Information Collection To Be Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval Under the Paperwork Reduction Act; Trade of Threatened Beluga Sturgeon (Huso huso), 37426-37429 [05-12854]
Download as PDF
37426
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2005 / Notices
Information collected
Reason for collection
For a cooperative or tribal enterprise, a copy of documents showing
that the organization is formally organized under tribal, State, or Federal law.
Signed certification that the business is an American Indian or Alaska
Native owned and operated cooperative, tribal enterprise, or nonprofit organization.
Copy of the business owner’s tribal enrollment card ...............................
To determine whether the business meets the eligibility requirement for
listing in the Source Directory.
Signed certification that the owner of the business is a member of a
federally recognized tribe.
The proposed use of the information:
The information collected will be used
by the Indian Arts and Crafts Board:
(a) to determine whether an
individual or business meets the
eligibility requirements for inclusion in
the Source Directory, i.e., whether they
are either an American Indian or Alaska
Native owned and operated cooperative,
tribal enterprise, or nonprofit
organization, or an enrolled member of
a federally recognized American Indian
tribe or Alaska Native group; and
(b) to identify the applicant’s business
information to be printed in the Source
Directory.
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
Office of Management and Budget
control number. The IACB has
submitted a request to OMB to renew its
approval of this information collection
for an additional three years. There are
four types of application forms: (1) new
businesses—group; (2) new
businesses—individual; (3) businesses
already listed—group; and (4)
businesses already listed—individual.
Each respondent will only be asked to
complete one applicable form.
As required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), a
Federal Register notice soliciting
comments on the collection of
information was published on March
29, 2005 (70 FR 15869). No comments
were received. This notice provides the
public with an additional 30 days in
which to comment on the following
information collection activity.
III. Data
(1) Title: Source Directory of
American Indian and Alaska Native
owned and operated arts and crafts
businesses application and renewal
forms.
OMB Control Number: 1085–0001.
Type of Review: Renewal of an
existing collection.
Affected Entities: Business or other
for-profit; tribes.
Estimated Annual Number of
Respondents: 100.
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:31 Jun 28, 2005
Jkt 205001
To obtain verification that the business is an American Indian or Alaska
Native owned and operated business.
To determine whether the business owner is an enrolled member of a
federally recognized tribe.
To obtain verification that the business owner is an enrolled member of
a federally recognized tribe.
Frequency of Collection: Annual.
(2) Annual reporting and
recordkeeping burden.
Total Annual Reporting per
Respondent: 15 minutes.
Total Annual Burden Hours: 25
hours.
(3) Description of the need and use of
the information: Submission of this
information is required to receive the
benefit of being listed in the Indian Arts
and Crafts Board Source Directory. The
information is collected to determine
the applicant’s eligibility for the service
and to obtain the applicant’s name and
business address to be printed in the
publication.
IV. Request for Comments
The Department of the Interior invites
comments on:
(a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the collection
and the validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or
provide information to or for a federal
agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; to develop,
acquire, install and utilize technology
and systems for the purpose of
collecting, validating and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; to train
personnel and to be able to respond to
a collection of information, to search
data sources, to complete and review
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the collection of information; and to
transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
Dated: June 23, 2005.
Meridith Z. Stanton,
Director, Indian Arts and Crafts Board.
[FR Doc. 05–12780 Filed 6–28–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–RK–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Information Collection To Be Sent to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for Approval Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act; Trade of
Threatened Beluga Sturgeon (Huso
huso)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We (Fish and Wildlife Service
or Service) plan to send the collection
of information described below to OMB
for approval under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The
information collected is needed to
effectively implement the provisions of
the special rule to control the trade of
threatened beluga sturgeon (Huso huso)
(70 FR 10493, March 4, 2005). That rule
requires that range countries for beluga
sturgeon provide us with information
and reports on a variety of issues related
to beluga sturgeon conservation and
trade. This information is necessary for
us to gauge the effectiveness of
international management efforts in the
Caspian Sea and Black Sea regions, and
to determine if the permit exemptions
granted under the special rule are
bringing about appropriate actions by
national fisheries authorities and
multilateral agreements.
