14562 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2012 / Notices 

Date Location 

Thursday, April 12–Friday, April 13, 2012 ............................... Miccosukee Resort and Gaming, 500 SW 177th Ave., Miami, FL 33194, (866) 

599–6674. 

When booking use: ‘‘Bureau of Indian Affairs’’. 

Thursday, April 19–Friday, April 20, 2012 ............................... Radisson Fort McDowell Resort Hotel, 10438 N. Fort McDowell Road, Scottsdale/Fountain Hill, AZ 85264, (480) 789–5300. 

When booking use: ‘‘Bureau of Indian Affairs Streamline Consultation’’. 

Thursday, April 26–Friday, April 27, 2012 ............................... Northern Quest Resort & Casino, 100 N. Hayford Road, Airway Heights, WA 

99001, (509) 481–6166. 

Thursday, May 3–Friday, May 4, 2012 .................................... Holiday Inn Rapid City-Rushmore Plaza, 505 N. 5th Street, Rapid City, SD 

57701, (605) 348–4000. 

Thursday, May 10–Friday, May 11, 2012 ................................ Choctaw Casino Resort, 4216 S. Hwy 69/75, Durant, OK 74701, (580) 931– 

8340. 

Thursday, May 17–Friday, May 18, 2012 ................................ Thunder Valley Casino Resort, 1200 Athens Avenue, Lincoln, CA 95648, (877) 

468–8777. 

When booking use: ‘‘120516BURE’’. 

The agenda for each of the sessions 

will be as follows (all times are local): 

Day 1 Agenda 

8 a.m.–10 a.m. ............................................... Administrative Organizational Assessment Draft Report ..................................................... AS–IA 

10 a.m.–12:30 p.m. ........................................ BIA Streamlining Plan .......................................................................................................... BIA 

12:30 p.m.–1:30 p.m. ..................................... Lunch (on your own) ............................................................................................................

1:30 p.m.–2:30 p.m. ....................................... BIA Streamlining Plan (continued) ....................................................................................... BIA 

2:30 p.m.–5 p.m. ............................................ BIE Streamlining Plan .......................................................................................................... BIE 

Day 2 Agenda 

8 a.m.–12 p.m. ............................................... Johnson-O’Malley Student Count Update ............................................................................ BIE 

Draft SF–424B Assurance Statement—Non-construction Programs.

A brief description of each of the 

topics is provided below. Further 

information is available at: http:// 

www.indianaffairs.gov/WhoWeAre/AS– 

IA/Consultation/index.htm. 

The Administrative Organizational 

Assessment Draft Report—The AS–IA is 

seeking input on the results of the 

Administrative Organizational 

Assessment Draft Report. The 

Assessment was conducted by an 

impartial third-party contractor, the 

Bronner Group, LLC, to evaluate the 

administrative support structures for 

BIA and BIE. The Draft Report includes 

a number of recommendations in the 

following functional areas: budget and 

financial management; acquisition and 

contract management; property 

management and building maintenance; 

human resources; safety management; 

and communications. More information 

on the Draft Report is available at: 

http://www.indianaffairs.gov/ 

WhoWeAre/AS–IA/Consultation/ 

index.htm. 

The BIA Streamlining Plan—The BIA 

is seeking tribal input on ways to 

streamline its organization to meet 

budgetary constraints and increase 

efficiency in the delivery of services to 

tribes and Indian beneficiaries. The BIA 

is particularly interested in tribes’ 

perspectives on consolidation of agency 

or field offices with minimal staffing 

and/or services, and consolidation of 

regional office programs or services 

where efficiencies may be achieved. 

The BIE Streamlining Plan—The BIE 

is seeking tribal input on ways to 

streamline its organization to meet 

imminent budgetary constraints and to 

improve the quality of education 

provided to students served by BIEfunded schools. 

The Johnson-O’Malley Student Count 

Update—The BIE is seeking tribal input 

on updating its count of students 

eligible for Johnson-O’Malley Program 

funding. As part of the Fiscal Year 2012 

appropriations, Congress directed the 

BIE, in consultation with tribes and the 

U.S. Department of Education, to update 

its count of students eligible for the 

Johnson-O’Malley Program funding, and 

to report the results to Congress. 

