This action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, amends regulations issued to carry out a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This rule amends Marketing Order No. 985, as amended (7 CFR part 985), regulating the handling of spearmint oil produced in the Far West. Part 985 (referred to as the “Order”) is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.” The Far West Spearmint Oil Administrative Committee (Committee) locally administers the Order and is comprised of spearmint oil producers operating within the area of production, and a public member.

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select a regulatory approach likely to maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity).

Executive Order 13563 is supplemental to and reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions of Executive Order 12866. It emphasizes the importance of seeking the views of those who are likely to be affected by regulation, providing an opportunity for public comment, and basing regulatory actions on a consideration of objective scientific, technical, and economic data.

This action falls within a category of regulatory actions that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive Order 12866 review.

This rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, which requires agencies to consider whether their rulemaking actions would have tribal implications. The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has determined that this rule is unlikely to have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. Under the Order now in effect, salable quantities and allotment percentages may be established for classes of spearmint oil produced in the Far West. This rule establishes salable quantities and allotment percentages for Scotch and Native spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 marketing year, which begins on June 1, 2022.

The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed no later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

Pursuant to the requirements in § 985.50 of the Order, the Committee meets each year to consider supply and demand of spearmint oil and to adopt a marketing policy for the ensuing marketing year. In determining such marketing policy, the Committee considers several factors, including, but not limited to, the current and projected supply of oil, estimated future demand, production costs, and producer prices for both classes of spearmint oil. Input from spearmint oil handlers and producers are considered as well.

Pursuant to the provisions in § 985.51, when the Committee's marketing policy considerations indicate a need to establish or to maintain stable market conditions through volume regulation, the Committee subsequently recommends to AMS the establishment of a salable quantity and allotment percentage for such class or classes of oil in the forthcoming marketing year. Recommendations for volume control are intended to ensure that market requirements for Far West spearmint oil are satisfied and orderly marketing conditions are maintained.

Section 985.12 defines salable quantity as the total quantity of each class of oil (Scotch or Native) which handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during a given marketing year. A producer's allotment base is their calculated share of the spearmint oil market based on a statistical representation of past spearmint oil production, with accommodation for reasonable, normal adjustments to such base as prescribed by the Committee and approved by AMS. Each producer's annual allotment of salable spearmint oil is calculated by multiplying their respective allotment base for each class of spearmint oil by the allotment percentage for that class of spearmint oil. The allotment percentage is the percentage used to calculate each producer's prorated share of the salable quantity and is derived by dividing the salable quantity for each class of spearmint oil by the total of all producers' allotment base for the same class of oil. The total allotment base is revised each year on June 1 to account for producer base being lost as a result of the “bona fide effort” production provision of § 985.53(e) and additional base made available pursuant to the provisions of § 985.153.

Salable quantities and allotment percentages are established at levels intended to fulfill market requirements and to maintain orderly marketing conditions. Committee recommendations for volume control are made well in advance of the upcoming marketing year in which the regulations are to be effective, thereby allowing producers ample time to adjust their production decisions accordingly.

The Committee met on October 13, 2021, to consider its marketing policy for the 2022-2023 marketing year. At that meeting, the Committee determined that, based on the current market and supply conditions, volume regulation for both classes of oil is necessary. The Committee unanimously recommended a salable quantity and allotment percentage for Scotch spearmint oil of 832,546 pounds and 37 percent and a salable quantity and allotment percentage for Native spearmint oil of 1,101,269 pounds and 43 percent.

This action establishes the amount of Scotch and Native spearmint oil that handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during the 2022-2023 marketing year, which begins on June 1, 2022. Salable quantities and allotment percentages have been placed into effect each season since the Order's inception in 1980.

The Committee recommended a Scotch spearmint oil salable quantity of 832,546 pounds and an allotment percentage of 37 percent for the 2022-2023 marketing year. The 2022-2023 marketing year salable quantity of 832,546 pounds is 14,138 pounds less than the 2021-2022 marketing year salable quantity of 846,684 pounds. The allotment percentage, recommended at 37 percent for the 2022-2023 marketing year, is one percent less than the percentage in effect the previous year. The total allotment base for the coming marketing year is estimated to be 2,250,124 pounds. This figure represents a one-percent increase over the revised 2021-2022 marketing year total allotment base of 2,227,846 pounds. The salable quantity (832,546 pounds) is the product of total allotment base (2,250,124 pounds) times the allotment percentage (37 percent).

The Committee considered several factors in making its recommendation, including the current and projected future supply, estimated future demand, production costs, and producer prices. The Committee's recommendation also accounts for the established acreage of Scotch spearmint, consumer demand, existing carry-in, reserve pool volume, and increased production in competing markets.

According to the Committee, as costs of production have increased and spearmint oil prices have decreased, many producers have forgone new plantings of Scotch spearmint. This has resulted in a significant decline in production of Scotch spearmint oil in recent years. Production has decreased from 1,113,346 pounds produced in 2016 to an estimated 556,559 pounds of Scotch spearmint production in 2021.

Industry reports indicate that trade demand for Far West Scotch spearmint oil has diminished over the past five years as international markets for spearmint-flavored products have slowed. Sales of Far West Scotch spearmint oil have declined from 1,060,232 pounds during the 2014-2015 marketing year to 717,952 pounds in 2018-2019, and further to 488,484 pounds in 2020-2021, the last full year of available data. In addition to declining spearmint oil demand, increasing production of Scotch spearmint oil in competing markets, most notably by Canadian producers, has put additional downward pressure on the Far West Scotch spearmint oil market.

Given the anticipated market conditions for the coming year, the Committee estimates that Scotch spearmint oil trade demand for the 2022-2023 marketing year will be 650,000 pounds, which is 25,000 pounds higher than the prior year estimate and right in line with the 5-year moving sales average of 650,033 pounds. Should the established volume regulation levels prove insufficient to adequately supply the market, the Committee has the authority to recommend intra-seasonal increases, as it has in previous marketing years.

The Committee calculated the minimum salable quantity of Scotch spearmint oil that will be required during the 2022-2023 marketing year (311,105 pounds) by subtracting the estimated salable carry-in on June 1, 2022, (338,895 pounds) from the estimated trade demand (650,000 pounds). This minimum salable quantity represents the estimated minimum amount of Scotch spearmint oil that will be needed to satisfy estimated trade demand for the coming year. To ensure that the market will be fully supplied, the Committee recommended a 2022-2023 marketing year salable quantity of 832,546 pounds. The recommended salable quantity, combined with an estimated 338,895 pounds of salable carry-in from the previous year, will yield a total available supply of 1,171,441 pounds of Scotch spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 marketing year. With the recommended salable quantity and current market environment, the Committee estimates that as much as 521,441 pounds of salable Scotch spearmint oil could be carried into the 2022-2023 marketing year.

Salable carry-in is the primary measure of excess spearmint oil supply under the Order, as it represents overproduction in prior years that is currently available to the market without restriction. Under volume regulation, spearmint oil that is designated as salable continues to be available to the market until it is sold and may be marketed at any time at the discretion of the owner. The Committee estimates that there will be 338,895 pounds of salable carry-in of Scotch spearmint oil on June 1, 2022. If current market conditions are maintained and the Committee's projections are correct, salable carry-in will increase to 521,441 pounds at the beginning of the 2022-2023 marketing year. This level will be above the quantity that the Committee generally considers favorable (150,000 pounds). However, the Committee believes that, given the current economic conditions in the Scotch spearmint oil industry, some Scotch spearmint oil producers may not produce enough oil in the 2022-2023 marketing year to fill all of their annual allotment. The Committee estimates that as much as 280,671 pounds of 2021-2022 marketing year annual allotment may not be filled by producers. While the Committee has not projected unused base allotment for the upcoming 2022-2023 marketing year, it anticipates that the actual quantity of Scotch spearmint oil carried into the following marketing year will be less than the quantity calculated above (521,441 pounds).

Spearmint oil held in reserve is oil that has been produced in excess of a producer's annual allotment, either in the current marketing year or in prior years. After December 1 of each marketing year, reserve pool oil is not available to the market in the current marketing year without an increase in the salable quantity and allotment percentage. However, reserve oil may be released for limited market development projects with the approval of the Secretary. Oil held in the reserve pool is another indicator of excess supply. Scotch spearmint oil held in the reserve pool was 72,361 pounds as of May 31, 2021, up from 67,645 pounds as of May 31, 2020. This quantity of reserve pool oil should be an adequate buffer to supply the market, if necessary, should the industry experience an unexpected increase in demand.

The Committee recommended an allotment percentage of 37 percent for the 2022-2023 marketing year for Scotch spearmint oil. During its October 13, 2021, meeting, the Committee calculated an initial allotment percentage by dividing the minimum required salable quantity (311,105 pounds) by the total estimated allotment base (2,250,124 pounds), resulting in 13.8 percent. However, producers and handlers at the meeting indicated that the computed percentage (13.8 percent) might not adequately supply potential 2022-2023 Scotch spearmint oil market demand and may also result in a less than desirable carry-in for the subsequent marketing year. After deliberation, the Committee recommended an allotment percentage of 37 percent. The total estimated allotment base (2,250,124 pounds) for the 2022-2023 marketing year, multiplied by the recommended salable allotment percentage (37 percent), yields 832,546 pounds, which is the recommended salable quantity for the 2022-2023 marketing year.

The 2022-2023 marketing year computational data for the Committee's recommendations is detailed below.

(A) Estimated carry-in of Scotch spearmint oil on June 1, 2022: 338,895 pounds. This figure is the difference between the 2021-2022 marketing year total available supply of 963,895 pounds and the revised 2021-2022 marketing year estimated trade demand of 625,000 pounds.

(B) Estimated trade demand of Scotch spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 650,000 pounds. This figure was established at the Committee meeting held on October 13, 2021.

(C) Salable quantity of Scotch spearmint oil required from the 2022-2023 marketing year production: 311,105 pounds. This figure is the difference between the estimated 2022-2023 marketing year trade demand (650,000 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2021 (338,895 pounds). This salable quantity represents the minimum amount of Scotch spearmint oil that may be needed to satisfy estimated demand for the coming year.

(D) Total estimated Scotch spearmint oil allotment base of for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 2,250,124 pounds. This figure represents a one-percent increase over the 2021-2022 total actual allotment base of 2,227,846 pounds, as prescribed by § 985.53(d). The one-percent increase equals 22,278 pounds. This total estimated allotment base is revised each year on June 1 in accordance with § 985.53(e).

(E) Computed Scotch spearmint oil allotment percentage for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 13.8 percent. This percentage is computed by dividing the minimum required salable quantity (311,105 pounds) by the total estimated allotment base (2,250,124 pounds).

(F) Recommended Scotch spearmint oil allotment percentage for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 37 percent. This is the Committee's recommendation and is based on the computed allotment percentage (13.8 percent) and input from producers and handlers at the October 13, 2021, meeting. The recommended 37 percent allotment percentage reflects the Committee's belief that the computed percentage (13.8 percent) may not adequately supply the anticipated 2022-2023 marketing year Scotch spearmint oil market demand.

(G) Recommended Scotch spearmint oil salable quantity for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 832,546 pounds. This figure is the product of the recommended salable allotment percentage (37 percent) and the total estimated allotment base (2,250,124 pounds) for the 2022-2023 marketing year.

(H) Estimated total available supply of Scotch spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 1,171,441 pounds. This figure is the sum of the 2022-2023 marketing year recommended salable quantity (832,546 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2021 (338,895 pounds).

For the reasons stated above, the Committee believes that the recommended salable quantity and allotment percentage will adequately satisfy trade demand, will result in a reasonable carry-in for the following year, and will contribute to the orderly marketing of Scotch spearmint oil.

The Committee recommended a Native spearmint oil salable quantity of 1,101,269 pounds and an allotment percentage of 43 percent for the 2022-2023 marketing year. These figures are, respectively, 162,872 pounds and 6 percentage points higher than the levels established for the 2021-2022 marketing year. The Committee utilized handlers' estimated trade demand of Native spearmint oil for the coming year, historical and current Native spearmint oil production, inventory statistics, and international market data obtained from consultants for the spearmint oil industry to arrive at these recommendations.

The Committee anticipates that 2021 Native spearmint oil production will total 985,797 pounds, down substantially from the previous year's production of 1,181,230 pounds. Committee records indicate that spearmint producing acres in the Far West have declined from a recent high of 9,013 acres in 2019 to an estimated 6,275 acres of Native spearmint production 2021.

However, sales of Native spearmint oil recovered from a 10-year low of 1,076,906 pounds in the 2019-2020 marketing year to 1,332,260 pounds in 2020-2021, the last full year of reported sales. The Committee estimates that trade demand for Native spearmint oil will be 1,200,000 pounds for the 2022-2023 marketing year, which is somewhat less than the 5-year sales average of 1,301,490 pounds.

The Committee expects that 284,357 pounds of salable Native spearmint oil from prior years will be carried into the 2022-2023 marketing year. This amount is down from the 412,095 pounds of salable oil carried into the 2021-2022 marketing year, but still above the level that the Committee generally considers favorable.

Further, the Committee estimates that there will be 1,272,854 pounds of Native spearmint oil in the reserve pool at the beginning of the 2022-2023 marketing year. This figure is 73,062 pounds higher than the quantity of reserve pool oil held by producers on June 1, 2021, and well above the level that the Committee believes is optimal. Generally, reserve pool oil has been steadily increasing over the past several marketing years, climbing from 996,050 pounds of reserve oil since the start of the 2016-2017 marketing year.

The Committee expects end users of Native spearmint oil to continue to rely on Far West production as their primary source of high-quality Native spearmint oil. Overseas production of Native spearmint has declined in recent years. As a result, U.S. exports of Native spearmint oil have been steadily increasing since 2018. However, increased domestic production of Native spearmint from regions outside of the Far West production area has created additional domestic competition for market share. For instance, there were fewer than 2,000 acres of Native spearmint production in the U.S. Midwest region in 2016, which compares to over 10,000 acres of Native spearmint oil production in the Far West. However, 2021 estimates show that Far West acreage has declined to approximately 6,275 acres, compared to acreage increasing to around 5,000 acres in the Midwest. This situation has contributed to declining trade demand for Far West Native spearmint oil and led to downward pressure on producer prices.

The Committee chose to be cautiously optimistic in the establishment of its trade demand estimate for the 2022-2023 marketing year to ensure that the market will be adequately supplied. At the October 13, 2021, meeting, the Committee estimated the 2022-2023 marketing year Native spearmint oil trade demand to be 1,200,000 pounds. This figure is based on input provided by producers at nine production area meetings held in early October 2021, as well as estimates provided by handlers and other meeting participants. This figure represents an increase of 134,000 pounds from the previous year's revised trade demand estimate. The average estimated trade demand for Native spearmint oil derived from the area producer meetings was 1,173,333 pounds, whereas the handlers' estimates ranged from 950,000 to 1,300,000 pounds. The average of Native spearmint oil sales over the last three years was 1,301,490 pounds. The quantity marketed over the most recent full marketing year, 2020-2021, was 1,332,260 pounds.

The estimated June 1, 2022, carry-in of 284,357 pounds of Native spearmint oil, plus the recommended 2022-2023 marketing year salable quantity of 1,101,269 pounds, will result in an estimated total available supply of 1,385,626 pounds of Native spearmint oil during the 2022-2023 marketing year. With the corresponding estimated trade demand of 1,200,000 pounds, the Committee projects that 185,626 pounds of oil will be carried into the 2023-2024 marketing year. This will result in a year-over-year decrease of 98,731 pounds. The Committee estimates that there will be 1,272,854 pounds of Native spearmint oil held in the reserve pool at the beginning of the 2022-2023 marketing year. Should the industry experience an unexpected increase in trade demand, oil in the Native spearmint oil reserve pool could be released through an intra-seasonal increase to satisfy that demand.

The Committee recommended an allotment percentage of 43 percent for the 2022-2023 marketing year. During its October 13, 2021, meeting, the Committee calculated an initial allotment percentage of 35.8 percent by dividing the minimum required salable quantity to satisfy estimated trade demand (915,643 pounds) by the total allotment base (2,561,090 pounds). However, producers and handlers at the meeting expressed that the computed percentage of 35.8 percent may not adequately supply the potential 2022-2023 marketing year Native spearmint oil market demand or result in adequate carry-in for the subsequent marketing year. After deliberation, the Committee increased the recommended allotment percentage to 43 percent. The total estimated allotment base (2,561,090 pounds) for the 2022-2023 marketing year multiplied by the recommended salable allotment percentage (43 percent) yields 1,101,269 pounds, the recommended salable quantity for the year.

The 2022-2023 marketing year computational data for the Committee's recommendations is further outlined below.

(A) Estimated carry-in of Native spearmint oil on June 1, 2022: 284,357 pounds. This figure is the difference between the 2021-2022 marketing year total available supply of 1,350,357 pounds and the revised 2021-2022 marketing year estimated trade demand of 1,066,000 pounds.

(B) Estimated trade demand of Native spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 1,200,000 pounds. This estimate was established by the Committee at the October 13, 2021, meeting.

(C) Salable quantity of Native spearmint oil required from the 2022-2023 marketing year production: 915,643 pounds. This figure is the difference between the 2022-2023 marketing year estimated trade demand (1,200,000 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2022 (284,357 pounds). This is the minimum amount of Native spearmint oil that the Committee believes will be required to meet the anticipated 2022-2023 marketing year trade demand.

(D) Total estimated allotment base of Native spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 2,561,090 pounds. This figure represents a one-percent increase over the 2021-2022 total actual allotment base of 2,535,733 pounds as prescribed in § 985.53(d). The one-percent increase equals 25,357 pounds of oil. This estimate is revised each year on June 1, to adjust for the bona fide effort production provisions of § 985.53(e).

(E) Computed Native spearmint oil allotment percentage for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 35.8 percent. This percentage is calculated by dividing the required salable quantity (915,643 pounds) by the total estimated allotment base (2,561,090 pounds) for the 2022-2023 marketing year.

(F) Recommended Native spearmint oil allotment percentage for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 43 percent. This is the Committee's recommendation based on the computed allotment percentage (35.8 percent) and input from producers and handlers at the October 13, 2021, meeting. The recommended 43 percent allotment percentage is also based on the Committee's belief that the computed percentage (35.8 percent) may not adequately supply the potential market for Native spearmint oil in the 2022-2023 marketing year or allow for salable Native spearmint oil to be carried into the beginning of the 2023-2024 marketing year.

(G) Recommended Native spearmint oil 2022-2023 marketing year salable quantity: 1,101,269 pounds. This figure is the product of the recommended allotment percentage (43 percent) and the total estimated allotment base (2,561,090 pounds).

(H) Estimated available supply of Native spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 marketing year: 1,385,626 pounds. This figure is the sum of the 2022-2023 recommended salable quantity (1,101,269 pounds) and the estimated carry-in on June 1, 2022 (284,357 pounds). This amount could be increased, as needed, through an intra-seasonal increase in the salable quantity and allotment percentage.

The Committee's recommended Scotch and Native spearmint oil salable quantities and allotment percentages of 832,546 pounds and 37 percent, and 1,101,269 pounds and 43 percent, respectively, is expected to match the available supply of each class of spearmint oil to the estimated demand of each, thus avoiding extreme fluctuations in inventories and prices. This rule is similar to regulations issued in prior seasons.

The salable quantities in this final rule are not expected to cause a shortage of either class of spearmint oil. Any unanticipated or additional market demand for either class of spearmint oil which may develop during the marketing year could be satisfied by an intra-seasonal increase in the salable quantity and corresponding allotment percentage. The Order contains a provision in § 985.51 for intra-seasonal increases to allow the Committee the flexibility to respond quickly to changing market conditions.

Under volume regulation, producers who produce more than their annual allotments during the marketing year may transfer such excess spearmint oil to producers who have produced less than their annual allotment. In addition, on December 1 of each year, producers who have not transferred their excess spearmint oil to other producers must place their excess spearmint oil production into the reserve pool to be released in the future, in accordance with market needs and under the Committee's direction.

AMS has reviewed the Committee's marketing policy statement for the 2022-2023 marketing year. The Committee's marketing policy statement, a requirement whenever the Committee recommends volume regulation, meets the requirements of §§ 985.50 and 985.51.

The establishment of the salable quantities and allotment percentages in this rule are expected to allow for anticipated market needs. In determining anticipated market needs, the Committee considered historical sales, as well as changes and trends in production and demand. This rule also provides producers with information regarding the amount of spearmint oil that should be produced for the 2022-2023 season to meet anticipated market demand.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

There are approximately 39 producers of Scotch spearmint oil and 93 producers of Native spearmint oil operating within the regulated production area. In addition, there are approximately 9 spearmint oil handlers (both Scotch and Native spearmint) subject to regulation under the Order. Small agricultural service firms are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts of less than $30,000,000, and small agricultural producers are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $2,250,000 (NAICS code 111998, All Other Miscellaneous Crop Farming) (13 CFR 121.201).

The Committee reported that recent producer prices for spearmint oil have ranged from $14.00 to $17.00 per pound. The National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) reported that the 2020 U.S. season average spearmint oil producer price per pound was $16.90. Spearmint oil utilization for the 2020-2021 marketing year, as reported by the Committee, was 488,484 pounds and 1,332,260 pounds for Scotch and Native spearmint oil, respectively, for a total of 1,820,744 pounds. Multiplying $16.90 per pound by 2020-2021 marketing year spearmint oil utilization of 1,820,744 pounds yields a crop value estimate of about $30.77 million.

Given the accounting requirements for the volume regulation provisions of the Order, the Committee maintains accurate records of each producer's production and sales. Using the $16.90 average spearmint oil price, and Committee production data for each producer, the Committee estimates that 37 of the 39 Scotch spearmint oil producers and all of the 93 Native spearmint oil producers could be classified as small entities under the SBA definition.

There is no third party or governmental entity that collects and reports spearmint oil prices received by spearmint oil handlers. However, the Committee estimates an average spearmint oil handling markup at approximately 20 percent of the price received by producers. Twenty percent of the 2020 producer price of ($16.90) is $3.38 which results in a handler free on board (f.o.b.) price per pound estimate of $20.28 ($16.90 + $3.38).

Multiplying this estimated handler f.o.b. price by the 2020-2021 marketing year total spearmint oil utilization of 1,820,744 pounds results in an estimated handler-level spearmint oil value of $36.92 million. Dividing this figure by the number of handlers (9) yields estimated average annual handler receipts of about $4.1 million, which is well below the SBA threshold for small agricultural service firms.

Furthermore, using confidential data on pounds handled by each handler, and the abovementioned estimated handler price per pound, the Committee reported that it is not likely that any of the nine handlers had 2020-2021 marketing year spearmint oil sales that exceeded the $30 million SBA threshold.

Therefore, in view of the foregoing, the majority of producers of spearmint oil may be classified as small entities, and all of the handlers of spearmint oil may be classified as small entities.

This final rule establishes the quantity of spearmint oil produced in the Far West, by class, which handlers may purchase from, or handle on behalf of, producers during the 2022-2023 marketing year. The Committee recommended this action to help maintain stability in the spearmint oil market by matching supply to estimated demand, thereby avoiding extreme fluctuations in supplies and prices. Establishing quantities that may be purchased or handled during the marketing year through volume regulation allows producers to coordinate their spearmint oil production with the expected market demand. Authority for this action is provided in §§ 985.50, 985.51, and 985.52 of the Order.

The Committee estimates the total trade demand for the 2022-2023 marketing year for both classes of oil at 1,850,000 pounds. In addition, the Committee expects that the combined salable carry-in for both classes of spearmint oil will be 623,252 pounds. As such, the combined required salable quantity for the 2022-2023 marketing year is estimated to be 1,226,748 pounds (1,850,000 pounds trade demand less 623,252 pounds carry-in). Under volume regulation, total sales of spearmint oil by producers for the 2022-2023 marketing year will be held to 2,557,067 pounds (the recommended salable quantity for both classes of spearmint oil of 1,933,815 pounds plus 623,252 of carry-in).

This total available supply of 2,557,067 pounds should be more than adequate to supply the 1,850,000 pounds of anticipated total trade demand for spearmint oil. In addition, as of May 31, 2021, the total reserve pool for both classes of spearmint oil stood at 1,272,153 pounds. That quantity is expected to remain relatively unchanged over the course of the 2021-2022 marketing year, with current Committee reserve pool estimates totaling 1,336,471 pounds. Should trade demand increase unexpectedly during the 2022-2023 marketing year, reserve pool spearmint oil could be released into the market to supply that increase in demand.

The recommended allotment percentages, upon which 2022-2023 marketing year annual allotments are based, are 37 percent for Scotch spearmint oil and 43 percent for Native spearmint oil. Without volume regulation, producers would not be held to these allotment levels, and could sell unrestricted quantities of spearmint oil.

The AMS econometric model used to evaluate the Far West spearmint oil market estimated that the season average producer price per pound (from both classes of spearmint oil) would decline about $2.70 per pound without volume regulation. The surplus situation for the spearmint oil market that would exist without volume regulation in the 2022-2023 marketing year also would likely dampen prospects for improved producer prices in future years because of the excessive buildup in stocks.

In addition, spearmint oil prices would likely fluctuate with greater amplitude in the absence of volume regulation. The coefficient of variation, or CV (a standard measure of variability), of Far West spearmint oil producer prices for the period 1980-2020 (the years in which the Order has been in effect), is 24 percent, compared to 49 percent for the 20-year period (1960-1979) immediately prior to the establishment of the Order. Since higher CV values correspond to greater variability, this is an indicator of the price stabilizing impact of the Order.

The use of volume regulation allows the industry to fully supply spearmint oil markets while avoiding the negative consequences of over-supplying these markets. The use of volume regulation is believed to have little or no effect on consumer prices of products containing spearmint oil and will not result in fewer retail sales of such products.

The Committee discussed alternatives to the recommendations contained in this rule for both classes of spearmint oil. The Committee rejected the idea of not regulating volume for either class of spearmint oil because of the severe, price-depressing effects that would likely occur without volume regulation. The Committee also discussed and considered salable quantities and allotment percentages that were above and below the levels that were eventually recommended for both classes of spearmint oil. Ultimately, the action recommended by the Committee was to slightly reduce the allotment percentage and salable quantity for Scotch spearmint oil and to increase the salable quantity and allotment percentage for Native spearmint oil from the levels established for the 2021-2022 marketing year.

As noted earlier, the Committee's recommendation to establish salable quantities and allotment percentages for both classes of spearmint oil was made after careful consideration of all available information including: (1) The estimated quantity of salable oil of each class held by producers and handlers; (2) the estimated demand for each class of oil; (3) the prospective production of each class of oil; (4) the total of allotment bases of each class of oil for the current marketing year and the estimated total of allotment bases of each class for the ensuing marketing year; (5) the quantity of reserve oil, by class, in storage; (6) producer prices of oil, including prices for each class of oil; and (7) general market conditions for each class of oil, including whether the estimated season average price to producers is likely to exceed parity.

Based on its review, the Committee believes that the salable quantities and allotment percentages established in this rule will achieve the objectives sought. The Committee also believes that, should there be no volume regulation in effect for the upcoming marketing year, the Far West spearmint oil industry would return to the pronounced cyclical price patterns that occurred prior to the promulgation of the Order. As previously stated, annual salable quantities and allotment percentages have been issued for both classes of spearmint oil since the Order's inception. The salable quantities and allotment percentages established herein are expected to facilitate the goal of maintaining orderly marketing conditions for Far West spearmint oil for the 2022-2023 and future marketing years.

Costs to producers and handlers, large and small, resulting from this action are expected to be offset by the benefits derived from a more stable market and increased returns. The benefits of this rule are expected to be equally available to all producers and handlers regardless of their size.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB No. 0581-0178, Vegetable and Specialty Crops. No changes are necessary in those requirements as a result of this rule. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This rule establishes the salable quantities and allotment percentages for Scotch spearmint oil and Native spearmint oil produced in the Far West during the 2022-2023 marketing year. Accordingly, this rule does not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large spearmint oil producers or handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. In addition, AMS has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this final rule.

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

A proposed rule concerning this action was published in the Federal Register on February 14, 2022 (87 FR 8211). Copies of the proposed rule were also mailed or sent via email to all Far West spearmint oil handlers. The proposal was made available through the internet by AMS and the Office of the Federal Register. A 60-day comment period ending April 15, 2022, was provided for interested persons to respond to the proposal. No comments were received during the comment period. Accordingly, no changes will be made to the rule as proposed.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

After consideration of all relevant material presented, including the information and recommendation submitted by the Committee and other available information, it is hereby found that this rule will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Agricultural Marketing Service is amending 7 CFR part 985 as follows:

The Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (CON Act) and the Rural Electrification Act (RE Act) authorize USDA assistance programs for agriculture and rural development in America's rural areas. Section 6301 of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill) allows for the exclusion of certain prison and military populations from the definition of rural area contained in the CON Act and used in the RE Act.

This rule updates the definition of “Rural area” to adopt the statutory definition provided in the 2018 Farm Bill for affected programs that have not already been updated. Section 6301 of the Farm Bill amends the rural definition in Section 343(a)(13) of the Con Act and excludes the following from rural area population counts: (1) individuals incarcerated on a long-term or regional basis, and (2) the first 1,500 individuals who reside in housing located on a military base

Rural Development has updated its eligibility mapping tools to include areas that are now eligible under the revised statutory definition. Notwithstanding those updates, any community or member of the community who believes that their community should be included may contact the individual identified in the FOR FUTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this rule.

The Administrative Procedures Act exempts from prior notice any actions “relating to agency management or personnel or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts” (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)): therefore, Rural Development is issuing this action as a final rule.

The authority for this final rule comes from the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018, Public Law 115-334, sec. 6301 (2018) (2018 Farm Bill) and applies to all programs under the Con Act and RE Act.

This final rule is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review,” as implemented under USDA's regulations at 2 CFR part 415, subpart C, because this final rule provides general guidance on population exclusions as a whole. Applications for Agency programs will be reviewed individually under Executive Order 12372 as required by program procedures.

This final rule is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12866 because it adopts statutory language that instructs the agency on how to qualify eligible projects, therefore, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866.

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988. In accordance with this final rule: (1) unless otherwise specifically provided, all State and local laws that conflict with this rule will be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be given to this rule except as specifically prescribed in the rule; and (3) administrative proceedings of the National Appeals Division of the Department of Agriculture (7 CFR part 11) must be exhausted before bringing suit in court that challenges action taken under this rule.

The policies contained in this final rule do not have any substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. This final rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments; therefore, consultation with States is not required.

Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. ), the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this final rule as not a major rule, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

This rule has been reviewed in accordance with 7 CFR part 1970, Subpart A, “Environmental Policies.” Rural Development has determined that this action does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the environment. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Public Law 91-190, an Environmental Impact Statement is not required.

The final rule has been reviewed with regard to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). The undersigned has determined and certified by signature on this document that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities since this rulemaking action does not involve a new or expanded program nor does it require any more action on the part of a small business than required of a large entity.

Title II of the UMRA, Public Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal Agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal Governments and on the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, Federal Agencies generally must prepare a written statement, including cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with “Federal mandates” that may result in expenditures to State, local, or tribal Governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. When such a statement is needed for a rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires a Federal Agency to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, more cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule.

This final rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of title II of the UMRA) for State, local, and tribal Governments or for the private sector. Therefore, this final rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

This final rule contains no reporting or recordkeeping provisions requiring Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

Rural Development is committed to complying with the E-Government Act by promoting the use of the internet and other Information Technologies in order to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information, services, and other purposes.

The programs affected by this regulation are listed in the Assistance Listing Catalog (formerly Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance) under numbers:

Executive Order 13175 imposes requirements on Rural Development in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications or preempt tribal laws. Rural Development has determined that this final rule does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribe(s) or on either the relationship or the distribution of powers and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, this final rule is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 13175. If tribal leaders are interested in consulting with Rural Development on this final rule, they are encouraged to contact USDA's Office of Tribal Relations or Rural Development's Native American Coordinator at: AIAN@usda.gov to request such a consultation.

Rural Development has reviewed this final rule in accordance with USDA Regulation 4300-4, Civil Rights Impact Analysis,” to identify any major civil rights impacts the rule might have on program participants on the basis of age, race, color, national origin, sex, or disability. After review and analysis of the rule and available data, it has been determined that issuance of this Final Rule will neither adversely nor disproportionately impact very low, low and moderate-income populations, minority populations, women, Indian tribes or persons with disability, by virtue of their race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, or marital or familial status.

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Mission Areas, agencies, staff offices, employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, familial/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Program information may be made available in languages other than English. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication to obtain program information ( e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language) should contact the responsible Mission Area, agency, or staff office; the USDA TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY); or the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

(1) To file a program discrimination complaint, a complainant should complete Form AD-3027, USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, which can be obtained online at https://www.ocio.usda.gov/document/ad-3027, from any USDA office, by calling (866) 632-9992, or by writing a letter addressed to USDA. The letter must contain the complainant's name, address, telephone number, and a written description of the alleged discriminatory action in sufficient detail to inform the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (ASCR) about the nature and date of an alleged civil rights violation. The completed AD-3027 form or letter must be submitted to USDA by: Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410;

(2) Fax: (202) 690-7442; or

(3) EMail: program.intake@usda.gov.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Agency amends 7 CFR chapters XVII, XVIII, and XLII as follows:

The Federal Reserve Banks make primary and secondary credit available to depository institutions as a backup source of funding on a short-term basis, usually overnight. The primary and secondary credit rates are the interest rates that the twelve Federal Reserve Banks charge for extensions of credit under these programs. In accordance with the Federal Reserve Act, the primary and secondary credit rates are established by the boards of directors of the Federal Reserve Banks, subject to review and determination of the Board.

On June 15, 2022, the Board voted to approve a 0.75 percentage point increase in the primary credit rate in effect at each of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks, thereby increasing from 1 percent to 1.75 percent the rate that each Reserve Bank charges for extensions of primary credit. In addition, the Board had previously approved the renewal of the secondary credit rate formula, the primary credit rate plus 50 basis points. Under the formula, the secondary credit rate in effect at each of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks increased by 0.50 percentage points as a result of the Board's primary credit rate action, thereby increasing from 1.50 percent to 2.25 percent the rate that each Reserve Bank charges for extensions of secondary credit. The amendments to Regulation A reflect these rate changes.

The 0.75 percentage point increase in the primary credit rate was associated with a 0.75 percentage point increase in the target range for the federal funds rate (from a target range of 3/4 percent to 1 percent to a target range of 1 1/2 percent to 1 3/4 percent) announced by the Federal Open Market Committee on June 15, 2022, as described in the Board's amendment of its Regulation D published elsewhere in today's Federal Register .

In general, the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”)  1 imposes three principal requirements when an agency promulgates legislative rules (rules made pursuant to Congressionally-delegated authority): (1) publication with adequate notice of a proposed rule; (2) followed by a meaningful opportunity for the public to comment on the rule's content; and (3) publication of the final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date. The APA provides that notice and comment procedures do not apply if the agency for good cause finds them to be “unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the public interest.”  2 Section 553(d) of the APA also provides that publication at least 30 days prior to a rule's effective date is not required for (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) a rule for which the agency finds good cause for shortened notice and publishes its reasoning with the rule. 3 The APA further provides that the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553 do not apply “to the extent that there is involved . . . a matter relating to agency management or personnel or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts.”  4

Regulation A establishes the interest rates that the twelve Reserve Banks charge for extensions of primary credit and secondary credit. The Board has determined that the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date requirements of the APA do not apply to these final amendments to Regulation A. The amendments involve a matter relating to loans and are therefore exempt under the terms of the APA. Furthermore, because delay would undermine the Board's action in responding to economic data and conditions, the Board has determined that “good cause” exists within the meaning of the APA to dispense with the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date procedures of the APA with respect to the final amendments to Regulation A.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required. 5 As noted previously, a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required if the final rule involves a matter relating to loans. Furthermore, the Board has determined that it is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirements relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) of 1995, 6 the Board reviewed the final rule under the authority delegated to the Board by the Office of Management and Budget. The final rule contains no requirements subject to the PRA.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board is amending 12 CFR Chapter II to read as follows:

For monetary policy purposes, section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act (“Act”) imposes reserve requirements on certain types of deposits and other liabilities of depository institutions. 1 Regulation D, which implements section 19 of the Act, requires that a depository institution meet reserve requirements by holding cash in its vault, or if vault cash is insufficient, by maintaining a balance in an account at a Federal Reserve Bank (“Reserve Bank”). 2 Section 19 also provides that balances maintained by or on behalf of certain institutions in an account at a Reserve Bank may receive earnings to be paid by the Reserve Bank at least once each quarter, at a rate or rates not to exceed the general level of short-term interest rates. 3 Institutions that are eligible to receive earnings on their balances held at Reserve Banks (“eligible institutions”) include depository institutions and certain other institutions. 4 Section 19 also provides that the Board may prescribe regulations concerning the payment of earnings on balances at a Reserve Bank. 5 Prior to these amendments, Regulation D established IORB at 0.90 percent. 6

The Board is amending § 204.10(b)(1) of Regulation D to establish IORB at 1.65 percent. The amendment represents a 0.75 percentage point increase in IORB. This decision was announced on June 15, 2022, with an effective date of June 16, 2022, in the Federal Reserve Implementation Note that accompanied the FOMC's statement on June 15, 2022. The FOMC statement stated that the Committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate to 1 1/2 to 1 3/4 percent].

A Federal Reserve Implementation note stated:

As a result, the Board is amending § 204.10(b)(1) of Regulation D to establish IORB at 1.65 percent.

In general, the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”)  7 imposes three principal requirements when an agency promulgates legislative rules (rules made pursuant to Congressionally-delegated authority): (1) publication with adequate notice of a proposed rule; (2) followed by a meaningful opportunity for the public to comment on the rule's content; and (3) publication of the final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date. The APA provides that notice and comment procedures do not apply if the agency for good cause finds them to be “unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the public interest.”  8 Section 553(d) of the APA also provides that publication at least 30 days prior to a rule's effective date is not required for (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) a rule for which the agency finds good cause for shortened notice and publishes its reasoning with the rule. 9

The Board has determined that good cause exists for finding that the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date provisions of the APA are unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the public interest with respect to these final amendments to Regulation D. The rate change for IORB that is reflected in the final amendment to Regulation D was made with a view towards accommodating commerce and business and with regard to their bearing upon the general credit situation of the country. Notice and public comment would prevent the Board's action from being effective as promptly as necessary in the public interest and would not otherwise serve any useful purpose. Notice, public comment, and a delayed effective date would create uncertainty about the finality and effectiveness of the Board's action and undermine the effectiveness of that action. Accordingly, the Board has determined that good cause exists to dispense with the notice, public comment, and delayed effective date procedures of the APA with respect to this final amendment to Regulation D.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (“RFA”) does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required. 10 As noted previously, the Board has determined that it is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirements relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) of 1995, 11 the Board reviewed the final rule under the authority delegated to the Board by the Office of Management and Budget. The final rule contains no requirements subject to the PRA.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board amends 12 CFR part 204 as follows:

On March 31, 2022, and April 4, 2022, two Bombardier Inc. BD-700-2A12 airplanes (marketed as Global 7500 airplanes), powered by GE Passport P20-19BB1A and GE Passport P20-18BB1A model turbofan engines, respectively, experienced an engine fire during flight. The engine fire on the GE Passport P20-19BB1A resulted in a commanded in-flight shutdown (IFSD) and air turnback (ATB). The engine fire on the GE Passport P20-18BB1A resulted in an ATB. A subsequent investigation by the manufacturer found evidence of fuel leakage on the lower outboard core panel, aft end of the bifi plate, ignition lead, and fuel manifold B-nut connections. The investigation also found that fuel nozzle to fuel manifold B-nut connections were under-torqued on both event engines and the fuel leak at the fuel nozzle B-nut connections likely caused the engine fires. As a result, the manufacturer published GE Service Bulletin (SB) PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0141-00A-930A-D, Issue No 000, dated April 12, 2022, and GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0142-00A-930A-D, Issue No 001, dated May 11, 2022. The service information specifies procedures for the performance of a visual inspection of the fuel nozzle zone in the core compartment for indications of fuel leakage, undetected fire, or heat distress, re-torque of the coupling nuts in the core compartment, a ground power assurance check, and a borescope inspection. This condition, if not addressed, could result in engine fire, failure of the engine, in-flight shutdown, and loss of the airplane. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

The FAA is issuing this AD because the agency has determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

The FAA reviewed GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0142-00A-930A-D, Issue No 001, dated May 11, 2022 (GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0142). GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0142 specifies procedures for the performance of a visual inspection, a re-torque of the coupling nuts in the core compartment, a ground power assurance check, and a borescope inspection. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES .

The FAA reviewed GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0141-00A-930A-D, Issue No 000, dated April 12, 2022 (GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0141). GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0141 specifies procedures for the performance of a borescope inspection of the core compartment for indications of fuel leak or fire.

This AD requires a visual inspection of the core compartment, re-torque of the core compartment coupling nuts, a ground power assurance check, and a borescope inspection. Depending on the results of the inspections, this AD requires operators to perform applicable maintenance in accordance with their FAA-approved instructions for continued airworthiness.

GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0142-00A-930A-D specifies procedures for reporting information to the manufacturer. This AD does not require operators to report information to the manufacturer.

GE SB PASSPORT20-A-72-00-0142-00A-930A-D specifies procedures for contacting a GE field service engineer or 24/7 Business Aviation Support. This AD does not require operators to contact a GE field service engineer or 24/7 Business Aviation Support. Instead, this AD requires following an FAA-approved method to return the engine to service.

The FAA considers this AD to be an interim action. This unsafe condition is still under investigation by the manufacturer and, depending on the results of that investigation, the FAA may consider further rulemaking action.

Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. ) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and comment procedures for rules when the agency, for “good cause,” finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under this section, an agency, upon finding good cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days, upon a finding of good cause.

An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies foregoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule. The FAA considers fuel leakage and engine fire to be an urgent safety issue. The visual inspection of the core compartment is necessary to prevent engine fire, IFSD, damage to the airplane, failure of the engine, and loss of control of the airplane. All GE Passport 20-17BB1A, Passport 20-18BB1A, and Passport 20-19BB1A model turbofan engines are equipped with fuel nozzle to fuel manifold coupling nut connections which were determined by the manufacturer to have the potential for under-torqueing, following two incidents of engine fire on airplanes wherein a fuel leak at the fuel nozzle coupling nut connection was likely the cause of the fire. Affected engines must undergo a visual inspection before exceeding 30, 50, or 75 flight cycles (FCs) after the effective date of this AD, depending on the engine's cycles since new (CSN). Re-torque of the core compartment coupling nuts is required within 30 or 100 FCs after the effective date of the AD, depending on the engine serial number. Current fleet utilization data estimates the flight cycles will be accumulated between 30 and 90 days after the effective date of this AD. For affected engines with indications of fuel leakage, undetected fire, or heat distress following a visual inspection of the core compartment, this AD requires operators to perform applicable maintenance in accordance with their FAA-approved instructions for continued airworthiness. Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days, for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forego notice and comment.

The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES . Include “Docket No. FAA-2022-0691 and Project Identifier AD-2022-00601-E” at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this final rule because of those comments.

Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact received about this final rule.

CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Scott Stevenson, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt this rule without prior notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 42 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.

The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company Model 737-700, -800, and -900ER series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 13, 2021 (86 FR 56840). The NPRM was prompted by reports of incorrectly installed fuselage skin fasteners found at the station (STA) 727 bulkhead. This condition was the result of incorrect procedures used to install affected fasteners during airplane production that occurred within a certain time period. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require a detailed inspection of STA 727 body station bulkhead, between stringers S-22 and S-27, for any incorrectly installed fastener common to fuselage skin, and applicable on-condition actions. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent continuous operation of the airplane with undetected incorrectly installed fasteners, which may generate fatigue cracking that could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

The FAA received comments from Boeing, United Airlines, Air Line Pilots Association, International, and an individual commenter, who supported the NPRM without change.

The FAA received additional comments from two commenters, including Aviation Partners Boeing and Delta Air Lines (DAL). The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response.

Aviation Partners Boeing and DAL commented regarding the installation of blended or split scimitar winglets per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST00830SE and the effect of that installation on compliance with the proposed actions. DAL further requested a change to paragraph (c) of the proposed AD to clarify that the installation of STC ST00830SE does not affect the accomplishment of the manufacturer's service instructions.

The FAA agrees to clarify that the installation of winglets per STC ST00830SE does not affect the accomplishment of the manufacturer's service instructions. Therefore, the installation of STC ST00830SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Operators of airplanes with these winglets do not need to request a “change in product” alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval as specified in 14 CFR 39.17. The FAA has redesignated paragraph (c) of the proposed AD as paragraph (c)(1) of this AD, and added paragraph (c)(2) to this AD accordingly.

The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered any comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Except for minor editorial changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1384 RB, dated September 10, 2020. This service information specifies procedures for a detailed inspection for incorrectly installed fasteners at the STA 727 bulkhead outer chord common to the fuselage skin between stringers S-22 and S-27 on the left and right sides, and applicable on-condition actions. In addition to repair and replacement, on-condition actions include repetitive inspections for cracking of the fuselage skin between stringers S-22 and S-27; an open hole high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection for cracking at all incorrectly installed fastener locations; and external and internal general visual inspections for repairs of the STA 727 bulkhead. On-condition actions also include repetitive HFEC and low frequency eddy current (LFEC) inspections in unrepaired areas for cracking of the inner skin from the wheel well; of the outer, upper, and lower chords from the wheel well; and of the fail-safe chord from the cargo compartment.

This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES .

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 78 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary actions that would be required based on the results of the inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions.

On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Open hole HFEC inspections 21 work-hours × $85 per hour = $85 per inspection cycle $0 $1,785 per inspection cycle. HFEC and LFEC inspections 36 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,060 per inspection cycle 0 3,060 per inspection cycle.

The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the work-hour estimates for the repair and replacement specified in this AD. The cost of any required fasteners, which are operator supplied, would be minimal.

The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it expands the availability of RNAV in Alaska and improve the efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System by lessening the dependency on ground based navigation.

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No. FAA-2021-0864 in the Federal Register (86 FR 59068; October 26, 2021), establishing United States Area Navigation (RNAV) route T-415 in the vicinity of Gulkana, AK in support of a large and comprehensive T-route modernization project for the state of Alaska. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting comments on the proposal. There were no comments received.

United States Area Navigation Routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021 and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV route listed in this document would be published subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11F.

This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by establishing RNAV route T-415 in the vicinity of Gulkana, AK in support of a large and comprehensive T-route modernization project for the state of Alaska.

The route is described below.

T-415: This action establishes T-415 extending between the WRNGL, AK, waypoint (WP), located over the McCarthy Airport (PAMX), AK and the Gulkana, AK, (GKN) VHF Omnidirectional Range/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigational aide (NAVAID).

FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

The FAA determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA determined that this airspace action of establishing RNAV route T-415 in the vicinity of Gulkana, AK qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points), and paragraph 5-6.5i, which categorically excludes from further environmental review the establishment of new or revised air traffic control procedures conducted at 3,000 feet or more above ground level (AGL); procedures conducted below 3,000 feet AGL that do not cause traffic to be routinely routed over noise sensitive areas; modifications to currently approved procedures conducted below 3,000 feet AGL that do not significantly increase noise over noise sensitive areas; and increases in minimum altitudes and landing minima. As such, this action is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it expands the availability of RNAV in Alaska and improve the efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System by lessening the dependency on ground based navigation.

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No. FAA-2021-0863 in the Federal Register (86 FR 58823; October 25, 2021), establishing United States Area Navigation (RNAV) route T-396 in the vicinity of Nome, AK in support of a large and comprehensive T-route modernization project for the state of Alaska. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting comments on the proposal. There were no comments received.

United States Area Navigation Routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021 and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV route listed in this document would be published subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11F.

Subsequent to the publication of the NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2021-0863 in the Federal Register (86 FR 58823; October 25, 2021), establishing United States Area Navigation (RNAV) route T-396 in the vicinity of Nome, AK, the FAA determined it was necessary to relocate the HALUS waypoint (WP), to address instrument flight procedure concerns related to two points ( i.e., fix, navigational aid, waypoints) being located too close to one another. As a result, the latitude/long geographic coordinates for the HALUS WP are changed from what was proposed in the NPRM. This change moves the WP by approximately 600-feet from the location as proposed in the NPRM. The regulatory text in this action incorporates these changes.

This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by establishing RNAV route T-396 in the vicinity of Nome, AK in support of a large and comprehensive T-route modernization project for the state of Alaska.

The route is described below.

T-396: This action establishes T-396 from the Nome, AK, (OME) VHF Omnidirectional Range/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) to the Galena, AK, (GAL) VOR/DME.

FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

The FAA determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA determined that this airspace action of establishing RNAV route T-396 in the vicinity of Nome, AK qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points), and paragraph 5-6.5i, which categorically excludes from further environmental review the establishment of new or revised air traffic control procedures conducted at 3,000 feet or more above ground level (AGL); procedures conducted below 3,000 feet AGL that do not cause traffic to be routinely routed over noise sensitive areas; modifications to currently approved procedures conducted below 3,000 feet AGL that do not significantly increase noise over noise sensitive areas; and increases in minimum altitudes and landing minima. As such, this action is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the route structure to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System.

The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No. FAA-2021-0741 in the Federal Register (86 FR 50686; September 10, 2021), revoking RNAV route Q-162 and Q-166 in the vicinity of Bishop, CA due to the establishment of a new RNAV route, Q-174, that provides better connectivity for the Las Vegas Terminal area arrivals. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting comments on the proposal. There were no comments received.

United States Area Navigation routes are published in paragraph 2006 of FAA Order 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021 and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV routes listed in this document will be removed from FAA Order JO 7400.11.

This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by revoking RNAV routes Q-162 and Q-166 due to the establishment of RNAV route Q-174 that provides better connectivity to the new Las Vegas Terminal Arrival routes. The revocation actions are outlined below.

Q-162: Q-162 extends between the NTELL, CA, waypoint (WP) and the MYCAL, NV, WP. The route is revoked in its entirety.

Q-166: Q-166 currently navigates between the VIKSN, CA, WP and the BIKKR, CA, WP. The route is revoked in its entirety.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

The FAA determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The FAA has determined that this airspace action of revoking RNAV routes Q-162 and Q-166 qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points). As such, this action is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard did not receive final details for this event until June 16, 2022. It is impracticable to go through the full notice and comment rule making process because the Coast Guard must establish this safety zone by July 3, 2022 and lacks sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and to consider those comments before issuing the rule.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register . Delaying the effective date of this rule would be contrary to public interest because action is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from the potential safety hazards associated with the fireworks display on Redwood Creek in Redwood City, CA on July 4, 2022.

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port San Francisco has determined that potential hazards associated with the Redwood City Fourth of July Fireworks on July 4, 2022, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 100-foot radius of the fireworks vessel during loading and staging, and anyone within a 850-foot radius of the fireworks vessel starting 30 minutes before the fireworks display is scheduled to commence and ending 30 minutes after the conclusion of the fireworks display. For this reason, this temporary safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters around the fireworks vessel and during the fireworks display.

This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 9 a.m. on July 3, 2022 until 10:20 p.m. on July 4, 2022, during the loading, staging, and transit of the fireworks vessel in San Francisco Bay from Pier 50 to Redwood Creek, Redwood City, CA, and until 30 minutes after completion of the fireworks display. During the loading, staging, and transit of the fireworks vessel, scheduled to take place between 9 a.m. on July 3, 2022 until 9 p.m. on July 4, 2022, until 30 minutes prior to the start of the fireworks display, the safety zone will encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks vessel, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by connection of all points 100 feet out from the fireworks vessel. The fireworks display is scheduled to start from 9:30 p.m. and end at approximately 9:50 p.m. on July 4, 2022, on Redwood Creek in Redwood City, CA.

The fireworks vessel will remain at Pier 50 until the start of its transit to the display location. Movement of the vessel from Pier 50 to the display location is scheduled to take place from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. on July 4, 2022, where it will remain until the conclusion of the fireworks display.

At 9 p.m. on July 4, 2022, 30 minutes prior to the commencement of the 20-minute fireworks display, the safety zone will increase in size and encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks vessel, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by all connecting points 850 feet from the circle center at approximate position 37°30′28.48″ N-122°12′51.53″ W (NAD 83). The safety zone will terminate at 10:20 p.m. on July 4, 2022 or as announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

This regulation is necessary to keep persons and vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the fireworks loading, staging, transit, and display site. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area. A “designated representative” means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel, or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone. This regulation is necessary to ensure the safety of participants, spectators, and transiting vessels.

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

This regulatory action determination is based on the limited duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zone. Although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant because the local waterways users will be notified to ensure the safety zone will result in minimum impact. The vessels desiring to transit through or around the temporary safety zone may do so upon express permission from the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a temporary safety zone in the navigable waters around the loading, staging, transit, and display of fireworks near Pier 50 in San Francisco Bay and on Redwood Creek in Redwood City. It is 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 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.

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.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

The Coast Guard will enforce a temporary safety zone in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5, line 3, for the Riverfront Marketing Group Independence Day Celebration fireworks display event. This regulation will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 4, 2022. This action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waterways during this event. Our regulation for marine events within the Eighth Coast Guard District, 33 CFR 165.801, specifies the location of the regulated area on the Lower Mississippi River, between mile marker (MM) 94.3 and MM 95.3. During the enforcement period, if you are the operator of a vessel in the regulated area, you must comply with directions from the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.

In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register , the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this enforcement period via a Marine Safety Information Bulletin and/or Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

The Coast Guard will enforce a temporary safety zone in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5, line 15, for the Madisonville Old Fashioned 4th of July fireworks display event. This regulation will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 4, 2022. This action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during this event. Our regulations for marine events within the Eighth Coast Guard District, 33 CFR 165.801, specifies the approximate location of the regulated area on the Tchefuncte River as 30°24′11.63″ N, 090°09′17.39″ W. During the enforcement period, if you are the operator of a vessel in the regulated area, you must comply with directions from the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.

In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal Register , the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this enforcement period via Marine Safety Information Bulletin and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

The Coast Guard will enforce a temporary safety zone in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5, line 2 for the St. John the Baptist Independence Day Celebration event. This regulation will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 1, 2022. This action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during this event. Our regulations for marine events within the Eighth Coast Guard District, 33 CFR 165.801, specifies the location of the regulated area on the Mississippi River between mile marker (MM) 137.5 and MM 138.5 on the Lower Mississippi River near Reserve, Louisiana. During the enforcement period, if you are the operator of a vessel in the regulated area, you must comply with directions from the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.

In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register , the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this enforcement period via a Marine Safety Information Bulletin and/or Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zones established in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item numbers 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 31 and 32 during the dates, times, and locations indicated in the table below. The dates, times, and locations will also be published in the Local Notice to Mariners at least 10 days prior to the date of each event.

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from anchoring, blocking, loitering, or impeding the through transit of participants or official patrol vessels in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM or other Official Patrol, defined as a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency on scene to assist the Coast Guard in enforcing the safety zone. During the enforcement periods, if you are the operator of a vessel in one of the safety zones, you must comply with directions from the Patrol Commander or other Official Patrol. The PATCOM or Official Patrol may, upon request, allow the transit of commercial vessels through regulated areas when it is safe to do so.

In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register , the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners.

If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

The Postal Service published a document in the Federal Register on June 13, 2022, (87 FR 35658-35660), adopting the standards for the July 10, 2022, Mailing Services price change. Under this supplemental final rule, the Postal Service further revises the standards for the Direct Container Discount.

The Postal Service is offering discounts for USPS Marketing Mail Saturation Flats (including EDDM, not EDDM Retail) and High Density Plus Flats in 5-digit (direct) containers (all pallets regardless of entry, and sacks, and tubs entered at the DDU). Under the standards adopted for the July 10, 2022 Mailing Services price change, the Postal Service offers discounts for Carrier Route Flats and High Density Flats on 5-digit (direct) pallets; these discounts will now extend to Carrier Route Flats and High Density Flats in 5-digit (direct) sacks and tubs entered at the DDU.

The Postal Service adopts the following changes to Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), to supplement those adopted at 87 FR 35658 (June 13, 2022), incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations. See 39 CFR 111.1.

We will publish an appropriate amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect these changes.

Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111, as amended at 87 FR 35658 (June 13, 2022), is further amended as follows:

Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the EPA.

On April 13, 2022 (87 FR 21822), the EPA proposed to approve the following rule into the California SIP.

We proposed to approve these revisions because we determined that they comply with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action contains more information on the rule and our evaluation.

The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received one non-germane comment. Therefore, we are finalizing our action as proposed.

No comments were submitted that change our assessment of the rule as described in our proposed action. Therefore, as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully approving the negative declarations into the California SIP. This approval stops all sanction and federal implementation plan clocks started by our December 3, 2020 partial approval and partial disapproval actions on the SDAPCD RACT SIP.

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the EPA finds there is good cause for this action to become effective immediately upon publication. The immediate effective date for this action is authorized under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).

Section 553(d)(1) of the APA provides that final rules shall not become effective until 30 days after publication in the Federal Register “except . . . a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction.” The purpose of this provision is to “give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior before the final rule takes effect.” Omnipoint Corp. v. Fed. Commc'n Comm'n, 78 F.3d 620, 630 (DC Cir. 1996); see also United States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (quoting legislative history). However, when the agency grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction, affected parties do not need a reasonable time to adjust because the effect is not adverse. The EPA has determined that this rule relieves a restriction because this rule terminates the sanctions and federal implementation plan clocks started by our December 3, 2020 partial approval and partial disapproval. Upon the effective date of this action, the sanctions and federal implementation plan clocks will stop. For this reason, the EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) for this action to become effective on the date of publication of this action.

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);

• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);

• Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and

• Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA, 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq. ) was enacted to conserve certain species of migratory birds and gives the Secretary of the Interior the authority to regulate the harvest of these birds. The law further authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations to ensure that the indigenous inhabitants of the State of Alaska may take migratory birds and collect their eggs for nutritional and other essential needs during seasons established by the Secretary so as to provide for the preservation and maintenance of stocks of migratory birds (16 U.S.C. 712(1)).

The take of migratory birds for subsistence uses in Alaska occurs during the spring and summer, during which timeframe when the annual fall/winter harvest of migratory birds is not allowed. Regulations governing the subsistence harvest of migratory birds in Alaska are located in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in part 92. These regulations allow for the continuation of customary and traditional subsistence uses of migratory birds and prescribe regional information on when and where the harvesting of birds in Alaska may occur.

The migratory bird subsistence harvest regulations are developed cooperatively. The Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council (Council or AMBCC) consists of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG), and representatives of Alaska's Native population. The Council's primary purpose is to develop recommendations pertaining to the subsistence harvest of migratory birds.

The Council generally holds an annual spring meeting to develop recommendations for migratory bird subsistence-harvest regulations in Alaska that would take effect in the spring of the next year. In 2021, the in-person spring meeting did not occur due to the coronavirus pandemic. Instead, the Council met virtually via teleconference on April 5, 2021, to approve subsistence harvest regulations that would take effect during the 2022 harvest season. The Council's recommendations were presented to the Pacific Flyway Council for review and subsequent submission to the Service Regulations Committee (SRC) for approval at the SRC meeting on September 28 and 29, 2021.

Per the collaborative process described above, we published a proposed rule to update the regulations for the taking of migratory birds for subsistence uses in Alaska during the spring and summer (87 FR 14232, March 14, 2022). By the end of the comment period on the proposed rule, we received two comments. We hereby respond to the relevant issues that were raised in the public input. We made no changes to the proposed rule as a result of the input we received via the public comments (see Final Regulations, below, for more information).

Issue: One commenter expressed the following sentiments: (i) migratory birds are endangered; (ii) the proposed rule would allow the killing of endangered species; (iii) subsistence harvest of migratory birds is not necessary because subsistence harvesters can survive on food that does not come from animals; (iv) by killing healthy animals, other species take over resources and disrupt the ecosystem; and (v) migratory birds should be protected.

Response: Migratory birds open for harvest during the spring/summer subsistence season in Alaska do not include threatened or endangered species. Annual harvest surveys show that species protected by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ), are not harvested by subsistence hunters. The Service conducted an intra-agency consultation and determined that this rule complies with the ESA (see Endangered Species Act Consideration, below, for more information). The Service agrees that subsistence hunters harvest healthy migratory birds; however, there is no evidence that this harvest results in other wildlife species taking food, habitat, or other resources to the detriment of the ecosystem. The comment that people can survive on food that is not animal-based is true; however, the spring/summer migratory bird subsistence harvest in Alaska is of cultural, traditional, and nutritional importance to Alaska Native peoples and other rural Alaskans. The Service conducts annual population and harvest surveys of migratory birds and establishes hunting regulations to ensure the sustainability of migratory bird populations and that harvest does not result in species becoming vulnerable or any disruptions to the ecosystem.

Issue: A commenter inquired about (i) the boundaries of the Kachemak Bay State Wilderness Park; (ii) use of quota sampling as a survey method to estimate subsistence harvest; and (iii) how these regulations may modernize existing rules and commitments.

Response: The Service revised the previously vague boundaries of the harvest area for the Villages of Nanwalek and Port Graham by referencing specific waypoints, lines of longitude, and boundaries of Game Management Units to define an exact map location. The harvest area includes parts of the Kachemak Bay State Park and Kachemak Bay State Wilderness Park; further, some of the waypoints and boundaries occur at the head of Kachemak Bay at the Fox River Flats in tidal/mud flats and marshland. The boundary occurs in this tidal flat area because the previous definition included the boundary as the “mouth of Fox River.” Given the vagueness of the phrase “mouth of Fox River” in a tidal mud flat, the Service selected a specific latitude/longitude to better define the boundary. The Service now defines the boundary as “the north bank of the Fox River [59°48′57″ N; 150°58′44″ W].”

The commenter also recommended the Service consider quota sampling to provide timely and accurate harvest information. Quota sampling is a method for selecting survey participants on a non-random basis, i.e., all members of the population do not have an equal chance of being selected to be a part of the sample group. Because quota sampling does not select sample units with a known inclusion probability and all units of the population do not have a known sample probability, the method can be unreliable. Because the non-random element of quota sampling is a source of uncertainty about the nature of the actual sample, the Service believes alternative sampling methods are preferred over quota sampling. Finally, the proposed changes to the regulations will allow publication of maps that are accurate and reproducible into the future and interpretable by subsistence hunters and law enforcement officials.

We are making no changes to the regulatory revisions in our March 14, 2022, proposed rule (87 FR 14232) as a result of the input we received via the public comments.

The rule sets forth the same subsistence harvest regulations in subpart D, Annual Regulations Governing Subsistence Harvest, as those from the 2021 subsistence harvest seasons (see 86 FR 11707, February 26, 2021; 86 FR 20311, April 19, 2021) with five clarifications:

In part 92, subpart A (general provisions), we clarify the regulations defining excluded areas, which are those areas that are closed to subsistence harvest.

First, we clarify that subsistence hunters whose communities petitioned successfully to be added to the list of included areas appearing at 50 CFR 92.5(a)(2) may harvest migratory birds within the entirety of the subsistence harvest areas designated for their community, including portions of harvest areas that occur within designated excluded areas.

For example, portions of the subsistence harvest areas selected by communities in the Upper Copper River Region listed as eligible under 50 CFR 92.5(a)(2)(i) occur within the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, an excluded area that is otherwise closed to harvest (50 CFR 92.5(b)(2)). The regulations do not specify that these portions of designated harvest areas that occur in excluded areas are, in fact, open to subsistence hunting. To address this issue, we amended 50 CFR 92.5(b) to make an exception to harvest closures in those portions of excluded areas that fall within subsistence harvest areas designated for specific communities that petitioned to be listed as eligible for participation in the spring/summer subsistence hunt (50 CFR 92.5(a)(2)).

This exception would not apply to subsistence harvest areas that have been generally designated for regions ( e.g., Bering Strait Norton Sound Region) or subregions ( e.g., Bering Strait Norton Sound Stebbins/St. Michael Area) listed as included areas at 50 CFR 92.5(a).

Second, to clarify the boundaries of areas that are closed to subsistence harvest, we address an apparent inconsistency in some terms used in part 92. The regulations governing subsistence harvest of migratory birds were set forth August 16, 2002 (67 FR 53511). That rule defined the term “village” at 50 CFR 92.4 and also set forth provisions regarding areas that are excluded from eligibility to participate in the subsistence harvest of migratory birds. Under 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2), excluded areas include “[v]illage areas” located in Anchorage, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, the Kenai Peninsula roaded area, the Gulf of Alaska roaded area, Southeast Alaska, and the Central Interior Excluded Area. The definition of “village” at 50 CFR 92.4 and use of the term “village areas” at 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2) to describe excluded areas has created confusion in determining the boundaries of closed areas. We never intended for the excluded areas set forth at 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2) to be only those portions of those areas that meet the definition of “village” at 50 CFR 92.4. Therefore, we remove the term “village areas” from 50 CFR 92.5(b)(2) to clarify that excluded areas are closed to harvest in their entirety, except those portions that occur within a harvest area that has been designated for a specific community.

Third, we clarify the language defining boundaries of the excluded areas of the Kenai Peninsula roaded area and the Gulf of Alaska roaded area. The geographic boundaries of the Kenai Peninsula roaded area and the Gulf of Alaska roaded area are undefined in the regulations, making the development of usable hunt maps imprecise and ambiguous. The changes to the regulations would allow publication of maps that are accurate and reproducible into the future and interpretable by subsistence hunters and law enforcement officials.

Finally, we are including a needed administrative correction. The Chugach Community of Cordova should have been included in the list of included areas for the Gulf of Alaska region in subpart A following Council action in 2014. The omission of this community from the regulations was the result of an inadvertent oversight. The Chugach Community of Cordova does appropriately appear in the regulations for eligible subsistence-harvest areas in 50 CFR 92.31(j)(2). Therefore, we are adding the Chugach Community of Cordova to the current list of included areas in 50 CFR 92.5(a)(2)(ii). Similarly, we are clarifying that the Central Interior Excluded Area includes the Fairbanks North Star Borough.

These revisions to the regulations in subpart A are not anticipated to result in a significant increase in harvest of birds and eggs because spring and summer subsistence practices likely occur in these areas at the present time.

In 50 CFR 92.31, we clarify the designated harvest area boundaries for the communities of Port Graham and Nanwalek in the Gulf of Alaska Region and for the community of Tyonek in the Cook Inlet Region. Current harvest area definitions in the regulations for these communities are incomplete (that is, they do not describe a complete polygon), and only partially define the boundaries of the harvest areas. The revisions would allow publication of maps that are accurate and reproducible into the future and provide a clear definition of the harvest areas designated for the communities that subsistence hunters and law enforcement officials can interpret and follow in the field.

The Service has dual objectives and responsibilities for authorizing a subsistence harvest while protecting migratory birds and threatened species. Although these objectives continue to be challenging, they are not irreconcilable, provided that: (1) regulations continue to protect threatened species, (2) measures to address documented threats are implemented, and (3) the subsistence community and other conservation partners commit to working together.

Mortality, sickness, and poisoning from lead exposure have been documented in many waterfowl species, including threatened spectacled eiders ( Somateria fischeri ) and the Alaska-breeding population of Steller's eiders ( Polysticta stelleri ). While lead shot has been banned nationally for waterfowl hunting since 1991, Service staff have documented the availability of lead shot in waterfowl rounds for sale in communities on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta and North Slope. The Service will work with partners to increase our education, outreach, and enforcement efforts to ensure that subsistence waterfowl hunting is conducted using nontoxic shot.

We have monitored subsistence harvest for the past 25 years through the use of household surveys in the most heavily used subsistence harvest areas, such as the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. Based on our monitoring of the migratory bird species and populations taken for subsistence, we find that this rule will provide for the preservation and maintenance of migratory bird stocks as required by the MBTA. Communication and coordination between the Service, the AMBCC, and the Pacific Flyway Council have allowed us to set harvest regulations to ensure the long-term viability of the migratory bird stocks.

Spectacled eiders and the Alaska-breeding population of Steller's eiders are listed as threatened species under the ESA. Their migration and breeding distributions overlap with areas where the spring and summer subsistence migratory bird hunt is open in Alaska. Neither species is included in the list of subsistence migratory bird species at 50 CFR 92.22; therefore, both species are closed to subsistence harvest. Under 50 CFR 92.21 and 92.32, the Service may implement emergency closures, if necessary, to protect Steller's eiders or any other endangered or threatened species or migratory bird population.

Section 7 of the ESA requires the Secretary of the Interior to review other programs administered by the Department of the Interior and utilize such programs in furtherance of the purposes of the ESA. The Secretary is further required to insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the Department of the Interior is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.

The Service's Alaska Region Migratory Bird Management Program conducted an intra-agency consultation with the Service's Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office. The consultation was completed with a biological opinion issued on March 15, 2022, that concluded these rulemaking actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. Therefore, we have determined that this rule complies with the ESA.

This rule takes effect on the date set forth above in DATES . Delaying the effective date for 30 days would have detrimental effects on Alaskans seeking to conduct subsistence harvest of migratory birds. To respect the subsistence hunt of many rural Alaskans, either for their cultural or religious exercise, sustenance, and/or materials for cultural use ( e.g., handicrafts), the Department of the Interior finds that it is in the public interest to make this rule effective as soon as possible. For these reasons, we find that “good cause” exists within the terms of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the Administrative Procedure Act and under the authority of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (July 3, 1918), as amended (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq. ), to make this rule take effect immediately upon publication in the Federal Register .

Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not significant.

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The Executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. ). A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. Accordingly, a small entity compliance guide is not required. This rule would legalize a preexisting subsistence activity, and the resources harvested will be consumed.

This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:

(a) Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. It would legalize and regulate a traditional subsistence activity. It would not result in a substantial increase in subsistence harvest or a significant change in harvesting patterns. The commodities that would be regulated under this rule are migratory birds. This rule deals with legalizing the subsistence harvest of migratory birds and, as such, does not involve commodities traded in the marketplace. A small economic benefit from this rule would derive from the sale of equipment and ammunition to carry out subsistence hunting. Most, if not all, businesses that sell hunting equipment in rural Alaska qualify as small businesses. We have no reason to believe that this rule would lead to a disproportionate distribution of benefits.

(b) Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government agencies; or geographic regions. This rule does not deal with traded commodities and, therefore, would not have an impact on prices for consumers.

(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. This rule deals with the harvesting of wildlife for personal consumption. It would not regulate the marketplace in any way to generate substantial effects on the economy or the ability of businesses to compete.

We have determined and certified under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. ) that this rule would not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local, State, or Tribal governments or private entities. The rule would not have a significant or unique effect on local, State, or Tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act is not required. Participation on regional management bodies and the Council requires travel expenses for some Alaska Native organizations and local governments. In addition, they assume some expenses related to coordinating involvement of village councils in the regulatory process. Total coordination and travel expenses for all Alaska Native organizations are estimated to be less than $300,000 per year. In a notice of decision (65 FR 16405; March 28, 2000), we identified 7 to 12 partner organizations (Alaska Native nonprofits and local governments) to administer the regional programs. The ADFG also incurs expenses for travel to Council and regional management body meetings. In addition, the State of Alaska would be required to provide technical staff support to each of the regional management bodies and to the Council. Expenses for the State's involvement may exceed $100,000 per year but should not exceed $150,000 per year. When funding permits, we make annual grant agreements available to the partner organizations and the ADFG to help offset their expenses.

Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this rule would not have significant takings implications. This rule is not specific to particular land ownership, but instead applies to the harvesting of migratory bird resources throughout Alaska. A takings implication assessment is not required.

Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. We discuss effects of this rule on the State of Alaska in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act section, above. We worked with the State of Alaska to develop these regulations. Therefore, a federalism summary impact statement is not required.

The Department, in promulgating this rule, has determined that it would not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.

Consistent with Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249; November 9, 2000), “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,” and Department of the Interior policy on Consultation with Indian Tribes (December 1, 2011), we sent letters via electronic mail to all 229 Alaska federally recognized Indian Tribes. Consistent with Congressional direction (Pub. L. 108-199, div. H, Sec. 161, Jan. 23, 2004, 118 Stat. 452, as amended by Public Law 108-447, div. H, title V, Sec. 518, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3267), we also sent letters to approximately 200 Alaska Native corporations and other Tribal entities in Alaska soliciting their input as to whether or not they would like the Service to consult with them on the 2022 migratory bird subsistence harvest regulations.

We implemented the amended treaty with Canada with a focus on local involvement. The treaty calls for the creation of management bodies to ensure an effective and meaningful role for Alaska's indigenous inhabitants in the conservation of migratory birds. According to the Letter of Submittal, management bodies are to include Alaska Native, Federal, and State of Alaska representatives as equals. They develop recommendations for, among other things: seasons and bag limits, methods and means of take, law enforcement policies, population and harvest monitoring, educational programs, research and use of traditional knowledge, and habitat protection. The management bodies involve village councils to the maximum extent possible in all aspects of management. To ensure maximum input at the village level, we required each of the 11 participating regions to create regional management bodies consisting of at least one representative from the participating villages. The regional management bodies meet twice annually to review and/or submit proposals to the statewide body.

This rule does not contain any new collection of information that requires approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). 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. OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements associated with subsistence harvest reporting and assigned the following OMB control numbers:

• Alaska Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest Household Survey, OMB Control Number 1018-0124 (expires 04/30/2024), and

• Regulations for the Taking of Migratory Birds for Subsistence Uses in Alaska, 50 CFR part 92, OMB Control Number 1018-0178 (expires 04/30/2024).

The annual regulations and options are considered in the January 2022 Environmental Assessment, “Managing Migratory Bird Subsistence Hunting in Alaska: Hunting Regulations for the 2022 Spring/Summer Harvest.” Copies are available from the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at https://www.regulations.gov.

Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare statements of energy effects when undertaking certain actions. This is not a significant regulatory action under this Executive order; it allows only for traditional subsistence harvest and improves conservation of migratory birds by allowing effective regulation of this harvest. Further, this rule is not expected to significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action under Executive Order 13211, and a statement of energy effects is not required.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, we amend 50 CFR part 92 as set forth below:

Atlantic HMS fisheries, including BFT fisheries, are managed under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. ) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. ). The 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and its amendments are implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. Section 635.27 divides the U.S. BFT quota recommended by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and as implemented by the United States among the various domestic fishing categories, per the allocations established in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments. NMFS is required under the MSA to provide U.S. fishing vessels with a reasonable opportunity to harvest quotas under relevant international fishery agreements such as the ICCAT Convention, which is implemented domestically pursuant to ATCA.

As described in § 635.27(a), the current baseline U.S. BFT quota is 1,247.86 metric tons (mt) (not including the 25 mt ICCAT allocated to the United States to account for bycatch of BFT in pelagic longline fisheries in the Northeast Distant Gear Restricted Area). The General category baseline quota is currently 555.7 mt. This baseline quota is further subdivided into subquotas by time period. The June through August subquota time period is 277.9 mt. As a result of the 2021 ICCAT recommendation regarding western Atlantic bluefin tuna management and the implementing final rule (87 FR 33049, June 1, 2022), on July 1, 2022, the baseline quotas noted above will increase to 1,316.14 mt, 587.9 mt, and 293.9 mt, respectively. The default General category daily retention limit is one large medium or giant BFT (measuring 73 inches (185 cm) curved fork length (CFL) or greater) per vessel per day/trip and applies to General category permitted vessels and to HMS Charter/Headboat permitted vessels (when fishing commercially for BFT) (§ 635.23(a)(2)). NMFS adjusted the daily retention limit adjustment for the beginning of the June through August 2022 subquota time period from the default daily retention limit of one to three large medium or giant BFT (87 FR 32094, May 27, 2022). This action would adjust the daily retention limit for the remainder of the second time period in 2022, June through August.

Under § 635.23(a)(4), NMFS may increase or decrease the daily retention limit of large medium and giant BFT over a range of zero to five BFT per vessel after considering the regulatory determination criteria under § 635.27(a)(8). As described below, NMFS considered all of the relevant determination criteria and their applicability to the General category BFT retention limit for June through August 2022. After considering these criteria, NMFS has decided to decrease the daily retention limit from three to one large medium or giant BFT per vessel per day/trip for General category permitted vessels and for HMS Charter/Headboat permitted vessels with a commercial sale endorsement when fishing commercially for BFT.

Regardless of the duration of a fishing trip, the daily retention limit applies upon landing. For example (and specific to the June through August 2022 limit), whether a vessel fishing under the General category retention limit takes a two-day trip or makes two trips in one day, the daily limit of three fish may not be exceeded upon landing. This General category retention limit is effective in all areas, except for the Gulf of Mexico, where NMFS prohibits targeting fishing for BFT, and applies to those vessels permitted in the General category, as well as to those HMS Charter/Headboat permitted vessels with a commercial sale endorsement when fishing commercially for BFT.

As described above, under § 635.23(a)(4), NMFS may adjust the daily retention limit of large medium and giant BFT after considering the regulatory determination criteria under § 635.27(a)(8). Regarding the usefulness of information obtained from catches in the particular category for biological sampling and monitoring of the status of the stock (§ 635.27(a)(8)(i)), biological samples collected from BFT landed by General category fishermen and provided by BFT dealers continue to provide NMFS with valuable parts and data for ongoing scientific studies of BFT age and growth, migration, and reproductive status. Additional opportunity to land BFT would support the continued collection of a broad range of data for these studies and for stock monitoring purposes.

NMFS also considered the catches of the General category quota to date and the likelihood of closure of the General category if no adjustment is made (§ 635.27(a)(8)(ii)). Commercial-size BFT are currently readily available to vessels fishing under the General category quota. As of June 23, 2022, the General category has landed approximately 20.5 mt, representing 7 percent of the General category subquota for the June 1 through August 31 subquota time period. If current catch rates continue with the three-fish daily limit, the available subquota for the June through August time period will be reached or exceeded, and NMFS would need to close the fishery earlier than otherwise would be necessary under a lower limit. NMFS intends to provide General category participants in all areas and time periods opportunities to harvest the General category quota without exceeding it, through active inseason management such as retention limit adjustments and/or the timing and amount of quota transfers (based on consideration of the determination criteria regarding inseason adjustments), while extending the season as long as practicable. NMFS is setting the limit for the remainder of the June through August 2022 subquota time period in such a way that NMFS believes, informed by past experience, increases the likelihood that the fishery will remain open throughout the subquota time period and year.

NMFS also took into consideration a recently published final rule that would set restricted-fishing days (RFDs) for the General category during the months of July through November 2022, with the first RFD scheduled for July 1 (87 FR 33056, June 1, 2022). On an RFD, General category permitted vessels and HMS Charter/Headboat permitted vessels (when fishing commercially for BFT) are prohibited from fishing for bluefin tuna. However, HMS Charter/Headboat permitted vessels are authorized to fish recreationally under the Angling category restrictions and must follow the Angling category retention and size limits. NMFS believes the final RFD action, in combination with reducing the daily retention limit that applies on open days (through this inseason action) would further increase the likelihood that the fishery would remain open throughout the subquota time period and year.

NMFS also considered the effects of the adjustment on the BFT stock and the effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP (§ 635.27(a)(8)(v) and (vi)). This retention limit adjustment would be consistent with established quotas and subquotas, which are implemented consistent with ICCAT recommendations, (established in Recommendation 17-06 and maintained in Recommendation 20-06), ATCA, and the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments. This retention limit adjustment would also be consistent with ICCAT Recommendation 21-07, which increases the U.S. baseline quota and subquotas slightly. The implementing final rule is effective July 1, 2022 (87 FR 33049, June 1, 2022). In establishing these quotas and subquotas and associated management measures, ICCAT and NMFS considered the best scientific information available, objectives for stock management and status, and effects on the stock. This retention limit adjustment is in line with the established management measures and stock status determinations. It is also important that NMFS limit landings to the subquotas both to adhere to the subquota time period allocations and to ensure that landings are as consistent as possible with the pattern of fishing mortality ( e.g., fish caught at each age) that was assumed in the latest stock assessment, and this retention limit adjustment is consistent with those objectives.

Another principal consideration in setting the retention limit is the objective of providing opportunities to harvest the available General category quota without exceeding the annual quota. This consideration is based on the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments, and includes achieving optimum yield on a continuing basis and optimizing the ability of all permit categories to harvest available BFT quota allocations (related to § 635.27(a)(8)(x)).

Given these considerations, NMFS has determined that a one-fish General category retention limit is warranted for the remainder of the June-August 2022 subquota time period. This retention limit would provide a reasonable opportunity to harvest the available U.S. BFT quota (including the expected increase in available 2022 quota based on 2021 underharvest), without exceeding it, while maintaining an equitable distribution of fishing opportunities; help optimize the ability of the General category to harvest its available quota; allow the collection of a broad range of data for stock monitoring purposes; and be consistent with the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments.

NMFS will continue to monitor the BFT fishery closely. Dealers are required to submit landing reports within 24 hours of a dealer receiving BFT. Late reporting by dealers compromises NMFS' ability to timely implement actions such as quota and retention limit adjustment, as well as closures, and may result in enforcement actions. Additionally, and separate from the dealer reporting requirement, General and HMS Charter/Headboat vessel owners are required to report their own catch of all BFT retained or discarded dead, within 24 hours of the landing(s) or end of each trip, by accessing hmspermits.noaa.gov or by using the HMS Catch Reporting app, or calling (888) 872-8862 (Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.).

Depending on the level of fishing effort and catch rates of BFT, NMFS may determine that additional adjustments are necessary to ensure available quota is not exceeded or to enhance scientific data collection from, and fishing opportunities in, all geographic areas. If needed, subsequent adjustments will be published in the Federal Register . In addition, fishermen may call the Atlantic Tunas Information Line at (978) 281-9260, or access hmspermits.noaa.gov, for updates on quota monitoring and inseason adjustments.

NMFS issues this action pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and regulations at 50 CFR part 635 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

The Assistant Administrator for NMFS (AA) finds that it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest to provide prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, this action for the following reasons.

The regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments provide for inseason retention limit adjustments to respond to the unpredictable nature of BFT availability on the fishing grounds, the migratory nature of this species, and the regional variations in the BFT fishery. Affording additional prior notice and an opportunity for public comment on the change in the daily retention limit from three BFT to the default level for the June through August 2022 subquota time period would be impracticable. Based on available BFT quotas, fishery performance in recent years, and the availability of BFT on the fishing grounds, responsive adjustment to the General category BFT daily retention limit from three BFT to one fish is warranted to allow fishermen to take advantage of availability of fish and of quota.

