65818 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

from 6 p.m. (e.s.t.) until 1 a.m. (e.s.t.) on

the first Monday in October.

(12) Seaport New Year’s Eve

Fireworks, East River, NY:

(i) Location: All waters of the East

River south of the Brooklyn Bridge and

north of a line drawn from the

southwest corner of Pier 3, Brooklyn, to

the northeast corner of Pier 6,

Manhattan.

(ii) Effective period. Paragraph (a)(2)(i)

is in effect annually from 8 p.m. (e.s.t.)

to 1 a.m. (e.s.t.) on New Year’s Eve. If

the event is cancelled due to inclement

weather, then paragraph (a)(12)(i) is

effective from 8 p.m. (e.s.t.) until 1 a.m.

(e.s.t.) on the day following New Year’s

Eve.

(b) Regulations. The general

regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23

apply.

(2) All persons and vessels shall

comply with the instructions of the

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the

designated on-scene-patrol personnel.

These personnel comprise

commissioned, warrant, and petty

officers of the Coast Guard. Upon being

hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by

siren, radio, flashing light, or other

means, the operator of a vessel shall

proceed as directed.

Dated: October 24, 2000.

R.E. Bennis,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the

Port, New York.

[FR Doc. 00–28059 Filed 11–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[FRL–6895–1]

Supplemental Information To Support

Proposed Approvals of One-Hour

Ozone Attainment Demonstrations for

Serious Ozone Nonattainment Areas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability and

extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: On October 16, 2000 (65 FR

61134), EPA published a notice of

availability and reopening of comment

period to provide the public with the

opportunity to comment on a reasonably

available control measures (RACM)

analysis that EPA performed. This

analysis was done for the following

serious ozone nonattainment areas:

Greater Connecticut, New York-New

Jersey-Connecticut; Springfield,

Massachusetts; Washington, DCVirginia-Maryland; and Atlanta,

Georgia. That action was taken to

supplement the proposed rules that EPA

took on those areas’ State

implementation plans (SIPs) on

December 16, 1999 (Greater Connecticut

(64 FR 70332); Springfield (64 FR

70319); Metropolitan Washington (64

FR 70460) and Atlanta (64 FR 70478).

By this action, EPA is extending the

comment period 15 additional days to

give the public a total of 30 days to

review this analysis and submit public

comments to EPA.

DATES: The EPA is extending the

comment period until November 15,

2001. All comments should be sent to

the appropriate regional office as listed

below by that date.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the

Greater Connecticut and Springfield

SIPs should be sent (in duplicate if

possible) to: David B. Conroy, EPA

Region I (New England) Office, One

Congress Street, Suite 1100–CAQ,

Boston, Massachusetts 02114–2023.

Copies of the Connecticut and

Massachusetts State submittals and

EPA’s technical support document are

available for public inspection during

normal business hours at the following

address: U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 1 (New England), One

Congress St., 11th Floor, Boston,

Massachusetts, telephone (617) 918–

1664. Please telephone in advance

before visiting.

Written comments on the

Washington, DC-Virginia-Maryland

submittals should be submitted (in

duplicate if possible) to: David L.

Arnold, Chief, Ozone and Mobile

Sources Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 3, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following address: Air

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19103, and the docket numbers are

DC039–2019, VA090–5036 and MD073–

3045.

Written comments on the Atlanta SIP

should be submitted (in duplicate if

possible) to: Scott M. Martin, EPA

Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61

Forsyth Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia

30303. Copies of the State submittal are

available at the following address for

inspection during normal business

hours: Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch,

61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia

30303–8960, and the docket number is

GA–47–200002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general questions on the RACM analysis

for mobile sources, contact Mr. Mark

Simons at either 734–214–4420 or by email simons.mark@epa.gov. For general

questions on the RACM analysis for

stationary sources, contact Mr. John

Silvasi at either (919) 541–5666 or by email silvasi.john@epa.gov. For specific

questions on the Greater Connecticut

and Springfield SIPs, contact Mr.

Richard Burkhart at (617) 918–1664 or

by e-mail burkhart.richard@epa.gov. For

specific questions on the Washington,

DC, SIP, contact Mr. David Arnold at

(215) 814–2172 or by e-mail

arnold.dave@epa.gov. For specific

questions on the Atlanta SIP, contact

Mr. Scott Martin at (404) 562–9036 or by

e-mail martin.scott@epa.gov.

Dated: October 26, 2000.

John S. Seitz,

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards.

[FR Doc. 00–28166 Filed 11–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 001025298-0298-01; I.D.

101000C]

RIN 0648-AO56

Fisheries of the Northeastern United

States; Summer Flounder, Scup, Black

Sea Bass, Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and

Butterfish Fisheries; Modification of

Scup Gear Restricted Areas (GRAs)

and Exemptions to the GRAs, and

Modifications to the Landing Limits in

the 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: NMFS proposes regulations to

modify the GRAs that were established

in the Mid-Atlantic Bight to reduce scup

bycatch in small-mesh fisheries; exempt

Atlantic mackerel fishing from all of the

GRA restrictions, and Loligo squid

fishing from the November 1 - December

31, 2000, GRA restrictions; modify the

procedure and criteria for exempting

small-mesh fisheries from the

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 65819

requirements of the GRAs; and modify

the landing limits in the Atlantic

mackerel, squid and butterfish fisheries.

The modification of the GRAs is

intended to reduce negative economic

impacts on the small-mesh fishing

industry, while still ensuring that scup

bycatch in small-mesh fisheries is

controlled. The modification of the

procedure for exempting small-mesh

fisheries from the requirements of the

GRAs is intended to address problems

with the current method of determining

exemptions. The modification of the

landing limits in the Atlantic mackerel,

squid and butterfish fisheries is

necessary to discourage directed fishing

after the closure of the directed

fisheries.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be received on or before November

17, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the

proposed rule should be sent to Patricia

A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator,

NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, One

Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.

Mark the outside of the envelope

‘‘Comments on proposed rule to modify

scup GRAs.’’ Comments may also be

sent via facsimile (fax) to (978) 281-

9371. Comments will not be accepted if

submitted via e-mail or the Internet.

Send comments on any ambiguity or

unnecessary complexity arising from the

language used in this proposed rule to

the Regional Administrator, Northeast

Region. Copies of the Regulatory Impact

Review (RIR), the Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) contained

within the RIR, and the Environmental

Assessment (EA) are available from the

Northeast Regional Office at the above

address. The EA/RIR/IRFA is also

accessible via the Internet at http:/

www.nero.gov/ro/doc/nr.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Pearson, Fishery Policy

Analyst, at 978-281-9279.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background Information

Scup are managed by the MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council

(Council) under the Summer Flounder,

Scup and Black Sea Bass FMP. Scup are

overfished and overfishing is occurring.

The most recent (2000) scup stock

assessment concluded that fishing

mortality should be reduced

substantially and immediately, and that

a reduction in fishing mortality from

discards would have the most impact on

rebuilding the stock.

GRAs were developed by the Council

in the specifications for the summer

flounder, scup, and black sea bass

fisheries, submitted for the 2000 fishing

year to reduce mortality from discards

in small-mesh fisheries. The Council’s

initial recommendation consisted of a

series of small, restricted areas that went

into place sequentially for 2-week

periods. Because of concerns regarding

the effectiveness of the Council’s GRAs,

the GRAs were revised by NMFS. The

final specifications (65 FR 33486, May

24, 2000) implemented larger GRAs,

which restrict the use of small-mesh

gear for several months. The GRAs are

scheduled to become effective

November 1, 2000.

Since publication of the final rule

implementing the GRAs, many fishing

industry members have expressed

opposition to the GRAs, claiming that

the restrictions would create severe

economic hardships. The Council, at its

August 14 to17, 2000, meeting,

requested that NMFS modify the GRAs

because additional analysis of available

data indicated that the GRAs could be

reduced in size without seriously

compromising conservation benefits to

scup. The Council requested that the

modifications to the GRAs be

implemented by November 1, 2000, and

carry forward into the 2001 fishing year,

so that the economic impacts of the

GRAs could be moderated prior to the

effective date of the annual

specifications. The modified GRAs were

analyzed by Council staff and endorsed

by the Council’s Scup Monitoring

Committee. The Council also

recommended the modified GRAs for

inclusion in the 2001 specifications for

the summer flounder, scup, and black

sea bass fisheries, which will be

proposed in a separate document in the

Federal Register. Copies of a chart

depicting these areas appears in the EA/

RIR/IRFA and are available from the

Regional Administrator upon request

(see ADDRESSES). The coordinates of the

proposed alternative GRAs are:

NORTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED AREA I

(NOVEMBER 1 TO DECEMBER 31)

Point N. lat. W. long.

NGA 1 41° 00’ 71° 00’

NGA 2 41° 00’ 71° 30’

NGA 3 40° 00’ 72° 40’

NGA 4 40° 00’ 72° 05’

NGA 5 41° 00’ 71° 00’

NORTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED AREA II

(DECEMBER 1 TO JANUARY 31)

Point N. lat. W. long.

NGA 6 40° 00’ 71° 40’

NGA 7 40° 00’ 72° 10’

NGA 8 39° 00’ 73° 09’

NGA 9 39° 00’ 72° 50’

NGA 10 40° 00’ 71° 40’

SOUTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED AREA

(JANUARY 1 TO APRIL 30)

Point N. lat. W. long.

SGA 1 39° 00’ 72° 50’

SGA 2 39° 11’ 72° 58’

SGA 3 38° 00’ 74° 05’

SGA 4 38° 00’ 73° 57’

SGA 5 39° 00’ 72° 50’

In support of the motion to modify the

GRAs, the Council provided additional

analysis to incorporate into the EA/RIR/

IRFA. The analysis indicated that the

proposed GRAs would have a less

negative economic impact on smallmesh fisheries than the existing GRAs,

with a relatively modest increase in

scup discards. The GRA alternative

proposed in this proposed rule is

estimated to reduce scup discards by 61

percent, as compared to an estimated

71-percent reduction in discards under

the existing, or status quo, GRAs. The

Council’s analysis of the proposed

modified GRAs indicates that they

would reduce vessel revenues

approximately 45 percent less than the

status-quo GRAs.

As noted in the 31st Stock

Assessment Review Committee Report

(SARC 31), there is no precise estimate

of scup discards, or of the scup fishing

mortality rate. Therefore, it is not

possible to quantitatively determine the

effect of a 10 percent increase in scup

discards on the scup fishing mortality

rate. In fact, the estimate of a 10 percent

difference in scup discards should only

be used for a relative comparison of the

GRAs, and not to indicate an absolute

quantitative difference. This is because

there is high uncertainty regarding

annual scup discard estimates in the

available sea sampling database. The

best available scientific information

(SARC 31) estimated that scup discards

have approached or exceeded landings

during the past decade. Discard

mortality accounts for approximately 50

percent of overall scup mortality.

Therefore, a 10 percent increase in scup

discards would equate roughly to a 5

percent increase in overall mortality.

NMFS notes that GRAs were established

to address discard mortality, while the

scup TAL remains the primary measure

to control scup mortality associated

with landings.

Section 648.122(a)(2) and (b)(2) list

the small-mesh fisheries that are not

exempt from the restrictions of the

southern and northern GRAs,

respectively. Vessels fishing for or in

possession of all other species of fish

and shellfish (e.g., Atlantic sea scallops)

are exempt from the GRA restrictions.

The Council voted to exempt the

65820 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Atlantic mackerel small-mesh fishery

from the GRAs. This exemption was

also recommended by the Scup

Monitoring Committee. The best

available scientific information

indicates that the GRAs may have only

a minimal impact in reducing scup

discards in the Atlantic mackerel

fishery. A summary of an analysis of sea

sampling (observer) data for directed

mackerel trips (those trips for which the

total catch of all species was more than

50 percent mackerel) from 1989 - 2000

conducted by the Council indicates that

total scup catches in the mackerel

fishery for this time period are less than

1 percent of the total catch. The highest

percentage of scup bycatch for any

observed directed mackerel trip between

1989 and 2000 was 6.3 percent. This

proposed rule would exempt Atlantic

mackerel from the mesh-size

requirements in all of the GRAs.

Exempting the Atlantic mackerel fishery

from the proposed GRAs is expected to

result in an overall increase in annual

revenue for that fishery of $346,000, as

compared to mackerel not being exempt

from the proposed GRAs.

This proposed rule would also

exempt the Loligo squid fishery from the

proposed GRAs from November 1 -

December 31, 2000. The directed Loligo

squid fishery will be closed after

October 25, 2000. However, vessels

directing effort on other species, and in

possession of an open-access squid/

butterfish incidental permit, may catch

and land up to 2,500 lb (1,134 kg) of

Loligo after closure of the directed

fishery. Exempting Loligo from the GRA

restrictions would allow vessels to

possess Loligo caught incidentally.

Because any Loligo retained in the GRAs

would have been caught by vessels

directing effort on other species already

exempted from the GRAs because of low

scup bycatch rates, the Loligo exemption

would not increase scup bycatch. A

Loligo exemption has been

recommended by the Council in the

2001 specifications for the summer

flounder, scup, and black sea bass

fisheries, and will be considered along

with the other recommendations of the

Council. It is being proposed now in

order to be effective prior to the

implementation date of the 2001

specifications.

In conjunction with the modification

to the GRAs, NMFS is proposing to

modify the procedures for establishing

exemptions to the GRAs. The current

regulations specify that a fishery may be

exempted from the GRAs if the Regional

Administrator, in consultation with the

Council, determines that scup caught as

bycatch in small-mesh fisheries is less

than 10 percent, by weight, of the total

catch and that such exemption will not

jeopardize fishing mortality objectives

for scup. However, it has proven to be

very difficult to apply the existing

criteria in a meaningful way, because of

very limited data. Rather than having

the Regional Administrator make such a

determination, this proposed rule would

require that the Council make such a

recommendation to the Regional

Administrator and provide justification.

This would provide for greater public

participation and supporting rationale

for any exemption.

NMFS is also proposing to modify the

regulations pertaining to landings limits

specified for Atlantic mackerel, squid,

and butterfish, as recommended by the

Council at its August 2000 meeting. The

directed Loligo fishery is a limited

access fishery and vessel owners had to

demonstrate historical participation in

the fishery to receive a permit. Those

owners unable to obtain the limited

access fishery permit could obtain an

open access incidental category permit.

The landing limits specified for the

incidental category were intended to be

sufficient to allow landings of squid,

mackerel, and butterfish incidentally

caught while targeting other species.

However, the regulations presently

allow multiple landings in a single day.

When Loligo are available in quantity in

nearshore areas, as they were in the

summer of 2000, some incidental

category vessels are able to target Loligo

and make as many as five landings of

their incidental trip limit in a day. The

Loligo squid directed fishery is closed

when any period quota is achieved and

when 95 percent of the annual quota is

attained. However, an incidental trip

limit of 2,500 lb (1,134 kg) is allowed for

the remainder of the quota period or the

year after closure of the directed fishery.

It was not intended that the trip limit

support a multiple trip per day directed

fishery. Therefore, NMFS proposes to

limit the trip limit to possession or

landing during one calendar day to

maintain the character of the incidental

category and to prevent exceeding the

2000 quota. The Council recommended

redefining the incidental allowance as a

possession limit, rather than a landing

limit, to enhance at-sea enforcement.

Classification

NMFS prepared an EA incorporating

by reference the EA prepared by the

Council for the 2000 Specifications to

the Summer Flounder, Scup and Black

Sea Bass FMP, which discusses the

impact on the environment as a result

of this proposed rule. A copy of the EA

may be obtained from NMFS (see

ADDRESSES).

This proposed rule has been

determined to be not significant for

purposes of Executive Order 12866.

NMFS prepared an IRFA as part of the

RIR, that describes the impact this

proposed rule, if adopted, would have

on small entities. A summary of the

IRFA follows:

A description of the reasons why

action by the agency is being considered

and the objectives of the proposed rule

are explained in the preamble to this

rule and are not repeated here. This

action does not contain any collection of

information, reporting, or recordkeeping

requirements. It will not duplicate,

overlap, or conflict with any other

Federal rules. This action is taken under

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act

and regulations at 50 CFR part 648.

The proposed GRAs could impact any

vessel that would otherwise have fished

with small mesh in the affected area. In

the analysis of the 2000 specifications

for the summer flounder, scup and black

sea bass fisheries, the Council estimated

that a maximum of 172 vessels (based

on 1998 vessel trip report (VTR) data)

would be affected by any of the

proposed GRAs. This estimate was

based on the largest, most restrictive

GRAs considered by the Council.

Although that alternative was not

implemented, the upper limit of affected

vessels under any alternative, including

the alternative proposed in this

proposed rule, is 172. Because the

proposed GRAs are smaller than the

area analyzed by the Council, the

number of impacted vessels is likely to

be less than 172. However, it is not

possible to quantify how many vessels

actually would be impacted by the

smaller GRAs, as proposed.

Various levels of reductions in scup

discards and landings of small-mesh

fisheries are associated with each of the

GRA alternatives. The proposed GRAs

would reduce scup discards by 61

percent, based on sea sampling data

from January 1989 through May 2000. In

addition, landings of small-mesh

species from the proposed GRAs are

expected to be reduced as follows:

Herring - 3 percent, mackerel - 11

percent, black sea bass - 42 percent,

whiting - 5 percent, and Loligo - 22

percent.

Sea sampling data indicates that the

status quo GRAs would reduce scup

discards by 71 percent, and would

reduce landings of other species as

follows: Herring - 8 percent, mackerel -

30 percent, black sea bass - 50 percent,

whiting - 17 percent, and Loligo - 38

percent.

Because the proposed GRAs would

result in less of a reduction in landings

of other species than the status quo

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 65821

GRAs, it would result in less of a

reduction in revenues. The proposed

GRAs would reduce total annual

revenues by $7,177,000, whereas the

status quo GRAs would reduce total

annual revenues by $13,663,000.

Exempting mackerel and Loligo squid

from the GRA restrictions would further

decrease the reduction in total annual

revenues associated with the proposed

GRA to $6,825,000.

NMFS prepared a supplemental

analysis of the status quo GRAs for the

2000 specifications. The analysis

included an exemption for vessels

targeting herring and provided a more

specific analysis of the status quo GRAs.

NMFS’ analysis of the status quo GRAs

estimated that 141 vessels could

potentially be affected, with an

estimated overall annual reduction in

revenue of $10.5 million.

In summary, the proposed GRAs

result in a 10-percent increase in scup

discards as compared to the existing

GRAs, but reduce vessel revenues

obtained from species caught in other

small mesh fisheries by approximately

45 percent less than the existing GRAs.

Estimates regarding revenue

reductions do not consider the possible

redirection of fishing effort to other

open areas due to the GRAs. Therefore,

the revenue reduction estimates are

likely to be larger than what would

actually be experienced in the fishery,

since some vessels will likely fish in

areas outside the GRAs. However, the

extent of this redirection of effort cannot

be quantified.

Exempting mackerel from the GRAs

could potentially affect any vessel

possessing a mackerel permit.

According to NMFS permit file data,

about 1980 commercial vessels hold an

Atlantic mackerel permit. Eleven

percent of mackerel landings (1989 -

2000), valued at $346,000 (1998 prices),

were derived from the area

encompassed by the proposed GRA.

Presumably, the economic benefits of

these landings would be realized if the

small-mesh mackerel fishery were

exempted from the GRA restrictions.

The alternative (i.e., not exempting

mackerel) would prevent fishermen

from obtaining such benefits.

The Loligo exemption is expected to

produce positive economic impacts on

permitted vessels. Although the directed

Loligo squid fishery will be closed after

October 25, 2000, vessels fishing in the

GRAs will be able to land up to 2,500

lb (1,134 kg) per trip. The alternative

(i.e., not exempting Loligo) would

maintain the status quo and prevent

fishing vessels from landing Loligo from

the GRAs.

VTR data are not yet available to

verify the exact number of vessels

making multiple landings of squid,

mackerel and butterfish in a single day.

However, the best available information

indicates that a modification of the

requirements of the landing limits in the

Atlantic mackerel, squid, and butterfish

fisheries is expected to impact

approximately 60 vessels that have

reportedly made multiple landings, out

of a total of 2,737 distinct vessels

holding one or more permits in these

fisheries.

Most reported multiple daily landings

of Loligo this year occurred off Long

Island, NY, during late summer,

particularly in the vicinity of

Shinnecock Inlet. Because this activity

has only begun recently, it is difficult to

estimate the extent of the practice of

making multiple landings in a single

day. Therefore, it is difficult to estimate

exactly how many trips would be lost as

a result of a regulatory change

prohibiting the activity, so, an overall

assessment of economic impacts is not

possible. While it is likely that the

specification of one landing per

calendar day would affect smaller

vessels operating closer to shore to a

greater degree than larger offshore

vessels, some larger vessels from Rhode

Island and New Jersey would also be

impacted, as they reportedly engaged in

the activity as well. Assuming an

average ex-vessel price of $ 0.50/lb

($1.10/kg), a reduction in revenues per

vessel ranging from $1,250.00/day (one

foregone landing of 2,500 lb (1,134 kg))

- $5000.00/day (four foregone landings

of 2,500 lb (1,134 kg)) could occur for

certain vessels, primarily during late

summer when Loligo are available in

nearshore areas. The prohibition of

multiple daily landings under the trip

limit would reduce the occurrence of

quota overages, which result in quota

deductions in subsequent quota periods.

Short-term economic losses as a result

of this measure could be offset by quota

that would be available in subsequent

periods. There is information that Loligo

prices often increase in the autumn and

winter seasons, as compared to the

summer season when most multiple

daily landings occur. If higher autumn

and winter prices do occur and landings

are redirected from the summer season

to autumn and winter because of this

proposed measure, then there could be

an overall revenue increase. However,

some of the approximately 60 vessels

that made multiple daily Loligo landings

during the summer may not be the same

vessels that benefit from increased

quotas in the autumn, due to limited

range of smaller vessels, inclement

weather, or employment in other

fisheries. So, foregone Loligo catches as

a result of this proposed measure may

not always be recouped in subsequent

quota periods by the same vessels.

Using information from three

representative vessels targeting Loligo

during the months of July and August,

the proposed measure could reduce

annual revenues for these vessels by as

much as 16 percent. However, since

these vessels may land one trip of 2,500

lb per day under the proposed measure,

total reduction in annual revenue is

likely to be less than the estimated

maximum of 16 percent. These data

suggest that Loligo is a substantial

proportion of a total annual revenues for

the affected vessels even in years when

multiple trips were not made. However,

the amount a vessel depends upon

Loligo fishing from year to year varies

depending upon the availability of the

resource. NMFS does not anticipate any

impacts on vessels landing butterfish or

mackerel as a result of the change to one

landing per day, because there have

been no reports of these vessels making

multiple landings per day of these

species.

The proposal to modify exemption

criteria and procedures is an

administrative change that is not likely

to result in any economic impacts.

A copy of this analysis is available

from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). The

President has directed Federal agencies

to use plain language in their

communications with the public,

including regulations. To comply with

this directive, we seek public comment

on any ambiguity or unnecessary

complexity arising from the language

used in this proposed rule. Such

comments should be sent to the

Regional Administrator, Northeast

Region (see ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 26, 2000.

William T. Hogarth

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. In § 648.14, paragraph (p)(4) is

removed and reserved and paragraphs

65822 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

(a)(73), (a)(122), (a)(123), and (p)(3) are

revised to read as follows:

§ 648.14 Prohibitions.

(a) * * *

(73) Take, retain, possess, or land

more mackerel, squid or butterfish than

specified under a notification issued

under § 648.22.

(122) Effective January 1, 2000, fish

for, possess or land Loligo squid, silver

hake, or black sea bass in or from the

areas, and during the time periods,

described in § 648.122(a), (b), or (c)

while in possession of midwater trawl

or other trawl nets or netting that do not

meet the minimum mesh restrictions or

that are modified, obstructed or

constricted, if subject to the minimum

mesh requirements specified in §

648.122 and § 648.123(a), unless the

nets or netting are stowed in accordance

with § 648.23(b).

(123) Effective through December 31,

2000, fish for, possess or land silver

hake or black sea bass in or from the

areas, and during the time periods,

described in § 648.122(a), (b), or (c)

while in possession of midwater trawl

or other trawl nets or netting that do not

meet the minimum mesh restrictions or

that are modified, obstructed or

constricted, if subject to the minimum

mesh requirements specified in §

648.122 and § 648.123(a), unless the

nets or netting are stowed in accordance

with § 648.23(b).

(p) * * *

(3) Take, retain, possess, or land

mackerel, squid or butterfish in excess

of a possession allowance specified

under § 648.22.

3. In § 648.22, paragraph (c) is revised

to read as follows:

§ 648.22 Closure of the fishery.

(c) Incidental catches. During the

closure of the directed fishery for

mackerel, the possession limit for

mackerel is 10 percent by weight of the

total amount of fish on board. During a

period of closure of the directed fishery

for Loligo, Illex, or butterfish, the

possession limit for Loligo and

butterfish is 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) each, and

the possession limit for Illex is 5,000 lb

(2.27 mt). Vessels may not land more

than these limits during any single

calendar day, which is defined as the

24-hour period beginning at 0001 hours

and ending at 2400 hours.

4. In § 648.122, paragraph (e) is

redesignated as (f); and paragraphs (a),

(b), (c), and (d) are revised, and a new

paragraph (e) is added as follows:

§ 648.122 Season and area restrictions.

(a) Southern Gear Restricted Area. (1)

From January 1 through April 30, all

trawl vessels in the Southern Gear

Restricted Area that fish for or possess

non-exempt species as specified in

paragraph (a)(2) of this section, must

fish with nets that have a minimum

mesh size of 4.5 inches (11.43 cm)

diamond mesh, applied throughout the

codend for at least 75 continuous

meshes forward of the terminus of the

net, or for codends with fewer than 75

meshes, the minimum-mesh-size

codend must be a minimum of one-third

of the net, measured from the terminus

of the codend to the head rope,

excluding any turtle excluder device

extension, unless otherwise specified in

this section. The Southern Gear

Restricted Area is an area bounded by

straight lines connecting the following

points in the order stated (copies of a

chart depicting the area are available

from the Regional Administrator upon

request):

SOUTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED

AREA

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

SGA1 39°00’ 72°50’

SGA2 39°11’ 72°58’

SGA3 38°00’ 74°05’

SGA4 38°00’ 73°57’

SGA1 39°00’ 72°50’

(2) Non-exempt species. Unless

otherwise specified in paragraph (d) of

this section, the restrictions specified in

paragraph (a)(1) of this section apply to

vessels in the Southern Gear Restricted

Area that are fishing for or in possession

of the following non-exempt species:

Black sea bass, Loligo squid, and silver

hake (whiting). Vessels fishing for or in

possession of all other species of fish

and shellfish are exempt from these

restrictions.

(b) Northern Gear Restricted Area I.

(1) From November 1 through December

31, all trawl vessels in the Northern

Gear Restricted Area I that fish for or

possess non-exempt species as specified

in paragraph (b)(2) of this section must

fish with nets that have a minimum

mesh size of 4.5 inches (11.43 cm)

diamond mesh, applied throughout the

codend for at least 75 continuous

meshes forward of the terminus of the

net, or for codends with fewer than 75

meshes, the minimum-mesh-size

codend must be a minimum of one-third

of the net, measured from the terminus

of the codend to the head rope,

excluding any turtle excluder device

extension, unless otherwise specified in

this section. The Northern Gear

Restricted Area I is an area bounded by

straight lines connecting the following

points in the order stated (copies of a

chart depicting the area are available

from the Regional Administrator upon

request):

NORTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED

AREA I

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

NGA1 41°00’ 71°00’

NGA2 41°00’ 71°30’

NGA3 40°00’ 72°40’

NGA4 40°00’ 72°05’

NGA1 41°00’ 71°00’

(2) Non-exempt species. Unless

otherwise specified in paragraphs (b)(3)

and (d) of this section, the restrictions

specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this

section apply to vessels in the Northern

Gear Restricted Area I that are fishing

for, or in possession of, the following

non-exempt species: Black sea bass,

Loligo squid, and silver hake (whiting).

Vessels fishing for or in possession of all

other species of fish and shellfish are

exempt from these restrictions.

(3) Temporarily Exempted Species.

From November 1, 2000 - December 31,

2000, the restrictions specified in

paragraph (b)(1) of this section do not

apply to vessels in the Northern Gear

Restricted Area I that are fishing for, or

in possession of Loligo squid.

(c) Northern Gear Restricted Area II.

(1) From December 1 through January

31, all trawl vessels in the Northern

Gear Restricted Area II that fish for or

possess non-exempt species as specified

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section must

fish with nets that have a minimum

mesh size of 4.5 inches (11.43 cm)

diamond mesh, applied throughout the

codend for at least 75 continuous

meshes forward of the terminus of the

net, or for codends with fewer than 75

meshes, the minimum-mesh-size

codend must be a minimum of one-third

of the net, measured from the terminus

of the codend to the head rope,

excluding any turtle excluder device

extension, unless otherwise specified in

this section. The Northern Gear

Restricted Area II is an area bounded by

straight lines connecting the following

points in the order stated (copies of a

chart depicting the area are available

from the Regional Administrator upon

request):

NORTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED

AREA I I

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

NGA6 40°00’ 71°40’

NGA7 40°00’ 72°10’

NGA8 39°00’ 73°09’

NGA9 39°00’ 72°50’

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 65823

NORTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED

AREA I I—Continued

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

NGA6 40°00’ 71°40’

(2) Non-exempt species. Unless

otherwise specified in paragraphs (c)(3)

and (d) of this section, the restrictions

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this

section apply to vessels in the Northern

Gear Restricted Area II that are fishing

for, or in possession of, the following

non-exempt species: Black sea bass,

Loligo squid, and silver hake (whiting).

Vessels fishing for or in possession of all

other species of fish and shellfish are

exempt from these restrictions.

(3) Temporarily Exempted Species.

From December 1, 2000 - December 31,

2000, the restrictions specified in

paragraph (c)(1) of this section do not

apply to vessels in the Northern Gear

Restricted Area II that are fishing for, or

in possession of Loligo squid.

(d) Transiting. Vessels that are subject

to the provisions of the Southern and

Northern GRAs, as specified in

paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of this

section, respectively, may transit these

areas provided that trawl net codends

on board of mesh size less than that

specified in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c)

of this section are not available for

immediate use and are stowed in

accordance with the provisions of §

648.23(b).

(e) Addition or deletion of

exemptions. The MAFMC may

recommend to the Regional

Administrator, through the framework

procedure specified in § 648.108(a),

additions or deletions to exemptions for

fisheries other than scup. A fishery may

be restricted or exempted by area, gear,

season, or other means determined to be

appropriate to reduce bycatch of scup.

[FR Doc. 00–28053 Filed 11–01–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE: 3510–22–S