The Draft SF–424B Assurance 

Statement—Non-Construction 

Programs—The BIE is seeking tribal 

input on revision of provisions of the 

SF–424B Assurance Statement for 

Public Law 100–297 Tribally Controlled 

Grant Schools. The assurance statement 

accompanies the transfer of funds from 

the BIE to tribally controlled grant 

schools. The BIE is particularly 

interested in tribes’ perspectives on 

adding the following to the assurance 

statement: ‘‘Will comply with all 

applicable statutory and regulatory 

requirements of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act (ESEA), also 

known as the No Child Left Behind 

(NCLB) Act of 2001, and Individuals 

with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).’’ 

Dated: March 6, 2012. 

Larry Echo Hawk, 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5870 Filed 3–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–6W–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R5–FHC–2012–N045; 

FXFR13340500000L4–123–FF05F24400] 

Information Collection Request Sent to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for Approval; Horseshoe Crab 

Tagging Program 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service) have sent an Information 

Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for 

review and approval. We summarize the 

ICR below and describe the nature of the 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2012 / Notices 14563 

collection and the estimated burden and 

cost. This information collection is 

scheduled to expire on March 31, 2012. 

We may not conduct or sponsor and a 

person is not required to respond to a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. However, under OMB 

regulations, we may continue to 

conduct or sponsor this information 

collection while it is pending at OMB. 

DATES: You must submit comments on 

or before April 11, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments and 

suggestions on this information 

collection to the Desk Officer for the 

Department of the Interior at OMB– 

OIRA at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or 

OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov (email). 

Please provide a copy of your comments 

to the Service Information Collection 

Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, MS 2042–PDM, 4401 

North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 

22203 (mail), or INFOCOL@fws.gov 

(email). Please include ‘‘1018–0127’’ in 

the subject line of your comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request additional information about 

this ICR, contact Hope Grey at 

INFOCOL@fws.gov (email) or 703–358– 

2482 (telephone). You may review the 

ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. 

Follow the instructions to review 

Department of the Interior collections 

under review by OMB. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 1018–0127. 

Title: Horseshoe Crab Tagging 

Program. 

Service Form Number(s): FWS Forms 

3–2310 and 3–2311. 

Type of Request: Extension of 

currently approved collection. 

Description of Respondents: Tagging 

agencies include Federal and State 

agencies, universities, and biomedical 

companies. Members of the general 

public provide recapture information. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. 

Frequency of Collection: On occasion. 

When horseshoe crabs are tagged and 

when horseshoe crabs are found or 

captured. 

Activity 

Number of 

annual 

respondents 

Number of 

annual 

responses 

Completion time per response Annual burden 

hours 

FWS Form 3–2310 ................................................................. 950 2,250 5 minutes ................................ 188 

FWS Form 3–2311 ................................................................. 18 18 95 hours * ............................... 1,710 

Totals ............................................................................... 968 2,268 ................................................. 1,898 

* Average time required per response is dependent on the number of tags applied by an agency in 1 year. Agencies tag between 25 and 9,000 

horseshoe crabs annually, taking between 2 to 5 minutes per crab to tag, record, and report data. Each agency determines the number of tags it 

will apply. 

Abstract: Horseshoe crabs play a vital 

role commercially, biomedically, and 

ecologically along the Atlantic coast. 

Horseshoe crabs are commercially 

harvested and used as bait in eel and 

conch fisheries. Biomedical companies 

along the coast also collect and bleed 

horseshoe crabs at their facilities. 

Limulus Amoebocyte Lysate is derived 

from crab blood, which has no synthetic 

substitute, and is used by 

pharmaceutical companies to test 

sterility of products. Finally, migratory 

shorebirds also depend on the eggs of 

horseshoe crabs to refuel on their 

migrations from South America to the 

Arctic. One bird in particular, the red 

knot, feeds primarily on horseshoe crab 

eggs during its stopover. That bird is 

currently listed as a candidate for 

protection under the Endangered 

Species Act. 

In 1998, the Atlantic States Marine 

Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), a 

management organization with 

representatives from each State on the 

Atlantic Coast, developed a horseshoe 

crab management plan. The ASMFC 

plan and its subsequent addenda 

established mandatory State-by-State 

harvest quotas, and created the 1,500- 

square-mile Carl N. Shuster, Jr., 

Horseshoe Crab Sanctuary off the mouth 

of Delaware Bay. 

Although restrictive measures have 

been taken in recent years, populations 

are increasing slowly. Because 

horseshoe crabs do not breed until they 

are 9 years or older, it may take some 

time before the population measurably 

increases. Federal and State agencies, 

universities, and biomedical companies 

participate in a Horseshoe Crab 

Cooperative Tagging Program. The 

Maryland Fishery Resources Office, Fish 

and Wildlife Service, maintains the 

information that we collect under this 

program and uses it to evaluate 

migratory patterns, survival, and 

abundance of horseshoe crabs. 

Agencies that tag and release the crabs 

complete FWS Form 3–2311 (Horseshoe 

Crab Tagging) and provide the Service 

with: 

• Organization name. 

• Contact person name. 

• Tag number. 

• Sex of crab. 

• Prosomal width. 

• Capture site, latitude, longitude, 

waterbody, State, and date. 

Members of the public who recover 

tagged crabs provide the following 

information using FWS Form 3–2310 

(Horseshoe Crab Recapture Report): 

• Tag number. 

• Whether or not tag was removed. 

• Whether or not the tag was circular 

or square. 

• Condition of crab. 

• Date captured/found. 

• Crab fate. 

• Finder type. 

• Capture method. 

• Capture location. 

• Reporter information. 

• Comments. 

If the public participant who reports 

the tagged crab requests information, we 

send data pertaining to the tagging 

program and tag and release information 

on the horseshoe crab that was found or 

captured. 

Comments: On September 26, 2011, 

we published in the Federal Register 

(76 FR 59422) a notice of our intent to 

ask OMB to renew approval for this 

information collection. In that notice, 

we solicited comments for 60 days, 

ending on November 25, 2011. We 

received comments from 10 individuals/ 

organizations. 

Commenter 1 appreciated the 

opportunity to tag horseshoe crabs and 

suggested that public outreach is an 

important component of the program 

and that increased public outreach 

would be useful. 

Commenter 2 said that the public 

outreach component has been very 

useful and the tagging program has 

benefited horseshoe crab management 

and increased public awareness of 

management issues. 

Commenter 3 said that both the 

scientific merit and public outreach 

components of the program have been 

very useful. The tagging program has 

benefited horseshoe crab management 

and increased public awareness of 

management issues. 

Commenter 4 discussed the scientific 

merit of the tagging program and said 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
14564 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2012 / Notices 

that it has been very useful. The tagging 

program has benefited horseshoe crab 

management and has had impacts on 

management of associated shorebird 

species whose population levels are of 

concern. The commenter had concerns 

on the effort of tag recoveries, and 

suggested that we provide higher 

incentives to commercial fishermen to 

report crab tags, increase efforts on 

spawning beaches to recover tags, 

record time searching for tags to 

determine catch-per-unit-effort, that 

online reporting can be done in a batch 

system, and that we increase efforts to 

collect tag data from commercial 

fishermen. While we recognize that all 

of these suggestions would make a 

stronger program with more significant 

scientific data, some come with 

substantial cost. At this time we do not 

have any additional funds to provide 

increased incentives to fishermen, 

increase tag recovery efforts on beaches 

(done by our cooperators at this time), 

or increase efforts to solicit tag data 

from commercial fishermen. Through 

our cooperators in the future, we can 

attempt to get an estimate of catch-perunit-effort and we will discuss this issue 

with the Atlantic States Marine 

Fisheries Commission to determine if 

those data would be useful. We will also 

explore providing a batch-type data 

entry program on our Web site to report 

recaptured tags. We will explore 

collecting catch-per-unit-effort and 

online batch reporting in the future. 

Commenter 5 was supportive of the 

information collection, and commented 

that the scientific data provided by the 

program has been very useful for 

horseshoe crab management. 

Information was collected efficiently 

and the burden estimates were accurate. 

Commenter 6 opposed the use of 

horseshoe crabs by biomedical 

companies and proposed a ban on the 

use of horseshoe crabs for any purpose. 

Commenter 7 said that the tagging 

program is not necessary and the data 

generated by the program is not useful. 

The commenter also opposed the 

commercial harvest of horseshoe crabs 

and the use of horseshoe crabs by 

biomedical companies. The commenter 

proposed a ban on the use of horseshoe 

crabs for any purpose. 

Commenter 8 discussed the scientific 

merit of the tagging program and said 

that it has been very useful for 

horseshoe crab management purposes. 

The commenter suggested that the Fish 

and Wildlife Service increase efforts in 

resighting tagged crabs outside the 

Delaware Bay area. While we recognize 

that increasing effort for resighting 

tagged crabs would increase the quality 

of the scientific data, there is substantial 

cost associated with increasing that 

effort. At this time, we do not have any 

additional funds to increase tag recovery 

efforts on beaches (done by our 

cooperators at this time). We will 

encourage our cooperators to increase 

efforts in tag recovery outside the 

Delaware Bay area. The commenter also 

suggested we develop an application for 

smart phones in addition to the online 

reporting system that we currently offer. 

We will explore the development of an 

app for smart phones to provide another 

method for tag reporting. 

Commenter 9 discussed the scientific 

merit of the tagging program and said 

that it has been very useful to horseshoe 

crab and shorebird management (whose 

population levels are of concern). The 

commenter suggested that we increase 

efforts on spawning beaches of 

Maryland and Virginia to recover tags, 

record time searching for tags to 

determine catch-per-unit-effort, and use 

formal models to determine survival of 

bled crabs from the Lysate industry. As 

with previous comments, we will 

encourage our cooperators to increase 

tag recovery efforts on the Maryland and 

Virginia beaches; however, without 

increased funding, we will not be able 

to increase tag recovery efforts without 

the assistance of cooperators. Some 

formal studies are being done by our 

cooperators using the Service tagging 

program to evaluate impacts of both 

tagging and of the Lysate bleeding 

programs. We will continue to support 

the tagging programs that are evaluating 

crab survival. The commenter also 

suggested that we should facilitate batch 

reporting of crabs on the phone and to 

encourage tag reporting by commercial 

fishermen. At this time we do not have 

any additional funds to provide 

increased incentives to fishermen, 

increase tag recovery efforts on beaches 

(done by our cooperators at this time), 

or increase efforts to solicit tag data 

from commercial fishermen. We will 

work with our cooperators to attempt to 

get better distribution of tag recovery 

efforts. 

Commenter 10 provided comments 

similar in nature to Commenters 4 and 

9. 

We did not make any changes to our 

information collection requirements 

based on the above comments. 

We again invite comments concerning 

this information collection on: 

• Whether or not the collection of 

information is necessary, including 

whether or not the information will 

have practical utility; 

• The accuracy of our estimate of the 

burden for this collection of 

information; 

• Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents. 

Comments that you submit in 

response to this notice are a matter of 

public record. Before including your 

address, phone number, email address, 

or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, you 

should be aware that your entire 

comment, including your personal 

identifying information, may be made 

publicly available at any time. While 

you can ask OMB in your comment to 

withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that it will be done. 

Dated: March 6, 2012. 

Tina A. Campbell, 

Chief, Division of Policy and Directives 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5879 Filed 3–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R9–MB–2012–N0059; FF09M21200– 

123–FXMB1231099BPP0L2] 

Information Collection Request Sent to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for Approval; Approval 

Procedures for Nontoxic Shot and 

Shot Coatings 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service) have sent an Information 

Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for 

review and approval. We summarize the 

ICR below and describe the nature of the 

collection and the estimated burden and 

cost. This information collection is 

scheduled to expire on April 30, 2012. 

We may not conduct or sponsor and a 

person is not required to respond to a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. However, under OMB 

regulations, we may continue to 

conduct or sponsor this information 

collection while it is pending at OMB. 

DATES: You must submit comments on 

or before April 11, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments and 

suggestions on this information 

collection to the Desk Officer for the 

Department of the Interior at OMB– 

OIRA at (202) 395–5806 (fax) or 

OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov (email). 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES