Financial Assistance: Wildlife Restoration, Sport Fish Restoration, Hunter Education and Safety, 32877-32899 [2010-13817]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 111 (Thursday, June 10, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32877-32899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13817]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 80

[Docket No. FWS-R9-WSR-2009-0088; 91400-5110-POLI-7B; 91400-9410-POLI-
7B]
RIN 1018-AW65


Financial Assistance: Wildlife Restoration, Sport Fish 
Restoration, Hunter Education and Safety

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose changes in the 
regulations governing the Wildlife Restoration, Sport Fish Restoration, 
and Hunter Education and Safety (Enhanced Hunter Education and Safety) 
financial assistance programs. We conducted rulemaking 2 years ago to 
amend these regulations, and based on experience gained since then, we 
propose to adopt two recommendations that we received in response to 
the prior proposed rule and to modify three provisions from the 
subsequent final rule. We also propose to update the regulations to 
reflect changes in law, regulation, policy, technology, and practice 
during the past 25 years. In addition, this proposed rule simplifies 
specific requirements of the establishing authorities of the Wildlife 
Restoration and Sport Fish Restoration programs and clarifies terms in 
those authorities as well as terms generally used in grant 
administration. Finally, this proposed rule organizes the regulations 
to follow the life cycle of a grant and rewords and reformats the 
regulations following Federal plain language policy and current 
rulemaking guidance.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before 
August 9, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments to Docket No. FWS-R9-
WSR-2009-0088.
     U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, 
Attn: RIN 1018-AW65; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, 
VA 22203.
    We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all public 
comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we 
will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public 
Comments section below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joyce Johnson, Wildlife and Sport Fish 
Restoration Program, Division of Policy and Programs, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, 703-358-2156.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The U.S. Department of the Interior's (DOI) Fish and Wildlife 
Service (Service) manages or co-manages 55 financial assistance 
programs, 19 of which are managed, in whole or in part, by the 
Service's Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. This proposed 
rule would revise title 50, part 80, of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR), which is ``Administrative Requirements, Pittman-Robertson 
Wildlife Restoration and Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Acts.'' 
The primary users of these regulations are the fish and wildlife 
agencies of the 50 States, the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the 
Northern Mariana Islands, the District of Columbia, and the territories 
of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. We use ``State'' 
or ``States'' in this document to refer to any or all of these 
jurisdictions except the District of Columbia for purposes of the 
Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act and the two grant programs 
and one subprogram under the Act because the Act does not authorize 
funding for the District. The term, ``the 50 States,'' applies only to 
the 50 States of the United States. It does not include the 
Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, the 
District of Columbia, or the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin 
Islands, and American Samoa. These regulations tell States how they 
may: (a) Use revenues from hunting and fishing licenses; (b) receive 
annual apportionments from the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund 
and the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund; (c) receive 
financial assistance from the Wildlife Restoration program, the Basic 
Hunter Education and Safety subprogram, and the Enhanced Hunter 
Education and Safety program; and (d) receive financial assistance from 
the Sport Fish Restoration program, the Recreational Boating Access 
subprogram, the Aquatic Resources Education subprogram, and the 
Outreach and Communications subprogram. These programs provide 
financial assistance to State fish and wildlife agencies to: (a) 
Restore or manage wildlife and sport fish; (b) provide hunter-
education, hunter-development, and hunter-safety programs; (c) provide 
recreational boating access; (d) enhance the public's understanding of 
water resources, aquatic-life forms, and sport fishing; and (e) develop 
responsible attitudes and ethics toward the aquatic environment. The 
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at https://www.cfda.gov describes 
these programs under 15.611, 15.605, and 15.626.
    The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act, as amended (50 
Stat. 917; 16 U.S.C. 669-669k), and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish 
Restoration Act, as amended (64 Stat. 430; 16 U.S.C. 777-777n, except 
777e-1 and g-1), established the programs affected by this proposed 
rule in 1937 and 1950 respectively. We refer to these acts in this 
document and in the proposed rule as ``the Acts.'' They established a 
hunting- and angling-based user-pay and user-benefit system in which 
the State fish and wildlife agencies of the 50 States, the 
Commonwealths, and the territories receive formula-based funding from a 
continuing appropriation. The District of Columbia also receives 
funding, but only under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act. 
The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act does not authorize 
funding for the District of

[[Page 32878]]

Columbia. Industry partners pay excise taxes on equipment and gear 
manufactured for purchase by hunters, anglers, boaters, archers, and 
recreational shooters. The Service distributes these funds to the fish 
and wildlife agencies of the States that contribute matching funds, 
generally derived from hunting and fishing license sales. In fiscal 
year 2009, the States and other eligible jurisdictions received $336 
million through the Wildlife Restoration and Enhanced Hunter Education 
and Safety programs and $404 million through the Sport Fish Restoration 
program.
    Revisions of 50 CFR 80 during the past 25 years include one section 
of 50 CFR 80 in 1987, another section in 1989, and two sections in 
2001. We revised the license-certification section in 2008 to address 
the greater number of license choices that many States have offered 
hunters and anglers in recent years. We also revised other sections in 
2008 to: (a) Comply with Federal policy on plain language and writing 
style, (b) remove subject matter addressed adequately in other grant 
regulations, or (c) correct obsolete references or legal requirements. 
The focus of all revisions since 1987 was on specific issues. We have 
not systematically reviewed and revised 50 CFR 80 since the early 
1980's, so the regulations at this part do not fully reflect the 
following laws and policies:
    (a) The Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement 
Act of 2000, Nov. 1, 2000, (Pub. L. 106-408). This amendment of the 
Acts authorized the Enhanced Hunter Education and Safety program.
    (b) Public Law 98-454, title VI, section 601(b), Oct. 5, 1984. This 
law states that a Federal awarding agency must waive any required match 
under $200,000 for grants to Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, the 
U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.
    (c) 43 CFR 12.43, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants 
and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, Mar. 11, 
1988. This section of the CFR defines ``obligations'' in the context of 
a grantee incurring costs under a grant. This definition does not apply 
to ``obligations'' in the context of a Federal obligation of funds, 
which involves the awarding agency making funds available for a grant, 
the submission of an application, and the issuance and acceptance of an 
award under specified terms and conditions.
    (d) OMB Circular A-102, Grants and Cooperative Agreements with 
State and Local Governments, Oct. 14, 1994, and amended Aug. 29, 1997. 
This policy requires us to treat land acquisition and development, in 
effect, as a phase of construction for the purpose of a grantee 
submitting an assurance statement with the Application for Federal 
Assistance.
    (e) Department of the Interior Manual, 505 DM 2, ``Procurement 
Contracts, Grant and Cooperative Agreements,'' Jan. 9, 2008. This DOI 
manual chapter states that a grant-funded project could involve amounts 
from more than one program or appropriation when different 
relationships would otherwise be appropriate and beneficial for 
different parts of the project.
    (f) Service Manual chapter 522 FW 4, ``Comprehensive Management 
System Grants,'' Nov. 30, 2004. This FWS manual chapter guides the 
award and operation of a Comprehensive Management System grant, which 
the establishing authorities authorize as an alternative to project-by-
project grants.
    (g) Service Manual chapter 522 FW 16, ``Preagreement Costs,'' Oct. 
13, 2005. This FWS manual chapter establishes conditions under which a 
grantee may incur costs before the effective date of a grant. It 
incorporates recommendations of a joint task force of Federal and State 
officials.
    (h) Service Manual chapter 522 FW 19, ``Program Income from Federal 
Assistance Grants,'' Feb. 20, 2008. This chapter establishes that 
States may: (a) Select the deduction or addition methods of applying 
program income to Federal and non-Federal outlays, and (b) reduce 
program income by an amount equal to the costs of generating it. The 
chapter gives examples of the costs of generating program income. It 
establishes criteria under which a Regional Director may approve an 
applicant's request to use program income as match. It also requires 
grant agreements to state that income earned by the grantee after the 
grant period from grant-supported activities will be treated as: (a) 
License revenue and used to support the administration of the State 
fish and wildlife agency, or (b) additional funding for purposes 
consistent with the grant or program that generated the income. The 
chapter also allows the grantee to request that grant agreements 
require that subgrantees account for program income earned after the 
grant period. Finally, the chapter gives examples of program income and 
states that the Service does not treat cooperative farming and grazing 
arrangements as program income if the State fish and wildlife agency 
designs the farming or grazing to advance its fish or wildlife 
management objectives. Service Manual chapter 522 FW 16 is based on 
recommendations of a joint task force of Federal and State officials.
    (i) Director's guidance on ``Policy--Federal Aid Timber Sales,'' 
June 6, 2002. This guidance applies a Dec. 5, 2000, Solicitor's Opinion 
to the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration program nationwide. That 
Opinion stated that timber revenue from wildlife management practices 
on lands bought under Wildlife Restoration or Sport Fish Restoration 
grants is program income instead of proceeds from the sale of real 
property.
    (j) The Presidential memorandum of June 1, 1998, ``Plain Language 
in Government Writing.'' This memorandum requires the use of plain 
language in all proposed and final rulemaking documents published in 
the Federal Register.

Updates to the Regulations

    We have arranged the sections of the proposed rule into subparts of 
related subject matter. The gaps in section numbers between each 
subpart allow the addition of new sections in the future. We have 
summarized the changes in the proposed rule by section or by group of 
sections, and cross-referenced proposed section numbers to the 
corresponding numbers in the currently published version of 50 CFR 80, 
as amended by the final rule published in the Federal Register at 73 FR 
43120 on July 24, 2008. We are referring to the 2008 version of 50 CFR 
80 when we use the term ``current'' before a section number or before a 
reference to 50 CFR 80.

Subpart A--General

Section 80.1 What does this part do?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current regulations. It is a needed introduction to a part that covers 
subjects as diverse as (a) hunting and fishing license revenue, and (b) 
financial assistance under the three grant programs and four 
subprograms authorized by the Acts.
Section 80.2 What terms do I need to know?
    This proposed section defines the following terms that are not in 
the corresponding ``Definitions'' section of the current Sec.  80.1: 
Agency, angler, capital improvement, comprehensive management system 
grant, construction, diversion, grant, grantee, match, project-by-
project grant, real property, sport fish, subaccount, useful life, and 
wildlife. We defined ``agency'' as the State fish and wildlife agency. 
We used this shorter form in headings and in most places in the text to 
make the

[[Page 32879]]

headings and text easier to read. However, not all readers will consult 
the definitions in Sec.  80.2 before reading the sections that are of 
interest to them. To avoid any misunderstanding, we used the longer 
``State fish and wildlife agency'' at the first opportunity in the text 
of each section and in places where clarity on this issue was 
especially important.
    We defined ``construction'' to include land acquisition and the 
clearing and reshaping of land as types or phases of construction. This 
is consistent with OMB Circular A-102, Grants and Cooperative 
Agreements with State and Local Governments, which treats land 
acquisition and development as construction for purposes of grantees' 
submitting an assurance statement at the time of application.
    We limited the definition of ``wildlife'' to birds and mammals, 
which have been the focus of this program since passage of the Pittman-
Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act in 1937. The Act was amended in 2000 
to include the Wildlife Conservation and Restoration program and 
accommodated this program by defining ``wildlife'' more broadly as 
``any species of wild free-ranging fauna including fish.'' The more 
limited definition in the proposed section is a common element in all 
State definitions of ``wildlife.'' We add this more restrictive 
definition to 50 CFR 80 to clarify that the broader definition in the 
Act addresses the full scope of the Wildlife Conservation and 
Restoration program.
    The proposed section deletes ``common horsepower'' because the term 
occurs only in the current Sec.  80.24, ``Recreational boating access 
facilities.'' The proposed Sec.  80.51(b)(1), which would replace the 
current Sec.  80.24, in part, uses the definition of ``common 
horsepower'' instead of the term.
    The proposed Sec.  80.2 also deletes ``resident angler'' because it 
occurs only in the proposed Sec.  80.66, so we defined the term in that 
proposed section. We deleted ``Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 
Program funds'' from the proposed Sec.  80.2 because the proposed rule 
does not use the term.

Subpart B--State Fish and Wildlife Agency Eligibility

Section 80.10 Who is eligible to receive the benefits of the Acts?
    This proposed section restates the current Sec.  80.2, 
``Eligibility,'' and Sec.  80.3, ``Assent legislation.''
Section 80.11 How does a State become ineligible to receive the 
benefits of the Acts?
    This proposed section restates, in part, the current Sec.  80.4, 
``Diversion of license fees.'' It is consistent with the remedies for 
noncompliance at 43 CFR 12.83, ``Enforcement.''
Section 80.12 Does an agency have to confirm that it wants to receive 
an annual apportionment of funds?
    This proposed section restates the current Sec.  80.9, ``Notice of 
desire to participate.'' This requirement is based on a provision of 
the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act. The proposed section 
would no longer require States to notify the Service within 60 days of 
receiving a certificate of apportionment that it wants to participate 
in the benefits of the Acts. It would require a 60-day notice only in 
the unlikely event that the State does not want to receive the annual 
apportionment of funds.

Subpart C--License Revenue

Section 80.20 What does revenue from hunting and fishing licenses 
include?
    This proposed section clarifies that license revenue includes fees 
for access to (a) property acquired or constructed with license 
revenue, or (b) a recreational opportunity, product, or commodity 
derived from property acquired, managed, maintained, or produced with 
license revenue. The proposed section includes animal products among 
the examples of personal property. This would correct the listing of 
animal products among examples of real property in the current Sec.  
80.4, ``Diversion of license fees.'' We clarify that only mineral 
rights and standing timber are real property, but become personal 
property when the owner extracts the minerals or harvests the timber. 
The clarification on timber is based on a Dec. 5, 2000, Solicitor's 
Opinion on Federal Aid Timber Sales. We also clarify in the proposed 
section that State property acquired or produced with license revenue 
could include intellectual property such as patents and copyrights.
Section 80.21 What if a State diverts license revenue from the control 
of its fish and wildlife agency?
    This proposed section restates the opening sentence of the current 
Sec.  80.4, ``Diversion of license fees,'' and the current Sec.  
80.4(c) and (d).
Section 80.22 What must a State do to resolve a declaration of 
diversion?
    This proposed section corresponds to and expands on the current 
Sec.  80.4(a)(3), ``Diversion of license fees,'' and Sec.  80.4(d). The 
proposed section mentions for the first time that an agency may receive 
the market rental rate of the diverted property during the period of 
diversion as an alternative to the actual income earned.
Section 80.23 Does a declaration of diversion affect a previous Federal 
obligation of funds?
    This proposed section restates the current Sec.  80.4(e) 
``Diversion of license fees.''

Subpart D--License Certification

Section 80.30 Why must an agency certify the number of paid license 
holders?
    This proposed section restates and expands part of the first 
sentence of the current Sec.  80.10(a), ``State certification of 
licenses.''
Section 80.31 How does an agency certify the number of paid license 
holders?
    This proposed section restates the current Sec.  80.10(a)(3), 
``State certification of licenses,'' and expands on the current Sec.  
80.10(c). The proposed section would require for the first time that if 
a State uses statistical sampling to eliminate multiple counting of 
single individuals in the annual certification of the number of people 
who hold paid licenses, it must sample: (a) Every 5 years, or (b) when 
the State changes the structure of its licensing system in a way that 
could affect the number of people who hold paid licenses, whichever 
comes first.
Section 80.32 What is the certification period?
    This proposed section restates the current Sec.  80.10(a)(1) and 
(2), ``State certification of licenses.''
Section 80.33 How does an agency decide who to count as paid license 
holders in the annual certification?
    This proposed section restates the current Sec.  80.10(b)(1)-(6), 
``State certification of licenses,'' but we made several significant 
changes. We state clearly in the proposed Sec.  80.33(a)(1) that an 
agency must count a person who has a paid license to hunt or fish even 
if that person is not required to have a paid license or is unable to 
hunt or fish. This reflects the view that any paid license holder meets 
the requirements of the Acts and that license fees support the State 
fish and wildlife agency even if the license holder does not engage in 
the activity. We added a requirement at the proposed Sec.  80.33(a) 
that the State fish and wildlife agency may count a person who has a 
paid license only if

[[Page 32880]]

the issue of the license in the license holder's name is verifiable in 
State records.
    In the proposed Sec.  80.33(a)(4) and (b), we replaced ``State'' in 
the current Sec.  80.10(b)(2) with ``State fish and wildlife agency.'' 
This would allow a State to use general-revenue funds to offset lost 
revenues from hunting and fishing licenses issued free of charge to 
veterans and other categories of license holders. The State could then 
count the individuals holding these licenses as paid license holders 
for annual certification purposes under certain conditions. We propose 
this change based on a recommendation of a joint task force of Federal 
and State officials.
    In the proposed Sec.  80.33(a)(4), we changed the ``period in which 
the license was purchased,'' which is the language of the current Sec.  
80.10(b)(3), to ``period in which the license first becomes valid.'' 
This change would more accurately reflect the actual participation in a 
hunting or fishing season by counting those who buy a license before 
the opening of a season.
    The current Sec.  80.10(b)(4)(i), reads ``The net revenue from the 
[multiyear] license is in close approximation with the number of years 
in which the license is legal.'' We changed this in the proposed 
section at Sec.  80.33(b) to read, ``The State fish and wildlife agency 
must receive net revenue from the multiyear license of at least $1 for 
each year in which the license is valid.'' This change applies the same 
net revenue standard to multiyear licenses as applies to single-year 
licenses. We propose this change based on a recommendation of a joint 
task force of Federal and State officials.
    We changed ``legal'' to ``valid'' in Sec.  80.33(b) for the sake of 
consistency with Sec.  80.33(a)(4). We added life-expectancy tables and 
mortality tables as potential techniques to determine if a lifetime-
license holder remains a license holder in the proposed Sec.  
80.33(b)(2), which corresponds to the current Sec.  80.10(b)(4)(ii).
Section 80.34 May an agency count license holders in the annual 
certification if the agency receives funds from the State to cover 
their license fees?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current 50 CFR 80. It establishes the conditions under which the State 
fish and wildlife agency may count a license holder if the State uses 
general-revenue funds to offset lost revenues from hunting and fishing 
licenses issued free of charge to veterans or another category of 
license holder. This proposed section is linked to language in the 
proposed Sec.  80.33(a)(4) and (b), which we discuss above.
Section 80.35 How does an agency calculate net revenue from a license?
    This proposed section restates and expands on the current Sec.  
80.10(b)(2), ``State certification of licenses,'' by adding examples of 
the costs of issuing licenses to include automated license-system costs 
and licensing-unit personnel costs.
Section 80.36 What must an agency do if it becomes aware of errors in 
its data?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current regulations, but the current Sec.  80.10(d), ``State 
certification of licenses,'' indirectly acknowledges the possibility 
that an agency may submit incorrect certified data. This proposed 
section establishes a 90-day window for the State fish and wildlife 
agency to submit revised certified data after it becomes aware of 
errors in its data.
Section 80.37 May the Service recalculate an apportionment if an agency 
submits revised data?
    This proposed section restates and expands on the current Sec.  
80.10(d), ``State certification of licenses.'' It explicitly states 
that the Service may recalculate an apportionment if it receives 
revised certified data on license holders before the Director approves 
the final apportionment.
Section 80.38 May the Director correct a Service error in apportioning 
funds?
    This proposed section restates the last sentence of the current 
Sec.  80.10(d), ``State certification of licenses.''

Subpart E--Eligible Activities

Section 80.50 What activities are eligible for funding under the 
Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act?
Section 80.51 What activities are eligible for funding under the 
Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act?
    These proposed sections restate and expand on the current Sec.  
80.5, ``Eligible undertakings,'' Sec.  80.15(f)(1), ``Allowable 
costs,'' and Sec.  80.24, ``Recreational boating access facilities.'' 
They list comprehensively the eligible activities for each program and 
subprogram and use standard terms and parallel construction to describe 
these activities in greater detail. In part, the proposed Sec.  80.51 
responds to several recommendations that we received on the proposed 
rule to amend 50 CFR 80 that was published in the Federal Register at 
73 FR 24523 on May 5, 2008. These recommendations stated that we should 
explicitly list outreach and communications and aquatic resource 
education as eligible activities. The proposed Sec.  80.51 does not 
include the following language of the current Sec.  80.5(b)(2): 
``Additional funds resulting from expansion of the Sport Fish 
Restoration Program must be added to existing State fishery program 
funds available from traditional sources and not as a substitute 
therefor.'' This language became part of the regulations after 
enactment of a significant expansion of the sources of funding for the 
Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act about 25 years ago. We did 
not include it in the proposed rule because of its weak legislative 
authority and the difficulty of enforcing it.
Section 80.52 What activities are ineligible for funding?
    The proposed Sec.  80.52(a) and (b) restate and broaden the scope 
of two ineligible activities in the current Sec.  80.6, ``Prohibited 
activities.'' The proposed Sec.  80.52(c), ``Activities conducted for 
the primary purpose of producing income,'' restates a similar 
prohibition at the current Sec.  80.14(c), ``Application of Wildlife 
and Sport Fish Restoration Program funds.'' The newly proposed 
ineligible activity at Sec.  80.52(d) reads ``activities, projects, or 
programs that promote or encourage opposition to regulated taking of 
fish, hunting, or the trapping of wildlife.'' This language is based on 
the intent of the drafters of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 
Programs Improvement Act of 2000, which amended the Pittman-Robertson 
Wildlife Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration 
Act. The Improvement Act applied similar language to the Multistate 
Conservation Grant program.
Section 80.53 Are administrative costs for State central services 
eligible expenses?
    This proposed section closely follows the language of the current 
Sec.  80.15(e), ``Allowable costs,'' but it does not include the 
unnecessary last sentence, which reads, ``Each State has a State Wide 
Cost Allocation Plan that describes approved allocations of indirect 
costs to agencies and programs within the State.''
Section 80.54 May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a 
larger project?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current regulations. It states conditions under which a grant may carry 
out part of a larger project. These conditions are based on advice from 
the Department of

[[Page 32881]]

the Interior's Office of the Solicitor. It is also consistent with the 
Department of the Interior Manual, 505 DM 2.18, ``Procurement 
Contracts, Grants, and Cooperative Agreements,'' issued Jan. 9, 2008.
Section 80.55 How does a proposed project qualify as substantial in 
character and design?
    This proposed section corresponds to the current Sec.  80.13, 
``Substantiality in character and design.'' The proposed section 
applies to both projects and comprehensive management systems as a 
result of the definition of ``project'' in the proposed Sec.  80.2.

Subpart F--Allocation of Funds by an Agency

Section 80.60 What is the relationship between the Basic Hunter 
Education and Safety subprogram and the Enhanced Hunter Education and 
Safety program?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current regulations. It clarifies for the first time in regulation the 
complex relationship between the Basic Hunter Education and Safety 
subprogram and the Enhanced Hunter Education and Safety subprogram, 
which was authorized by the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 
Programs Improvement Act of 2000.
Section 80.61 What requirements apply to funds for the Recreational 
Boating Access subprogram?
    This proposed section corresponds, in part, with the current Sec.  
80.24, ``Recreational boating access facilities.'' The proposed Sec.  
80.61(b) requires that Regional allocations average 15 percent over a 
5-year period. Although this provision is not in the current Sec.  
80.24, the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act requires it. The 
proposed Sec.  80.61 also introduces a new requirement to ensure that 
Regional Offices will have information in time to ensure that the 
Regional allocation will average 15 percent over a 5-year period. It 
reads: ``A State must apply to use these allocated funds by the end of 
the fourth consecutive Federal fiscal year after the Federal fiscal 
year in which the funds first became available for allocation.'' The 
current Sec.  80.24 states, ``Any portion of a State's 15-percent set 
aside for the above purposes that remain unexpended or unobligated 
after 5 years must revert to the Service for apportionment among the 
States.'' The proposed Sec.  80.61(g) does not refer to an expenditure 
of grant funds as does the current Sec.  80.24. It is unnecessary to 
include such a reference because: (a) a Federal obligation must precede 
an agency's expenditure, or (b) the agency's expenditure may be the 
last step in completing a Federal obligation, thus occurring 
simultaneously with the obligation.
Section 80.62 What limitations apply to spending on the Aquatic 
Resource Education and Outreach and Communications subprograms?
    This proposed section corresponds in part to the current Sec.  
80.15(f), ``Allowable Costs.'' The proposed section corrects the 
current section's incorrect reference to the two subprograms as a 
single ``program.''
Section 80.63 Does an agency have to allocate costs in multipurpose 
projects and facilities?
Section 80.64 How does an agency allocate costs in multipurpose 
projects and facilities?
    The proposed Sec.  80.63 and Sec.  80.64 correspond to the current 
Sec.  80.15(d), ``Allowable costs.'' We added the following language in 
Sec.  80.64, ``The agency must describe the method used to allocate 
costs in multipurpose projects or facilities in the project statement 
included in the grant application.''
Section 80.65 Does an agency have to allocate funds between marine and 
freshwater fisheries projects?
    This proposed section corresponds, in part, to the current Sec.  
80.23, ``Allocation of funds between marine and freshwater fishery 
projects.'' The proposed section includes the new language, ``The 
subprograms authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration 
Act do not have to allocate funding in the same manner as long as the 
State fish and wildlife agency equitably allocates Dingell-Johnson 
Sport Fish Restoration funds as a whole between marine and freshwater 
fisheries.''
Section 80.66 What requirements apply to the allocation of funds 
between marine and freshwater fisheries projects?
    This proposed section corresponds, in part, to the current Sec.  
80.23, ``Allocation of funds between marine and freshwater fishery 
projects.'' The proposed section defines a resident angler as ``one who 
fishes for recreational purposes in the same State where he or she 
maintains legal residence.'' The current regulations include this term 
in the Definitions section, but the definition leaves out ``for 
recreational purposes.'' The proposed section adds the following: ``(c) 
* * * Agencies must use the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and 
Wildlife-associated Recreation or another statistically reliable survey 
or technique approved by the Director for this purpose. (d) If a State 
uses statistical sampling, it must sample at the earlier of the 
following: (1) Five years after the last statistical sample, or (2) The 
first certification period affected by any change in the licensing 
system that could affect the number of people who hold a paid license 
to fish.'' We did not include in the proposed Sec.  80.66 this language 
from the current Sec.  80.23 because it is unnecessary, ``Ongoing 
marine project costs can be applied toward the State's saltwater 
allocation.''
Section 80.67 May an agency finance an activity from more than one 
annual apportionment?
Section 80.68 What requirements apply to financing an activity from 
more than one annual apportionment?
    The proposed Sec.  80.67 and Sec.  80.68 correspond to the current 
Sec.  80.25, ``Multiyear financing under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish 
Restoration program,'' but the proposed sections broaden the 
authorization of multiyear financing. They also extend the multiyear-
financing option to projects under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife 
Restoration Act. The proposed Sec.  80.68(c) changes the current Sec.  
80.25 by allowing interest and other financing costs subject to 
restrictions in the Federal Cost Principles.

Subpart G--Application for a Grant

Section 80.80 How does an agency apply for a grant?
Section 80.81 What must an agency submit when applying for a 
comprehensive management system grant?
Section 80.82 What must an agency submit when applying for a project-
by-project grant?
    These proposed sections correspond to the current and less 
comprehensive Sec.  80.11, ``Submission of proposals.'' The proposed 
sections include detailed information on the information that grantees 
must include in the application packages for comprehensive management 
system grants and project-by-project grants. This information is based 
on information in: (a) Service Manual Chapter 522 FW 4, ``Comprehensive 
Management System Grant;'' (b) OMB Circular A-102, Grants and 
Cooperative Agreements with State and Local Governments, Section 
(c)(5); (c) the current 50 CFR 80.25(b)(3) on multiyear financing; and 
(d) Service Manual chapter 522 FW 19, ``Program Income from Federal 
Assistance Grants.''

[[Page 32882]]

Section 80.83 What is the Federal share of allowable costs?
    This proposed section corresponds, in part, to the current Sec.  
80.12, ``Cost sharing.'' It changes the current regulations by 
authorizing the Regional Director to waive the 10-percent minimum 
Federal share of allowable costs if an agency requests a waiver and 
provides compelling reasons to justify it.
Section 80.84 How does the Service establish the non-Federal share of 
allowable costs?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current 50 CFR 80. It is based on the requirements of the Acts and 48 
U.S.C. 1469a.
Section 80.85 What requirements apply to match?
    The proposed Sec. Sec.  80.85(a) and (b)(1) correspond in part to 
the current Sec.  80.12, ``Cost sharing.'' The proposed Sec.  
80.85(b)(2) is new, but it is consistent with the Federal Cost 
Principles. The proposed Sec.  80.85(c) is based upon Service policy 
issued in Service Manual chapter 522 FW 17, which in turn is based on a 
2005 recommendation of a joint task force of Federal and State 
officials.

Subpart H--General Grant Administration

Section 80.90 What are the responsibilities of an agency?
    This proposed section corresponds to and closely follows the 
language of the current Sec.  80.18, ``Responsibilities.''
Section 80.91 What is a Federal obligation of funds and how does it 
occur?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current regulations. We proposed this section for the following 
reasons:
    (a) The nature of a Federal obligation is not defined in any 
regulations or policies of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 
program;
    (b) Both State and Federal employees have at times expressed 
different understandings of what a Federal obligation is.
    (c) Some of the confusion is due to a parallel and related process, 
in which grantees obligate funds available to them under a grant. These 
``grantee obligations'' are discussed at 43 CFR 12.43 and 43 CFR 12.902 
in the definitions of ``obligations,'' ``unliquidated obligations,'' 
and ``unobligated balance.'' We do not define or discuss grantee 
obligations.
    (d) We use the term ``obligation'' or ``obligate'' in the proposed 
Sec.  80.60, Sec.  80.61, and Sec.  80.92.
Section 80.92 How long are funds available for a Federal obligation?
    This proposed section restates and corrects the current Sec.  80.8, 
``Availability of funds,'' which does not take into account the 1-year 
availability of funds under the Enhanced Hunter Education and Safety 
program or the 5-year availability of funds in the Recreational Boating 
Access subprogram.
Section 80.93 When may an agency incur costs under a grant?
    This proposed section corresponds, in part, to the current Sec.  
80.15(c), ``Allowable costs.'' It leads to the subject of preagreement 
costs in the proposed Sec.  80.94.
Section 80.94 May an agency incur costs before the effective date of 
the grant period?
    This proposed section corresponds, in part, to the current Sec.  
80.15(c), ``Allowable costs,'' but describes the conditions under which 
the State fish and wildlife agency may incur preagreement costs. The 
proposed section is based on: (a) Service Manual Chapter 522 FW 16, 
``Preagreement Costs,'' which is based on a 2004 recommendation of a 
joint task force of Federal and State officials, and (b) the Federal 
Cost Principles in OMB Circular A-87. The proposed section goes beyond 
522 FW 16 by allowing the completion of a proposed project before the 
grant's effective date as long as the grantee meets certain conditions.
Section 80.95 How does an agency receive Federal grant funds?
    This proposed section corresponds to and expands on the current 
Sec.  80.16, ``Payments.'' It states that under certain circumstances a 
grantee may receive an advance of funds. An advance of funds is 
authorized in 43 CFR 12.61, and the Acts do not prohibit it. The 
current Sec.  80.16 also limits the means of requesting payment. The 
proposed section recognizes the nearly universal use of electronic 
payments by stating that State fish and wildlife agencies may request 
funds on a standard form only if it cannot use the electronic payment 
system.
Section 80.96 May an agency request funds in excess of the Federal 
share?
    This proposed section expands on the current Sec.  80.16, 
``Payments,'' by clarifying that the grantee may request Federal grant 
funds for construction work in excess of the proportional Federal share 
of the project taking into account all previous advances and 
reimbursements for the project. This proposed practice is consistent 
with the Acts.
Section 80.97 May an agency barter goods or services to carry out a 
grant-funded project?
Section 80.98 How must an agency report barter transactions?
    The proposed Sec.  80.97 and Sec.  80.98 do not have corresponding 
sections in the current regulations. We added them because of audit 
findings in several States. The Office of the Inspector General also 
recommended that the Service address inconsistencies in Service Manual 
Chapter 522 FW 19 on program income and provide clear guidance on 
reporting barter transactions.
Section 80.99 Are symbols available to identify projects?
Section 80.100 Do agencies have to display the symbols in this part on 
completed projects?
    The proposed Sec.  80.99 and Sec.  80.100 correspond to and closely 
follow the language of the current Sec.  80.26, ``Symbols.'' The only 
significant change is in the proposed Sec.  80.100, which allows 
Regional Directors to authorize certain uses of the symbols instead of 
or in addition to the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Subpart 1--Program Income

    The proposed Sec. Sec.  80.120 through 80.126 explain: (a) What 
program income is, (b) the conditions under which an agency may earn 
it, (c) how to calculate it, and (d) how to apply it to Federal and 
non-Federal outlays. Only the proposed Sec.  80.121, ``May an agency 
earn program income?'', has a corresponding section at the current 
Sec.  80.14(c), ``Application of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 
Program funds.'' The remaining sections in subpart I are based on 
Service Manual chapter 522 FW 19, ``Program Income from Federal 
Assistance Grants.'' This chapter incorporates recommendations of a 
joint task force of Federal and State officials in 2004 and 2007.

Subpart J--Real Property

Section 80.130 Does an agency have to hold title to real property 
acquired under a grant?
Section 80.131 Does an agency have to hold an easement acquired under a 
grant?
    The proposed Sec.  80.130 and Sec.  80.131 do not have 
corresponding sections in

[[Page 32883]]

the current regulations. The Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act 
states: ``Title to any real or personal property acquired by any State, 
and to improvements placed on State-owned lands through the use of 
funds paid to the State under the provisions of this Act, shall be 
vested in such State.'' The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act 
does not have a similar requirement. The Act uses the term ``title,'' 
which applies to ownership or possessory interests, but not to 
easements or other nonownership or nonpossessory interests. The 
proposed section Sec.  80.130 would require grantees under either Act 
to hold title to the ownership interest in real property acquired under 
a grant. The proposed Sec.  80.130 would prohibit the State fish and 
wildlife agency from holding title to an undivided ownership interest 
in the real property concurrently with a subgrantee or any other 
entity. The proposed Sec.  80.131 would require grantees under both 
Acts to hold easements acquired under a grant, but the proposed section 
would allow the grantee to share certain rights and responsibilities 
with another State agency or a subgrantee. The proposed Sec.  80.130 
and Sec.  80.131 are based on input received from State agencies and a 
joint task force of Federal and State officials.
Section 80.132 Does an agency have to control the land or water where 
it completes capital improvements?
    This proposed section requires the grantee to control lands or 
waters on which it makes capital improvements with funds apportioned 
under the Acts. The proposed section corresponds to and closely follows 
the language of the current Sec.  80.20, ``Land control.'' This 
language is only in the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act, but 
the current regulations apply the requirement to funding under both 
Acts. The proposed section continues to apply it to funding under both 
Acts in the interest of having standard requirements for all funding 
under the Acts to the extent legally possible.
Section 80.133 Does an agency have to maintain acquired or completed 
capital improvements?
    This proposed section corresponds to and is consistent with the 
language of the current Sec.  80.17, ``Maintenance.''
Section 80.134 How must an agency use real property?
    This proposed section is consistent with the language of the 
current Sec.  80.14(b), ``Application of Wildlife and Sport Fish 
Restoration Program funds,'' the current Sec.  80.20, ``Land control,'' 
and Service Manual chapters 522 FW 18, ``Useful Life,'' 522 FW 21, 
``Allowable Recreational Activities and Related Facilities on Federal 
Assistance Lands,'' and 522 FW 22, ``Allowable Commercial Activities 
and Related Facilities on Federal Assistance Lands.'' These Service 
Manual chapters were based on recommendations of a joint task force of 
Federal and State officials.
Section 80.135 What if an agency allows a use of real property that 
interferes with the authorized purpose?
    This proposed section corresponds to and closely follows the 
language of the current Sec.  80.14(b), ``Application of Wildlife and 
Sport Fish Restoration Program funds.'' It is also consistent with 
Service Manual Chapter 522 FW 20, ``Loss of Control and Disposal of 
Real Property.'' This chapter is based on the recommendation of a joint 
task force of Federal and State officials.
Section 80.136 When is a use of real property that interferes with the 
authorized purpose considered a diversion?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current regulations, but it is based on the requirements of the current 
Sec.  80.4, ``Diversion of license fees.''
Section 80.137 What if real property is no longer useful or needed for 
its original purpose?
    This proposed section corresponds, in part, to the current Sec.  
80.14(b)(3), ``Application of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 
Program funds.'' One new element is that the director of an agency may 
propose another eligible purpose for real property no longer useful or 
needed for its original purpose. The director of the State fish and 
wildlife agency must ask the Service Regional Director to approve the 
proposed purpose. This section is based on a recommendation of a joint 
task force of Federal and State officials. It also follows, in large 
part, Service Manual chapter 522 FW 20, Loss of Control and Disposal of 
Real Property, which is based on a recommendation of a joint task force 
of Federal and State officials.

Subpart K--Amendments and Appeals

Section 80.150 How does an agency ask for an amendment of a grant?
    This proposed section does not have a corresponding section in the 
current regulations, but it is consistent with the current Sec.  80.11, 
``Submission of proposals,'' and Office of Management and Budget 
Circular A-102, Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local 
Governments, Paragraph 1.c.(5)(e). It is also consistent with 43 CFR 
12.70.
Section 80.151 May an agency appeal a decision?
    This proposed section corresponds to the current Sec.  80.7, 
``Appeals,'' but expands it by providing timelines for appeals. It also 
specifies that appeals to the Secretary are governed by 43 CFR 4, 
subpart G.

Subpart L--Information Collection

Section 80.160 What are the information-collection requirements of this 
part?
    This proposed section corresponds to and expands on the current 
Sec.  80.27, ``Information collection requirements.'' The proposed 
section lists all information collection requirements in the proposed 
rule that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Office of 
Management and Budget has approved all of these information collections 
and assigned them control numbers.

Public Comments

    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not 
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in 
the ADDRESSES section. Finally, we will not consider hand-delivered 
comments that we do not receive, or mailed comments that are not 
postmarked, by the date specified in the DATES section.
    Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

Required Determinations

Clarity of This Regulation

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
    (a) Be logically organized;
    (b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one

[[Page 32884]]

of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To better help us 
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For 
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs 
that you find unclear, which sections or sentences are too long, the 
sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866)

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this 
rule is not significant and has not reviewed this rule under E.O. 
12866. OMB bases its determination on 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.)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires an agency to consider the 
impact of proposed rules on small entities, i.e., small businesses, 
small organizations, and small government jurisdictions. If there is a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, 
the agency must perform a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. This is not 
required if the head of an agency certifies the rule would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) amended 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to state the 
factual basis for certifying that a rule would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    We have examined this proposed rule's potential effects on small 
entities as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We have 
determined that the proposed changes do not have a significant impact 
and do not require a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis because the 
changes:
    a. Give information to State fish and wildlife agencies that allows 
them to apply for and administer grants more easily, more efficiently, 
and with greater flexibility. Only State fish and wildlife agencies may 
receive grants in the three programs affected by this regulation, but 
small entities sometimes voluntarily become subgrantees of agencies. 
Any impact on these subgrantees would be beneficial.
    b. Address changes in law and regulation. This helps grant 
applicants and recipients by making the regulation consistent with 
current standards. Any impact on small entities that voluntarily become 
subgrantees of agencies would be beneficial.
    c. Change three provisions on license certification adopted in a 
final rule published on July 24, 2008, based on subsequent experience. 
These changes would impact only agencies and not small entities.
    d. Clarify additional issues in the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife 
Restoration Act and Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act. This 
would help agencies comply with statutory requirements and increase 
awareness of alternatives available under the law. Any impact on small 
entities that voluntarily become subgrantees of agencies would be 
beneficial.
    e. Clarify that (1) cooperative farming or grazing arrangements and 
(2) sales receipts retained by concessionaires or contractors are not 
program income. This clarification allows States to expand projects 
with small businesses and farmers without making these cooperative 
arrangements or sales receipts subject to program income restrictions. 
This clarification would be potentially beneficial to the small 
entities that voluntarily become cooperative farmers, cooperative 
ranchers, and concessionaires.
    f. Add information that allows States to enter into agreements with 
nonprofit organizations to share rights or responsibilities for 
easements acquired under grants for the mutual benefit of both parties. 
This addition would benefit the small entities that enter into these 
agreements voluntarily.
    g. Reword and reorganize the regulation to make it easier to 
understand. Any impact on the small entities that voluntarily become 
subgrantees of agencies would be beneficial.
    The Service has determined that the changes primarily impact State 
governments. The small entities affected by the changes are primarily 
concessionaires, cooperative farmers, cooperative ranchers, and 
subgrantees who voluntarily enter into mutually beneficial 
relationships with an agency. The impact on small entities would be 
very limited and beneficial in all cases.
    Consequently, we certify that because this proposed rule would not 
have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required.
    In addition, this proposed rule is not a major rule under SBREFA (5 
U.S.C. 804(2)) and would not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because it does not:
    a. Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.
    b. Cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers; 
individual industries; Federal, State, or local government agencies; or 
geographic regions.
    c. Have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, 
investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based 
enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 USC Ch.25; Pub. L. 104-
4) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects 
of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and 
the private sector. The Act requires each Federal agency, to the extent 
permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment of the effects of a 
proposed rule with Federal mandates that may result in the expenditure 
by State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the 
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for 
inflation) in any one year. We have determined the following under the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.):
    a. As discussed in the determination for the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic effect on 
a substantial number of small entities.
    b. The regulation does not require a small government agency plan 
or any other requirement for expenditure of local funds.
    c. The programs governed by the current regulations and enhanced by 
the proposed changes potentially assist small governments financially 
when they occasionally and voluntarily participate as subgrantees of an 
agency.
    d. The proposed rule clarifies and enhances the current regulations 
allowing State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector 
to receive the benefits of grant funding in a more flexible, efficient, 
and effective manner. They may receive these benefits as a subgrantee 
of a State fish and wildlife agency, a cooperating farmer or rancher, a 
concessionaire, a

[[Page 32885]]

concurrent holder of a grant-acquired easement, or a holder of 
enforcement rights under an easement.
    e. Any costs incurred by a State, local, and tribal government, or 
the private sector are voluntary. There are no mandated costs 
associated with the proposed rule.
    f. The benefits of grant funding outweigh the costs. The Federal 
Government provides up to 75 percent of the cost of each grant to the 
50 States in the three programs affected by the proposed rule. The 
Federal Government may also provide up to 100 percent of the cost of 
each grant to the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana 
Islands, the District of Columbia, and the territories of Guam, the 
U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. All 50 States and other 
eligible jurisdictions voluntarily apply for grants in these programs 
each year. This rate of participation is clear evidence that the 
benefits of grant funding outweigh the costs.
    g. This proposed rule would 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.

Takings

    This proposed rule would not have significant takings implications 
under E.O. 12630 because it would not have a provision for taking 
private property. Therefore, a takings implication assessment is not 
required.

Federalism

    This proposed rule would not have sufficient Federalism effects to 
warrant preparation of a Federalism assessment under E.O. 13132. It 
would not interfere with the States' ability to manage themselves or 
their funds. We work closely with the States in administration of these 
programs, and they helped us identify those sections of the current 
regulations in need of change and new issues in need of clarification 
through regulation. In drafting the proposed rule, we received comments 
from committees of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and 
from the Joint Federal/State Task Force on Federal Assistance Policy. 
The Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the President of 
the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies jointly chartered the 
Joint Federal/State Task Force on Federal Assistance Policy in 2002 to 
identify issues of national concern in the three grant programs 
affected by the proposed rule.

Civil Justice Reform

    The Office of the Solicitor has determined under E.O. 12988 that 
the rule would not unduly burden the judicial system and meets the 
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. The proposed 
rule will benefit grantees because it:
    (a) Updates the regulations to reflect changes in policy and 
practice during the past 25 years;
    (b) Makes the regulations easier to use and understand by improving 
the organization and using plain language;
    (c) Modifies three provisions in the final rule to amend 50 CFR 80 
published in the Federal Register at 73 FR 43120 on July 24, 2008, 
based on subsequent experience; and
    (d) Adopts two recommendations on new issues received from State 
fish and wildlife agencies in response to the proposed rule to amend 50 
CFR 80 published in the Federal Register at 73 FR 24523 on May 5, 2008.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    We examined the proposed rule under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). We may not collect or sponsor and you are not 
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
current OMB control number. The proposed 50 CFR 80.160 describes seven 
information collections in the proposed rule. All of these collections 
request information from State fish and wildlife agencies, and all have 
current OMB control numbers.
    OMB authorized and approved Governmentwide standard forms for three 
of the seven information collections. These three information 
collections are for the purposes of: (a) Application for a grant; (b) 
certifications related to authority, capability, and legal compliance; 
and (c) reporting on the use of Federal funds, match, and program 
income.
    OMB approved three other information collections in the proposed 
rule under control number 1018-0109, but has not approved 
Governmentwide standard forms for these collections. The purposes of 
these information collections are to provide the Service with: (a) A 
project statement in support of a grant application, (b) a report on 
progress in completing a grant-funded project, and (c) a request to 
approve an update or another change in information provided in a 
previously approved application. OMB authorized these information 
collections in its Circular A-102.
    The Acts and the current 50 CFR 80.10 authorize the seventh 
information collection. This collection allows the Service to learn the 
number of people who have a paid license to hunt and the number of 
people who have a paid license to fish in each State during a State-
specified certification year. The Service uses this information in 
statutory formulas to apportion funds in the Wildlife Restoration and 
Sport Fish Restoration programs among the States. OMB approved this 
information collection on forms FWS 3-154a and 3-154b under control 
number 1018-0007. The proposed rule does not change the information 
required on forms FWS 3-154a and 3-154b. It merely establishes a common 
approach for States to assign license holders to a certification year.

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have analyzed this rule under the National Environmental Policy 
Act, 42 U.S.C. 432-437(f) and part 516 of the Departmental Manual. This 
rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting 
the quality of the human environment. An environmental impact 
statement/assessment is not required due to the categorical exclusion 
for administrative changes provided at 516 DM 2, Appendix 1, section 
1.10.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    We have evaluated potential effects on federally recognized Indian 
tribes under the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, and 512 DM 2. We have 
determined that there are no potential effects. This proposed rule 
would not interfere with the tribes' ability to manage themselves or 
their funds.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (E.O. 13211)

    E.O. 13211 addresses regulations that significantly affect energy 
supply, distribution, and use and requires agencies to prepare 
Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. This 
rule is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866 and would 
not affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this 
action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of Energy 
Effects is required.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 80

    Education, Fish, Fishing, Grants administration, Grant programs, 
Hunting, Natural resources, Real property acquisition, Recreation and 
recreation areas, Signs and symbols, Wildlife.

[[Page 32886]]

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, we propose to amend 
title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, chapter I, subchapter F, 
by revising part 80 to read as follows:

PART 80--ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE 
RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS

Subpart A--General
Sec.
80.1 What does this part do?
80.2 What terms do I need to know?
Subpart B--State Fish and Wildlife Agency Eligibility
80.10 Who is eligible to receive the benefits of the Acts?
80.11 How does a State become ineligible to receive the benefits of 
the Acts?
80.12 Does an agency have to confirm that it wants to receive an 
annual apportionment of funds?
Subpart C--License Revenue
80.20 What does revenue from hunting and fishing licenses include?
80.21 What if a State diverts license revenue from the control of 
its fish and wildlife agency?
80.22 What must a State do to resolve a declaration of diversion?
80.23 Does a declaration of diversion affect a previous Federal 
obligation of funds?
Subpart D--Licensee Certification
80.30 Why must an agency certify the number of paid license holders?
80.31 How does an agency certify the number of paid license holders?
80.32 What is the certification period?
80.33 How does an agency decide who to count as paid license holders 
in the annual certification?
80.34 May an agency count license holders in the annual 
certification if the agency receives funds from the State to cover 
their license fees?
80.35 How does an agency calculate net revenue from a license?
80.36 What must an agency do if it discovers errors in its data?
80.37 May the Service recalculate an apportionment if an agency 
submits revised data?
80.38 May the Director correct