Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81139 

rule. Accordingly, the correction is 

effective January 1, 2011. 

II. Summary of Errors 

On page 70417, in Table 13B, the 

calculation of the NRS payment 

amounts for services provided in rural 

areas is incorrect. In Table 13B, we 

multiplied the NRS payment amounts 

(from Tables 8B and 9B) by the rural 

add-on (X 1.03). However, we should 

have multiplied the NRS conversion 

factors for rural areas (from Table 13A) 

by the appropriate relative weights. We 

are replacing Table 13B in its entirety in 

order to show the correct calculation of 

the NRS payment amounts for services 

provided in rural areas. 

III. Correction of Errors 

In FR Doc. 2010–27778 of November 

17, 2010 (75 FR 70372), make the 

following corrections: 

1. On page 70417, Table 13B is 

corrected to read as follows: 

TABLE 13B—RELATIVE WEIGHTS FOR THE 6-SEVERITY NRS SYSTEM FOR SERVICES PROVIDED IN RURAL AREAS

Severity level Points (scoring) 

For HHAs that DO submit quality 

data (NRS conversion factor = 

54.12) 

For HHAs that DO NOT submit 

quality data (NRS conversion factor 

= 53.05) 

Relative weight 

Total NRS 

payment amount 

for rural areas 

Relative weight 

Total NRS 

payment amount 

for rural areas 

1 ................................................ 0 ................................................ 0.2698 $14.60 0.2698 $14.31 

2 ................................................ 1 to 14 ...................................... 0.9742 $52.72 0.9742 $51.68 

3 ................................................ 15 to 27 .................................... 2.6712 $144.57 2.6712 $141.71 

4 ................................................ 28 to 48 .................................... 3.9686 $214.78 3.9686 $210.53 

5 ................................................ 49 to 98 .................................... 6.1198 $331.20 6.1198 $324.66 

6 ................................................ 99+ ............................................ 10.5254 $569.63 10.5254 $558.37

IV. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking 

We ordinarily publish a notice of 

proposed rulemaking in the Federal 

Register to provide a period for public 

comment before the provisions of a 

notice such as this take effect in 

accordance with section 553(b) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 

U.S.C. 553(b)). However, we can waive 

both the notice and comment procedure 

and the 30-day delay in effective date if 

the Secretary finds, for good cause, that 

the notice and comment process is 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest, and incorporates 

a statement of the finding and the 

reasons therefore in the notice. 

We find for good cause that it is 

unnecessary to undertake notice and 

comment rulemaking because this 

notice merely provides typographical 

and technical corrections to the 

regulations. We are not making 

substantive changes to our payment 

methodologies or policies, but rather, 

are simply implementing correctly the 

payment methodologies and policies 

that we previously proposed, received 

comment on, and subsequently 

finalized. The public has already had 

the opportunity to comment on these 

payment methodologies and policies, 

and this correction notice is intended 

solely to ensure that the CY 2011 HH 

PPS final rule accurately reflects them. 

Therefore, we believe that undertaking 

further notice and comment procedures 

to incorporate these corrections into the 

CY 2011 HH PPS final rule is 

unnecessary and contrary to the public 

interest. 

Further, we believe a delayed 

effective date is unnecessary because 

this correction notice merely corrects 

inadvertent typographical and technical 

errors. The changes noted above do not 

make any substantive changes to the HH 

PPS payment methodologies or policies. 

Moreover, we regard imposing a delay 

in the effective date as being contrary to 

the public interest. We believe that it is 

in the public interest for providers to 

receive appropriate HH PPS payments 

in as timely a manner as possible and 

to ensure that the CY 2011 HH PPS final 

rule accurately reflects our payment 

methodologies, payment rates, and 

policies. Therefore, we find good cause 

to waive notice and comment 

procedures, as well as the 30-day delay 

in effective date. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital 

Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, 

Medicare—Supplementary Medical 

Insurance Program) 

Dated: December 20, 2010. 

Dawn L. Smalls, 

Executive Secretary to the Department. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32496 Filed 12–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 21 

[FWS–R9–MB–2010–0064; 91200–1231– 

9BPP] 

RIN 1018–AX31 

Migratory Bird Permits; States 

Delegated Falconry Permitting 

Authority; Technical Corrections to the 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The States of Arkansas, 

Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Michigan, 

Missouri, South Dakota, and 

Washington have requested that we, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, delegate 

permitting for falconry to the State, as 

provided under the regulations at 50 

CFR 21.29. We have reviewed 

regulations and supporting materials 

provided by the States and have 

concluded that their regulations comply 

with the Federal regulations. We change 

the falconry regulations accordingly. We 

also correct or clarify several small 

errors in the regulations and move one 

section to make the regulations more 

consistent. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 

2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

George T. Allen, Division of Migratory 

Bird Management, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 703–358–1825. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
81140 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Background 

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, published a final rule in the 

Federal Register on October 8, 2008 (73 

FR 59448), to revise our regulations 

governing falconry in the United States. 

These regulations are found in title 50 

of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

at § 21.29. The regulations provide that, 

when a State meets the requirements for 

operating under the regulations, 

falconry permitting must be delegated to 

the State. 

The States of Arkansas, Colorado, 

Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, 

South Dakota, and Washington have 

submitted revised falconry regulations 

and supporting materials and have 

requested to be allowed to operate 

under the revised Federal regulations. 

We have reviewed the regulations 

administered by these States and have 

determined that their regulations meet 

the requirements of 50 CFR 21.29(b). 

According to the regulations at 

§ 21.29(b)(4), we must issue a rule to 

add a State to the list at § 21.29(b)(10) 

of approved States with a falconry 

program. Therefore, we change the 

Federal regulations accordingly, and a 

Federal permit will no longer be 

required to practice falconry in the 

States of Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, 

Maine, Michigan, Missouri, South 

Dakota, and Washington beginning 

January 1, 2011. 

We also make several nonsubstantive 

corrections and improvements to the 

falconry regulations in 50 CFR 21.29. In 

paragraph (d)(9), we add a paragraph 

heading for consistency with the other 

subordinate paragraphs in paragraph 

(d), which all have headings. We correct 

an incorrect reference in paragraph 

(e)(6)(ii). Finally, we remove redundant 

subparagraphs from paragraphs (e)(2) 

and (e)(3): The same text appears at both 

of these locations. We are removing this 

text from both of these locations and 

moving it to a more logical location in 

paragraph (c)(3)(i) in a new paragraph 

(E). The information in this text pertains 

to the possession of raptors by 

Apprentice Falconers, and we believe 

this information fits better with other 

information about the possession 

options for Apprentice Falconers 

presented in paragraph (c) than it does 

in either of its current locations in 

paragraph (e) of the regulations. 

Administrative Procedure 

In accordance with section 553 of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

551 et seq.), we are issuing this final 

rule without prior opportunity for 

public comment. Under the regulations 

at 50 CFR 21.29(b)(1)(ii), the Director of 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must 

determine if a State, tribal, or territorial 

falconry permitting program meets 

Federal requirements. When the 

Director makes this determination, the 

Service is required by regulations at 50 

CFR 21.29(b)(4) to publish a rule in the 

Federal Register adding the State, tribe, 

or territory to the list of those approved 

for allowing the practice of falconry. On 

January 1st of the calendar year 

following publication of the rule, the 

Service will terminate Federal falconry 

permitting in any State certified under 

the regulations at 50 CFR 21.29. 

This is a ministerial and 

nondiscretionary action that must be 

enacted shortly to enable the subject 

States to assume all responsibilities of 

falconry permitting by January 1, 2011, 

the effective date of this regulatory 

amendment. Further, the relevant 

regulation at 50 CFR 21.29 governing 

the transfer of permitting authority to 

these States has already been subject to 

public notice and comment procedures. 

Therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(B), we did not publish a 

proposed rule in regard to this 

rulemaking action because, for good 

cause as stated above, we found prior 

public notice and comment procedures 

to be unnecessary. In addition, per 5 

U.S.C. 553(d)(1), we are making this rule 

effective in less than 30 days because 

this rule relieves a restriction: It 

relinquishes Federal control of the 

falconry permitting program to the 

approved States. 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this rule is 

not significant under Executive Order 

12866. OMB bases its determination 

upon the following four criteria: 

a. Whether the rule will have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy or adversely affect an 

economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 

environment, or other units of the 

government. 

b. Whether the rule will create 

inconsistencies with other Federal 

agencies’ actions. 

c. Whether the rule will materially 

affect entitlements, grants, user fees, 

loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of their recipients. 

d. Whether the rule raises novel legal 

or policy issues. 

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 (that 

is, small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of an agency certifies the rule will 

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 

will 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 will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This rule 

delegates authority to States that have 

requested it, and those States have 

already changed their falconry 

regulations. This rule does not change 

falconers’ costs for practicing their 

sport, nor does it affect businesses that 

provide equipment or supplies for 

falconry. Consequently, we certify that, 

because this rule will 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 the 

SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). It will not 

have a significant economic 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. There are no costs to 

permittees or any other part of the 

economy associated with this 

regulations change. 

b. This rule will not cause a major 

increase in costs or prices for 

consumers, individual industries, 

Federal, State, or local government 

agencies, or geographic regions. The 

practice of falconry does not 

significantly affect costs or prices in any 

sector of the economy. 

c. This rule will not have significant 

adverse effects on competition, 

employment, investment, productivity, 

innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based 

enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises. Falconry is an 

endeavor of private individuals. Neither 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 81141 

regulation nor practice of falconry 

significantly affects business activities. 

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 will not ‘‘significantly or 

uniquely’’ affect small governments in a 

negative way. A small government 

agency plan is not required. The eight 

States affected by this rule applied for 

the authority to issue permits for the 

practice of falconry. 

b. This rule will 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. A takings implication 

assessment is not required. This rule 

does not contain a provision for taking 

of private property. 

Federalism 

This rule does not have sufficient 

Federalism effects to warrant 

preparation of a Federalism assessment 

under E.O. 13132. The States being 

delegated authority to issue permits to 

conduct falconry have requested that 

authority. No significant economic 

impacts are expected to result from the 

State regulation of falconry. 

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 meets the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of the Order. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

We examined this rule under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB 

has approved the information collection 

requirements of the Migratory Bird 

Permits Program and assigned OMB 

control number 1018–0022, which 

expires November 30, 2013. This 

regulation change does not add to the 

approved information collection. 

Information from the collection is used 

to document take of raptors from the 

wild for use in falconry and to 

document transfers of raptors held for 

falconry between permittees. A Federal 

agency may not conduct or sponsor and 

a person is not required to respond to 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

We evaluated the environmental 

impacts of the changes to these 

regulations, and determined that this 

rule does not have any environmental 

impacts. Within the spirit and intent of 

the Council on Environmental Quality’s 

regulations for implementing the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), and other statutes, orders, and 

policies that protect fish and wildlife 

resources, we determined that these 

regulatory changes do not have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. 

Under the guidance in Appendix 1 of 

the Department of the Interior Manual at 

516 DM 2, we conclude that the 

regulatory changes are categorically 

excluded because they ‘‘have no or 

minor potential environmental impact’’ 

(516 DM 2, Appendix 1A(1)). No more 

comprehensive NEPA analysis of the 

regulations change is required. 

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), Executive 

Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have 

evaluated potential effects on Federally 

recognized Indian Tribes and have 

determined that this rule will not 

interfere with Tribes’ ability to manage 

themselves or their funds or to regulate 

falconry on Tribal lands. 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

E.O. 13211 requires agencies to 

prepare Statements of Energy Effects 

when undertaking certain actions. 

Because this rule only affects the 

practice of falconry in the United States, 

it is not a significant regulatory action 

under E.O. 12866, and will not 

significantly affect energy supplies, 

distribution, or use. Therefore, this 

action is not a significant energy action 

and no Statement of Energy Effects is 

required. 

Environmental Consequences of the 

Action 

Socioeconomic. This action will not 

have discernible socioeconomic 

impacts. 

Raptor populations. This rule will not 

change the effects of falconry on raptor 

populations. We have reviewed and 

approved the State regulations. 

Endangered and threatened species. 

This rule does not change protections 

for endangered and threatened species. 

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)). 

Delegating falconry permitting authority 

to States with approved programs will 

not affect threatened or endangered 

species or their habitats in the United 

States. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 21 

Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

we amend subpart C of part 21, 

subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 21—MIGRATORY BIRD PERMITS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 21 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 40 

Stat. 755 (16 U.S.C. 703); Pub. L. 95–616, 92 

Stat. 3112 (16 U.S.C. 712(2)); Public Law 

106–108, 113 Stat. 1491, Note Following 16 

U.S.C. 703. 

■ 2. Amend § 21.29 by: 

■ a. Amending paragraph (b)(10)(i) by 

removing the word ‘‘or’’ from the first 

column and adding in alphabetic order 

to the list of States the words 

‘‘Arkansas,’’ ‘‘Colorado,’’ ‘‘Idaho,’’ 

‘‘Maine,’’ ‘‘Michigan,’’ ‘‘Missouri,’’ ‘‘South 

Dakota,’’ and ‘‘or Washington,’’; 

■ b. Amending paragraph (b)(10)(ii) by 

removing the words ‘‘Arkansas,’’ 

‘‘Colorado,’’ ‘‘Idaho,’’ ‘‘Maine,’’ 

‘‘Michigan,’’ ‘‘Missouri,’’ ‘‘South Dakota,’’ 

and ‘‘Washington,’’; 

■ c. Redesignating paragraphs 

(c)(3)(i)(E) through (c)(3)(i)(I) as 

paragraphs (c)(3)(i)(F) through (c)(3)(i)(J) 

and adding a new paragraph (c)(3)(i)(E) 

to read as set forth below; 

■ d. Amending paragraph (d)(9) by 

adding a paragraph heading to read as 

set forth below; 

■ e. Removing the second paragraph 

designated as paragraph (e)(2)(i); 

■ f. Removing paragraph (e)(3)(i) and 

redesignating paragraphs (e)(3)(ii) 

through (e)(3)(x) as paragraphs (e)(3)(i) 

through (e)(3)(ix); and 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
81142 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

■ g. Amending paragraph (e)(6)(ii) by 

removing the reference ‘‘(e)(3)(iii)(C)’’ 

and adding in its place ‘‘(e)(3)(ii)(E).’’ 

§ 21.29 Falconry standards and falconry 

permitting. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(E) You may take raptors less than 1 

year old, except nestlings, from the wild 

during any period or periods specified 

by the State, tribe, or territory. You may 

take any raptor species from the wild 

except a federally listed threatened or 

endangered species or the following 

species: Bald eagle (Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus), white-tailed eagle 

(Haliaeetus albicilla), Steller’s sea-eagle 

(Haliaeetus pelagicus), golden eagle 

(Aquila chrysaetos), American swallowtailed kite (Elanoides forficatus), 

Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), 

peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), 

flammulated owl (Otus flammeolus), elf 

owl (Micrathene whitneyi), and shorteared owl (Asio flammeus). 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(9) Inspections. * * * 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 14, 2010. 

Thomas L. Strickland, 

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 

Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32243 Filed 12–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 101013504–0610–02] 

RIN 0648–XY27 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

Provisions; Fisheries of the 

Northeastern United States; Atlantic 

Surfclam and Ocean Quahog Fishery; 

Final 2011–2013 Fishing Quotas for 

Atlantic Surfclam and Ocean Quahog 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS implements final 

quotas for the Atlantic surfclam and 

ocean quahog fisheries for 2011, 2012, 

and 2013. Regulations governing these 

fisheries require NMFS to publish the 

final quota specifications for the 2011– 

2013 fishing years. The intent of this 

action is to establish allowable harvest 

levels of Atlantic surfclams and ocean 

quahogs from the Exclusive Economic 

Zone to prevent overfishing and to 

allow harvesting of optimum yield (OY). 

DATES: Effective January 1, 2011, to 

December 31, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting 

documents, including the 

Environmental Assessment, Regulatory 

Impact Review (RIR), and Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) 

are available from Christopher Moore, 

Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic 

Fishery Management Council, Suite 201, 

800 N. State St., Dover, DE 19901. A 

copy of the EA/RIR/IRFA is accessible 

via the Internet at http:// 

www.nero.noaa.gov/nero/regs/

com.html. 

The Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (FRFA) consists of the IRFA 

and the summary of impacts and 

alternatives contained in the 

Classification section of the preamble to 

this final rule. Copies of the small entity 

compliance guide are available from 

Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional 

Administrator, NMFS Northeast 

Regional Office, 55 Great Republic 

Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anna Macan, Fishery Management 

Specialist, 978–281–9165. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

fishery management plan (FMP) for 

Atlantic surfclams and ocean quahogs 

requires that NMFS, in consultation 

with the Mid-Atlantic Fishery 

Management Council (Council), specify 

quotas for surfclam and ocean quahog 

for a 3-year period, with an annual 

review, from a range that represents the 

OY for each fishery. It is the policy of 

the Council that the levels selected 

allow sustainable fishing to continue at 

that level for at least 10 years for 

surfclams, and 30 years for ocean 

quahogs. In addition to this constraint, 

the Council policy also considers the 

economic impacts of the quotas. 

Regulations implementing Amendment 

10 to the FMP (63 FR 27481, May 19, 

1998) added Maine ocean quahogs 

(locally known as Maine mahogany 

quahogs) to the management unit, and 

provided for a small artisanal fishery for 

ocean quahogs in the waters north of 

43°50′ N. lat., with an annual quota 

within a range of 17,000 to 100,000 

Maine bu (5,991 to 35,240 hL). As 

specified in Amendment 10, the Maine 

mahogany ocean quahog quota is 

allocated separately from the quota 

specified for the ocean quahog fishery. 

Regulations implementing Amendment 

13 to the FMP (68 FR 69970, December 

16, 2003) established the ability to set 

multi-year quotas. An evaluation, in the 

form of an annual quota 

recommendation, is conducted by the 

Council every year to determine if the 

multi-year quota specifications remain 

appropriate. The fishing quotas must be 

in compliance with overfishing 

definitions for each species. In 

recommending these quotas, the 

Council considered the most recent 

stock assessments, data reported by 

harvesters and processors, and other 

relevant information concerning 

exploitable biomass and spawning 

biomass, fishing mortality rates, stock 

recruitment, projected fishing effort and 

catches, and areas closed to fishing. 

In June 2010, the Council voted to 

recommend maintaining the 2010 quota 

levels of 5.333 million bu (284 million 

L) for the ocean quahog fishery, 3.400 

million bu (181 million L) for the 

Atlantic surfclam fishery, and 100,000 

Maine bu (35,240 hL) for the Maine 

ocean quahog fishery for 2011–2013. 

The basis for the Council’s quota 

recommendations was provided in the 

proposed rule published on October 25, 

2010 (75 FR 65442), and is not repeated 

here. 

With this rule, NMFS approves and 

implements the quotas proposed by the 

Council. The final quotas for the 2011– 

2013 Atlantic surfclam and ocean 

quahog fishery are shown in the table 

below. The Atlantic surfclam and ocean 

quahog quotas are specified in 

‘‘industry’’ bu of 53.24 L per bu, while 

the Maine ocean quahog quota is 

specified in ‘‘Maine’’ bu of 35.24 L per 

bu. Because Maine ocean quahogs are 

the same species as ocean quahogs, both 

fisheries are assessed under the same 

ocean quahog overfishing definition. 

When the two quota amounts (ocean 

quahog and Maine ocean quahog) are 

added, the total allowable harvest is still 

lower than the level that would result in 

overfishing for the entire stock. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES