribes (tribes) as 

listed in 73 FR 18533 (April 4, 2008). 

ANILCA does not specifically provide 

rights to tribes for the subsistence taking 

of wildlife, fish, and shellfish. However, 

because tribal members are affected by 

subsistence fishing, hunting, and 

trapping regulations, the Secretaries 

have elected to provide tribes an 

opportunity to consult on this proposed 

rule. The Board will consider other 

opportunities for tribal consultation, as 

appropriate. The Board will consider 

tribes’ information, input, and 

recommendations, and address their 

concerns as much as practicable. 

Compliance with Statutory and 

Regulatory Authorities 

National Environmental Policy Act 

A Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement that described four 

alternatives for developing a Federal 

Subsistence Management Program was 

distributed for public comment on 

October 7, 1991. The Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) 

was published on February 28, 1992. 

The Record of Decision (ROD) on 

Subsistence Management for Federal 

Public Lands in Alaska was signed April 

6, 1992. The selected alternative in the 

FEIS (Alternative IV) defined the 

administrative framework of an annual 

regulatory cycle for subsistence 

regulations. 

A 1997 environmental assessment 

dealt with the expansion of Federal 

jurisdiction over fisheries and is 

available at the office listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The 

Secretary of the Interior, with 

concurrence of the Secretary of 

Agriculture, determined that expansion 

of Federal jurisdiction does not 

constitute a major Federal action 

significantly affecting the human 

environment and, therefore, signed a 

Finding of No Significant Impact. 

Section 810 of ANILCA 

An ANILCA Section 810 analysis was 

completed as part of the FEIS process on 

the Federal Subsistence Management 

Program. The intent of all Federal 

subsistence regulations is to accord 

subsistence uses of fish and wildlife on 

public lands a priority over the taking 

of fish and wildlife on such lands for 

other purposes, unless restriction is 

necessary to conserve healthy fish and 

wildlife populations. The final section 

810 analysis determination appeared in 

the April 6, 1992, ROD and concluded 

that the Federal Subsistence 

Management Program, under 

Alternative IV with an annual process 

for setting subsistence regulations, may 

have some local impacts on subsistence 

uses, but will not likely restrict 

subsistence uses significantly. 

During the subsequent environmental 

assessment process for extending 

fisheries jurisdiction, an evaluation of 

the effects of this rule was conducted in 

accordance with section 810. That 

evaluation also supported the 

Secretaries’ determination that the rule 

will not reach the ‘‘may significantly 

restrict’’ threshold that would require 

notice and hearings under ANILCA 

section 810(a). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements contained in this rule have 

been approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and assigned 

OMB control number 1018–0075, which 

expires October 31, 2009. We may not 

conduct or sponsor, and you are not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a current 

valid OMB control number. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Order 12866) 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this rule is 

not significant. 

OMB bases its determination of 

significance upon the following four 

criteria: 

a. Whether the rule will have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy or adversely affect an 

economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 

environment, or other units of the 

government. 

b. Whether the rule will create 

inconsistencies with other agencies’ 

actions. 

c. Whether the rule will materially 

affect entitlements, grants, user fees, 

loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of their recipients. 

d. Whether the rule raises novel legal 

or policy issues. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires 

preparation of flexibility analyses for 

rules that will have a significant effect 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, which include small 

businesses, organizations, or 

governmental jurisdictions. In general, 

the resources to be harvested under this 

rule are already being harvested and 

consumed by the local harvester and do 

not result in an additional dollar benefit 

to the economy. However, we estimate 

that 2 million pounds of meat are 

harvested by subsistence users annually 

and, if given an estimated dollar value 

of $3.00 per pound, this amount would 

equate to about $6 million in food value 

statewide. Based upon the amounts and 

values cited above, the Departments 

certify that this rulemaking will not 

have a significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

Under the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 801 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 52715 

et seq.), this rule is not a major rule. It 

does not have an effect on the economy 

of $100 million or more; will not cause 

a major increase in costs or prices for 

consumers; and does 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. 

Executive Order 12630 

Title VIII of ANILCA requires the 

Secretaries to administer a subsistence 

priority on public lands. The scope of 

this program is limited by definition to 

certain public lands. Likewise, these 

regulations have no potential takings of 

private property implications as defined 

by Executive Order 12630. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Secretaries have determined and 

certify pursuant to the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et 

seq., that this rulemaking will not 

impose a cost of $100 million or more 

in any given year on local or State 

governments or private entities. The 

implementation of this rule is by 

Federal agencies and there is no cost 

imposed on any State or local entities or 

tribal governments. 

Executive Order 12988 

The Secretaries have determined that 

these regulations meet the applicable 

standards provided in Sections 3(a) and 

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, 

regarding civil justice reform. 

Executive Order 13132 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the rule does not have sufficient 

Federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a Federalism Assessment. 

Title VIII of ANILCA precludes the State 

from exercising subsistence 

management authority over fish and 

wildlife resources on Federal lands 

unless it meets certain requirements. 

Executive Order 13175 

ANILCA does not specifically provide 

rights to tribes for the subsistence taking 

of wildlife, fish, and shellfish. And 

while, for this rule, E.O. 13175 does not 

require the agencies to consult with 

tribes, the Secretaries have elected to 

provide tribes an opportunity to consult 

on this rule. The Board will provide a 

variety of opportunities for consultation 

through: Commenting on proposed 

changes to the existing rule; engaging in 

dialogue at the Board’s meetings; and 

providing input in person, by mail, 

email, or phone at any time during the 

rulemaking process. 

Executive Order 1321 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

E.O. 13211 on regulations that 

significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use. This Executive 

Order requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. This rule is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

E.O. 13211, affecting energy supply, 

distribution, or use, and no Statement of 

Energy Effects is required. 

Drafting Information 

Theo Matuskowitz drafted these 

regulations under the guidance of Peter 

J. Probasco of the Office of Subsistence 

Management, Alaska Regional Office, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Anchorage, Alaska. Additional 

assistance was provided by: 

• Daniel Sharp, Alaska State Office, 

Bureau of Land Management; 

• Sandy Rabinowitch and Nancy 

Swanton, Alaska Regional Office, 

National Park Service; 

• Drs. Warren Eastland and Glenn 

Chen, Alaska Regional Office, Bureau of 

Indian Affairs; 

• Jerry Berg and Carl Jack, Alaska 

Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; and 

•Calvin H. Casipit, Alaska Regional 

Office, U.S. Forest Service. 

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 242 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alaska, Fish, National 

forests, Public lands, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 100 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Alaska, Fish, National 

forests, Public lands, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Federal Subsistence 

Board proposes to amend subpart B of 

part 242 of title 36 and part 100 of title 

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

as set forth below. 

PART ___—SUBSISTENCE 

MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS FOR 

PUBLIC LANDS IN ALASKA 

1. The authority citation for both 36 

CFR Part 242 and 50 CFR Part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3, 472, 551, 668dd, 

3101–3126; 18 U.S.C. 3551–3586; 43 U.S.C. 

1733. 

2. Amend § ___.10 by revising 

paragraph (d)(4)(vi), redesignating 

paragraphs (d)(4)(vii) through (xix) as 

paragraphs (d)(4)(viii) through (xx), and 

adding a new paragraph (d)(4)(vii) to 

read as follows: 

§ ___.10 Federal Subsistence Board. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(vi) Restrict the taking of fish and 

wildlife on public lands for 

nonsubsistence uses, close or open 

public lands for the take of fish and 

wildlife for nonsubsistence uses, or 

otherwise modify the requirements 

regarding the taking of fish and wildlife 

on public lands for nonsubsistence uses 

when necessary for the conservation of 

healthy populations of fish or wildlife, 

to continue subsistence uses of fish or 

wildlife, or for reasons of public safety 

or administration; 

(vii) Restrict the taking of a particular 

fish or wildlife population on public 

lands for subsistence uses, close public 

lands to take for subsistence uses, or 

otherwise modify the requirements for 

take from a particular fish or wildlife 

population on public lands for 

subsistence uses when necessary to 

ensure the continued viability of a fish 

or wildlife population, or for reasons of 

public safety or administration (As soon 

as conditions warrant, the Board may 

also reopen public lands to the taking of 

a fish and wildlife population for 

subsistence users to continue those 

uses.); 

* * * * * 

3. Revise the introductory text of 

paragraph (a) of § ___.18 to read as 

follows: 

§___.18 Regulation adoption process. 

(a) The Board will accept proposals 

for changes to the Federal subsistence 

regulations in subparts C or D of this 

part according to a published schedule, 

except for proposals for emergency and 

temporary special actions, which the 

Board will accept according to 

procedures set forth in § ___.19. The 

Board may establish a rotating schedule 

for accepting proposals on various 

sections of subpart C or subpart D 

regulations over a period of years. The 

Board will develop and publish 

proposed regulations in the Federal 

Register, publish notice in local 

newspapers, and distribute comments 

on the proposed regulations in the form 

of proposals for public review. 

* * * * * 

4. Revise §___.19 to read as follows: 

§___.19 Special actions. 

(a) Emergency special actions. In an 

emergency situation, the Board may 

immediately open or close public lands 

for the taking of fish and wildlife for 

subsistence uses, or modify the 

requirements for take for subsistence 

uses, or close public lands to take for 

nonsubsistence uses of fish and wildlife, 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
52716 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 197 / Wednesday, October 14, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

or restrict the requirements for take for 

nonsubsistence uses, if necessary to 

ensure the continued viability of a fish 

or wildlife population, to continue 

subsistence uses of fish or wildlife, or 

for public safety reasons. The Board 

may also reopen public lands to 

nonsubsistence uses if new information 

or changed conditions indicate that the 

closure is no longer warranted. 

(1) If the timing of a regularly 

scheduled meeting of the affected 

Regional Council so permits without 

incurring undue delay, the Board may 

seek Council recommendations on the 

proposed emergency special action. 

Such a Council recommendation, if any, 

will be subject to the requirements of § 

___.18. 

(2) The emergency action will be 

effective when directed by the Board, 

may not exceed 60 days, and may not 

be extended unless the procedures for 

adoption of a temporary special action, 

as set forth in paragraph (b) of this 

section, have been followed. 

(b) Temporary special actions. After 

adequate notice and public hearing, the 

Board may temporarily close or open 

public lands for the taking of fish and 

wildlife for subsistence uses or modify 

the requirements for subsistence take, or 

temporarily close public lands for the 

taking of fish and wildlife for 

nonsubsistence uses or restrict take for 

nonsubsistence uses. The Board may 

make such temporary changes only after 

it determines that the proposed 

temporary change will not interfere with 

the conservation of healthy fish and 

wildlife populations, will not be 

detrimental to the long-term subsistence 

use of fish or wildlife resources, and is 

not an unnecessary restriction on 

nonsubsistence users. 

(1) Prior to implementing a temporary 

special action, the Board will consult 

with the State of Alaska and the Chairs 

of the Regional Councils of the affected 

regions. 

(2) If the timing of a regularly 

scheduled meeting of the affected 

Regional Council so permits without 

incurring undue delay, the Board will 

seek Council recommendations on the 

proposed temporary special action. 

Such Council recommendations, if any, 

will be subject to the requirements of § 

___.18. 

(3) The length of any temporary action 

will be confined to the minimum time 

period or harvest limit determined by 

the Board to be necessary under the 

circumstances. In any event, a 

temporary opening or closure will not 

extend longer than the end of the 

current regulatory cycle. 

(c) The Board may reject a request for 

either an emergency or a temporary 

special action if the Board concludes 

that there are no time-sensitive 

circumstances necessitating a regulatory 

change before the next regular proposal 

cycle. However, a special action request 

that has been rejected for this reason 

may be deferred, if appropriate and after 

consultation with the proponent, for 

consideration during the next regular 

proposal cycle. The Board will consider 

changes to customary and traditional 

use determinations in subpart C of this 

part only during the regular proposal 

cycle. 

(d) The Board will provide notice of 

all regulatory changes adopted via 

special action by posting the change on 

the Office of Subsistence Management 

website (http://alaska.fws.gov/asm/ 

osm.cfml). When appropriate, notice 

may also include distribution of press 

releases to newspapers, local radio 

stations, and local contacts, as well as 

direct notification to the proponent and 

interested parties. The Board will 

publish notice and reasons justifying the 

special action in the Federal Register as 

soon as practicable. 

(e) The decision of the Board on any 

proposed special action will constitute 

its final administrative action. 

(f) Regulations authorizing any 

individual agency to implement 

closures or restrictions on public lands 

managed by the agency remain 

unaffected by the regulations in this 

part. 

(g) You may not take fish and wildlife 

in violation of any restriction, closure, 

or change authorized by the Board. 

Dated: October 6, 2009 

Ken Salazar, 

Secretary of the Interior, Department of the 

Interior. 

Dated: July 22, 2009 

Dennis E. Bschor, 

Regional Forester, USDA—Forest Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–24653 Filed 10–13–09; 8:45 am 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2007–0908; FRL–8957–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio 

Administrative Code Rule 3742–21–17 

Portable Fuel Containers 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency submitted a revision 

to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

under the Clean Air Act in order to 

reduce air pollution in Ohio. The SIP 

revision consists of a new regulation 

entitled Ohio’s Administrative Code 

Rule 3745–21–17 ‘‘Control of VOC 

Emissions from Portable Fuel 

Containers.’’ This rule impacts sale, use, 

and manufacture of Portable Fuel 

Containers in the State of Ohio. EPA is 

proposing to approve this rule. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 13, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2007–0908, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2551. 

4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael G. Leslie, Environmental 

Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680, 

leslie.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP revision submittal as a direct final 

rule without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS