Migratory Bird Permits; Delegating Falconry Permitting Authority to 17 States, 72830-72833 [2013-28709]

Download as PDF 72830 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (e) Amendments to study plans. Test sponsors must submit all amendments by the method specified in § 790.5(b). ■ 38. In § 790.55, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 790.55 Modification of test standards or schedules during conduct of test. (a) Application. Any test sponsor who wishes to modify the test schedule for the mandatory testing conditions or requirements (i.e., ‘‘shall statements’’) in the test standard for any test required by a test rule must submit an application in accordance with this paragraph. Application for modification must be made by the method specified in § 790.5(b). Applications must include an appropriate explanation and rationale for the modification. Where a test sponsor requests EPA to provide guidance or to clarify a non-mandatory testing requirement (i.e., ‘‘should statements’’) in a test standard, the test sponsor must submit these requests to EPA by the method format specified in § 790.5(b). * * * * * ■ 39. In § 790.62, revise paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows: § 790.62 Submission of study plans and conduct of testing. * * * * * (c) * * * (4) The test sponsor shall submit any amendments to study plans to EPA using the method specified in § 790.5(b). * * * * * ■ 40. In § 790.68, revise paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows: § 790.68 Modification of consent agreements. wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES * * * * * (b) * * * (1) Any test sponsor who wishes to modify the test schedule for any test required under a consent agreement must submit an application in accordance with this paragraph. Application for modification must be made using the method specified in § 790.5(b). Applications must include an appropriate explanation and rationale for the modification. EPA will consider only those applications that request modifications to mandatory testing conditions or requirements (‘‘shall statements’’ in the consent agreement). Where a test sponsor requests EPA to provide guidance or to clarify a nonmandatory testing requirement (i.e., ‘‘should statements’’), the test sponsor shall submit these requests to EPA using the method specified in § 790.5(b). * * * * * ■ 41. In § 790.87, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows: VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:12 Dec 03, 2013 Jkt 232001 § 790.87 Approval of exemption applications. § 790.97 * * * * * (c)(1) EPA will give exemption applicants final notice that they have received a conditional exemption through one of the following ways: (i) A final Phase II test rule that adopts the study plans in a two-phase rulemaking. (ii) A separate Federal Register notice in a single-phase rulemaking. (iii) A letter by certified mail will give exemption applicants final notice that they have received a conditional exemption. (2) All conditional exemptions thus granted are contingent upon the test sponsors’ successful completion of testing according to the specifications of the test rule. ■ 42. In § 790.90, revise paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows: § 790.90 Appeal of denial of exemption application. * * * * * (c) * * * (2) Hearing requests must be submitted using the method specified in § 790.5(b) and be received by EPA within 30 days of receipt of the Agency’s notification under § 790.88(b). Hearing requests must provide reasons why a hearing is necessary. * * * * * ■ 43. In § 790.93, revise paragraphs (c) and (d)(2) to read as follows: § 790.93 Termination of conditional exemption. * * * * * (c) Within 30 days after receipt of a letter notification or publication of a notice in the Federal Register that EPA intends to terminate a conditional exemption, the exemption holder may submit information using the method specified in § 790.5(b) either to rebut EPA’s preliminary decision or notify EPA of its intent to conduct the required test pursuant to the test standard established in the test rule. Such a letter of intent shall contain all of the information required by § 790.45(c). (d) * * * (2) Hearing requests must be submitted using the method specified in § 790.5(b) and must be received by EPA within 30 days after receipt of the letter or publication in the Federal Register notice described in paragraph (b) of this section. * * * * * ■ 44. In § 790.97, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows: PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Hearing procedures. (a) Hearing requests must be submitted using the method specified in § 790.5(b). Such requests must include the applicant’s basis for appealing EPA’s decision. * * * * * PART 799—[AMENDED] 45. The authority citation for part 799 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2603, 2611, and 2625. ■ 46. Revise § 799.5 to read as follows: § 799.5 Submission of information. (a) Information (e.g., letters, study plans, or reports) submitted to EPA must be submitted using the method specified in paragraph (b) of this section. All information submitted under this part must bear the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) section number of the subject chemical test rule (e.g., § 799.1053 for trichlorobenzenes). (b) You must use CISS to complete and submit all data, reports, and other information required under this part. Submissions must be submitted to EPA via the Central Data Exchange (CDX). (c) To access CISS go to https:// cdx.epa.gov/ssl/CSPP/ PrimaryAuthorizedOfficial/Home.aspx and follow the appropriate links and for further instructions to go http:// www.epa.gov/oppt/chemtest/ereporting/ index.html. [FR Doc. 2013–28510 Filed 12–3–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 21 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2013–0110; FF09M21200–134–FXMB1231099BPP0] RIN 1018–BA01 Migratory Bird Permits; Delegating Falconry Permitting Authority to 17 States Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The States of Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin have requested that we delegate permitting for falconry to the State, as provided under our regulations. We have reviewed regulations and SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM 04DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2013 / Rules and Regulations wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES supporting materials provided by these States, and have concluded that their regulations comply with the Federal regulations. We change the falconry regulations accordingly. We make additional changes to the regulations to remove parts that will no longer be relevant after December 31, 2013, and, in one case, to remove contradictory language, and to correct errors. DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George T. Allen, 703–358–1825. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background We published a final rule in the Federal Register on October 8, 2008 (73 FR 59448), to revise our regulations governing falconry in the United States, found in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at § 21.29. The regulations provide that when a State meets the requirements for operating under the regulations, falconry permitting will be delegated to the State. The States of Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin have submitted revised falconry regulations and supporting materials and have requested to be allowed to operate under the revised Federal regulations. We have reviewed the regulations administered by these States and have determined that their regulations meet the requirements of 50 CFR 21.29(b). According to the regulations at § 21.29(b)(4), we must issue a rule to add a State to the list at § 21.29(b)(10) of approved States with a falconry program. Therefore, we change the Federal regulations accordingly, and a Federal permit will no longer be required to practice falconry in any State with its own falconry regulations beginning January 1, 2014. In addition, we remove paragraphs (b)(4)(i) and (ii) from § 21.29. Those paragraphs deal with review of State regulations changes and examination changes. The provisions in them are provided by the succeeding paragraphs. We remove other paragraphs that will no longer be relevant because all States with falconry permitting have transitioned to operation under the current federal falconry regulations. Administrative Procedure In accordance with section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), we issue this final rule without prior opportunity for public VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:12 Dec 03, 2013 Jkt 232001 comment. Under the regulations at 50 CFR 21.29(b)(1)(ii), the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) must determine if a State, tribal, or territorial falconry permitting program meets Federal requirements. When the Director makes this determination, the Service is required by regulations at 50 CFR 21.29(b)(4) to publish a rule in the Federal Register adding the State, tribe, or territory to the list of those approved for allowing the practice of falconry. On January 1st of the calendar year following publication of the rule, the Service will terminate Federal falconry permitting in any State certified under the regulations at 50 CFR 21.29. This is a ministerial and nondiscretionary action that must be enacted promptly to enable the subject States to assume all responsibilities of falconry permitting by January 1, 2014, the effective date of this regulatory amendment. Further, the relevant regulation at 50 CFR 21.29 governing the transfer of permitting authority to these States has already been subject to public notice and comment procedures. Therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), we did not publish a proposed rule in regard to this rulemaking action because, for good cause as stated above, we found prior public notice and comment procedures to be unnecessary. Required Determinations Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not significant. Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation’s regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements. PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 72831 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 action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule delegates authority to States that have requested it, and those States have already changed their falconry regulations. This rule does not change falconers’ costs for practicing their sport, nor does it affect businesses that provide equipment or supplies for falconry. Consequently, we certify that, because this rule will not have a significant economic effect on 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 this regulations change. 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 falconry does not significantly affect costs or prices in any sector of the economy. c. This rule will not have significant adverse effects on competition, E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM 04DER1 72832 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2013 / Rules and Regulations employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises. Falconry is an endeavor of private individuals. Neither regulation nor practice of falconry 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 in a negative way. A small government agency plan is not required. The 17 States affected by this rule applied for the authority to issue permits for the practice of falconry. b. This rule will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or greater in any year. It is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 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. The States being delegated authority to issue permits to conduct falconry have requested that authority. No significant economic impacts are expected to result from the State regulation of falconry. 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. wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES Paperwork Reduction Act We examined this rule under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and it does not contain any new collections of information that require OMB approval. OMB has approved the information collection requirements of the Migratory Bird Permits Program and assigned OMB control number 1018– 0022, which expires February 28, 2014. Information from the collection is used to document take of raptors from the wild for use in falconry and to document transfers of raptors held for falconry between permittees. A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:12 Dec 03, 2013 Jkt 232001 a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. National Environmental Policy Act We evaluated the environmental impacts of the changes to these regulations, and determined that this rule does not have any environmental impacts. 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, we determined that these regulatory changes do not have a significant effect on the human environment. In accordance with the Department of the Interior Manual at 516 DM 8.5, we conclude that the regulatory changes are categorically excluded because they ‘‘have no or minor potential environmental impact.’’ 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 falconry 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 falconry 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. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of Energy Effects is required. Environmental Consequences of the Action Socioeconomic. This action will not have discernible socioeconomic impacts. Raptor populations. This rule will not change the effects of falconry on raptor populations. We have reviewed and approved the State regulations. Endangered and threatened species. This rule does not change protections for endangered and threatened species. PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 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)). Delegating falconry permitting authority to States with approved programs 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 of 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: 16 U.S.C. 703–12. 2. Amend § 21.29 by: a. Removing paragraph (b)(1)(ii) and redesignating paragraph (b)(1)(iii) as paragraph (b)(1)(ii); ■ b. Removing paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(11), and (b)(12) and redesignating paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(10) as paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(9); ■ c. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (b)(3) by removing paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (b)(3)(ii); ■ d. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (b)(4) introductory text, (b)(4)(i), (b)(5)(i), and (b)(9); and ■ e. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (f)(11)(i) by removing the comma after the word ‘‘falconry’’ and the words ‘‘if you have a Special Purpose Abatement permit’’. ■ ■ § 21.29 Falconry standards and falconry permitting. * * * * * (b) * * * (4) Review of a State, tribal, or territorial falconry program. We may review the administration of an approved State’s, tribe’s, or territory’s falconry program if complaints from the E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM 04DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2013 / Rules and Regulations wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES public or law enforcement investigations indicate the need for a review or for revisions to the State’s, tribe’s, or territory’s laws, or falconry examination. The review may involve, but is not limited to: (i) Inspecting falconers’ facilities to ensure that the facilities standards in this section are met; * * * * * (5) * * * VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:12 Dec 03, 2013 Jkt 232001 (i) We may propose to suspend, and may suspend, the approval of a State, tribal, or territorial falconry program in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section if we determine that the State, tribe, or territory has deficiencies in one or more items in paragraph (b)(4) of this section. * * * * * (9) Standards in effect in your place of residence. If you live in any State PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 72833 except Hawaii, you may practice falconry as permitted in these regulations if you have a falconry permit from your State, tribe, or territory. * * * * * Dated: November 21, 2013. Michael J. Bean, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2013–28709 Filed 12–3–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM 04DER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 4, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72830-72833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28709]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 21

[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2013-0110; FF09M21200-134-FXMB1231099BPP0]
RIN 1018-BA01


Migratory Bird Permits; Delegating Falconry Permitting Authority 
to 17 States

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The States of Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, 
Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New 
York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, West Virginia, and 
Wisconsin have requested that we delegate permitting for falconry to 
the State, as provided under our regulations. We have reviewed 
regulations and

[[Page 72831]]

supporting materials provided by these States, and have concluded that 
their regulations comply with the Federal regulations. We change the 
falconry regulations accordingly. We make additional changes to the 
regulations to remove parts that will no longer be relevant after 
December 31, 2013, and, in one case, to remove contradictory language, 
and to correct errors.

DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George T. Allen, 703-358-1825.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    We published a final rule in the Federal Register on October 8, 
2008 (73 FR 59448), to revise our regulations governing falconry in the 
United States, found in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR) at Sec.  21.29. The regulations provide that when a State meets 
the requirements for operating under the regulations, falconry 
permitting will be delegated to the State.
    The States of Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, 
Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, 
Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin 
have submitted revised falconry regulations and supporting materials 
and have requested to be allowed to operate under the revised Federal 
regulations. We have reviewed the regulations administered by these 
States and have determined that their regulations meet the requirements 
of 50 CFR 21.29(b). According to the regulations at Sec.  21.29(b)(4), 
we must issue a rule to add a State to the list at Sec.  21.29(b)(10) 
of approved States with a falconry program. Therefore, we change the 
Federal regulations accordingly, and a Federal permit will no longer be 
required to practice falconry in any State with its own falconry 
regulations beginning January 1, 2014.
    In addition, we remove paragraphs (b)(4)(i) and (ii) from Sec.  
21.29. Those paragraphs deal with review of State regulations changes 
and examination changes. The provisions in them are provided by the 
succeeding paragraphs. We remove other paragraphs that will no longer 
be relevant because all States with falconry permitting have 
transitioned to operation under the current federal falconry 
regulations.

Administrative Procedure

    In accordance with section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act 
(5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), we issue this final rule without prior 
opportunity for public comment. Under the regulations at 50 CFR 
21.29(b)(1)(ii), the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
(Service) must determine if a State, tribal, or territorial falconry 
permitting program meets Federal requirements. When the Director makes 
this determination, the Service is required by regulations at 50 CFR 
21.29(b)(4) to publish a rule in the Federal Register adding the State, 
tribe, or territory to the list of those approved for allowing the 
practice of falconry. On January 1st of the calendar year following 
publication of the rule, the Service will terminate Federal falconry 
permitting in any State certified under the regulations at 50 CFR 
21.29.
    This is a ministerial and nondiscretionary action that must be 
enacted promptly to enable the subject States to assume all 
responsibilities of falconry permitting by January 1, 2014, the 
effective date of this regulatory amendment. Further, the relevant 
regulation at 50 CFR 21.29 governing the transfer of permitting 
authority to these States has already been subject to public notice and 
comment procedures. Therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 
553(b)(3)(B), we did not publish a proposed rule in regard to this 
rulemaking action because, for good cause as stated above, we found 
prior public notice and comment procedures to be unnecessary.

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Management and 
Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will 
review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not 
significant.
    Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while 
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote 
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most 
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. 
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches 
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for 
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and 
consistent with regulatory objectives.
    E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the 
best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for 
public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed 
this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (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 action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. This rule delegates authority to 
States that have requested it, and those States have already changed 
their falconry regulations. This rule does not change falconers' costs 
for practicing their sport, nor does it affect businesses that provide 
equipment or supplies for falconry. Consequently, we certify that, 
because this rule will not have a significant economic effect on 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 this regulations change.
    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 falconry does not 
significantly affect costs or prices in any sector of the economy.
    c. This rule will not have significant adverse effects on 
competition,

[[Page 72832]]

employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. 
Falconry is an endeavor of private individuals. Neither regulation nor 
practice of falconry 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 in a negative way. A small government agency plan is not 
required. The 17 States affected by this rule applied for the authority 
to issue permits for the practice of falconry.
    b. This rule will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or 
greater in any year. It is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

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. The States 
being delegated authority to issue permits to conduct falconry have 
requested that authority. No significant economic impacts are expected 
to result from the State regulation of falconry.

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, 
and it does not contain any new collections of information that require 
OMB approval. OMB has approved the information collection requirements 
of the Migratory Bird Permits Program and assigned OMB control number 
1018-0022, which expires February 28, 2014. Information from the 
collection is used to document take of raptors from the wild for use in 
falconry and to document transfers of raptors held for falconry between 
permittees. 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 changes to these 
regulations, and determined that this rule does not have any 
environmental impacts. 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, we determined that 
these regulatory changes do not have a significant effect on the human 
environment.
    In accordance with the Department of the Interior Manual at 516 DM 
8.5, we conclude that the regulatory changes are categorically excluded 
because they ``have no or minor potential environmental impact.'' 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 falconry 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 falconry 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. Therefore, 
this action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of 
Energy Effects is required.

Environmental Consequences of the Action

    Socioeconomic. This action will not have discernible socioeconomic 
impacts.
    Raptor populations. This rule will not change the effects of 
falconry on raptor populations. We have reviewed and approved the State 
regulations.
    Endangered and threatened species. This rule does not change 
protections for endangered and threatened species.

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)). Delegating falconry 
permitting authority to States with approved programs 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 of 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: 16 U.S.C. 703-12.

0
2. Amend Sec.  21.29 by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (b)(1)(ii) and redesignating paragraph 
(b)(1)(iii) as paragraph (b)(1)(ii);
0
b. Removing paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(11), and (b)(12) and redesignating 
paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(10) as paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(9);
0
c. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (b)(3) by removing paragraphs 
(b)(3)(i) and (b)(3)(ii);
0
d. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (b)(4) introductory text, 
(b)(4)(i), (b)(5)(i), and (b)(9); and
0
e. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (f)(11)(i) by removing the 
comma after the word ``falconry'' and the words ``if you have a Special 
Purpose Abatement permit''.


Sec.  21.29  Falconry standards and falconry permitting.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Review of a State, tribal, or territorial falconry program. We 
may review the administration of an approved State's, tribe's, or 
territory's falconry program if complaints from the

[[Page 72833]]

public or law enforcement investigations indicate the need for a review 
or for revisions to the State's, tribe's, or territory's laws, or 
falconry examination. The review may involve, but is not limited to:
    (i) Inspecting falconers' facilities to ensure that the facilities 
standards in this section are met;
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (i) We may propose to suspend, and may suspend, the approval of a 
State, tribal, or territorial falconry program in accordance with the 
procedures in paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section if we determine that 
the State, tribe, or territory has deficiencies in one or more items in 
paragraph (b)(4) of this section.
* * * * *
    (9) Standards in effect in your place of residence. If you live in 
any State except Hawaii, you may practice falconry as permitted in 
these regulations if you have a falconry permit from your State, tribe, 
or territory.
* * * * *

    Dated: November 21, 2013.
Michael J. Bean,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2013-28709 Filed 12-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P