14232 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

salamander is not a valid taxonomic 

entity and, accordingly, does not meet 

the statutory definition of a listable 

entity under the Act. Additionally, even 

if our conclusion is incorrect and the 

Blanco blind salamander was a valid 

taxonomic entity, it has not been 

collected in over 70 years despite survey 

efforts; thus, we have no evidence it has 

remained extant. Because the Blanco 

blind salamander either does not meet 

the definition of a listable entity or is 

extinct, it does not warrant listing under 

the Act. A detailed discussion of the 

basis for this finding can be found in the 

Blanco blind salamander species 

assessment form and other supporting 

documents (see ADDRESSES, above). 

New Information 

We request that you submit any new 

information concerning the taxonomy 

of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or 

stressors to Blanco blind salamander, 

Georgia bully, or Rio Grande cooter to 

the appropriate person, as specified 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT, whenever it becomes 

available. New information will help us 

monitor these species and make 

appropriate decisions about their 

conservation and status. We encourage 

local agencies and stakeholders to 

continue cooperative monitoring and 

conservation efforts. 

References Cited 

A list of the references cited in this 

petition finding is available in the 

relevant species assessment form, which 

is available on the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov in the appropriate 

docket (see ADDRESSES, above) and upon 

request from the appropriate person (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 

above). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this document 

are the staff members of the Species 

Assessment Team, Ecological Services 

Program. 

Authority 

The authority for this action is section 

4 of the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.). 

Martha Williams, 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05331 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 92 

[Docket No. FWS–R7–MB–2021–0172; 

FXMB12610700000–201–FF07M01000] 

RIN 1018 BF65 

Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest in 

Alaska; Harvest Regulations for 

Migratory Birds in Alaska During the 

2022 Season 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS), 

are proposing changes to the migratory 

bird subsistence harvest regulations in 

Alaska. These regulations allow for the 

continuation of customary and 

traditional subsistence uses of migratory 

birds in Alaska and prescribe regional 

information on when and where the 

harvesting of birds may occur. These 

regulations were developed under a comanagement process involving the 

Service, the Alaska Department of Fish 

and Game, and Alaska Native 

representatives. The proposed changes 

would update the regulations to 

incorporate revisions requested by these 

partners. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received or postmarked on or before 

April 13, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments to 

Docket No. FWS–R7–MB–2021–0172. 

• U.S. Mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: FWS–R7–MB–2021– 

0172, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

MS: JAO/3W, 5275 Leesburg Place, Falls 

Church, VA 22041 3803. 

We will post all comments on https:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see the 

Public Comment Procedures section, 

below, for more information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric 

J. Taylor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

1011 E Tudor Road, Mail Stop 201, 

Anchorage, AK 99503; (907) 903 7210. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comment Procedures 

To ensure that any action resulting 

from this proposed rule will be as 

accurate and as effective as possible, we 

request that you send relevant 

information for our consideration. The 

comments that will be most useful and 

likely to influence our decisions are 

those that you support by quantitative 

information or studies and those that 

include citations to, and analyses of, the 

applicable laws and regulations. Please 

make your comments as specific as 

possible and explain the basis for them. 

In addition, please include sufficient 

information with your comments to 

allow us to authenticate any scientific or 

commercial data you include. 

You must submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed above in 

ADDRESSES. We will not accept 

comments sent by email or fax or to an 

address not listed in ADDRESSES. If you 

submit a comment via https://

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

comment—including any personal 

identifying information, such as your 

address, telephone number, or email 

address—will be posted on the website. 

When you submit a comment, the 

system receives it immediately. 

However, the comment will not be 

publicly viewable until we post it, 

which might not occur until several 

days after submission. 

If you mail a hardcopy comment 

directly to us that includes personal 

information, you may request at the top 

of your document that we withhold this 

information from public review. 

However, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. All comments and 

materials we receive will be available 

for public inspection via https://

www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS– 

R7–MB–2021–0172, which is the docket 

number for this rulemaking. 

Background 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 

(MBTA, 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.) was 

enacted to conserve certain species of 

migratory birds and gives the Secretary 

of the Interior the authority to regulate 

the harvest of these birds. The law 

further authorizes the Secretary to issue 

regulations to ensure that the 

indigenous inhabitants of the State of 

Alaska may take migratory birds and 

collect their eggs for nutritional and 

other essential needs during seasons 

established by the Secretary so as to 

provide for the preservation and 

maintenance of stocks of migratory birds 

(16 U.S.C. 712(1)). 

The take of migratory birds for 

subsistence uses in Alaska occurs 

during the spring and summer, during 

which timeframe when the annual fall/ 

winter harvest of migratory birds is not 

allowed. Regulations governing the 

subsistence harvest of migratory birds in 

Alaska are located in title 50 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations (CFR) in part 92. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14233 

These regulations allow for the 

continuation of customary and 

traditional subsistence uses of migratory 

birds and prescribe regional information 

on when and where the harvesting of 

birds in Alaska may occur. 

The migratory bird subsistence 

harvest regulations are developed 

cooperatively. The Alaska Migratory 

Bird Co-Management Council (Council 

or AMBCC) consists of the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, the Alaska Department 

of Fish and Game (ADFG), and 

representatives of Alaska’s Native 

population. The Council’s primary 

purpose is to develop recommendations 

pertaining to the subsistence harvest of 

migratory birds. 

The Council generally holds an 

annual spring meeting to develop 

recommendations for migratory bird 

subsistence-harvest regulations in 

Alaska that would take effect in the 

spring of the next year. In 2021, the inperson spring meeting did not occur due 

to the coronavirus pandemic. Instead, 

the Council met virtually via 

teleconference on April 5, 2021, to 

approve subsistence harvest regulations 

that would take effect during the 2022 

harvest season. The Council’s 

recommendations were presented to the 

Pacific Flyway Council for review and 

subsequent submission to the Service 

Regulations Committee (SRC) for 

approval at the SRC meeting on 

September 28 and 29, 2021. 

Proposed Revisions to the Regulations 

Per the collaborative process 

described above, this document 

proposes the following revisions to the 

regulations for the taking of migratory 

birds for subsistence uses in Alaska 

during the spring and summer. 

Proposed Revisions to Subpart A 

In part 92, subpart A (general 

provisions), we propose to clarify the 

regulations defining excluded areas, 

which are those areas that are closed to 

subsistence harvest. 

First, we propose revisions to clarify 

that subsistence hunters whose 

communities petitioned successfully to 

be added to the list of included areas 

appearing at 50 CFR 92.5(a)(2) may 

harvest migratory birds within the 

entirety of the subsistence harvest areas 

designated for their community, 

including portions of harvest areas that 

occur within designated excluded areas. 

For example, portions of the 

subsistence harvest areas selected by 

communities in the Upper Copper River 

Region listed as eligible under 50 CFR 

92.5(a)(2)(i) occur within the 

Matanuska-Susitna Borough, an 

excluded area that is otherwise closed to 

harvest (50 CFR 92.5(b)(2)). The 

regulations do not specify that these 

portions of designated harvest areas that 

occur in excluded areas are, in fact, 

open to subsistence hunting. To address 

this issue, we propose to amend 50 CFR 

92.5(b) to make an exception to harvest 

closures in those portions of excluded 

areas that fall within subsistence harvest 

areas designated for specific 

communities that petitioned to be listed 

as eligible for participation in the 

spring-summer subsistence hunt (50 

CFR 92.5(a)(2)). 

This exception would not apply to 

subsistence harvest areas that have been 

generally designated for regions (e.g., 

Bering Strait Norton Sound Region) or 

subregions (e.g., Bering Strait Norton 

Sound Stebbins/St. Michael Area) listed 

as included areas at 50 CFR 92.5(a). 

Second, to clarify the boundaries of 

areas that are closed to subsistence 

harvest, we propose to address an 

apparent inconsistency in some terms 

used in part 92. The regulations 

governing subsistence harvest of 

migratory birds were set forth August 

16, 2002 (67 FR 53511). That rule 

defined the term ‘‘village’’ at 50 CFR 

92.4 and also set forth provisions 

regarding areas that are excluded from 

eligibility to participate in the 

subsistence harvest of migratory birds. 

Under 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2), excluded areas 

include ‘‘[v]illage areas’’ located in 

Anchorage, the Matanuska-Susitna 

Borough, the Kenai Peninsula roaded 

area, the Gulf of Alaska roaded area, 

Southeast Alaska, and the Central 

Interior Excluded Area. The definition 

of ‘‘village’’ at 50 CFR 92.4 and use of 

the term ‘‘village areas’’ at 50 CFR 

92.5(b)(2) to describe excluded areas has 

created confusion in determining the 

boundaries of closed areas. We never 

intended for the excluded areas set forth 

at 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2) to be only those 

portions of those areas that meet the 

definition of ‘‘village’’ at 50 CFR 92.4. 

Therefore, we propose to remove the 

term ‘‘village areas’’ from 50 CFR 

92.5(b)(2) to clarify that excluded areas 

are closed to harvest in their entirety, 

except those portions that occur within 

a harvest area that has been designated 

for a specific community. 

Third, we would clarify the language 

defining boundaries of the excluded 

areas of the Kenai Peninsula roaded area 

and the Gulf of Alaska roaded area. The 

geographic boundaries of the Kenai 

Peninsula roaded area and the Gulf of 

Alaska roaded area are undefined in the 

regulations, making the development of 

usable hunt maps imprecise and 

ambiguous. The proposed changes to 

the regulations would allow publication 

of maps that are accurate and 

reproducible into the future and 

interpretable by subsistence hunters and 

law enforcement officials. 

Finally, we are including in this 

proposed rule a needed correction. The 

Chugach Community of Cordova should 

have been included in the list of 

included areas for the Gulf of Alaska 

region in subpart A following Council 

action in 2014. The omission of this 

community from the regulations was the 

result of an inadvertent oversight. The 

Chugach Community of Cordova does 

appropriately appear in the regulations 

for eligible subsistence-harvest areas in 

50 CFR 92.31(j)(2). Therefore, we are 

proposing to add the Chugach 

Community of Cordova to the current 

list of included areas in 50 CFR 

92.5(a)(2)(ii). 

These proposed revisions to the 

regulations in subpart A are not 

anticipated to result in a significant 

increase in harvest of birds and eggs 

because spring and summer subsistence 

practices likely occur in these areas at 

the present time. 

Proposed Revisions to Subpart D 

In 50 CFR 92.31, we propose to clarify 

the designated harvest area boundaries 

for the communities of Port Graham and 

Nanwalek in the Gulf of Alaska Region 

and for the community of Tyonek in the 

Cook Inlet Region. Current harvest area 

definitions in the regulations for these 

communities are incomplete (that is, 

they do not describe a complete 

polygon), and only partially define the 

boundaries of the harvest areas. The 

proposed revisions would allow 

publication of maps that are accurate 

and reproducible into the future and 

provide a clear definition of the harvest 

areas designated for the communities 

that subsistence hunters and law 

enforcement officials can interpret and 

follow in the field. 

Compliance With the MBTA and the 

Endangered Species Act 

The Service has dual objectives and 

responsibilities for authorizing a 

subsistence harvest while protecting 

migratory birds and threatened species. 

Although these objectives continue to be 

challenging, they are not irreconcilable, 

provided that: (1) Regulations continue 

to protect threatened species, (2) 

measures to address documented threats 

are implemented, and (3) the 

subsistence community and other 

conservation partners commit to 

working together. 

Mortality, sickness, and poisoning 

from lead exposure have been 

documented in many waterfowl species, 

including threatened spectacled eiders 

(Somateria fischeri) and the AlaskaVerDate Sep<11>2014 16:46 Mar 11, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM 14MRP1

jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14234 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

breeding population of Steller’s eiders 

(Polysticta stelleri). While lead shot has 

been banned nationally for waterfowl 

hunting since 1991, Service staff have 

documented the availability of lead shot 

in waterfowl rounds for sale in 

communities on the Yukon-Kuskokwim 

Delta and North Slope. The Service will 

work with partners to increase our 

education, outreach, and enforcement 

efforts to ensure that subsistence 

waterfowl hunting is conducted using 

nontoxic shot. 

Conservation Under the MBTA 

We have monitored subsistence 

harvest for the past 25 years through the 

use of household surveys in the most 

heavily used subsistence harvest areas, 

such as the Yukon–Kuskokwim Delta. 

Based on our monitoring of the 

migratory bird species and populations 

taken for subsistence, we find that this 

rule will provide for the preservation 

and maintenance of migratory bird 

stocks as required by the MBTA. 

Communication and coordination 

between the Service, the AMBCC, and 

the Pacific Flyway Council have 

allowed us to set harvest regulations to 

ensure the long-term viability of the 

migratory bird stocks. 

Endangered Species Act Consideration 

Spectacled eiders and the Alaskabreeding population of Steller’s eiders 

are listed as threatened species under 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Their migration and breeding 

distribution overlap with areas where 

the spring and summer subsistence 

migratory bird hunt is open in Alaska. 

Neither species is included in the list of 

subsistence migratory bird species at 50 

CFR 92.22; therefore, both species are 

closed to subsistence harvest. Under 50 

CFR 92.21 and 92.32, the Service may 

implement emergency closures, if 

necessary, to protect Steller’s eiders or 

any other endangered or threatened 

species or migratory bird population. 

Section 7 of the ESA requires the 

Secretary of the Interior to review other 

programs administered by the 

Department of the Interior and utilize 

such programs in furtherance of the 

purposes of the ESA. The Secretary is 

further required to insure that any 

action authorized, funded, or carried out 

by the Department of the Interior is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered species or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. 

The Service’s Alaska Region 

Migratory Bird Management Program is 

conducting an intra-agency consultation 

with the Service’s Fairbanks Fish and 

Wildlife Field Office on this proposed 

rule. A biological opinion will be 

updated based on new information to 

ensure this rulemaking action is not 

likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of endangered or threatened 

species or result in the destruction or 

adverse modification of designated 

critical habitat. Therefore, we expect 

this rule will comply with the ESA. 

Comment Period 

Implementation of the Service’s 2013 

Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement (SEIS) on the hunting of 

migratory birds resulted in changes to 

the overall timing of the annual 

regulatory schedule for the 

establishment of migratory bird hunting 

regulations and the Alaska migratory 

bird subsistence harvest regulations. 

The programmatic document, ‘‘Second 

Final Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement: Issuance of Annual 

Regulations Permitting the Hunting of 

Migratory Birds (SEIS 20130139),’’ filed 

with the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) on May 24, 2013, 

addresses compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act by the Service 

for issuance of the annual framework 

regulations for hunting of migratory 

game bird species. We published a 

notice of availability of the SEIS in the 

Federal Register on May 31, 2013 (78 

FR 32686), and our Record of Decision 

on July 26, 2013 (78 FR 45376). 

The 2013 SEIS moved the annual SRC 

meeting from July to October, and this 

procedural change has greatly shortened 

our period each year to publish the 

proposed regulations and solicit 

comments. We are further bounded by 

a subsistence harvest start date of April 

2, 2022. Thus, we have established a 30- 

day comment period for this proposed 

rule (see DATES, above), and we will be 

conducting Tribal consultations within 

Alaska simultaneously. We believe a 30- 

day comment period gives the public 

adequate time to provide meaningful 

comments. 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 

Executive Order 12866 provides that 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant 

rules. OIRA has determined that this 

proposed rule is not significant. 

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the 

principles of E.O. 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. E.O. 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 proposed rule in a manner 

consistent with these requirements. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that, if adopted as proposed, 

this proposed rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities as 

defined under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). A regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

Accordingly, a small entity compliance 

guide is not required. This proposed 

rule would legalize a preexisting 

subsistence activity, and the resources 

harvested will be consumed. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This proposed rule is not a major rule 

under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act. This proposed rule: 

(a) Would not have an annual effect 

on the economy of $100 million or 

more. It would legalize and regulate a 

traditional subsistence activity. It would 

not result in a substantial increase in 

subsistence harvest or a significant 

change in harvesting patterns. The 

commodities that would be regulated 

under this rule are migratory birds. This 

proposed rule deals with legalizing the 

subsistence harvest of migratory birds 

and, as such, does not involve 

commodities traded in the marketplace. 

A small economic benefit from this rule 

would derive from the sale of 

equipment and ammunition to carry out 

subsistence hunting. Most, if not all, 

businesses that sell hunting equipment 

in rural Alaska qualify as small 

businesses. We have no reason to 

believe that this proposed rule would 

lead to a disproportionate distribution 

of benefits. 

(b) Would not cause a major increase 

in costs or prices for consumers; 

individual industries; Federal, State, or 

local government agencies; or 

geographic regions. This proposed rule 

does not deal with traded commodities 

and, therefore, would not have an 

impact on prices for consumers. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14235 

(c) Would 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 proposed rule deals with the 

harvesting of wildlife for personal 

consumption. It would not regulate the 

marketplace in any way to generate 

substantial effects on the economy or 

the ability of businesses to compete. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

We have determined and certified 

under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) that this rule 

would not impose a cost of $100 million 

or more in any given year on local, 

State, or Tribal governments or private 

entities. The proposed rule would not 

have a significant or unique effect on 

local, State, or Tribal governments or 

the private sector. A statement 

containing the information required by 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act is 

not required. Participation on regional 

management bodies and the Council 

requires travel expenses for some Alaska 

Native organizations and local 

governments. In addition, they assume 

some expenses related to coordinating 

involvement of village councils in the 

regulatory process. Total coordination 

and travel expenses for all Alaska 

Native organizations are estimated to be 

less than $300,000 per year. In a notice 

of decision (65 FR 16405; March 28, 

2000), we identified 7 to 12 partner 

organizations (Alaska Native nonprofits 

and local governments) to administer 

the regional programs. The ADFG also 

incurs expenses for travel to Council 

and regional management body 

meetings. In addition, the State of 

Alaska would be required to provide 

technical staff support to each of the 

regional management bodies and to the 

Council. Expenses for the State’s 

involvement may exceed $100,000 per 

year but should not exceed $150,000 per 

year. When funding permits, we make 

annual grant agreements available to the 

partner organizations and the ADFG to 

help offset their expenses. 

Takings (Executive Order 12630) 

Under the criteria in Executive Order 

12630, this proposed rule would not 

have significant takings implications. 

This proposed rule is not specific to 

particular land ownership, but instead 

applies to the harvesting of migratory 

bird resources throughout Alaska. A 

takings implication assessment is not 

required. 

Federalism (Executive Order 13132) 

Under the criteria in Executive Order 

13132, this proposed rule does not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a federalism 

summary impact statement. We discuss 

effects of this rule on the State of Alaska 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

section, above. We worked with the 

State of Alaska to develop these 

proposed regulations. Therefore, a 

federalism summary impact statement is 

not required. 

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 

12988) 

The Department, in promulgating this 

proposed rule, has determined that it 

would not unduly burden the judicial 

system and that it meets the 

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

of Executive Order 12988. 

Government-to-Government Relations 

With Native American Tribal 

Governments 

Consistent with Executive Order 

13175 (65 FR 67249; November 9, 2000), 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments,’’ and 

Department of the Interior policy on 

Consultation with Indian Tribes 

(December 1, 2011), we will send letters 

via electronic mail to all 229 Alaska 

federally recognized Indian Tribes. 

Consistent with Congressional direction 

(Pub. L. 108–199, div. H, Sec. 161, Jan. 

23, 2004, 118 Stat. 452, as amended by 

Pub. L. 108–447, div. H, title V, Sec. 

518, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3267), we 

also will send letters to approximately 

200 Alaska Native corporations and 

other Tribal entities in Alaska soliciting 

their input as to whether or not they 

would like the Service to consult with 

them on the 2022 migratory bird 

subsistence harvest regulations. 

We implemented the amended treaty 

with Canada with a focus on local 

involvement. The treaty calls for the 

creation of management bodies to 

ensure an effective and meaningful role 

for Alaska’s indigenous inhabitants in 

the conservation of migratory birds. 

According to the Letter of Submittal, 

management bodies are to include 

Alaska Native, Federal, and State of 

Alaska representatives as equals. They 

develop recommendations for, among 

other things: Seasons and bag limits, 

methods and means of take, law 

enforcement policies, population and 

harvest monitoring, educational 

programs, research and use of 

traditional knowledge, and habitat 

protection. The management bodies 

involve village councils to the 

maximum extent possible in all aspects 

of management. To ensure maximum 

input at the village level, we required 

each of the 11 participating regions to 

create regional management bodies 

consisting of at least one representative 

from the participating villages. The 

regional management bodies meet twice 

annually to review and/or submit 

proposals to the Statewide body. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 

This rule does not contain any new 

collection of information that requires 

approval by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. OMB has previously 

approved the information collection 

requirements associated with 

subsistence harvest reporting and 

assigned the following OMB control 

numbers: 

• Alaska Migratory Bird Subsistence 

Harvest Household Survey, OMB 

Control Number 1018–0124 (expires 04/ 

30/2024), and 

• Regulations for the Taking of 

Migratory Birds for Subsistence Uses in 

Alaska, 50 CFR part 92, OMB Control 

Number 1018–0178 (expires 04/30/ 

2024). 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Consideration (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 

The annual regulations and options 

are considered in the January 2022 

Environmental Assessment, ‘‘Managing 

Migratory Bird Subsistence Hunting in 

Alaska: Hunting Regulations for the 

2022 Spring/Summer Harvest.’’ Copies 

are available from the person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT or at https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

(Executive Order 13211) 

Executive Order 13211 requires 

agencies to prepare statements of energy 

effects when undertaking certain 

actions. This is not a significant 

regulatory action under this Executive 

Order; it allows only for traditional 

subsistence harvest and improves 

conservation of migratory birds by 

allowing effective regulation of this 

harvest. Further, this proposed rule is 

not expected to significantly affect 

energy supplies, distribution, or use. 

Therefore, this action is not a significant 

energy action under Executive Order 

13211, and a statement of energy effects 

is not required. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 92 

Hunting, Treaties, Wildlife. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14236 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Proposed Regulation Promulgation 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, we propose to amend 50 CFR 

part 92 as set forth below: 

PART 92—MIGRATORY BIRD 

SUBSISTENCE HARVEST IN ALASKA 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 92 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703–712. 

■ 2. Amend § 92.5 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(ii), the 

first full sentence of the introductory 

text of paragraph (b), and paragraphs 

(b)(2) and (3); and 

■ b. Adding paragraphs (b)(4) and (5). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 92.5 Who is eligible to participate? 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) Gulf of Alaska Region—Chugach 

Community of Chenega, Chugach 

Community of Cordova, Chugach 

Community of Nanwalek, Chugach 

Community of Port Graham, and 

Chugach Community of Tatitlek. 

* * * * * 

(b) Excluded areas. Excluded areas 

are not subsistence harvest areas and are 

closed to harvest, with the exception of 

any portion of an excluded area that 

falls within a harvest area that has been 

designated for a specific community 

under paragraph (a)(2) of this section. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

(2) The Municipality of Anchorage, 

the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, the 

Kenai Peninsula roaded area (as 

described in paragraph (b)(3) of this 

section), the Gulf of Alaska roaded area 

(as described in paragraph (b)(4) of this 

section), Southeast Alaska, and the 

Central Interior Excluded Area (as 

described in paragraph (b)(5) of this 

section) do not qualify for a spring and 

summer harvest. 

(3) The Kenai Peninsula roaded area 

comprises the following: Game 

Management Unit (Unit) 7, Unit 15(A), 

Unit 15(B), and that portion of Unit 

15(C) east and north of a line beginning 

at the northern boundary of Unit 15(C) 

and mouth of the Kasilof River at 

60°23′19′′ N; 151°18′37′′ W, extending 

south along the coastline of Cook Inlet 

to Bluff Point (59°40′00′′ N), then south 

along longitude line 151°41′48′′ W to 

latitude 59°35′56′′ N, then east to the tip 

of Homer Spit (excluding any land of 

the Homer Spit), then northeast to the 

north bank of Fox River (59°48′57′′ N; 

150°58′44′′ W), and then east to the 

eastern boundary of Unit 15(C) at 

150°19′59′′ W. 

(4) The Gulf of Alaska roaded area 

comprises the incorporated city 

boundaries of Valdez and Whittier, 

Alaska. 

(5) The Central Interior Excluded Area 

comprises the following: The Fairbanks 

North Star Borough and that portion of 

Unit 20(A) east of the Wood River 

drainage and south of Rex Trail, 

including the upper Wood River 

drainage south of its confluence with 

Chicken Creek; that portion of Unit 

20(C) east of Denali National Park north 

to Rock Creek and east to Unit 20(A); 

and that portion of Unit 20(D) west of 

the Tanana River between its confluence 

with the Johnson and Delta Rivers, west 

of the east bank of the Johnson River, 

and north and west of the Volkmar 

drainage, including the Goodpaster 

River drainage. The following 

communities are within the Excluded 

Area: Delta Junction/Big Delta/Fort 

Greely, McKinley Park/Village, Healy, 

Ferry, and all residents of the formerly 

named Fairbanks North Star Borough 

Excluded Area. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 92.31 by revising 

paragraphs (j)(3) and (k)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 92.31 Region-specific regulations. 

* * * * * 

(j) * * * 

(3) Kachemak Bay Area (Harvest area: 

That portion of Game Management Unit 

[Unit] 15[C] west and south of a line 

beginning at the northern boundary of 

Unit 15[C] and mouth of the Kasilof 

River at 60°23′19′′ N; 151°18′37′′ W, 

extending south along the coastline of 

Cook Inlet to Bluff Point [59°40′00′′ N], 

then south along longitude line 

151°41′48′′ W to latitude 59°35′56′′ N, 

then east to the tip of Homer Spit 

[excluding any land of the Homer Spit], 

then northeast to the north bank of the 

Fox River [59°48′57′′ N; 150°58′44′′ W], 

and then east to the eastern boundary of 

Unit 15[C] at 150°19′59′′ W) (Eligible 

Chugach Communities: Port Graham, 

Nanwalek): 

* * * * * 

(k) * * * 

(1) Season: April 2–May 31—That 

portion of Game Management Unit 16(B) 

west of the east bank of the Yentna 

River, south of the north bank of the 

Skwentna River, and south of the north 

bank of Portage Creek to the boundary 

of Game Management Unit 16(B) at 

Portage Pass; and August 1–31—That 

portion of Game Management Unit 16(B) 

west of longitude line 150° 56′ W, south 

of the north banks of the Beluga River 

and Beluga Lake, then south of latitude 

line 61°26′08′′ N. 

* * * * * 

Shannon A. Estenoz, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05251 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1