DATES: You must submit comments on
or before August 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments on
this information collection to Hope
Grey, Information Collection Clearance
Officer, Fish and Wildlife Service, MS–
222–ARLSQ, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2005 / Notices
Arlington, VA 22203;
hope_grey@fws.gov (e-mail); or (703)
358–2269 (fax).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request a copy of the information
collection requirements, explanatory
information, or related materials,
contact Hope Grey at the above
addresses or by telephone at (703) 358–
2482.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320, which
implement provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), require that interested members
of the public and affected agencies have
an opportunity to comment on
information collection and
recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR
1320.8(d)). We plan to send a request to
OMB for approval of the collection of
information required by the special rule
to control the trade of threatened beluga
sturgeon (70 FR 10493, March 4, 2005).
Federal agencies may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. However, there is no
OMB control number for this
information collection because fewer
than 10 entities currently commercially
trade in beluga caviar and, therefore,
this requirement under the Paperwork
Reduction Act does not apply. While an
OMB control number is not necessary
for collections that have such a low
number of affected parties, it is
reasonable to assume that there may be
additional applicants or affected parties
in the coming years. Therefore, we will
request a 3-year term of approval for this
information collection.
The special rule requires that range
countries for beluga sturgeon develop
multilateral fishery management plans,
implement appropriate sturgeon
fisheries laws and regulations, and
provide biennial reports to us on a
variety of issues related to beluga
sturgeon conservation and trade. Range
countries must do this if they wish to
have an exemption to the standard
threatened species permits issued under
50 CFR part 17, normally required
under the Endangered Species Act to
import, export, re-export, or conduct
interstate commerce in listed species.
The special rule also requires certain
information from U.S. and foreign
aquaculture facilities wishing to trade in
beluga sturgeon products without
threatened species permits. If such
facilities wish to import, re-export, or
conduct U.S. interstate commerce in
their beluga sturgeon products without
threatened species permits, they must
submit proof that they have agreements
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:40 Jun 28, 2005
Jkt 205001
with one or more range countries to
research, protect, or recover wild beluga
sturgeon. These facilities must use
captive-bred broodstock in all of their
beluga sturgeon production. Also, upon
application for a permit exemption
under the special rule, these facilities
must submit proof that the relevant
government authority certifies they are
following aquaculture best-management
practices to prevent the escape of live
specimens or pathogens into
surrounding habitats. Finally, these
facilities must also submit biennial
reports to the Service documenting their
collaboration with beluga sturgeon
range countries to study and conserve
wild beluga sturgeon. We will use the
information collected from the relevant
aquaculture facilities to determine if the
special rule’s exemptions are having the
intended effect of capacity building and
technology transfer from viable
businesses to the range countries.
Beluga sturgeon are currently known
to occur only in the Caspian and Black
Seas and certain rivers connected to
these basins. Of the 14 countries where
the species still occurs, only 11 have
significant beluga sturgeon habitat in
the Caspian Sea, Black Sea, or Danube
River, and, consequently, these
countries (Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia,
Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan,
Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia
and Montenegro, Turkey, Turkmenistan,
and Ukraine; hereafter referred to as the
‘‘littoral states’’) take responsibility for
cooperative management of the species.
Only eight of these countries
(Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Islamic Republic
of Iran, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russian
Federation, Serbia and Montenegro, and
Turkmenistan) currently permit
commercial harvest and export of beluga
sturgeon.
Overharvest, severe habitat
degradation, and other factors led to the
listing of beluga sturgeon as threatened
throughout its range under the
Endangered Species Act (Act) and in
Appendix II of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES). On March 4, 2005, we issued
a special rule under Section 4(d) of the
Act to control the trade in beluga
sturgeon, monitor the effects of
commercial aquaculture on recovery of
wild beluga sturgeon populations, and
effect robust conservation programs in
the littoral states. The 4(d) rule prohibits
all trade (import, export, re-export, and
foreign and interstate commerce) in
beluga sturgeon and beluga sturgeon
products, except as provided in the
special rule or with permits under the
provisions of Section 10 of the Act. This
special rule initially allows littoral
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37427
states 6 months from the rule’s effective
date to submit a suite of reports,
including information on management
measures, to us for review. During this
initial 6-month period, imports, reexports, and exports of, and interstate
and foreign commerce in, certain beluga
sturgeon caviar and meat may continue
without a requirement for threatened
species permits. This is intended to
provide the littoral states time to submit
the required documents. Similarly, we
will consider making programmatic
permit exemptions for commercial
aquaculture facilities outside the littoral
states if they meet certain criteria for: (1)
Enhancing the survival of populations
of wild beluga sturgeon and (2) not
threatening native aquatic fauna in the
country in which the facility is located.
CITES documentation will still be
required for any international
movement of beluga sturgeon and
beluga sturgeon products, except as they
may qualify for an exemption as
personal or household effects.
By September 6, 2005, each littoral
state wishing to export beluga caviar or
beluga meat to the United States
without the need for a threatened
species permit issued under 50 CFR
17.32 must submit to the Service’s
Division of Scientific Authority a copy
of a cooperative management plan for
that state’s respective basin. This plan
must be agreed to by each littoral state
in the relevant basin (not just exporting
nations). These comprise Bulgaria,
Georgia, Romania, Serbia and
Montenegro, Turkey, and Ukraine in the
Black Sea and Danube River, and, in the
Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, the Islamic
Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, the
Russian Federation, and Turkmenistan.
This basinwide management plan must
contain the following elements:
1. A clear statement of the recovery
and management objectives for the plan,
including a specification of the stock(s)
concerned, a definition of what
constitutes overfishing for that stock,
and a rebuilding objective and schedule
for that stock;
2. A statement of standard fishery
management measures and habitat
improvement strategies the nations
involved will use (e.g., size limits, target
harvest rates, quotas, seasons, fishing
gear, effort caps, fish passage
improvement, water quality controls);
3. A complete statement of the
specific regulatory, monitoring, and
research requirements that each
cooperating nation must implement to
comply with the management plan;
4. A complete description of how
stock survey data and fisheries data are
used to establish annual catch and
export quotas, including a full
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
37428
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2005 / Notices
explanation of any models used and the
assumptions underlying those models;
5. Procedures under which the
nations may implement and enforce
alternative management measures that
achieve the same conservation benefits
for beluga sturgeon as the standards
mentioned in paragraph 2; and
6. A complete schedule showing
when nations must take particular
actions to comply with the plan.
Within 90 days of receipt, the
Service’s Division of Scientific
Authority will review these basinwide
management plans for completeness and
clarity. If any elements of the
management plans are missing or
unclear, we will give the appropriate
littoral states 60 days to provide
additional information. If the littoral
states fail to respond or fail to submit
basinwide management plans by the
specified deadlines, or if we are unable
to confirm that all littoral states are
signatories to those plans, we will
immediately suspend trade with all
littoral states in the given basin (Caspian
Sea or Black Sea) until we are satisfied
that such management plans exist and
have been agreed to by the relevant
countries.
Also by September 6, 2005, the
effective date of this special rule, all
littoral states wishing to export beluga
caviar and meat to the United States
under an exemption from threatened
species permits must submit copies of
national legislation and national fishery
regulations pertaining to the harvest,
trade, aquaculture, restocking, and
processing of beluga sturgeon. These
laws and regulations must exhibit clear
means to implement the cooperative
management plans mentioned in
paragraph 1 above. The Service’s
Division of Scientific Authority will
review these laws and regulations for
completeness and clarity within 90 days
of receipt. If any elements of the
national legislation or national fishery
regulations are missing or unclear, we
will ask the appropriate littoral state(s)
to provide additional information
within 60 days of the date we contact
them. If the littoral states fail to respond
or fail to submit copies of national laws
and regulations by the specified
deadlines, we will immediately suspend
trade with the given littoral states until
we are satisfied that such laws and
regulations are in effect.
No later than December 1, 2005, and
every 2 years on that anniversary, all
littoral states wishing to export beluga
sturgeon products to the United States
must submit a report to the Service.
This report must contain, at a minimum:
1. A description of the specific fishery
regulations that affect the harvest of
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:40 Jun 28, 2005
Jkt 205001
Huso huso in the respective littoral
state, with any changes from the
previous report highlighted;
2. A description of any revisions to
the cooperative management program
mentioned above, including any new
models, assumptions, or equations used
to set harvest and export quotas;
3. Updated time-series of information
on beluga sturgeon obtained from
monitoring programs, including
estimates of relative or absolute stock
size, fishing mortality, natural mortality,
spawning activity, habitat use, hatchery
and restocking programs, and other
relevant subjects;
4. A summary of law enforcement
activities undertaken in the last 2 years,
and a description of any changes in
programs to prevent poaching and
smuggling, including indicators of their
effectiveness;
5. A summary of the revenues the
commercial exploitation of beluga
sturgeon generates in the respective
littoral state, and a summary of any
documented conservation benefits
resulting from the commercial harvest
program in that country (e.g., revenues
allocated to hatchery and restocking
programs or research programs); and
6. Export data for the previous 2
calendar years.
Starting in December 2005, we will
review information in the littoral state
reports and any other pertinent
information on wild beluga sturgeon
conservation. Thereafter, we will
conduct reviews biennially within 90
days of receiving the reports. If any
elements of the biennial reports are
missing or unclear, we will give the
appropriate littoral states 60 days to
provide additional information. If the
littoral states fail to respond or fail to
submit biennial reports by the specified
deadline, we will immediately suspend
trade with the given littoral states. We
will use these reviews to determine if
littoral state management programs are
leading to recovery of wild beluga
sturgeon stocks.
Based on the review of biennial
reports, we propose to administratively
suspend or restrict imports, re-exports,
exports, and interstate commerce
involving beluga sturgeon products from
the littoral states if we determine that
wild beluga sturgeon stock status
worsens or threats to the species
increase. Any such restriction would
also apply to foreign commerce in
beluga sturgeon products involving
persons under U.S. jurisdiction.
Except in certain circumstances, the
special rule does not exempt beluga
sturgeon or any beluga sturgeon
products derived from aquaculture or
grow-out operations outside the littoral
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
states from the provisions of the Act,
which could (1) undermine the
incentives for conserving wild Huso
huso in the littoral states; (2) utilize
Huso huso broodstock from the littoral
states without any direct benefit to wild
populations; and (3) result in the release
of beluga sturgeon or disease pathogens
into habitats outside their native range.
Therefore, import, export, re-export, or
interstate or foreign commerce involving
any beluga sturgeon products that
originate from aquaculture operations
outside the littoral states will normally
require a threatened species permit in
addition to any applicable CITES
documents (except as provided for
captive-bred wildlife in 50 CFR
17.21(g)). However, we will consider
programmatic exemptions to this
prohibition for beluga caviar and meat
from aquaculture facilities that provide
information to our offices that
demonstrate (1) the relevant regulatory
agency has certified that the facility uses
best-management practices to prevent
escapes and disease introduction into
surrounding habitats, and the Service
has approved the specific practices; (2)
the facility has entered into a formal
agreement with one or more littoral
states to study, conserve, or otherwise
enhance the survival of wild
populations of beluga sturgeon; and (3)
the facility uses only captive-bred
beluga sturgeon (i.e., captive F1
generation and beyond) in its
production systems. We will require the
facilities to file biennial reports so we
can document the results and efficacy of
any arrangements with littoral states.
Title: Trade of Threatened Beluga
Sturgeon (Huso huso).
Form number: None.
Frequency: For littoral states, an
initial reporting requirement for
basinwide management plans and
national regulations is due by
September 6, 2005. Biennial reports are
due from littoral state governments on
December 1, 2005, and every 2 years
thereafter. For aquaculture facilities
outside the littoral states, we require an
initial application with relevant
documents followed by biennial reports
on the anniversary of the exemption.
Description of respondents: Foreign
government officials and sturgeon
aquaculture businesses.
Total annual burden hours: For
littoral state governments in 2005: 5,120
hours; for biennial reporting years:
1,280 hours. For aquaculture facilities:
80 hours in year of application, 80 hours
in biennial reporting years.
Total annual responses: Nine (eight
littoral state governments, one
commercial aquaculture facility).
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 29, 2005 / Notices
We invite your comments on: (1)
Whether or not the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether or not the
information will have practical utility;
(2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the information
collection; (3) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents.
Dated: June 20, 2005.
Hope Grey,
Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 05–12854 Filed 6–28–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Marriage and Dissolution in Courts of
Indian Offenses
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of submission of
information collection to the Office of
Management and Budget.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we
are submitting this collection of
information to the Office of
Management and Budget’s (OMB) Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
for approval and renewal.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted by July 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments are to be
sent directly to the Desk Officer for the
Department of the Interior, by e-mail to
OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov, or by
telefacsimile to (202) 395–6566. Please
send a copy of your comments to Ralph
Gonzales, Office of Tribal Services,
Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1951
Constitution Avenue, NW., Mail Stop
320–SIB, Washington, DC 20240.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ralph Gonzales, (202) 513–7629.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On November 3, 2004, a notice of
proposed renewal was published in the
Federal Register (69 FR 64094) which
requested comments. No comments
were received.
I. Abstract
The Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Department of the Interior, must collect
personal information to carry out the
requirements of title 25, section
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:40 Jun 28, 2005
Jkt 205001
11.600(c)—Marriage, and title 25,
section 11.606(c)—Dissolution of
Marriage, in order for a Courts of Indian
Offenses (CFR court) to issue a marriage
license or dissolve a marriage. The
information is collected at the initiation
of an applicant and only basic
information necessary for the CFR court
to properly dispose of the matter.
II. Method of Collection
Basic information is requested of
applicants for the issuance of a marriage
license or for the dissolution of a
marriage by a CFR court under 25 CFR
part 11. Information is collected by the
Clerk of the CFR court so that the
functions under 25 CFR 11.600(c), and
11.606(c) may be carried out.
III. Information Collected
CFR courts have been established on
certain Indian reservations under the
authority vested in the Secretary of the
Interior by 5 U.S.C. 301 and 25 U.S.C.
2 and 9; and 25 U.S.C. 13, which
authorizes appropriations for ‘‘Indian
judges.’’ See Tillett v. Hodel, 730 F.
Supp., 381 (W.D. Okla. 1990), aff’d 931
F.2d 636 (10th Cir. 1991), United States
v. Clapox, 13 Sawy. 349, 35 F. 575 (D.
Ore. 1888). The CFR Courts provide
adequate machinery for the
administration of justice for Indian
tribes in those areas where tribes retain
jurisdiction over Indians and is
exclusive of state jurisdiction but where
tribal courts have not been established
to exercise that jurisdiction.
Accordingly, CFR courts exercise
jurisdiction under title 25 part 11 of the
Code of Federal Regulations. Domestic
Relations are governed by 25 CFR
11.600 which authorizes the CFR court
to conduct marriages and dissolve
marriages. In order to be married in a
CFR court a marriage license must be
obtained (25 CFR 11.601). To comply
with this requirement an applicant must
respond to the following six questions
found at 25 CFR 11.600(c):
(c) A marriage license application
shall include the following information:
(1) Name, sex, occupation, address,
social security number, and date and
place of birth of each party to the
proposed marriage;
(2) If either party was previously
married, his or her name, and the date,
place, and court in which the marriage
was dissolved or declared invalid or the
date and place of death of the former
spouse;
(3) Name and address of the parents
or guardian of each party;
(4) Whether the parties are related to
each other and, if so, their relationship;
(5) The name and date of birth of any
child of which both parties are parents,
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37429
born before the making of the
application, unless their parental rights
and the parent and child relationship
with respect to the child have been
terminated; and
(6) A certificate of the results of any
medical examination required by either
applicable tribal ordinances, or the laws
of the State in which the Indian country
under the jurisdiction of the CFR court
is located.
For the purposes of § 11.600, the
social security number information is
requested to confirm identity. Previous
marriage information is requested to
avoid multiple simultaneous marriages,
and to ensure that any pre-existing legal
relationships are dissolved. Information
on consanguinity is requested to avoid
conflict with state or tribal laws against
marriages between parties who are
related by blood as defined in such
laws. Medical examination information
may be requested if required under the
laws of the state in which the CFR court
is located.
To comply with the requirement for
dissolution of marriage an applicant
must respond to the following six
questions found at 25 CFR 11.606(c):
(1) The age, occupation, and length of
residence within the Indian country
under the jurisdiction of the court of
each party;
(2) The date of the marriage and the
place at which it was registered;
(3) That jurisdictional requirements
are met and that the marriage is
irretrievably broken in that either (i) the
parties have lived separate and apart for
a period of more than 180 days next
preceding the commencement of the
proceeding or (ii) there is a serious
marital discord adversely affecting the
attitude of one or both of the parties
toward the marriage, and there is no
reasonable prospect of reconciliation;
(4) The names, age, and addresses of
all living children of the marriage and
whether the wife is pregnant;
(5) Any arrangement as to support,
custody, and visitation of the children
and maintenance of a spouse; and
(6) The relief sought.
For the purposes of § 11.606,
Dissolution proceedings, information on
occupation and residency is necessary
to establish CFR court jurisdiction.
Information on the status of the parties,
whether they have lived apart 180 days
or if there is serious marital discord
warranting dissolution, is necessary for
the court to determine if dissolution is
appropriate. Information on the children
of the marriage, their ages and whether
the wife is pregnant is necessary for the
CFR court to determine the appropriate
level of support that may be required
from the non-custodial parent.
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 29, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37426-37429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12854]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Information Collection To Be Sent to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for Approval Under the Paperwork Reduction Act; Trade of
Threatened Beluga Sturgeon (Huso huso)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We (Fish and Wildlife Service or Service) plan to send the
collection of information described below to OMB for approval under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information
collected is needed to effectively implement the provisions of the
special rule to control the trade of threatened beluga sturgeon (Huso
huso) (70 FR 10493, March 4, 2005). That rule requires that range
countries for beluga sturgeon provide us with information and reports
on a variety of issues related to beluga sturgeon conservation and
trade. This information is necessary for us to gauge the effectiveness
of international management efforts in the Caspian Sea and Black Sea
regions, and to determine if the permit exemptions granted under the
special rule are bringing about appropriate actions by national
fisheries authorities and multilateral agreements.
DATES: You must submit comments on or before August 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments on this information collection to Hope
Grey, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS-222-ARLSQ, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
[[Page 37427]]
Arlington, VA 22203; hope_grey@fws.gov (e-mail); or (703) 358-2269
(fax).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request a copy of the information
collection requirements, explanatory information, or related materials,
contact Hope Grey at the above addresses or by telephone at (703) 358-
2482.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB regulations at 5 CFR part 1320, which
implement provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), require that interested members of the public and
affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). We plan
to send a request to OMB for approval of the collection of information
required by the special rule to control the trade of threatened beluga
sturgeon (70 FR 10493, March 4, 2005). Federal agencies may not conduct
or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
However, there is no OMB control number for this information collection
because fewer than 10 entities currently commercially trade in beluga
caviar and, therefore, this requirement under the Paperwork Reduction
Act does not apply. While an OMB control number is not necessary for
collections that have such a low number of affected parties, it is
reasonable to assume that there may be additional applicants or
affected parties in the coming years. Therefore, we will request a 3-
year term of approval for this information collection.
The special rule requires that range countries for beluga sturgeon
develop multilateral fishery management plans, implement appropriate
sturgeon fisheries laws and regulations, and provide biennial reports
to us on a variety of issues related to beluga sturgeon conservation
and trade. Range countries must do this if they wish to have an
exemption to the standard threatened species permits issued under 50
CFR part 17, normally required under the Endangered Species Act to
import, export, re-export, or conduct interstate commerce in listed
species.
The special rule also requires certain information from U.S. and
foreign aquaculture facilities wishing to trade in beluga sturgeon
products without threatened species permits. If such facilities wish to
import, re-export, or conduct U.S. interstate commerce in their beluga
sturgeon products without threatened species permits, they must submit
proof that they have agreements with one or more range countries to
research, protect, or recover wild beluga sturgeon. These facilities
must use captive-bred broodstock in all of their beluga sturgeon
production. Also, upon application for a permit exemption under the
special rule, these facilities must submit proof that the relevant
government authority certifies they are following aquaculture best-
management practices to prevent the escape of live specimens or
pathogens into surrounding habitats. Finally, these facilities must
also submit biennial reports to the Service documenting their
collaboration with beluga sturgeon range countries to study and
conserve wild beluga sturgeon. We will use the information collected
from the relevant aquaculture facilities to determine if the special
rule's exemptions are having the intended effect of capacity building
and technology transfer from viable businesses to the range countries.
Beluga sturgeon are currently known to occur only in the Caspian
and Black Seas and certain rivers connected to these basins. Of the 14
countries where the species still occurs, only 11 have significant
beluga sturgeon habitat in the Caspian Sea, Black Sea, or Danube River,
and, consequently, these countries (Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia,
Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russian Federation,
Serbia and Montenegro, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Ukraine; hereafter
referred to as the ``littoral states'') take responsibility for
cooperative management of the species. Only eight of these countries
(Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, Romania,
Russian Federation, Serbia and Montenegro, and Turkmenistan) currently
permit commercial harvest and export of beluga sturgeon.
Overharvest, severe habitat degradation, and other factors led to
the listing of beluga sturgeon as threatened throughout its range under
the Endangered Species Act (Act) and in Appendix II of the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES). On March 4, 2005, we issued a special rule under Section 4(d)
of the Act to control the trade in beluga sturgeon, monitor the effects
of commercial aquaculture on recovery of wild beluga sturgeon
populations, and effect robust conservation programs in the littoral
states. The 4(d) rule prohibits all trade (import, export, re-export,
and foreign and interstate commerce) in beluga sturgeon and beluga
sturgeon products, except as provided in the special rule or with
permits under the provisions of Section 10 of the Act. This special
rule initially allows littoral states 6 months from the rule's
effective date to submit a suite of reports, including information on
management measures, to us for review. During this initial 6-month
period, imports, re-exports, and exports of, and interstate and foreign
commerce in, certain beluga sturgeon caviar and meat may continue
without a requirement for threatened species permits. This is intended
to provide the littoral states time to submit the required documents.
Similarly, we will consider making programmatic permit exemptions for
commercial aquaculture facilities outside the littoral states if they
meet certain criteria for: (1) Enhancing the survival of populations of
wild beluga sturgeon and (2) not threatening native aquatic fauna in
the country in which the facility is located. CITES documentation will
still be required for any international movement of beluga sturgeon and
beluga sturgeon products, except as they may qualify for an exemption
as personal or household effects.
By September 6, 2005, each littoral state wishing to export beluga
caviar or beluga meat to the United States without the need for a
threatened species permit issued under 50 CFR 17.32 must submit to the
Service's Division of Scientific Authority a copy of a cooperative
management plan for that state's respective basin. This plan must be
agreed to by each littoral state in the relevant basin (not just
exporting nations). These comprise Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Serbia
and Montenegro, Turkey, and Ukraine in the Black Sea and Danube River,
and, in the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, the Islamic Republic of Iran,
Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, and Turkmenistan. This basinwide
management plan must contain the following elements:
1. A clear statement of the recovery and management objectives for
the plan, including a specification of the stock(s) concerned, a
definition of what constitutes overfishing for that stock, and a
rebuilding objective and schedule for that stock;
2. A statement of standard fishery management measures and habitat
improvement strategies the nations involved will use (e.g., size
limits, target harvest rates, quotas, seasons, fishing gear, effort
caps, fish passage improvement, water quality controls);
3. A complete statement of the specific regulatory, monitoring, and
research requirements that each cooperating nation must implement to
comply with the management plan;
4. A complete description of how stock survey data and fisheries
data are used to establish annual catch and export quotas, including a
full
[[Page 37428]]
explanation of any models used and the assumptions underlying those
models;
5. Procedures under which the nations may implement and enforce
alternative management measures that achieve the same conservation
benefits for beluga sturgeon as the standards mentioned in paragraph 2;
and
6. A complete schedule showing when nations must take particular
actions to comply with the plan.
Within 90 days of receipt, the Service's Division of Scientific
Authority will review these basinwide management plans for completeness
and clarity. If any elements of the management plans are missing or
unclear, we will give the appropriate littoral states 60 days to
provide additional information. If the littoral states fail to respond
or fail to submit basinwide management plans by the specified
deadlines, or if we are unable to confirm that all littoral states are
signatories to those plans, we will immediately suspend trade with all
littoral states in the given basin (Caspian Sea or Black Sea) until we
are satisfied that such management plans exist and have been agreed to
by the relevant countries.
Also by September 6, 2005, the effective date of this special rule,
all littoral states wishing to export beluga caviar and meat to the
United States under an exemption from threatened species permits must
submit copies of national legislation and national fishery regulations
pertaining to the harvest, trade, aquaculture, restocking, and
processing of beluga sturgeon. These laws and regulations must exhibit
clear means to implement the cooperative management plans mentioned in
paragraph 1 above. The Service's Division of Scientific Authority will
review these laws and regulations for completeness and clarity within
90 days of receipt. If any elements of the national legislation or
national fishery regulations are missing or unclear, we will ask the
appropriate littoral state(s) to provide additional information within
60 days of the date we contact them. If the littoral states fail to
respond or fail to submit copies of national laws and regulations by
the specified deadlines, we will immediately suspend trade with the
given littoral states until we are satisfied that such laws and
regulations are in effect.
No later than December 1, 2005, and every 2 years on that
anniversary, all littoral states wishing to export beluga sturgeon
products to the United States must submit a report to the Service. This
report must contain, at a minimum:
1. A description of the specific fishery regulations that affect
the harvest of Huso huso in the respective littoral state, with any
changes from the previous report highlighted;
2. A description of any revisions to the cooperative management
program mentioned above, including any new models, assumptions, or
equations used to set harvest and export quotas;
3. Updated time-series of information on beluga sturgeon obtained
from monitoring programs, including estimates of relative or absolute
stock size, fishing mortality, natural mortality, spawning activity,
habitat use, hatchery and restocking programs, and other relevant
subjects;
4. A summary of law enforcement activities undertaken in the last 2
years, and a description of any changes in programs to prevent poaching
and smuggling, including indicators of their effectiveness;
5. A summary of the revenues the commercial exploitation of beluga
sturgeon generates in the respective littoral state, and a summary of
any documented conservation benefits resulting from the commercial
harvest program in that country (e.g., revenues allocated to hatchery
and restocking programs or research programs); and
6. Export data for the previous 2 calendar years.
Starting in December 2005, we will review information in the
littoral state reports and any other pertinent information on wild
beluga sturgeon conservation. Thereafter, we will conduct reviews
biennially within 90 days of receiving the reports. If any elements of
the biennial reports are missing or unclear, we will give the
appropriate littoral states 60 days to provide additional information.
If the littoral states fail to respond or fail to submit biennial
reports by the specified deadline, we will immediately suspend trade
with the given littoral states. We will use these reviews to determine
if littoral state management programs are leading to recovery of wild
beluga sturgeon stocks.
Based on the review of biennial reports, we propose to
administratively suspend or restrict imports, re-exports, exports, and
interstate commerce involving beluga sturgeon products from the
littoral states if we determine that wild beluga sturgeon stock status
worsens or threats to the species increase. Any such restriction would
also apply to foreign commerce in beluga sturgeon products involving
persons under U.S. jurisdiction.
Except in certain circumstances, the special rule does not exempt
beluga sturgeon or any beluga sturgeon products derived from
aquaculture or grow-out operations outside the littoral states from the
provisions of the Act, which could (1) undermine the incentives for
conserving wild Huso huso in the littoral states; (2) utilize Huso huso
broodstock from the littoral states without any direct benefit to wild
populations; and (3) result in the release of beluga sturgeon or
disease pathogens into habitats outside their native range. Therefore,
import, export, re-export, or interstate or foreign commerce involving
any beluga sturgeon products that originate from aquaculture operations
outside the littoral states will normally require a threatened species
permit in addition to any applicable CITES documents (except as
provided for captive-bred wildlife in 50 CFR 17.21(g)). However, we
will consider programmatic exemptions to this prohibition for beluga
caviar and meat from aquaculture facilities that provide information to
our offices that demonstrate (1) the relevant regulatory agency has
certified that the facility uses best-management practices to prevent
escapes and disease introduction into surrounding habitats, and the
Service has approved the specific practices; (2) the facility has
entered into a formal agreement with one or more littoral states to
study, conserve, or otherwise enhance the survival of wild populations
of beluga sturgeon; and (3) the facility uses only captive-bred beluga
sturgeon (i.e., captive F1 generation and beyond) in its production
systems. We will require the facilities to file biennial reports so we
can document the results and efficacy of any arrangements with littoral
states.
Title: Trade of Threatened Beluga Sturgeon (Huso huso).
Form number: None.
Frequency: For littoral states, an initial reporting requirement
for basinwide management plans and national regulations is due by
September 6, 2005. Biennial reports are due from littoral state
governments on December 1, 2005, and every 2 years thereafter. For
aquaculture facilities outside the littoral states, we require an
initial application with relevant documents followed by biennial
reports on the anniversary of the exemption.
Description of respondents: Foreign government officials and
sturgeon aquaculture businesses.
Total annual burden hours: For littoral state governments in 2005:
5,120 hours; for biennial reporting years: 1,280 hours. For aquaculture
facilities: 80 hours in year of application, 80 hours in biennial
reporting years.
Total annual responses: Nine (eight littoral state governments, one
commercial aquaculture facility).
[[Page 37429]]
We invite your comments on: (1) Whether or not the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether or not the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden of the information collection; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents.
Dated: June 20, 2005.
Hope Grey,
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 05-12854 Filed 6-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P