Migratory Bird Permits; Regulations Governing Take of Migratory Birds; Environmental Impact Statement, 5913-5915 [2020-01770]
Download as PDF
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
5913
the human environment. This proposed
rule involves a safety zone lasting from
March 2, 2020 through March 20, 2020
from mile 28.0 to mile 30.0 on the
Monongahela River near Pittsburgh, PA.
Normally such actions are categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table
1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–
001–01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions
on locating the docket, see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. We
seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
A.W. Demo,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of
the Port Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
[FR Doc. 2020–01920 Filed 1–31–20; 8:45 am]
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
■
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking, and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this
document, see DHS’s Correspondence
System of Records notice (84 FR 48645,
September 26, 2018).
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jan 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T08–0057 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.T08–0057 Safety Zone;
Monongahela, Mile 28.0 to Mile 30.0,
Pittsburgh, PA.
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: all navigable waters of the
Monongahela River from mile 28.0 to
mile 30.0.
(b) Effective period. This section is
effective from March 2, 2020 through
March 20, 2020.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23, entry
of persons and vessels into this zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit
Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated
representative.
(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry
into or passage through the zone must
request permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. The COTP’s
representative may be contacted at 412–
221–0807.
(3) All persons and vessels shall
comply with the instructions of the
COTP or a designated representative.
Designated COTP representatives
include United States Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, and petty
officer.
(d) Information broadcasts. The
Captain COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public
through Local Notice to Mariners
(LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners
(BNMs), and/or Marine Safety
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Information Bulletins (MSIBs), as
appropriate.
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 10
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0090;
FF09M29000–201–FXMB12320900000]
RIN 1018–BD76
Migratory Bird Permits; Regulations
Governing Take of Migratory Birds;
Environmental Impact Statement
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Supplementary proposed rule;
intent to prepare an environmental
impact statement.
AGENCY:
This document advises that
we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service), intend to prepare a draft
environmental impact statement
pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The Service
hereby notifies Federal, State, and local
agencies, tribes, and the public of our
intentions to evaluate the potential
environmental impacts of a proposal to
adopt a regulation that clarifies that the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act’s prohibitions
on pursuing, hunting, taking, capturing,
killing, or attempting to do the same,
apply only to actions directed at
migratory birds, their nests, or their
eggs, and, therefore, do not extend to
incidental take, which occurs when
injury or mortality to migratory birds
results from, but is not the purpose of,
an activity. The review will analyze the
environmental effects of the proposed
approach and will provide detailed
analysis of the environmental effects of
the proposed rule. We invite input from
other Federal and State agencies, tribes,
nongovernmental organizations, and
members of the public on the scope of
the proposed NEPA analysis, the
pertinent issues we should address, and
alternatives to our proposed approach
for implementing the MBTA. We will
hold multiple public scoping webinars
to inform the public about the proposal.
DATES:
Comment submission: Public scoping
will begin with the publication of this
document in the Federal Register and
will continue through March 19, 2020.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03FEP1.SGM
03FEP1
5914
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
We will consider all comments on the
scope of the draft environmental review
that are received or postmarked by that
date. Comments received or postmarked
after that date will be considered to the
extent practicable.
Public scoping meetings: We will hold
public scoping meetings in the form of
multiple webinars in February/March
2020. We will announce exact webinar
dates, times, and registration details on
the internet at https://fws.gov/
migratorybirds/2020Regulation.php.
ADDRESSES:
Comment submission: You may
submit written comments by one of the
following methods. Please do not
submit comments by both.
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments to
Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0090.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–MB–2018–
0090; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
MS: JAO/1N; 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls
Church, VA 22041–3803.
We do not accept email or faxes. We
will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide.
Document availability: The proposed
rule and supplementary materials will
be available at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov in
Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0090.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jerome Ford, Assistant Director,
Migratory Birds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service at 202–208–1050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Background
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703–12) was enacted
in 1918 to help fulfill the United States’
obligations under the 1916 ‘‘Convention
between the United States and Great
Britain for the protection of Migratory
Birds,’’ 39 Stat. 1702 (Aug. 16, 1916)
(ratified Dec. 7, 1916) (Migratory Bird
Treaty). The list of migratory birds
protected by the MBTA is currently
codified in title 50 of the Code of
Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 10.13.
In its current form, section 2(a) of the
MBTA (16 U.S.C. 703(a)) provides that,
unless permitted by regulations, it is
unlawful:
at any time, by any means or in any manner,
to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to
take, capture, or kill, possess, offer for sale,
sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase,
purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, export,
import, cause to be shipped, exported, or
imported, deliver for transportation,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jan 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
transport or cause to be transported, carry or
cause to be carried, or receive for shipment,
transportation, carriage, or export, any
migratory bird, any part, nest, or egg of any
such bird, or any product, whether or not
manufactured, which consists, or is
composed in whole or part, of any such bird
or any part, nest, or egg thereof.
Section 3(a) of the MBTA (16 U.S.C.
704(a)) authorizes and directs the
Secretary of the Interior to ‘‘adopt
suitable regulations’’ allowing ‘‘hunting,
taking, capture, killing, possession, sale,
purchase, shipment, transportation,
carriage, or export of any such bird, or
any part, nest, or egg thereof’’ while
considering (‘‘having due regard to’’)
temperature zones and ‘‘distribution,
abundance, economic value, breeding
habits, and times and lines of migratory
flight of such birds.’’ Section 3(a) also
requires the Secretary to ‘‘determine
when, to what extent, if at all, and by
what means, it is compatible with the
terms of the conventions’’ to adopt such
regulations allowing these otherwiseprohibited activities.
On December 22, 2017, the Principal
Deputy Solicitor of the Department of
the Interior, exercising the authority of
the Solicitor pursuant to Secretary’s
Order 3345, issued a legal opinion, M–
37050, ‘‘The Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Does Not Prohibit Incidental Take’’ (M–
37050 or M-Opinion). This opinion
thoroughly examined the text, history,
and purpose of the MBTA and
concluded that the MBTA’s prohibitions
on pursuing, hunting, taking, capturing,
killing, or attempting to do the same
apply only to actions directed at
migratory birds, their nests, or their
eggs. This opinion is consistent with the
Fifth Circuit’s decision in United States
v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 801 F.3d 477
(5th Cir. 2015), which examined
whether the MBTA prohibits incidental
take. It also marked a change from prior
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
interpretations and an earlier Solicitor’s
Opinion, M–37041, ‘‘Incidental Take
Prohibited Under the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act.’’ The Office of the Solicitor
performs the legal work for the
Department of the Interior, including
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The
Service is the Federal agency delegated
the primary responsibility for managing
migratory birds.
Need for Proposed Agency Action
The Service proposes to interpret the
MBTA to prohibit only actions directed
at migratory birds, their nests, or their
eggs, and to clarify that incidental take
is not prohibited. The purpose of this
action is to provide an official
regulatory definition of the scope of the
statute as it relates to incidental take.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The Service needs to conduct this action
to improve consistency in enforcement
of the MBTA’s prohibitions across the
country and thereby eliminate public
uncertainty caused by the current
patchwork of legal standards across the
different Circuit Courts of Appeal,
which have reached different
conclusions on the central question of
whether the MBTA prohibits incidental
take. This approach also aligns with and
implements the Department’s
interpretation of the MBTA in M–37050.
NEPA Analysis of Potential Codification
of the Solicitor’s Opinion Options
The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321–
4347) requires Federal agencies to
undertake an assessment of the
environmental effects of any proposed
action prior to making a final decision
and implementing it. NEPA
requirements apply to any Federal
project, decision, or action that may
have a significant impact on the quality
of the human environment. NEPA also
established the Council on
Environmental Quality, which issued
regulations implementing the
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
1500–1508).
We intend to complete an
environmental impact statement to
assess the impacts of codifying the
Solicitor’s Opinion, M–37050 and the
effects on migratory bird populations of
mortality resulting from incidental take.
We will address our compliance with
other applicable authorities in our
proposed environmental review.
Tribal Trust Responsibilities
The Service has overarching Tribal
Trust Doctrine responsibilities to tribes
under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668–668d); the
National Historic Preservation Act (16
U.S.C. 470 et seq.); the American Indian
Religious Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. 1996);
the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.);
Secretarial Order 3206, American Indian
Tribal Rights, Federal–Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered
Species Act (June 5, 1997); Executive
Order 13007, Indian Sacred Sites (61 FR
26771, May 29, 1996); and the Service’s
Native American Policy. We apply the
terms ‘‘tribal’’ or ‘‘tribe(s)’’ generally to
federally recognized tribes and Alaska
Native tribal entities. We will refer to
Native Hawaiian Organizations
separately when we intend to include
those entities. The Service will
separately consult with tribes and with
Native Hawaiians on the proposals set
forth in the proposed rule. We will also
ensure that those tribes and Native
E:\FR\FM\03FEP1.SGM
03FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 22 / Monday, February 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Hawaiians wishing to engage directly in
the NEPA process will have the
opportunity to do so. As part of this
process, we will protect the confidential
nature of any consultations and other
communications we have with tribes
and Native Hawaiians to the extent
authorized by law.
Public Scoping and Comments
See DATES for information about
upcoming scoping webinars. Please note
that the Service will ensure that the
public scoping webinars will be
accessible to members of the public
with disabilities. A primary purpose of
the scoping process is to receive
suggestions and information on the
scope of issues and alternatives to
consider when drafting the
environmental documents and to
identify significant issues and
reasonable alternatives related to the
Service’s proposed action. To ensure
that we identify a range of issues and
alternatives related to the proposed
action, we invite comments and
suggestions from all interested parties.
We will conduct a review of this
proposed action according to the
requirements of NEPA and its
regulations, other relevant Federal laws,
regulations, policies, and guidance, and
our procedures for compliance with
applicable regulations.
We request information from
interested government agencies, Native
American tribes, Native Hawaiian
Organizations, the scientific
community, industry, nongovernmental
organizations, and other interested
parties. We solicit input on the
following:
(1) The avoidance, minimization, and
mitigation measures entities employed
to address incidental take of migratory
birds (prior to M-Opinion 37050);
(2) The direct costs associated with
implementing these measures;
(3) The indirect costs that entities
have incurred related to the legal risk of
prosecution for incidental take of
migratory birds (e.g., legal fees,
increased interest rates on financing,
insurance, opportunity costs);
(4) The extent that avoidance,
minimization, and mitigation measures
continue to be used (after issuance of MOpinion 37050);
(5) Any quantitative information
regarding the economic benefits and/or
ecosystem services (e.g., pollination,
pest control, etc.) provided by migratory
birds;
(6) Information regarding resources
that may be affected by the proposal;
and
(7) Species having religious or
cultural significance for tribes and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jan 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
Native Hawaiian Organizations, and
species having cultural significance for
the general public and impacts to
cultural values from the actions being
considered.
You may submit your comments and
materials by one of the methods
described above under ADDRESSES. Once
the draft environmental documents are
completed, we will offer further
opportunities for public comment.
Public Availability of Comments
Written comments we receive become
part of the public record associated with
this action. Your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information that
you include in your comment may
become publicly available. You may ask
us to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, but we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so. All submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, will be
made available for public disclosure in
their entirety.
Authority
The authorities for this action are the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C.
703–712) and the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Dated: January 6, 2020.
Rob Wallace,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2020–01770 Filed 1–31–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 10
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0090;
FF09M29000–156–FXMB1232090BPP0]
RIN 1018–BD76
Regulations Governing Take of
Migratory Birds
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS, Service, we),
propose to adopt a regulation that
defines the scope of the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (MBTA or Act) as it applies
to conduct resulting in the injury or
death of migratory birds protected by
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5915
the Act. This proposed rule is consistent
with the Solicitor’s Opinion, M–37050,
which concludes that the MBTA’s
prohibitions on pursuing, hunting,
taking, capturing, killing, or attempting
to do the same, apply only to actions
directed at migratory birds, their nests,
or their eggs.
DATES: We will accept written
comments on this proposed rule until
March 19, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by either one of the following methods.
Please do not submit comments by both.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments to
Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2018–0090.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–
MB–2018–0090; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; MS: JAO/1N; 5275 Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803.
We will not accept email or faxes. We
will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. See
Public Comments, below, for more
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jerome Ford, Assistant Director,
Migratory Birds, at 202–208–1050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.) was
enacted in 1918 to help fulfill the
United States’ obligations under the
1916 ‘‘Convention between the United
States and Great Britain for the
protection of Migratory Birds.’’ 39 Stat.
1702 (Aug. 16, 1916) (ratified Dec. 7,
1916) (Migratory Bird Treaty). The list
of applicable migratory birds protected
by the MBTA is currently codified in
title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations at 50 CFR 10.13.
In its current form, section 2(a) of the
MBTA provides that, unless permitted
by regulations, it is unlawful:
at any time, by any means or in any manner,
to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to
take, capture, or kill, possess, offer for sale,
sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase,
purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, export,
import, cause to be shipped, exported, or
imported, deliver for transportation,
transport or cause to be transported, carry or
cause to be carried, or receive for shipment,
transportation, carriage, or export, any
migratory bird, any part, nest, or egg of any
such bird, or any product, whether or not
manufactured, which consists, or is
composed in whole or part, of any such bird
or any part, nest, or egg thereof.
16 U.S.C. 703(a).
Section 3(a) of the MBTA authorizes
and directs the Secretary of the Interior
E:\FR\FM\03FEP1.SGM
03FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 22 (Monday, February 3, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5913-5915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01770]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 10
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0090; FF09M29000-201-FXMB12320900000]
RIN 1018-BD76
Migratory Bird Permits; Regulations Governing Take of Migratory
Birds; Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Supplementary proposed rule; intent to prepare an environmental
impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document advises that we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), intend to prepare a draft environmental impact
statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA). The Service hereby notifies Federal, State, and local agencies,
tribes, and the public of our intentions to evaluate the potential
environmental impacts of a proposal to adopt a regulation that
clarifies that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act's prohibitions on
pursuing, hunting, taking, capturing, killing, or attempting to do the
same, apply only to actions directed at migratory birds, their nests,
or their eggs, and, therefore, do not extend to incidental take, which
occurs when injury or mortality to migratory birds results from, but is
not the purpose of, an activity. The review will analyze the
environmental effects of the proposed approach and will provide
detailed analysis of the environmental effects of the proposed rule. We
invite input from other Federal and State agencies, tribes,
nongovernmental organizations, and members of the public on the scope
of the proposed NEPA analysis, the pertinent issues we should address,
and alternatives to our proposed approach for implementing the MBTA. We
will hold multiple public scoping webinars to inform the public about
the proposal.
DATES:
Comment submission: Public scoping will begin with the publication
of this document in the Federal Register and will continue through
March 19, 2020.
[[Page 5914]]
We will consider all comments on the scope of the draft environmental
review that are received or postmarked by that date. Comments received
or postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent
practicable.
Public scoping meetings: We will hold public scoping meetings in
the form of multiple webinars in February/March 2020. We will announce
exact webinar dates, times, and registration details on the internet at
https://fws.gov/migratorybirds/2020Regulation.php.
ADDRESSES:
Comment submission: You may submit written comments by one of the
following methods. Please do not submit comments by both.
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments to
Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0090.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0090; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; MS: JAO/1N; 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We do not accept email or faxes. We will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide.
Document availability: The proposed rule and supplementary
materials will be available at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2018-0090.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerome Ford, Assistant Director,
Migratory Birds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at 202-208-1050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703-12) was enacted
in 1918 to help fulfill the United States' obligations under the 1916
``Convention between the United States and Great Britain for the
protection of Migratory Birds,'' 39 Stat. 1702 (Aug. 16, 1916)
(ratified Dec. 7, 1916) (Migratory Bird Treaty). The list of migratory
birds protected by the MBTA is currently codified in title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 10.13.
In its current form, section 2(a) of the MBTA (16 U.S.C. 703(a))
provides that, unless permitted by regulations, it is unlawful:
at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take,
capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill, possess, offer for
sale, sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase, purchase,
deliver for shipment, ship, export, import, cause to be shipped,
exported, or imported, deliver for transportation, transport or
cause to be transported, carry or cause to be carried, or receive
for shipment, transportation, carriage, or export, any migratory
bird, any part, nest, or egg of any such bird, or any product,
whether or not manufactured, which consists, or is composed in whole
or part, of any such bird or any part, nest, or egg thereof.
Section 3(a) of the MBTA (16 U.S.C. 704(a)) authorizes and directs the
Secretary of the Interior to ``adopt suitable regulations'' allowing
``hunting, taking, capture, killing, possession, sale, purchase,
shipment, transportation, carriage, or export of any such bird, or any
part, nest, or egg thereof'' while considering (``having due regard
to'') temperature zones and ``distribution, abundance, economic value,
breeding habits, and times and lines of migratory flight of such
birds.'' Section 3(a) also requires the Secretary to ``determine when,
to what extent, if at all, and by what means, it is compatible with the
terms of the conventions'' to adopt such regulations allowing these
otherwise-prohibited activities.
On December 22, 2017, the Principal Deputy Solicitor of the
Department of the Interior, exercising the authority of the Solicitor
pursuant to Secretary's Order 3345, issued a legal opinion, M-37050,
``The Migratory Bird Treaty Act Does Not Prohibit Incidental Take'' (M-
37050 or M-Opinion). This opinion thoroughly examined the text,
history, and purpose of the MBTA and concluded that the MBTA's
prohibitions on pursuing, hunting, taking, capturing, killing, or
attempting to do the same apply only to actions directed at migratory
birds, their nests, or their eggs. This opinion is consistent with the
Fifth Circuit's decision in United States v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 801
F.3d 477 (5th Cir. 2015), which examined whether the MBTA prohibits
incidental take. It also marked a change from prior U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service interpretations and an earlier Solicitor's Opinion, M-
37041, ``Incidental Take Prohibited Under the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act.'' The Office of the Solicitor performs the legal work for the
Department of the Interior, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. The Service is the Federal agency delegated the primary
responsibility for managing migratory birds.
Need for Proposed Agency Action
The Service proposes to interpret the MBTA to prohibit only actions
directed at migratory birds, their nests, or their eggs, and to clarify
that incidental take is not prohibited. The purpose of this action is
to provide an official regulatory definition of the scope of the
statute as it relates to incidental take. The Service needs to conduct
this action to improve consistency in enforcement of the MBTA's
prohibitions across the country and thereby eliminate public
uncertainty caused by the current patchwork of legal standards across
the different Circuit Courts of Appeal, which have reached different
conclusions on the central question of whether the MBTA prohibits
incidental take. This approach also aligns with and implements the
Department's interpretation of the MBTA in M-37050.
NEPA Analysis of Potential Codification of the Solicitor's Opinion
Options
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C.
4321-4347) requires Federal agencies to undertake an assessment of the
environmental effects of any proposed action prior to making a final
decision and implementing it. NEPA requirements apply to any Federal
project, decision, or action that may have a significant impact on the
quality of the human environment. NEPA also established the Council on
Environmental Quality, which issued regulations implementing the
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508).
We intend to complete an environmental impact statement to assess
the impacts of codifying the Solicitor's Opinion, M-37050 and the
effects on migratory bird populations of mortality resulting from
incidental take. We will address our compliance with other applicable
authorities in our proposed environmental review.
Tribal Trust Responsibilities
The Service has overarching Tribal Trust Doctrine responsibilities
to tribes under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668d); the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et
seq.); the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. 1996); the
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.);
Secretarial Order 3206, American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal
Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act (June 5, 1997);
Executive Order 13007, Indian Sacred Sites (61 FR 26771, May 29, 1996);
and the Service's Native American Policy. We apply the terms ``tribal''
or ``tribe(s)'' generally to federally recognized tribes and Alaska
Native tribal entities. We will refer to Native Hawaiian Organizations
separately when we intend to include those entities. The Service will
separately consult with tribes and with Native Hawaiians on the
proposals set forth in the proposed rule. We will also ensure that
those tribes and Native
[[Page 5915]]
Hawaiians wishing to engage directly in the NEPA process will have the
opportunity to do so. As part of this process, we will protect the
confidential nature of any consultations and other communications we
have with tribes and Native Hawaiians to the extent authorized by law.
Public Scoping and Comments
See DATES for information about upcoming scoping webinars. Please
note that the Service will ensure that the public scoping webinars will
be accessible to members of the public with disabilities. A primary
purpose of the scoping process is to receive suggestions and
information on the scope of issues and alternatives to consider when
drafting the environmental documents and to identify significant issues
and reasonable alternatives related to the Service's proposed action.
To ensure that we identify a range of issues and alternatives related
to the proposed action, we invite comments and suggestions from all
interested parties. We will conduct a review of this proposed action
according to the requirements of NEPA and its regulations, other
relevant Federal laws, regulations, policies, and guidance, and our
procedures for compliance with applicable regulations.
We request information from interested government agencies, Native
American tribes, Native Hawaiian Organizations, the scientific
community, industry, nongovernmental organizations, and other
interested parties. We solicit input on the following:
(1) The avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures entities
employed to address incidental take of migratory birds (prior to M-
Opinion 37050);
(2) The direct costs associated with implementing these measures;
(3) The indirect costs that entities have incurred related to the
legal risk of prosecution for incidental take of migratory birds (e.g.,
legal fees, increased interest rates on financing, insurance,
opportunity costs);
(4) The extent that avoidance, minimization, and mitigation
measures continue to be used (after issuance of M-Opinion 37050);
(5) Any quantitative information regarding the economic benefits
and/or ecosystem services (e.g., pollination, pest control, etc.)
provided by migratory birds;
(6) Information regarding resources that may be affected by the
proposal; and
(7) Species having religious or cultural significance for tribes
and Native Hawaiian Organizations, and species having cultural
significance for the general public and impacts to cultural values from
the actions being considered.
You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods
described above under ADDRESSES. Once the draft environmental documents
are completed, we will offer further opportunities for public comment.
Public Availability of Comments
Written comments we receive become part of the public record
associated with this action. Your address, phone number, email address,
or other personal identifying information that you include in your
comment may become publicly available. You may ask us to withhold your
personal identifying information from public review, but we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or
businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their
entirety.
Authority
The authorities for this action are the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(16 U.S.C. 703-712) and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Dated: January 6, 2020.
Rob Wallace,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2020-01770 Filed 1-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P