Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 68777 

OAR–2005–FL–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: hou.james@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2005–FL–

0002,’’ Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: James 

Hou, Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Please see the direct final action 

which is located in the Rules Section of 

this Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Hou, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–8965. 

Mr. Hou can also be reached via 

electronic mail at hou.james@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

additional information see the direct 

final rule which is published in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: November 6, 2006. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. E6–20077 Filed 11–27–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 61 and 63 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2006–0345; FRL–8237–9] 

Approval of the Clean Air Act, Section 

112(l), Authority for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants: Asbestos Management and 

Control; State of New Hampshire 

Department of Environmental Services 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

approve New Hampshire Department of 

Environmental Services’ (NH DES) 

request to implement and enforce its 

regulation entitled ‘‘Asbestos 

Management and Control’’ in lieu of the 

Asbestos National Emission Standard 

for Hazardous Air Pollutants (Asbestos 

NESHAP) as it applies to certain 

asbestos-related activities. Upon 

approval, NH DES’ rule will be federally 

enforceable and will apply to all sources 

that otherwise would be regulated by 

the Asbestos NESHAP with the 

exception of inactive waste disposal 

sites that ceased operation on or before 

July 9, 1981. These inactive disposal 

sites are already regulated by State rules 

that were approved by EPA on May 23, 

2003. NH DES’ request seeks to adjust 

the federal rules by demonstrating the 

equivalency of its rules to the federal 

requirements. 

DATES: EPA must receive written 

comments by December 28, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA–

R01–OAR–2006–0345 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: lancey.susan@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0656. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R01–OAR–2006–

0345’’, Daniel Brown, Manager, Air 

Permits, Toxics & Indoor Programs Unit, 

Office Of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, One 

Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP), 

Boston, MA 02114–2023. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to: Daniel Brown, 

Manager, Air Permits, Toxics & Indoor 

Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, One Congress Street, 

Suite 1100 (CAP), Boston, MA 02114–

2023. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office’s normal 

hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding legal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules Section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Lancey, Air Permits, Toxics & 

Indoor Programs Unit, U.S. EPA, One 

Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP), 

Boston, MA 02114–2023, (617) 918–

1656. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

submittal as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of the Federal 

Register. 

Dated: October 17, 2006. 

Robert W. Varney, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. E6–20173 Filed 11–27–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

49 CFR Part 71 

[OST Docket No. 2006–26442] 

RIN 2105–AD65 

Standard Time Zone Boundary in 

Pulaski County, IN 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), 

the Department of Transportation 

(DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: DOT proposes to relocate the 

time zone boundary in Indiana to move 

Pulaski County from the Central Time 

Zone to the Eastern Time Zone. This 

action is taken at the request of the 

County Commissioners and the County 

Council. DOT requests comment on 

whether this change would serve the 

convenience of commerce, the statutory 

standard for a time zone change. 

Persons supporting or opposing the 

change should not assume that the 

change will be made merely because 

DOT is making the proposal. Our 

decision in the final rule will be made 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
68778 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

based on all of the information 

developed during the entire rulemaking 

proceeding. 

DATES: Comments should be received by 

December 28, 2006 to be assured of 

consideration. Comments received after 

that date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. If the time zone 

boundary is changed as a result of this 

rulemaking, the effective date would be 

no earlier than 2 a.m. EDT Sunday, 

March 11, 2007, which is the 

changeover date from standard time to 

daylight saving time. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments on the DOT electronic docket 

site. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–

001. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 am and 5 pm, Monday 

through Friday, except Federal 

Holidays. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number (OST Docket Number 2006–

26442) or Regulatory Identification 

Number (RIN) (2105-AD65) for this 

rulemaking. Note that all comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://dms.dot.gov including any 

personal information provided. Please 

see the Privacy Act heading under 

Regulatory Notices. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL–

401 on the plaza level of the Nassif 

Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal Holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Judith S. Kaleta, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Room 10424, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20590, indianatime@dot.gov; (202) 366–

9283. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Current Indiana Time Observance 

Indiana is divided into 92 counties. 

Under Federal law, 74 Indiana counties 

are in the Eastern Time Zone and 18 are 

in the Central Time Zone. The Central 

Time Zone counties include seven in 

the northwest (Lake, Porter, La Porte, 

Starke, Newton, Jasper, and Pulaski) and 

eleven in the southwest (Knox, Daviess, 

Martin, Gibson, Pike, Dubois, Posey, 

Vanderburgh, Warrick, Spencer, and 

Perry). The remaining 74 counties are in 

the Eastern Time Zone. Neighboring 

States observe both Eastern and Central 

time. Illinois and western Kentucky 

observe Central time, while eastern 

Kentucky, Ohio, and the portion of 

Michigan adjoining Indiana observe 

Eastern time. 

Federal law provides that it is up to 

an individual State to decide whether or 

not to observe daylight saving time. In 

2005, the Indiana General Assembly 

adopted legislation (Pub. L. 243–005 or 

‘‘the Indiana Act’’) providing that the 

entire State of Indiana will observe 

daylight saving time beginning in 2006. 

In addition, the Indiana Act addressed 

the issue of changing the location of the 

boundary between the Eastern and 

Central Time Zones. 

In January 2006, DOT completed a 

rulemaking proceeding establishing new 

time zone boundaries that resulted in 

the current time zone observance. Since 

that time, Pulaski County has filed a 

Petition requesting a time zone change 

back to the Eastern Time Zone, and 

subsequently filed an Amended 

Petition. Knox, Daviess, Martin, Pike, 

and Dubois Counties in Southwestern 

Indiana (the Southwestern Counties) 

filed a Joint Petition for a Time Zone 

Change (Joint Petition). This Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking addresses only 

Pulaski County. DOT is waiting for 

additional information from the 

Southwestern Counties before making a 

determination whether to propose a 

time zone change or deny the Joint 

Petition. 

Statutory Requirements 

Under the Standard Time Act of 1918, 

as amended by the Uniform Time Act of 

1966 (15 U.S.C. 260–64), the Secretary 

of Transportation has authority to issue 

regulations modifying the boundaries 

between time zones in the United States 

in order to move an area from one time 

zone to another. The standard in the 

statute for such decisions is ‘‘regard for 

the convenience of commerce and the 

existing junction points and division 

points of common carriers engaged in 

interstate or foreign commerce.’’

DOT Procedures To Change a Time 

Zone Boundary 

DOT has typically used a set of 

procedures to address time zone issues. 

Under these procedures, DOT will 

generally begin a rulemaking proceeding 

to change a time zone boundary if the 

highest elected officials in the area 

provide adequate supporting data for 

the proposed change. We ask that the 

petition include, or be accompanied by, 

detailed information supporting the 

requesting party’s contention that the 

requested change would serve the 

convenience of commerce. The 

principal standard for deciding whether 

to change a time zone is defined very 

broadly to include consideration of all 

the impacts upon a community of a 

change in its standard of time. We also 

ask that the supporting documentation 

address, at a minimum, each of the 

following questions in as much detail as 

possible. 

1. From where do businesses in the 

community get their supplies, and to where 

do they ship their goods or products? 

2. From where does the community receive 

television and radio broadcasts? 

3. Where are the newspapers published 

that serve the community? 

4. From where does the community get its 

bus and passenger rail services; if there is no 

scheduled bus or passenger rail service in the 

community, to where must residents go to 

obtain these services? 

5. Where is the nearest airport; if it is a 

local service airport, to what major airport 

does it carry passengers? 

6. What percentage of residents of the 

community work outside the community; 

where do these residents work? 

7. What are the major elements of the 

community’s economy; is the community’s 

economy improving or declining; what 

Federal, State, or local plans, if any, are there 

for economic development in the 

community? 

8. If residents leave the community for 

schooling, recreation, health care, or religious 

worship, what standard of time is observed 

in the places where they go for these 

purposes? 

In addition, we consider any other 

information that the county or local 

officials believe to be relevant to the 

proceeding. We consider the effect on 

economic, cultural, social, and civic 

activities, and how a change in time 

zone would affect businesses, 

communication, transportation, and 

education. 

2005–2006 Time Zone Rulemaking 

Proceedings 

On August 17, 2005, DOT published 

a notice in the Federal Register inviting 

county and local officials in Indiana that 

wished to change their current time 

zone in response to the Indiana Act to 

notify DOT of their request for a change 

by September 16, 2005 and to provide 

data in response to the questions above. 

In addition, DOT announced the 

opening of an Internet-accessible, public 

docket to receive any petitions and 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 68779 

other relevant documents concerning 

the appropriate placement of the time 

zone boundary in the State of Indiana. 

DOT received nineteen petitions from 

counties asking to be changed from the 

Eastern Time Zone to the Central Time 

Zone, and one county subsequently 

withdrew its request. Pulaski County 

was one of the counties that petitioned 

for a change. 

Pulaski County is located in 

Northwestern Indiana, 95 miles from 

both Chicago and Indianapolis and 60 

miles from both South Bend and 

Lafayette. It has a population of 13,783. 

According to ‘‘Key Economic 

Development Statistics,’’ prepared for 

the Pulaski County Community 

Development Commission, dated 

January 6, 2004, ‘‘Although the 

agricultural heritage of Pulaski County 

is very strong, the fact remains that 83% 

of all employment is created in nonagricultural opportunities.’’

The Pulaski County Commissioners 

submitted a petition (original petition) 

in which they enumerated reasons for a 

move to the Central Time Zone based on 

comments made during an open public 

meeting. County Commissioners 

commented that at that open public 

meeting, ‘‘There were no citizens who 

were in favor of Eastern. All were in 

favor of leaving the time alone, by not 

having to change time during the year. 

But, if we have to choose one of the two, 

the choice would be Central Time.’’ The 

Pulaski County Commissioners also 

noted the consideration of school 

children waiting during a late sunrise, 

the importance of sunlight to its farming 

community, television programming 

from South Bend and Chicago, 

newspapers from Indianapolis, South 

Bend, Logansport, and Chicago, and 

airports in Indianapolis and Chicago. In 

addition, the County Commissioners 

submitted annual commuting data in 

support of their position. 

At a public hearing conducted by 

DOT in Logansport, Indiana, Director 

Dan Dolezal of the Pulaski Community 

Development Commission presented 

information from the two major 

employers in the County who favored 

the Central Time Zone as well as from 

other employers. The President of the 

Pulaski County Council also spoke in 

favor the Pulaski County petition; he 

noted the difficulty of being a border 

county and suggested that the entire 

state be in the same time zone. In 

written comments to the docket, one 

commenter noted that Pulaski County 

has regional ties to counties that are 

currently in the Central Time Zone or 

would be moved to the Central Time 

Zone by DOT’s decision. He referred to 

workforce planning, economic growth, 

and economic development regions and 

said that moving Pulaski to the Central 

Time Zone would ensure that all 

counties in these regions were in the 

same time zone. 

Out of 71 comments submitted to the 

docket from Pulaski County, 41 favored 

the Central Time Zone, 17 favored the 

Eastern Time Zone, and 13 expressed 

interest in keeping Indiana on the same 

time zone, expressing no preference. 

Based on this record, Pulaski County 

was one of the eight Counties that 

moved from the Eastern Time Zone to 

the Central Time Zone under DOT’s 

January 2006 final rule. DOT expected 

that each of these Counties would begin 

observing Central Time in accordance 

with DOT’s final rule and the change 

they requested. However, on February 7, 

2006, Pulaski County petitioned DOT 

for a time zone boundary change back 

to the Eastern Time Zone. The new 

petition followed DOT’s final rule by 

only a few weeks and was submitted 

before the County had any experience 

with the new time zone changes that it 

solicited. Furthermore, the new petition 

requested a change that was contrary to 

the County’s original petition and other 

information submitted to the docket in 

the rulemaking proceeding. In fact, the 

County Commissioners represented that 

they did not provide accurate 

information in their original petition. 

The new petition did not provide 

detailed information in support of its 

position or the sources for the 

information submitted. Therefore, 

before making any determination on 

changing the time zone boundary for 

Pulaski County, DOT requested 

information from Pulaski County to 

assist DOT in making a careful 

assessment on the appropriate time zone 

for the County consistent with Federal 

requirements. 

On June 27, 2006, Pulaski County 

submitted an Amended Petition that 

includes answers to the questions DOT 

considers in making time zone 

determinations and exhibits in support 

of the answers. The Amended Petition 

repeatedly states that the information 

set forth in the original petition in 

response to DOT’s time zone questions 

‘‘is limited, and opinion without 

substantial and verifiable evidence to 

support the claims made.’’ The 

Amended Petition provides significantly 

more detailed responses to DOT’s 

questions related to community imports 

and exports, television and radio 

broadcasts, newspapers, bus and 

passenger rail services, airports/airline 

services, worker commuting patterns, 

the community’s economy/economic 

development, and schooling, recreation, 

health care, or religious worship. 

In August, Governor Daniels, the 

Indiana Economic Development 

Corporation, and the Indiana 

Department of Workforce Development 

submitted letters to the docket. The 

Governor wrote in support of the 

Amended Petition (as well as the Joint 

Petition filed by the Southwestern 

Counties), stating that putting more of 

the State on the same time zone will 

provide clarity on the time questions 

and advance economic growth. The two 

organizations addressed regional 

connections. They noted that they 

established their respective state regions 

based on their ability to deliver services. 

They did not establish regions based on 

time zones or ‘‘stream of commerce.’’

DOT Determination 

Based on the Amended Petition and 

the supporting data submitted with it, 

we find that Pulaski County has 

provided enough information to justify 

proposing to change its time zone 

boundary from the Central Time Zone to 

the Eastern Time Zone. We are now 

providing a further opportunity to 

others to submit information that might 

refute or support the basis provided to 

date, in order to enable DOT to make a 

final decision. Pulaski County 

addressed all of the factors that we 

consider in these proceedings and made 

a reasonable case that changing back to 

the Eastern Time Zone would serve ‘‘the 

convenience of commerce.’’

Community Imports and Exports 

The Amended Petition provides 

extensive information regarding the 

sources of supplies and raw materials 

for major businesses and industries as 

well as the distribution points for their 

products and services. Of the County’s 

eight largest employers, five had 100% 

of their customers in the Eastern Time 

Zone while the remaining three had 

between 50 and 100% in the Central 

Time Zone. On the other hand, six of 

these same employers had between 66 

and 100% of their suppliers in the 

Eastern Time Zone. Of the remaining 

two employers, one had 100% of its 

suppliers in the Central Time Zone and 

the other 66%. CSX Railroad, serving 

Pulaski County, ships 100% of its 

carloads to states in the Eastern Time 

Zone, whereas 74% of its incoming 

carloads are received from states in the 

Central Time Zone. 

With regard to agricultural products, 

the Amended Petition states that the 

County ranks 15th in the state in corn 

production and 25th in soybean 

production. The inputs for these crops 

come from Eastern Time Zone areas and 

85% of the marketing of these crops 

occurs in Indiana communities in the 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
68780 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Eastern Time Zone. Likewise, according 

to the Amended Petition, the markets 

for livestock, poultry and dairy products 

are all primarily in the Eastern Time 

Zone. Ninety percent of the agricultural 

fertilizer and chemical dealers 

marketing to the County have facilities 

in the Eastern Time Zone. 

The Amended Petition says that the 

County has two financial institutions, 

both of which have branches in the 

Eastern and Central Time Zones. Data 

distribution from the County’s banks is 

to South Bend, Indianapolis and 

Warsaw, Indiana, all of which are in the 

Eastern Time Zone. The County has one 

branch office of a national investment 

firm which is headquartered in St. Louis 

(Central Time Zone). 

Based upon the information 

submitted with the Amended Petition, it 

appears that the vast majority of the 

County’s businesses and industries have 

their suppliers, customers and 

marketing connections with areas that 

are in the Eastern Time Zone and that 

moving the time zone boundary for 

Pulaski County to the Eastern Time 

Zone would serve the convenience of 

commerce. DOT solicits further 

information that would aid in 

determining whether a change in the 

time zone for Pulaski County would 

serve the convenience of commerce. 

Television and Radio Broadcasts 

The Amended Petition provides 

detailed information regarding 

television and radio broadcasting to 

cities in Pulaski County. It says that 

Pulaski County is in the South Bend/ 

Elkhart Designated Market Area (DMA) 

which consists of 10 counties, eight in 

the Eastern Time Zone and two, Pulaski 

and Starke, in the Central Time Zone. 

The Amended Petition maintains that 

having a part of the DMA in a different 

time zone makes it more difficult to 

timely report local news and that most 

of the news broadcasters covering local 

news are centered in the Eastern Time 

Zone. 

The Amended Petition claims that the 

only cable TV service is provided in 

Winamac and that service has 15 

‘‘locally generated’’ channels, four from 

Chicago in the Central Time Zone and 

eleven from South Bend, Lafayette and 

Indianapolis, in the Eastern Time Zone. 

The Direct TV service is also varied: 

Francesville and Medaryville seem to 

receive network news from Chicago, 

while Winamac and Star City are 

focused on Indianapolis, and Monterey 

has its network news from South Bend. 

DISH Network has its local channels 

from South Bend. Other residents use 

TV antennas. 

With regard to radio broadcasting, the 

Amended Petition provides a list of all 

Indiana radio stations, but does not 

indicate the strength of the radio signals 

in Pulaski County. 

Based on the Amended Petition, DOT 

is unable to determine whether this 

aspect of the ‘‘convenience of 

commerce’’ standard supports a change 

in Pulaski County’s time zone. DOT 

seeks comment on the information 

submitted and requests any additional 

information on television and radio 

broadcasting in Pulaski County that 

would aid in determining whether a 

time zone change for Pulaski County 

would serve the convenience of 

commerce. 

Newspapers 

The Amended Petition includes a 

chart on newspaper circulation numbers 

in Pulaski County and discusses the 

circulation of Pulaski County’s two 

family-owned newspapers. The chart 

shows Pulaski County subscribers of 

Eastern and Central Time Zone papers. 

According to the Amended Petition, 

there are 1498 Pulaski County 

subscribers to newspapers that are 

published in the Eastern Time Zone and 

66 Pulaski County subscribers to 

newspapers that are published in the 

Central Time Zone. The Pulaski County 

Journal, one of the two newspapers 

published in Pulaski County, has a 

weekly circulation of 1064 Pulaski 

County subscribers, with 112 additional 

subscribers living in the Eastern Time 

Zone and 25 from the Central Time 

Zone. The Amended Petition claims that 

The Francesville Tribune, the other 

newspaper published in Pulaski County, 

has 752 subscribers in the Eastern Time 

Zone and 48 subscribers in the Central 

Time Zone, and does not indicate how 

many subscribers are from Pulaski 

County. 

Based on the information submitted 

in the Amended Petition with regard to 

newspapers that serve the community, it 

appears that moving the time zone 

boundary for Pulaski County to the 

Eastern Time Zone would serve the 

convenience of commerce. DOT seeks 

comment on the information submitted 

and requests any additional information 

on newspaper circulation in Pulaski 

County that would aid in determining 

whether changing the time zone for 

Pulaski County would serve the 

convenience of commerce. 

Bus and Passenger Rail Services 

With regard to bus service, the 

Amended Petition identifies three bus 

stations within 60 miles of Pulaski 

County. It claims the nearest bus station 

for a north/south trip is in Lafayette, 

Indiana, in the Eastern Time Zone. The 

Amended Petition also contends the two 

nearest bus stations for east/west trips 

are located in Michigan City, in the 

Central Time Zone, and South Bend in 

the Eastern Time Zone. 

With regard to passenger rail service, 

the Amended Petition claims the nearest 

rail station for a north/south trip is in 

Rensselaer, Indiana, in the Central Time 

Zone. The Amended Petition also 

contends the nearest rail station for east/ 

west trips is located in South Bend in 

the Eastern Time Zone. 

The Amended Petition admits, ‘‘The 

use of rail or bus services by Pulaski 

County residents is unknown.’’

Nevertheless, it asserts, ‘‘Given that two 

(2) of the nearest bus stations and one 

(1) of the rail stations are located in 

Eastern Time, it makes sense to place 

Pulaski County on Eastern Time so that 

residents will be on the same time zone 

as most of the existing junction points 

and division points of common 

carriers.’’

Based on the information submitted 

in the Amended Petition with regard to 

the use of rail or bus services by Pulaski 

County residents, DOT is unable to 

determine whether this aspect of the 

‘‘convenience of commerce’’ standard 

supports a change in Pulaski County’s 

time zone. DOT seeks comment on the 

information submitted and requests any 

additional information on bus and rail 

services in Pulaski County that would 

aid in determining whether a time zone 

change for Pulaski County would serve 

the convenience of commerce. 

Airports/Airline Services 

The Amended Petition identifies three 

airports that could potentially serve 

Pulaski County residents: Indianapolis 

International Airport, 99 miles from the 

County; Chicago O’Hare, 124 miles from 

the County; and South Bend Regional 

Airport, 68 miles from the County. The 

Amended Petition admits that ‘‘no 

reliable information is available to 

demonstrate the number of Pulaski 

County residents who are airline 

passengers to and from Chicago and 

Indianapolis,’’ and refers to the County’s 

largest employer who asserts, 

‘‘Indianapolis by far is the airport most 

frequently used by staff and customers 

on company business.’’ In addition, the 

Amended Petition quotes the Vice 

President for Travel Agency Services at 

AAA Hoosier Motor Club in 

Indianapolis who contends, ‘‘Leisure 

travelers will use the airport where they 

get the best ticket price.’’ The Amended 

Petition then claims ‘‘it is highly likely 

that the passenger fees and other airport 

taxes are higher at Chicago O’Hare than 

Indianapolis International or South 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 68781 

Bend,’’ but provides no supporting 

evidence. The Amended Petition notes 

that FedEx operates its East Service Hub 

Center from Indianapolis International 

Airport and that UPS all-points 

international air hub is located in 

Louisville, Kentucky, both in the 

Eastern Time Zone. Exhibit E includes 

a page from the UPS Web site that states 

other regional hubs are located in 

strategic cities across the United States. 

Based on the information submitted 

in the Amended Petition with regard to 

airports and airline services that serve 

the community, DOT is unable to 

determine whether this aspect of the 

‘‘convenience of commerce’’ standard 

supports a change in Pulaski County’s 

time zone. DOT seeks comment on the 

information submitted and requests any 

additional information on airport and 

airline services in Pulaski County that 

would aid in determining whether 

changing the time zone for Pulaski 

County would serve the convenience of 

commerce. 

Worker Commuting Patterns 

The Amended Petition notes that, 

according to STATS Indiana Annual 

Commuting Trends Profile, 2004, 77% 

of Pulaski County residents who work 

do so in the County and 13% of the total 

numbers of persons who work in 

Pulaski County come from other 

counties. More come from the Eastern 

Time Zone than the Central Time Zone. 

Local employers reported that more outof-county workers came from counties 

in the Eastern Time Zone than counties 

in the Central Time Zone. Pulaski 

Memorial Hospital reported the same. 

The Amended Petition sums up workers 

migration by stating, ‘‘Of those 

migrating in to work, the majority come 

from the Eastern Time Zone. Of those 

going out of the County to work, a lesser 

number go to the Central Time Zone 

than the Eastern Time Zone.’’ The 

Amended Petition asserts, ‘‘Given that 

migration patterns to Eastern Time 

exceed migration patterns to Central 

Time, there is a greater pool of potential 

workers in the East that may be 

discouraged from commuting to Pulaski 

County due to time zone difference.’’

Based upon the information 

submitted with the Amended Petition 

with regard to worker migration, it 

appears that moving the time zone 

boundary for Pulaski County to the 

Eastern Time Zone would serve the 

convenience of commerce. DOT solicits 

further information and data supporting 

or rebutting the information supplied by 

the Amended Petition and how it 

supports a change in the time zone for 

the convenience of commerce. 

The Community’s Economy/Economic 

Development 

The Amended Petition states, 

‘‘Outside of its borders Pulaski County 

is not a ‘‘hub’’ for the regional economy. 

It is a peripheral player.’’ In support of 

this assertion, the Amended Petition 

refers to the study undertaken by the 

Pulaski County Community 

Development Commission on ‘‘Key 

Economic Development Statistics’’

which states that the employment in the 

County ‘‘is highly concentrated in 

agriculture, manufacturing, and 

government.’’ The Amended Petition 

notes that immediately after the release 

of this study, the Commission 

commissioned a ‘‘strategic plan for 

economic development.’’ The plan 

addresses ‘‘job creation and retention, 

planning and zoning, housing 

opportunities, educational needs, and 

recreational activities and visitor 

accommodations.’’ According to the 

Amended Petition, each challenge is 

being addressed and positive progress is 

being made to resolve the challenges. 

This section of the Amended Petition 

also referred to the sections addressing 

worker migration patterns that favor the 

Eastern Time Zone and stated that 

regions established by the State ‘‘for the 

administrative ease of delivering 

governmental services* * *should not 

be relied on as decisive evidence of 

what time zone best serves the 

commercial convenience of Pulaski 

County.’’

Based upon the information 

submitted with the Amended Petition, it 

appears that moving the time zone 

boundary for Pulaski County to the 

Eastern Time Zone would serve the 

convenience of commerce. DOT solicits 

further information and data supporting 

or rebutting the information supplied by 

the Amended Petition and how it 

supports a change in the time zone for 

the convenience of commerce. 

Schooling, Recreation, Health Care, or 

Religious Worship 

The Amended Petition notes that 

there are four school districts that cover 

Pulaski County. According to the 

Amended Petition, the Eastern Pulaski 

Community School Corporation serves 

Pulaski County and part of Fulton 

County, Union Township (Eastern Time 

Zone); the West Central School 

Corporation serves Pulaski County and 

Jasper County (Central Time Zone); the 

Culver Community School Corporation, 

based in Marshall County, covers 

Pulaski County, Starke County (Central 

Time Zone), and Fulton and Marshall 

Counties (Eastern Time Zone); and the 

North Judson-San Pierre School 

Corporation includes Pulaski County 

and Starke County (Central Time Zone). 

The Amended Petition provides 

detailed information on the number of 

students in each school district and the 

County of residence for the faculty. In 

addition, it includes detailed 

information on the athletic programs 

and events scheduled in Eastern and 

Central Time Zone Counties. The four 

school districts had requested to have 

the time zone issue resolved before 

school began last August. 

With regard to higher education, the 

Amended Petition asserts, ‘‘Businesses 

encouraging employees to return for 

further instruction in order to 

strengthen the company with high-skill 

workers or high school graduates unable 

to afford campus life will be limited if 

Pulaski County remains on the Central 

Time Zone.’’ The Amended Petition 

notes that six of the eight colleges and 

universities within 50 miles are located 

in the Eastern Time Zone. 

With regard to recreation, the 

Amended Petition notes, ‘‘Indiana is 

unique in its observance of college and 

high school basketball as a main source 

of family entertainment.’’ The Amended 

Petition refers back to the concerns it 

raised with regard to high school 

sporting activities. Furthermore, five out 

of the six colleges noted for collegiate 

sports within 100 miles of Pulaski 

County and referenced in the Amended 

Petition are in the Eastern Time Zone. 

The Amended Petition notes that with 

regard to professional football and 

basketball, there is an equal split 

between the Eastern and Central Time 

Zones. 

With regard to health care, the 

Amended Petition provides substantial 

information on the activities of Pulaski 

Memorial Hospital, which the Amended 

Petition identifies as ‘‘the primary 

health care provider in Pulaski County’’

and its second largest employer. The 

Amended Petition asserts, ‘‘Pulaski 

Memorial Hospital activities, with one 

(1) exception point to the Eastern Time 

Zone.’’ The number of referrals of inpatients discharged to another hospital 

in the Eastern Time zone was 147 as 

compared to 101 to the Central Time 

Zone. Out-patient referrals for 

procedures done in out-of-county 

facilities, however, favored the Central 

Time Zone 287 to 242 for the Eastern 

Time Zone. There are more independent 

practitioners and specialty group 

physicians from the Eastern Time Zone. 

With regard to in-home health care 

services, the number of visits 

overwhelmingly favors the Eastern Time 

Zone 9538 to 1366. 

The Amended Petition does not 

address religious worship. 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
68782 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Based on the information submitted 

in the Amended Petition with regard to 

higher education and recreation and 

possibly health care, it appears that 

moving the time zone boundary for 

Pulaski County to the Eastern Time 

Zone would serve the convenience of 

commerce. It is unclear, however, 

whether a time zone boundary change 

would serve primary and secondary 

education. The Amended Petition was 

submitted prior to the school year and 

does not include any actual experience 

with regard to Pulaski County’s change 

to the Central Time Zone and its effect 

on school districts that cover Pulaski 

County. DOT seeks comment on the 

information submitted and requests any 

additional information on schooling as 

it relates to the school districts that 

cover Pulaski County that would aid in 

determining whether changing the time 

zone for Pulaski County would serve the 

convenience of commerce. DOT 

specifically requests comments from the 

Fulton, Marshall, Starke, and Jasper 

Counties that are in the same school 

districts as Pulaski County. DOT also 

requests comments on any other 

recreational activities that would be 

relevant to this proceeding, on whether 

the home visits by county of residence 

noted on page 24 of the Amended 

Petition were based on a per person or 

per visit basis, and on a time zone 

change and its effect on religious 

worship, if any. 

Regional Connections 

In the original rulemaking proceeding 

to change time zone boundaries from 

the Eastern Time Zone to the Central 

Time Zone, petitioning counties and 

commenters advocated for a move by 

referring to their ties to other Indiana 

counties currently in the Central Time 

Zone. Many referred to data from 

STATS Indiana, an information service 

of the Indiana Business Research Center 

at Indiana University’s Kelly School of 

Business. This data includes the Indiana 

Annual Commuting Trends Profile, 

based on Indiana IT 40 returns. 

Commenters supporting the proposed 

change to Central Time also referred to 

data from the Indiana Economic 

Development Corporation (IEDC), the 

Indiana Department of Workforce 

Development, the Indiana Department 

of Transportation and the Indiana 

Department of Education, and 

Designated Media Markets as defined by 

the Nielsen for use in television ratings. 

DOT carefully reviewed this data and 

utilized it in reaching its decision. As 

stated in the January 2006 Final Rule, 

‘‘Pulaski has regional economic and 

workforce ties and business connections 

to counties already in the Central Time 

Zone. Those ties are enhanced by 

moving the time zone boundary for 

Pulaski County.’’

The Amended Petition does not 

address regional connections, as a 

specific, separate issue. It does, 

however, address regional connectivity 

as part of its answers to the questions 

raised by DOT. The Amended Petition 

refers to regions established by the State 

of Indiana and notes, ‘‘These regions are 

properly regarded as regions for the 

administrative ease of delivering 

governmental services and should not 

be relied upon as decisive evidence of 

what time zone best serves the 

commercial convenience of Pulaski 

County. Regardless of where Pulaski 

County is placed in state government 

regions, Pulaski County is 

fundamentally different as a rural 

county and on the periphery from the 

major cities that comprise the hub of 

these regions.’’ It further states, ‘‘A 

rational basis can be asserted for 

including Pulaski County in a time zone 

that serves commercial convenience 

focusing on small rural populations 

with an agricultural/small 

manufacturing economy. This informal 

region would include the counties of 

Fulton, Pulaski, White, Jasper, and 

Newton.’’

Regional connections are also 

addressed in letters from the Indiana 

Economic Development Corporation 

and the Indiana Department of 

Workforce Development. They noted 

that they established their respective 

regions based on their ability to deliver 

services. They did not establish regions 

based on time zones or ‘‘stream of 

commerce.’’ The data from STATS 

Indiana concerning employment and 

earnings by industry refer to the Bureau 

of Economic Analysis (BEA) as its 

source. According to BEA’s Web site, 

‘‘BEA produces economic accounts 

statistics that enable government and 

business decision-makers, researchers, 

and the American public to follow and 

understand the performance of the 

Nation’s economy. To do this, BEA 

collects source data, conducts research 

and analysis, develops and implements 

estimation methodologies, and 

disseminates statistics to the public. 

BEA’s economic areas define the 

relevant regional markets surrounding 

metropolitan or micropolitan statistical 

areas. They consist of one or more 

economic nodes—metropolitan or 

micropolitan statistical areas that serve 

as regional centers of economic 

activity—and the surrounding counties 

that are economically related to the 

nodes.’’ (Emphasis added.) Pulaski 

County is in BEA area 156 with other 

counties that are in the Eastern Time 

Zone (Elkhart, Fulton, Kosciusko, 

Lagrange, Marshall, St. Joseph Counties 

in Indiana and Berrien, Cass, and St. 

Joseph Counties in Michigan), with the 

exception of Starke County. Starke 

County, like Pulaski County, petitioned 

to have its time zone boundary changed 

to the Central Time Zone and DOT 

granted that petition and changed the 

time zone in January 2006. 

Based on the information submitted 

in the Amended Petition with regard to 

regional connections, it appears that 

moving the time zone boundary for 

Pulaski County to the Eastern Time 

Zone would serve the convenience of 

commerce. DOT seeks comment on the 

information submitted and requests any 

additional information concerning 

regional connections that would aid in 

determining whether changing the time 

zone for Pulaski County would serve the 

convenience of commerce. 

Request for Comments 

To aid us in our consideration of 

whether a time zone change would be 

‘‘for the convenience of commerce,’’ we 

ask for comments on the impact on 

commerce of a change in the time zone 

and whether a new time zone would 

improve the convenience of commerce. 

The comments should address the 

impact on such things as economic, 

cultural, social, and civic activities and 

how time zone changes affect 

businesses, communication, 

transportation, and education. The 

comments should be as detailed as 

possible, providing the basis of the 

information including factual data or 

surveys. For example, with regard to 

major bus, rail, and air transportation, 

information such as the average time it 

takes for a county resident to travel to 

a transportation terminal or the average 

distance to the terminal for a county 

resident would be useful. With regard to 

the impact of the time zone on 

education, if a school district crosses 

county lines, the number of students in 

each county in that district would be 

helpful. Information on school activities 

such as sporting events or academic 

competitions that take place in other 

counties or locations that are not on the 

same time zone as the school district 

would also be useful. Similar 

information on community colleges 

could also be beneficial. Finally, we 

would appreciate information on how 

the different time zones affect the 

students and the schools. 

We specifically invite comment from 

neighboring Indiana counties and 

counties in other States that may also be 

impacted by changing Pulaski County’s 

time zone boundary. 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 68783 

Although Pulaski County has 

submitted sufficient information to 

begin the rulemaking process, the 

decision whether actually to make the 

change will also consider information 

submitted in writing to the docket. 

Persons supporting or opposing the 

change should not assume that the 

change will be made merely because 

DOT is making the proposal. DOT here 

issues no opinion on the ultimate merits 

of the County’s request. We note that 

Pulaski County and its residents have 

had only a short time to experience the 

effects of changing from Eastern to 

Central Time and now the County 

proposes to change back again. This 

may result in many comments to the 

docket. Our decision in the final rule 

will be made on the basis of information 

and comments developed during the 

entire rulemaking proceeding. In our 

experience, time zone boundary changes 

can be extremely disruptive to a 

community and, therefore, should not 

be made without careful consideration. 

At the close of the comment period, we 

will analyze the comments submitted 

and decide whether to withdraw the 

proposal (and deny the petition) or issue 

a final rule. 

Comment Period 

We are providing 30 days for public 

comments in this proceeding. Although 

we normally provide 60 days for public 

comments on proposed rules, we 

believe that 30 days is an adequate 

public comment period in this instance. 

It is important to resolve this 

rulemaking expeditiously so that we can 

provide ample notice if a change to 

Pulaski County’s time zone boundary is 

adopted. Since the introduction and 

passage of the Indiana Act in 2005 and 

through DOT’s time zone regulatory 

proceeding and compliance discussions 

with Pulaski County, the time zone 

boundary issue has been actively 

discussed and analyzed. In this regard, 

we expect that 30 days is adequate time 

to gather the necessary data, which is 

based on currently available 

information. 

Regulatory Analysis & Notices 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 

and does not require an assessment of 

potential costs and benefits under 

section 6(a)(3) of that Order. It has not 

been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget under that 

Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

the Department of Transportation (44 FR 

11040; February 26, l979). We expect 

the economic impact of this proposed 

rule to be so minimal that a full 

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 

10e of the regulatory policies and 

procedures of DOT is unnecessary. The 

rule primarily affects the convenience of 

individuals in scheduling activities. By 

itself, it imposes no direct costs. Its 

impact is localized in nature. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. This 

proposal, if adopted, would primarily 

affect individuals and their scheduling 

of activities. Although it would affect 

some small businesses, not-for-profits 

and, perhaps, a number of small 

governmental jurisdictions, it would not 

be a substantial number. In addition, the 

change should have little, if any, 

economic impact. 

Therefore, I certify under 5 U.S.C. 

605(b) that this proposed rule would 

not, if adopted, have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. If you think 

that your business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a 

small entity and that this rule would 

have a significant economic impact on 

it, please submit a comment to the 

Docket Management Facility at the 

address under ADDRESSES. In your 

comment, explain why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the rule would affect your small 

business, organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please call Joanne Petrie at 

(202) 366–9315. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under E.O. 12612 and have determined 

that this rule does not have sufficient 

implications for federalism to warrant 

the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. 

Unfunded Mandates 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) and E.O. 

12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental 

Partnership, (58 FR 58093; October 28, 

1993) govern the issuance of Federal 

regulations that impose unfunded 

mandates. An unfunded mandate is a 

regulation that requires a State, local, or 

tribal government or the private sector 

to incur direct costs without the Federal 

Government’s having first provided the 

funds to pay those costs. This proposed 

rule would not impose an unfunded 

mandate. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not result 

in a taking of private property or 

otherwise have taking implications 

under E.O. 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under E.O. 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not concern an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Environment 

This rulemaking is not a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act and, therefore, an 

environmental impact statement is not 

required. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
68784 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 71 

Time zones. 

For the reasons discussed above, the 

Office of the Secretary proposes to 

amend Title 49 Part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—STANDARD TIME ZONE 

BOUNDARIES 

1. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 1–4, 40 Stat. 450, as 

amended; sec. 1, 41 Stat. 1446, as amended; 

secs. 2–7, 80 Stat. 107, as amended; 100 Stat. 

764; Act of Mar. 19, 1918, as amended by the 

Uniform Time Act of 1966 and Pub. L. 97–

449, 15 U.S.C. 260–267; Pub. L. 99–359; Pub. 

L. 106–564, 15 U.S.C. 263, 114 Stat. 2811; 49 

CFR 1.59(a). 

2. Paragraph (b) of § 71.5 is revised to 

read as follows: 

§ 71.5 Boundary line between eastern and 

central zones. 

* * * * * 

(b) Indiana-Illinois. From the junction of 

the western boundary of the State of 

Michigan with the northern boundary of the 

State of Indiana easterly along the northern 

boundary of the State of Indiana to the east 

line of LaPorte County; thence southerly 

along the east line of LaPorte County to the 

north line of Starke County; thence east along 

the north line of Starke County to the west 

line of Mashall County; thence south along 

the west line of Marshall County thence west 

along the north line of Pulaski County to the 

east line of Jasper County; thence south along 

the east line of Jasper County to the south 

line of Jasper County; thence west along the 

south lines of Jasper and Newton Counties to 

the western boundary of the State of Indiana; 

thence south along the western boundary of 

the State of Indiana to the north line of Knox 

County; thence easterly along the north line 

of Knox, Daviess, and Martin Counties to the 

west line of Lawrence County; thence south 

along the west line of Lawrence, Orange, and 

Crawford Counties to the north line of Perry 

County; thence easterly and southerly along 

the north and east line of Perry County to the 

Indiana-Kentucky boundary. 

Issued in Washington, DC on November 22, 

2006. 

Rosalind A. Knapp, 

Acting General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 06–9432 Filed 11–22–06; 2:27 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 061121306–6306–01; I.D. 

110206A] 

RIN 0648–AU86 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

(HMS); U.S. Atlantic Swordfish Fishery 

Management Measures 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to amend 

regulations governing the U.S. Atlantic 

swordfish fishery to enable a more 

thorough utilization of the U.S. North 

Atlantic swordfish quota. The U.S. 

North Atlantic swordfish quota is 

derived from the recommendations of 

the International Commission for the 

Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), 

and is implemented under the authority 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) and the 

Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA). 

For the past several years, the U.S. 

Atlantic swordfish fishery has not fully 

harvested its available quota. The 

objective of this proposed action is to 

provide a reasonable opportunity for 

U.S. vessels to fully harvest the ICCATrecommended U.S. North Atlantic 

swordfish quota, as specified in the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, in recognition 

of the improved stock status of North 

Atlantic swordfish. This proposed rule 

would increase swordfish retention 

limits for Incidental swordfish permit 

holders, and modify recreational 

swordfish retention limits for HMS 

Charter/headboat and Angling category 

permit holders. The proposed rule 

would also modify HMS limited access 

vessel upgrading restrictions for pelagic 

longline (PLL) vessels. These actions are 

necessary to address persistent 

underharvests of the domestic swordfish 

quota, while continuing to minimize 

bycatch to the extent practicable, so that 

swordfish are harvested in a sustainable, 

yet economically viable manner. 

DATES: Written comments on the 

proposed rule must be received by 5 

p.m. on January 31, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

proposed rule or the Draft 

Environmental Assessment(Draft EA) 

may be submitted to Sari Kiraly, 

Fisheries Management Specialist, 

Highly Migratory Species Management 

Division, using any of the following 

methods: 

• E-mail: SF1.110206A@noaa.gov. 

• Mail: 1315 East-West Highway, 

Silver Spring, MD 20910. Please mark 

the outside of the envelope ‘‘Comments 

on Proposed Swordfish Rule’’. 

• Fax: 301–713–1917. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Include in the 

subject line the following identifier: 

‘‘I.D. 110206A.’’

Copies of the Draft EA, the 2006 Final 

Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory 

Species Fishery Management Plan 

(Consolidated HMS FMP) and other 

relevant documents are also available 

from the Highly Migratory Species 

Management Division website at http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms or by 

contacting Sari Kiraly (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sari 

Kiraly, by phone: 301–713–2347; by fax: 

301–713–1917; or by e-mail: 

Sari.Kiraly@noaa.gov,or Richard A. 

Pearson, by phone: 727–824–5399; by 

fax: 727–824–5398; or by e-mail: 

Rick.A.Pearson@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The North Atlantic Swordfish Fishery 

The U.S. Atlantic swordfish fishery is 

managed under the Consolidated HMS 

FMP. Implementing regulations at 50 

CFR part 635 are issued under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

(16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), and ATCA (16 

U.S.C. 971 et seq). Under ATCA, the 

United States is obligated to implement 

the recommendations of ICCAT, 

including those for Atlantic swordfish 

quotas (ICCAT Recommendations 02–

02, 03–03, and 04–02). ICCAT is an 

inter-governmental fishery organization, 

currently consisting of 42 contracting 

parties, that is responsible for the 

conservation of tunas and tuna-like 

species, including swordfish, in the 

Atlantic Ocean and its adjacent seas. 

In 2001, ICCAT established its 

‘‘Criteria for the Allocation of Fishing 

Possibilities’’ (ICCAT Recommendation 

01–25) that included 15 separate criteria 

to be considered when allocating quota 

within the ICCAT framework. The first 

two criteria relate to the past and 

present fishing activity of qualifying 

participants. These criteria specify that 

‘‘historical catches’’ and ‘‘the interests, 

fishing patterns and fishing practices’’

of qualifying participants are to be 

considered when making allocation 

recommendations. Other criteria, 

including conservation measures, 

economic importance of the fishery, 


ycherry on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS