34356 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 121 /Wednesday, June 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules

operations and are not small businesses

within the meaning of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. Further, small

organizations and governmental

jurisdictions would not be significantly

affected by the proposed rule as the

price of new motor vehicles should not

be impacted. Accordingly, no

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has been

prepared.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

This action has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 on ‘‘Federalism.’’ It has been

determined that the rulemaking action

does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking

action for purposes of the National

Environmental Policy Act. The

rulemaking action would not have a

significant effect upon the environment

as it does not affect the present method

of manufacturing motor vehicle lighting

equipment.

Civil Justice Reform

This rule would not have any

retroactive effect. Under 49 U.S.C.

30103(b), whenever a Federal motor

vehicle safety standard is in effect, a

state may not adopt or maintain a safety

standard applicable to the same aspect

of performance which is not identical to

the Federal standard. Section 30161 sets

forth a procedure for judicial review of

final rules establishing, amending, or

revoking Federal motor vehicle safety

standards. That section does not require

submission of a petition for

reconsideration or other administrative

proceedings before parties may file suit

in court.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor

vehicles.

PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR

VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

In consideration of the foregoing, it is

proposed that 49 CFR Part 571 be

amended as follows:

1. The authority section would

continue to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,

30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at

49 CFR 1.50.

§ 571.108 [Amended]

2. Section 571.108 would be amended

by adding paragraphs S5.1.1.23 and

S5.1.1.24 to read as follows:

§ 571.108 Standard No. 108; Lamps,

reflective devices, and associated

equipment.

* * * * *

S5.1.1.23 Instead of being designed to

conform to photometric requirements

based on the number of lighted sections

specified in SAE J586 FEB84, SAE J588

NOV84, and SAE J585e September 1977,

as applicable, each stop lamp, turn

signal lamp, and taillamp that is

equipped with light-emitting diodes or

other miniature light sources, and that

needs more than one light source to

achieve compliance with the

photometric performance required of a

single lighted section, shall be designed

to conform to photometric requirements

based on the dimension of the effective

projected luminous lens area for the

function being tested. A lamp is

regarded as having one lighted section

if the maximum horizontal or vertical

linear dimension of the effective

projected luminous lens area of the

lamp is less than 150 millimeters (mm),

two lighted sections if the dimension is

150–300 mm, and three lighted sections

if the dimension is greater than 300 mm.

S5.1.1.24 Any lamp whose light is

provided by light-emitting diodes shall

be designed to conform to the

photometric requirements appropriate

for its type when the lamp is stabilized

at 23±5 degrees C, energized, tested 60

seconds after being energized, and

allowed to operate continuously until

either the internal heat buildup has

stabilized or for 30 minutes, whichever

occurs first, and tested again.

* * * * *

Issued: June 18, 1998.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 98–16808 Filed 6–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 300

[Docket No. 980611156–8156–01; I.D.

060898A]

Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Control Date

for the Halibut Charterboat Fishery

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS); National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA);

Commerce.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking; notice of control date for

the halibut charterboat fishery.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that anyone

entering the halibut charterboat fishery

in convention waters off Alaska after

June 24, 1998 will not be assured of

future access to that fishery if a

management regime that limits the

number of participants is developed and

implemented under the authority of the

Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982

(Halibut Act). For purposes of this

notice, a person in the halibut

charterboat fishery means the owner or

operator of a vessel that carries

passengers for hire to engage in

recreational fishing for Pacific halibut

(Hippoglossus stenolepis) in convention

waters off Alaska. This notice is

intended to promote awareness of

potential eligibility criteria for future

access to the halibut charterboat fishery

in convention waters off Alaska and to

discourage new entrants into this

fishery based on economic speculation

while the North Pacific Fishery

Management Council (Council)

contemplates whether and how access

to the halibut charterboat fishery in

convention waters off Alaska should be

controlled. The potential eligibility

criteria may be based on historical

participation. Therefore, current

participants in the halibut charterboat

fishery in convention waters off Alaska

should locate and preserve records that

substantiate and verify their

participation in that fishery.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 24, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to Susan J. Salveson,

Assistant Administrator for Sustainable

Fisheries, Sustainable Fisheries

Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, 709

West 9th Street, Room 453, Juneau, AK

99801, or P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK

99802, Attention: Lori J. Gravel.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Lepore, 907–586–7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 5 of the Halibut Act (16 U.S.C.

773c(c)) provides that the Regional

Fishery Management Council having

authority for the geographical area

concerned may develop regulations

governing Pacific halibut catch in U.S.

Convention waters, including limited

access regulations, that are in addition

to, but not in conflict with, regulations

of the International Pacific Halibut

Commission (IPHC). The IPHC is the

body authorized by the Convention

between the United States and Canada

for the Preservation of the Halibut

Fishery of the North Pacific Ocean and

the Bering Sea (Convention) to

promulgate regulations for the

conservation and management of the

Pacific halibut fishery. Section 5 of the
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 121 /Wednesday, June 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules 34357

Halibut Act also provides that the

Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) shall

have the general responsibility for

carrying out the Convention, and that

the Secretary shall adopt such

regulations as may be necessary to carry

out the purposes and objectives of the

Convention and the Halibut Act. The

Secretary’s authority has been delegated

to the Assistant Administrator for

Fisheries, NOAA.

The Council began consideration of

management alternatives for the halibut

charterboat fishery in September 1993

in response to a proposal from the

Alaska Longline Fishermen’s

Association (ALFA). The proposal

requested the Council to consider some

type of limited access management for

the halibut charterboat fishery, citing

the recent and dramatic growth in that

fishery and the consequential increase

in halibut catch by that sector. Based on

the ALFA proposal, the Council

established the Halibut Charter Working

Group (Work Group) to further develop

management options for the halibut

charterboat fishery.

The Work Group presented various

management options to the Council for

consideration. The Council, due to

staffing priorities, deferred further

action on the halibut charterboat issue

until January 1995. In January 1995, the

Council again reviewed the Work

Group’s findings, received public

testimony, discussed further

development of management options,

and formulated a problem statement for

analysis. Again, staffing priorities

delayed formal analysis of the problem

statement.

In June 1996, the Council revisited the

halibut charterboat issue. The Council

decided to narrow the alternatives for

study by focusing on specific

management alternatives. The specific

alternatives were: (1) Status quo; (2)

implement reporting requirements; (3)

annually allocate the total allowable

catch between guided sport and

commercial fisheries; (4) a moratorium

on new entries into the charterboat

fishery; and (5) combine Alternatives 2,

3, and 4. In September 1996, a contract

to analyze the specific alternatives was

awarded to University of Alaska’s

Institute for Social and Economic

Research.

In February 1997, a preliminary

analysis was presented to the Council.

The Council recommended several

changes to the preliminary analysis. In

April 1997, a revised analysis was

presented to the Council for initial

review. The Council recommended that

the revised analysis be condensed prior

to submission for public review. Also,

the Council postponed final action on

the halibut charterboat issue until

September 1997.

In September 1997, the Council

recommended that participants in the

halibut charterboat fishery be required

to complete performance reports and

that guideline harvest levels (GHLs) be

established for IPHC Areas 2C and 3A.

Information collected by the

performance reports was to include

catch figures, location of catch, number

of clients, residence information,

ownership of vessel, and the identity of

the operator. The GHLs would be based

on the halibut charterboat fleet receiving

125 percent of its 1995 catch for IPHC

Areas 2C and 3A.

In November 1997, NMFS informed

the Council that the GHLs for the

halibut charterboat fishery could not be

published as a regulation until

management measures, which would be

employed if the GHLs were reached,

were specified. In December 1997, the

Council announced the formation of a

Halibut GHL Committee (Committee).

This Committee, made up of individuals

representing the halibut charterboat

fishery, the halibut non-guided sport

fishery, the Council, and the Alaska

Board of Fisheries, was tasked with

developing management measures to

employ if the halibut charterboat fishery

exceeded the GHLs.

In February 1998, the Committee met

and developed recommendations for

management measures for the halibut

charterboat fishery. The Committee

presented its recommendations to the

Council in April 1998. The

recommendations included dropping

the GHLs and developing local area

management plans to resolve resource

conflicts, converting the GHLs to

allocations and allowing the ‘‘banking’’

of any uncaught portion of those

allocations, and adopting the GHLs and

employing a range of management

measures to prevent the halibut

charterboat fleet from exceeding the

GHLs.

The Council approved the

Committee’s recommendations for

analysis. Also, the Council requested

that the analysis include a discussion on

a rod permit program and further details

on the proposed ‘‘banking’’ concept.

Finally, the Council set a control date of

April 27, 1998, or alternatively, the date

of publication in the Federal Register.

Previously, the Council had set control

dates for the halibut charterboat fishery

of September 23, 1993, and April 17,

1997. The Council requested that a

discussion paper further describing the

alternatives be presented to the Council

in October 1998, and set initial review

and final action for this issue for

February 1999, and April 1999,

respectively.

The Council intends to address

whether and how to limit entry into the

halibut charterboat fishery. The

publication of this control date is to

discourage speculative entry into the

halibut charterboat fishery while

potential management regimes to

control access into the fishery are

discussed and possibly developed by

the Council. The control date will help

distinguish established participants

from speculative entrants into the

fishery. Although participants are

notified that entering the halibut

charterboat fishery after the control date

will not assure them of future access to

the fishery based on previous

participation, additional or other

qualifying criteria may be applied. The

Council may choose different and

variably weighted methods to qualify

participants based on the type and

length of participation in the fishery or

other methods of determining

dependence on the fishery.

This notification hereby establishes

June 24, 1998 for potential use in

determining historical of traditional

participation in the halibut charterboat

fishery. This action does not commit the

Council or the Secretary to develop or

adopt any particular management

regime or to use any specific criteria for

determining entry into the fishery. The

Council may choose a different control

date or management program that does

not make use of such a date. The

Council may also choose to take no

further action to control entry or access

to the halibut charterboat fishery. Any

action by the Council will be taken

pursuant to the requirements of the

Halibut Act and the Magnuson-Stevens

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773–773k and 16

U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: June 15, 1998.

David L. Evans,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–16817 Filed 6–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F