Draft Compatibility Policy Pursuant to the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997

SUMMARY: We propose to establish in policy, the process for determining

whether or not a use of a national wildlife refuge is a compatible use.

This draft compatibility policy incorporates the compatibility

provisions of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of

1997 (NWRSIA-1997), that amends the National Wildlife Refuge System

Administration Act of 1966 (NWRSAA-1966), into our policy as Part 603

Chapter 3 of the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual. Published

concurrently in this Federal Register are our proposed compatibility

regulations describing the process for determining whether or not a use

of a national wildlife refuge is a compatible use.

DATES: Submit comments on or before November 8, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Send comments concerning this draft compatibility policy via

mail, fax or email to: Chief, Division of Refuges, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 670, Arlington,

Virginia 22203; fax (703)358-2248; e-mail Compatibility__Policy__

C[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief, Division of Refuges, U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, Telephone (703) 358-1744.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NWRSIA-1997 amends and builds upon the

NWRSAA-1966, providing an ``Organic Act'' for the National Wildlife

Refuge System. It clearly establishes that wildlife conservation is the

singular National Wildlife Refuge System Mission, provides guidance to

the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) for management of the

National Wildlife Refuge System, provides a mechanism for national

wildlife refuge planning, and gives Refuge Managers uniform direction

and procedures for making decisions regarding wildlife conservation and

uses of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

The NWRSAA-1966 required the Secretary, before permitting uses, to

ensure that those uses are compatible with the purposes of the national

wildlife refuge. We built this legal requirement into our policy and

regulation. For 32 years, the compatibility standard for national

wildlife refuge uses has helped us manage national wildlife refuge

lands sensibly and in keeping with the general goal of putting wildlife

conservation first. The NWRSIA-1997 maintains the compatibility

standard as provided in the NWRSAA-1966, provides significantly more

detail regarding the compatibility standard and compatibility

determination process, and requires that we promulgate the

compatibility process in regulations. This policy will ensure that

compatibility becomes a more effective conservation standard, more

consistently applied across the entire National Wildlife Refuge System,

and more understandable and open to involvement by the public.

Compatibility and the NWRSIA-1997

The NWRSIA-1997 includes a number of provisions that specifically

address compatibility. The following is a summary of those provisions

and how they apply to us.

We will not initiate or permit a new use of a national wildlife

refuge or expand, renew, or extend an existing use of a national

wildlife refuge, unless we have determined that the use is a compatible

use and that the use is not inconsistent with public safety. We may

make compatibility determinations for a national wildlife refuge

concurrently with the development of a Comprehensive Conservation Plan.

On lands added to the National Wildlife Refuge System after March

25, 1996, we will identify, prior to acquisition, withdrawal, transfer,

reclassification, or donation of any such lands, existing compatible

wildlife-dependent recreational public uses (if any) that we will

permit to continue on an interim basis pending completion of a

Comprehensive Conservation Plan for the national wildlife refuge.

We may authorize wildlife-dependent recreational uses on a national

wildlife refuge when we determine they are compatible uses and are not

inconsistent with public safety. We are not required to make any other

determinations or findings to comply with the NWRSAA-1966 or the Refuge

Recreation Act of 1962 (RRA-1962) for wildlife-dependent recreational

uses to occur except for consideration of consistency with State laws

and regulations.

Compatibility determinations in existence on the date of enactment

of the NWRSIA-1997, October 9, 1997, will remain in effect until and

unless modified. In addition, we will make compatibility determinations

prepared during the period between enactment of the NWRSIA-1997 and the

effective date of the compatibility regulations published concurrently

with this notice under the existing compatibility process. After the

effective date of the compatibility regulations, we will make

compatibility determinations and re-evaluations of compatibility

determinations under the compatibility process in the regulations.

By October 9, 1999, we will issue final regulations establishing

the process for determining whether or not a use of a national wildlife

refuge is a compatible use. These regulations will:

1. Identify the refuge official responsible for making

compatibility determinations;

2. Require an estimate of the time-frame, location, manner, and

purpose of each use;

3. Require the identification of the effects of each use on

national wildlife refuge resources and purposes of each national

wildlife refuge;

4. Require that compatibility determinations be made in writing;

5. Provide for the expedited consideration of uses that will likely

have no detrimental effect on the fulfillment of the affected national

wildlife refuge's purposes or the National Wildlife Refuge System

Mission;

6. Provide for the elimination or modification of any use as

expeditiously as practicable after we make a determination that the use

is not a compatible use;

7. Require, after an opportunity for public comment, reevaluation

of each existing use, other than wildlife-dependent recreational uses,

if conditions under which the permitted use change significantly or if

there is significant new information regarding the effects of the use,

but not less frequently than once every 10 years, to ensure that the

use remains a compatible use. In the case of any use authorized for a

period longer than 10 years (such as an electric utility right-of-way),

the reevaluation will examine compliance with the terms and conditions

of the authorization, not examine the authorization itself;

8. Require, after an opportunity for public comment, reevaluation

of each existing wildlife-dependent recreational use when conditions

under which the permitted use change significantly or if there is

significant new information regarding the effects of the use, but not

less frequently than in conjunction with each preparation or revision

of a comprehensive conservation plan or at least every 15 years,

whichever is earlier; and

[[Page 49068]]

9. Provide an opportunity for public review and comment on each

evaluation of a use, unless we have already provided an opportunity

during the development or revision of a Comprehensive Conservation Plan

for the national wildlife refuge or have already provided an

opportunity during routine, periodic determinations of compatibility

for wildlife-dependent recreational uses.

Purpose of This Draft Policy

The purpose of this draft policy is to establish in policy, the

process for determining compatibility of proposed national wildlife

refuge uses and procedures for documentation and periodic review of

existing uses, and to ensure that we administer proposed and existing

uses according to the compatibility provisions of the NWRSIA-1997.

Published concurrently in this Federal Register are our proposed

compatibility regulations. This draft compatibility policy reflects the

proposed compatibility regulations and provides additional detail for

each step in the compatibility determination process.

