Migratory Bird Permits; Changes in the Regulations Governing Migratory Bird Rehabilitation, 29917-29919 [2010-12882]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
adopted, or to suggest that a change
should be made to the rule. Under the
direct final rule process, FMCSA does
not consider the following types of
comments to be adverse:
(1) Comments recommending another
rule change, unless the commenter
states that the direct final rule will be
ineffective without the change;
(2) Comments outside the scope of the
rule and comments suggesting that the
rule’s policy or requirements should or
should not be extended to other Agency
programs outside the scope of the rule;
(3) Comments in support of the rule;
or
(4) Comments requesting clarification.
(c) Confirmation of effective date.
FMCSA will publish a confirmation rule
document in the Federal Register, if it
has not received an adverse comment or
notice of intent to file an adverse
comment by the date specified in the
direct final rule. The confirmation rule
document tells the public the effective
date of the rule.
(d) Withdrawal of a direct final rule.
(1) If FMCSA receives an adverse
comment or a notice of intent to file an
adverse comment within the comment
period, it will publish a rule document
in the Federal Register, before the
effective date of the direct final rule,
advising the public and withdrawing
the direct final rule.
(2) If FMCSA withdraws a direct final
rule because of an adverse comment, the
Agency may issue a notice of proposed
rulemaking if it decides to pursue the
rulemaking.
Issued on: May 24, 2010.
Anne S. Ferro,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–12834 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 21
[FWS–R9–MB–2010–0020; 91200–1231–
9BPP]
RIN 1018–AX09
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Migratory Bird Permits; Changes in the
Regulations Governing Migratory Bird
Rehabilitation
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
15:16 May 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
Background
On October 27, 2003, we published a
final rule in the Federal Register (68 FR
61123) to establish regulations for the
issuance of permits to rehabilitate
migratory birds in the United States.
These regulations are at 50 CFR 21.31.
Prior to issuance of the rehabilitation
permit rule, migratory bird
rehabilitators were required to obtain a
special use permit to engage in
rehabilitation activities. The last
paragraph in the rehabilitation permit
rule dealt with how we would handle
issuing permits during the transition to
the (then) new regulations. Since
publication of that rule, all persons
interested in having a permit to
rehabilitate migratory birds must have
transitioned from a special purpose
permit to a rehabilitation permit.
Because special purpose permits are
valid for only 3 years, all of those
permits in existence in 2003 have
expired by now.
Therefore, the text in 50 CFR 21.31(i),
‘‘Will I need to apply for a new permit
under this section if I already have a
special purpose permit to rehabilitate
birds, issued under § 21.27 (Special
purpose permits)?’’ is no longer needed.
With this final rule, our only change to
the rehabilitation regulations is to
remove all of the language under
paragraph (i). This change is simply a
ministerial administrative action to
remove text that is no longer necessary
from the Code of Federal Regulations
and, therefore, will have no substantive
effect on the general public.
Administrative Procedure
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, published a final rule
in the Federal Register on October 27,
2003, to create regulations governing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
migratory bird rehabilitation in the
United States. Before creation of those
regulations, rehabilitators were required
to obtain a special purpose permit to
engage in rehabilitation activities. The
language in the final paragraph of the
2003 regulations dealt with the
transition of special purpose permit
holders to operation under the new
rehabilitation permit regulations. This
paragraph is no longer relevant, so we
remove it from the regulation.
DATES: This regulations change will be
effective on May 28, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
George T. Allen, Division of Migratory
Bird Management, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 703–358–1825.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
In accordance with section 553
(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), we
are issuing this final rule without prior
opportunity for public comment
because public notice and comment
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29917
procedures are unnecessary. We find
that good cause exists to delete
paragraph (i) of section 21.31 without
going through the public-notice-andcomment procedure because the
transition language is anachronistic and
no public input received through an
open comment period could justify
retention of this paragraph. For the same
reasons stated above, we find that there
is good cause to have this final rule take
effect immediately upon publication in
the Federal Register (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this rule is
not significant under Executive Order
12866. OMB bases its determination
upon the following four criteria:
a. Whether the rule will have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on
the economy or adversely affect an
economic sector, productivity, jobs, the
environment, or other units of the
government.
b. Whether the rule will create
inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies’ actions.
c. Whether the rule will materially
affect entitlements, grants, user fees,
loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of their recipients.
d. Whether the rule raises novel legal
or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L.
104–121)), whenever an agency is
required to publish a notice of
rulemaking for any proposed or final
rule, it must prepare and make available
for public comment a regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the
effect of the rule on small entities (that
is, small businesses, small
organizations, and small government
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory
flexibility analysis is required if the
head of an agency certifies the rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide the statement of the
factual basis for certifying that a rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. We have examined this rule’s
potential effects on small entities as
required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, and have determined that this
E:\FR\FM\28MYR1.SGM
28MYR1
29918
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because the
change in the regulation is simply to
eliminate language that is no longer
needed. Consequently, we certify that
because this rule will not have a
significant economic effect on any
entity, let alone a substantial number of
small entities, a regulatory flexibility
analysis is not required.
This rule is not a major rule under the
SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). It will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
a. This rule does not have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more. There are no costs to
permittees or any other part of the
economy associated with these
regulation changes.
b. This rule will not cause a major
increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries,
Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions. The
practice of migratory bird rehabilitation
does not significantly affect costs or
prices in any sector of the economy.
c. This rule will not have significant
adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based
enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises. Neither regulation
nor practice of migratory bird
rehabilitation significantly affects
business activities.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.), we have determined the following:
a. This rule will not ‘‘significantly or
uniquely’’ affect small governments. A
small government agency plan is not
required. Neither regulation nor practice
of migratory bird rehabilitation affects
small government activities.
b. This rule will not produce a
Federal mandate of $100 million or
greater in any year; i.e., it is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. No
revisions of State, tribal, or territorial
regulations will be necessary.
Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630, the
rule does not have significant takings
implications. A takings implication
assessment is not required. This rule
does not contain a provision for taking
of private property.
Federalism
This rule does not have sufficient
Federalism effects to warrant
preparation of a Federalism assessment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
under E.O. 13132. It will not interfere
with the States’ abilities to manage
themselves or their funds. No significant
economic impacts are expected to result
from the regulation of migratory bird
rehabilitation.
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the
Office of the Solicitor has determined
that the rule does not unduly burden the
judicial system and meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order.
Paperwork Reduction Act
We examined this rule under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB
has approved the information collection
requirements of the Migratory Bird
Permits Program and assigned OMB
control number 1018–0022, which
expires November 30, 2010. This rule
does not change the approved
information collection. Information
from the collection is used to ensure
that rehabilitation permit applicants are
qualified and that their activities are
documented. A Federal 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.
National Environmental Policy Act
We evaluated the environmental
impacts of the change to the regulations,
and determined that, within the spirit
and intent of the Council on
Environmental Quality’s regulations for
implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and
other statutes, orders, and policies that
protect fish and wildlife resources, the
regulatory change does not have a
significant effect on the human
environment. Under the guidance in
Appendix 1 of the Department of the
Interior Manual at 516 DM 8, we
conclude that the regulatory change is
categorically excluded because it has
‘‘no or minor potential environmental
impact’’ (516 DM 8.5(A)(1)). No more
comprehensive NEPA analysis of the
regulations change is required.
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive
Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have
evaluated potential effects on Federally
recognized Indian Tribes and have
determined that this rule will not
interfere with tribes’ ability to manage
themselves or their funds or to regulate
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
migratory bird rehabilitation on tribal
lands.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to
prepare Statements of Energy Effects
when undertaking certain actions.
Because this rule only affects the
practice of migratory bird rehabilitation
in the United States, it is not a
significant regulatory action under E.O.
12866, and will not significantly affect
energy supplies, distribution, or use. No
Statement of Energy Effects is required.
Environmental Consequences of the
Proposed Action
This action has no environmental or
socioeconomic impacts.
Compliance With Endangered Species
Act Requirements
Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that ‘‘The
Secretary [of the Interior] shall review
other programs administered by him
and utilize such programs in
furtherance of the purposes of this
chapter’’ (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1)). It further
states that the Secretary must ‘‘insure
that any action authorized, funded, or
carried out * * * 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’’ (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)). This
regulatory change will not affect
threatened or endangered species or
their habitats in the United States.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 21
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Wildlife.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
we amend subpart C of part 21,
subchapter B, chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
■
PART 21—MIGRATORY BIRD PERMITS
1. The authority citation for part 21
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 40
Stat. 755 (16 U.S.C. 703–12); Public Law 95–
616, 92 Stat. 3112 (16 U.S.C. 712(2)); Pub. L.
106–108, 113 Stat. 1491, Note Following 16
U.S.C. 703.
§ 21.31
[Amended]
2. Amend § 21.31 by removing
paragraph (i).
■
E:\FR\FM\28MYR1.SGM
28MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: May 17, 2010.
Thomas L. Strickland,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010–12882 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am]
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:16 May 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\28MYR1.SGM
28MYR1
29919
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 103 (Friday, May 28, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29917-29919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12882]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 21
[FWS-R9-MB-2010-0020; 91200-1231-9BPP]
RIN 1018-AX09
Migratory Bird Permits; Changes in the Regulations Governing
Migratory Bird Rehabilitation
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, published a final rule
in the Federal Register on October 27, 2003, to create regulations
governing migratory bird rehabilitation in the United States. Before
creation of those regulations, rehabilitators were required to obtain a
special purpose permit to engage in rehabilitation activities. The
language in the final paragraph of the 2003 regulations dealt with the
transition of special purpose permit holders to operation under the new
rehabilitation permit regulations. This paragraph is no longer
relevant, so we remove it from the regulation.
DATES: This regulations change will be effective on May 28, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George T. Allen, Division of
Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 703-358-
1825.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 27, 2003, we published a final rule in the Federal
Register (68 FR 61123) to establish regulations for the issuance of
permits to rehabilitate migratory birds in the United States. These
regulations are at 50 CFR 21.31. Prior to issuance of the
rehabilitation permit rule, migratory bird rehabilitators were required
to obtain a special use permit to engage in rehabilitation activities.
The last paragraph in the rehabilitation permit rule dealt with how we
would handle issuing permits during the transition to the (then) new
regulations. Since publication of that rule, all persons interested in
having a permit to rehabilitate migratory birds must have transitioned
from a special purpose permit to a rehabilitation permit. Because
special purpose permits are valid for only 3 years, all of those
permits in existence in 2003 have expired by now.
Therefore, the text in 50 CFR 21.31(i), ``Will I need to apply for
a new permit under this section if I already have a special purpose
permit to rehabilitate birds, issued under Sec. 21.27 (Special purpose
permits)?'' is no longer needed. With this final rule, our only change
to the rehabilitation regulations is to remove all of the language
under paragraph (i). This change is simply a ministerial administrative
action to remove text that is no longer necessary from the Code of
Federal Regulations and, therefore, will have no substantive effect on
the general public.
Administrative Procedure
In accordance with section 553 (b)(3)(B) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), we are issuing this final rule
without prior opportunity for public comment because public notice and
comment procedures are unnecessary. We find that good cause exists to
delete paragraph (i) of section 21.31 without going through the public-
notice-and-comment procedure because the transition language is
anachronistic and no public input received through an open comment
period could justify retention of this paragraph. For the same reasons
stated above, we find that there is good cause to have this final rule
take effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register (5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this
rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866. OMB bases its
determination upon the following four criteria:
a. Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
b. Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies' actions.
c. Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients.
d. Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121)), whenever an agency is required to
publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must
prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (that
is, small businesses, small organizations, and small government
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required
if the head of an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide the statement of the factual basis for certifying
that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. We have examined this rule's
potential effects on small entities as required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, and have determined that this
[[Page 29918]]
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because the change in the regulation is simply
to eliminate language that is no longer needed. Consequently, we
certify that because this rule will not have a significant economic
effect on any entity, let alone a substantial number of small entities,
a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
This rule is not a major rule under the SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)).
It will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities.
a. This rule does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more. There are no costs to permittees or any other part of
the economy associated with these regulation changes.
b. This rule will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions. The practice of migratory bird
rehabilitation does not significantly affect costs or prices in any
sector of the economy.
c. This rule will 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. Neither regulation nor practice of migratory bird
rehabilitation significantly affects business activities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.), we have determined the following:
a. This rule will not ``significantly or uniquely'' affect small
governments. A small government agency plan is not required. Neither
regulation nor practice of migratory bird rehabilitation affects small
government activities.
b. This rule will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or
greater in any year; i.e., it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. No revisions of State,
tribal, or territorial regulations will be necessary.
Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630, the rule does not have significant
takings implications. A takings implication assessment is not required.
This rule does not contain a provision for taking of private property.
Federalism
This rule does not have sufficient Federalism effects to warrant
preparation of a Federalism assessment under E.O. 13132. It will not
interfere with the States' abilities to manage themselves or their
funds. No significant economic impacts are expected to result from the
regulation of migratory bird rehabilitation.
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has
determined that the rule does not unduly burden the judicial system and
meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
Paperwork Reduction Act
We examined this rule under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
OMB has approved the information collection requirements of the
Migratory Bird Permits Program and assigned OMB control number 1018-
0022, which expires November 30, 2010. This rule does not change the
approved information collection. Information from the collection is
used to ensure that rehabilitation permit applicants are qualified and
that their activities are documented. A Federal 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.
National Environmental Policy Act
We evaluated the environmental impacts of the change to the
regulations, and determined that, within the spirit and intent of the
Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and other statutes, orders,
and policies that protect fish and wildlife resources, the regulatory
change does not have a significant effect on the human environment.
Under the guidance in Appendix 1 of the Department of the Interior
Manual at 516 DM 8, we conclude that the regulatory change is
categorically excluded because it has ``no or minor potential
environmental impact'' (516 DM 8.5(A)(1)). No more comprehensive NEPA
analysis of the regulations change is required.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we
have evaluated potential effects on Federally recognized Indian Tribes
and have determined that this rule will not interfere with tribes'
ability to manage themselves or their funds or to regulate migratory
bird rehabilitation on tribal lands.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy
Effects when undertaking certain actions. Because this rule only
affects the practice of migratory bird rehabilitation in the United
States, it is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866, and
will not significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. No
Statement of Energy Effects is required.
Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action
This action has no environmental or socioeconomic impacts.
Compliance With Endangered Species Act Requirements
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that ``The Secretary [of the
Interior] shall review other programs administered by him and utilize
such programs in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter'' (16
U.S.C. 1536(a)(1)). It further states that the Secretary must ``insure
that any action authorized, funded, or carried out * * * 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'' (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)). This regulatory change
will not affect threatened or endangered species or their habitats in
the United States.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 21
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, we amend subpart C of part 21,
subchapter B, chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as follows:
PART 21--MIGRATORY BIRD PERMITS
0
1. The authority citation for part 21 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 40 Stat. 755 (16 U.S.C.
703-12); Public Law 95-616, 92 Stat. 3112 (16 U.S.C. 712(2)); Pub.
L. 106-108, 113 Stat. 1491, Note Following 16 U.S.C. 703.
Sec. 21.31 [Amended]
0
2. Amend Sec. 21.31 by removing paragraph (i).
[[Page 29919]]
Dated: May 17, 2010.
Thomas L. Strickland,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010-12882 Filed 5-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P