43706 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

limited to ten interrogatories (including 

subparts) absent advance authorization 

from the Board. 

10. Amend § 1114.30 by adding new 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 1114.30 Production of documents and 

records and entry upon land for inspection 

and other purposes. 

* * * * * 

(c) Limitation under simplified 

standards. In a case using the ThreeBenchmark methodology, each party is 

limited to ten document requests 

(including subparts) absent advance 

authorization from the Board. 

11. Amend § 1114.31 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1114.31 Failure to respond to discovery. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Reply to motion to compel 

generally. Except in rate cases to be 

considered under the stand-alone cost 

methodology or simplified standards, 

the time for filing a reply to a motion 

to compel is governed by 49 CFR 

1104.13. 

(2) Reply to motion to compel in 

stand-alone cost and simplified 

standards rate cases. A reply to a 

motion to compel must be filed with the 

Board within 10 days thereafter in a rate 

case to be considered under the standalone cost methodology or under the 

simplified standards. 

(3) Conference with parties on motion 

to compel. Within 5 business days after 

the filing of a reply to a motion to 

compel in a rate case to be considered 

under the stand-alone cost methodology 

or under the simplified standards, Board 

staff may convene a conference with the 

parties to discuss the dispute, attempt to 

narrow the issues, and gather any 

further information needed to render a 

ruling. 

(4) Ruling on motion to compel in 

stand-alone cost and simplified 

standards rate cases. Within 5 business 

days after a conference with the parties 

convened pursuant to paragraph (a)(3) 

of this section, the Secretary will issue 

a summary ruling on the motion to 

compel discovery. If no conference is 

convened, the Secretary will issue this 

summary ruling within 10 days after the 

filing of the reply to a motion to compel. 

Appeals of a Secretary’s ruling will 

proceed under 49 CFR 1115.9, and the 

Board will attempt to rule on such 

appeals within 20 days after the filing 

of the reply to the appeal. 

* * * * * 

PART 1115—APPELLATE 

PROCEDURES 

12. The authority citation for part 

1115 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 559, 49 U.S.C. 721. 

13. Amend § 1115.9 by revising the 

first sentence of paragraph (b) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1115.9 Interlocutory appeals. 

* * * * * 

(b) In stand-alone cost complaints or 

in cases filed under the simplified 

standards, any interlocutory appeal of a 

ruling shall be filed with the Board 

within three (3) business days of the 

ruling. * * * 

* * * * * 

PART 1244—WAYBILL ANALYSIS OF 

TRANSPORTATION OF PROPERTYRAILROADS 

13. The authority citation for part 

1244 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 721, 10707, 11144, 

11145. 

14. Amend § 1244.9 as follows: 

A. Redesignate paragraph (b)(5) as 

(b)(6) and add new paragraph (b)(5). 

B. In paragraph (c), remove the word 

‘‘(b)(5)’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘(b)(6)’’. 

C. In paragraph (d) introductory text, 

remove the word ‘‘(b)(5)’’ and add, in its 

place, the word ‘‘(b)(6)’’. 

§ 1244.9 Procedures for the release of 

waybill data. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) Transportation practitioners, 

consulting firms and law firms in 

simplified standards cases. Once the 

Board determines that a complainant is 

eligible to use the Three-Benchmark 

method, the Board, without any further 

request from the parties, would release 

all movements in the most recent 

Waybill Sample of the same 2-digit 

STCC code as the issue movement and 

with a revenue-to-variable cost ratio 

above 180%. Confidential contract rate 

information will be encrypted. A signed 

confidentiality agreement consistent 

with paragraph (b)(4)(v) of this section 

must accompany the parties’ complaint 

and answer. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E6–12433 Filed 8–1–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 622 

[I.D. 072806A] 

RIN 0648–AS67 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish 

Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; 

Individual Fishing Quota Program for 

Gulf Commercial Red Snapper Fishery 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Announcement of availability of 

fishery management plan amendment; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS announces the 

availability of Amendment 26 to the 

Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the 

Reef Fish Resource of the Gulf of 

Mexico (Amendment 26) prepared by 

the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management 

Council (Council). Amendment 26 

would establish an Individual Fishing 

Quota (IFQ) program for the Gulf of 

Mexico commercial red snapper fishery. 

The intended effect of Amendment 26 is 

to reduce overcapacity in the 

commercial red snapper fishery and to 

eliminate, to the extent possible, the 

problems associated with derby fishing, 

in order to assist the Council in 

achieving optimum yield (OY) from the 

fishery. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received no later than 5 p.m., eastern 

time, on October 2, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• E-mail: 0648–AS67.NOA@noaa.gov. 

Include in the subject line the following 

document identifier: 0648–AS67–NOA. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Phil Steele, Southeast Regional 

Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, 

St. Petersburg, FL 33701. 

• Fax: 727–824–5308, Attention: Phil 

Steele. 

Copies of Amendment 26, which 

includes a supplemental environmental 

impact statement (SEIS), a regulatory 

impact review (RIR), and an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), 

may be obtained from the Gulf of 

Mexico Fishery Management Council, 

2203 N. Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, 

Tampa, FL 33607; telephone: 813–348–

1630; fax: 813–348–1711; e-mail: 

gulfcouncil@gulfcouncil.org. In 

mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 148 / Wednesday, August 2, 2006 / Proposed Rules 43707 

addition, copies of the final SEIS, a 

revised RIR, and a revised IRFA, 

prepared by NMFS are also available 

from the Council at the address above. 

Copies of all of these documents may 

also be downloaded from the Council’s 

Web site at www.gulfcouncil.org. 

The final supplemental 

environmental impact statement (FSEIS) 

for this amendment includes discussion 

and analyses NMFS added to the 

environmental impact statement 

contained in the amendment the 

Council approved and submitted for 

Secretarial review. In the FSEIS, NMFS 

also included a revision of the IFRA 

originally integrated in the Council 

amendment. Additional text and 

analyses clarify the distinction between 

IFQ shareholders and IFQ allocation 

holders, and more clearly distinguish 

the roles and responsibilities of these 

two participant types. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Phil 

Steele, 727 824 5305; fax 727–824–5308; 

e-mail: phil.steele@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Council addressed overcapacity in the 

red snapper fishery in 1995 through 

Amendment 8 to the FMP. In this 

amendment, the Council examined 

several management alternatives 

including license limitation, IFQs, and 

more traditional management measures 

(i.e., open access), and determined an 

IFQ program had the most potential to 

address the immediate 

overcapitalization problems and achieve 

OY from the fishery. However, 

Amendment 8 was never implemented 

because of congressional action. 

Following the expiration of the 

congressional IFQ moratorium, NMFS 

conducted a referendum required by 

Section 407(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) to 

determine whether commercial red 

snapper fishermen supported further 

consideration of an IFQ program. The 

Council began developing this 

amendment following a majority ‘‘yes’’

vote on the referendum. NMFS 

conducted the second referendum 

required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

to determine whether fishermen 

approved the IFQ amendment 

developed by the Council for 

submission to the Secretary of 

Commerce (Secretary). Following a 

majority ‘‘yes’’ vote in the second 

referendum, the Council at its March 

2006 meeting voted to submit the IFQ 

amendment to the Secretary for review. 

The main action in this amendment 

(Action 1) is to establish an IFQ 

program. The following actions (Actions 

2–11) determine the structure of the 

program. These actions are: IFQ 

program duration; ownership caps and 

restrictions on IFQ share certificates; 

eligibility for initial IFQ allocation; 

initial apportionment of IFQ shares; 

establishment and structure of an 

appeals process; transfer eligibility 

requirements; use it or lose it clause for 

IFQ shares or allocations; adjustments 

in commercial quota; use of a vessel 

monitoring system; and a cost recovery 

plan. 

A proposed rule that would 

implement the measures outlined in 

Amendment 26 has been received from 

the Council. In accordance with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS is 

evaluating the proposed rule to 

determine whether it is consistent with 

the FMPs, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 

and other applicable law. If that 

determination is affirmative, NMFS will 

publish the proposed rule in the Federal 

Register for public review and 

comment. 

Comments received by October 2, 

2006, whether specifically directed to 

Amendment 26 or the proposed rule, 

will be considered by NMFS in its 

decision to approve, disapprove, or 

partially approve the amendment. 

Comments received after that date will 

not be considered by NMFS in this 

decision. All comments received by 

NMFS on the amendment or the 

proposed rule during their respective 

comment periods will be addressed in 

the final rule. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: July 28, 2006. 

James P. Burgess, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 06–6645 Filed 7–28–06; 2:19 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 060719196–6196–01.; I.D. 

071106F] 

RIN 0648–AU54 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and 

Butterfish Fisheries 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule, request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The final rule implementing 

the specifications for the 2005 fishing 

year for Atlantic mackerel, squid, and 

butterfish (MSB) clarified the expiration 

date of the limited entry program for 

Illex squid, established a minimum 

mesh requirement for the butterfish 

fishery, and removed a regulatory 

requirement for annual specifications to 

be published by a specific date. These 

regulatory measures were intended to be 

of a permanent nature, unlike the 

specifications themselves, which 

expired January 1, 2006. An error in the 

final rule caused these three measures to 

expire; this proposed rule would restore 

the regulatory requirements. This action 

is being taken by NMFS under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). 

DATES: Public comments must be 

received no later than 5 p.m., Eastern 

Daylight Time, on August 17, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting 

documents used by the Mid-Atlantic 

Fishery Management Council (Council), 

including the Environmental 

Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact 

Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), for the 2005 

specifications are available from: Daniel 

Furlong, Executive Director, MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council, 

Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South 

New Street, Dover, DE 19904–6790. The 

EA/RIR/IRFA is accessible via the 

Internet at http:/www.nero.noaa.gov. 

Comments on the proposed rule 

should be sent to: Patricia A. Kurkul, 

Regional Administrator, Northeast 

Regional Office, NMFS, One Blackburn 

Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930–2298. 

Please mark the envelope, ‘‘Comments–

2005 MSB Specifications Corrections.’’

Comments also may be sent via 

facsimile (fax) to 978–281–9135. 

Comments on the specifications may be 

submitted by e-mail. The mailbox 

address for providing e-mail comments 

is MSB2005corrections@noaa.gov. 

Include in the subject line of the e-mail 

comment the following document 

identifier: ‘‘Comments–2005 MSB 

Corrections.’’ Comments may also be 

submitted via Webform at the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal 

www.regulations.com by following the 

instructions at that site for submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don 

Frei, Fishery Management Specialist, 

978–281–9221, fax 978–281–9135. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

NMFS published final specifications 

for the 2005 fishing year for MSB in the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS