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: https://
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 https://
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 https://
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 https://
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 https://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: https://
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: https://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 https://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
https://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 https://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 https://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