[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 194 (Wednesday, October 7, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54022-54026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-26857]
[[Page 54021]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Department of the Interior
_______________________________________________________________________
Fish and Wildlife Service
_______________________________________________________________________
50 CFR Part 20
Migratory Bird Hunting; Temporary Approval of Tungsten-Polymer Shot as
Nontoxic for the 1998-99 Season; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 1998 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 54022]]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 20
RIN 1018-AE66
Migratory Bird Hunting; Temporary Approval of Tungsten-Polymer
Shot as Nontoxic for the 1998-99 Season
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) amends Section
20.21(j) to grant temporary approval of tungsten-polymer shot as
nontoxic for the 1998-99 migratory bird hunting season, except in the
Yukon-Kuskokwim (Y-K) Delta region, Alaska. The toxicological report,
which is an extensive literature search and analysis of tungsten and
Nylon 6 (the polymer), suggests that these compounds are nontoxic under
assumed use and in the environment. Analysis of the toxicity study
reveal no adverse effects over a 30-day period when dosing mallards
(Anas platyrhynchos) with 8 BB size tungsten-polymer shot.
DATES: This rule takes effect on October 7, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the EA are available by writing to the Chief,
Office of Migratory Bird Management (MBMO), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 1849 C Street, NW., room 634-ARLSQ, Washington, DC 20240. The
public may inspect comments during normal business hours in room 634,
Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Blohm, Acting Chief, Office
of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (703)
358-1838.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since the mid-1970s, the Service has sought
to identify shot that, when spent, does not pose a significant toxic
hazard to migratory birds and other wildlife. The Service established
procedures and requirements for approval of shot and shot coatings as
nontoxic in 1986 and published them in 50 CFR 20.134. The Service
adopted new procedures in December 1997. These are published at 50 CFR
20.134. Currently, only steel shot and bismuth-tin shot are approved by
the Service as nontoxic shot. The Service granted temporary approval of
bismuth-tin as nontoxic on two separate actions for the hunting seasons
of 1994-95 and 1995-96. Tungsten-iron shot was given temporary approval
for the 1997-98 migratory bird hunting season (62 FR 43444 published
August 18, 1997). The Service believes approval for other suitable
candidate shot materials as nontoxic is feasible. Compliance with the
use of nontoxic shot is increasing over the last few years. The Service
believes that this level of compliance will continue to increase with
the availability and approval of other nontoxic shot types.
Federal Cartridge Company's (Anoka, Minnesota) candidate shot is a
matrix of Nylon 6 or 11 polymer surrounding particles of elemental
tungsten. Shot made from this material has a density of approximately
11.2 g/cm3 or approximately the density of lead. The shot
will contain approximately 95.5 percent tungsten and 4.5 percent Nylon
6 or 11 by weight. At this time, only tungsten-polymer shot with Nylon
6 has been tested. TP shot with Nylon 11 is currently undergoing
research and testing. Therefore, this final rule for temporary approval
only deals with Nylon 6.
Federal's application includes a description of the new tungsten-
polymer (TP) shot, a toxicological report (Barr, 1996), and the results
of a 30-day dosing study of the toxicity of this shot in game-farm
mallards (Anas platyrhynchos). The toxicological report incorporates
toxicity information (a synopsis of acute and chronic toxicity data for
mammals and birds, potential for environmental concern, and toxicity to
aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles) and
information on environmental fate and transport (shot alteration,
environmental half-life, and environmental concentration). The toxicity
study is a 30-day dosing test to determine if the candidate shot poses
any deleterious effects to game-farm mallards. This will meet the
requirements for Tier 2 consideration, as described in 50 CFR
20.134(b)(3).
Toxicity Information
There is considerable difference in the toxicity of soluble and
insoluble compounds of tungsten. Elemental tungsten (the material
submitted by Federal) is virtually insoluble and is, therefore,
expected to be relatively nontoxic. The potential toxicity of nylon
compounds due to degradation is primarily associated with the
stabilizers, antioxidants, plasticizers, and unreacted prepolymers.
Residual caprolactum has been found in some commercial Nylon 6
products, but little concern regarding this compound has been developed
(Patty, 1981). Even though most toxicity tests reviewed were based on
soluble tungsten compounds rather than elemental tungsten (while the
toxicity of Nylon 6 is negligible due to its insolubility), there
appears to be no basis for concern of toxicity to wildlife for the TP
shot (metallic tungsten and Nylon 6) via ingestion by fish, birds, or
mammals (Bursian et al., 1996; Gigiena, 1983; Patty, 1981; Industrial
Medicine, 1946; Karantassis, 1924).
Environmental Fate and Transport
Tungsten is insoluble in water and, therefore, not mobile in
hypergenic environments. Tungsten is very stable in acids and does not
easily complex. Preferential uptake by plants in acid soil suggests
that uptake of tungsten in the anionic form is associated with tungsten
minerals rather than elemental tungsten (Kabata-Pendias and Pendias,
1984).
Environmental Concentrations
Calculation of the estimated environmental concentration (EEC) of
tungsten in a terrestrial ecosystem is based on 69,000 shot per hectare
(Pain, 1990), assuming complete erosion of material in 5 cm of soil.
The EECs for tungsten and Nylon 6 in soil are 58.3 mg/kg and 2.7 mg/kg,
respectively. Calculation of the EEC in an aquatic ecosystem assumes
complete erosion of the shot in one cubic foot of water. The EECs in
water for tungsten and Nylon 6 are 18.7 mg/L and 0.9 mg/L,
respectively. The Hazard Quotients assume that complete erosion of the
shot components would occur; however, the TP shot is considered
insoluble and is stable in basic, neutral, and mildly acidic
environments. Therefore, erosion is expected to be minimal, and adverse
effects on biota are not expected to occur.
Effects on Birds
An extensive literature review provided information on the toxicity
of elemental tungsten to waterfowl and other birds. Ringelman et al.
(1993) orally dosed 20 8-week-old game-farm mallards with 12-17 (1.03g)
tungsten-bismuth-tin (TBT) pellets and monitored them for 32 days for
evidence of intoxication. No birds died during the trial, gross lesions
were not observed during the postmortem examination, histopathological
examinations did not reveal any evidence of toxicity or tissue damage,
and tungsten was not detectable in kidney or liver samples. The authors
concluded that TBT shot presented virtually no potential for acute
intoxication in mallards.
Kraabel et al. (1996) assessed the effects of embedded TBT shot on
mallards and concluded that TBT was not acutely toxic when implanted in
muscle tissue. Inflammatory reactions to TBT shot were localized and
had no
[[Page 54023]]
detectable systemic effects on mallard health.
Nell (1981) fed laying hens (Gallus domesticus) 0.4 or 1 g/kg
tungsten in a commercial mash for five months to assess reproductive
performance. Weekly egg production was normal and hatchability of
fertile eggs was not affected. Exposure of chickens to large doses of
tungsten either through injection or by feeding, resulted in an
increased tissue concentration of tungsten and a decreased
concentration of molybdenum (Nell, 1981). The loss of tungsten from the
liver occurred in an exponential manner with a half-life of 27 hours.
The alterations in molybdenum metabolism seemed to be associated with
tungsten intake rather than molybdenum deficiency. Death due to
tungsten occurred when tissue concentrations increased to 25 mg/g
liver. At that concentration, xanthine dehydrogenase activity was zero.
Nylon 6 is the commercially important homopolymer of caprolactum.
Most completely polymerized nylon materials are physiologically inert,
regardless of the toxicity of the monomer from which they are made
(Peterson, 1977). Few data exist on the toxicity of Nylon 6 in animals.
Most toxicity studies relate to thermal degradation products and so are
not relevant to the exposure of wildlife to shot containing nylon.
Montgomery (1982) reported that feeding Nylon 6 to rats at a level of
25 percent of the diet for 2 weeks caused a slower rate of weight gain,
presumably due to a decrease in food consumption and feed efficiency.
However, the rats suffered no anatomic injuries due to the consumption
of nylon.
Federal's 30-day dosing study (Bursian et al., 1996) included four
treatment groups of game-farm mallards (16 birds in each group, 8 males
and 8 females) exposed to different types of shot: 8 No. 4 steel, 8 No.
4 lead, 8 BBs of tungsten-polymer, and none (control). All TP-dosed
birds survived the test with no significant alteration in body weight.
There were no changes in hematocrit, hemoglobin concentration, or
aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (an enzyme important to hemoglobin
synthesis) activity. The only significant difference between no-shot,
steel, and TP males in any of the 25 plasma chemistry parameters at day
15 was an increase in the albumin/globulin ratio in the TP birds when
compared to the other two groups, but the authors felt this was not
remarkable. Three TP-dosed males developed mild biliary stasis. The
authors attributed this to the intubating of mallards with 8 BBs of TP
shot inducing a pathological condition, however, slight, that is not
found in the control birds. No other histopathological lesions were
found. In general, no adverse effects were seen in mallards given 8 BB-
size TP shot and monitored over a 30-day period. Tungsten was detected
in the femur of 2 TP-dosed females and the kidneys of 2 TP-dosed birds;
in both tissues, concentrations were only slightly above detection
limits.
Based on the results of the toxicological report and the toxicity
test (Tier 1 and 2), the Service concludes that TP shot (95.5 percent
tungsten and 4.5 percent Nylon 6, by weight with <1 percent residual
lead), does not pose a significant danger to migratory birds or other
wildlife and their habitats. However, the Service has some concern that
the absorption of tungsten into the femur, kidney, and liver could
potentially affect the spectacled eider (Somateria fischeri), a species
already subject to adverse weather, predation, and lead poisoning on
the Yukon-Kuskokwim (Y-K) Delta, Alaska. Until a reproductive/chronic
toxicity test has been completed and the Service has reviewed the
results, TP shot cannot be conditionally approved for the Y-K Delta
region.
The first condition of approval is toxicity testing. Candidate
materials not approved under Tier 1 and/or 2 testing are subjected to
standards of Tier 3 testing. The scope of Tier 3 includes chronic
exposure under adverse environmental conditions and effects on
reproduction in game-farm mallards, as outlined in 50 CFR
20.134(b)(4)(A and B) (Tier 3) and in consultation with the Service's
Office of Migratory Bird Management and the U.S. Geological Survey's
Division of Biological Resources. This study includes assessment of
long-term toxicity under depressed temperature conditions using a
nutritionally-deficient diet, as well as a moderately long-term study
that includes reproductive assessment. The tests require the applicant
to demonstrate that TP shot is nontoxic to waterfowl and their
offspring.
The second condition of approval is testing for residual lead
levels. Any TP shot with lead levels equal to or exceeding 1 percent
will be considered toxic and, therefore, illegal. In the August 18,
1995, Federal Register (60 FR 43314), the Service indicated that it
would establish a maximum level for residual lead. The Service has
determined that the maximum environmentally acceptable level of lead in
any nontoxic shot is trace amounts of <1 percent, and has incorporated
this requirement (50 CFR 20.134(b)(5)) in the December 1, 1997, final
rule (62 FR 63608).
The third condition of approval involves enforcement. In the August
18, 1995, Federal Register (60 FR 43314), the Service indicated that
final unconditional approval of any nontoxic shot would be contingent
upon the development and availability of a noninvasive field testing
device. This requirement was incorporated into regulations at 50 CFR
20.134(b)(6) in the December 1, 1997, final rule (62 FR 63608). Several
noninvasive field testing devices are under development to separate TP
shot from lead shot. Law enforcement officials can distinguish between
shotshells containing lead pellets and those containing tungsten-
polymer in two ways. First, the headstamp of the shell will clearly
distinguish it as a shell containing tungsten-polymer shot. Second,
electronic devices designed to distinguish between shotshells
containing different shot materials will register tungsten-polymer
shells as non-toxic, similar to bismuth-tin shells.
In summary, this rule amends 50 CFR 20.21(j) by granting temporary
approval of tungsten-polymer shot as nontoxic for the 1998-99 migratory
bird hunting season, except in the Y-K Delta region, Alaska. It is
based on the original request made to the Service by Federal Cartridge
Company on July 16, 1997, the toxicological report, and acute toxicity
study reviewed by the Service, and comments received on the July 27,
1998 proposed rule (63 FR 40074). Results of the toxicological report
and 30-day toxicity test undertaken for Federal Cartridge Company
document the apparent absence of any deleterious effects of tungsten-
polymer shot when ingested by captive-reared mallards or to the
ecosystem. However, there is some concern that the absorption of
tungsten into the femur, kidney, and liver could potentially affect the
spectacled eider (Somateria fischeri), a species already subject to
adverse weather, predation, and lead poisoning on the Y-K Delta. Until
a reproductive/chronic toxicity test has been completed and the Service
has reviewed the results, tungsten-polymer shot will not be
conditionally approved for the Y-K Delta region. A reproductive/chronic
toxicity test will be completed and the Service will review the
results, prior to any final unconditional approval of tungsten-polymer
shot for migratory bird hunting.
Public Comments and Responses
The July 27, 1998 proposed rule published in the Federal Register
(63 FR 40077) invited public comments
[[Page 54024]]
from interested parties. The closing date for receipt of all comments
was August 26, 1998. During this 30-day comment period, the Service
received four comments.
Federal Cartridge Company pointed out a minor technical discrepancy
in our description of tungsten-polymer shot. Federal indicated that
tungsten-polymer shot contains no iron.
The California Waterfowl Association strongly supported the
proposed temporary approval of tungsten-polymer shot for the 1998-99
season. They believed that the temporary approval of tungsten-polymer
shot was an important step to address concerns relating to efforts to
reduce the unnecessary crippling of waterfowl through the development
of more effective nontoxic shot materials.
Kent Cartridge Company questioned the Service's stipulation on the
requested reproductive testing as it relates to the Y-K Delta. Kent
pointed out language in the July 27 Federal Register indicating that
``until a reproductive/chronic toxicity test has been completed and the
Service has reviewed the results, the Service proposes not to approve
the use of tungsten-polymer shot on the Y-K Delta.'' Kent believed that
these references clearly indicate that the required reproductive tests
relates only to tungsten shot use in the Y-K Delta and that use of
tungsten shot elsewhere in the U.S. was not so conditioned.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (Wisconsin) supported
the proposal to grant temporary approval of tungsten-polymer as
nontoxic shot. Wisconsin was concerned, however, with the timing of the
proposed and final rules. Because of the lateness of the Service's
proposed rule, relative to the establishing and beginning of the
migratory bird hunting seasons, Wisconsin was not able to include
information on the status of tungsten-polymer shot in their annual
hunting regulations pamphlet that went to press in late August.
Wisconsin uses the pamphlet to inform their hunters as to the
availability of different nontoxic shot materials and stated that
because of the timing of the final rule they would not be able to
adequately inform their hunters. Wisconsin encouraged that any
subsequent rules on nontoxic shot be initiated earlier in the year so
that any final rules would be published before August 1.
Service Response: The Service has corrected the description of
tungsten-polymer shot to indicate that the shot contains no iron.
Regarding Kent Cartridge Company's assertions that the required
reproductive testing relates only to the use of tungsten shots in the
Y-K Delta, the Service would like to make clear that the required
testing relates to the entire U.S., not just the Y-K Delta. Until a
reproductive/chronic toxicity test has been completed and the Service
has reviewed the results, tungsten shots will not be conditionally
approved for the Y-K Delta region nor unconditionally approved
elsewhere. A reproductive/chronic toxicity test will be completed and
the Service will review the results, prior to any final unconditional
approval of tungsten-polymer shot for migratory bird hunting.
Regarding the timing of the proposed and final rule, the Service
realizes the information dissemination problems caused by conditionally
approving tungsten-polymer shot at this time. However, we believe that
the public benefits of conditionally approving the shot outweigh any
potential timing issues and/or problems. We believe that it is in the
best interest of the hunting public to provide them an additional legal
option for hunting waterfowl and coots for the 1998-99 season and it is
in the best interest of small retailers who have stocked tungsten-
polymer shot for the coming season. Additionally, we believe that
another nontoxic shot option likely will improve hunter compliance,
thereby reducing the amount of lead shot in the environment.
Effective Date
Under the APA (5 U.S.C. 553(d)) the Service waives the 30-day
period before the rule becomes effective and finds that ``good cause''
exists, within the terms of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the APA, and this
rule will, therefore, take effect immediately upon publication. This
rule relieves a restriction and, in addition, it is not in the public
interest to delay the effective date of this rule. During the public
comment period for conditional approval the Service received four
comments. Of these comment letters, one was from a conservation
organization, two from industry companies/representatives, and one from
a State natural resource agency. All objections/comments have been
remedied satisfactorily and are discussed under the Public Comment and
Responses section of this document. It is in the best interest of
migratory birds and their habitats to grant conditional approval on
tungsten-polymer shot as nontoxic for the 1998-99 migratory bird
hunting season. It is in the best interest of the hunting public to
provide them an additional legal option for hunting waterfowl and coots
for the 1998-99 season, which began on September 1, 1998. It is in the
best interest of small retailers who have stocked tungsten-polymer shot
for the coming season. The Services believes another nontoxic shot
option likely will improve hunter compliance, thereby reducing the
amount of lead shot in the environment.
References
Barr Engineering Company. 1996. Toxicology report on new shot. Contract
Report 2302118/40970091/CET. 21 pp.
Bursian, S. J., M. E. Kelly, R. J. Aulerich, D. C. Powell, and S.
Fitzgerald. 1996. Thirty-day dosing test to assess the toxicity of
tungsten-polymer shot in game-farm mallards. Report to Federal
Cartridge Co. 77 pp.
Gigiema I. Sanitariya. 1983. Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga. Moscow, USSR.
48(7):77.
Grandy, J. W., L. N. Locke and G. E. Bagley. 1968. Relative toxicity of
lead and five proposed substitute shot types to pen-reared mallards.
Journal of Wildlife Management 32(3):483-488.
Industrial Medicine. 1946. Volume 15, p. 482.
Interagency Ecosystem Management Task Force. 1995. The ecosystem
approach: healthy ecosystems and sustainable economics. Volume II-
Implementation Issues.
Kabata-Pendias, A. and H. Pendias. 1984. Trace elements in soil and
plants. CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, FL.
Karantassis, T. 1924. On the toxicity of compounds of tungsten and
molybdenum. Ann. Med. 28:1541091543.
Kraabel, F. W., M. W. Miller, D. M. Getzy, and J. K. Ringleman. 1996.
Effects of embedded tungsten-bismuth-tin shot and steel shot on
mallards. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 38(1):1098.
Montgomery, R. R. 1982. Polymers. In Patty's Industrial Hygiene and
Toxicology, Vol. IIIA (G. D. Clayton and F. E. Clayton, Eds.) pp. 4209-
4526. John Wiley and Sons, NY.
Nell, J. A, W. L. Bryden, G. S. Heard, and D. Balnave. 1981.
Reproductive performance of laying hens fed tungsten. Poultry Science
60(1):257-258.
Pain, D. J. 1990. Lead shot ingestion by waterbirds in the Carmarque,
France: an investigation of levels and interspecific difference.
Environ. Pollut. 66:273-285.
Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology. 1981. Wiley
[[Page 54025]]
Interscience. Wiley & Sons, Inc. NY, NY. Third Edition.
Peterson, J. E. 1977. Industrial Health. Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
Ringelman, J. K., M. W. Miller and W. F. Andelt. 1993. Effects of
ingested tungsten-bismuth-tin shot on mallards. Colorado Division of
Wildlife, Fort Collins, 24 pp.
NEPA Consideration
In compliance with the requirements of section 102(2)(C) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(C)), and the
Council on Environmental Quality's regulation for implementing NEPA (40
CFR 1500-1508), the Service prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment
(EA) in May, 1998 and a Final EA in September 1998. This EA is
available to the public at the location indicated under the ADDRESSES
caption. Based on review and evaluation of the information in the EA,
the Service has determined that amending 50 CFR 20.21(j) to grant
temporary approval of tungsten-polymer shot as nontoxic for the 1998-99
migratory bird hunting season would not be a major Federal action that
would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
Endangered Species Act Considerations
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1972, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.), provides that Federal agencies shall
``insure that any action authorized, funded or carried out * * * is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species
or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of (critical) habitat * * *'' The Service has completed a
Section 7 consultation under the ESA for this rule and determined that
granting temporary approval of tungsten-polymer shot for the 1998-99
hunting season, except on the Yukon-Kuskokwin (Y-K) Delta, is not
likely to affect any threatened, endangered, proposed or candidate
species. The result of the Service's consultation under Section 7 of
the ESA is available to the public at the location indicated under the
ADDRESSES caption.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.)
requires the preparation of flexibility analyses for rules that will
have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities,
which includes small businesses, organizations or governmental
jurisdictions. The economic impacts of annual hunting on small business
entities were analyzed in detail and a Small Entity Flexibility
Analysis (Analysis), under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601, et seq.), was issued by the Service in 1998 (copies available upon
request from the Office of Migratory Bird Management). The Analysis
documented the significant beneficial economic effect on a substantial
number of small entities. The primary source of information about
hunter expenditures for migratory game bird hunting is the National
Hunting and Fishing Survey, which is conducted at 5-year intervals. The
Analysis utilized the 1996 National Hunting and Fishing Survey which it
was estimated that migratory bird hunters would spend between $429 and
$1084 million nationwide at small businesses in 1998. The approval of
tungsten-polymer as an alternative shot to steel and bismuth-tin will
have a minor positive impact on small businesses by allowing them to
sell a third nontoxic shot to the hunting public. However, the overall
effect to hunting expenditures in general would be minor. Therefore,
the Service determined this rule will have no effect on small entities
since the approved shot merely will supplement nontoxic shot already in
commerce and available throughout the retail and wholesale distribution
systems. The Service anticipates no dislocation or other local effects,
with regard to hunters and others.
Executive Order 12866, and the Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
review under Executive Order 12866. E.O. 12866 requires each agency to
write regulations that are easy to understand. The Service invites
comments on how to make this rule easier to understand, including
answers to questions such as the following: (1) Are the requirements in
the rule clearly stated? (2) Does the rule contain technical language
or jargon that interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the format of the
rule (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing,
etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Would the rule be easier to
understand if it were divided into more (but shorter) sections? (5) Is
the description of the rule in the Supplementary Information section of
the preamble helpful in understanding the rule? What else could the
Service do to make the rule easier to understand? Send a copy of any
comments that concern how this rule could be made easier to understand
to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Interior, Room
7229, 1849 C Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240. Comments may also be
e-mailed to: E[email protected].
Congressional Review
In accordance with Section 251 of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 8), this rule has been
submitted to Congress. Because this rule deals with the Service's
migratory bird hunting program, this rule qualifies for an exemption
under 5 U.S.C. 808(1); therefore, the Department determines that this
rule shall take effect immediately.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Service has examined this regulation under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to contain no information collection
requirements. However, the Service does have OMB approval (1018-0067;
expires 06/30/2000) for information collection relating to what
manufacturers of shot are required to provide the Service for the
nontoxic shot approval process. For further information see 50 CFR
20.134.
Unfunded Mandates Reform
The Service has determined and certifies pursuant to the Unfunded
Mandates Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502, et seq., that this rulemaking will not
impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local or
State government or private entities.
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
The Service, in promulgating this rule, determines that these
regulations meet the applicable standards provided in Sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
Takings Implication Assessment
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, these rules, authorized
by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, do not have significant takings
implications and do not affect any constitutionally protected property
rights. These rules will not result in the physical occupancy of
property, the physical invasion of property, or the regulatory taking
of any property. In fact, these rules allow hunters to exercise
privileges that would be otherwise unavailable; and, therefore, reduce
restrictions on the use of private and public property.
Federalism Effects
Due to the migratory nature of certain species of birds, the
Federal government has been given responsibility over these species by
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. These rules do not have a substantial
direct effect on fiscal capacity, change the roles or responsibilities
of Federal or State
[[Page 54026]]
governments, or intrude on State policy or administration. Therefore,
in accordance with Executive Order 12612, these regulations do not have
significant federalism effects and do not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible
effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that
there are no effects.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20
Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Accordingly, for reasons set out in the preamble, title 50, Chapter
1, subchapter B, part 20 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 20--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 20 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703-712; and 16 U.S.C. 742 a-j.
2. Amend Section 20.21 by revising paragraph (j) introductory text
and adding paragraph (j)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 20.21 Hunting methods.
* * * * *
(j) While possessing shot (either in shotshells or as loose shot
for muzzleloading) other than steel shot, or bismuth-tin (97 parts
bismuth: 3 parts tin with <1 percent residual lead) shot, or tungsten-
iron ([nominally] 40 parts tungsten: 60 parts iron with <1 percent
residual lead) shot, or tungsten-polymer (95.5 part tungsten: 4.5 parts
Nylon 6 with <1 percent residual lead) shot, or such shot approved as
nontoxic by the Director pursuant to procedures set forth in
Sec. 20.134, provided that:
* * * * *
(3) Tungsten-polymer shot (95.5 parts tungsten: 4.5 parts Nylon 6
with <1 percent residual lead) is legal as nontoxic shot for the 1998-
99 migratory bird hunting season, except for the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta
region in Alaska.
Dated: October 1, 1998.
Donald Barry,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 98-26857 Filed 10-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P