Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 38669 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Part 488 

Survey, Certification, and Enforcement 

Procedures 

CFR Correction 

This rule is being published by the 

Office of the Federal Register to correct 

an editorial or technical error that 

appeared in the most recent annual 

revision of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

■ In Title 42 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, parts 482 to end, revised as 

of October 1, 2021, in § 488.5, remove 

paragraph (a)(21). 

[FR Doc. 2022–13993 Filed 6–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 0099–10–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: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS, Service, or we) is revising 

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 co-management 

process involving the Service, the 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 

and Alaska Native representatives. The 

changes update the regulations to 

incorporate revisions requested by these 

partners. 

DATES: This rule is effective June 29, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may find the comments 

submitted on the proposed rule as well 

as supplementary materials for this 

rulemaking action at the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: https://

www.regulations.gov in Docket No. 

FWS–R7–MB–2021–0172. 

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. 

Individuals in the United States who are 

deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have 

a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, 

TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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. 

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. 

Comments Received on the Proposed 

Rule 

Per the collaborative process 

described above, we published a 

proposed rule to update the regulations 

for the taking of migratory birds for 

subsistence uses in Alaska during the 

spring and summer (87 FR 14232, 

March 14, 2022). By the end of the 

comment period on the proposed rule, 

we received two comments. We hereby 

respond to the relevant issues that were 

raised in the public input. We made no 

changes to the proposed rule as a result 

of the input we received via the public 

comments (see Final Regulations, 

below, for more information). 

Issue: One commenter expressed the 

following sentiments: (i) migratory birds 

are endangered; (ii) the proposed rule 

would allow the killing of endangered 

species; (iii) subsistence harvest of 

migratory birds is not necessary because 

subsistence harvesters can survive on 

food that does not come from animals; 

(iv) by killing healthy animals, other 

species take over resources and disrupt 

the ecosystem; and (v) migratory birds 

should be protected. 

Response: Migratory birds open for 

harvest during the spring/summer 

subsistence season in Alaska do not 

include threatened or endangered 

species. Annual harvest surveys show 

that species protected by the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

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

are not harvested by subsistence 

hunters. The Service conducted an 

intra-agency consultation and 

determined that this rule complies with 

the ESA (see Endangered Species Act 

Consideration, below, for more 

information). The Service agrees that 

subsistence hunters harvest healthy 

migratory birds; however, there is no 

evidence that this harvest results in 

other wildlife species taking food, 

habitat, or other resources to the 

detriment of the ecosystem. The 

comment that people can survive on 

food that is not animal-based is true; 

however, the spring/summer migratory 

bird subsistence harvest in Alaska is of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
38670 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

cultural, traditional, and nutritional 

importance to Alaska Native peoples 

and other rural Alaskans. The Service 

conducts annual population and harvest 

surveys of migratory birds and 

establishes hunting regulations to 

ensure the sustainability of migratory 

bird populations and that harvest does 

not result in species becoming 

vulnerable or any disruptions to the 

ecosystem. 

Issue: A commenter inquired about (i) 

the boundaries of the Kachemak Bay 

State Wilderness Park; (ii) use of quota 

sampling as a survey method to estimate 

subsistence harvest; and (iii) how these 

regulations may modernize existing 

rules and commitments. 

Response: The Service revised the 

previously vague boundaries of the 

harvest area for the Villages of 

Nanwalek and Port Graham by 

referencing specific waypoints, lines of 

longitude, and boundaries of Game 

Management Units to define an exact 

map location. The harvest area includes 

parts of the Kachemak Bay State Park 

and Kachemak Bay State Wilderness 

Park; further, some of the waypoints and 

boundaries occur at the head of 

Kachemak Bay at the Fox River Flats in 

tidal/mud flats and marshland. The 

boundary occurs in this tidal flat area 

because the previous definition 

included the boundary as the ‘‘mouth of 

Fox River.’’ Given the vagueness of the 

phrase ‘‘mouth of Fox River’’ in a tidal 

mud flat, the Service selected a specific 

latitude/longitude to better define the 

boundary. The Service now defines the 

boundary as ‘‘the north bank of the Fox 

River [59°48′57′′ N; 150°58′44′′ W].’’ 

The commenter also recommended 

the Service consider quota sampling to 

provide timely and accurate harvest 

information. Quota sampling is a 

method for selecting survey participants 

on a non-random basis, i.e., all members 

of the population do not have an equal 

chance of being selected to be a part of 

the sample group. Because quota 

sampling does not select sample units 

with a known inclusion probability and 

all units of the population do not have 

a known sample probability, the method 

can be unreliable. Because the nonrandom element of quota sampling is a 

source of uncertainty about the nature of 

the actual sample, the Service believes 

alternative sampling methods are 

preferred over quota sampling. Finally, 

the proposed changes to the regulations 

will allow publication of maps that are 

accurate and reproducible into the 

future and interpretable by subsistence 

hunters and law enforcement officials. 

Final Regulations 

We are making no changes to the 

regulatory revisions in our March 14, 

2022, proposed rule (87 FR 14232) as a 

result of the input we received via the 

public comments. 

The rule sets forth the same 

subsistence harvest regulations in 

subpart D, Annual Regulations 

Governing Subsistence Harvest, as those 

from the 2021 subsistence harvest 

seasons (see 86 FR 11707, February 26, 

2021; 86 FR 20311, April 19, 2021) with 

five clarifications: 

Revisions to Subpart A 

In part 92, subpart A (general 

provisions), we clarify the regulations 

defining excluded areas, which are 

those areas that are closed to 

subsistence harvest. 

First, we 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 amended 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 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 MatanuskaSusitna 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 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 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 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 a needed 

administrative 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 

adding the Chugach Community of 

Cordova to the current list of included 

areas in 50 CFR 92.5(a)(2)(ii). Similarly, 

we are clarifying that the Central 

Interior Excluded Area includes the 

Fairbanks North Star Borough. 

These 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. 

Revisions to Subpart D 

In 50 CFR 92.31, we clarify the 

designated harvest area boundaries for 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 38671 

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 

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 Alaskabreeding 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 ESA. Their migration and breeding 

distributions 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 

conducted an intra-agency consultation 

with the Service’s Fairbanks Fish and 

Wildlife Field Office. The consultation 

was completed with a biological 

opinion issued on March 15, 2022, that 

concluded these rulemaking actions are 

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 have 

determined that this rule complies with 

the ESA. 

Immediate Effective Date 

This rule takes effect on the date set 

forth above in DATES. Delaying the 

effective date for 30 days would have 

detrimental effects on Alaskans seeking 

to conduct subsistence harvest of 

migratory birds. To respect the 

subsistence hunt of many rural 

Alaskans, either for their cultural or 

religious exercise, sustenance, and/or 

materials for cultural use (e.g., 

handicrafts), the Department of the 

Interior finds that it is in the public 

interest to make this rule effective as 

soon as possible. For these reasons, we 

find that ‘‘good cause’’ exists within the 

terms of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act and 

under the authority of the Migratory 

Bird Treaty Act (July 3, 1918), as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), to 

make this rule take effect immediately 

upon publication in the Federal 

Register. 

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 

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 rule in a manner consistent with 

these requirements. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this 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 rule would 

legalize a preexisting subsistence 

activity, and the resources harvested 

will be consumed. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

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

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This 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 

rule deals with legalizing the 

subsistence harvest of migratory birds 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
38672 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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 rule does not 

deal with traded commodities and, 

therefore, would not have an impact on 

prices for consumers. 

(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 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 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 rule would not have 

significant takings implications. This 

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 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 

regulations. Therefore, a federalism 

summary impact statement is not 

required. 

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 

12988) 

The Department, in promulgating this 

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 sent 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 

Public Law 108–447, div. H, title V, Sec. 

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

also sent 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 38673 

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 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. 

Regulation Promulgation 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, we 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 sentence of paragraph (b) 

introductory text, 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) introductory text 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. 2022–13403 Filed 6–28–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 180117042–8884–02] 

RTID 0648–XC097 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason 

retention limit adjustment. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is adjusting the 

General category daily retention limit 

from three large medium or giant 

Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT) to one large 

medium or giant BFT. This daily 

retention limit applies to Atlantic Tunas 

General category (commercial) 

permitted vessels and Highly Migratory 

Species (HMS) Charter/Headboat 

permitted vessels with a commercial 

sale endorsement when fishing 

commercially for BFT. This adjustment 

will be effective for the remainder of the 

June through August subquota time 

period. 

DATES: Effective July 3, 2022, through 

August 31, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Larry Redd, Jr., larry.redd@noaa.gov, 

301–427–8503, Nicholas Velseboer, 

nicholas.velseboer@noaa.gov, 978–281– 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1