Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 76601

Emergency Medical Services and Evaluation

(XXXX)

The Contractor shall be responsible for

making all arrangements for emergency

medical services and evacuation, if required,

for its employees while performing work

under this contract outside the United States

or in remote locations in the United States.

If necessary to deal with certain emergencies,

the Contractor may request the Government

to provide medical or evacuation services. If

the Government provides such services, the

Contractor shall reimburse the Government

for the costs incurred.

(End of clause)

[FR Doc. 00–31102 Filed 12–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 635

[Docket No. 000323080-0329-02; I.D.

031500A]

RIN 0648-AN97

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species

(HMS); Atlantic Tunas Reporting,

Fishery Allocations and Regulatory

Adjustments

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; public hearings;

request for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to amend the

regulations governing the Atlantic HMS

fisheries to require mandatory dealer

reporting of all purchases of Atlantic

bigeye, albacore, yellowfin, and skipjack

(BAYS) tunas; adjust the north-south

dividing line for the Atlantic bluefin

tuna (BFT) Angling category

subdivisions; adjust associated subquota

percentages allocated to each area;

modify regulatory text to clarify the

requirement that imports, exports, and

re-exports of bluefin tuna (both Atlantic

and Pacific subspecies) must be

accompanied by a Bluefin Tuna

Statistical Document (BSD); and modify

regulatory text to facilitate enforcement

of, and compliance with, the

regulations. The proposed regulatory

amendment is necessary to comply with

the United States’ obligations under the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), the Atlantic

Tunas Convention Act (ATCA), and the

Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic

Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks (HMS

FMP). NMFS will hold public hearings

to receive comments from fishery

participants and other interested parties

regarding the proposed regulatory

amendment.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before January 30, 2001.

The public hearing dates are:

1. December 11, 2000, 7–9 p.m.,

Ocean City, MD.

2. December 12, 2000, 7–9 p.m., Cape

May, NJ.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the

proposed regulatory amendment should

be sent to Christopher Rogers, Acting

Chief, Highly Migratory Species

Management Division, Office of

Sustainable Fisheries (F/SF1), NMFS,

1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,

MD 20910-3282. Comments also may be

sent via facsimile (fax) to (301) 713-

1917. Comments will not be accepted if

submitted via e-mail or the Internet.

Comments regarding the collection of

information requirements contained in

this proposed rule should be sent to the

above address and to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB), Washington, DC, 20503

(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).

The public hearing locations are:

1. Cape May—The Inn of Cape May,

7 Ocean St, Cape May, NJ 08204.

2. Ocean City—Ocean City Rec &

Parks Dept., 200–125th Street, Ocean

City, MD 21842.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pat

Scida, (978) 281–9208.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Atlantic

tunas are managed under the dual

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act

and ATCA. ATCA authorizes the

Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to

implement binding recommendations of

the International Commission for the

Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT).

The authority to issue regulations under

the Magnuson-Stevens Act and ATCA

has been delegated from the Secretary to

the Assistant Administrator for

Fisheries, NOAA (AA).

BAYS Dealer Reporting

On May 28, 1999, NMFS published in

the Federal Register (64 FR 29090) final

regulations implementing the HMS FMP

that was adopted and made available to

the public in April 1999. The

implementing regulations require

dealers that receive Atlantic swordfish

and Atlantic sharks from U.S. vessels to

report to NMFS all Atlantic tunas

(including BAYS) received from U.S.

vessels (50 CFR 635.5(b)(1)(i)). The

regulations require dealers to report

BAYS tunas only when received

together with sharks and swordfish. As

BAYS tunas are usually landed and sold

along with other species, and because

many dealers voluntarily report their

BAYS purchases (dealers are often

permitted in several fisheries and record

all purchases on a consolidated HMS

reporting form), the lack of mandatory

reporting of BAYS tunas has not likely

resulted in significant underreporting.

Recently, however, several new dealers

in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto

Rico have obtained dealer permits, and

most of these dealers are handling

BAYS tunas only. In order to collect

data from these new dealers and to

ensure that U.S. data on BAYS tunas are

complete, NMFS needs to require that

all purchases of BAYS tunas be

reported, regardless of whether other

regulated HMS are purchased. NMFS,

therefore, proposes to amend the HMS

regulations to require dealers to report

all purchases of BAYS tunas, regardless

of whether they also purchase Atlantic

sharks or swordfish. Similar to current

reporting regulations for sharks and

swordfish, NMFS proposes to require

dealers to submit negative reports for

reporting periods in which they do not

purchase and/or receive BAYS tunas.

BFT Angling Category Geographical

Division

In response to quota reductions in

1992, two management areas were

created for the BFT Angling category

fishery. The north-south division line is

located at 38°47’ N. latitude (Delaware

Bay). The geographic split was designed

to enable NMFS to manage the early

season (June/July off the Virginia to

Delaware coasts) and late season

(August/September off the New Jersey to

Massachusetts coasts) to manage BFT

fisheries under separate quotas,

corresponding with the summer feeding

migration of school, large school, and

small medium BFT.

For the last several BFT fishing

seasons, NMFS has received comments

that an adjustment to the Angling

category BFT north-south division line

is warranted. Specifically, vessels

fishing for BFT from ports in southern

New Jersey, which is in the northern

area, tend to utilize fishing areas located

in the southern area (i.e., offshore of

Ocean City, Maryland). This pattern of

activity raises two concerns with respect

to the dividing line for the southern and

northern areas. First, when the southern

and northern areas are both open, a

significant number of fish caught in the

southern area are landed in the northern

area and counted against the applicable

northern area subquotas. Second, when

the southern area is closed, vessels from

southern New Jersey are effectively

excluded from the school BFT fishery

because the fish are generally

76602 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

distributed too far north to

accommodate single-day trips.

Because of differing opinions on

where a new dividing line should be

placed and on the associated

reallocation of subquotas, NMFS

published an Advance Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) in the

Federal Register on April 10, 2000 (65

FR 18960), requesting public comments

regarding the geographical division of

the BFT Angling category fishery and

whether an adjustment of the northsouth division line and an associated

adjustment of the BFT subquota

percentages allocated to each area is

warranted.

During the comment period, NMFS

received 13 comments on the ANPR,

and NMFS staff attended an industrysponsored meeting regarding the ANPR

in Ocean City, MD. The comments

received as well as the

recommendations from the meeting

indicate an industry preference for

adjustment of the north-south dividing

line to Ocean City, NJ, at 39o18’ N. lat.,

just north of Great Egg Inlet. Moving the

line to this location would effectively

isolate the recreational fisheries, since

virtually all vessels fishing for BFT from

Ocean City, NJ, and areas south fish in

the southern, early season fishery (as

suggested to NMFS in previous public

comments). Adjustment of the line may

reduce confusion regarding fishing areas

and catch limits and may prevent

vessels from being excluded from

participating in the fishery, particularly

when seasonal retention limits are

different in the two areas. Thus, NMFS

proposes to move the line to this new

location and has preliminarily

determined that this proposed action

would ensure reasonable fishing

opportunities in all geographic areas

without risking overharvest of the

Angling category quota.

Angling Category BFT Subquotas

Public comment on an appropriate

subdivision of Angling category quota

between the two areas was less

consistent than on the location of the

dividing line. Several comments

supported the status quo, whereas other

comments suggested a transfer of a

small amount of quota (i.e., 2 to 5 metric

tons (mt)) from the north to south.

However, most comments suggested

switching the current allocation

percentage from 52.8 percent in the

north and 47.2 percent in the south to

47.2 percent to the north and 52.8

percent to the south. Comments

generally supported the notion that any

change be fair and equitable based on

the geographic extent of the adjustment

to the dividing line.

However, the geographic distance

involved in the movement of the

dividing line is slight (31 nautical

miles), and at this fine spatial

resolution, data are insufficient to

determine the precise changes in

landings for the respective areas.

Nevertheless, as a consequence of

moving the dividing line, additional

catch is now expected to be applied

against the southern area (with a

corresponding decrease in the north),

and some change in quota allocation is

appropriate between these two areas.

Therefore, NMFS proposes to reverse

the Angling category subquota

allocations to 47.2 percent for the north

and 52.8 percent for the south. Thus, as

an example, if the total Angling category

quota for school-size BFT were 100 mt,

the reallocation from the north to the

south would be approximately 5.6 mt.

Public comment is specifically

requested on the proposed reallocation

of quota, as well as any suggestions for

alternative quota reallocations.

BSD Requirements

On March 17, 1995, NMFS published

final regulations requiring an

appropriately completed, approved BSD

as a condition for import, export, or reexport of bluefin tuna into or from the

United States (60 FR 14381). Because

the Atlantic and Pacific stocks of

northern bluefin tuna are of the same

species subject to the ICCAT

recommendations, implementation of,

and compliance with, the ICCAT BSD

program also applies to Pacific bluefin

tuna. Implementing regulations for the

HMS FMP, published on May 28, 1999

(64 FR 29090), were not intended to

alter the applicability of the BSD

regulations, but due to the definitions

and acronyms used to define Atlantic

bluefin tuna (i.e., BFT) and all species

of northern bluefin tuna (i.e., bluefin

tuna), the regulatory text requires

clarification. The proposed revision

would clarify that the BSD

requirements, consistent with ICCAT

recommendations, apply to all northern

bluefin tuna (i.e., northern bluefin tuna

from both the Atlantic and Pacific

oceans), not just BFT.

Facilitation of Enforcement and

Compliance

Tagging and Offloading of BFT

Current regulations specify that large

medium and giant BFT caught and

retained by vessels in a commercial

Atlantic tunas vessel permit category

must be tagged upon offloading.

Numerous vessels that are not

permanently docked at any particular

port, but that are brought to a launch

site by a trailer, are used to fish for BFT

under the General category quota.

Current regulations can be interpreted to

allow vessels to be removed from the

water and trailered away from the

landing port, with an untagged BFT

inside the vessel. This proposed rule

would amend the regulations to require

that, for trailered vessels, BFT be tagged

immediately upon the vessel being

removed from the water.

Definition of Pelagic Longline Gear

The regulatory text for the final rule

implementing the DeSoto Canyon, east

Florida coast, and Charleston Bump

closures (65 FR 47214, August 1, 2000)

defines pelagic longline gear in a

manner designed to avoid applying the

vessel monitoring system requirement

and fishing restrictions to vessels

fishing with bottom longline gear. The

regulations define pelagic longline gear

as a longline that is suspended by floats

in the water column and that is not

fixed to or in contact with the ocean

bottom. It consists of five components:

a power-operated longline hauler, a

mainline, high-flyers, floats capable of

supporting the length of the mainline,

and leaders (gangions) with hooks.

Those regulations further state that the

removal of any one of these components

from a vessel constitutes the removal of

pelagic longline gear. Vessel operators

removing one or all of the listed

components would be eligible to fish in

the closed areas and would not be

required to operate a VMS while at sea.

Since publication of the time and area

requirements, NMFS has become aware

that it is possible to use a longline that

is suspended by floats without the use

of high-flyers. Fishing vessels could

potentially utilize the remaining

components of pelagic longline gear in

the areas when closed to target HMS

with pelagic longlines in the closed

areas, thereby undermining the

objective of bycatch reduction and

reducing the benefits of the closures.

Removal of the term ‘‘high-flyer’’ from

the list of components constituting

pelagic longline gear would avoid this

potential problem. This measure would

have no measurable impact on the

environment or fishermen, since the

intent of the closures is to prohibit all

pelagic longline fishing by vessels with

HMS fishing permits when the areas are

closed. The environmental, economic,

and social impacts associated with the

closures were previously considered

and are discussed in detail in the HMS

FMP and Final Supplemental

Environmental Impact Statement issued

for the August 1, 2000, final rule.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 76603

Swordfish Minimum Size

In 1991, ICCAT adopted a prohibition

on the taking and landing of swordfish,

in the entire Atlantic Ocean, weighing

less than 25 kg (55 lbs) or measuring

less than 125 cm (approximately 50

inches) Lower Jaw Fork Length (LJFL),

with a tolerance of 15 percent

undersized fish. In 1996, the United

States adopted an alternative minimum

size of 119 cm (47 inches) LJFL, with no

tolerance for undersized fish in order to

better enforce the regulation and protect

small swordfish. In recent regulations,

NMFS converted the minimum size to a

cleithrum to keel measurement which

relates to the manner in which

commercially-landed swordfish are

dressed for resale (61 FR 27304, May 31,

1996).

The recreational swordfish fishery is

re-emerging, particularly on the East

Coast of Florida, and NMFS seeks to

provide recreational fishermen with a

size limit that is easy to estimate while

the fish is still in the water, thereby

facilitating release of undersized

swordfish. Therefore, NMFS proposes to

modify the existing regulations to also

specify the existing size limit in terms

of LJFL. This change to the regulations

would specify that the LJFL of a

retained swordfish must be no less than

119 cm or 47 inches. The specification

of the minimum size in this manner

would facilitate compliance by

recreational fishermen, while allowing

for retention of legal-sized swordfish in

the fishery.

Collection of Scientific or Management

Information

In addition to the measures here, this

proposed rule would restore a

prohibition on assaulting or impeding

NMFS employees or contractors

collecting scientific or management

information on Atlantic HMS that was

inadvertently omitted when the HMS

regulations were consolidated under 50

CFR part 635 (64 FR 29090, May 28,

1999).

Public Hearings and Special

Accommodations

Participants at the public hearings are

expected to conduct themselves

appropriately. At the beginning of each

public hearing, a NMFS representative

will explain the ground rules (i.e.,

alcohol is prohibited from the hearing

room; attendees will be called to give

their comments in the order in which

they registered to speak; each attendee

will have an equal amount of time to

speak; attendees should not interrupt

one another). The NMFS representative

will attempt to structure the hearing so

that all attending members of the public

will be able to comment, if they so

choose, regardless of the controversial

nature of the subject(s). Attendees are

expected to respect the ground rules,

and, if they do not, they will be asked

to leave the hearing.

The public hearing sites are

physically accessible to people with

disabilities. Requests for sign language

interpretation or other auxiliary aids

should be directed to Pat Scida (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7

days prior to the hearing.

After reviewing the public comments

and additional information or data that

may be available, NMFS will, if

appropriate, make final determinations

regarding the consistency of these

proposed measures with the MagnusonStevens Act and its national standards,

ATCA, the objectives of the HMS FMP,

and other applicable law.

Classification

This proposed regulatory amendment

is published under the authority of the

Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801

et seq., and ATCA, 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.

Preliminarily, the AA has determined

that the regulations contained in the

proposed regulatory amendment are

consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens

Act, ATCA, and the HMS FMP.

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of

the Department of Commerce has

certified to the Chief Counsel for

Advocacy of the Small Business

Administration that this proposed

regulatory amendment, if implemented,

would not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities as follows:

The proposed regulatory amendment

would amend the highly migratory species

regulations to require mandatory dealer

reporting of all purchases of BAYS tunas,

change the north/south dividing line (and

quota distribution) for the Angling category

BFT fishery, clarify regulations regarding

BSD reporting requirements, and modify

regulatory text to facilitate enforcement of,

and compliance with, the regulations.

Because the proposed regulations would

only: (1) modify and/or clarify reporting

requirements; (2) require permitted Atlantic

tuna dealers to submit reports at estimated

annual burden of less then 2 hours per year;

(3) implement a minor change to the

geographic division of the BFT Angling

category division line (by approximately 30

nautical miles) and subquota allocation (by

less than 10 mt); and (4) modify regulations

to facilitate enforcement of, and compliance

with, regulations, there is no anticipated

change in revenues that would accrue to

small businesses in the fishery overall, and

the amendment would not alter current

fishing practices in any significant way.

Because of this certification, an Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was not

prepared.

This proposed regulatory amendment

has been determined to be not

significant for purposes of Executive

Order 12866.

This proposed regulatory amendment

would not significantly change the

operations of any HMS fishery. Since

the proposed regulatory amendment

would modify reporting requirements

and would not alter fishing practices, it

is not expected to increase endangered

species or marine mammal interaction

rates.

NMFS reinitiated formal consultation

for all Atlantic HMS commercial

fisheries on November 19, 1999, under

section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

NMFS issued a Biological Opinion (BO)

on June 30, 2000, and concluded that

the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery for

tunas, swordfish, and sharks is likely to

jeopardize the continued existence of

leatherback and loggerhead sea turtles,

and may adversely affect, but is not

likely to jeopardize, the continued

existence of other listed and protected

species. Additionally, NMFS concluded

that other components of the Atlantic

tunas fisheries (purse seine, handgear,

traps) may adversely affect, but are not

likely to jeopardize, the continued

existence of listed and protected

species. The BO determined reasonable

and prudent alternatives to avoid

jeopardizing the continued existence of

any protected species and incorporated

an incidental take statement listing

reasonable and prudent measures and

terms and conditions to implement

those measures that would serve to

reduce takes.

Since the June 30, 2000, BO was

issued, NMFS has concluded that

further analyses of observer data and

additional population modeling of

loggerhead sea turtles are needed to

determine more precisely the impact of

the pelagic longline fishery on sea

turtles. Consequently, NMFS has reinitiated consultation. NMFS anticipates

completing the consultation and issuing

a new BO in early 2001. Until the

consultation is completed and

appropriate long-term measures can be

determined, NMFS has implemented

emergency measures in the short-term to

reduce sea turtle bycatch and bycatch

mortality in the pelagic longline fishery.

The regulations proposed in this

document, if implemented, would not

likely increase takes of listed species

and would not result in any irreversible

and irretrievable commitment of

resources that would have the effect of

foreclosing the formulation or

implementation of any reasonable and

prudent alternative measures to reduce

adverse impacts on protected resources,

as they would only modify reporting

76604 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

requirements and would not alter

fishing practices.

The area affected by this proposed

action has been identified as essential

fish habitat (EFH) for species managed

by the New England Fishery

Management Council, the Mid-Atlantic

Fishery Management Council, the South

Atlantic Fishery Management Council,

the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management

Council, the Caribbean Fishery

Management Council, and the HMS

Management Division of NMFS. It is not

anticipated that this action will have

any adverse impacts on EFH, and,

therefore, no consultation is required.

Notwithstanding any other provision

of the law, no person is required to

respond to, nor shall any person be

subject to, a penalty for failure to

comply with, a collection of information

subject to the requirements of the PRA,

unless that collection of information

displays a currently valid OMB Control

Number.

This proposed rule contains a new

collection-of-information requirement

and restates several existing reporting

requirements subject to review and

approval by the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork

Reduction Act (PRA). The new

requirement has been submitted to OMB

for approval as a revision to a collection

currently approved under OMB control

number 0648-0013.

The new requirement that has been

submitted to OMB for approval is an

extension of dealer reporting

requirements to Atlantic tunas, with an

estimated public reporting burden of 12

minutes per response for dealers who

would otherwise have been required to

file a negative report (if permitted for

swordfish or shark), 15 minutes for

other dealers reporting purchases, and 3

minutes for other dealers to file.

This proposed rule also restates a

number of collection-of-information

requirements that have been approved

by OMB. These requirements and their

OMB control numbers and estimated

response times are: swordfish and shark

dealer reports (15 minutes; 0648-0013);

negative reports by swordfish and shark

dealers (3 minutes; 0648-0013);

swordfish import dealer reports (15

minutes; 0648-0363) and swordfish

certificates of eligibility (1 hour; 0648-

0363); bluefin tuna landing reports (2

minutes; 0648-0239); Atlantic tuna biweekly dealer report (15 minutes; 0648-

0239); affixing tags to bluefin tunas and

transferring tag numbers to documents

(10 minutes; 0648-0239).

All estimates include the time for

reviewing instructions, searching

existing data sources, gathering and

maintaining the data needed, and

completing and reviewing the collection

of information. Public comment is

sought regarding: (1) the need for the

proposed collection of information for

the proper performance of the functions

of the agency, including the practical

utility of the information; (2) the

accuracy of the burden estimate; (3)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information,

including through the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology. Send comments

on these or any other aspects of the

collection of information to NMFS and

to OMB (see ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Treaties.

Dated: November 30, 2000.

William T. Hogarth,

Deputy Assistant Administration for

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 50 CFR part 635 is proposed

to be amended as follows:

PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY

MIGRATORY SPECIES

1. The authority citation for part 635

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C.

1801 et seq.

2. In § 635.5, paragraphs (b)(1)(i),

(b)(1)(ii), (b)(1)(iii),(b)(2)(i),(b)(2)(ii)(A)

and (b)(2)(ii)(B) are revised to read as

follows:

§ 635.5 Recordkeeping and reporting.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) Atlantic HMS. (i) Dealers that

receive Atlantic tunas, Atlantic

swordfish, and Atlantic sharks from

U.S. vessels must report all such species

received on forms available from NMFS.

(ii) Dealers that import bluefin tuna or

swordfish must report all such species

imported on forms available from

NMFS.

(iii) Reports of Atlantic tunas, Atlantic

swordfish, and Atlantic sharks received

by dealers from U.S. vessels, or reports

of bluefin tuna and swordfish imported,

on the first through the 15th of each

month, must be postmarked not later

than the 25th of that month. Reports of

such fish received or imported on the

16th through the last day of each month

must be postmarked not later than the

10th of the following month. For

swordfish imports, a dealer must attach

a copy of each certificate of eligibility to

the report required under paragraph

(b)(1)(ii) of this section. If a dealer

issued an Atlantic tunas, swordfish or

sharks dealer permit under § 635.4 has

not received any Atlantic HMS from

U.S. vessels during a reporting period as

specified in this section, he or she must

still submit the report required under

paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section stating

that no Atlantic HMS were received.

This negative report must be

postmarked for the applicable reporting

period as specified in this section.

* * * * *

(2) Requirements for bluefin tuna--(i)

Dealer reports--(A) Landing reports.

Each dealer issued an Atlantic tunas

permit under § 635.4 must submit a

completed landing report on a form

available from NMFS for each BFT

received from a U.S. fishing vessel.

Such report must be submitted by

electronic facsimile (fax) to a number

designated by NMFS not later than 24

hours after receipt of the BFT. The

landing report must indicate the name

and permit number of the vessel that

landed the BFT and must be signed by

the permitted vessel’s owner or operator

immediately upon transfer of the BFT.

The dealer must inspect the vessel’s

permit to verify that the required vessel

name and vessel permit number as

listed on the permit are correctly

recorded on the landing report.

(B) Biweekly reports. Each dealer

issued an Atlantic tunas permit under

§ 635.4 must submit a bi-weekly report

on forms supplied by NMFS for BFT

received from U.S. vessels and for

imports of bluefin tuna. For BFT

received from U.S. vessels and for

bluefin tuna imported on the first

through the 15th of each month, the

dealer must submit the bi-weekly report

forms to NMFS postmarked not later

than the 25th of that month. Reports of

BFT received and bluefin tuna imported

on the 16th through the last day of each

month must be postmarked not later

than the 10th of the following month.

(ii) * * *

(A) Affixing dealer tags. A dealer or a

dealer’s agent must affix a dealer tag to

each BFT purchased or received from a

U.S. vessel immediately upon offloading

the BFT. If a vessel is placed on a trailer,

the dealer or dealer’s agent must affix

the dealer tag to the BFT immediately

upon the vessel being removed from the

water. The dealer tag must be affixed to

the BFT between the fifth dorsal finlet

and the caudal keel.

(B) Removal of dealer tags. A dealer

tag affixed to any BFT under paragraph

(b)(2)(ii)(A) of this section or a BSD tag

affixed to an imported bluefin tuna must

remain on the fish until it is cut into

portions. If the bluefin tuna or bluefin

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 76605

tuna parts subsequently are packaged

for transport for domestic commercial

use or for export, the number of the

dealer tag or the BSD tag must be

written legibly and indelibly on the

outside of any package containing the

tuna. Such tag number also must be

recorded on any document

accompanying the shipment of bluefin

tuna for commercial use or export.

* * * * *

3. In § 635.20, in paragraph (f)(1), the

first two sentences are revised to read as

follows:

§ 635.20 Size limits.

* * * * *

(f) Swordfish. (1) No person shall

take, retain, or possess a north or south

Atlantic swordfish taken from its

management unit that is less than 29

inches (73 cm), CK, 47 inches (119 cm),

LJFL, or 33 lb (15 kg) dressed weight. A

swordfish that is damaged by shark bites

may be retained only if the remainder of

the carcass is at least 29 inches (73 cm)

CK, 47 inches (119 cm), LJFL, or 33 lb

(15 kg) dw. * * *

* * * * *

4. In § 635.21, in paragraph (c)

introductory text, the first sentence is

revised to read as follows:

§ 635.21 Gear operation and deployment

restrictions.

(c) Pelagic longlines. For purposes of

this part, a vessel is considered to have

pelagic longline gear on board when a

power-operated longline hauler, a

mainline, floats capable of supporting

the mainline, and leaders (gangions)

with hooks are on board. * * *

* * * * *

5. In § 635.27, paragraphs (a)(2)(i),

(a)(2)(ii), and (a)(2)(iii) are revised to

read as follows:

§ 635.27 Quotas.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) Under paragraph (a)(7)(ii) of this

section, 52.8 percent of the school BFT

Angling category landings quota, minus

the school BFT quota held in reserve,

may be caught, retained, possessed, or

landed south of 39°18’ N. lat.;

(ii) An amount equal to 52.8 percent

of the large school/small medium BFT

Angling category quota may be caught,

retained, possessed, or landed south of

39°18’ N. lat.;

(iii) An amount equal to 66.7 percent

of the large medium and giant BFT

Angling category quota may be caught,

retained, possessed, or landed south of

39°18’ N. lat.

* * * * *

6. In the following sections, remove

the word ‘‘tuna’’, each time it appears,

and add in its place the words ‘‘bluefin

tuna’’.

§ 635.42 [Amended]

a. Section 635.42, paragraphs (a)(1),

(a)(2), (a)(3), and (b)(3).

§ 635.43 [Amended]

b. Section 635.43, paragraphs (a)(2),

and (a)(12).

7. In the following sections, remove

the acronym ‘‘BFT’’, each time it

appears, and add in its place the words

‘‘bluefin tuna’’.

§ 635.41 [Amended]

a. Section 635.41 introductory text,

paragraph (a) introductory text,

paragraphs(a)(1), (a)(2), and (b).

§ 635.42 [Amended]

b. Section 635.42, paragraph (a)

heading, paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3),

(b) heading, (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3).

§ 635.43 [Amended]

c. Section 635.43, paragraphs (a)(2),

(a)(5), (b), and (c).

d. Section 635.44, paragraphs (a) and

(b).

§ 635.44 [Amended]

e. Section 635.45.

§ 635.45 [Amended]

f. Section 635.47

§ 635.47 [Amended]

g. Section 635.71 paragraphs

(a)(24),(b)(25), and (b)(26).

8. In § 635.71, paragraph (a)(35) is

added to read as follows:

§ 635.71 Prohibitions.

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(35) For any person to assault, resist,

oppose, impede, intimidate, interfere

with, obstruct, delay, or prevent, by any

means, NMFS personnel or anyone

collecting information for NMFS, under

an agreement or contract, relating to the

scientific monitoring or management of

Atlantic HMS.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–31104 Filed 12–1–00; 4:58 pm]

BILLING CODE: 3510–22–S