21674 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

36 CFR Part 2 

[NPS–WASO–AILO–15846; 

PCU00RP14.R50000, PPWOCRADI0] 

RIN 1024–AD84 

Gathering of Certain Plants or Plant 

Parts by Federally Recognized Indian 

Tribes for Traditional Purposes 

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The National Park Service 

proposes to authorize agreements 

between the National Park Service and 

federally recognized Indian tribes to 

allow the gathering and removal of 

plants or plant parts by designated tribal 

members for traditional purposes. The 

agreements would facilitate 

continuation of tribal cultural traditions 

on traditionally associated lands that are 

now included within units of the 

National Park System without a 

significant adverse impact to park 

resources and values. The proposed rule 

respects tribal sovereignty and the 

government-to-government relationship 

between the United States and the 

tribes, and would provide system-wide 

consistency to this aspect of National 

Park Service-tribal relations. The 

proposed rule would provide 

opportunities for tribal youth, the 

National Park Service, and the public to 

understand tribal traditions. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

July 20, 2015. Comments on the 

information collection requirements 

must be received by May 20, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit your 

comments, identified by Regulation 

Identifier Number (RIN) 1024–AD84, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: National Park Service, Joe 

Watkins, Office of Tribal Relations and 

American Cultures, 1201 Eye Street 

NW., Washington, DC 20005. 

• All submissions received must 

include the agency name and RIN. For 

additional information see Public 

Participation under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

• Send your comments and 

suggestions on the information 

collection requirements to the Desk 

Officer for the Department of the 

Interior at OMB–OIRA at (202) 395– 

5806 (fax) or OIRA_Submission@

omb.eop.gov (email). Please provide a 

copy of your comments to the 

Information Collection Clearance 

Officer, National Park Service, 1849 C 

Street NW., Washington, DC 20240 

(mail); or madonna_baucum@nps.gov 

(email). Please reference ‘‘1024–AD84’’ 

in the subject line of your comments. 

You may review our Information 

Collection Request online at http://

www.reginfo.gov. Follow the 

instructions to review Department of the 

Interior collections under review by 

OMB. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

National Park Service, Joe Watkins, 

Office of Tribal Relations and American 

Cultures, 1201 Eye Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20005, 202–354–2126, 

joe_watkins@nps.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The National Park Service (NPS) has 

a unique relationship with Indian tribes 

that is strengthened by a shared 

commitment to stewardship of the land 

and resources. This relationship is 

augmented by the historical, cultural, 

and spiritual relationships that Indian 

tribes have with the park lands and 

resources with which they are 

traditionally associated. 

Indian tribes practiced their 

traditional harvests of plants and plant 

parts on or from lands that are now 

included in units of the National Park 

System long before the arrival of the 

European settlers. Much of this activity 

was prohibited upon the promulgation 

of 36 CFR part 2 in 1983. The 

fundamental purpose of the proposed 

rule is to lift this prohibition and allow 

for gathering and removal of traditional 

plants or plant parts while ensuring 

there is no significant adverse impact to 

park resources and values. The 

proposed rule would also provide 

opportunities for tribal youth, the NPS, 

and the public to understand tribal 

traditions. 

The NPS is responsible for managing 

all units of the National Park System in 

such a manner and by such means as 

will leave them unimpaired for future 

generations. Park managers are given the 

discretion to manage public use within 

the parks in a manner that ensures that 

there is no impairment. 

Managing the various areas of the 

National Park System in a manner that 

helps tribes maintain their cultural 

traditions and relationships with the 

land may contribute to the protection 

and stewardship of such areas. The 

sustainable uses envisioned by the 

proposed rule would approximate some 

part of the pre-existing, pre-European 

environment of the park and thus would 

not be considered to be consumptive 

use. The proposed rule would provide 

a recognized exception to current 

regulations by offering resource and 

location-specific agreements between 

the NPS and federally recognized Indian 

tribes to gather and remove plants or 

plant parts for traditional purposes. 

Cooperation in the continuation of 

tribal traditions is at the heart of this 

proposed rule change. The NPS has a 

long history of encouraging Indian arts 

and crafts in national parks for the 

education and enjoyment of the public, 

and to support the continued practice of 

cultural traditions. The teaching and 

sharing of tribal traditions associated 

with national parks is an important part 

of the NPS mission. The proposed rule 

would provide new opportunities for 

the NPS and tribal governments to work 

together in support of the continuation 

of sustainable Indian cultural traditions 

that make up a unique and irreplaceable 

part of our national heritage. Limited 

gathering by hand of certain renewable 

natural resources has been allowed by 

the NPS for more than 50 years. See 36 

CFR 1.2(c) (1960) (authorizing hand 

picking and eating of designated native 

fruits and berries). In 1966, the NPS 

expanded this authority for NPS 

recreation areas, authorizing the 

gathering and collection of reasonable 

quantities of natural, renewable 

products (e.g. seashells, fruits, berries, 

driftwood, and marine deposits of 

natural origin) for personal, noncommercial use. (31 FR 16651, 

December 29, 1966). 

Existing NPS regulations at 36 CFR 

2.1(c), promulgated in 1983, allow for 

the personal consumption of ‘‘fruits, 

berries, nuts, or unoccupied seashells’’ 

by the general public, subject to certain 

conditions. The proposed rule would be 

an additional form of gathering, but 

would be limited to only members of 

federally recognized Indian tribes that 

have traditional associations with 

specific park areas and resources and 

that wish their members to be able to 

gather and remove plants or plant parts 

within those park areas for traditional 

uses. 

Existing NPS regulations at 36 CFR 

2.1(d) do not allow tribes or tribal 

members to gather plants or plant parts 

on parklands for traditional purposes 

except where specific statutes or treaties 

grant rights to do so. However, 

traditional tribal gathering and removal 

occurred in many areas that are now 

part of the National Park System. The 

proposed rule would provide an orderly 

and consistent process for such 

gathering and removal by authorizing 

agreements between the NPS and 

federally recognized Indian tribes to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 21675 

gather and remove plants or plant parts 

for traditional purposes. 

In designing the proposed rule, the 

NPS has applied principles used by 

Congress when it has addressed the 

issue of tribal gathering, usually in the 

context of establishing new units of the 

National Park System or establishing 

new management systems within 

existing units. For instance, the enabling 

legislation for El Malpais National 

Monument, New Mexico, states: ‘‘In 

recognition of the past use of portions 

of the monument and the conservation 

area by Indian people for traditional 

cultural and religious purposes, the 

Secretary shall assure nonexclusive 

access to the monument . . . by Indian 

people for traditional cultural and 

religious purposes, including the 

harvesting of pine nuts.’’ (Pub. L. 100– 

225, 101 Stat. 1548). In this and other 

cases, Congress has provided for 

gathering on parklands by traditionally 

associated Indian tribes for traditional 

purposes that predate the establishment 

of the park. It is, however, impractical 

to seek specific legislative language for 

each unit of the National Park System in 

which there were individual tribal 

traditional uses. 

In the 20 years since Indian tribes 

brought the issue of gathering to the 

attention of NPS leadership, studies in 

the fields of ethnobotany, traditional 

plant management, and consideration of 

traditional ecological knowledge in 

scientific symposia and scholarly 

gatherings have increased greatly. 

Research has shown that traditional 

gathering, when done with traditional 

methods and in traditionally established 

quantities, does not impair the ability to 

conserve plant communities and can 

help to conserve them, thus supporting 

the NPS conclusion that cooperation 

with Indian tribes in the management of 

plant resources is consistent with the 

preservation of national park lands for 

all American people. This concept is 

incorporated into National Park Service 

Management Policies 2006 at Section 

4.2.1, which directs the NPS to 

inventory, monitor, and research 

traditional knowledge and authorizes 

the NPS to support studies designed to 

‘‘understand the ceremonial and 

traditional resource management 

practices of Native Americans. . . .’’ 

The NPS and tribal governments can 

draw on this research and may conduct 

further research to ensure that 

traditional tribal gathering and removal 

does not have a significant adverse 

impact on park resources and values. To 

the extent that it is appropriate, park 

visitors can learn about the cultures 

associated with traditional tribal 

gathering practices. The proposed rule 

would require that environmental 

reviews and further studies be 

undertaken, as needed, prior to entering 

into agreements that would allow 

gathering and removal in national park 

units. These environmental reviews 

would include consulting with other, 

nearby tribes, especially those tribes 

that may also have traditional 

associations with those park units. 

Authority 

Authority for the proposed rule is the 

statute commonly known as the NPS 

Organic Act of 1916, as amended. The 

NPS Organic Act created the NPS and 

defined its purpose by stating that the 

NPS shall promote and regulate the use 

of the National Park System by means 

and measures that conform to the 

fundamental purpose of the System 

units, which purpose is to conserve the 

scenery, natural and historic objects, 

and wild life in the System units and to 

provide for the enjoyment of the 

scenery, natural and historic objects, 

and wild life in such manner and by 

such means as will leave them 

unimpaired for the enjoyment of future 

generations. (54 U.S.C. 100101) 

The Organic Act further authorizes 

the Secretary of the Interior to make 

‘‘such regulations as the Secretary 

considers necessary or proper for the 

use and management of [National Park] 

System units.’’ (54 U.S.C. 100751(a)). 

The proposed rule would authorize 

the NPS to enter into agreements with 

federally recognized Indian tribes to 

allow for the gathering and removal of 

plants or plant parts for traditional 

purposes. The proposed rule is intended 

to continue Indian tribal cultural 

traditions that are rooted in the history 

of specific parks. 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Indian Tribes 

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, ‘‘Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments,’’ of November 6, 2000; 

President Obama’s Executive 

Memorandum on Tribal Consultation of 

November 5, 2009; Department of the 

Interior Secretarial Order No. 3317 of 

December 1, 2011, and Department of 

the Interior Departmental Manual Part 

512,’’American Indian and Alaska 

Native Programs;’’ we have evaluated 

the potential effects on federally 

recognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that this proposed rule 

would have direct tribal implications. 

Tribal Consultation 

Six tribal consultation meetings were 

held in the ‘‘Lower 48’’ to consult with 

Indian tribes on this proposed rule. 

Locations in or near units of the 

National Park System where gathering 

by tribal members has been discussed 

over the years were selected in 

consultation with Indian tribes and NPS 

regional and park staff. One hundred 

and fifty representatives from 50 tribes 

attended meetings held from May 

through July 2010, in Bar Harbor, 

Maine; Flagstaff, Arizona; Pipestone, 

Minnesota; Yurok, California; 

Suquamish, Washington; and Cherokee, 

North Carolina. An additional meeting 

was held at Pipestone, Minnesota, in 

September 2010. Staff in Alaska 

contacted more than 70 federally 

recognized Indian tribes traditionally 

associated with parks in Alaska. 