Delays in decreasing the retention limit may result in the available June through August subquota time period being reached or exceeded and NMFS needing to close the fishery earlier than otherwise would be necessary under the lower limit being set for the remainder of this period. Such delays could adversely affect those General category and HMS Charter/Headboat vessels that would otherwise have an opportunity to harvest BFT if the fishery were to remain open for as feasible throughout the remaining subquota time periods. Limited opportunities to harvest the respective quotas may have negative social and economic impacts for U.S. fishermen that depend upon catching the available quota within the time periods designated in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments. Adjustment of the retention limit needs to be effective as soon as possible to extend fishing opportunities for fishermen in all geographic areas, and to provide equitable opportunities. NMFS provides notification of retention limit adjustments by publishing the notice in the Federal Register , emailing individuals who have subscribed to the Atlantic HMS News electronic newsletter, and updating the information posted on the Atlantic Tunas Information Line and on hmspermits.noaa.gov. With quota available and fish available on the grounds, and with no additional expected impacts to the stock, it would be contrary to the public interest to require vessels to wait to harvest the additional fish allowed through this action. Therefore, the AA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment. For these reasons, there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness.

The Atlantic shark fisheries are managed under the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP), its amendments, and implementing regulations (50 CFR part 635) issued under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. ). Section 635.27(b) describes the baseline quotas for different shark management groups and regions, describes the process for annual adjustments to those baseline quotas, and includes the criteria to consider for inseason quota transfers between regions and sub-regions. Section 635.28(b) describes quotas that are linked for management purposes.

On November 12, 2021 (86 FR 62737), NMFS announced the 2022 commercial western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS (72.0 mt dw; 158,724 lb dw) and hammerhead shark (11.9 mt dw; 26,301 lb dw) sub-regional quotas, eastern Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS (85.5 mt dw; 188,593 lb dw) sub-regional quota, and Atlantic hammerhead shark (27.1 mt dw; 59,736 lb dw) regional quota. Based on dealer reports received as of May 20, 2022, NMFS estimates that in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region, 65.7 mt (144,732 lb) or 91 percent of the aggregated LCS sub-regional quota and less than 2.0 mt dw (less than 4,400 lb dw) or less than 17 percent of the hammerhead sub-regional quota has been landed. In the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region, 31.1 mt dw (68,582 lb dw) or 36 percent of the aggregated LCS sub-regional quota has been landed. In the Atlantic region, 18.5 mt dw (40,874 lb dw) or 68 percent of the hammerhead shark regional quota has been landed.

Regulations provide that quotas for certain shark species and/or management groups are linked, including Atlantic hammerhead sharks and Atlantic aggregated LCS; eastern Gulf of Mexico hammerhead sharks and eastern Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS; and western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead sharks and western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS (see § 635.28(b)(4)). Regulations further provide that for each pair of linked species and/or management groups, if landings reach, or are projected to reach, a threshold of 80 percent of the available quota and are also projected to reach 100 percent of the available quota before the end of the 2022 fishing year, NMFS will close the relevant shark management groups (see § 635.28(b)(3)). At this time, without further action, NMFS projects that both the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS and Atlantic hammerhead shark management group quotas could be reached by August 15, 2022, and September 15, 2022, respectively. If that happens, NMFS would need to close the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS group and the linked western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead group, as well as the Atlantic aggregated LCS and the linked Atlantic hammerhead management groups.

Under § 635.27(b)(2), NMFS may transfer quota inseason between regions or sub-regions. Such transfers may occur for species or management groups that are the same in both regions or sub-regions and the quota is split for management purposes and not as a result of a stock assessment. As described at § 635.27(b)(1)(ii), the sub-regional splits for the quotas in the Gulf of Mexico region were done for management purposes. Therefore, NMFS may transfer aggregated LCS quota between Gulf of Mexico sub-regions. As described at § 635.27(b)(1)(iii)(C), the regional and sub-regional splits for the overall hammerhead quota were done for management purposes. Therefore, NMFS may transfer hammerhead quota between the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions. Before making any such transfer, NMFS must consider the following determination criteria in § 635.27(b)(2)(iii), and other relevant factors: (1) The usefulness of information obtained from catches in the particular management group for biological sampling and monitoring of the status of the respective shark species and/or management group; (2) the catches of the particular species and/or management group quota to date and the likelihood of closure of that segment of the fishery if no adjustment is made; (3) the projected ability of the vessels fishing under the particular species and/or management group quota to harvest the additional amount of corresponding quota before the end of the fishing year; (4) effects of the adjustment on the status of all shark species; (5) effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of the fishery management plan; (6) variations in seasonal distribution, abundance, or migration patterns of the appropriate shark species and/or management group; (7) effects of catch rates in one area precluding vessels in another area from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a portion of the quota; and/or (8) review of dealer reports, daily landing trends, and the availability of the respective shark species and/or management group on the fishing grounds.

NMFS has determined that, for the Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS sub-regional landings, the eastern Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS sub-regional landings are not projected to reach their quota by the end of the year and that the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS sub-regional quota has exceeded 80 percent (93 percent) of their quota and are projected to reach their quota by the end of the year. Therefore, NMFS has considered the inseason quota transfer criteria, documented in the Quota Transfer section below, and determined that a transfer from the sub-regional eastern Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS quota to the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS quota is warranted to avoid potential closure of the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS quota and the western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead shark quota, which are linked under 50 CFR 635.28(b)(4)(iii), while fishing opportunities still exist.

For the hammerhead shark landings, the western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead sub-regional landings are relatively low when compared to past fishing seasons, hammerhead sharks are not targeted nor landed in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region, and that the Atlantic hammerhead regional quota is nearing 80 percent (63 percent) of their quota and are projected to reach their quota by the end of the year. Therefore, NMFS has considered the inseason quota transfer criteria, documented in the Quota Transfer section below, and determined that a transfer from the western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead shark quota to the Atlantic hammerhead shark quota is warranted to avoid potential closure of the Atlantic hammerhead shark quota and the Atlantic aggregated LCS quota, which are linked under 50 CFR 635.28(b)(4)(i), while fishing opportunities still exist.

After fully considering all the criteria listed above, NMFS is taking action to transfer aggregated LCS quota from the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-regional quota to the western Gulf of Mexico sub-regional quota, and hammerhead shark management group quota from the western Gulf of Mexico sub-regional quota to the Atlantic hammerhead shark quota. NMFS' consideration of the relevant criteria found at § 635.27(b)(2)(iii) includes, but is not limited to, the following:

Regarding the usefulness of information obtained from catches in the particular category for biological sampling and monitoring of the status of the stock (§ 635.27(b)(2)(iii)(A)), biological samples collected by NMFS scientific observers on commercial vessels targeting aggregated LCS and hammerhead sharks continue to provide NMFS with valuable data for ongoing scientific studies of shark age and growth, migration, and reproductive status. This is especially important for the upcoming bull, spinner, and tiger shark assessments in 2024.

Regarding the catches of the quotas to date and the likelihood of a fishery closure if no adjustment is made, commercial shark dealer data show that landings of the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS have exceeded 80 percent of the quota (93 percent), while landings of the Atlantic hammerhead shark are approaching 80 percent of the quota (63 percent). Once the landings exceed the threshold of 80 percent of the quotas and are also projected to reach 100 percent before the end of the 2022 fishing year, the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS and hammerhead shark management groups, and the Atlantic aggregated LCS and hammerhead shark management groups will close absent a transfer of additional quota.

NMFS also analyzed landings data, catch trends, and potential migration of the species involved (§ 635.27(b)(2)(iii)(C)-(D) and (F)-(H)) and determined that under current fishing rates, 11.3 mt dw of eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-regional aggregated LCS and 6.8 mt dw of western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead shark management groups are reasonable amounts of quota to transfer, allowing fishermen the opportunity to fully utilize the available shark quotas while avoiding negative economic impacts that would occur by closing the shark management groups. This action will not have impacts beyond those already analyzed in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments and thus is not expected to negatively impact the stock.

Regarding the effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP (§ 635.27(b)(2)(iii)(E)), this action is consistent with the quotas previously implemented and analyzed in the 2022 shark quota final rule (86 FR 62737; November 12, 2021) and in the final rules implementing Amendment 5a (78 FR 40317; July 3, 2013) and Amendment 6 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP (80 FR 50073; August 18, 2015). Specifically, this action is consistent with the objective of providing opportunities to fully harvest shark quotas without exceeding them.

Based on the considerations above, NMFS is transferring 11.3 mt dw of eastern Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS sub-regional quota to the western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS sub-regional quota, and 6.8 mt dw of western Gulf of Mexico hammerhead shark sub-regional quota to the Atlantic hammerhead shark management group quota as of June 28, 2022. This quota transfer results in adjusted quotas of 74.2 mt dw for aggregated LCS in the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region, 83.3 mt dw for aggregated LCS and 5.1 mt dw for the hammerhead shark management group in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region, and 33.9 mt dw for the hammerhead shark management group in the Atlantic region. If landings and fishing rates do not increase substantially, transferring Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS sub-regional and Atlantic hammerhead shark regional quotas could allow the fisheries in each sub-region and region to remain open through the end of the 2022 fishing year.

Therefore, NMFS adjusts the eastern and western Gulf of Mexico aggregated LCS and hammerhead management group sub-regional quotas and the Atlantic hammerhead shark management group quota for the remainder of the 2022 shark fishing year, unless NMFS announces another quota transfer in the Federal Register or close the fishery. NMFS may also announce future retention limit adjustments as needed throughout the remainder of the 2022 shark fishing year.

The boundary between the Gulf of Mexico region and the Atlantic region is defined at § 635.27(b)(1) as a line beginning on the East Coast of Florida at the mainland at 25°20.4′ N lat., proceeding due east. Any water and land to the south and west of that boundary is considered, for the purposes of monitoring and setting quotas, to be within the Gulf of Mexico region. The boundary between the western and eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-regions is drawn along 88°00′ W long. (§ 635.27(b)(1)(ii)).

NMFS issues this action pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and regulations at 50 CFR part 635 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

The Assistant Administrator for NMFS (AA) finds that it is impracticable and contrary to the public interest to provide prior notice of, and an opportunity for public comment on, this action for the following reasons:

The regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments provide for inseason adjustments to respond to the unpredictable nature of shark species availability on the fishing grounds, the migratory nature of these species, and the regional variations in the shark fisheries. Affording prior notice and an opportunity for public comment regarding this quota transfer is impracticable. NMFS could not have proposed this action earlier, as it needed to consider and respond to updated landings data, including the recently available data as of May 20, 2022, in deciding whether to transfer a portion of the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-regional aggregated LCS quota to the western Gulf of Mexico sub-regional aggregated LCS quota and western Gulf of Mexico sub-regional hammerhead shark quota to the Atlantic regional hammerhead shark quota. If NMFS was to offer a public comment period, after having appropriately considered that data, it could preclude fishermen from harvesting aggregated LCS and hammerhead sharks in the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region and Atlantic region that are legally available consistent with all of the regulatory criteria.

With quota available, and with no additional expected impacts to the stock, it would be contrary to the public interest to preclude fishing opportunities for fishermen in sub-regions or regions when quota is still available for harvest. Analysis of available data shows that transfer of the quota from the eastern Gulf of Mexico sub-region to the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region would result in minimal risks of exceeding the aggregated LCS quotas in the Gulf of Mexico region, and transfer of the quota from the western Gulf of Mexico sub-region to the Atlantic region would result in minimal risks of exceeding the hammerhead shark quotas in either sub-region or region. NMFS notes that the public had an opportunity to comment on the underlying rulemakings that established the commercial shark quotas and the inseason adjustment criteria. Additionally, NMFS provides notification of inseason adjustments by publishing the notice in the Federal Register , emailing individuals who have subscribed to the Atlantic HMS News electronic newsletter, and updating the information posted on hmspermits.noaa.gov. Therefore, the AA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior notice and the opportunity for public comment.

This quota transfer needs to be effective upon filing for public inspection with the Office of the Federal Register, or as soon as possible thereafter, to minimize any unnecessary disruption in fishing patterns, to allow the impacted sectors to benefit from the quota transfer, and to not preclude fishing opportunities for fishermen in sub-regions or regions when quota is still available for harvest. Foregoing opportunities to harvest the respective quotas may have negative social and economic impacts for U.S. fishermen that depend upon catching the available quota designated in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and amendments.

Therefore, the AA finds there is also good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness.