[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 140 (Monday, July 21, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42279-42281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-16526]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 13

RIN 1018-AV63


Migratory Bird Permits; Addresses for Applications for Eagle and 
Migratory Bird Permit Applications

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We correct omissions in our list of addresses the public can 
use to submit permit applications to conduct activities with migratory 
birds or with bald eagles or golden eagles.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 21, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George T. Allen, Wildlife 
Biologist, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, 703-358-1825.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    We are the Federal agency delegated the primary responsibility for 
managing migratory birds, as authorized by the Migratory Bird Treaty 
Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), which implements conventions with 
Great Britain (for Canada), Mexico, Japan, and the Soviet Union 
(Russia).
    We correct omissions of States, territories, and possessions in 50 
CFR 13.11(b)(5), in which we have listed addresses for the public to 
use to submit permit applications to conduct activities with migratory 
birds or with bald eagles or golden eagles.
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 
553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that 
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 
to the public interest, an agency may issue a rule without providing 
notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that 
there is good cause for making today's rule final without prior 
proposal and opportunity for comment because we are merely making 
administrative corrections to omissions in the lists of States, 
territories, and possessions we include in our regulations with our 
addresses for the public to use to request or submit permit 
applications for activities with bald or golden eagles or migratory 
birds. Further, it is in the public's best interest to have access to 
these corrected lists as soon as possible. Thus, notice and public 
procedure are unnecessary. We find that this constitutes good cause 
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Moreover, since today's action does not 
create any new regulatory requirements, we find that good cause exists 
to provide for an immediate effective date pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3).

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review

    In accordance with the criteria in E.O. 12866, this rule is not a 
significant regulatory action. The Office of Management and Budget 
makes the final determination of significance under E.O. 12866.
    a. This rule does not have an annual economic effect of $100 
million or more, or adversely affect an economic sector, productivity, 
jobs, the environment, or other units of government. A cost-benefit and 
economic analysis thus is not required. There are no costs associated 
with this rule.
    b. This rule does not create inconsistencies with other agencies' 
actions. The rule deals solely with governance of migratory bird 
permitting in the United States. No other Federal agency has any role 
in regulating activities with migratory birds.
    c. This rule does not materially affect entitlements, grants, user 
fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their recipients. 
There are no entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs 
associated with the regulation of migratory birds.
    d. This rule does not raise novel legal or policy issues. The 
regulations change is in compliance with other laws, policies, and 
regulations.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121)), whenever an agency is required to 
publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must 
prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility 
analysis that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e.,

[[Page 42280]]

small businesses, small organizations, and small government 
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required 
if the head of an agency certifies the rule does not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal 
agencies to provide the statement of the factual basis for certifying 
that a rule does not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. We have examined this rule's 
potential effects on small entities as required by the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, and have determined that this action does not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, 
because the changes simplify/clarify application addresses for the 
public.
    There are no costs associated with this regulations change. 
Consequently, we certify that because this rule does not have a 
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities, 
a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
    This rule is not a major rule under SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). It 
does not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    a. This rule does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 
million or more.
    b. This rule does not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government 
agencies; or geographic regions.
    c. This rule does 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.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 
et seq.), we have determined the following:
    a. This rule does not ``significantly or uniquely'' affect small 
governments. A small government agency plan is not required. This rule 
does not affect small government activities in any significant way.
    b. This rule does not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or 
greater in any year; i.e., it is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

Takings

    In accordance with E.O. 12630, the rule does not have significant 
takings implications because it does not contain a provision for taking 
of private property. Therefore, a takings implication assessment is not 
required.

Federalism

    This rule does not have sufficient Federalism effects to warrant 
preparation of a Federalism assessment under E.O. 13132. It does not 
interfere with the States' ability to manage their programs or their 
funds. No significant economic impacts will result from correcting the 
listings of Migratory Bird Permits offices and the areas for which they 
are responsible.

Civil Justice Reform

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

Paperwork Reduction Act

    We examined these regulations under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). There are no new information collection 
requirements associated with this rule. We may not collect or sponsor, 
nor is a person required to respond to a collection of information 
unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget 
control number.

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have analyzed this rule in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 432-437(f), and Part 516 of 
the U.S. Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM). This regulations 
change correcting the listing of States, territories, and possessions 
does not have any environmental impact.

Environmental Consequences of the Action

    Socioeconomic. This rule does not have any socioeconomic impacts.
    Migratory bird populations. This rule does not affect migratory 
bird populations.
    Endangered and threatened species. The regulation is 
administrative, and does not affect threatened or endangered species or 
critical habitats.

Compliance With Endangered Species Act Requirements

    Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended 
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that ``The Secretary [of the 
Interior] shall review other programs administered by him and utilize 
such programs in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter'' (16 
U.S.C. 1536(a)(1)). It further states that the Secretary must ``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 '' (16 U.S.C. 1536 (a)(2)). The regulations 
change does not affect listed species in any way.

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), E.O. 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have 
determined that there are no potential effects of this rule on 
Federally recognized Indian Tribes. This rule does not interfere with 
the Tribes' ability to manage themselves or their funds, or to regulate 
migratory bird activities on Tribal lands.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (E.O. 13211)

    On May 18, 2001, the President issued E.O. 13211 addressing 
regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and 
use. E.O. 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy 
Effects when undertaking certain actions. This regulations change is 
not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866, and does not 
affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is 
not a significant energy action and no Statement of Energy Effects is 
required.

Author

    The author of this rulemaking is Dr. George T. Allen, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop 4107, Arlington, VA 22203-1610.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 13

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Fish, Imports, 
Plants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, 
Wildlife.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, we amend part 13 of subchapter 
B, chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows.

PART 13--GENERAL PERMIT PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority for Part 13 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 668a, 704, 712, 742j-l, 1374(g), 1382, 
1538(d), 1539, 1540(f), 3374, 4901-4916; 18 U.S.C. 42; 19 U.S.C. 
1202; 31 U.S.C. 9701.


[[Page 42281]]



0
2. Amend Sec.  13.11(b)(5) by revising the entries for Region 1 and 
Region 4 to read as follows:
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) * * *

Region 1 (CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, WA, American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of 
the Northern Mariana Islands, and other Pacific possessions): U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Permit Office, 911 N.E. 11th 
Avenue, Portland, OR 97232-4181.
* * * * *
Region 4 (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MS, NC, SC, TN, PR, VI, and Caribbean 
possessions): U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Permit 
Office, P.O. Box 49208, Atlanta, GA 30359.
* * * * *

    Dated: July 2, 2008.
David M. Verhey,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. E8-16526 Filed 7-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P