Consultation then occurred with those 

tribes that requested it. Additionally, 

general presentations were given at two 

statewide conventions: The Alaska 

Tribal Leaders Summit in Fairbanks 

during the annual meetings of the 

Alaska Federation of Natives in October 

2010 and at the annual Bureau of Indian 

Affairs Providers Conference in 

Anchorage in December 2010. A 

conference call with traditional elders 

and tribal people not representing tribal 

governments was also conducted in 

June 2010 at the request of Arvol 

Looking Horse, Keeper of the Sacred 

White Buffalo Calf Pipe of the Lakota, 

Dakota, and Nakota Nation of the Sioux. 

Park managers and staff also attended 

these consultation meetings and 

participated in the discussions. The 

major concerns of representatives of 

tribal governments and the NPS are 

summarized and addressed here. 

Gathering To Be Limited to Members of 

Federally Recognized Indian Tribes 

Tribal representatives expressed 

support for the concept that only 

members of federally recognized Indian 

tribes be allowed to gather and remove 

park resources for traditional purposes. 

The proposed rule limits gathering and 

removal to members of an Indian tribe 

or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, 

pueblo, village or community that the 

Secretary of the Interior acknowledges 

to exist as an Indian tribe under the 

Federally Recognized Tribe List Act of 

1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. This provision 

will limit gathering and removal to 

members of Indian tribes with which 

the United States has a government-togovernment relationship. The proposed 

rule provides avenues for cooperative 

NPS-tribal government oversight of 

member activities on park lands to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

21676 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

ensure that traditional gathering and 

removal remains sustainable with no 

significant adverse impacts to park 

resources and values, consistent with 

NPS Management Policies 2006, 8.2. 

Gathering To Be Limited to Those 

Indian Tribes Traditionally Associated 

With Specific Park Lands 

A central purpose of the proposed 

rule is to support the continuation of 

Indian cultural traditions on lands that 

are now administered as units of the 

National Park System. The proposed 

rule would apply only to those Indian 

tribes traditionally associated with 

specific park units. The concept of 

acknowledging and respecting the 

special and longstanding connections 

that Indian tribes have with parklands 

prior to the establishment of park units 

is specifically described in NPS 

Management Policies 2006, 1.11. 

Government-to-Government Agreements 

The NPS and tribal representatives 

expressed support for agreements 

between tribal governments and the 

NPS to establish the conditions for 

gathering in park units. These 

agreements would respect both tribal 

sovereignty and NPS authority to 

manage park resources. These 

agreements would authorize traditional 

tribal gathering in ways that could be 

administered flexibly to respond to local 

resource concerns. The participating 

tribal government would be responsible 

for designating which tribal members 

would be allowed to gather in 

accordance with the terms and 

conditions set forth in the agreement. 

Park Resource Protection 

Tribal representatives expressed deep 

concern for the long-term health of park 

ecosystems. Reminding the NPS of their 

long history of productive and 

protective relationships with such 

ecosystems, they expressed willingness 

to accept limitations on gathering to 

protect park resources. The NPS and 

tribal representatives are interested in 

jointly developing park specific plant 

gathering management plans to ensure 

the long-term health of any park 

resource that may be gathered. 

Respect for Tribal Cultural Traditions 

Tribal representatives stressed that 

each Indian tribe is unique, and that 

tribal agreements entered into under the 

proposed rule should allow for 

traditional cultural practices specific to 

each tribe. 

Traditional Gathering Needs May Be 

Site-Specific to National Park Land 

Some national park units contain 

places where tribal members historically 

have gathered plant resources. Using a 

particular gathering site within a 

national park unit may be vital to the 

continuation of a cultural tradition that 

cannot be met at locations outside the 

park, or even at alternative locations 

within it. Thus, even though some plant 

materials may be available outside park 

lands, tribal members may still 

reasonably desire to gather at 

traditionally significant locations inside 

a park unit. The rationale for in-park 

gathering of materials available outside 

park boundaries needs to be 

documented on a case-by-case basis as 

outlined in § 2.6(d) of the proposed rule. 

The information used to make this 

determination may be subject to peer 

review by qualified specialists from 

both the tribal and academic 

communities. 

Collaborative Research and 

Administration 

Tribal representatives expressed the 

desire to work with the NPS to create 

and maintain the knowledge base 

needed to manage gathering and 

removal and to leave park resources 

unimpaired for future generations. This 

would include joint research and 

monitoring, training programs for tribal 

members and park staff, and ongoing 

consultation regarding park resources. 

Relationship of the Proposed Rule to 

Existing Regulations 

Existing NPS regulations, 

promulgated in 1983, prohibit 

‘‘possessing, destroying, injuring, 

defacing, removing, digging, or 

disturbing from its natural state’’ living 

or dead wildlife or fish, plants, 

paleontological specimens, or mineral 

resources, or the parts or products of 

any of these items, except as otherwise 

provided in NPS regulations. The 

proposed rule, to be codified at 36 CFR 

2.6, would be consistent with this 

general prohibition. It would provide a 

recognized exception to current 

regulations by authorizing resource- and 

location-specific agreements between 

the NPS and federally recognized Indian 

tribes to gather and remove plants or 

plant parts for traditional purposes. 

Gathered plants or plant parts, as 

envisioned under this proposed rule, are 

not meant to be used for ‘‘benefits 

sharing,’’ which allows for commercial 

use of the results of research on material 

collected in a park area under a 

specimen collection permit under 36 

CFR 2.5. See NPS Management Policies 

2006, 4.2.4. 

The proposed rule would leave in 

place 36 CFR 2.1(c)(1), which allows a 

park Superintendent to authorize 

gathering of designated fruits, berries, 

nuts, or unoccupied seashells by all 

park visitors, subject to certain 

conditions. The proposed rule would 

amend section 2.1(d), which currently 

states that 36 CFR 2.1 ‘‘shall not be 

construed as authorizing the taking, use 

or possession of fish, wildlife, or plants 

for ceremonial or religious purposes, 

except where specifically authorized by 

Federal statutory law, treaty rights or in 

accordance with § 2.2 (wildlife 

protection) or § 2.3 (fishing).’’ The 

proposed rule would permit the 

gathering and removal of plants or plant 

parts for traditional purposes under 

specific tribal agreements, but would 

not alter the prohibition on taking fish 

or wildlife for such purposes. 

NPS Units in Alaska 

Title 36 CFR 13.35 regulates the 

gathering and collection of natural 

products in many of the National Park 

System units in Alaska, and allows for 

the limited gathering of a wider range of 

natural products than are included in 

the proposed rule. Except for the park 

areas listed in § 13.35(a), § 13.35(c) 

permits gathering, by hand and for 

personal use only, of renewable 

resources such as natural plant food 

items (e.g. fruits, berries, and 

mushrooms) that are not threatened or 

endangered species; driftwood and 

uninhabited seashells; and plant 

materials and minerals that are essential 

to the conduct of traditional ceremonies 

by Native Americans. Therefore, the 

proposed rule would have no 

discernable effect upon National Park 

System units in Alaska where § 13.35(c) 

applies. The proposed rule would apply 

to the park units in Alaska listed in 

§ 13.35(a) and to parks in the contiguous 

United States. The proposed rule would 

not address subsistence issues 

authorized in Alaska by 36 CFR 13.400– 

13.495. 

Section-by-Section Analysis 

Sec. 2.1(d) Authorization of Agreements 

The proposed rule would remove the 

existing prohibition on the taking, use, 

or possession of plants or plant parts, 

provided such taking, use or possession 

was done under an agreement described 

in this rule. The proposed rule would 

have no effect on existing statutory or 

treaty rights, or on the taking of wildlife 

or fish. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 21677 

Sec. 2.6(a) Definitions 

The rule proposes to define the 

following terms for use in this section: 

Indian tribe, Traditional association, 

Traditional purpose, and Tribal official. 

Sec. 2.6(b) Agreements Between the NPS 

and Indian Tribes 

The proposed rule would authorize 

agreements allowing and regulating 

tribal gathering and removal of plants or 

plant parts for traditional purposes in 

park units where such gathering and 

removal have not been specifically 

authorized by Congress. The agreements 

would explicitly recognize the special 

government-to-government relationship 

between Indian tribes and the United 

States, and would be based upon 

mutually agreed upon terms and 

conditions subject to the requirements 

of § 2.6(d). The agreements would serve 

as the framework under which the NPS 

would allow tribal gathering and 

removal and would be implemented by 

an accompanying permit under § 1.6, 

which would authorize the gathering 

and removal activities. 

Sec. 2.6(c) Tribal Request 

The NPS would respond to a request 

from the appropriate tribal official 

expressing interest in entering into an 

agreement for gathering and removal 

based on tribal traditional association 

with the park unit, and on the 

continuation of tribal cultural traditions 

on park land. The tribal request would 

include a description of the traditional 

association that the Indian tribe has to 

the park area, a brief explanation of the 

traditional purposes to which the 

gathering and removal activities will 

relate, and a description of the gathering 

and removal activities that the Indian 

tribe is interested in conducting. 

The NPS believes that under existing 

law it can protect sensitive or 

confidential information submitted by 

tribes (see e.g., 54 U.S.C. 307103). 

Sec. 2.6(d) Criteria for Entering Into 

Agreement 

The proposed rule would require the 

Superintendent to determine that the 

proposed gathering is a traditional use 

of the park area by the Indian tribe, 

analyze any potential impacts of the 

proposed gathering in accordance with 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

and other applicable laws, and 

document a determination that the 

proposed gathering and removal will 

not result in a significant adverse 

impact (i.e., make a Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI)), and is 

consistent with the requirements of 

other applicable laws and regulations. 

Sec. 2.6(e) Denial of Request To Enter 

Into Agreement 

The proposed rule would require the 

NPS to deny a request to enter into an 

agreement if sufficient information does 

not exist to demonstrate the Indian 

tribe’s traditional association or the 

traditional purposes for which the park 

resource would be gathered and 

removed, or if the analyses required by 

§ 2.6(d) indicate significant adverse 

impacts to park resources or values. 

Sec. 2.6(f) Contents of Agreements 

The proposed rule outlines the 

required contents of agreements in 

detail. According to the terms of the 

agreement, the NPS would authorize the 

tribal government to manage gathering 

and removal by tribal members subject 

to the conditions of the agreement. The 

agreement could operate in a variety of 

ways, but, at a minimum, it would 

require that the tribal government 

identify who within the tribe is 

designated to gather and remove; how 

such individuals will be identified; 

what plants or plant parts may be 

gathered and removed; and limits on 

size, quantities, seasons, or locations 

where the gathering and removal may 

take place. 

Agreements would also establish 

NPS-tribal protocols for monitoring park 

resources subject to gathering and 

removal operating protocols, and 

remedies for noncompliance in addition 

to those set out in the proposed rule. In 

the case of noncompliance by members 

of the tribe, the NPS would initially 

apply these agreed-upon remedies and, 

if warranted, seek prosecution of 

specific violators, prior to terminating 

the agreement. This section also 

provides for any special conditions 

unique to the park unit or tribal 

tradition that may be included within 

the scope of existing law. 

Sec. 2.6(g) Regional Office Concurrence 

The proposed rule would require the 

Regional Director to approve an 

agreement entered into under the 

proposed rule. 

Sec. 2.6(h) Closure 

The proposed rule would provide for 

closures and restrictions on gathering 

and removal when necessary to provide 

for public health and safety or protect 

park resources and values, after 

providing appropriate public notice 

under § 1.7 (Public notice). 

Sec. 2.6(i) Termination or Suspension 

The proposed rule would provide for 

suspension or termination of an 

agreement where terms or conditions 

are violated or unanticipated or 

significant impacts occur. The 

Superintendent would be required to 

prepare a written determination 

justifying the action. A termination 

would be subject to the concurrence of 

the Regional Director. Termination of an 

agreement would be based on factors 

such as careful analysis of impacts on 

park resources and the effectiveness of 

NPS-tribal agreement administration. 

Sec. 2.6(j) Prohibitions 

Gathering and removal are prohibited, 

except as authorized under this 

regulation, or as otherwise authorized 

by Federal statute, treaty, or another 

NPS regulation. Any gathering and 

removal done under this regulation 

must be done according to the 

provisions of the applicable agreement 

and permit. 

Relationship of the Proposed Rule to 

Proposed U.S. Forest Service 

Regulations 

On July 31, 2014, the United States 

Forest Service (USFS) published a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register 

(79 FR 44327) to implement section 

8105 of the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008 (Farm Bill). The 

USFS proposed rule would authorize 

Regional Foresters or designated Forest 

Officers to provide trees, portions of 

trees, or forest products to Indian tribes 

free of charge for noncommercial 

traditional and cultural purposes. The 

rule would require federally-recognized 

Indian tribes seeking products under the 

Farm Bill authority to submit a written 

request to the USFS for free use. The 

rule encourages tribal officials making 

the requests to explain their requests to 

the Regional Forester or designated 

Forest Officer, and, if necessary, how 

the requests fit a noncommercial 

traditional and cultural purpose. The 

comment period for the USFS rule 

closed on September 29, 2014. 

The NPS recognizes that a federallyrecognized tribe may have a traditional 

association with an NPS unit that is 

adjacent to USFS lands. This tribe may 

seek to gather and remove natural 

products from the NPS and adjacent 

USFS lands for the same traditional or 

cultural purpose. In these 

circumstances, tribal officials would 

need to enter into an agreement with the 

NPS and obtain an NPS permit to gather 

and remove plants or plant parts from 

the NPS lands; and submit a written 

request to the USFS to remove trees, 

portions of trees, or forest products from 

the adjacent USFS lands. 

The NPS and USFS have distinct 

statutory mandates and authorities that 

result in separate regulations and 

policies that govern the resources they 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

21678 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

manage. As a result, the process for 

removing plants and plant parts from 

NPS lands will be governed by 

regulations that are separate from the 

regulations that will govern the removal 

of trees, portions of trees, or forest 

products from USFS lands. The NPS 

seeks comment about how the NPS and 

the USFS can coordinate their separate 

processes for requesting approval to 

remove natural products from the 

respective lands they administer, in the 

circumstances described above. In 

particular, the NPS seeks comment on 

ways the NPS proposed rule can better 

align with the USFS proposed rule—for 

example, how a joint or coordinated 

permitting process between the two 

agencies would impact paperwork 

burden and regulatory compliance. 

Compliance With Other Laws, 

Executive Orders, and Department 

Policy 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 

Executive Order 12866 provides that 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of 

Management and Budget will review all 

significant rules. OIRA has determined 

that this rule is not significant. 

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the 

principles of Executive Order 12866 

while calling for improvements in the 

nation’s regulatory system to promote 

predictability, to reduce uncertainty, 

and to use the best, most innovative, 

and least burdensome tools for 

achieving regulatory ends. The 

executive order directs agencies to 

consider regulatory approaches that 

reduce burdens and maintain flexibility 

and freedom of choice for the public 

where these approaches are relevant, 

feasible, and consistent with regulatory 

objectives. Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes further that regulations 

must be based on the best available 

science and that the rulemaking process 

must allow for public participation and 

an open exchange of ideas. We have 

developed this rule in a manner 

consistent with these requirements. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

This rule will not have a significant 

economic effect on a substantial number 

of small entities under the RFA (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This certification is 

based on information contained in the 

report titled, ‘‘Cost-Benefit and 

Regulatory Flexibility Analyses’’ 

available for review at http://

www.nps.gov/tribes/proposed_rule.htm. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the SBREFA. This rule: 

(a) Does not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

(b) Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

(c) 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. 

This determination is based on 

information from ‘‘Cost-Benefit and 

Regulatory Flexibility Analyses’’ 

available for review at http://

www.nps.gov/tribes/proposed_rule.htm. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This rule does not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

rule does not have a significant or 

unique effect on State, local or tribal 

governments or the private sector. It 

addresses use of NPS lands only. A 

statement containing the information 

required by the UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.) is not required. 

Takings (Executive Order 12630) 

This rule does not effect a taking of 

private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630. A takings implication 

assessment is not required. 

Federalism (Executive Order 13132) 

Under the criteria in Executive Order 

13132, the rule does not have sufficient 

Federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a Federalism summary 

impact statement. This proposed rule 

only affects use of NPS administered 

lands. It has no outside effects on other 

areas. A Federalism summary impact 

statement is not required. 

