Revision of Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) Contest Regulations, 5182-5186 [2020-01497]

Download as PDF 5182 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules TABLE TO § 100.704—SPECIAL LOCAL REGULATIONS; MARINE EVENTS WITHIN THE CAPTAIN OF THE PORT CHARLESTON—Continued [Datum NAD 1983] Date/time Event/sponsor Regulated area Location: The following is a moving safety zone. All waters 50 yards in front of the lead safety vessel preceding the first race participants, 50 yards behind the safety vessel trailing the last race participants, and at all times extends 100 yards on either side of safety vessels. The Swim Around Charleston swimming race consists of a 12 mile course that starts at Remley′s Point on the Wando River in approximate position 32°48′49″, 79°54′27″, crosses the main shipping channel under the main span of the Ravenel Bridge, and finishes at the I–526 bridge and boat landing on the Ashley River in approximate position 32°50′14″ N, 80°01′23″ W. Location: Charleston harbor, South Carolina, from Anchorage A through Shutes Folly, Horse Reach, Hog Island Reach, Town Creek Lower Reach, Ashley River, and finishing at City Marina. 9. One Saturday or Sunday during the last two weeks of September or the first two weeks of October; Time (Approximate): 7:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. Swim Around Charleston; Sponsor: Kathleen Wilson.. Charleston, SC .................. 10. One Friday, Saturday or Sunday in December; Time (Approximate): 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. Charleston Parade of Boats; Sponsor: City of Charleston, SC Office of Cultural Affairs. Charleston, SC .................. § 100.713 ■ [Removed] 4. Remove § 100.713. Dated: January 17, 2020. J.W. Reed, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Charleston. [FR Doc. 2020–01147 Filed 1–28–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Royalty Board 37 CFR Chapter III [Docket No. 19–CRB–0014–RM] Notice of Inquiry Regarding Categorization of Claims for Cable or Satellite Royalty Funds and Treatment of Ineligible Claims; Extension of Comment Period Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress. ACTION: Notice of inquiry; extension of comment period. AGENCY: The Copyright Royalty Judges extend the comment period regarding the notice of inquiry regarding categorization of claims for cable or satellite royalty funds and treatment of royalties associated with invalid claims from January 29, 2020, to March 15, 2020. DATES: The comment period for the notice of inquiry (84 FR 71852) is extended. Comments are due on or before March 16, 2020. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments and proposals, identified by docket number 19–CRB–0014–RM, by any of the following methods: SUMMARY: lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS Location VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:42 Jan 28, 2020 Jkt 250001 CRB’s electronic filing application: Submit comments and proposals online in eCRB at https://app.crb.gov/. U.S. mail: Copyright Royalty Board, P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024– 0977; or Overnight service (only USPS Express Mail is acceptable): Copyright Royalty Board, P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024–0977; or Commercial courier: Address package to: Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress, James Madison Memorial Building, LM–403, 101 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20559– 6000. Deliver to: Congressional Courier Acceptance Site, 2nd Street NE and D Street NE, Washington, DC; or Hand delivery: Library of Congress, James Madison Memorial Building, LM– 401, 101 Independence Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20559–6000. Instructions: Unless submitting online, commenters must submit an original, two paper copies, and an electronic version on a CD. All submissions must include a reference to the CRB and this docket number. All submissions will be posted without change to eCRB at https://app.crb.gov/ including any personal information provided. Docket: For access to the docket to read submitted background documents or comments, go to eCRB, the Copyright Royalty Board’s electronic filing and case management system, at https:// app.crb.gov/, and search for docket number 19–CRB–0014–RM. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Blaine, CRB Program Specialist, by telephone at (202) 707–7658 or email at crb@loc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 16, 2020, MPA-Represented PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Program Suppliers, Joint Sports Claimants, and Settling Devotional Claimants filed a motion with the Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) requesting an extension of the comment period for the notice of inquiry, 84 FR 71852 (Dec. 30, 2019), in order to prepare comments that include any relevant factual evidence and economic analyses. On the same day, the Judges granted the motion extending the deadline as requested to March 16, 2020. Dated: January 24, 2020. Jesse M. Feder, Chief Copyright Royalty Judge. [FR Doc. 2020–01544 Filed 1–28–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410–72–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 91 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0105; FXMB12330900000//201//FF09M13200] RIN 1018–BE20 Revision of Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) Contest Regulations Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose revising regulations governing the annual Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Contest (also known as the Federal Duck Stamp SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules Contest (Contest)). Our proposed amendments would specify a permanent theme and the mandatory inclusion of an appropriate hunting element beginning with the 2020 Contest, make a permanent change to the qualifications of the judging panel, and remove references to the 2018 Contest. DATES: We will accept comments that we receive on or before March 16, 2020. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below), the deadline for submitting an electronic comment is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019– 0105. • U.S. Mail or Hand-Delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ– MB–2019–0105; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: JAO/ 1N; Falls Church, VA 22041. We will not accept emailed or faxed comments. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that your entire submission—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the website. See the Public Comments Procedures and Public Availability of Comments, below, for more information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Fellows at: Federal Duck Stamp Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, MS:MB, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041; (703) 358–2145; suzanne_fellows@fws.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS History of the Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) Program On March 16, 1934, Congress passed, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed, the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act. Popularly known as the Duck Stamp Act, it required all waterfowl hunters 16 years or older to buy a stamp annually. The revenue generated was originally earmarked for the Department of Agriculture, but 5 years later was transferred to the Department of the Interior and the Service. In the years since its enactment, the Federal Duck Stamp Program has become one of the most popular and successful conservation programs ever VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:49 Jan 28, 2020 Jkt 250001 initiated. Today, some 1.5 million stamps are sold each year, and as of 2018, Federal Duck Stamps have generated more than $1 billion for the conservation of more than 6 million acres of waterfowl habitat in the United States. Numerous other birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians have similarly prospered because of habitat protection made possible by the program. An estimated one-third of the Nation’s endangered and threatened species find food or shelter in refuges conserved by Duck Stamp funds. Moreover, healthy wetlands help dissipate storms, purify water supplies, store flood water, and nourish fish hatchlings important for sport and commercial fishermen. History of the Duck Stamp Contest The first Federal Duck Stamp was designed at President Roosevelt’s request by Jay N. ‘‘Ding’’ Darling, a nationally known political cartoonist for the Des Moines Register and a noted hunter and wildlife conservationist. In subsequent years, noted wildlife artists were asked to submit designs for the stamp. The first Federal Duck Stamp Contest was opened in 1949 to any U.S. artist who wished to enter; 65 artists submitted a total of 88 design entries. Since then, the Contest has attracted large numbers of entrants, and it remains the only art competition of its kind sponsored by the U.S. Government. The Secretary of the Interior appoints a panel of noted art, waterfowl, and philatelic authorities to select each year’s winning design. Winners receive no compensation for the work, except a pane of their stamps, but winners may sell prints of their designs, which are sought by hunters, conservationists, and art collectors. Throughout the history of the Federal Duck Stamp, there has been an effort to increase its messaging capabilities. For example, in 1959, the theme of the Contest was ‘‘Retrievers Save Game,’’ and artists were required to produce a design which illustrated this theme. The resulting 1959–1960 stamp, the ‘‘King Buck,’’ featuring a black Labrador Retriever and a mallard, is arguably among the most identifiable Federal Duck Stamps. With the 1998–1999 stamp, the pressure-sensitive adhesive dollar-bill sized carrier was introduced. This gave stamp designers more area to work with to produce both visual and verbal messages. Additional opportunities exist for messages on the back of the carrier as well as on the appreciation certificates that are available to customers interested in the Duck Stamp Program. PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 5183 As the only ones required to purchase a Federal Duck Stamp, waterfowl hunters have been the primary supporters of the Federal Duck Stamp program and have enabled the purchase of wetland habitats that support both hunted and nonhunted species, assist in flood control and water purification, and provide communities with an economic stimulus. To address Executive Order 13443 (Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation; 72 FR 46537, August 20, 2007) and Secretarial Order 3356 (Hunting, Fishing, Recreational Shooting, and Wildlife Conservation Opportunities and Coordination with States, Tribes, and Territories; September 15, 2017), it was determined that the theme of the 2019–2020 Federal Duck Stamp would be ‘‘celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.’’ To accomplish this, the 2018 Contest regulations required the mandatory inclusion of ‘‘appropriate huntingrelated accessories and/or scenes.’’ An image of a drake wood duck with an old decoy was chosen as the winner of the 2018 Federal Duck Stamp Contest, and that image appears on the 2019–2020 Federal Duck Stamp. Text and special stamp products were developed to highlight the theme and to provide visual and verbal recognition to the contributions waterfowl hunters make to habitat conservation. By celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage and showing hunters in a positive light as active wildlife conservationists on the 2019–2020 stamp, we celebrate their contributions to providing public lands and robust wildlife populations. Proposed Changes to the Regulations at 50 CFR Part 91 The regulations governing the Contest are at 50 CFR part 91. On March 21, 2018, we published a final rule (83 FR 12275) that revised the regulations at 50 CFR part 91 governing the annual Federal Duck Stamp Contest. Of specific interest to this proposal, we set forth the 2018 Contest regulations regarding the theme, the mandatory elements, and an additional requirement for judges which we stated we would remove at a later date. In this proposed rule, we propose to specify a permanent ‘‘celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage’’ theme and the mandatory inclusion of an appropriate hunting element beginning with the 2020 Contest, make a permanent change to the qualifications of the judging panel, and remove references to the 2018 Contest. E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1 5184 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules Removing Language Specific to 2018 Contest and Instituting a Permanent Theme and Mandatory Hunting Element Requirement Currently, § 91.14 explains that a live portrayal of any bird(s) of the five or fewer identified eligible waterfowl species must be the dominant feature of the design, but that the design may depict other appropriate elements, such as hunting dogs, as long as an eligible waterfowl species is in the foreground and clearly the focus of attention. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added § 91.14(b) with additional requirements specified for the 2018 Contest only. In this proposed rule, we propose to make it a permanent requirement that Contest entries must include one or more elements that reflect the theme ‘‘celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.’’ Section 91.21(b) outlines the qualification of the judging panel. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added § 91.21(b)(2) with additional requirements specified for the 2018 Contest only. In this proposed rule, we propose to revise § 91.21(b) to remove reference to the 2018 Contest and make it a permanent requirement that all selected contest judges have an understanding and appreciation of the waterfowl hunting heritage and be able to recognize waterfowl hunting accessories. Finally, § 91.23 sets forth the scoring criteria for the contest. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added § 91.23(b) with an additional scoring criterion specified for the 2018 Contest only. In this proposed rule, we propose to revise § 91.23 to remove reference to the 2018 Contest and specify that entries will also be judged on how well they illustrate the theme of ‘‘celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.’’ lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS Public Comments Procedures To ensure that any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be as accurate and as effective as possible, we request that you send relevant information for our consideration. We will accept public comments we receive on or before the date listed above in DATES. We are striving to ensure that any final rule resulting from this proposed rule would be in effect with sufficient time for artists to prepare submissions by the June opening of the 2020 Contest. The comments that will be most useful are those that you support by quantitative information or studies and those that include citations to, and analyses of, the applicable laws and regulations. Please make your comments as specific as possible and VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:49 Jan 28, 2020 Jkt 250001 explain the basis for them. In addition, please include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to authenticate any scientific or commercial data you include. You must submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed rule by one of the methods listed above in ADDRESSES. We will not accept comments sent by email or fax or to an address not listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit a comment via http:// www.regulations.gov, your entire comment—including any personal identifying information, such as your address, telephone number, or email address—will be posted on the website. Please note that comments submitted to this website are not immediately viewable. When you submit a comment, the system receives it immediately. However, the comment will not be publically viewable until we post it, which might not occur until several days after submission. If you mail or hand-carry a hardcopy comment directly to us that includes personal information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. To ensure that the electronic docket for this rulemaking is complete and all comments we receive are publicly available, we will post all hardcopy comments on http:// www.regulations.gov. In addition, comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, will be available for public inspection in two ways: (1) You can view them on http:// www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0105, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel on the left side of the screen, select the type of documents you want to view under the Document Type heading. (2) You can make an appointment, during normal business hours, to view the comments and materials in person by contacting the person listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Public Availability of Comments As stated above in more detail, before including your address, phone number, email 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 publically available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Required Determinations National Environmental Policy Act This proposed rule is categorically excluded. It reflects an administrative modification of procedures and the impacts are limited to administrative effects (516 DM 8.5(a)(3)). A detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) is therefore not required. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consideration Of the species on our List of Eligible Species, only two species are currently listed as endangered or threatened under section 4 of the ESA of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). No legal complications arise from the dual listing, as the two lists are developed under separate authorities and for different purposes. Because this proposed rule is strictly administrative in nature, it has no effect on endangered or threatened species. Thus, it does not require consultation under section 7 of the ESA. Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this proposed rule is not significant. Executive Order (E.O.) 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 Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a notice of E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1 lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules 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 (i.e., small businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis to be required, impacts must exceed a threshold for ‘‘significant impact’’ and a threshold for a ‘‘substantial number of small entities.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The changes we propose are intended primarily to clarify the requirements for the Contest. These changes would affect individuals, not businesses or other small entities as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Currently, stamp sales average approximately 1.5 million each year. Active waterfowl hunters, the only people required to purchase an annual stamp, number approximately 1.1 million each year. Stamps are also purchased by stamp and wildlife art collectors, bird watchers, and other conservationists, and a current stamp can be used for access at any of the national wildlife refuges that have an entry fee. Many hunters also purchase multiple stamps for different purposes. We are currently unable to quantify numbers of stamps purchased by each user group; we do not anticipate being able to attribute any increase or decrease in sales due to the proposed changes. In recent years, we have received an average of 200 entries per year to our annual contest. We received approximately 190 Contest entries in 2019; in the 2018 Contest, we had approximately 150 eligible entries under the temporary mandatory hunting theme rule. We do not believe that the number of entries in 2020 or beyond will fall below 150 entries. We therefore certify that, if adopted, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a Small Entity Compliance Guide is not required. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:49 Jan 28, 2020 Jkt 250001 5185 Clarity of This Rule Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 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 of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us revise the rulemaking, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc. This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The rulemaking does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) This rulemaking is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This proposed rule: a. Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. b. Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government agencies; or geographic regions. c. Would not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) This rule does not contain any new collections of information that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements associated with the Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp) Contest and assigned OMB Control Number 1018–0172. You may view the information collection request(s) at http://www.reginfo.gov/ public/do/PRAMain. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Civil Justice Reform In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has determined that this proposed rule does not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. Takings In accordance with E.O. 12630, this proposed rule does not have significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is not required. Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, or use. This proposed rule would revise the current regulations at 50 CFR part 91 that govern the Federal Duck Stamp Contest. This rule would not significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is a not a significant energy action and no Statement of Energy Effects is required. Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes Under the President’s memorandum of April 29, 1994, ‘‘Government-toGovernment Relations with Native American Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible effects on federally recognized Indian Tribes and have determined that there are no effects. Individual tribal members must meet the same regulatory requirements as other individuals who enter the Federal Duck Stamp Contest. Federalism These proposed revisions to part 91 do not contain significant Federalism implications. A federalism summary impact statement under Executive Order 13132 is not required. Executive Order 13771 This rule is not an Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action because this rule is not significant under E.O. 12866. E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1 5186 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 91 Hunting, Wildlife. ■ Proposed Regulation Promulgation Accordingly, we propose to amend part 91, subchapter G of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows: Entries will be judged on the basis of anatomical accuracy, artistic composition, suitability for reduction in the production of a stamp, and how well they illustrate the theme of ‘‘celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.’’ PART 91—MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING AND CONSERVATION STAMP CONTEST Dated: January 6, 2020. Rob Wallace, Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. § 91.23 1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows: ■ 2. Revise § 91.14(b) to read as follows: § 91.14 entry. Restrictions on subject matter for * * * * * (b) Mandatory waterfowl hunting components. In addition to the restrictions set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, designs will also be required to include appropriate waterfowl hunting-related accessories or elements celebrating the Federal Duck Stamp’s long-standing connection as part of our Nation’s waterfowl hunting heritage and the contributions to conservation made by waterfowl hunters. Designs may include, but are not limited to, hunting dogs, hunting scenes, hunting equipment, waterfowl decoys, managed waterfowl areas as the background of habitat scenes, or other designs that represent our waterfowl hunting heritage. The design chosen will clearly meet the theme of ‘‘celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.’’ ■ 3. Revise § 91.21(b) to read as follows: § 91.21 Selection and qualification of contest judges. lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS * * * * * (b) Qualifications. The panel of five judges will be made up of individuals, all of whom have one or more of the following prerequisites: Recognized art credentials, knowledge of the anatomical makeup and the natural habitat of the eligible waterfowl species, an understanding of the wildlife sporting world in which the Duck Stamp is used, an awareness of philately and the role the Duck Stamp plays in stamp collecting, demonstrated support for the conservation of waterfowl and wetlands through active involvement in the conservation community, an understanding and appreciation of waterfowl hunting heritage, and the ability to recognize waterfowl hunting accessories. * * * * * VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:49 Jan 28, 2020 Jkt 250001 Scoring criteria for contest. [FR Doc. 2020–01497 Filed 1–28–20; 8:45 am] Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 718j; 31 U.S.C. 9701. ■ 4. Revise § 91.23 to read as follows: BILLING CODE 4333–15–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 200121–0026] RIN 0648–BJ38 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Implementing Permitting and Reporting for Private Recreational Tilefish Vessels National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments. AGENCY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement permitting and reporting measures for private recreational tilefish vessels that were approved in Amendment 6 to the Tilefish Fishery Management Plan. These measures are being implemented after the other management measures in Amendment 6 because of additional time needed for development. The intended effect of this action is to notify private recreation tilefish vessels of the proposed changes and to solicit public comment on these measures. DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 28, 2020. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by NOAA–NMFS–2020–005, by either of the following methods: • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/ #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2020005, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments. • Mail: Michael Pentony, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope: ‘‘Comments on Permitting and Reporting for Private Recreational Tilefish Anglers.’’ Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are part of the public record and will generally be posted to www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Copies of Amendment 6, and of the Environmental Assessment (EA), are available from the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 North State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901. The EA and Regulatory Impact Review are also accessible via the internet at: http:// www.mafmc.org/actions/bluelinetilefish. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Hansen, Fishery Management Specialist, 978–281–9225. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On November 15, 2017, we announced our approval of all the measures proposed by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in the Amendment 6 to the Tilefish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) final rule (82 FR 52851). The final rule implemented most, but not all, of the measures in the amendment. The amendment implemented management measures and quotas for the previously unregulated blueline tilefish fishery in the Mid-Atlantic region and additional information and analysis on these measures are provided in the EA (see ADDRESSES). We also approved, but did not implement, Mid-Atlantic Council recommended measures to better characterize and monitor the recreational fisheries for both blueline tilefish and golden tilefish. Angler intercepts for these species are rare events and are poorly captured by the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). Amendment 6 measures included a new Federal permit for private recreational fishing vessels to target or retain blueline or golden tilefish, as well as mandatory reporting requirements for these vessels. These measures required additional E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5182-5186]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01497]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0105; FXMB12330900000//201//FF09M13200]
RIN 1018-BE20


Revision of Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp 
(Duck Stamp) Contest Regulations

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose 
revising regulations governing the annual Migratory Bird Hunting and 
Conservation Stamp Contest (also known as the Federal Duck Stamp

[[Page 5183]]

Contest (Contest)). Our proposed amendments would specify a permanent 
theme and the mandatory inclusion of an appropriate hunting element 
beginning with the 2020 Contest, make a permanent change to the 
qualifications of the judging panel, and remove references to the 2018 
Contest.

DATES: We will accept comments that we receive on or before March 16, 
2020. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal 
(see ADDRESSES, below), the deadline for submitting an electronic 
comment is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-HQ-
MB-2019-0105.
     U.S. Mail or Hand-Delivery: Public Comments Processing, 
Attn: FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0105; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 5275 
Leesburg Pike, MS: JAO/1N; Falls Church, VA 22041.
    We will not accept emailed or faxed comments. We will post all 
comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that your 
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will 
be posted on the website. See the Public Comments Procedures and Public 
Availability of Comments, below, for more information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Fellows at: Federal Duck Stamp 
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, 
MS:MB, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041; (703) 358-2145; 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

History of the Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp 
(Duck Stamp) Program

    On March 16, 1934, Congress passed, and President Franklin D. 
Roosevelt signed, the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act. Popularly known 
as the Duck Stamp Act, it required all waterfowl hunters 16 years or 
older to buy a stamp annually. The revenue generated was originally 
earmarked for the Department of Agriculture, but 5 years later was 
transferred to the Department of the Interior and the Service.
    In the years since its enactment, the Federal Duck Stamp Program 
has become one of the most popular and successful conservation programs 
ever initiated. Today, some 1.5 million stamps are sold each year, and 
as of 2018, Federal Duck Stamps have generated more than $1 billion for 
the conservation of more than 6 million acres of waterfowl habitat in 
the United States. Numerous other birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, and 
amphibians have similarly prospered because of habitat protection made 
possible by the program. An estimated one-third of the Nation's 
endangered and threatened species find food or shelter in refuges 
conserved by Duck Stamp funds. Moreover, healthy wetlands help 
dissipate storms, purify water supplies, store flood water, and nourish 
fish hatchlings important for sport and commercial fishermen.

History of the Duck Stamp Contest

    The first Federal Duck Stamp was designed at President Roosevelt's 
request by Jay N. ``Ding'' Darling, a nationally known political 
cartoonist for the Des Moines Register and a noted hunter and wildlife 
conservationist. In subsequent years, noted wildlife artists were asked 
to submit designs for the stamp. The first Federal Duck Stamp Contest 
was opened in 1949 to any U.S. artist who wished to enter; 65 artists 
submitted a total of 88 design entries. Since then, the Contest has 
attracted large numbers of entrants, and it remains the only art 
competition of its kind sponsored by the U.S. Government. The Secretary 
of the Interior appoints a panel of noted art, waterfowl, and 
philatelic authorities to select each year's winning design. Winners 
receive no compensation for the work, except a pane of their stamps, 
but winners may sell prints of their designs, which are sought by 
hunters, conservationists, and art collectors.
    Throughout the history of the Federal Duck Stamp, there has been an 
effort to increase its messaging capabilities. For example, in 1959, 
the theme of the Contest was ``Retrievers Save Game,'' and artists were 
required to produce a design which illustrated this theme. The 
resulting 1959-1960 stamp, the ``King Buck,'' featuring a black 
Labrador Retriever and a mallard, is arguably among the most 
identifiable Federal Duck Stamps. With the 1998-1999 stamp, the 
pressure-sensitive adhesive dollar-bill sized carrier was introduced. 
This gave stamp designers more area to work with to produce both visual 
and verbal messages. Additional opportunities exist for messages on the 
back of the carrier as well as on the appreciation certificates that 
are available to customers interested in the Duck Stamp Program.
    As the only ones required to purchase a Federal Duck Stamp, 
waterfowl hunters have been the primary supporters of the Federal Duck 
Stamp program and have enabled the purchase of wetland habitats that 
support both hunted and nonhunted species, assist in flood control and 
water purification, and provide communities with an economic stimulus. 
To address Executive Order 13443 (Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and 
Wildlife Conservation; 72 FR 46537, August 20, 2007) and Secretarial 
Order 3356 (Hunting, Fishing, Recreational Shooting, and Wildlife 
Conservation Opportunities and Coordination with States, Tribes, and 
Territories; September 15, 2017), it was determined that the theme of 
the 2019-2020 Federal Duck Stamp would be ``celebrating our waterfowl 
hunting heritage.'' To accomplish this, the 2018 Contest regulations 
required the mandatory inclusion of ``appropriate hunting-related 
accessories and/or scenes.'' An image of a drake wood duck with an old 
decoy was chosen as the winner of the 2018 Federal Duck Stamp Contest, 
and that image appears on the 2019-2020 Federal Duck Stamp. Text and 
special stamp products were developed to highlight the theme and to 
provide visual and verbal recognition to the contributions waterfowl 
hunters make to habitat conservation. By celebrating our waterfowl 
hunting heritage and showing hunters in a positive light as active 
wildlife conservationists on the 2019-2020 stamp, we celebrate their 
contributions to providing public lands and robust wildlife 
populations.

Proposed Changes to the Regulations at 50 CFR Part 91

    The regulations governing the Contest are at 50 CFR part 91. On 
March 21, 2018, we published a final rule (83 FR 12275) that revised 
the regulations at 50 CFR part 91 governing the annual Federal Duck 
Stamp Contest. Of specific interest to this proposal, we set forth the 
2018 Contest regulations regarding the theme, the mandatory elements, 
and an additional requirement for judges which we stated we would 
remove at a later date. In this proposed rule, we propose to specify a 
permanent ``celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage'' theme and the 
mandatory inclusion of an appropriate hunting element beginning with 
the 2020 Contest, make a permanent change to the qualifications of the 
judging panel, and remove references to the 2018 Contest.

[[Page 5184]]

Removing Language Specific to 2018 Contest and Instituting a Permanent 
Theme and Mandatory Hunting Element Requirement

    Currently, Sec.  91.14 explains that a live portrayal of any 
bird(s) of the five or fewer identified eligible waterfowl species must 
be the dominant feature of the design, but that the design may depict 
other appropriate elements, such as hunting dogs, as long as an 
eligible waterfowl species is in the foreground and clearly the focus 
of attention. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added Sec.  
91.14(b) with additional requirements specified for the 2018 Contest 
only. In this proposed rule, we propose to make it a permanent 
requirement that Contest entries must include one or more elements that 
reflect the theme ``celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.''
    Section 91.21(b) outlines the qualification of the judging panel. 
In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added Sec.  91.21(b)(2) with 
additional requirements specified for the 2018 Contest only. In this 
proposed rule, we propose to revise Sec.  91.21(b) to remove reference 
to the 2018 Contest and make it a permanent requirement that all 
selected contest judges have an understanding and appreciation of the 
waterfowl hunting heritage and be able to recognize waterfowl hunting 
accessories.
    Finally, Sec.  91.23 sets forth the scoring criteria for the 
contest. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added Sec.  91.23(b) 
with an additional scoring criterion specified for the 2018 Contest 
only. In this proposed rule, we propose to revise Sec.  91.23 to remove 
reference to the 2018 Contest and specify that entries will also be 
judged on how well they illustrate the theme of ``celebrating our 
waterfowl hunting heritage.''

Public Comments Procedures

    To ensure that any final action resulting from this proposed rule 
will be as accurate and as effective as possible, we request that you 
send relevant information for our consideration. We will accept public 
comments we receive on or before the date listed above in DATES. We are 
striving to ensure that any final rule resulting from this proposed 
rule would be in effect with sufficient time for artists to prepare 
submissions by the June opening of the 2020 Contest. The comments that 
will be most useful are those that you support by quantitative 
information or studies and those that include citations to, and 
analyses of, the applicable laws and regulations. Please make your 
comments as specific as possible and explain the basis for them. In 
addition, please include sufficient information with your comments to 
allow us to authenticate any scientific or commercial data you include.
    You must submit your comments and materials concerning this 
proposed rule by one of the methods listed above in ADDRESSES. We will 
not accept comments sent by email or fax or to an address not listed in 
ADDRESSES. If you submit a comment via http://www.regulations.gov, your 
entire comment--including any personal identifying information, such as 
your address, telephone number, or email address--will be posted on the 
website. Please note that comments submitted to this website are not 
immediately viewable. When you submit a comment, the system receives it 
immediately. However, the comment will not be publically viewable until 
we post it, which might not occur until several days after submission.
    If you mail or hand-carry a hardcopy comment directly to us that 
includes personal information, you may request at the top of your 
document that we withhold this information from public review. However, 
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. To ensure that the 
electronic docket for this rulemaking is complete and all comments we 
receive are publicly available, we will post all hardcopy comments on 
http://www.regulations.gov.
    In addition, comments and materials we receive, as well as 
supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection in two ways:
    (1) You can view them on http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search 
box, enter FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0105, which is the docket number for this 
rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel on the left side of the screen, 
select the type of documents you want to view under the Document Type 
heading.
    (2) You can make an appointment, during normal business hours, to 
view the comments and materials in person by contacting the person 
listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Public Availability of Comments

    As stated above in more detail, before including your address, 
phone number, email 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 publically 
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

National Environmental Policy Act

    This proposed rule is categorically excluded. It reflects an 
administrative modification of procedures and the impacts are limited 
to administrative effects (516 DM 8.5(a)(3)). A detailed statement 
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
seq.) is therefore not required.

Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consideration

    Of the species on our List of Eligible Species, only two species 
are currently listed as endangered or threatened under section 4 of the 
ESA of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). No legal 
complications arise from the dual listing, as the two lists are 
developed under separate authorities and for different purposes. 
Because this proposed rule is strictly administrative in nature, it has 
no effect on endangered or threatened species. Thus, it does not 
require consultation under section 7 of the ESA.

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has 
determined that this proposed rule is not significant.
    Executive Order (E.O.) 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
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), 
whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a notice of

[[Page 5185]]

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 (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions) (5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is 
required if the head of an agency certifies that the rule would not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis to be required, 
impacts must exceed a threshold for ``significant impact'' and a 
threshold for a ``substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C. 
605(b). SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require 
Federal agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for 
certifying that a rule would not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. The changes we propose are 
intended primarily to clarify the requirements for the Contest. These 
changes would affect individuals, not businesses or other small 
entities as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Currently, stamp 
sales average approximately 1.5 million each year. Active waterfowl 
hunters, the only people required to purchase an annual stamp, number 
approximately 1.1 million each year. Stamps are also purchased by stamp 
and wildlife art collectors, bird watchers, and other conservationists, 
and a current stamp can be used for access at any of the national 
wildlife refuges that have an entry fee. Many hunters also purchase 
multiple stamps for different purposes. We are currently unable to 
quantify numbers of stamps purchased by each user group; we do not 
anticipate being able to attribute any increase or decrease in sales 
due to the proposed changes. In recent years, we have received an 
average of 200 entries per year to our annual contest. We received 
approximately 190 Contest entries in 2019; in the 2018 Contest, we had 
approximately 150 eligible entries under the temporary mandatory 
hunting theme rule. We do not believe that the number of entries in 
2020 or beyond will fall below 150 entries.
    We therefore certify that, if adopted, this proposed rule would not 
have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a Small Entity 
Compliance Guide is not required.

Clarity of This Rule

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

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This rulemaking is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This proposed rule:
    a. Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more.
    b. Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government 
agencies; or geographic regions.
    c. Would not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)

    This rule does not contain any new collections of information that 
require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). OMB has 
previously approved the information collection requirements associated 
with the Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck 
Stamp) Contest and assigned OMB Control Number 1018-0172. You may view 
the information collection request(s) at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate on State, 
local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 
million per year. The rulemaking does not have a significant or unique 
effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A 
statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

Civil Justice Reform

    In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 
determined that this proposed rule does not unduly burden the judicial 
system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of the Order.

Takings

    In accordance with E.O. 12630, this proposed rule does not have 
significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is 
not required.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on 
regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, or 
use. This proposed rule would revise the current regulations at 50 CFR 
part 91 that govern the Federal Duck Stamp Contest. This rule would not 
significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, 
this action is a not a significant energy action and no Statement of 
Energy Effects is required.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    Under the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-
to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments'' (59 
FR 22951), and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible effects on 
federally recognized Indian Tribes and have determined that there are 
no effects. Individual tribal members must meet the same regulatory 
requirements as other individuals who enter the Federal Duck Stamp 
Contest.

Federalism

    These proposed revisions to part 91 do not contain significant 
Federalism implications. A federalism summary impact statement under 
Executive Order 13132 is not required.

Executive Order 13771

    This rule is not an Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 (82 FR 9339, 
February 3, 2017) regulatory action because this rule is not 
significant under E.O. 12866.

[[Page 5186]]

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 91

    Hunting, Wildlife.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we propose to amend part 91, subchapter G of chapter 
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 91--MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING AND CONSERVATION STAMP CONTEST

0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 718j; 31 U.S.C. 9701.

0
2. Revise Sec.  91.14(b) to read as follows:

Sec.  91.14  Restrictions on subject matter for entry.

* * * * *
    (b) Mandatory waterfowl hunting components. In addition to the 
restrictions set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, designs will 
also be required to include appropriate waterfowl hunting-related 
accessories or elements celebrating the Federal Duck Stamp's long-
standing connection as part of our Nation's waterfowl hunting heritage 
and the contributions to conservation made by waterfowl hunters. 
Designs may include, but are not limited to, hunting dogs, hunting 
scenes, hunting equipment, waterfowl decoys, managed waterfowl areas as 
the background of habitat scenes, or other designs that represent our 
waterfowl hunting heritage. The design chosen will clearly meet the 
theme of ``celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.''
0
3. Revise Sec.  91.21(b) to read as follows:


Sec.  91.21  Selection and qualification of contest judges.

* * * * *
    (b) Qualifications. The panel of five judges will be made up of 
individuals, all of whom have one or more of the following 
prerequisites: Recognized art credentials, knowledge of the anatomical 
makeup and the natural habitat of the eligible waterfowl species, an 
understanding of the wildlife sporting world in which the Duck Stamp is 
used, an awareness of philately and the role the Duck Stamp plays in 
stamp collecting, demonstrated support for the conservation of 
waterfowl and wetlands through active involvement in the conservation 
community, an understanding and appreciation of waterfowl hunting 
heritage, and the ability to recognize waterfowl hunting accessories.
* * * * *
0
4. Revise Sec.  91.23 to read as follows:


Sec.  91.23  Scoring criteria for contest.

    Entries will be judged on the basis of anatomical accuracy, 
artistic composition, suitability for reduction in the production of a 
stamp, and how well they illustrate the theme of ``celebrating our 
waterfowl hunting heritage.''

    Dated: January 6, 2020.
Rob Wallace,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2020-01497 Filed 1-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P