Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Notices 4653 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

[NPS–IMR–YELL–33194; PPWONRADE2, 

PMP00EI05.YP0000] 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement for a 

Bison Management Plan for 

Yellowstone National Park, Idaho, 

Montana, Wyoming 

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: The National Park Service is 

preparing an Environmental Impact 

Statement in accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) for a Bison Management Plan 

for Yellowstone National Park. 

DATES: The National Park Service 

requests comments concerning the 

scope of the analysis, and identification 

of potential alternatives, information, 

and analyses relevant to the planning 

process. All comments must be received 

or postmarked by February 28, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Information will be 

available for public review and 

comment online at https://

parkplanning.nps.gov/ 

YellowstonebisonEIS. You may also 

mail your written comments to the 

Office of the Superintendent, P.O. Box 

168, Yellowstone National Park, WY 

82190–0168. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Morgan Warthin, Public Affairs 

Specialist, Yellowstone National Park, 

307–344–2010, morgan_warthin@

nps.gov. Individuals who use 

telecommunication devices for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope and Purpose and Need 

The plan will focus on actions the 

National Park Service (NPS) may take to 

manage bison within Yellowstone 

National Park (the park) and consolidate 

various actions and environmental 

compliance analyses conducted over the 

past two decades into a contemporary 

plan. Other tribal and governmental 

agencies play important roles in bison 

management outside of the park, and 

the NPS intends to continue to work 

cooperatively with these groups as 

appropriate. 

The purpose of the plan is to preserve 

an ecologically sustainable population 

of wild, migratory bison while 

continuing to work with partners to 

address brucellosis transmission, 

human safety, property damage, and 

support tribal hunting outside of the 

park. 

Action is needed because new 

information obtained since the approval 

of the Interagency Bison Management 

Plan (IBMP) in 2000 indicates some of 

the premises regarding disease 

transmission in the initial plan were 

incorrect or changed over time. In 

addition, there are fewer cattle near the 

park and Federal and State disease 

regulators have taken steps to lessen the 

economic impacts of brucellosis 

outbreaks in cattle. Since 2006, seven 

tribes have hunted bison on national 

forest lands adjacent to the park 

pursuant to long-standing treaties with 

the Federal Government. 

Preliminary Alternatives Under 

Consideration 

The NPS’s proposed action is to 

prepare and implement a new plan that 

provides Yellowstone National Park 

with tools to manage bison that reflect 

the best available information and 

current circumstances on the ground. 

The alternatives have been developed 

by taking into consideration 

management actions that could occur on 

lands outside the park in Montana. The 

alternatives describe external actions 

that could enhance management efforts 

inside the park, while acknowledging 

the NPS does not have jurisdiction or 

control over actions beyond the park 

boundary such as hunting, construction 

of capture or quarantine facilities, or 

tolerance for bison. Descriptions of 

external actions is not an endorsement 

or commitment from partners. 

Actions Common to All Alternatives 

Beginning in 2014, twenty-eight First 

Nations and Tribes signed The Buffalo: 

A Treaty of Cooperation, Renewal and 

Restoration to restore buffalo to their 

rightful place in the First Nations’ and 

Tribes’ respective cultures and 

territories. In 2016, these Buffalo 

Nations provided the Secretary of the 

Interior with a resolution supporting the 

Bison Conservation and Transfer 

Program (BCTP) in Yellowstone 

National Park. In 2020, they also 

conveyed their support for the 

Department of the Interior’s Bison 

Conservation Initiative and offered to 

collaborate with the Department and 

others through shared stewardship to 

bring this vision into reality. The NPS 

will continue to support the 2014 

Buffalo Treaty and 2020 Bison 

Conservation Initiative by engaging 

Buffalo Nations associated with 

Yellowstone bison to explore ways to 

increase the efficiency and safety of 

hunting outside the park and increase 

the restoration of brucellosis-free bison 

to tribal and public lands. Other Federal 

and State IBMP partners would inform 

this vision with the U.S. Forest Service 

and Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks 

participating in consultations about 

hunting and the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and 

Montana Department of Livestock 

participating in consultations about the 

BCTP. 

Research by park scientists and 

collaborators has determined there is 

sufficient forage in the park to sustain 

the numbers of bison described in the 

preliminary alternatives. They used 

state-of-the-art technology to analyze 

satellite images and conservatively 

estimate the amount of plant forage 

produced in non-forested areas. They 

determined that all the grazers 

combined, including bison, elk, 

pronghorn, mule deer, and bighorn 

sheep, would not consume more than 

half of the plant material produced 

during most years. There is considerable 

complexity around these estimates, 

however, due to large variations in 

weather and grass production from yearto-year. As a result, scientists will 

continue to monitor and adapt these 

estimates. 

Adaptive management is a key 

concept that would be incorporated into 

all the preliminary alternatives. Under 

adaptive management, biologists 

establish desired conditions, evaluate 

current conditions, identify undesired 

trends, implement management actions, 

monitor progress towards desired 

conditions, and adjust actions to 

improve progress. The NPS and other 

Federal and State agencies and tribes 

involved with the IBMP have used this 

process to inform decision-making and 

adjust bison management. The NPS 

would continue to implement 

monitoring and research to obtain 

timely information and adjust 

conservation and management 

activities. 

Operations plans would continue to 

serve as the main mechanism for 

describing, implementing, and adjusting 

commitments and agreements for the 

cooperative management of Yellowstone 

bison across jurisdictions. Under each 

alternative, managers from the NPS 

would continue to meet with the other 

Federal, State, and Tribal agencies to 

coordinate bison management using the 

existing framework and partnership 

protocols for the IBMP. The NPS would 

continue to prepare annual assessments 

of the status of the bison population and 

propose adjustments to adaptive 

management and operations plans based 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
4654 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Notices 

on the selected alternative in the record 

of decision resulting from this process. 

When Yellowstone bison cross the 

boundary of the park into surrounding 

states, they are no longer under the 

jurisdiction of the NPS. Instead, their 

management is the prerogative of the 

respective state and the U.S. Forest 

Service on National Forest System 

lands. The NPS would continue to work 

with the State of Montana, Custer 

Gallatin National Forest, and private 

landowners to increase tolerance for 

bison on suitable lands outside the park 

where a low risk of brucellosis 

transmission to cattle can be 

maintained. In addition, the NPS would 

continue to explore other activities with 

partners to advance the purpose of this 

plan, such as construction of additional 

quarantine facilities, use of temporary 

trapping facilities near the edge of 

management (tolerance) areas, and 

streamlining brucellosis testing 

protocols and quarantine periods for the 

BCTP. 

Preliminary alternatives being 

considered are as follows: 

Alternative 1—No Action Alternative— 

Current Management 

The NPS would continue to manage 

bison pursuant to the 2000 IBMP as 

adaptively adjusted and implemented 

through consensus decisions and annual 

operations plans by the agencies 

involved with bison management. Other 

members of the IBMP include APHIS, 

Confederated Salish and Kootenai 

Tribes of the Flathead Nation, U.S. 

Forest Service (Custer Gallatin National 

Forest), InterTribal Buffalo Council, Nez 

Perce Tribe, and State of Montana 

(Department of Livestock; Fish, Wildlife 

& Parks). The NPS would maintain a 

population range of bison similar to the 

last two decades (3,500 to 5,000 after 

calving). 

IBMP managers have made consensus 

decisions about population targets since 

2013 that led to a bison population 

averaging nearly 4,200 at the end of 

winter and 5,000 animals after calving. 

Managers agreed to these numbers 

because of increased tolerance for bison 

outside the park, balancing hunting 

outside the park with capturing animals 

for slaughter inside the park, developing 

a transfer program to relocate bison to 

tribes, and continued success limiting 

bison-related conflicts outside the park. 

The IBMP partners have 20 years of 

experience managing bison at higher 

numbers with no brucellosis 

transmission to cattle and fewer 

property and safety conflicts over time. 

The larger numbers conserved also have 

supported bison as a meaningful 

component of the food web influencing 

energy and nutrient transfer throughout 

the ecosystem, improved visitor 

experience by providing an unparalleled 

opportunity to view large herds of freeroaming bison, and ensured gene flow 

and conservation of existing genetic 

diversity. 

Under this alternative, bison would be 

allowed to exit the park into established 

northern and western management 

zones in Montana, and numbers and 

distribution would be regulated by 

captures for quarantine or shipment to 

slaughter and public and tribal harvests 

primarily on national forest lands near 

the park boundary. The NPS, in 

consultation with the tribes and 

informed by other agencies, would 

adaptively adjust removals and 

population size based on assessments of 

the status of the population and bison 

movements in and outside the park. 

Within the park, management of bison 

such as capture, hazing, and quarantine 

would generally occur near the 

boundary. However, the NPS may haze 

bison as necessary outside the park by 

working with partners to reduce 

conflicts with cattle, people, and 

property. Hazing involves moving bison 

away from an area where they are not 

wanted such as developed areas, 

highways, or private property using 

people on foot, on horseback, or in 

vehicles. Disease surveillance would 

continue to be conducted on bison 

placed in the BCTP and some bison 

shipped to slaughter or harvested 

outside the park. 

Under this alternative, the NPS would 

rely substantially on captures of 

migrating bison at Stephens Creek 

(inside the northern boundary of the 

park) and shipments of bison to 

slaughter to regulate numbers and 

provide bison to tribes. If space is 

available, some bison testing negative 

for previous brucellosis exposure would 

be placed in quarantine as part of the 

BCTP to increase the number of live 

brucellosis-free animals relocated to the 

Fort Peck Indian Reservation in 

northeastern Montana and eventually 

other tribal lands. If space is not 

available, these bison would be shipped 

to slaughter. The NPS would continue 

to work with APHIS and nongovernmental organizations to increase 

capacity in the BCTP and lower the 

number of transfer-eligible animals sent 

to slaughter. These efforts would 

include doubling the size of quarantine 

pastures in and around Stephens Creek 

and developing necessary water 

infrastructure to support this expansion 

as described in the Finding of No 

Significant Impact for the park’s 2018 

Environmental Assessment for Bison 

Quarantine. The NPS would continue to 

coordinate captures at Stephens Creek 

with tribal harvests outside the park to 

reduce the effects of capture on harvest 

opportunities and continue discussions 

with the tribes and other agencies to 

improve communication, safety, and 

handling of bison carcasses. 

Alternative 2—Enhance Restoration and 

Tribal Engagement 

Bison would be managed within a 

population range of about 4,500 to 6,000 

bison after calving with an emphasis on 

using the BCTP and tribal hunting 

outside the park to regulate bison 

numbers. The NPS may use proactive 

measures such as low stress hazing of 

bison toward the park boundary to 

increase tribal hunting opportunities 

outside the park. The NPS would reduce 

shipment to slaughter based on the 

needs and requests of tribes. The upper 

limit of the population range in this 

alternative is somewhat higher than 

current management under the IBMP 

over the last decade (Alternative 1). 

Bison would continue to exit the park 

into established northern and western 

management zones and management of 

bison within the park would be like 

Alternative 1 regarding criteria used for 

removals, hazing, and disease 

surveillance. The BCTP and hunt-trap 

coordination would continue as in 

Alternative 1. The NPS may collaborate 

with interested partners to establish 

additional quarantine facilities outside 

the park. As the BCTP expands and 

hunter harvests increase over a broader 

area in Montana, the NPS would reduce 

captures for shipments to slaughter. 