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 

12988) 

This rule complies with the 

requirements of Executive Order 12988. 

Specifically, this rule: 

(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) 

requiring that all proposed rules be 

reviewed to eliminate errors and 

ambiguity and be written to minimize 

litigation; and 

(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) 

requiring that all proposed rules be 

written in clear language and contain 

clear legal standards. 

Consultation With Indian Tribes 

(Executive Order 13175 and Department 

Policy) 

The Department of the Interior strives 

to strengthen its government-togovernment relationship with Indian 

tribes through a commitment to 

consultation with Indian tribes and 

recognition of their right to selfgovernance and tribal sovereignty. We 

have evaluated this rule under the 

Department’s consultation policy and 

under the criteria in Executive Order 

13175, and have identified direct tribal 

implications. 

Accordingly, we have consulted with 

tribes on a government-to-government 

basis as detailed previously in this 

preamble. 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This proposed rule contains a 

collection of information that we have 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review and 

approval under the PRA of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). We may not 

conduct or sponsor and you are not 

required to respond to a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

An Indian tribe that has a traditional 

association with a park area may request 

that we enter into an agreement with the 

tribe for gathering and removal from the 

park area of plants or plant parts for 

traditional purposes. The agreement 

will define the terms under which the 

Indian tribe may be issued permits that 

will designate the tribal members who 

may gather and remove plants or plant 

parts within the park area in accordance 

with the terms and conditions of the 

agreement and the permit. We collect 

the following information: 

Initial Written Request From an Indian 

Tribal Official 

The request must include: 

(1) An explanation of the traditional 

association that the Indian tribe has to 

the park area; 

(2) An explanation of the traditional 

purposes to which the gathering 

activities will relate; and 

(3) A description of the gathering and 

removal activities that the Indian tribe 

is interested in conducting. 

Agreement With Indian Tribes 

To make determinations based upon 

these requests or to enter into 

agreements, we may need to collect 

information from those Indian tribes 

who make requests and from the 

specific tribal members, who are 

proposed to participate in the 

authorization, including: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 21679 

(1) A description of the system to be 

used to administer gathering and 

removal, including a clear means of 

identifying appropriate tribal members 

who, under the permit, are designated 

by the Indian tribe to gather and remove 

and a means for the tribal government 

to keep the NPS regularly informed of 

which tribal members are the current 

gathering and removal designees of the 

Indian tribe; 

(2) A description of the specific plants 

or plant parts that may be gathered and 

removed; 

(3) Specification of the size and 

quantity of the plants or plant parts that 

may be gathered and removed; 

(4) Identification of the times and 

locations at which the plants or plant 

parts may be gathered and removed; 

(5) Identification of the methods that 

may be used for gathering and removal; 

(6) Protocols for monitoring gathering 

and removal activities; 

(7) Operating protocols and additional 

remedies for noncompliance with the 

terms of the agreement; and 

(8) Key officials. 

Title: Gathering of Certain Plants or 

Plant Parts by Federally Recognized 

Indian Tribes for Traditional Purposes, 

36 CFR 2. 

OMB Control Number: 1024–XXXX. 

Service Form Number: None. 

Type of Request: Request for a new 

OMB Control Number. 

Description of Respondents: Indian 

tribes. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Required to 

obtain or retain a benefit. 

Frequency of Collection: On occasion. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

20. 

Activity 

Estimated 

number of 

annual 

responses 

Completion 

time per 

response 

(hours) 

Estimated total 

annual burden 

hours 

Initial written request from an Indian tribal official ....................................................................... 20 4 80 

Agreement with Indian Tribes ...................................................................................................... 5 20 100 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 25 ........................ 180 

As part of our continuing effort to 

reduce paperwork and respondent 

burdens, we invite the public and other 

Federal agencies to comment on any 

aspect of this information collection, 

including: 

(1) Whether or not the collection of 

information is necessary, including 

whether or not the information will 

have practical utility; 

(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the 

burden for this collection of 

information; 

(3) Ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and 

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on 

respondents. 

Send your comments and suggestions 

on this information collection by the 

date indicated in the DATES section to 

the Desk Officer for the Department of 

the Interior at OMB–OIRA at (202) 395– 

5806 (fax) or OIRA_Submission@

omb.eop.gov (email). Please provide a 

copy of your comments to the 

Information Collection Clearance 

Officer, National Park Service, 1849 C 

Street NW., Washington, DC 20240 

(mail); or madonna_baucum@nps.gov 

(email). Please reference ‘‘1024–AD84’’ 

in the subject line of your comments. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

This rule does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment. A 

detailed statement under the NEPA 

1969 is not required because the rule is 

covered by a categorical exclusion. The 

Department of the Interior Regulations 

for implementing NEPA at 43 CFR 

46.210(i) allow for the following to be 

categorically excluded: Policies, 

directives, regulations, and guidelines 

that are of an administrative, financial, 

legal, technical, or procedural nature; or 

whose environmental effects are too 

broad, speculative, or conjectural to 

lend themselves to meaningful analysis 

and will later be subject to the NEPA 

process, either collectively or case-bycase.’’ 

The NPS has determined that the 

environmental effects of this rule are too 

broad, speculative, or conjectural for a 

meaningful analysis. In order to enter 

into an agreement for gathering of 

natural products under the rule, the 

NPS would first need to receive a 

request from an appropriate tribal 

official. While there are a number of 

Indian tribes that may qualify for an 

agreement under the rule, the NPS can 

only speculate at this point as to which 

Indian tribes will request an agreement, 

which park units will be affected, and 

what specific resources specific Indian 

tribes will request to collect. Because of 

this, the NPS has explicitly required 

that each agreement will undergo its 

own NEPA analysis, on a case-by-case 

basis. No collection of plants or plant 

parts would occur under this rule until 

after a site-specific NEPA analysis is 

completed. 

The NPS has also determined that the 

rule does not involve any of the 

extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 

CFR 46.215 that would require further 

analysis under NEPA. 

Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive 

Order 13211) 

This rule is not a significant energy 

action under the definition in Executive 

Order 13211. A Statement of Energy 

Effects is not required. 

Clarity of This Rule 

The NPS is required by Executive 

Orders 12866 (section 1(b)(12) and 

12988 section 3(b)(1)(B)) and by the 

Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 

1998, to write all rules in plain 

language. This means that each rule we 

publish must: 

(a) Be logically organized; 

(b) Use the active voice to address 

readers directly; 

(c) Use clear language rather than 

jargon; 

(d) Be divided into short sections and 

sentences; and 

(e) Use lists and tables wherever 

possible. 

If you feel that we have not met these 

requirements, send us comments by one 

of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES

section. To better help us revise the 

proposed rule, your comments should 

be as specific as possible. For example, 

you should tell us the numbers of the 

sections or paragraphs that you find 

unclear, which sections or sentences are 

too long, the sections where you feel 

lists or tables would be useful, etc. 

Drafting Information 

The primary authors of this proposed 

rule were Patricia L. Parker, Chief, 

American Indian Liaison Office; 

Frederick F. York, Regional 

Anthropologist, Pacific West Region; 

and Philip Selleck, Associate Regional 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

21680 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Director for Operations, National Capital 

Region. 

Public Participation 

All submissions received must 

include the agency name and docket 

number or Regulation Identifier Number 

(RIN), 1024–AD84, for this rulemaking. 

All comments received will be posted 

without change to www.regulations.gov. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publically 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. 

For access to the docket to read 

background documents or comments 

received, go to www.regulations.gov and 

enter 1024–AD84 in the search box. 

List of Subjects in Part 2 

National parks, Native Americans, 

Natural resources. 

For the reasons given in the preamble, 

the National Park Service proposes to 

amend 36 CFR part 2 as follows: 

PART 2—RESOURCE PROTECTION, 

PUBLIC USE AND RECREATION 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 2 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, 

320102. 

■ 2. In § 2.1, revise paragraph (d) to read 

as follows: 

§ 2.1 Preservation of natural, cultural and 

archeological resources. 

* * * * * 

(d) This section shall not be construed 

as authorizing the taking, use, or 

possession of fish, wildlife, or plants, 

except for the gathering and removal for 

traditional purposes of plants or plant 

parts by members of an Indian tribe 

under an agreement in accordance with 

§ 2.6, or where specifically authorized 

by Federal statutory law, treaty rights, or 

in accordance with § 2.2 or § 2.3. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Add § 2.6 to read as follows: 

§ 2.6 Gathering of plants or plant parts by 

federally recognized Indian tribes. 

(a) What terms do I need to know? The 

following definitions apply only to this 

section. 

Indian tribe means an American 

Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, 

nation, pueblo, village, or community 

that the Secretary of the Interior 

acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe 

under the Federally Recognized Tribe 

List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. 

Traditional association means a 

longstanding relationship of historical 

or cultural significance between an 

Indian tribe and a park area predating 

the establishment of the park area. 

Traditional purpose means a 

customary activity or practice that is 

rooted in the history of an Indian tribe 

and is important to the continuation of 

that tribe’s distinct culture. 

Tribal official means an elected or 

duly appointed official of the federally 

recognized government of an Indian 

tribe authorized to act on behalf of the 

tribe with respect to the subject matter 

of this regulation. 

(b) How will the Superintendent 

authorize gathering and removal? Upon 

the request of an Indian tribe that has a 

traditional association with a park area, 

the Superintendent may negotiate and 

enter into an agreement with the tribe to 

authorize the gathering and removal 

from the park area of plants or plant 

parts for traditional purposes. This 

agreement will define the terms and 

conditions under which the tribe may 

be issued permits that designate 

members who may gather and remove 

plants or plant parts within the park. 

The agreement will be implemented 

through permits, which the 

Superintendent will issue under § 1.6 of 

this chapter. 

(c) How can a tribe request to enter 

into an agreement? An Indian tribe’s 

request to enter into an agreement under 

this section must be submitted to the 

Superintendent by a tribal official and 

must contain: 

(1) An explanation of the Indian 

tribe’s traditional association to the park 

area; 

(2) An explanation of the traditional 

purposes to which the gathering 

activities will relate; and 

(3) A description of the gathering and 

removal activities that the tribe is 

interested in conducting. 

(d) What are the criteria for entering 

into agreements? Before entering into an 

agreement to allow gathering and 

removal, the Superintendent must do all 

of the following: 

(1) Determine and document, based 

on information provided by the Indian 

tribe or others, and other available 

information, that: 

(i) The Indian tribe has a traditional 

association with the park area; and 

(ii) The proposed gathering and 

removal is a traditional use of the park 

area by the Indian tribe. 

(2) Analyze potential impacts of the 

proposed gathering and removal in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

National Environmental Policy Act, the 

National Historic Preservation Act, and 

other applicable laws. 

(3) Document a determination that the 

proposed gathering and removal 

activities will not result in a significant 

adverse impact on park resources or 

values. 

(4) Determine that the agreement for 

the proposed gathering and removal 

meets the requirements for issuing a 

permit under § 1.6(a) of this chapter. 

(e) When will the Superintendent 

deny a request to enter into an 

agreement? The Superintendent must 

deny the request to enter into an 

agreement to gather if any of the 

determinations required by paragraph 

(d) of this section cannot be made. 

(f) How will agreements be 

implemented? An agreement to gather 

and remove plants or plant parts must 

be implemented through a permit issued 

in accordance with § 1.6 of this chapter. 

The agreement must contain the 

following: 

(1) The name of the Indian tribe 

authorized to gather and remove plants 

and plant parts; 

(2) The basis for the tribe’s eligibility 

under paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this 

section to enter into the agreement; 

(3) A description of the system to be 

used to administer gathering and 

removal including a clear means of 

identifying appropriate tribal members 

who, under the permit, are designated 

by the Indian tribe to gather and 

remove; 

(4) A means for the tribal government 

to keep the NPS regularly informed of 

which tribal members are the current 

gathering and removal designees of the 

Indian tribe; 

(5) A description of the specific plants 

or plant parts that may be gathered and 

removed; 

(6) Specification of the size and 

quantity of the plants or plant parts that 

may be gathered and removed; 

(7) Identification of the times and 

locations at which the plants or plant 

parts may be gathered and removed; 

(8) Identification of the methods that 

may be used for gathering and removal; 

(9) A statement that commercial use 

of natural resources is prohibited under 

§ 2.1(c)(3)(v); 

(10) Protocols for monitoring 

gathering and removal activities and 

thresholds above which NPS and tribal 

management intervention will occur; 

(11) Operating protocols and 

additional remedies for non-compliance 

with the terms of the agreement beyond 

those provided in this section; 

(12) Any additional terms or 

conditions that the parties may agree to; 

and, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 21681 

(13) A list of key officials. 

(g) What concurrence must the 

Superintendent obtain? The 

superintendent must obtain the written 

concurrence of the Regional Director to 

any agreement before it can go into 

effect, and before any permit may be 

issued. 

(h) When will the Superintendent 

close areas to gathering and removal? 

Notwithstanding the terms of any 

agreement executed under this section, 

the Superintendent may close park 

areas, or portions thereof, to gathering 

and removal for any of the following 

reasons: 

(i) Maintenance of public health and 

safety; 

(ii) Protection of environmental or 

scenic values; 

(iii) Protection of natural or cultural 

resources; 

(iv) Aid to scientific research; 

(v) Implementation of management 

responsibilities; 

(vi) Equitable allocation and use of 

facilities; or 

(vii) Avoidance of conflict among 

visitor use activities. 

(2) Closed areas may not be reopened 

to traditional gathering and removal 

until the reasons for the closure have 

been resolved. 

(3) Except in emergency situations, 

the Superintendent will provide public 

notice of any closure or reopening under 

this section in accordance with § 1.7 of 

this chapter. 

(i) When will the agreement and 

permit be suspended or terminated? 

(1) Notwithstanding any remedy 

provisions of an agreement, violation of 

the terms or conditions of an agreement 

or permit issued under this section may 

result in suspension or termination of 

the agreement and permit, and loss of 

authorization to gather and remove. 

(2) A Superintendent may suspend an 

agreement and implementing permit if 

terms or conditions are violated or if 

unanticipated or significant impacts 

occur. The Superintendent shall prepare 

a written determination justifying the 

action. 

(3) The Superintendent must have the 

written concurrence of the Regional 

Director before terminating an 

agreement or implementing permit. 

(j) When is gathering prohibited? 

Gathering, possession, or removal from 

a park area of plants or plant parts 

(including for traditional purposes), is 

prohibited except where specifically 

authorized by; 

(1) Federal statutory law; 

(2) Treaty rights; 

(3) Other regulations of this chapter; 

or 

(4) The terms and conditions of an 

agreement and permit issued under this 

section. 

(k) Have the information collection 

requirements been approved? The Office 

of Management and Budget has 

reviewed and approved the information 

collection requirements in this section 

and assigned OMB Control No. 1024– 

XXXX. We will use this information to 

determine whether a traditional 

association and purpose can be 

documented in order to authorize 

gathering. We may not conduct or 

sponsor and you are not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. You may send 

comments on any aspect of this 

information collection to the 

Information Collection Clearance 

Officer, National Park Service, 1849 C 

Street NW., Washington, DC 20240. 

* * * * * 

Dated: April 2, 2105. 

Michael Bean, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish 

and Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2015–08852 Filed 4–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–EJ–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0705; FRL–9926–27– 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; 

Illinois Power Holdings and 

AmerenEnergy Medina Valley Cogen 

Variance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

into the Illinois Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) a variance for 

the electrical generating units (EGUs) 

included in the Ameren multi-pollutant 

standard group (Ameren MPS Group). 

The Ameren MPS Group consists of five 

facilities owned by Illinois Power 

Holdings, LLC (IPH) and two facilities 

owned by AmerenEnergy Medina Valley 

Cogen, LLC (Medina Valley). The 

Illinois Environmental Protection 

Agency (IEPA) submitted the variance to 

EPA for approval on September 3, 2014. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 20, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2014–0705, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano, 

Chief, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office normal hours 

of operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The Regional Office official 

hours of business are Monday through 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014– 

0705. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS