Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 182 / Friday, September 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules 49193

localities in Mariposa County. Both

localities are steep north-facing slopes

within the Sierra National Forest and

partly within a California Department of

Transportation (Caltrans) right-of-way.

The species was considered to be

threatened by road construction and

maintenance activities, power line

maintenance activities, and landslides.

Implementation of protection measures

through a Memorandum of

Understanding signed by the Forest

Service, Caltrans, and Pacific Gas and

Electric has reduced the level of threats

to the Merced clarkia. The available

information indicates that the degree of

the threats to the Merced clarkia does

not warrant issuance of a proposed rule

nor continuation of candidate status for

this species.

The San Gabriel Mountains dudleya

(Dudleya densiflora) is a white or pinkflowered perennial of the stonecrop

family that is endemic to southern

California. It occurs on steep cliffs and

canyon walls within chaparral, oak

woodland, and riparian woodlands.

This species is known from four

populations within a 9 square-mile area

along the southern face of the San

Gabriel Mountains in Los Angeles

County. The species was considered to

be threatened by mining, road

maintenance, and recreational activities.

The San Gabriel Mountains dudleya is

being removed from candidate status

because about 75 percent of the

subpopulations of the species occur on

steep cliffs and canyon walls on U.S.

Forest Service lands and are not

threatened by habitat modification at

this time.

Author

This notice was compiled from

materials supplied by staff biologists

located in the Service’s regional and

field offices. The materials were

compiled by Martin J. Miller, Division

of Endangered Species (see ADDRESSES

section).

Authority

The authority for this action is the

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

Dated: September 3, 1997.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 97–24806 Filed 9–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 970829217–7217–01; I.D.

081597E]

RIN 0648–AJ79

Fisheries of the Northeastern United

States; Northeast Multispecies

Fishery; Framework Adjustment 18

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed

rule and request for comments for

Framework Adjustment 18 to the

Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Management Plan (FMP). This rule

proposes to allow pelagic midwater

trawling for herring and mackerel in

Multispecies Closed Areas I and II, the

Gulf of Maine (GOM) multispecies

closure areas, and in the Nantucket

Lightship Closed Area under certain

conditions. The intended effect of this

action is to provide greater economic

opportunity for pelagic midwater trawl

vessels to harvest herring and mackerel

while maintaining the conservation

benefits of the current multispecies

management measures.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before October 6, 1997.

ADDRESSES: All comments concerning

these proposed regulations should be

addressed to Andrew A. Rosenberg

Ph.D., Administrator, Northeast Region,

National Marine Fisheries Service, One

Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.

Copies of the framework document are

available upon request from Paul J.

Howard, Executive Director, New

England Fishery Management Council, 5

Broadway, (Route 1), Saugus, MA

01906.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Pearson, NMFS, Fishery

Policy Analyst, 508–281–9279.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

In 1994, at the request of the New

England Fishery Management Council

(NEFMC), NMFS, by emergency action,

closed three large areas for the duration

of the emergency to all fishing gear

capable of catching multispecies (59 FR

63926, December 12, 1994, and

amended at 60 FR 3102, January 13,

1995). These areas, known as Closed

Areas I and II, and the Nantucket

Lightship Closed Area, cover

approximately 4800 square miles (12432

sq km). In order to avoid a hiatus

between the emergency action and

implementation of Amendment 7,

NMFS issued Framework Adjustment 9

(60 FR 19364, April 18, 1995) to

implement the emegency measures on a

permament basis while Amendment 7

was being developed to address a

longterm objective of stock rebuilding.

In 1996, Amendment 7 to the FMP

continued the existing year-round

closures and closed seasonally three

additional large areas in the GOM (61

FR 27710, May 31, 1996). These areas

currently remain closed to all gear

capable of catching multispecies,

including pelagic midwater trawls.

Recently, the NEFMC was requested

by fishery participants to allow pelagic

midwater trawling for herring and

mackerel in the multispecies closed

areas. According to the participants, the

herring and mackerel fisheries capture

negligible amounts of regulated

multispecies due to the spatial

separation of pelagic and demersal

species in the water column. Because of

the low value of herring and mackerel,

it is important to industry that vessels

have unimpeded access to these species

throughout their migration to ensure

that the harvesting and/or processing

capacity of the vessels is maximized.

Large closed areas impede access and

make fishing for herring and mackerel

less economically feasible. These

pelagic species are very important for

commercial fishing vessels in New

England that participate in joint

ventures or in the directed domestic

fishery. Due to the prohibition on

fishing in closed areas and an increased

reliance on closed areas for multispecies

mortality reduction, it has become

increasingly difficult to conduct these

pelagic fishing operations.

The NEFMC has reviewed NMFS sea

sampling data from the fisheries and has

determined that pelagic midwater

trawls, when fished properly, can

operate in closed areas with a minimal

bycatch of regulated multispecies.

NMFS agrees with this determination.

However, allowing one type of trawl

vessel while prohibiting another type

could present enforcement problems.

Several requirements in Framework 18

address these enforcement concerns.

This proposed rule would allow pelagic

midwater trawling for herring and

mackerel in Closed Areas I and II, the

Nantucket Lightship Closed Area, and

the GOM Closed Areas under the

following conditions: (1) Vessels must

obtain and comply with a midwater

trawl letter of authorization (as

currently required under § 648.80(d)(2)
49194 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 182 / Friday, September 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules

for the midwater trawl gear exemption)

from the Administrator, Northeast

Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator);

(2) harvesting or processing vessels

must carry observers if required by

NMFS, and (3) if the Regional

Administrator determines, on the basis

of sea sampling data or other credible

information, that bycatch of regulated

multispecies in the closed areas for the

fishery or for an individual vessel is

likely to exceed, or exceeds, 1 percent

of the catch (by weight), then the

Regional Administrator may place

restrictions and/or conditions in the

letter(s) of authorization of any or all of

the fishing operations; or, after

consulting with the NEFMC, may

suspend all midwater trawl activities in

the closed areas.

Classification

This action is authorized by CFR part

648 and has been determined not to be

significant for purposes of E.O. 12866.

The NEFMC prepared an initial

regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA)

that describes the impact this proposed

rule, if adopted, would have on small

entities. This proposed action would

have a significant, but positive impact

on small business entities because it is

expected to increase the annual gross

revenues of a substantial number of

small business entities by more than 5

percent. The IRFA concluded that this

action could affect all of the

approximately 35 pelagic midwater

trawl vessels (which are small business

entities) participating in the fisheries by

allowing them to fish in areas currently

closed to them, and thereby increasing

their annual gross revenues by more

than 5 percent. Ten to twelve additional

vessels could enter these fisheries in the

next year. However, it is unlikely more

than this estimate will enter the

fisheries because of the expense, which

is estimated to range from $75,000 to

$250,000 depending on the changes

made, to convert conventional trawl

vessels into competitive mid-water

trawls. Because of the conversion

expenses, many vessels would be

precluded from entering these fisheries.

The proposed action could improve

the economic competitiveness of all

U.S. Atlantic herring and mackerel

harvesting operations and preserve the

enforceability and effectiveness of the

multispecies closed areas. The IRFA

indicated that it is difficult to predict

the exact increase in annual gross

revenues as a result of allowing fishing

in the currently closed areas due to the

migratory nature of herring and

mackerel, but overall annual ex-vessel

revenues for the fleet may potentially

rise from between $255,684 to $767,051,

as compared to taking no action.

The NEFMC considered but rejected

requiring observers to be present

whenever fish are transferred from the

harvesting vessel to the processor. The

NEFMC rejected this alternative because

it was considered to be too costly for

U.S. freezer trawlers and vessels that

land herring or mackerel ashore. The

NEFMC has received many comments

that pelagic midwater vessels do not

catch regulated groundfish species, and

the NEFMC felt this view is supported

by the available sea sampling data. In

addition, the IRFA indicates there may

be an insufficient number of trained

observers to provide coverage for the

non-joint venture boats in the near

future. Observers already are required

on processing vessels participating in

joint venture operations. Under this

non-preferred alternative (mandatory

use of observers), the range in ex-vessel

revenues was estimated to be from

$217,000 to $640,000. However,

observer costs would range from an

estimated 8 percent to as much as 148

percent of ex-vessel revenues, making it

economically unfeasible for some

vessels to carry observers. Observer

costs would average 55 percent of gross

revenues for ton-class 3 vessels and 14

percent of gross revenues for ton-class 4

vessels based on available herring catch

rate data.

No alternatives to ‘‘minimize’’ the

economic impact were considered by

the NEFMC because the impacts are all

beneficial and thus need not be

minimized. As noted above, the NEFMC

rejected an alternative that would have

reduced the economic benefit. A copy of

this analysis is available from the

NEFMC (see ADDRESSES).

This proposed rule contains no new

collection-of-information requirements.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: September 12, 1997.

David L. Evans,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed

to be amended as follows:

PART 648–FISHERIES OF THE

NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

1. The authority citation for part 648

continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 648.80 is amended by

revising paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) to

read as follows:

§ 648.80 Regulated mesh areas and

restrictions on gear and methods of fishing.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(2) When fishing under this

exemption in the GOM/GB and SB/JL

Areas, and in any or all of the areas

described in § 648.81

(a)(1),(b)(1),(c)(1),(f)(1),(g)(1),(h)(1), and

(i)(1), the vessel has on board a letter of

authorization issued by the Regional

Administrator, and complies with all

restrictions and conditions thereof;

(3) The vessel only fishes for,

possesses, or lands Atlantic herring,

blueback herring, or mackerel in areas

north of 42°20’ N. lat. and in the areas

described in § 648.81 (a)(1), (b)(1), (c)(1),

(f)(1), (g)(1), (h)(1), and (i)(1); and

Atlantic herring, blueback herring,

mackerel, or squid in all other areas

south of 42°20’ N. lat.; and

* * * * *

3. Section 648.81 is amended by

adding paragraph (a)(2)(iii), and by

revising paragraphs (a)(2)(ii), (b)(2)

introductory text, (c)(2)(i), and (f)(2)(ii)

to read as follows:

§ 648.81 Closed areas.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(ii) Fishing with or using pelagic hook

or longline gear or harpoon gear,

provided that there is no retention of

regulated species, and provided that

there is no other gear on board capable

of catching NE multispecies; or

(iii) Fishing with midwater trawl gear

consistent with § 648.80(d), provided

that the Regional Administrator shall

review information pertaining to the

bycatch of regulated multispecies from

the closed areas specified in paragraphs

(a)(1), (b)(1), (c)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1), (h)(1),

and (i)(1) of this section, and if the

Regional Administrator determines, on

the basis of sea sampling data or other

credible information, that the bycatch of

regulated multispecies in the areas

exceeds, or is likely to exceed, one

percent of herring and mackerel

harvested, by weight, in the fishery or

by any individual fishing operation, the

Regional Administrator may place

restrictions and conditions in the letter

of authorization for any or all individual

fishing operations or, after consulting

with the Council, suspend or prohibit

any or all midwater trawl activities in

any or all such areas.

(b) * * *

(2) Paragraph (b)(1) of this section

does not apply to persons on fishing

vessels or fishing vessels authorized to

fish in Closed Area I under paragraph

(a)(2) of this section, or that are

transiting the area provided—

* * * * *
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 182 / Friday, September 19, 1997 / Proposed Rules 49195

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) Fishing with gear as described in

paragraph (a)(2) of this section;

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(2) * * *

(ii) That are fishing with or using

exempted gear as defined under this

part, excluding pelagic gillnet gear

capable of catching multispecies, except

vessels may fish with a single pelagic

gillnet, not longer than 300 ft. (91.44 m)

and not greater than 6 ft (1.83 m.) deep,

with a maximum mesh size of 3 inches

(7.62 cm.), provided the net is fished in

the upper two-thirds of the water

column and is marked with the owners

name and vessel identification number,

and provided there is no other gear on

board capable of catching multispecies

finfish; or

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–24812 Filed 9–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 970908229–7229–01; I.D.

082797A]

RIN 0648–AJ55

Fisheries of the Northeastern United

States; Amendment 10 to the Summer

Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass

Fishery Management Plan

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed

rule to implement the provisions of

proposed Amendment 10 to the Fishery

Management Plan for the Summer

Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass

Fisheries (FMP). Amendment 10 would

revise some of the management

measures in the summer flounder

fisheries and require a number of

corresponding revisions to the

regulations implementing the FMP and

its amendments.

DATES: Public comments must be

received on or before November 3, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed

rule should be sent to Andrew A.

Rosenberg, Ph.D., Regional

Administrator, Northeast Regional

Office, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive,

Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside

of the envelope, ‘‘Comments on

Amendment 10 Proposed Rule.’’

Copies of Amendment 10, the

environmental assessment and the

regulatory impact review are available

from David R. Keifer, Executive

Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery

Management Council, Room 2115

Federal Building, 300 S. New Street,

Dover, DE 19904-6790.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Regina L. Spallone, Fishery Policy

Analyst, 508–281–9221.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Proposed Amendment 10 was

prepared by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery

Management Council (Council) and the

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries

Commission (Commission), in

consultation with the New England and

South Atlantic Fishery Management

Councils. A notice of availability for the

amendment was published in the

Federal Register on September 3, 1997

(62 FR 46470), soliciting public

comments on Amendment 10 through

November 3, 1997. All comments

received by the end of the comment

period on the proposed amendment,

whether specifically directed to

Amendment 10 or the proposed rule,

will be considered in the approval/

disapproval decision on Amendment

10; comments received after that date

will not be considered in the approval/

disapproval decision of Amendment 10.

Public comments must be received (not

postmarked or otherwise transmitted) by

the close of business on November 3,

1997, to be considered in the approval/

disapproval decision.

Amendment 10 revises the

management measures in the summer

flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) fishery,

pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), as

amended. The management unit

continues to be summer flounder in U.S.

waters in the western Atlantic Ocean

from the southern border of North

Carolina, northward to the U.S./Canada

border.

The regulations implementing the

FMP and its amendments impose a

broad spectrum of measures on the

fishery to stop overfishing and increase

spawning stock biomass. These

measures include minimum mesh size

limits in the otter trawl fishery, a

moratorium on the entry of new vessels

into the commercial fishery, and a total

harvest limit allocated between the

commercial and recreational sectors of

the fishery. The harvest limit for the

commercial sector is allocated as a

quota, apportioned to the states based

on historical landings data. All

commercial landings in a state count

against that state’s quota.

Proposed Amendment 10 would

require a number of changes to the

summer flounder regulations.

Amendment 10 would modify the

commercial minimum mesh size limit,

continue the moratorium on entry of

additional commercial vessels, remove

the landing requirements applicable to

permit retention, modify the vessel

replacement criteria, would allow any

state to be granted de minimus status if

commercial summer flounder landings

during the preceding calendar year were

less than 0.1 percent of the total

coastwide quota, allow federally

permitted charter and/or party vessels to

possess fillets less than the minimum

size if in possession of a permit to do

so issued by their state, and prohibit

transfer of summer flounder at sea.

Amendment 10 also contains measures

adopted by the Commission as part of

its interstate management process.

Defined as compliance criteria, these

management measures are not part of

the Federal regulatory process and are,

therefore, not included in this proposed

rule. Details of these measures are

described in Amendment 10, which is

available from the Council (see

ADDRESSES).

In addition, the Council reevaluated

in Amendment 10 the commercial quota

system implemented by Amendment 2.

During the public hearings for

Amendment 10, the Council and

Commission proposed several

alternative quota allocation methods,

with the status quo being the preferred

alternative. After receiving and

considering public comments, the

Council and Commission voted to

maintain the existing state-by-state

commercial quota allocation system.

The Council and Commission felt the

current system allows the states the

most flexibility in managing their

quotas, by implementing state subquotas

and trip limits.

After a preliminary review of

Amendment 10, NMFS found that the

de minimus status provision was not

consistent with national standard 7,

raised questions of consistency with

national standard 1, and appears

arbitrary and capricious. This measure

would require an annual examination of

state landings to determine if landings

in that state during the preceding year

for which data are available were less

than 0.1 percent of the overall annual

quota. If a state met this criterion, it

would be granted de minimus status.

The de minimus measure would impose