Alternative 3—Food-Limited Carrying 

Capacity 

The NPS would rely on natural 

selection, bison dispersal, and public 

and tribal harvests in Montana as the 

primary tools to regulate bison numbers, 

which would likely range from 5,500 to 

8,000 or more bison after calving. 

Trapping for shipments to slaughter 

would immediately cease. The NPS 

would continue captures to maintain 

the BCTP as in Alternatives 1 and 2. 

Under this alternative, the NPS expects 

a large increase in hunting opportunities 

from increasing population size and the 

elimination of captures for shipments to 

slaughter. Substantially larger harvests 

would have to occur outside the park for 

this alternative to be effective, which 

would require public and tribal hunters 

to allow bison to distribute and hunt 

them across a larger landscape. If bison 

numbers approach the estimated foodlimited carrying capacity of the park 

(>8,000 bison), the NPS would 

reinstitute shipments to slaughter as 

described for Alternatives 1 and 2. Large 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Notices 4655 

captures may occur more frequently as 

bison numbers approach or exceed 

carrying capacity. The NPS may haze 

bison in Yellowstone National Park 

when necessary to protect people and 

property. Disease surveillance would be 

conducted on some harvested bison. 

Summary of Expected Impacts 

Expected impacts within the park 

boundary from implementation of NPS 

bison management actions include: 

Potential changes in population 

structure and bison behavior from 

hazing, culling, and hunting outside the 

park; maintenance of the ecological role 

provided by bison (engineering habitats, 

redistributing nutrients, altering plant 

growth patterns, improving biodiversity, 

and providing meat for predators, 

scavengers and decomposers); potential 

impacts to human health and safety; 

potential impacts on vegetation as a 

result of bison grazing at various 

population levels; and potential impacts 

to the visitor experience due to closures 

and bison management operations in 

and around the capture and quarantine 

facilities within the Park. 

Expected impacts outside of the park 

boundary from implementation of NPS 

bison management actions include 

potential changes in: Maintaining the 

low risk of brucellosis spreading from 

bison to cattle, of which there are no 

documented cases since the IBMP was 

implemented in 2000 due to existing 

mitigation measures; the number of 

bison available for tribal and public 

hunting opportunities; the number of 

conflicts between bison and cattle, 

people, and property; and the number of 

brucellosis-free bison available to be 

sent to other appropriate lands. 

Anticipated Permits and Authorizations 

The NPS anticipates consulting with 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act 

for potential impacts to threatened and 

endangered species. The NPS will 

continue to participate in the IBMP 

framework and work cooperatively with 

its partners. the NPS will use and 

coordinate the NEPA public scoping 

process to help fulfill the public 

involvement requirements under the 

National Historic Preservation Act (54 

U.S.C. 306108) as provided in 36 CFR 

800.2(d)(3). The information about 

historic and cultural resources within 

the area potentially affected by the 

alternatives will assist the NPS in 

identifying and evaluating impacts to 

such resources, and consulting with the 

State Historic Preservation Officer on 

the potential for adverse effects. 

Schedule for the Decision-Making 

Process 

• Agencies have two years from the 

date of the issuance of the notice of 

intent to the date a record of decision 

is signed to complete an Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) (40 CFR 

1501.10). 

• The NPS expects to make the Draft 

EIS available to the public in Fall 2022. 

• After public review and comment, 

the NPS expects to make the Final EIS 

available to the public in Fall 2023. 

• At least 30 days after the Final EIS 

is available, the record of decision will 

be completed in accordance with 

applicable timeframes established in 40 

CFR 1506.11. 

Public Scoping Process 

This notice of intent initiates the 

scoping process, which guides the 

development of the EIS. The NPS will 

host two virtual public scoping 

meetings. During the virtual public 

scoping meetings, the NPS will present 

information pertinent to the EIS for the 

Bison Management Plan and allow the 

public to ask questions regarding the 

scope of issues and alternatives that 

should be considered when preparing 

the EIS. While the NPS will not solicit 

oral comments at these virtual public 

meetings, written comments may be 

submitted at any time during the 

scoping process. See the ADDRESSES

section (above) and the Submitting 

Comments section (below) for more 

information. Details regarding the exact 

dates and times of these virtual public 

scoping meetings will be announced on 

the project website (https://

parkplanning.nps.gov/ 

YellowstonebisonEIS) and through local 

and regional media. The virtual public 

scoping meetings will also be 

announced through email notification, 

press release, and social media to 

individuals and organizations. 

Reasonable Accommodations 

Persons needing reasonable 

accommodations to attend and 

participate in the virtual public scoping 

meetings should contact Yellowstone 

National Park’s Office of Strategic 

Communications, using one of the 

methods listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section as soon as 

possible. To allow sufficient time to 

process requests, please make contact 

no later than one week before the 

desired virtual public meeting. 

Request for Identification of Potential 

Alternatives, Information, and 

Analyses Relevant to the Planning 

Process 

The NPS requests possible 

alternatives, information, and analyses 

from all interested parties. The NPS will 

consider these comments in developing 

the Draft EIS. Specifically, the NPS is 

seeking: 

1. Biological information, analyses, 

and relevant data concerning bison and 

other wildlife; 

2. Potential effects that the 

alternatives could have on other aspects 

of the human environment, including 

ecological, aesthetic, historic, cultural, 

economic, social, environmental justice, 

or health effects; 

3. Other possible reasonable 

alternatives that the NPS should 

consider, including additional or 

alternative avoidance, minimization, 

and mitigation measures; 

4. Other information relevant to the 

Bison Management Plan and its impacts 

on the human environment. 

Submitting Comments 

If you wish to comment, you may 

submit comments by the methods listed 

above in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will not be accepted by fax, 

email, or by any method other than 

those specified above. Bulk comments 

in any format (hard copy or electronic) 

submitted on behalf of others will not be 

accepted. Comments must be provided 

prior to the close of the comment period 

and should clearly articulate the 

reviewer’s concerns and contentions. 

Public Availability of Comments 

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 us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. Comments submitted 

anonymously will be accepted and 

considered. 

Cooperating Agencies 

• U.S. Forest Service, Custer Gallatin 

National Forest 

• Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

• State of Montana (Montana 

Department of Livestock, Montana 

Fish, Wildlife & Parks) 

• Nez Perce Tribe 

• Intertribal Buffalo Council 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
4656 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Notices 

• Confederated Salish and Kootenai 

Tribes 

Yellowstone National Park has also 

invited the following tribes with treaty 

hunting rights to participate as 

cooperating agencies (responses are 

forthcoming): Blackfeet Tribe of the 

Blackfeet Indian Reservation of 

Montana, Confederated Tribes of the 

Umatilla Indian Reservation, Crow Tribe 

of Montana, Northern Arapaho Tribe of 

the Wind River Reservation, ShoshoneBannock Tribes of the Fort Hall 

Reservation, and the Yakama Nation. 

Decision Maker 

The Decision Maker is the NPS 

Regional Director for Interior Regions 6, 

7, and 8. 

Termination of 2015 EIS Process 

This notice also terminates the EIS for 

a Management Plan for Yellowstonearea Bison initiated by the NPS on 

March 16, 2015 (80 FR 13603–13604). 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. et seq. 

Michael Reynolds, 

Regional Director, Interior Regions 6, 7, & 

8. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01865 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

[OMB Control Number 1010–NEW; Docket 

ID: BOEM–2017–0016] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Evaluating Connections: 

BOEM’s Environmental Studies and 

Assessments 

AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of information collection; 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

(BOEM) is proposing a new information 

collection request (ICR). 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before February 

28, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your written 

comments on this ICR to the Office of 

Management and Budget’s desk officer 

for the Department of the Interior at 

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice. From the www.reginfo.gov/ 

public/do/PRAMain landing page, find 

this information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under Review—Open for 

Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. Please provide a copy 

of your comments to the BOEM 

Information Collection Clearance 

Officer, Anna Atkinson, Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management, 45600 

Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 

20166; or by email to anna.atkinson@

boem.gov. Please reference Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) Control 

Number 1010–NEW in the subject line 

of your comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anna Atkinson by email at 

anna.atkinson@boem.gov or by 

telephone at 703–787–1025. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, BOEM provides 

the public and Federal agencies with an 

opportunity to comment on new, 

proposed, revised, and continuing 

collections of information. This helps 

BOEM assess the impact of the 

information collection requirements and 

minimize the public’s reporting burden. 

It also helps the public understand 

BOEM’s information collection 

requirements. 

Title of Collection: Evaluating 

Connections: BOEM’s Environmental 

Studies and Assessments. 

Abstract: Section 20 of the Outer 

Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) 

(43 U.S.C. 1346) requires the Secretary 

of the Interior to study any area or 

region included in an oil, gas, or other 

lease sale to gather information needed 

for assessment and management of 

impacts on the human, marine, and 

coastal environments of the Outer 

Continental Shelf (OCS) and the affected 

coastal areas. Additionally, subsequent 

to the leasing and developing of any 

OCS area, the Secretary may authorize 

further environmental studies to gather 

information that can be used for 

identifying significant changes and 

trends in the quality and productivity of 

such environments and for designing 

experiments to identify the causes of 

such changes. 

This statutory authority is carried out 

through BOEM’s Environmental Studies 

Program (ESP). In fulfilling its mission, 

BOEM must comply with a range of 

environmental laws and regulations. To 

comply with relevant statutes and 

policies, BOEM requires current and 

relevant scientific information to 

develop informed environmental 

analyses required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

to conduct appropriate and meaningful 

consultations with other Federal 

agencies. For example, the following 

types of documents are considered in 

the universe of BOEM environmental 

analyses: 

• NEPA environmental impact 

statements. 

• NEPA environmental assessments. 

• National Historic Preservation Act 

documents (including section 106 

evaluations of effects on historic 

properties and programmatic 

agreements). 

• Essential fish habitat assessments 

for Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

consultations. 

• Endangered Species Act section 7 

biological evaluations or biological 

assessments. 

• Analyses and assessments prepared 

to comply with the Clean Air Act, 

Coastal Zone Management Act, and 

Marine Mammal Protection Act. 

• Analyses and assessments such as 

engineering analyses, regulatory impact 

analyses, resource evaluations, 

additional NEPA-related analyses, site 

assessments, and cost-benefit analyses 

prepared for OCSLA and other 

regulatory requirements. 

Environmental studies sponsored by 

ESP provide scientific information to 

inform BOEM’s environmental analyses, 

which are overseen through BOEM’s 

Environmental Assessment Program 

(EAP). BOEM describes the process by 

which environmental studies inform 

environmental analyses and 

environmental analyses inform 

environmental studies as a ‘‘feedback 

loop.’’ To determine how well this 

feedback loop is functioning and to 

identify potential improvements in the 

science-to-policy process, BOEM is 

pursuing an evaluation of the linkages 

between the scientific research it is 

funding and the information needs 

within its environmental analyses. The 

evaluation will include surveys and 

interviews of BOEM’s ESP and EAP 

partners (e.g., Federal and State 

agencies, academic institutions and 

scholars, consultants, tribal members, 

industry representatives, and 

environmental non-governmental 

organizations). 

The survey will focus on information 

exchange between BOEM’s ESP and 

EAP and their external program 

partners. The survey results will be used 

to understand how program partners use 

information derived from BOEM’s 

studies and analyses and to trace the 

networks through which this 

information is disseminated. The survey 

results will inform a network analysis to 

understand the network structure, 

possible network influence on 

outcomes, and people or organizations 

that could be targeted or connected to 

achieve better expected outcomes. 

The survey will be administered 

online. The survey will be sent to ESP 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1