51758 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 169 / Thursday, August 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

and Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 5100.1, which 

guides the Coast Guard in complying 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–

4370f), and have concluded that there 

are no factors in this case that would 

limit the use of a categorical exclusion 

under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. 

Therefore, this rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(h), of the Instruction, from further 

environmental documentation. Special 

local regulations issued in conjunction 

with a regatta or marine parade permit 

are specifically excluded from further 

analysis and documentation under that 

section. 

Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), 

of the Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental 

Analysis Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are not 

required for this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

■ For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add a temporary § 100.35–T05–065 

to read as follows: 

§ 100.35–T05–065 Choptank River, 

Cambridge, MD. 

(a) Definitions: (1) Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander means a commissioned, 

warrant, or petty officer of the Coast 

Guard who has been designated by the 

Commander, Coast Guard Sector 

Baltimore. 

(2) Official Patrol means any vessel 

assigned or approved by Commander, 

Coast Guard Sector Baltimore with a 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

on board and displaying a Coast Guard 

ensign. 

(3) Participant includes all vessels 

participating in the 2006 Cambridge 

Offshore Challenge under the auspices 

of the Marine Event Permit issued to the 

event sponsor and approved by 

Commander, Coast Guard Sector 

Baltimore. 

(b) Regulated area includes all waters 

of the Choptank River, from shoreline to 

shoreline, bounded to the west by the 

Route 50 Bridge and bounded to the east 

by a line drawn along longitude 076° W, 

between Goose Point, MD and 

Oystershell Point, MD. All coordinates 

reference Datum: NAD 1983. 

(c) Special local regulations: (1) 

Except for event participants and 

persons or vessels authorized by the 

Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no 

person or vessel may enter or remain in 

the regulated area. 

(2) The operator of any vessel in the 

regulated area must: 

(i) Stop the vessel immediately when 

directed to do so by any Official Patrol. 

(ii) Proceed as directed by any Official 

Patrol. 

(iii) When authorized to transit the 

regulated area, all vessels shall proceed 

at the minimum speed necessary to 

maintain a safe course that minimizes 

wake near the race course. 

(d) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 10:30 a.m. on 

September 23, 2006 to 4:30 p.m. on 

September 24, 2006. 

Dated: August 21, 2006. 

L.L. Hereth, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E6–14494 Filed 8–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

36 CFR Part 242 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 100 

Subsistence Management Regulations 

for Public Lands in Alaska, Subpart D; 

Seasonal Adjustment—Arctic Village 

Sheep Management Area 

AGENCIES: Forest Service, USDA; Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Seasonal adjustment. 

SUMMARY: This provides notice of the 

Federal Subsistence Board’s in-season 

management action to remove closure 

restrictions on non-Federally qualified 

users in the Red Sheep and Cane Creek 

drainages of the Arctic Village Sheep 

Management Area. The Board’s action 

provides an exception to the 

Subsistence Management Regulations 

for Public Lands in Alaska, published in 

the Federal Register on June 30, 2006. 

Those regulations established seasons, 

harvest limits, methods, and means 

relating to the taking of wildlife for 

subsistence uses during the 2006 

regulatory year. 

DATES: The action is effective from 

August 10, 2006, through September 20, 

2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter J. Probasco, Office of Subsistence 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, telephone (907) 786–3888. For 

questions specific to National Forest 

System lands, contact Steve Kessler, 

Subsistence Program Manager, USDA—

Forest Service, Alaska Region, 

telephone (907) 786–3592. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Title VIII of the Alaska National 

Interest Lands Conservation Act 

(ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111–3126) 

requires that the Secretary of the Interior 

and the Secretary of Agriculture 

(Secretaries) implement a joint program 

to grant a preference for subsistence 

uses of fish and wildlife resources on 

public lands in Alaska, unless the State 

of Alaska enacts and implements laws 

of general applicability that are 

consistent with ANILCA and that 

provide for the subsistence definition, 

preference, and participation specified 

in Sections 803, 804, and 805 of 

ANILCA. In December 1989, the Alaska 

Supreme Court ruled that the rural 


erjones on PROD1PC72 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 169 / Thursday, August 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 51759 

preference in the State subsistence 

statute violated the Alaska Constitution 

and, therefore, negated State compliance 

with ANILCA. 

The Department of the Interior and 

the Department of Agriculture 

(Departments) assumed, on July 1, 1990, 

responsibility for implementation of 

Title VIII of ANILCA on public lands. 

The Departments administer Title VIII 

through regulations at Title 50, Part 100 

and Title 36, Part 242 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR). Consistent 

with Subparts A, B, and C of these 

regulations, as revised January 8, 1999 

(64 FR 1276), the Departments 

established a Federal Subsistence Board 

to administer the Federal Subsistence 

Management Program. The Board’s 

composition includes 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, National 

Park Service; the Alaska State Director, 

Bureau of Land Management; the Alaska 

Regional Director, Bureau of Indian 

Affairs; and the Alaska Regional 

Forester, USDA Forest Service. Through 

the Board, these agencies participate in 

the development of regulations for 

Subparts A, B, and C, which establish 

the program structure and determine 

which Alaska residents are eligible to 

take specific species for subsistence 

uses, and the annual Subpart D 

regulations, which establish seasons, 

harvest limits, and methods and means 

for subsistence take of species in 

specific areas. Subpart D regulations for 

the 2006 wildlife seasons, harvest 

limits, and methods and means were 

published on June 30, 2006 (71 FR 

37642). Because this action relates to a 

joint program managed by an agency or 

agencies in both the Departments of 

Agriculture and the Interior, an 

identical adjustment would apply to 36 

CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100. 

The Alaska Department of Fish and 

Game (ADF&G), under the direction of 

the Alaska Board of Fisheries (BOF), 

manages sport, commercial, personal 

use, and State subsistence harvest on all 

lands and waters throughout Alaska. 

However, on Federal lands and waters, 

the Federal Subsistence Board 

implements a subsistence priority for 

rural residents as provided by Title VIII 

of ANILCA. In providing this priority, 

the Board may, when necessary, 

preempt State harvest regulations for 

fish or wildlife on Federal lands and 

waters. 

Current Management Action 

This action is authorized and in 

accordance with 50 CFR 100.19(d)–(e) 

and 36 CFR 242.19(d)–(e). 

Arctic Village Sheep Management Area 

Section 815(3) of ANILCA authorizes 

restrictions or closures to 

nonsubsistence uses on the public lands 

only when necessary for the 

conservation of healthy populations of 

fish and wildlife or to continue 

subsistence uses of such populations. 

Federal closure regulations for the 

Arctic Village Sheep Management Area 

have been in existence since the 1991/ 

92 regulatory year. The management 

area was expanded in 1995 to include 

the Cane Creek and Red Sheep Creek 

drainages. The initial closure was 

proposed to address concerns regarding 

low number of sheep in the area, and to 

provide for continued subsistence use of 

sheep in the area. 

In 2005, the Alaska Department of 

Fish and Game submitted a proposal 

that requested the Board remove the 

closure in the Arctic Village Sheep 

Management Area to nonrural hunters. 

Their proposal stated that without 

evidence of any significant use by local 

subsistence hunters, the necessity of the 

closure to continue subsistence use of 

sheep in the area could not be used to 

justify maintaining the closure. The 

public and the Eastern Interior 

Subsistence Regional Advisory Council 

reviewed and made recommendations 

on the proposal. At its May 2006 

meeting, the Board rejected the 

proposal, as well as a motion to remove 

the closure for only the Red Sheep and 

Cane Creek drainages, based on the lack 

of biological and harvest data that 

would support or oppose the proposed 

action. The Board requested agency staff 

to conduct a sheep population survey 

within the affected area and indicated it 

would revisit this issue pending the 

results of the survey. 

A survey of sheep in the Red Sheep 

Creek and Cane Creek drainages within 

the Arctic Village Sheep Management 

Area conducted June 19–21, 2006, 

found a minimum of 188 sheep in these 

drainages, including 53 rams, of which 

18 were classified as mature rams. The 

estimated density of sheep in these 

drainages was 1.8 sheep/mi2. Although 

the density of sheep in the area is 

relatively low compared to some other 

areas in the state, the density reflects the 

relatively poor quality of the sheep 

habitat. The sex and age ratios of the 

sheep are within normal ranges and 

indicate that the population is healthy. 

Allowing sheep hunting by nonFederally qualified hunters in these 

drainages would not adversely affect the 

sheep population because these hunters 

would be limited to taking one full curl 

ram in the fall season when this special 

action would be effective. Removal of 

some full curl rams from the population 

will not reduce reproductive success in 

the sheep population. Maintaining the 

closure to nonsubsistence hunting of 

sheep in the Red Sheep Creek and Cane 

Creek drainages within the Arctic 

Village Sheep Management Area is no 

longer necessary for conservation of a 

healthy sheep population. 

Maintaining the closure to 

nonsubsistence hunting of sheep in 

these drainages is also not necessary to 

provide for continued subsistence use of 

sheep. Currently, despite the closure to 

non-Federally qualified hunters and a 

more liberal Federal subsistence harvest 

limit during the fall than that provided 

under State regulations in adjacent 

areas, there has been relatively little 

hunting effort in these drainages 

reported by Arctic Village and other 

Federally qualified residents and very 

few sheep have been reported taken 

there since the closure was instituted in 

1995. The sheep population in these 

drainages can support harvest by both 

subsistence and nonsubsistence hunters. 

In fact, because subsistence hunters can 

take rams of any age, the number of 

rams available to subsistence hunters far 

exceeds the number of full curl rams to 

which non-Federally qualified hunters 

are limited. Allowing hunting by nonFederally qualified hunters in the Red 

Sheep Creek and Cane Creek drainages 

would not significantly reduce harvest 

opportunities for Arctic Village 

residents. 

Finally, the existing closure is not 

justified for reasons of public safety, 

administration, or pursuant to other 

applicable law. 

On July 18, 2006, at a public work 

session in Anchorage, the Board 

approved lifting the closure in the Red 

Sheep and Cane Creek drainages from 

August 10, 2006, through September 20, 

2006. The remainder of the Arctic 

Village Sheep Management Area 

remains closed to nonrural hunters. 

Conformance With Statutory and 

Regulatory Authorities 

Administrative Procedure Act 

The Board finds that additional public 

notice and comment requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) for this adjustment are 

impracticable, unnecessary, and 

contrary to the public interest. Lack of 

appropriate and immediate action 

would generally fail to serve the overall 

public interest and conflict with Section 


erjones on PROD1PC72 with RULES
51760 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 169 / Thursday, August 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

815(3) of ANILCA. Therefore, the Board 

finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(B) to waive additional public 

notice and comment procedures prior to 

implementation of this action and 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make 

this rule effective as indicated in the 

DATES section. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Compliance 

A Final Environmental Impact 

Statement (FEIS) was published on 

February 28, 1992, and a Record of 

Decision on Subsistence Management 

for Federal Public Lands in Alaska 

(ROD) was signed April 6, 1992. The 

final rule for Subsistence Management 

Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska, 

Subparts A, B, and C (57 FR 22940, 

published May 29, 1992), implemented 

the Federal Subsistence Management 

Program and included a framework for 

an annual cycle for subsistence hunting 

and fishing regulations. A final rule that 

redefined the jurisdiction of the Federal 

Subsistence Management Program to 

include waters subject to the 

subsistence priority was published on 

January 8, 1999 (64 FR 1276). 

Section 810 of ANILCA 

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. A Section 810 analysis was 

completed as part of the FEIS process. 

The final Section 810 analysis 

determination appeared in the April 6, 

1992, ROD, which concluded that the 

Federal Subsistence Management 

Program, under Alternative IV with an 

annual process for setting hunting and 

fishing regulations, may have some local 

impacts on subsistence uses, but the 

program is not likely to significantly 

restrict subsistence uses. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The adjustment does not contain 

information collection requirements 

subject to Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Federal Agencies 

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. 

Other Requirements 

The adjustment has been exempted 

from OMB review under Executive 

Order 12866. 

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. The exact 

number of businesses and the amount of 

trade that will result from this Federal 

land-related activity is unknown. The 

aggregate effect is an insignificant 

economic effect (both positive and 

negative) on a small number of small 

entities supporting subsistence 

activities, such as sporting goods 

dealers. The number of small entities 

affected is unknown; however, the 

effects will be seasonally and 

geographically limited in nature and 

will likely not be significant. The 

Departments certify that this adjustment 

will not have a significant economic 

effect on a substantial number of small 

entities within the meaning of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

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

Title VIII of ANILCA requires the 

Secretaries to administer a subsistence 

preference on public lands. The scope of 

this program is limited by definition to 

certain public lands. Likewise, this 

adjustment has no potential takings of 

private property implications as defined 

by Executive Order 12630. 

The Service has determined and 

certifies under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that 

the adjustment will not impose a cost of 

$100 million or more in any given year 

on local or State governments or private 

entities. The implementation is by 

Federal agencies, and no cost is 

involved to any State or local entities or 

Tribal governments. 

The Service has determined that the 

adjustment meets the applicable 

standards provided in Sections 3(a) and 

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

regarding civil justice reform. 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, the adjustment 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. Cooperative salmon run 

assessment efforts with ADF&G will 

continue. 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive 

Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have 

evaluated possible effects on Federally 

recognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that there are no substantial 

direct effects. The Bureau of Indian 

Affairs is a participating agency in this 

rulemaking. 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 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. As this 

action is not expected to significantly 

affect energy supply, distribution, or 

use, it is not a significant energy action 

and no Statement of Energy Effects is 

required. 

Drafting Information 

Bill Knauer drafted this document 

under the guidance of Peter J. Probasco, 

of the Office of Subsistence 

Management, Alaska Regional Office, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Anchorage, Alaska. Chuck Ardizzone, 

Alaska State Office, Bureau of Land 

Management; Greg Bos, Alaska Regional 

Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 

Sandy Rabinowitch, Alaska Regional 

Office, National Park Service; Dr. 

Warren Eastland, Alaska Regional 

Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs; and 

Steve Kessler, USDA—Forest Service, 

provided additional guidance. 

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

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

1733. 

Dated: August 8, 2006. 

Peter J. Probasco, 

Acting Chair, Federal Subsistence Board. 

Dated: August 8, 2006. 

Steve Kessler, 

Subsistence Program Leader, USDA—Forest 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 06–7276 Filed 8–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P, 4310–55–P 


erjones on PROD1PC72 with RULES