Fish and Wildlife Service Directives System

Because many of our field stations are located in remote areas

across the United States, it is important that all employees have

available and know the current policy and management directives that

affect their daily activities. The Fish and Wildlife Service Directives

System, consisting of the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Director's

Orders, and National Policy Issuances, is the vehicle for issuing the

standing and continuing policy and management directives of the

Service. New directives are posted on the Internet upon approval,

ensuring that all employees have prompt access to the most current

guidance.

The Fish and Wildlife Service Manual contains our standing and

continuing directives with which our employees must comply and has

regulatory force and effect within the Service. We use it to implement

our authorities and to ``step down'' our compliance with Statutes,

Executive orders, and Departmental directives. It establishes the

requirements and procedures to assist our employees in carrying out our

authorities, responsibilities, and activities.

Director's Orders are limited to temporary policy, procedures,

delegations of authority, emergency regulations, special assignments of

functions, and initial functional statements on the establishment of

new organizational units. All Director's Orders must be converted as

soon as practicable to appropriate parts of the Fish and Wildlife

Service Manual or removed. Material appropriate for immediate inclusion

in the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual generally is not issued as a

Director's Order.

National Policy Issuances promulgate the Director's national

policies for managing the Service and its programs. These policies are

necessarily broad and generally require management discretion or

judgment in their implementation. They represent the Director's

expectations of how the Service and its employees will act in carrying

out their official responsibilities.

The Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Director's Orders, and

National Policy Issuances are available on the Internet at http://

www.fws.gov/directives/direct.html. When finalized, we will incorporate

this compatibility policy into the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual as

Part 603 Chapter 3.

Comment Solicitation

If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments by any one of

several methods. You may mail comments to: Chief, Division of Refuges,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 670,

Arlington, Virginia 22203. You may comment via the Internet to:

Compatibility__Policy__ C[email protected]. Please submit Internet

comments as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and

any form of encryption. Please also include: ``Attn: 1018-AE98'' and

your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not

receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your

Internet message, contact us directly at (703)358-1744. You may also

fax comments to: Chief, Division of Refuges, (703)358-2248. Finally,

you may hand-deliver comments to the address mentioned above.

Our practice is to make comments, including names and home

addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular

business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold

their home address from the record, which we will honor to the extent

allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which we would

withhold from the record a respondent's identity, as allowable by law.

If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state

this prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we will not

consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from

organizations or businesses and from individuals identifying themselves

as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses,

available for public inspection in their entirety.

We seek public comments on this draft compatibility policy and will

take into consideration comments and any additional information

received during the 60-day comment period.

We published a notice in the Federal Register on January 23, 1998

(63 FR 3583) notifying the public that we would be revising the Fish

and Wildlife Service Manual, establishing regulations as they relate to

the NWRSIA-1997, and offering to send copies of specific draft Fish and

Wildlife Service Manual chapters to anyone who would like to receive

them. We will mail a copy of this draft Fish and Wildlife Service

Manual compatibility chapter to those who requested one, along with a

copy of the proposed compatibility regulations published concurrently

in this Federal Register. In addition, this draft Fish and Wildlife

Service Manual compatibility chapter and the proposed compatibility

regulations will be available on the National Wildlife Refuge System

web site (http://refuges.fws.gov) during the 60-day comment period.

Required Determinations

We have analyzed the impacts of this policy in concert with the

proposed rule published concurrently in today's issue of the Federal

Register. For compliance with applicable laws and Executive orders

affecting the issuance of rules and policies, see the ``Supplementary

Information'' section of the proposed rule.

Primary Author

J. Kenneth Edwards, Refuge Program Specialist, Division of Refuges,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the primary author of this notice.

Draft Compatibility Policy

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM USES

Refuge Management

Part 603 National Wildlife Refuge System Uses

Chapter 3 Compatibility

603 FW 3.1

3.1 What is the purpose of this chapter? This chapter provides

guidance for determining compatibility of proposed and existing uses of

national wildlife refuges.

3.2 What does this policy apply to? This policy applies to all

proposed and

[[Page 49069]]

existing uses of national wildlife refuges where we have jurisdiction

over such uses.

3.3 What is the compatibility policy? The Refuge Manager will not

initiate or permit a new use of a national wildlife refuge or expand,

renew, or extend an existing use of a national wildlife refuge, unless

the Refuge Manager has determined that the use is a compatible use.

3.4 What are the objectives of this chapter?

A. To provide guidelines for determining compatibility of proposed

national wildlife refuge uses and procedures for documentation and

periodic review of existing national wildlife refuge uses; and

B. To ensure that we administer proposed and existing national

wildlife refuge uses according to laws, regulations, and policies

concerning compatibility.

3.5 What are our statutory authorities for requiring uses of

national wildlife refuges to be compatible?

A. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 as

amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997,

16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee (Refuge Administration Act). This law states that

``The Secretary is authorized, under such regulations as he may

prescribe, to--(A) permit the use of any area within the System for any

purpose, including but not limited to hunting, fishing, public

recreation and accommodations, and access whenever he determines that

such uses are compatible'' and that ``* * * the Secretary shall not

initiate or permit a new use of a refuge or expand, renew, or extend an

existing use of a refuge, unless the Secretary has determined that the

use is a compatible use and that the use is not inconsistent with

public safety.'' The law also provides that, in administering the

Refuge System, ``* * * the Secretary is authorized to * * * Issue

regulations to carry out this Act.''

A significant goal of the Refuge Administration Act is to ensure

that we maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental

health of the Refuge System for present and future generations of

Americans. Fragmentation of the Refuge System's wildlife habitats is a

direct threat to the integrity of the Refuge System, both today and in

the decades ahead. Uses that we reasonably may anticipate to reduce the

quality or quantity or fragment habitats on a refuge will not be

compatible.

B. Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, 16 U.S.C. 460k (Refuge Recreation

Act). This law requires that any recreational use of a refuge must be

compatible with the primary purposes for which the refuge was

established.

C. Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980, 16

U.S.C. 140hh-3233, 43 U.S.C. 1602-1784 (ANILCA). Section 304 of the

ANILCA adopted the compatibility standard of the Refuge Administration

Act for Alaska refuges.

3.6 What do these terms mean?

A. Compatible use means a proposed or existing wildlife-dependent

recreational use or any other use of a national wildlife refuge that,

in the sound professional judgment of the Refuge Manager, will not

materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission or the major purposes of the

affected national wildlife refuge.

B. Compatibility determination means a written determination signed

and dated by the Refuge Manager, signifying that a proposed or existing

use of a national wildlife refuge is either a compatible use or a not

compatible use. The Director delegates authority to make this

determination through the Regional Director, to the Refuge Manager.

C. Comprehensive Conservation Plan means a document that describes

the desired future conditions of a national wildlife refuge, and

provides long-range guidance and management direction for a Refuge

Manager to accomplish the purposes of the affected national wildlife

refuge, contribute to the National Wildlife Refuge System Mission, and

to meet other relevant mandates.

D. Conservation, and Management mean to sustain and, where

appropriate, restore and enhance, healthy populations of fish,

wildlife, and plants utilizing, in accordance with applicable Federal

and State laws, methods, and procedures associated with modern

scientific resource programs. Such methods and procedures include,

consistent with the provisions of the National Wildlife Refuge System

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), protection,

research, census, law enforcement, habitat management, propagation,

live trapping and transplantation, and regulated taking.

E. Coordination area means a wildlife management area made

available to a State: (1) By cooperative agreement between the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service and a State agency having control over

wildlife resources pursuant to section 4 of the Fish and Wildlife

Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 664); or (2) by long-term leases or

agreements pursuant to title III of the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act

(7 U.S.C. 1010 et seq.). The States manage coordination areas as a part

of the National Wildlife Refuge System. The compatibility standard does

not apply to coordination areas.

F. Director means the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or

the authorized representative of such official.

G. Fish, Wildlife, and Fish and wildlife mean any member of the

animal kingdom in a wild, unconfined state, whether alive or dead,

including a part, product, egg, or offspring of the member.

H. National wildlife refuge, and Refuge mean a designated area of

land, water, or an interest in land or water located within the

external boundaries of the National Wildlife Refuge System but does not

include coordination areas.

I. National Wildlife Refuge System, and Refuge System mean all

lands, waters, and interests therein administered by, or subject to the

jurisdiction of, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as wildlife

refuges, wildlife ranges, wildlife management areas, waterfowl

production areas, and other areas administered by the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service for the protection and conservation of fish and

wildlife, including those that are threatened with extinction. A

complete listing of all areas of the Refuge System is in the current

annual ``Report of Lands Under Control of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service.''

J. National Wildlife Refuge System Mission, and Refuge System

Mission mean to administer a national network of lands and waters for

the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the

fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the

United States for the benefit of present and future generations of

Americans.

K. Plant means any member of the plant kingdom in a wild,

unconfined state, including any plant community, seed, root, or other

part of a plant.

L. Purpose(s) of the refuge means the purposes specified in or

derived from the law, proclamation, executive order, agreement, public

land order, donation document, or administrative memorandum

establishing, authorizing, or expanding a national wildlife refuge,

national wildlife refuge unit, or national wildlife refuge subunit.

M. Refuge Manager means the person who is directly in charge of a

national wildlife refuge.

N. Refuge use, and Use of a refuge mean a recreational use

(including refuge actions associated with a recreational use or other

general public

[[Page 49070]]

use), refuge management economic activity, or other use of a national

wildlife refuge by the public or other non-Service entity.

O. Refuge management economic activity means any refuge management

activity on a national wildlife refuge which results in generation of

income or in a commodity which is or can be sold for income or revenue

or traded for goods or services. Examples include: farming, grazing,

haying, timber harvesting, and trapping. Specifically excluded from

this definition are refuge management activities which generate

commodities not sold for income or revenue and not traded for goods or

services, on or off a national wildlife refuge.

P. Refuge management activity means an activity conducted by the

Service or a Service-authorized agent to fulfill all purposes or at

least one or more purposes of the national wildlife refuge, or the

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission. Service-authorized agents

include contractors, cooperating agencies, cooperating associations,

friends organizations, and volunteers.

Q. Regional Director means the official in charge of a region of

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the authorized representative of

such official.

R. Secretary means the Secretary of the Interior or the authorized

representative of such official.

S. Service, and We mean the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

Department of the Interior.

T. Sound professional judgment means a finding, determination, or

decision that is consistent with principles of sound fish and wildlife

management and administration, available science and resources, and

adherence to the requirements of the National Wildlife Refuge System

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), and other

applicable laws. Included in this finding, determination, or decision

is a Refuge Manager's field experience and a Refuge Manager's knowledge

of the particular affected refuge's resources.

U. State, and United States mean one or more of the States of the

United States, Puerto Rico, American Somoa, the Virgin Islands, Guam,

and the territories and possessions of the United States.

V. Wildlife-dependent recreational use, and Wildlife-dependent

recreation mean a use of a national wildlife refuge involving hunting,

fishing, wildlife observation and photography, or environmental

education and interpretation. The National Wildlife Refuge System

Administration Act of 1966, as amended, specifies that these are the

six priority general public uses of the National Wildlife Refuge

System.

3.7 What are our responsibilities?

A. Director.

(1) Provides national policy for making compatibility

determinations to ensure that such determinations comply with all

applicable authorities.

B. Regional Director.

(1) Ensures that Refuge Managers follow laws, regulations, and

policies when making compatibility determinations.

(2) Notifies the Director regarding controversial or complex

compatibility determinations.

C. Refuge Manager.

(1) Determines if a proposed or existing use is subject to the

compatibility standard.

(2) Determines whether a use is compatible or not compatible. The

Director delegates the authority to make this determination, through

the Regional Director, to the Refuge Manager.

(3) Consults with the Regional Office supervisor or designee prior

to approving each compatibility determination.

(4) Documents all compatibility determinations in writing.

(5) Ensures that we provide for public review and comment

opportunities for all compatibility determinations, unless previously

provided.

3.8 What is the compatibility standard for Alaska refuges?

A. The Refuge Administration Act, as amended, establishes the same

standard for compatibility for Alaska refuges as for other national

wildlife refuges, but it specifically acknowledges that the ANILCA

provisions take precedence if any conflict arises between the two laws.

Additionally, the provisions of the ANILCA are the primary guidance

Refuge Managers should apply when examining issues regarding

subsistence use. We may alter the compatibility process, in some cases,

for Alaska refuges to include additional procedural steps, such as when

reviewing applications for oil and gas leasing on non-North Slope lands

(ANILCA Sec. 1008) and for applications for transportation and utility

systems (ANILCA Sec. 1104).

B. Alaska refuges established before the passage of the ANILCA have

two sets of purposes. Purposes for pre-ANILCA refuges (in effect on the

day before the enactment of the ANILCA ) remain in force and effect,

except to the extent that they may be inconsistent with the ANILCA or

the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, in which case the provisions

of those Acts control. However, the original purposes for pre-ANILCA

refuges apply only to those portions of the refuge established by the

prior executive order or public land order, and not to those portions

of the refuge added by the ANILCA.

C. Section 22(g) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act

provides that patents issued to Village Corporations for selected land

within the boundaries of a refuge existing on December 18, 1971, the

signing date of the Act, will contain provisions that these lands

remain subject to laws and regulations governing the use and

development of such refuges. This includes application of the

compatibility standard in accordance with the Service's compatibility

rules and procedures with regard to such use and development.

3.9 When is a compatibility determination required?

A. We require a compatibility determination for all refuge uses as

defined by the term ``refuge use'' and must include in the analysis

consideration of all associated facilities, structures, and

improvements, including those constructed or installed by us or at our

direction. This requirement will apply to all such facilities,

structures, improvements, and refuge actions associated with uses that

we approve on or after the effective date of this policy and to the

replacement or major repair or alteration of facilities, structures,

and improvements associated with already approved uses.

B. Facilities, structures, and improvements commonly associated

with recreational public uses include: campgrounds/campsites;

environmental education centers; boat/fishing docks; parking lots; boat

ramps; roads; trails; viewing platforms/towers; and visitor centers.

C. Facilities, structures, and improvements commonly associated

with refuge management economic activities include: loading/unloading

areas; construction, operation, and maintenance buildings; parking

lots; roads and trails; fences; stock ponds and other livestock

watering facilities; and crop irrigation facilities.

D. We will make compatibility determinations for such facilities,

structures, and improvements at the same time we make the compatibility

determination for the use or activity in question.

3.10 When is a compatibility determination not required?

A. Refuge management activity. We do not require a compatibility

determination for refuge management activities as defined by the term

``refuge management activity'' except for ``refuge management economic

activities.'' Examples include: prescribed burning;

[[Page 49071]]

water level management; invasive species control; routine scientific

monitoring, studies, surveys, and censuses; historic preservation

activities; law enforcement activities; and maintenance of existing

refuge facilities, structures, and improvements.

B. Other exceptions.

1. There are other circumstances under which the requirements of

compatibility may not be applicable. The most common of these

exceptions involves property rights that are not vested in the Federal

Government, such as reserved rights to explore and develop minerals or

oil and gas beneath a refuge. In some cases, these exceptions may

include water rights, easements, or navigability issues. Exceptions may

apply when there are rights or interests imparted by a treaty or other

legally binding agreement, where primary jurisdiction of refuge lands

falls to an agency other than us, or where legal mandates supersede

those requiring compatibility. Where reserved rights or legal mandates

provide that we must allow certain activities, we should not prepare a

compatibility determination. In the case of reserved rights, the Refuge

Manager should work with the owner of the property interest to develop

stipulations in a special use permit or other agreement to alleviate or

minimize adverse impacts to the refuge.

2. Communication and cooperation between the Refuge Manager and the

owner of reserved rights will help protect refuge resources without

infringing upon privately-held rights. Refuge Managers may find it

helpful in these instances to secure legal advice from the Department

of the Interior Solicitor's Office.

3. Compatibility provisions of the Refuge Administration Act do not

apply to Department of Defense or other overflights above a refuge.

However, other Federal laws (e.g., Airborne Hunting Act, Endangered

Species Act, Bald Eagle Protection Act), may govern overflights above a

refuge. For military overflights, active communication and cooperation

between the Refuge Manager and the local base commander will be the

most effective way to protect refuge resources.

4. Compatibility requirements apply to activities on bodies of

water ``in'' or ``within'' any area of the Refuge System. Under 50 CFR

25.11, this is effectively to the extent of the ownership interest of

the United States in lands or waters. Where activities on water bodies

not within an area of the Refuge System are affecting refuge resources,

the Refuge Manager should seek State cooperation in controlling the

activities. If necessary, the refuge manger should consider refuge-

specific regulations that would address the problem.

5. Compatibility provisions of the Refuge Administration Act do not

apply to activities authorized, funded, or conducted by another Federal

agency which has primary jurisdiction over the area where a refuge or a

portion of a refuge has been established, if those activities are

conducted in accordance with a memorandum of understanding between the

Secretary or the Director and the head of the Federal agency with

primary jurisdiction over the area.

C. Emergencies. The Refuge Administration Act states that the

Secretary may temporarily suspend, allow, or initiate any use in a

refuge in the Refuge System if the Secretary determines it is necessary

to act immediately in order to protect the health and safety of the

public or any fish or wildlife population. Authority to make decisions

under this emergency power is delegated to the Refuge Manager.

Temporary actions should not exceed 12-months and will usually be of

shorter duration. Such emergency actions are not subject to the

compatibility determination process as outlined in this chapter. When

using this authority, the Refuge Manager will notify the Regional

Office supervisor or designee in advance of the action, or in cases

where the nature of the emergency requires immediate response, as soon

as possible afterwards, and typically no later than the start of

business on the first normal workday following the emergency action.

The Refuge Manager will create a written record (memorandum to the

file) of the decision, the reasons supporting it, and why it was

necessary to protect the health and safety of the public or any fish or

wildlife population.

D. Denying a proposed use without determining compatibility.

1. The Refuge Manager should deny a proposed use without

determining compatibility if any of the following situations exist:

(a) the proposed use is inconsistent with any applicable law or

regulation (e.g., Wilderness Act, Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal

Protection Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act);

(b) the proposed use is inconsistent with the goals or objectives

in an approved refuge management plan (e.g., Comprehensive Conservation

Plan, Comprehensive Management Plan, Master Plan or step-down

management plan);

(c) the proposed use has already been considered in an approved

refuge management plan and was not accepted;

(d) the proposed use is inconsistent with any applicable Executive

Order, or written Department of the Interior or Service policy;

(e) the proposed use is inconsistent with public safety;

(f) the proposed use is a use other than a wildlife-dependent

recreational use that is not manageable within the available budget and

staff; or

(g) the proposed use conflicts with other resource or management

objectives provided that the Refuge Manager specifies those objectives

in denying the use.

2. A compatibility determination should only be prepared for a

proposed use after the Refuge Manager has determined that we have

jurisdiction over the use and has considered items (a) through (g)

above (see Exhibit 1).

E. Existing compatibility determinations. Compatibility

determinations in existence prior to the effective date of this policy

will remain in effect until and unless modified and will be subject to

periodic re-evaluation as described in section 3.11 G. Any use

specifically authorized for a period longer than 10 years (such as

rights-of-way) is subject to a compatibility determination at the time

of the initial application and when the term expires and we receive a

request for renewal. We will use periodic re-evaluations for such long-

term uses to review compliance with permit terms and conditions.

3.11 What are considerations when applying compatibility?

A. Sound professional judgment.

1. In determining what is a compatible use, the Refuge

Administration Act relies on the ``sound professional judgment'' of the

Director. The Director delegates authority to make compatibility

determinations through the Regional Director to the Refuge Manager.

Therefore, it is the Refuge Manager who is required and authorized to

exercise sound professional judgment. Compatibility determinations are

inherently complex and require the Refuge Manager to consider their

field experiences and knowledge of a refuge's resources, particularly

its biological resources and make conclusions that are consistent with

principles of sound fish and wildlife management and administration,

available scientific information, and applicable laws.

2. The Refuge Manager must also consider the extent to which

available resources (funding, personnel, and facilities) are adequate

to develop, manage, and maintain the proposed use so as to ensure

compatibility. The Refuge Manager must make reasonable efforts to

ensure that the lack of resources is not an obstacle to permitting

otherwise compatible

[[Page 49072]]

wildlife-dependent recreational uses (hunting, fishing, wildlife

observation and photography, and environmental education and

interpretation). If reasonable efforts do not yield adequate resources

to develop, manage, and maintain the wildlife-dependent recreational

use, the use will not be compatible because the Service will lack the

administrative means to ensure proper management of the public activity

on the refuge.

3. Refuge Managers are reminded, that unless otherwise provided for

in law or other legally binding directive, permitting uses of national

wildlife refuges is a determination vested by law in the Service. Under

no circumstances (except emergency provisions necessary to protect the

health and safety of the public or any fish or wildlife population) may

we authorize any use not determined to be compatible.

B. Materially interfere with or detract from.

1. When completing compatibility determinations, Refuge Managers

use sound professional judgment to determine if a use will materially

interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the Refuge System

Mission or the major purpose(s) of the refuge. Compatibility,

therefore, is a threshold issue, and the proponent(s) of any use or

combination of uses must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Refuge

Manager that the proposed use(s) pass this threshold test. The burden

of proof is on the proponent to show that they pass; not on the Refuge

Manager to show that they surpass. Some uses, like a proposed

construction project on or across a refuge that affects the flow of

water through a refuge, may exceed the threshold immediately, while

other uses, such as boat fishing in a small lake with a colonial

nesting bird rookery may be of little concern if it involves few boats,

but of increasing concern with growing numbers of boats. Likewise, when

considered separately, a use may not exceed the compatibility

threshold, but when considered cumulatively in conjunction with other

existing or planned uses, a use may exceed the compatibility threshold.

2. A use that has a tangible adverse effect will ``materially

interfere with or detract.'' That effect should be one where we can

reasonably foresee a lingering or continued adverse effect or influence

on refuge resources. For example, the removal of a number of individual

animals from a refuge through regulated hunting, trapping or fishing

would in many instances help the Refuge Manager manage for improving

the health of wildlife populations. However, the take of even one

individual of a threatened or endangered species could significantly

impact the refuge's ability to manage for and perpetuate that species.

Likewise, wildlife disturbance which is very limited in scope or

duration may not result in a tangible, lingering or continued adverse

effect on refuge resources. However, even unintentional harassment or

disturbance during critical biological times, in critical locations, or

repeated over time may exceed the compatibility threshold.

3. The Refuge Manager must consider not only the direct impacts of

a use but also the indirect impacts associated with the use and the

cumulative impacts of the use when conducted in conjunction with other

existing or planned uses of the refuge, and uses of adjacent lands or

waters that may exacerbate the effects of a refuge use.

C. Making a use compatible through replacement of lost habitat

values or other compensation. We will not allow making proposed refuge

uses compatible through replacement of lost habitat values or other

compensation. If we cannot make the proposed use compatible through

stipulations we cannot allow the use.

D. Refuge-specific analysis. We must base compatibility

determinations on a refuge-specific analysis of reasonably anticipated

impacts of a particular use on refuge resources. We should base this

refuge-specific analysis on information readily available to the Refuge

Manager, including field experience and familiarity with refuge

resources, or made available to the Refuge Manager by the State,

Tribes, proponent of the use, or through the public review and comment

period. Refuge-specific analysis need not rely on refuge-specific

biological impact data, but may be based on information derived from

other areas or species which are similarly situated and therefore

relevant to the refuge-specific analysis. We do not require Refuge

Managers to independently generate data to make determinations. If

available information to the Refuge Manager is insufficient to document

that a proposed use is compatible, then the Refuge Manager would be

unable to make an affirmative finding of compatibility and we must not

authorize or permit the use.

E. Relationship to management plans. The Refuge Manager will

usually complete compatibility determinations as part of the

Comprehensive Conservation Plan or step-down management plan process

for individual uses, specific use programs, or groups of related uses

described in the plan. The Refuge Manager will incorporate

compatibility determinations prepared concurrently with a plan as an

appendix to the plan. These compatibility determinations may summarize

and incorporate by reference what the Refuge Manager addressed in

detail in the Comprehensive Conservation Plan, step-down management

plan, or associated National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document.

F. Managing conflicting uses. The Refuge Manager may need to

allocate uses in time and/or space to reduce or eliminate conflicts

among users of the refuge. If this cannot be done, the Refuge Manager

may need to terminate or disallow one or more of the uses. The Refuge

Administration Act does not prioritize among the six wildlife-dependent

recreational uses. Therefore, in the case of direct conflict between

these priority uses, the Refuge Manager should evaluate, among other

things, which use most directly supports long-term attainment of refuge

purposes and the Refuge System Mission. This same analysis would

support a decision involving conflict between two non-priority public

uses. Where there are conflicts between priority and non-priority uses,

priority uses take precedence.

G. Re-evaluation of uses.

1. We will re-evaluate compatibility determinations for existing

wildlife-dependent recreational uses when conditions under which the

permitted use changes significantly, or if there is significant new

information regarding the effects of the use, or concurrently with the

preparation or revision of a Comprehensive Conservation Plan, or at

least every 15 years, whichever is earlier. In addition, a Refuge

Manager always may re-evaluate the compatibility of a use at any time.

2. Except for uses specifically authorized for a period longer than

10 years (such as rights-of-way), we will re-evaluate compatibility

determinations for all other existing uses when conditions under which

the permitted use changes significantly, or if there is significant new

information regarding the effects of the use, or concurrently with the

preparation or revision of a Comprehensive Conservation Plan, or at

least every 10 years, whichever is earlier. Again, a Refuge Manager

always may re-evaluate the compatibility of a use at any time.

3. For uses specifically authorized for a period longer than 10

years (such as long-term rights-of-way), our re-evaluation will examine

compliance with the terms and conditions of the authorization, not the

authorization itself. However, we will frequently monitor and review

the activity to ensure that all permit terms and

[[Page 49073]]

conditions are being carried out. We will make a new compatibility

determination prior to extending or renewing such long-term uses at the

expiration of the authorization.

H. Public review and comment. An opportunity for public review and

comment is required for all compatibility determinations. For

compatibility determinations prepared concurrently with Comprehensive

Conservation Plans or step-down management plans, we can achieve public

review and comment concurrently with the public review and comment of

the draft plan and associated NEPA document. For compatibility

determinations prepared separate from a plan, we will determine the

appropriate level of opportunity for public review and comment through

a tiered approach based on complexity, controversy, and level of impact

to the refuge. See 3.12 A10 for details on public review and comment.

3.12 What are the steps for preparing compatibility

determinations?

A. The following steps outline the procedure for reviewing uses for

compatibility. To maintain consistency, we will use the format provided

in Exhibit 2 for documenting all compatibility determinations.

1. Use. Identify the use. A use may be proposed or existing, and

may be an individual use, a specific use program, or a group of related

uses. The Refuge Manager will determine whether to consider a use

individually, a specific use program, or in conjunction with a group of

related uses. However, whenever practicable, the Refuge Manager should

concurrently consider related uses or uses that are likely to have

similar effects, in order to facilitate analysis of cumulative effects

and to provide opportunity for effective public review and comment.

2. Refuge name. Identify the name of the refuge.

3. Establishing and acquisition authority(ies). Identify the

specific authority(ies) used to establish the refuge (e.g., Executive

Order, public land order, Secretarial Order, refuge-specific

legislation, or general legislation).

4. Refuge purpose(s). Identify the purpose(s) of the refuge from

the documents identified in 3.12 A3. For a use proposed for designated

wilderness areas within the Refuge System, the Refuge Manager must

first analyze whether the activity can be allowed under the terms of

the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. sections 1131-36). If so, the Refuge

Manager must then determine whether the activity is compatible. As a

matter of policy, the Refuge Manager will also analyze whether the

activity is compatible with the purposes of the Wilderness Act, which

makes such purposes supplemental to those of the national wildlife

refuge.

5. National Wildlife Refuge System Mission. The Mission of the

National Wildlife Refuge System is ``to administer a national network

of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where

appropriate, restoration of fish, wildlife, and plant resources and

their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and

future generations of Americans.''

6. Description of use. Describe the nature and extent of the use.

The Refuge Manager may work with the proponent(s) of a use to gather

information required in items (a) through (e) below to describe the

proposed use. If the use is described in sufficient detail in a

Comprehensive Conservation Plan, step-down management plan, other plan,

or associated NEPA document, the Refuge Manager may provide a summary

of the use and reference the plan or NEPA document.

At a minimum, the Refuge Manager must address and include the

following in the compatibility determination:

(a) What is the use?

(b) Where would the use be conducted? Describe the specific areas

of the refuge that will be used: habitat types and acres involved; key

fish, wildlife, and plants that occur in or use that habitat; and the

proportion of total refuge acreage and the specific habitat type

involved. Include a description of other areas that may be affected

incidental to the specific use, such as access to the destination area

and storage of equipment. This information may be described in writing

and on a map.

(c) When would the use be conducted? Describe the time of year and

day, and duration of the use.

(d) How would the use be conducted? Describe the techniques to be

used, types of equipment required, and number of people per given

period. Include supporting uses and facilities as appropriate, e.g.,

boating and boat ramps to support fishing, camping and campsites to

support hunting, etc.

(e) Why is this use being proposed? Describe the reason for the use

and the need to conduct the use on the refuge. Consider the extent to

which other areas in the vicinity provide similar opportunities.

7. Availability of resources.

a. Complete an analysis of costs for administering and managing

each use. Implicit within the definition of sound professional judgment

is that adequate resources (including financial, personnel, facilities,

and other infrastructure) exist or can be provided by the Service or a

partner to properly develop, operate, and maintain the use in a way

that will not materially interfere with or detract from fulfillment of

the refuge purpose(s) and the Refuge System Mission. If resources are

lacking for establishment or continuation of wildlife-dependent

recreational uses, the Refuge Manager will make reasonable efforts to

obtain additional resources or outside assistance from States, other

public agencies, local communities, and/or private and non-profit

groups before determining that the use is not compatible. If adequate

resources cannot be secured, the use will be found not compatible and

cannot be allowed. Efforts to find additional funding must be

documented on the compatibility determination form.

b. For many refuges, analysis of available resources will have been

made for general categories of uses when preparing Comprehensive

Conservation Plans, step-down management plans, other plans, or NEPA

documents. If the required and available resources are described in

sufficient detail in a Comprehensive Conservation Plan, step-down

management plan, other plan, or associated NEPA document, provide a

summary of the required and available resources for the use and

reference the plan or NEPA document. If not sufficiently covered in the

planning document, the following should be documented in the

compatibility determination:

(i) Resources involved in the administration and management of the

use.

(ii) Special equipment, facilities or improvements necessary to

support the use. Itemize expenses such as costs associated with special

equipment, physical changes or improvements necessary on the refuge

that would be required to comply with disabled access requirements.

(iii) Maintenance costs associated with the use (e.g., trail

maintenance and mowing, signing, garbage pickup or sanitation costs,

parking areas, road repair or grading, building or structure repair,

including blinds, boat ramps, kiosks, etc.).

(iv) Monitoring costs (e.g., biological surveys, maintenance of

control sites, etc) to assess the impact of uses over time.

c. This analysis of cost for administering and managing each use

will only include the incremental increase above general operational

costs

[[Page 49074]]

that we can show as being directly caused by the proposed use.

d. Offsetting revenues, such as entrance fees and user fees that

are returned to the refuge, should be documented in determining the

costs to administer individual or aggregated uses.

8. Anticipated impacts of the use.

a. Identify and describe the reasonably anticipated impacts of the

use. In assessing the potential impacts of a proposed use on the refuge

purpose(s) and the Refuge System Mission, Refuge Managers will use and

cite available sources of information, as well as their best

professional judgment, to substantiate their analysis. Sources may

include planning documents, environmental assessments, environmental

impact statements, annual narratives, information from previously-

conducted or ongoing research, data from refuge inventories or studies,

published literature on related biological studies, State conservation

management plans, field management experience, etc. Refuge Managers are

not required to independently generate data on which to base

compatibility determinations. The Refuge Manager may work with the

proponent of the use to gather additional information before making the

determination. If available information to the Refuge Manager is

insufficient to document that a proposed use is compatible, then the

Refuge Manager would be unable to make an affirmative finding of

compatibility and we must not authorize or permit the use.

b. Refuge Managers should distinguish between long-term and short-

term impacts. For example, a use may initially only be expected to

cause minor impacts to the resource, however, the cumulative impacts

over time may become quite substantial. Other uses may have impacts

which are very short in duration but very significant while they are

occurring, or are the converse: very long in duration but very

insignificant in effect.

c. Direct impacts on refuge resources, such as wildlife disturbance

or destruction of habitats, may be easily predicted. However, the

analysis of impacts must also address indirect and cumulative effects

that may be reasonably associated with a specific use. A use with

little potential for impact on its own may contribute to more

substantive cumulative impacts on refuge resources when conducted in

conjunction with or preceding or following other uses, and when

considered in conjunction with proposed or existing uses of lands and

waters adjacent to the refuge.

d. If the anticipated impacts of the use are described in

sufficient detail in a Comprehensive Conservation Plan, step-down

management plan, other plan, or associated NEPA document, Refuge

Managers may provide a summary of the anticipated impacts of the use

and reference the plan or NEPA document.

9. Justification. After completing the steps described above, the

Refuge Manager will provide a logical explanation for the

determination. The justification must describe how the proposed use is

reasonably expected to affect fulfilling the refuge's major purpose(s)

and the Refuge System Mission.

10. Public review and comment.

a. The Refuge Manager must provide for public review and comment on

the proposed refuge uses(s) before issuing a final compatibility

determination. Public review and comment, includes actively seeking to

identify individuals and organizations that reasonably might be

affected by, or interested in, a refuge use. Additionally, public

review and comment will offer the public the opportunity to provide

relevant information and express their views on whether or not a use is

compatible. The extent and complexity of public review and comment that

is necessary or appropriate will be determined by the Refuge Manager.

For example, significantly modifying a popular hunting, fishing, or

wildlife observation program would likely be controversial and would

require considerable opportunity for public review and comment;

whereas, temporarily closing a small portion of a wildlife observation

trail would likely require much less opportunity for public review and

comment. For compatibility determinations prepared concurrently with

Comprehensive Conservation Plans or step-down management plans, public

involvement can be achieved concurrently with the public review and

comment of the draft plan and associated NEPA document. For

compatibility determinations prepared separate from a plan, the level

of public review and comment will be handled through the following

tiered approach.

b. For minor, incidental, or one-time uses which have been shown by

past experience at this or other refuges in the Refuge System to result

in no significant, cumulative, lingering or continuing adverse impacts

to the refuge and would likely generate minimal public interest, the

public review and comment requirement can be accomplished by posting a

notice of the proposed determination at the refuge headquarters so as

to maximize the opportunity for comment as is practicable. For all

other uses, at a minimum, the Refuge Manager will solicit public

comment by placing a public notice in a newspaper with wide local

distribution. The notice must contain, at a minimum: a brief

description of the compatibility determination process, a description

of the use that is being evaluated, the types of information that may

be used in completing the evaluation, how to provide comments, when

comments are due, and how people may be informed of the decision the

Refuge Manager will make regarding the use. The public will be given at

least 14 calendar days to provide comments following the day the notice

is published. This period may be reduced by the Refuge Manager when

there is not sufficient time to provide the full 14-days.

c. For evaluations of controversial or complex uses, the Refuge

Manager should expand the public review and comment process to allow

for additional opportunities for comment. This may include newspaper or

radio announcements, notices or postings in public places, notices in

the Federal Register, letters to potentially interested people such as

adjacent landowners, holding public meetings, or extending the comment

period.

d. Public review and comment efforts must be documented on the

compatibility determination form and relevant information retained with

compatibility determinations as part of the administrative record. The

documentation must include a description of the process used, a summary

of comments received, and a description of any actions taken because of

the comments received. All written public comments will be retained in

the administrative record. If a Comprehensive Conservation Plan or NEPA

document is being prepared, this information would be included in these

documents as part of the administrative record.

11. Use is compatible or not compatible. Identify whether the use

is compatible or not compatible. This is where the Refuge Manager

states whether the use materially interferes with or detracts from

fulfilling the National Wildlife Refuge System Mission or the major

purposes of the refuge.

12. Stipulations necessary to ensure compatibility.

a. Describe any stipulations necessary to ensure compatibility. If

a use is not compatible as initially proposed, it may be modified with

stipulations that avoid or minimize potential adverse impacts, making

the use compatible. It is not the responsibility of the Refuge Manager

to

[[Page 49075]]

develop a sufficient set of stipulations so as to make an otherwise not

compatible proposed use, compatible. If the use cannot be modified with

stipulations to ensure compatibility, the use cannot be allowed.

b. Protective stipulations in the compatibility determination for a

particular use should specify the manner in which that use must be

carried out to ensure compatibility. Stipulations must be detailed and

specific. They may identify such things as limitations on time (daily,

seasonal, or annual) or space where a use could be safely conducted,

the routes or forms of access to be used, and any restrictions on the

types of equipment to be used or number of people to be involved.

Monitoring of the use must be sufficient to evaluate compliance with

stated conditions and swift action must be taken to correct or respond

to any serious deviations.

13. Consultation with Regional Office. Prior to approving each

compatibility determination, the Refuge Manager will consult with their

Regional Office supervisor or designee. The consultation will be

documented by recording on the compatibility determination form the

date and name of person consulted with.

14. Signature. The Refuge Manager will sign and date the

compatibility determination.

15. Mandatory 10 or 15-year re-evaluation date. At the time the

compatibility determination is made, the Refuge Manager will insert the

required maximum 10-year re-evaluation date for uses other than

wildlife-dependent recreational uses or a 15-year maximum re-evaluation

date for wildlife-dependent recreational uses.

3.13 How do we expedite the compatibility determination process?

The Refuge Administration Act provides for expedited consideration of

uses that will likely have no detrimental effect on the fulfillment of

the purpose(s) of the refuge or the Refuge System Mission. The intent

of this provision is to reduce the administrative burden on the Refuge

Manager and speed the compatibility determination process for uses that

are frequently found to be compatible. For minor, incidental, or one-

time uses which have been shown to have no significant, cumulative,

lingering, or continuing adverse impacts to the refuge and would likely

generate minimal public interest, the time period for an opportunity

for public review and comment may be reduced to the time available.

3.14 What do we do with existing uses that are not compatible?

Existing uses determined to be not compatible will be terminated or

modified to make the use compatible as expeditiously as practicable.

3.15 May we deny uses that are compatible? A determination that a

use is compatible does not require the use to be allowed.

Determinations on whether to allow otherwise compatible uses are based

on compliance with other laws, the Refuge System Mission, policy,

refuge purposes, availability of resources to manage the use, possible

conflicts with other uses, public safety, and other administrative

factors. The Refuge Manager must clearly document and describe in

writing the administrative reasons for not permitting a compatible use.

Usually, a Refuge Manager will make this decision prior to making a

compatibility determination and completing one will be unnecessary.

3.16 What are the procedures for appealing a permit denial?

Procedures for appealing a permit denial are provided in 50 CFR 25.45

(special use permits), 50 CFR 29.23 (rights-of-way), 50 CFR 36.41(b)

(special use permits for refuges in Alaska), or 43 CFR 36.8 (rights-of-

way for Alaska).

3.17 Compatibility on Lands Added to the National Wildlife Refuge

System.

A. When we add lands to the National Wildlife Refuge System, the

Refuge Manager assigned management responsibility for the land to be

acquired, will identify prior to acquisition, withdrawal, transfer,

reclassification, or donation of those lands, existing wildlife-

dependent recreational public uses (if any) determined to be compatible

that we will permit to continue on an interim basis, pending completion

of the Comprehensive Conservation Plan. For this purpose, the Refuge

Manager will make a pre-acquisition compatibility determination that

will apply to existing wildlife-dependent recreational public uses that

may be allowed, if determined to be compatible during the interim

between acquisition and completion of the Comprehensive Conservation

Plan. The purpose of this policy is to inform the public, prior to

acquisition, which wildlife-dependent recreational public uses will be

allowed to continue on newly acquired lands. Such decisions must be

based on the compatibility standards and procedures outlined in this

chapter. These pre-acquisition compatibility determinations for

continuing existing wildlife-dependent recreational public uses will be

made in writing, using the format in Exhibit 2.

B. Pre-acquisition compatibility determinations only apply to

existing wildlife-dependent recreational public uses and are intended

to be short term in nature, bridging the gap between acquisition of

refuge lands and completion of refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plans.

They should be made in conjunction with the preparation and release of

appropriate pre-acquisition Realty documentation, prepared pursuant to

NEPA. Pre-acquisition compatibility determinations should document the

type, level and location of wildlife-dependent recreational public uses

that are presently occurring on lands proposed for acquisition.

3.18 What is the relationship of compatibility to NEPA?

A. Analysis done to comply with NEPA with regard to proposed

actions are closely related to the compatibility determination process

because the NEPA process requires analysis of the impacts of a proposed

action on the natural, cultural, and physical environment, and requires

public participation in the decision-making process. The information

developed in complying with NEPA will be useful in completing

compatibility determinations.

B. Comprehensive Conservation Plans and step-down management plans

will have associated NEPA compliance documentation, and Refuge Managers

should ensure that the analysis in the NEPA document adequately covers

the factors that are relevant to compatibility determinations. If this

is done, it will only be necessary to summarize and reference the

analysis and conclusion in the compatibility determination. Final

compatibility determinations should be deferred until the NEPA document

is completed and a decision is made on the proposed action. Public

involvement efforts should be undertaken concurrently to the extent

practicable.

C. A decision to allow a proposed use, or terminate or

significantly modify an existing use made independent of a formal

planning process should be accompanied by appropriate NEPA

documentation. However, if a proposed use is not authorized, as a

result of a compatibility determination, no action results that would

require NEPA documentation. NEPA compliance for authorizations of uses

that are categorically excluded should be documented with an

Environmental Action Statement as described in 550 FW 3. The Refuge

Manager may work with the proponent(s) of a use to provide the

appropriate NEPA documentation.

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 49076]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN09SE99.001

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 49077]]

Exhibit 2--Compatibility Determination

Use:

Refuge Name:

Establishing and Acquisition Authority(ies):

Refuge Purpose(s):

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission:

Description of Use:

Availability of Resources:

Anticipated Impacts of the Use:

Justification:

Public Review and Comment:

Use is Compatible or Not Compatible (circle one):

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility:

Consultation with Regional Office:

Signature:

Refuge Manager: ______________________________

(Signature/Date)

Mandatory 10 or 15-year Reevaluation Date: ____________________

Dated: May 26, 1999.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 99-22993 Filed 9-8-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P