18328 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 20 

RIN 1018–AV12 

Migratory Bird Hunting; Proposed 

2007–08 Migratory Game Bird Hunting 

Regulations (Preliminary) With 

Requests for Indian Tribal Proposals 

and Requests for 2008 Spring/Summer 

Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest 

Proposals in Alaska 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of 

supplemental information. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (hereinafter the Service or we) 

proposes to establish annual hunting 

regulations for certain migratory game 

birds for the 2007–08 hunting season. 

We annually prescribe outside limits 

(frameworks) within which States may 

select hunting seasons. This proposed 

rule provides the regulatory schedule, 

describes the proposed regulatory 

alternatives for the 2007–08 duck 

hunting seasons, requests proposals 

from Indian tribes that wish to establish 

special migratory game bird hunting 

regulations on Federal Indian 

reservations and ceded lands, and 

requests proposals for the 2008 spring/ 

summer migratory bird subsistence 

season in Alaska. Migratory game bird 

hunting seasons provide hunting 

opportunities for recreation and 

sustenance; aid Federal, State, and tribal 

governments in the management of 

migratory game birds; and permit 

harvests at levels compatible with 

migratory game bird population status 

and habitat conditions. 

DATES: You must submit comments on 

the proposed regulatory alternatives for 

the 2007–08 duck hunting seasons and 

the draft environmental assessment for 

the take of Lower Colorado River Valley 

Population of sandhill cranes by May 

15, 2007. Following later Federal 

Register documents, you will be given 

an opportunity to submit comments for 

proposed early-season frameworks by 

July 31, 2007, and for proposed lateseason frameworks and subsistence 

migratory bird seasons in Alaska by 

August 31, 2007. Tribes must submit 

proposals and related comments by June 

1, 2007. Proposals from the Comanagement Council for the 2008 

spring/summer migratory bird 

subsistence harvest season must be 

submitted to the Flyway Councils and 

the Service by June 15, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments on the 

proposals to the Chief, Division of 

Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Department of the 

Interior, MS MBSP–4107–ARLSQ, 1849 

C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240. 

All comments received, including 

names and addresses, will become part 

of the public record. You may inspect 

comments during normal business 

hours in room 4107, Arlington Square 

Building, 4501 North Fairfax Drive, 

Arlington, Virginia. Proposals for the 

2008 spring/summer migratory bird 

subsistence season in Alaska should be 

sent to the Executive Director of the Comanagement Council, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 1011 E. Tudor Road, 

Anchorage, AK 99503, or fax to (907) 

786–3306 or email to ambcc@fws.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron 

W. Kokel, at: Division of Migratory Bird 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Department of the Interior, MS 

MBSP–4107–ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20240, (703) 358– 

1714. For information on the migratory 

bird subsistence season in Alaska, 

contact Fred Armstrong, (907) 786– 

3887, or Donna Dewhurst, (907) 786– 

3499, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

1011 E. Tudor Road, Mail Stop 201, 

Anchorage, AK 99503. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background and Overview 

Migratory game birds are those bird 

species so designated in conventions 

between the United States and several 

foreign nations for the protection and 

management of these birds. Under the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 

703–712), the Secretary of the Interior is 

authorized to determine when ‘‘hunting, 

taking, capture, killing, possession, sale, 

purchase, shipment, transportation, 

carriage, or export of any * * * bird, or 

any part, nest, or egg’’ of migratory game 

birds can take place, and to adopt 

regulations for this purpose. These 

regulations are written after giving due 

regard to ‘‘the zones of temperature and 

to the distribution, abundance, 

economic value, breeding habits, and 

times and lines of migratory flight of 

such birds’ and are updated annually 

(16 U.S.C. 704(a)). This responsibility 

has been delegated to the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service) of the 

Department of the Interior as the lead 

Federal agency for managing and 

conserving migratory birds in the 

United States. 

The Service develops migratory game 

bird hunting regulations by establishing 

the frameworks, or outside limits, for 

season lengths, bag limits, and areas for 

migratory game bird hunting. 

Acknowledging regional differences in 

hunting conditions, the Service has 

administratively divided the nation into 

four Flyways for the primary purpose of 

managing migratory game birds. Each 

Flyway (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, 

and Pacific) has a Flyway Council, a 

formal organization generally composed 

of one member from each State and 

Province in that Flyway. The Flyway 

Councils, established through the 

International Association of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA), also assist 

in researching and providing migratory 

game bird management information for 

Federal, State, and Provincial 

Governments, as well as private 

conservation agencies and the general 

public. 

The process for adopting migratory 

game bird hunting regulations, located 

at 50 CFR 20, is constrained by three 

primary factors. Legal and 

administrative considerations dictate 

how long the rulemaking process will 

last. Most importantly, however, the 

biological cycle of migratory game birds 

controls the timing of data-gathering 

activities and thus the dates on which 

these results are available for 

consideration and deliberation. 

The process includes two separate 

regulations-development schedules, 

based on early and late hunting season 

regulations. Early hunting seasons 

pertain to all migratory game bird 

species in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, 

and the Virgin Islands; migratory game 

birds other than waterfowl (i.e., dove, 

woodcock, etc.); and special early 

waterfowl seasons, such as teal or 

resident Canada geese. Early hunting 

seasons generally begin prior to October 

1. Late hunting seasons generally start 

on or after October 1 and include most 

waterfowl seasons not already 

established. 

There are basically no differences in 

the processes for establishing either 

early or late hunting seasons. For each 

cycle, Service biologists gather, analyze, 

and interpret biological survey data and 

provide this information to all those 

involved in the process through a series 

of published status reports and 

presentations to Flyway Councils and 

other interested parties. Because the 

Service is required to take abundance of 

migratory game birds and other factors 

into consideration, the Service 

undertakes a number of surveys 

throughout the year in conjunction with 

Service Regional Offices, the Canadian 

Wildlife Service, and State and 

Provincial wildlife-management 

agencies. To determine the appropriate 

frameworks for each species, we 

consider factors such as population size 

and trend, geographical distribution, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18329 

annual breeding effort, the condition of 

breeding and wintering habitat, the 

number of hunters, and the anticipated 

harvest. 

After frameworks, or outside limits, 

are established for season lengths, bag 

limits, and areas for migratory game bird 

hunting, migratory game bird 

management becomes a cooperative 

effort of State and Federal governments. 

After Service establishment of final 

frameworks for hunting seasons, the 

States may select season dates, bag 

limits, and other regulatory options for 

the hunting seasons. States may always 

be more conservative in their selections 

than the Federal frameworks but never 

more liberal. 

Notice of Intent To Establish Open 

Seasons 

This notice announces our intent to 

establish open hunting seasons and 

daily bag and possession limits for 

certain designated groups or species of 

migratory game birds for 2007–08 in the 

contiguous United States, Alaska, 

Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin 

Islands, under §§ 20.101 through 20.107, 

20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K of 50 

CFR part 20. 

For the 2007–08 migratory game bird 

hunting season, we will propose 

regulations for certain designated 

members of the avian families Anatidae 

(ducks, geese, and swans); Columbidae 

(doves and pigeons); Gruidae (cranes); 

Rallidae (rails, coots, moorhens, and 

gallinules); and Scolopacidae 

(woodcock and snipe). We describe 

these proposals under Proposed 2007–

08 Migratory Game Bird Hunting 

Regulations (Preliminary) in this 

document. We published definitions of 

waterfowl flyways and mourning dove 

management units, as well as a 

description of the data used in and the 

factors affecting the regulatory process, 

in the March 14, 1990, Federal Register 

(55 FR 9618). 

Regulatory Schedule for 2007–08 

This document is the first in a series 

of proposed, supplemental, and final 

rulemaking documents for migratory 

game bird hunting regulations. We will 

publish additional supplemental 

proposals for public comment in the 

Federal Register as population, habitat, 

harvest, and other information become 

available. Because of the late dates 

when certain portions of these data 

become available, we anticipate 

abbreviated comment periods on some 

proposals. Special circumstances limit 

the amount of time we can allow for 

public comment on these regulations. 

Specifically, two considerations 

compress the time for the rulemaking 

process: The need, on one hand, to 

establish final rules early enough in the 

summer to allow resource agencies to 

select and publish season dates and bag 

limits prior to the beginning of hunting 

seasons and, on the other hand, the lack 

of current status data on most migratory 

game birds until later in the summer. 

Because the regulatory process is 

strongly influenced by the times when 

information is available for 

consideration, we divide the regulatory 

process into two segments: Early 

seasons and late seasons (further 

described and discussed under the 

Background and Overview section). 

Major steps in the 2007–08 regulatory 

cycle relating to open public meetings 

and Federal Register notifications are 

illustrated in the diagram at the end of 

this proposed rule. All publication dates 

of Federal Register documents are target 

dates. 

All sections of this and subsequent 

documents outlining hunting 

frameworks and guidelines are 

organized under numbered headings. 

These headings are: 

1. Ducks 

A. General Harvest Strategy 

B. Regulatory Alternatives 

C. Zones and Split Seasons 

D. Special Seasons/Species 

Management 

i. September Teal Seasons 

ii. September Teal/Wood Duck 

Seasons 

iii. Black ducks 

iv. Canvasbacks 

v. Pintails 

vi. Scaup 

vii. Mottled ducks 

viii. Youth Hunt 

2. Sea Ducks 

3. Mergansers 

4. Canada Geese 

A. Special Seasons 

B. Regular Seasons 

C. Special Late Seasons 

5. White-fronted Geese 

6. Brant 

7. Snow and Ross’s (Light) Geese 

8. Swans 

9. Sandhill Cranes 

10. Coots 

11. Moorhens and Gallinules 

12. Rails 

13. Snipe 

14. Woodcock 

15. Band-tailed Pigeons 

16. Mourning Doves 

17. White-winged and White-tipped 

Doves 

18. Alaska 

19. Hawaii 

20. Puerto Rico 

21. Virgin Islands 

22. Falconry 

23. Other 

Later sections of this and subsequent 

documents will refer only to numbered 

items requiring your attention. 

Therefore, it is important to note that we 

will omit those items requiring no 

attention, and remaining numbered 

items will be discontinuous and appear 

incomplete. 

We will publish final regulatory 

alternatives for the 2007–08 duck 

hunting seasons in early June. We will 

publish proposed early season 

frameworks in mid-July and late season 

frameworks in mid-August. We will 

publish final regulatory frameworks for 

early seasons on or about August 17, 

2007, and those for late seasons on or 

about September 14, 2007. 

Request for 2008 Spring/Summer 

Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest 

Proposals in Alaska 

Background 

The 1916 Convention for the 

Protection of Migratory Birds between 

the United States and Great Britain (for 

Canada) established a closed season for 

the taking of migratory birds between 

March 10 and September 1. Residents of 

northern Alaska and Canada 

traditionally harvested migratory birds 

for nutritional purposes during the 

spring and summer months. The 

governments of Canada, Mexico, and the 

United States recently amended the 

1916 Convention and the subsequent 

1936 Mexico Convention for the 

Protection of Migratory Birds and Game 

Mammals. The amended treaties 

provide for the legal subsistence harvest 

of migratory birds and their eggs in 

Alaska and Canada during the closed 

season. 

On August 16, 2002, we published in 

the Federal Register (67 FR 53511) a 

final rule that established procedures for 

incorporating subsistence management 

into the continental migratory bird 

management program. These 

regulations, developed under a new comanagement process involving the 

Service, the Alaska Department of Fish 

and Game, and Alaska Native 

representatives, established an annual 

procedure to develop harvest guidelines 

for implementation of a spring/summer 

migratory bird subsistence harvest. 

Eligibility and inclusion requirements 

necessary to participate in the spring/ 

summer migratory bird subsistence 

season in Alaska are outlined in 50 CFR 

part 92. 

This proposed rule calls for proposals 

for regulations that will expire on 

August 31, 2008, for the spring/summer 

subsistence harvest of migratory birds in 

Alaska. Each year, seasons will open on 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
18330 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

or after March 11 and close prior to 

September 1. 

Alaska Spring/Summer Subsistence 

Harvest Proposal Procedures 

We will publish details of the Alaska 

spring/summer subsistence harvest 

proposals in later Federal Register 

documents under 50 CFR part 92. The 

general relationship to the process for 

developing national hunting regulations 

for migratory game birds is as follows: 

(a) Alaska Migratory Bird CoManagement Council. Proposals may be 

submitted by the public to the Comanagement Council during the period 

of November 1–December 15, 2007, to 

be acted upon for the 2008 migratory 

bird subsistence harvest season. 

Proposals should be submitted to the 

Executive Director of the Comanagement Council, listed above 

under the caption ADDRESSES. 

(b) Flyway Councils. (1) Proposed 

2008 regulations recommended by the 

Co-management Council will be 

submitted to all Flyway Councils for 

review and comment. The Council’s 

recommendations must be submitted 

prior to the Service Regulations 

Committee’s last regular meeting of the 

calendar year in order to be approved 

for spring/summer harvest beginning 

March 11 of the following calendar year. 

(2) Alaska Native representatives may 

be appointed by the Co-management 

Council to attend meetings of one or 

more of the four Flyway Councils to 

discuss recommended regulations or 

other proposed management actions. 

(c) Service regulations committee. 

Proposed annual regulations 

recommended by the Co-management 

Council will be submitted to the Service 

Regulations Committee (SRC) for their 

review and recommendation to the 

Service Director. Following the Service 

Director’s review and recommendation, 

the proposals will be forwarded to the 

Department of the Interior for approval. 

Proposed annual regulations will then 

be published in the Federal Register for 

public review and comment, similar to 

the annual migratory game bird hunting 

regulations. Final spring/summer 

regulations for Alaska will be published 

in the Federal Register in the preceding 

fall. 

Because of the time required for 

review by us and the public, proposals 

from the Co-management Council for 

the 2008 spring/summer migratory bird 

subsistence harvest season must be 

submitted to the Flyway Councils and 

the Service by June 15, 2007, for 

Council comments and Service action at 

the late-season SRC meeting. 

Review of Public Comments 

This proposed rulemaking contains 

the proposed regulatory alternatives for 

the 2007–08 duck hunting seasons. This 

proposed rulemaking also describes 

other recommended changes or specific 

preliminary proposals that vary from the 

2006–07 final frameworks (see August 

29, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 

51406) for early seasons and September 

22, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 

55654) for late seasons) and issues 

requiring early discussion, action, or the 

attention of the States or tribes. We will 

publish responses to all proposals and 

written comments when we develop 

final frameworks for the 2007–08 

season. We seek additional information 

and comments on the recommendations 

in this proposed rule. 

Consolidation of Notices 

For administrative purposes, this 

document consolidates the notice of 

intent to establish open migratory game 

bird hunting seasons, the request for 

tribal proposals, and the request for 

Alaska migratory bird subsistence 

seasons with the preliminary proposals 

for the annual hunting regulationsdevelopment process. We will publish 

the remaining proposed and final 

rulemaking documents separately. For 

inquiries on tribal guidelines and 

proposals, tribes should contact the 

following personnel: 

Region 1 (California, Idaho, Nevada, 

Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, and the 

Pacific Islands)—Brad Bortner, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 911 NE. 11th 

Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232–4181; 

(503) 231–6164. 

Region 2 (Arizona, New Mexico, 

Oklahoma, and Texas)—Jeff Haskins, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 

1306, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103; 

(505) 248–7885. 

Region 3 (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, 

and Wisconsin)—Steve Wilds, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Federal Building, 

One Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, 

Minnesota 55111–4056; (612) 713–5432. 

Region 4 (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, 

Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto 

Rico/Virgin Islands, South Carolina, and 

Tennessee)—David Viker, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 1875 Century 

Boulevard, Room 324, Atlanta, Georgia 

30345; (404) 679–4000. 

Region 5 (Connecticut, Delaware, 

Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, 

Virginia, and West Virginia)—Diane 

Pence, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, 

Massachusetts 01035–9589; (413) 253–

8576. 

Region 6 (Colorado, Kansas, Montana, 

Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Utah, and Wyoming)—Stephanie Jones, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 

25486, Denver Federal Building, 

Denver, Colorado 80225; (303) 236–

8145. 

Region 7 (Alaska)—Russ Oates, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East 

Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503; 

(907) 786–3423. 

Requests for Tribal Proposals 

Background 

Beginning with the 1985–86 hunting 

season, we have employed guidelines 

described in the June 4, 1985, Federal 

Register (50 FR 23467) to establish 

special migratory game bird hunting 

regulations on Federal Indian 

reservations (including off-reservation 

trust lands) and ceded lands. We 

developed these guidelines in response 

to tribal requests for our recognition of 

their reserved hunting rights, and for 

some tribes, recognition of their 

authority to regulate hunting by both 

tribal and nontribal members 

throughout their reservations. The 

guidelines include possibilities for: 

(1) On-reservation hunting by both 

tribal and nontribal members, with 

hunting by nontribal members on some 

reservations to take place within Federal 

frameworks, but on dates different from 

those selected by the surrounding 

State(s); 

(2) On-reservation hunting by tribal 

members only, outside of usual Federal 

frameworks for season dates and length, 

and for daily bag and possession limits; 

and 

(3) Off-reservation hunting by tribal 

members on ceded lands, outside of 

usual framework dates and season 

length, with some added flexibility in 

daily bag and possession limits. 

In all cases, tribal regulations 

established under the guidelines must 

be consistent with the annual March 10 

to September 1 closed season mandated 

by the 1916 Convention Between the 

United States and Great Britain (for 

Canada) for the Protection of Migratory 

Birds (Convention). The guidelines are 

applicable to those tribes that have 

reserved hunting rights on Federal 

Indian reservations (including offreservation trust lands) and ceded lands. 

They also may be applied to the 

establishment of migratory game bird 

hunting regulations for nontribal 

members on all lands within the 

exterior boundaries of reservations 

where tribes have full wildlife 

management authority over such 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18331 

hunting, or where the tribes and affected 

States otherwise have reached 

agreement over hunting by nontribal 

members on non-Indian lands. 

Tribes usually have the authority to 

regulate migratory game bird hunting by 

nonmembers on Indian-owned 

reservation lands, subject to our 

approval. The question of jurisdiction is 

more complex on reservations that 

include lands owned by non-Indians, 

especially when the surrounding States 

have established or intend to establish 

regulations governing migratory bird 

hunting by non-Indians on these lands. 

In such cases, we encourage the tribes 

and States to reach agreement on 

regulations that would apply throughout 

the reservations. When appropriate, we 

will consult with a tribe and State with 

the aim of facilitating an accord. We 

also will consult jointly with tribal and 

State officials in the affected States 

where tribes may wish to establish 

special hunting regulations for tribal 

members on ceded lands. It is 

incumbent upon the tribe and/or the 

State to request consultation as a result 

of the proposal being published in the 

Federal Register. We will not presume 

to make a determination, without being 

advised by either a tribe or a State, that 

any issue is or is not worthy of formal 

consultation. 

One of the guidelines provides for the 

continuation of tribal members’ harvest 

of migratory game birds on reservations 

where such harvest is a customary 

practice. We do not oppose this harvest, 

provided it does not take place during 

the closed season required by the 

Convention, and it is not so large as to 

adversely affect the status of the 

migratory game bird resource. Since the 

inception of these guidelines, we have 

reached annual agreement with tribes 

for migratory game bird hunting by 

tribal members on their lands or on 

lands where they have reserved hunting 

rights. We will continue to consult with 

tribes that wish to reach a mutual 

agreement on hunting regulations for 

on-reservation hunting by tribal 

members. 

Tribes should not view the guidelines 

as inflexible. We believe that they 

provide appropriate opportunity to 

accommodate the reserved hunting 

rights and management authority of 

Indian tribes while also ensuring that 

the migratory game bird resource 

receives necessary protection. The 

conservation of this important 

international resource is paramount. 

Use of the guidelines is not required if 

a tribe wishes to observe the hunting 

regulations established by the State(s) in 

which the reservation is located. 

Details Needed in Tribal Proposals 

Tribes that wish to use the guidelines 

to establish special hunting regulations 

for the 2007–08 migratory game bird 

hunting season should submit a 

proposal that includes: 

(1) The requested migratory game bird 

hunting season dates and other details 

regarding the proposed regulations; 

(2) Harvest anticipated under the 

proposed regulations; 

(3) Methods that will be employed to 

measure or monitor harvest (mailquestionnaire survey, bag checks, etc.); 

(4) Steps that will be taken to limit 

level of harvest, where it could be 

shown that failure to limit such harvest 

would seriously impact the migratory 

game bird resource; and 

(5) Tribal capabilities to establish and 

enforce migratory game bird hunting 

regulations. 

A tribe that desires the earliest 

possible opening of the migratory game 

bird season for nontribal members 

should specify this request in its 

proposal, rather than request a date that 

might not be within the final Federal 

frameworks. Similarly, unless a tribe 

wishes to set more restrictive 

regulations than Federal regulations will 

permit for nontribal members, the 

proposal should request the same daily 

bag and possession limits and season 

length for migratory game birds that 

Federal regulations are likely to permit 

the States in the Flyway in which the 

reservation is located. 

Tribal Proposal Procedures 

We will publish details of tribal 

proposals for public review in later 

Federal Register documents. Because of 

the time required for review by us and 

the public, Indian tribes that desire 

special migratory game bird hunting 

regulations for the 2007–08 hunting 

season should submit their proposals as 

soon as possible, but no later than June 

1, 2007. 

Tribes should direct inquiries 

regarding the guidelines and proposals 

to the appropriate Service Regional 

Office listed above under the caption 

Consolidation of Notices. Tribes that 

request special migratory game bird 

hunting regulations for tribal members 

on ceded lands should send a courtesy 

copy of the proposal to officials in the 

affected State(s). 

Public Comments Solicited 

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 migratory 

game bird hunting regulations, we will 

take into consideration all comments 

received. Such comments, and any 

additional information received, may 

lead to final regulations that differ from 

these proposals. We invite interested 

persons to participate in this rulemaking 

by submitting written comments to the 

address indicated under the caption 

ADDRESSES. 

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. 

You may inspect comments received 

on the proposed annual regulations 

during normal business hours at the 

Service’s Division of Migratory Bird 

Management office in room 4107, 4501 

North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. 

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 received 

during the comment period and respond 

to them after the closing date in any 

final rules. 

NEPA Consideration 

NEPA considerations are covered by 

the programmatic document ‘‘Final 

Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement: Issuance of Annual 

Regulations Permitting the Sport 

Hunting of Migratory Birds (FSES 88–

14),’’ filed with the Environmental 

Protection Agency on June 9, 1988. We 

published Notice of Availability in the 

Federal Register on June 16, 1988 (53 

FR 22582). We published our Record of 

Decision on August 18, 1988 (53 FR 

31341). In addition, an August 1985 

environmental assessment entitled 

‘‘Guidelines for Migratory Bird Hunting 

Regulations on Federal Indian 

Reservations and Ceded Lands’’ is 

available from the address indicated 

under the caption ADDRESSES. 

In a notice published in the 

September 8, 2005, Federal Register (70 

FR 53376), we announced our intent to 

develop a new Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement for the 

migratory bird hunting program. Public 

scoping meetings were held in the 

spring of 2006, as detailed in a March 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
18332 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

9, 2006, Federal Register (71 FR 12216). 

We have prepared a scoping report 

summarizing the scoping comments and 

scoping meetings. The report is 

available by either writing to the 

address indicated under ADDRESSES or 

by viewing on our Web site at http:// 

fws.gov/migratorybirds. 

Endangered Species Act Consideration 

Prior to issuance of the 2007–08 

migratory game bird hunting 

regulations, we will comply with 

provisions of the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 

1531–1543; hereinafter the Act), to 

ensure that hunting is not likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of 

any species designated as endangered or 

threatened or modify or destroy its 

critical habitat and is consistent with 

conservation programs for those species. 

Consultations under Section 7 of this 

Act may cause us to change proposals 

in this and future supplemental 

proposed rulemaking documents. 

Executive Order 12866 

The migratory bird hunting 

regulations are economically significant 

and were reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

Executive Order 12866. As such, a cost/ 

benefit analysis was initially prepared 

in 1981. This analysis was subsequently 

revised annually from 1990–96, updated 

in 1998 and updated again in 2004. It is 

further discussed below under the 

heading Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Results from the 2004 analysis indicate 

that the expected welfare benefit of the 

annual migratory bird hunting 

frameworks is on the order of $734 to 

$1,064 million, with a mid-point 

estimate of $899 million. Copies of the 

cost/benefit analysis are available upon 

request from the address indicated 

under ADDRESSES or from our Web site 

at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/ 

reports/SpecialTopics/ 

EconomicAnalysis-Final-2004.pdf. 

Executive Order 12866 also requires 

each agency to write regulations that are 

easy to understand. We invite comments 

on how to make this rule easier to 

understand, including answers to 

questions such as the following: 

(1) Are the requirements in the rule 

clearly stated? 

(2) Does the rule contain technical 

language or jargon that interferes with 

its clarity? 

(3) Does the format of the rule 

(grouping and order of sections, use of 

headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or 

reduce its clarity? 

(4) Would the rule be easier to 

understand if it were divided into more 

(but shorter) sections? 

(5) Is the description of the rule in the 

‘‘Supplementary Information’’ section of 

the preamble helpful in understanding 

the rule? 

(6) What else could we do to make the 

rule easier to understand? 

Send a copy of any comments that 

concern how we could make this rule 

easier to understand to: Office of 

Regulatory Affairs, Department of the 

Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20240. You may 

also e-mail the comments to this 

address: Exsec@ios.doi.gov. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

These regulations have a significant 

economic impact on substantial 

numbers of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). We analyzed the economic 

impacts of the annual hunting 

regulations on small business entities in 

detail as part of the 1981 cost-benefit 

analysis discussed under Executive 

Order 12866. This analysis was revised 

annually from 1990–95. In 1995, the 

Service issued a Small Entity Flexibility 

Analysis (Analysis), which was 

subsequently updated in 1996, 1998, 

and 2004. The primary source of 

information about hunter expenditures 

for migratory game bird hunting is the 

National Hunting and Fishing Survey, 

which is conducted at 5-year intervals. 

The 2004 Analysis was based on the 

2001 National Hunting and Fishing 

Survey and the U.S. Department of 

Commerce’s County Business Patterns, 

from which it was estimated that 

migratory bird hunters would spend 

between $481 million and $1.2 billion at 

small businesses in 2004. Copies of the 

Analysis are available upon request 

from the address indicated under 

ADDRESSES or from our Web site at 

htttp://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/ 

reports/SpecialTopics/ 

EconomicAnalysis-Final-2004.pdf. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

For the reasons outlined above, this rule 

has an annual effect on the economy of 

$100 million or more. However, because 

this rule establishes hunting seasons, we 

do not plan to defer the effective date 

under the exemption contained in 5 

U.S.C. 808(1). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

We examined these regulations under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

The various recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements imposed under 

regulations established in 50 CFR part 

20, Subpart K, are utilized in the 

formulation of migratory game bird 

hunting regulations. Specifically, OMB 

has approved the information collection 

requirements of the surveys associated 

with the Migratory Bird Harvest 

Information Program and assigned 

clearance number 1018–0015 (expires 

2/29/2008). This information is used to 

provide a sampling frame for voluntary 

national surveys to improve our harvest 

estimates for all migratory game birds in 

order to better manage these 

populations. OMB has also approved 

the information collection requirements 

of the Sandhill Crane Harvest Survey 

and assigned clearance number 1018–

0023 (expires 11/30/2007). The 

information from this survey is used to 

estimate the magnitude and the 

geographical and temporal distribution 

of the harvest, and the portion it 

constitutes of the total population. 

Lastly, OMB has approved the 

information collection requirements of 

the Alaska Subsistence Household 

Survey, an associated voluntary annual 

household survey used to determine 

levels of subsistence take in Alaska. The 

OMB control number for the 

information collection is 1018–0124 

(expires 1/31/2010). A Federal agency 

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. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

We have determined and certify, in 

compliance with the requirements of 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 government or private entities. 

Therefore, this rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act. 

Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 

12988 

The Department, in promulgating this 

proposed rule, has determined that this 

proposed rule will not unduly burden 

the judicial system and that it meets the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of Executive Order 12988. 

Takings Implication Assessment 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, this proposed rule, authorized by 

the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, does not 

have significant takings implications 

and does not affect any constitutionally 

protected property rights. This rule will 

not result in the physical occupancy of 

property, the physical invasion of 

property, or the regulatory taking of any 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18333 

property. In fact, these rules allow 

hunters to exercise otherwise 

unavailable privileges and, therefore, 

reduce restrictions on the use of private 

and public property. 

Energy Effects—Executive Order 13211 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 on regulations 

that significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Executive Order 

13211 requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. While this 

proposed rule is a significant regulatory 

action under Executive Order 12866, it 

is not expected to adversely affect 

energy supplies, distribution, or use. 

Therefore, this action is not a significant 

energy action and no Statement of 

Energy Effects is required. 

Federalism Effects 

Due to the migratory nature of certain 

species of birds, the Federal 

Government has been given 

responsibility over these species by the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We annually 

prescribe frameworks from which the 

States make selections regarding the 

hunting of migratory birds, and we 

employ guidelines to establish special 

regulations on Federal Indian 

reservations and ceded lands. This 

process preserves the ability of the 

States and tribes to determine which 

seasons meet their individual needs. 

Any State or Indian tribe may be more 

restrictive than the Federal frameworks 

at any time. The frameworks are 

developed in a cooperative process with 

the States and the Flyway Councils. 

This process allows States to participate 

in the development of frameworks from 

which they will make selections, 

thereby having an influence on their 

own regulations. These rules do not 

have a substantial direct effect on fiscal 

capacity, change the roles or 

responsibilities of Federal or State 

governments, or intrude on State policy 

or administration. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

these regulations do not have significant 

federalism effects and do not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20 

Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

The rules that eventually will be 

promulgated for the 2007–08 hunting 

season are authorized under 16 U.S.C. 

703–711, 16 U.S.C. 712, and 16 U.S.C. 

742 a–j. 

Dated: March 21, 2007. 

David M. Verhey, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

Proposed 2007–08 Migratory Game 

Bird Hunting Regulations (Preliminary) 

Pending current information on 

populations, harvest, and habitat 

conditions, and receipt of 

recommendations from the four Flyway 

Councils, we may defer specific 

regulatory proposals. At this time, we 

are proposing no changes from the final 

2006–07 frameworks established on 

August 29 and September 22, 2006 (71 

FR 51406 and 71 FR 55654). Other 

issues requiring early discussion, action, 

or the attention of the States or tribes are 

contained below: 

1. Ducks 

Categories used to discuss issues 

related to duck harvest management are: 

(A) General Harvest Strategy, (B) 

Regulatory Alternatives, (C) Zones and 

Split Seasons, and (D) Special Seasons/ 

Species Management. Only those 

containing substantial recommendations 

are discussed below. 

A. General Harvest Strategy 

We propose to continue use of 

adaptive harvest management (AHM) to 

help determine appropriate duckhunting regulations for the 2007–08 

season. AHM is a tool that permits 

sound resource decisions in the face of 

uncertain regulatory impacts, as well as 

providing a mechanism for reducing 

that uncertainty over time. The current 

AHM protocol is used to evaluate four 

alternative regulatory levels based on 

the population status of mallards 

(special hunting restrictions are enacted 

for species of special concern, such as 

canvasbacks, scaup, and pintails). 

In recent years, the prescribed 

regulatory alternative for the Pacific, 

Central, and Mississippi Flyways has 

been based on the status of mallards and 

breeding-habitat conditions in central 

North America (Federal survey strata 1–

18, 20–50, and 75–77, and State surveys 

in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and 

Michigan). For the 2007 hunting season, 

however, we are considering setting 

hunting regulations in the Pacific 

Flyway based on the status and 

dynamics of a newly defined stock of 

‘‘western’’ mallards. For now, western 

mallards would be defined as those 

breeding in Alaska (as based on federal 

surveys in strata 1–12), and in California 

and Oregon (as based on stateconducted surveys). Efforts to improve 

survey designs in Washington State and 

British Columbia are ongoing, and 

mallards breeding in these areas would 

be included in regulatory assessments 

when a sufficient time-series of 

abundance estimates is available for 

analysis. Predicting changes in the 

abundance of western mallards due to 

harvest and uncontrolled environmental 

factors would be based on a model of 

density-dependent growth, with 

appropriate allowances for model 

uncertainty and the impact of hunting. 

Various harvest-management 

objective(s) for western mallards are 

being considered but, in any case, 

would not allow for a harvest higher 

than the estimated maximum 

sustainable yield. More specifics 

concerning this proposed change in 

AHM protocol are available on our 

website at http://www.fws.gov/ 

migratorybirds/mgmt/AHM/AHMintro.htm and will be provided in a 

supplemental proposed rule in May 

along with Flyway Council 

recommendations and comments. The 

final AHM protocol for the 2007–08 

season will be detailed in the earlyseason proposed rule, which will be 

published in July (see Schedule of 

Regulations Meetings and Federal 

Register Publications at the end of this 

proposed rule for further information). 

Finally, since 2000, we have prescribed 

a regulatory alternative for the Atlantic 

Flyway based on the population status 

of mallards breeding in eastern North 

America (Federal survey strata 51–54 

and 56, and State surveys in New 

England and the mid-Atlantic region). 

We are recommending a continuation of 

this protocol for the 2007–08 season. 

We will propose a specific regulatory 

alternative for each of the Flyways 

during the 2007–08 season after survey 

information becomes available in late 

summer. More information on AHM is 

located at http://www.fws.gov/ 

migratorybirds/mgmt/AHM/AHMintro.htm. 

B. Regulatory Alternatives 

The basic structure of the current 

regulatory alternatives for AHM was 

adopted in 1997. The alternatives 

remained largely unchanged until 2002, 

when we (based on recommendations 

from the Flyway Councils) extended 

framework dates in the ‘‘moderate’’ and 

‘‘liberal’’ regulatory alternatives by 

changing the opening date from the 

Saturday nearest October 1 to the 

Saturday nearest September 24, and 

changing the closing date from the 

Sunday nearest January 20 to the last 

Sunday in January. These extended 

dates were made available with no 

associated penalty in season length or 

bag limits. At that time we stated our 

desire to keep these changes in place for 

3 years to allow for a reasonable 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
18334 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

opportunity to monitor the impacts of 

framework-date extensions on harvest 

distribution and rates of harvest prior to 

considering any subsequent use (67 FR 

12501). 

For 2007–08, we are proposing to 

maintain the same regulatory 

alternatives that were in effect last year 

(see accompanying table for specifics of 

the proposed regulatory alternatives). 

Alternatives are specified for each 

Flyway and are designated as ‘‘RES’’ for 

the restrictive, ‘‘MOD’’ for the moderate, 

and ‘‘LIB’’ for the liberal alternative. We 

will announce final regulatory 

alternatives in early June. Public 

comments will be accepted until May 

15, 2007, and should be sent to the 

address under the caption ADDRESSES. 

D. Special Seasons/Species 

Management 

iii. Black Ducks 

For several years we have consulted 

with the Atlantic and Mississippi 

Flyway Councils, the Canadian Wildlife 

Service, and provincial wildlife 

agencies in eastern Canada concerning 

the development of an international 

harvest strategy for black ducks. In 

November 2006, a working group of 

Federal, provincial, and State 

technicians expressed a desire to move 

forward with development of a strategy 

this year, with implementation to occur 

in 2008. The strategy would consist of 

a maximum harvest rate for the 

continental black duck population, as 

well as criteria for maintaining 

approximate parity in harvest between 

the two countries. Further consultations 

are required, however, to determine an 

acceptable upper limit to the overall 

harvest rate, procedures for determining 

whether the realized harvest rate is 

below this limit, procedures for 

determining whether the distribution of 

harvest between the countries is 

acceptable, and rules for changing 

regulations if the harvest-rate and parity 

criteria are not met. Based on the 

outcome of those consultations, we are 

planning to propose the specifics of a 

joint harvest strategy with Canada in the 

early-season proposed rule, which will 

be published in July (see Schedule of 

Regulations Meetings and Federal 

Register Publications at the end of this 

proposed rule for further information). 

v. Pintails 

In collaboration with scientists from 

the U.S. Geological Survey, progress has 

been made in the development of a 

compensatory harvest-mortality model 

for pintails. The model predicts that 

pintail survival during the period 

following the hunting season is densitydependent, and represents an 

alternative hypothesis about the effect of 

hunting mortality on pintail population 

change. We are considering the 

inclusion of a ‘‘strong’’ compensatory 

model as a competing model in the 

analytical framework used to prescribe 

harvest regulations under the current 

pintail harvest strategy. Presently, in the 

current pintail harvest strategy, hunting 

mortality is assumed to be ‘‘additive’’ to 

natural forms of mortality. Predictions 

of pintail population size derived from 

the additive and compensatory models 

will be compared to the results of past 

population surveys to determine the 

initial predictive reliability of each 

alternative model. These comparisons 

will be used to weight each model in a 

manner that reflects past predictive 

ability. Model weights determine the 

influence that the alternative harvestmortality models will have on 

subsequent regulatory decisions. Model 

weights will be updated annually by 

comparing model predictions with 

survey results such that the model with 

greater predictive ability exerts greater 

influence in regulatory decisions over 

time. We remain committed to the 

development of a framework to inform 

pintail harvest management based on a 

formal, derived strategy and clearly 

articulated management objectives. 

vi. Scaup 

In 2006, we did not change scaup 

harvest regulations with the 

understanding that a draft harvest 

strategy would be available for Flyway 

Council review prior to the 2007 winter 

meetings (see September 22, 2007, 

Federal Register, 71 FR 55654). In 

response to this expectation, we have 

developed models to represent scaup 

population and harvest dynamics that 

rely on the available scaup monitoring 

information and account for 

uncertainties about factors affecting 

scaup population change. The details of 

the models and assessment methods 

used to derive a scaup harvest strategy 

were presented during the Winter 

Flyway Technical Section meetings and 

a summary is available at http:// 

www.fws.gov/migatorybirds/reports. As 

part of the strategy-development 

process, we provide several example 

harvest strategies based on a range of 

potential harvest-management 

objectives in order to solicit feedback 

regarding the appropriate objective for 

scaup harvest management. 

The final scaup harvest strategy will 

be detailed in the July early-season 

proposed rule (see Schedule of 

Regulations Meetings and Federal 

Register Publications at the end of this 

proposed rule for further information). 

vii. Mottled Ducks 

The Service and other agencies have 

been concerned about the status of 

mottled ducks since at least the late 

1990’s. This concern stems from 

negative trends in population survey 

data, loss and degradation of habitat, 

interbreeding with captive-reared and 

feral mallards, and increased harvest 

rates as the result of longer hunting 

seasons since 1997. In the past, we have 

expressed our desire to work with the 

States to develop a harvest-management 

strategy for mottled ducks. Since 2005, 

several workshops have been convened 

with State agencies, the U.S. Geological 

Survey, and others to discuss the status 

of mottled ducks, population structure 

and delineation, and to evaluate current 

monitoring programs and plan for the 

development of new population 

surveys. Major conclusions from these 

workshops are that mottled ducks 

should be managed as two separate 

stocks, a Florida stock and a Western 

Gulf Coast stock, and that the lack of a 

range-wide population survey for 

Western Gulf Coast mottled ducks is a 

significant impediment to management. 

Although progress has been made 

toward development of monitoring 

systems to improve assessment 

capabilities for mottled ducks, we 

remain concerned about the status of 

mottled ducks across their range, 

especially in the Western Gulf Coast. 

Reasons for these concerns were 

mentioned previously. We will provide 

the Flyway Councils with analyses of 

harvest data that examine potential 

harvest restrictions to reduce harvest 

rates, should that be deemed necessary. 

We encourage the Flyway Councils to 

examine the status of mottled ducks and 

assess the potential need for any 

regulatory actions for the 2007–08 

season. 

9. Cranes 

Greater and lesser (and Canadian) 

sandhill cranes are presently hunted in 

parts of their range and have been 

divided into management populations 

based on their geographic distribution 

during Fall and Winter. The Flyway 

Management Plan for the Lower 

Colorado River Valley Population 

(LCRVP) of sandhill cranes (Pacific 

Flyway Council 1983, revised in 1989, 

1995) allows for hunting of this 

population when the wintering 

population exceeds 2,500 cranes. This 

population level has now been 

exceeded. In 2005, the Pacific Flyway 

Council proposed a limited open season 

on this population. In response to the 

Pacific Flyway Council’s proposal, we 

stated in the August 29, 2006, Federal 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18335 

Register (71 FR 51406) that while we 

were in general support of allowing a 

very limited, carefully controlled 

harvest of sandhill cranes from this 

population, we did not believe that this 

limited harvest was of immediate 

concern, and recommended that prior to 

initiating such a season, which would 

be the first time harvest from this 

population has been permitted, a more 

detailed harvest strategy be developed 

by the Flyway Council. We stated that 

this harvest strategy should be included 

as an appendix to the management plan 

prior to any hunting season being 

initiated. In further response to this 

proposal, we have now prepared a draft 

environmental assessment (DEA) 

considering the action to begin a limited 

harvest of sandhill cranes from the 

LCRVP by reviewing current 

management strategies and population 

objectives, and examining alternatives 

to current management programs. 

Copies of the DEA can be obtained by 

writing Robert Trost, Pacific Flyway 

Representative, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Division of Migratory Bird 

Management, 911 NE. 11th Avenue, 

Portland, Oregon 97232–4181. The DEA 

may also be viewed via the Fish and 

Wildlife Service home page at http:// 

fws.gov/migratorybirds. Written 

comments should be sent to the address 

above. You must submit comments on 

the Draft Environmental Assessment by 

May 15, 2007. 

16. Mourning Doves 

Last year, we approved guidelines 

that will be used to guide zone/split 

seasons for doves (see July 28, 2006, 

Federal Register, 71 FR 43008) with 

implementation beginning in the 2007–

08 season. The initial period will be 4 

years (2007–2010); beginning in 2011, 

zoning will conform to a 5-year period. 

Guidelines for Dove Zones and Split 

Seasons in the Eastern and Central 

Mourning Dove Management Units 

1. A zone is a geographic area or 

portion of a State, with a contiguous 

boundary, for which independent 

seasons may be selected for dove 

hunting. 

2. States may select a zone/split 

option during an open season. It must 

remain in place for the following 5 years 

except that States may make a one-time 

change and revert back to their previous 

zone/split configuration in any year of 

the 5-year period. Formal approval will 

not be required, but States must notify 

the Service prior to making the change. 

3. Zoning periods for dove hunting 

will conform to those years used for 

ducks, e.g., 2006–2010. 

4. The zone/split configuration 

consists of two zones with the option for 

3-way (3-segment) split seasons in one 

or both zones. As a grandfathered 

arrangement, Texas will have three 

zones with the option for 2-way (2- 

segment) split seasons in one, two, or all 

three zones. 

5. States that do not wish to zone for 

dove hunting may split their seasons 

into no more than 3 segments. 

We request that States notify us 

whether or not they plan to change their 

zone/split configurations for the 

upcoming 4-year period (2007–2010) by 

May 1, 2007. 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2
18336 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2EP11AP07.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18337 

[FR Doc. 07–1750 Filed 4–10–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS2EP11AP07.001</GPH>