17774 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97–9436 Filed 4–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 96–103, RM–8794; RM–

8839]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Smith

and Reno, NV, Susanville and Truckee,

CA

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; Order to Show

Cause.

SUMMARY: The Commission, in response

to a counterproposal filed by Chris Kidd

d/b/a Kidd Communications, proposes

the allotment of Channel 268A to

Truckee, CA, as the community’s first

local aural transmission service. To

accommodate the allotment at Truckee,

the Commission also proposes that

Channel 271C3 be substituted for

Channel 269C3 at Reno, NV, the license

of Station KRNV-FM be modified to

specify the alternate Class C3 channel,

and that Channel 222C2 be substituted

for Channel 271C2 at Susanville, CA,

and the license of Station KHJQ be

modified to specify the alternate Class

C2 channel. An Order to Show Cause is

directed to Sunbelt Broadcasting

Company, licensee of Station KRNVFM, and to Olympic Broadcasters, Inc.,

licensee of Station KHJQ, as to why

their licenses should not be modified to

specify the alternate Class C3 and Class

C2 channels, respectively. In addition,

to resolve the conflict between the

proposed allotment of Channel 271C3 at

Smith, NV, and Channel 268A at

Truckee, CA, alternate Channel 222C3

can be allotted to Smith, NV. Channel

268A can be allotted to Truckee, CA,

with a site restriction of 9.3 kilometers

(5.8 miles) west, to avoid a shortspacing to KRNG, Channel 267C2,

Fallon, NV, at coordinates 39–17–45;

120–16–57. Channel 271C3 can be

allotted to Reno at Station KRNV-FM’s

presently licensed transmitter site, at

coordinates 39–35–03; 119–47–52.

Channel 222C2 can be allotted to

Susanville at the transmitter site

specified in Station KHJQ’s outstanding

construction permit (BPH–961017IB), at

coordinates 40–27–13; 120–34–14.

Channel 222C3 can be allotted to Smith,

with a site restriction of 0.7 kilometers

(0.4 miles) south, at coordinates 38–47–

39; 119–19–31, to avoid a short-spacing

to Station KZSR, Channel 225C, Reno,

NV.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before May 27, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leslie K. Shapiro, Mass Media Bureau,

(202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Order to

Show Cause, MM Docket No. 96–103,

adopted March 26, 1997, and released

April 4, 1997. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC. The complete text of

this decision may also be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street,

NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97–9437 Filed 4–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 216

[Docket No. 970326068–7068–01; I.D.

031197A]

RIN 0648–AJ86

Marine Mammals; Subsistence Taking

of Northern Fur Seals; Harvest

Estimates

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the regulations

governing the subsistence taking of

northern fur seals, this action proposes

annual estimates of fur seal subsistence

need for 1997 through 1999 on the

Pribilof Islands, Alaska (AK) and

summarizes the annual fur seal

subsistence harvests on St. George and

St. Paul Islands (the Pribilof Islands) for

1994 through 1996.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by May 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to Hilda Diaz-Soltero, Acting

Director, Office of Protected Resources,

(F/PR), 1315 East-West Highway, Silver

Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steve Zimmerman, (907) 586–7235, or

Margot Bohan, (301) 713–2322.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

subsistence harvest of northern fur

seals, Callorhinus ursinus, on the

Pribilof Islands, AK, is governed by

regulations found in 50 CFR part 216,

subpart F, Taking for Subsistence

Purposes. The purpose of these

regulations, published under the

authority of the Fur Seal Act (FSA), 16

U.S.C. 1151 et seq., and the Marine

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 16

U.S.C. 1361 et seq., is to limit the take

of fur seals to a level providing for the

subsistence needs of the Pribilof

residents, while restricting taking by

sex, age, and season for herd

management purposes. To further

minimize negative effects on the Pribilof

Islands’’ fur seal population, the harvest

has been limited to a 47-day season

(June 23–August 8).

Pursuant to the regulations governing

the taking of fur seals for subsistence

purposes, NMFS publishes this

summary of the fur seal harvest for the

previous 3-year period and a projection

of the number of seals expected to be

taken in the subsequent 3-year period to
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules 17775

meet the subsistence needs of the Aleut

residents of the Pribilof Islands, AK.

Subsistence Trends and Estimates

Table 1 shows the number of fur seals

taken on the Pribilof Islands for

subsistence purposes between 1985 and

1996. The annual harvests were

conducted in the established manner

and employed the standard methods

required under regulations at 50 CFR

216.72. NMFS personnel monitored

each daily harvest and worked closely

with the tribal governments of each

island to further improve the efficiency

of the annual harvest and full utilization

of the animals taken. NMFS personnel

also monitored the disposal of byproducts of the subsistence harvest in

an effort to ensure that certain parts,

such as bacula, of harvested seals were

not taken illegally and that waste of

edible portions was not occurring.

The number of northern fur seals

harvested on St. Paul Island since 1986

has ranged from 1,077 (1990) to 1,710

(1987) (Table 1). The annual subsistence

takes on St. George Island since 1986

have ranged from 92 (1987) to 319

(1993) seals (Table 1). Within the past

6 years, the number of fur seals

harvested annually has been relatively

consistent. Since 1991, the average

number of seals harvested each year on

St. Paul and St. George Islands has been

1,563 (range: 1,482 to 1,645) and 241

(range: 161 to 319), respectively (Table

1). The actual number of animals

harvested has never reached the upper

end of the estimated range and has

exceeded the lower range in only two

(1991 and 1993) of the 6 years, 1991–

1996.

TABLE 4.—Subsistence Harvest Levels for Northern Fur Seals on the Pribilof Islands, 1985–1996

Year

Subsistence estimates Actual harvest levels

St. Paul St. George St. Paul St. George

1985 ................................................................................................................ ........................ .......................... 3,384 329

1986 ................................................................................................................ 2,400–8,000 800–1,800 1,299 124

1987 ................................................................................................................ 1,600–2,400 533–1,800 1,710 92

1988 ................................................................................................................ 1,800–2,200 600–740 1,145 113

1989 ................................................................................................................ 1,600–1,800 533–600 1,340 181

1990 ................................................................................................................ 1,145–1,800 181–500 1,077 164

1991 ................................................................................................................ 1,145–1,800 181–500 1,645 281

1992 ................................................................................................................ 1,645–2,000 281–500 1,482 194

1993 ................................................................................................................ 1,645–2,000 281–500 1,518 319

1994 ................................................................................................................ 1,645–2,000 281–500 1,616 161

1995 ................................................................................................................ 1,645–2,000 281–500 1,525 260

1996 ................................................................................................................ 1,645–2,000 281–500 1,591 232

Summary of Harvest Operations and

Monitoring 1994–1996

Beginning with the 1995 harvest, the

tribal government of St. Paul voluntarily

eliminated the ‘‘butterfly cut’’ as a

standard method of field dressing

harvested seals and resolved to take

only whole animals off the field as a

step toward maximum utilization of

harvested seals for subsistence

purposes. The only exceptions to the

removal of whole carcasses from the

field, as permitted by the tribal

government, are: (a) Those animals

taken to accommodate some of the elder

residents who are physically unable to

butcher whole animals supplied to them

by the tribal government, and; (b) those

carcasses in which the gall bladder was

inadvertently ruptured, thus

contaminating some of the meat with

bile. During 1995 and 1996, only 44

butterfly cuts (1.3 percent of the

combined Pribilof total take for these

years), were taken from the field under

these exceptions.

As a result of the elimination of the

butterfly cut as a standard field dressing

method and since the removal of whole

carcasses constitutes full utilization of

the edible portions of harvested seals,

NMFS determined that it was no longer

necessary to continue the percent-use

calculations previously applied to the

harvest. The butterfly cut was never a

standard field dressing method on St.

George Island; therefore, removal of

only whole carcasses from the

harvesting field is now a uniform

practice in the Pribilofs.

Regarding the utilization of the

inedible portions of harvested seals, the

tribal governments of both islands have

implemented a program that supports

full utilization of inedible seal parts for

traditional arts, crafts, and other uses

permitted under regulations at 50 CFR

216.73. The result has been an

expanded use of these materials by the

Aleut residents and increased

fulfillment of the non-wasteful harvest

requirements.

During the 1995 and 1996 harvests,

NMFS and the tribal governments of

both islands agreed to conduct an

investigation into the entanglement of

fur seals in marine debris, such as

discarded fishing netting, rope, and

packaging bands. Part of this effort

involved removing the entangling debris

from seals encountered during harvest

operations. A total of 88 seals (both

islands) were temporarily restrained on

the harvesting fields and, upon

successful removal of the entangling

debris, were released back into their

natural environment by the sealing

crews.

Estimate of Subsistence Need for the

Period 1997–1999

The projected subsistence harvest

estimates are given as a range, the lower

end of which may be exceeded if NMFS

is given notice, and the Assistant

Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA,

determines that the annual subsistence

needs of the Pribilof Aleuts have not

been satisfied (50 CFR 216.72(e)(1)(i)).

Conversely, the harvest can be

terminated before the lower end of the

range is reached if it is determined that

the annual subsistence needs of the

Pribilof residents have been met or the

harvest has been conducted in a

wasteful manner.

In September 1996, NMFS requested

that the tribal government of each island

determine the number of fur seals that

would be needed by their communities

each year for the 3-year period 1997

through 1999. The response from the St.

Paul Island tribal government was to

maintain the current range of 1,645–

2,000 seals. The St. George Island tribal

government requested that the lower

end range be increased from 281 to 300

seals and that the upper bound remain

at 500 seals.

In its response to the NMFS request

for subsistence need estimates, the St.

George tribal government also formally

requested to be allowed to take fur seal
17776 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 70 / Friday, April 11, 1997 / Proposed Rules

pups for their traditional potlatch rites.

Representatives of the St. Paul Island

tribal government have made similar

requests. Current regulations at 50 CFR

216.72(c)(3) prohibit the taking of fur

seal pups.

The tribal government of St. George

Island also requested an increase in the

number of allowable haulout areas from

which to conduct the annual harvest. At

present, regulations at 50 CFR

216.72(d)(2) limit harvestable locations

to two haulouts, which can be harvested

no more than twice per week. These

requests for pups and additional

haulouts for harvesting will not be

addressed in time for this harvest; they

will be considered through a separate

co-management process in the future.

Regarding the proposed increase of

the lower end estimate range for St.

George Island from 281 to 300 seals, the

continuing decline of the island’s

economy has resulted in an increased

rate of unemployment and, thus, a

greater reliance on subsistence

harvesting of food resources by the

Aleut residents of St. George Island to

meet their needs for the 1997–1999

period. In response to the information

provided by the tribal governments of

St. Paul and St. George Islands, NMFS

proposes that the estimated range on St.

Paul Island for each of the years, 1997–

1999, remains the same as was

established for the years 1994–1996

(1,645 to 2,000), and that the annual

range on St. George Island for the years,

1997–1999, be established at 300–500

seals.

As described earlier in this document,

if the Aleut residents of either island

reach the lower end of this yearly

harvest estimate and have unmet

subsistence needs and no indication of

waste, they may request an additional

number of seals up to the upper limit of

the respective harvest estimates. The

residents of St. George and St. Paul

Islands may substantiate any additional

need for seals by submitting in writing

the information upon which they base

their decision that subsistence needs are

unfulfilled. The regulations at 50 CFR

216.72(e)(1)(I) require a suspension of

the fur seal harvest for up to 48 hours

once the lower end of the estimated

harvest levels is reached. The

suspension is to last no more than 48

hours, followed either by a finding that

the subsistence needs have been met or

by a revised estimate of the number of

seals necessary to satisfy the Aleuts’

subsistence needs.

NMFS emphasizes that it expects the

harvest of fur seals to be non-wasteful

and in full compliance with the

regulations specified at 50 CFR 216.72.

The agency will continue to monitor the

entire harvest on St. Paul Island and a

portion of the harvest on St. George

Island during 1997–1999 to ensure this

result.

Dated: April 2, 1997.

Rolland A. Schmitten,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–9389 Filed 4–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[I.D. 031797A]

RIN 0648–AJ27

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management

Council; Public Hearings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Public hearings; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery

Management Council (Council) will

convene 12 public hearings on Draft

Amendment 15 to the Fishery

Management Plan for Reef Fish

Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP)

and a related draft environmental

assessment (EA).

DATES: Written comments will be

accepted until May 2, 1997. The

hearings will be held from April 14 to

April 24, 1997. See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION for specific dates and

times.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to and copies of the draft

amendment are available from Mr.

Wayne E. Swingle, Executive Director,

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management

Council, 3018 U.S. Highway 301, North,

Suite 1000, Tampa, FL 33619.

The hearings will be held in FL, AL,

MS, LA, and TX. See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION for locations of the

hearings and public accommodations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wayne E. Swingle, (813) 228–2815.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Council will hold public hearings on

Draft Amendment 15 to the FMP and its

draft EA. The purposes of Amendment

15 include: (1) Establishing a license

limitation system for the commercial

red snapper fishery; (2) limiting

possession of reef fish in excess of the

recreational bag limit to fish taken in

reef fish traps and stone crab and spiny

lobster traps; (3) increasing the

commercial fishery size limit for

vermilion snapper; (4) removing from

management under the FMP all grunts,

porgies, and sea bass; (5) prohibiting

commercial landings of greater

amberjack during the spawning season

(i.e., March, April, and May); and (6)

specifying that the 20-fish aggregate bag

limit includes only those species within

the reef fish management unit.

Regarding the license limitation

system for the commercial red snapper

fishery, the Council is considering 10

alternatives related to establishing

initial eligibility to participate in the

fishery and initial trip limits. The

initially preferred alternative would

limit participation to vessels with

records of landing in 2 out of 3 years

during the period 1990–1992 of at least

2,500 lb (1,134 kg). Under this

alternative, eligible participants would

be granted one of three classes of

licenses based on their level of landings

during the 1990–1992 period. The three

license classes would correspond to

allowable trip limits of 2,000 (907 kg),

1,000 (454 kg), and 500 lb (227 kg) of

red snapper. The license classes and

criteria under this alternative are shown

in the table below.

License class 1990–92 landings in 2 out of 3 years Initial trip limit

1 ........................ More than 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) ................................................................................................................ 2,000 lb (907 kg).

2 ........................ 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) (but less than 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) .......................................................................... 1,000 lb (454 kg).

3 ........................ 2,500 lb (1,134 kg) but less than 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) .............................................................................. 500 lb (227 kg).

The Council is considering other

license limitation system alternatives or

variations including: (1) Issuing licenses

to vessels rather than persons; (2) in

instances where the landings records of

a vessel upon which a historical captain

served are used to qualify for a license,

issuing separate class (1) or class (2)

licenses to the historical captain and the