16132 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 1997 / Proposed Rules

no data whatsoever to support its

assertion that some drivers perceive a

difficulty in utilizing their turn signal

system’s ‘‘lane-change’’ feature and,

therefore, fail to signal their maneuver.

Absent such data, NHTSA has no reason

to believe that requiring an automatic

turn signal would significantly increase

their use.

Hawkhill’s other claim is that its

system would address situations when a

driver inadvertently leaves the turn

signal on after completing a driving

maneuver that does not turn the wheel

enough to trigger the current automatic

shut-off feature required in S5.1.1.5 of

FMVSS No. 108. Hawkhill’s system is

designed to address this situation.

However, NHTSA believes this is a

much less frequent occurrence than the

failure to signal. We base this on

anecdotal evidence and driving

experience in the Washington, DC

metropolitan area. In addition,

manufacturers have taken voluntary

steps to address this problem with the

‘‘lane-change’’ feature discussed

previously. For example, General

Motors has designed all its Skylarks

with a turn signal reminder chime that

gives the driver an added signal if the

turn signal indicator is still on after one

half mile of driving. See 61 FR 56734,

November 4, 1996. Further, because the

standard would not preclude the use of

Hawkhill’s proposed turn signal system,

perhaps manufacturers will voluntarily

place this feature in some of their

vehicles as well.

Hawkhill provided no data to indicate

the size of the safety problem that

would be addressed by automatically

turning off turn signals in situations not

addressed by the current automatic

shut-off requirement. Absent such data,

NHTSA has no information indicating

this is a large problem. Most vehicles do

not now have computer-controlled turn

signals, nor does the agency have any

information indicating that a significant

number of vehicles will be equipped

with them in the near future. If we

assume for the sake of discussion that as

many as half of the 16 million light

vehicles produced each year will be

equipped with computer-controlled turn

signals in the near future, that would

still leave eight million vehicles that

would need to be redesigned. At a cost

of $10 per vehicle to redesign the turn

signal circuit, that would translate into

an annual cost of $80 million. NHTSA

would not consider imposing costs of

this magnitude without some clear and

convincing evidence that it would

produce safety benefits commensurate

with this cost. In this case, there are no

data or other information suggesting the

safety benefits would be anything more

than marginal.

In accordance with 49 CFR part 552,

this completes the agency’s review of

the petition. The agency has concluded

that there is no reasonable possibility

that the amendment requested by the

petitioner would be issued at the

conclusion of a rulemaking proceeding.

Accordingly, it denies Hawkhill’s

petition.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30103, 30162;

delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and

501.8.

Issued on: March 31, 1997.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–8613 Filed 4–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Parts 285, 630, 644, and 678

[I.D. 030497E]

Establishment of Highly Migratory

Species Advisory Panels; Combination

of Fishery Management Plans

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed process; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS solicits comments on

the feasibility of developing Fishery

Management Plans (FMPs) for Atlantic

shark, swordfish, and tunas. If NMFS

were to develop one FMP, it would

establish one Highly Migratory Species

(HMS) Advisory Panel (AP) for those

species to assist NMFS in the collection

and evaluation of information relevant

to the preparation of the consolidated

HMS management plan for those

species. A combined HMS FMP and AP

would reduce the burden on the AP

members, in addition to being

consistent with existing laws such as

the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and

other holistic, ecosystem approaches to

fishery management. The HMS AP

would include representatives from all

interests in Atlantic HMS fisheries.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before May 15, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

submitted to Rebecca Lent, Chief,

Highly Migratory Species Management

Division, NMFS, 1315 East-West

Highway, Silver Spring, MD, 20910.

Comments may be submitted by fax:

301–713–1917.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Kelly, 301–713–2347.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

In accordance with the MagnusonStevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., as

amended by the Sustainable Fisheries

Act (Public Law 104–297) FMPs shall be

prepared with respect to any HMS

fishery. APs must be established to

consult with NMFS in the collection

and evaluation of information relevant

to the preparation or amendment of

HMS FMPs. Nominations have already

been solicited for a billfish AP and a

pelagic longline AP. Prior to requesting

nominations for AP members regarding

tunas, sharks or swordfish, NMFS

solicits comments on options for

developing FMPs for Atlantic tunas,

shark, and swordfish. Separate FMPs

already exist for billfish, sharks, and

swordfish. No FMP exists for Atlantic

tunas.

Due to the overlap of biological

characteristics and management issues

concerning Atlantic tunas, sharks, and

swordfish, NMFS believes there may be

benefit to combining some or all of the

FMPs to reduce time and financial

resources and to produce a cohesive

plan for multispecies fishery

management. Likewise, participants and

interested parties overlap in these HMS

fisheries, and NMFS believes there may

be benefit to combining some or all of

the APs to reduce time and financial

resources needed for participation in the

APs as well as the administration of the

APs. A combined Atlantic tunas,

swordfish, and shark FMP could also be

less burdensome to the constituency in

that many issues are common to the

three species groups.

The purpose of the combined HMS

AP would be to assist NMFS in the

development of this FMP. The first

action would be the development of

new requirements (i.e., bycatch,

overfishing) of the Magnuson-Stevens

Act.

In addition, a combined HMS FMP for

these species would be consistent with

the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NEPA,

regulatory reform (consolidated HMS

regulations), and other holistic

ecosystem approaches to fishery

management. HMS fisheries and HMS

stocks are interdependent. Boundaries

overlap between fisheries, gears, and

geographical locations and an ecosystem

approach to management would be

useful and efficient.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 1997 / Proposed Rules 16133

An alternative approach could

include developing a separate Atlantic

tunas FMP and combining the existing

shark and swordfish FMPs into one.

However, similarities among these

fisheries and the participation of many

fishermen in all three fisheries make

this option less preferable.

A final option would include

developing a separate Atlantic tunas

FMP and keeping the existing shark and

swordfish FMPs separate. This option

appears to be the least desirable as

evidenced by recent public comments

concerning proposed amendments to

these two FMPs.

NMFS is also soliciting comments on

the appropriate role of existing advisory

groups and or processes (Shark

Operations Team, Negotiated

Rulemaking for Atlantic tunas) in light

of the establishment of HMS APs,

whether or not they are combined.

Once NMFS has collected comments

regarding the appropriate combination

and/or separation of the tuna, shark, and

swordfish FMPs, and thus of the APs,

NMFS will issue a separate Federal

Register document calling for

nominations for members of the AP(s).

Tentative Schedule

NMFS intends to establish all APs

(combined or separate APs for Shark,

Swordfish, and Tunas) by July 1, 1997.

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

Dated: March 31, 1997.

Gary C. Matlock,

Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–8567 Filed 4–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F