Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 15669 

corrected paragraph B.(15) of the 

General Instructions of Form 40–F is 

corrected to read as follows: 

‘‘(ii) Interactive Data File is not required to 

be submitted to the Commission under 

subparagraph (a) of this paragraph (15).’’ 

§ 249.306 [Corrected] 

■ 21. On page 6820, in the second 

column, the amendatory language for 

amendment 32, is corrected to read as 

follows: 

‘‘32. Amend Form 6–K (referenced in 

§ 249.306) by revising paragraph (5) and 

adding paragraph (6) to General Instruction C 

to read as follows:’’. 

■ 22. Beginning on page 6820 in the 

third column and continuing on page 

6821 in the first and second columns, 

correct paragraphs (6)(a), introductory 

text, (6)(a)(ii), (6)(a)(iii), and (6)(b)(ii) to 

General Instruction C of Form 6–K to 

read as follows: 

‘‘(6) * * * 

(a) Required to be submitted and posted. 

Required to be submitted to the Commission 

and posted on the registrant’s corporate Web 

site, if any, in the manner provided by Rule 

405 of Regulation S–T (§ 232.405 of this 

chapter) and, as submitted, listed as exhibit 

101, if the registrant does not prepare its 

financial statements in accordance with 

Article 6 of Regulation S–X (17 CFR 210.6– 

01 et seq.) and is described in subparagraph 

(a)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this paragraph (6), except 

that an Interactive Data File: first is required 

for a periodic report on Form 10–Q 

(§ 249.308a of this chapter), Form 20–F 

(§ 249.220f of this chapter) or Form 40–F 

(§ 249.240f of this chapter), as applicable; 

and is required for a Form 6–K (§ 249.306 of 

this chapter) only when the Form 6–K 

contains either of the following: audited 

annual financial statements that are a revised 

version of financial statements that 

previously were filed with the Commission 

that have been revised pursuant to applicable 

accounting standards to reflect the effects of 

certain subsequent events, including a 

discontinued operation, a change in 

reportable segments or a change in 

accounting principle; or current interim 

financial statements included pursuant to the 

nine-month updating requirement of Item 

8.A.5 of Form 20–F, and, in either such case, 

the Interactive Data File would be required 

only as to such revised financial statements 

or current interim financial statements 

regardless of whether the Form 6–K contains 

other financial statements: 

* * * * * 

(ii) A large accelerated filer not specified 

in subparagraph (a)(i) of this paragraph (6) 

that prepares its financial statements in 

accordance with generally accepted 

accounting principles as used in the United 

States and the filing contains financial 

statements of the registrant for a fiscal period 

that ends on or after June 15, 2010; or 

(iii) A filer not specified in subparagraph 

(a)(i) or (ii) of this paragraph (6) that prepares 

its financial statements in accordance with 

either generally accepted accounting 

principles as used in the United States or 

International Financial Reporting Standards 

as issued by the International Accounting 

Standards Board, and the filing contains 

financial statements of the registrant for a 

fiscal period that ends on or after June 15, 

2011. 

(b) * * * 

(ii) Interactive Data File is not required to 

be submitted to the Commission under 

subparagraph (a)(i) of this paragraph (6).’’ 

■ 23. On page 6821, second column, 

paragraph ‘‘(iii)’’ designation is 

corrected to read paragraph ‘‘(c)’’. 

Dated: April 1, 2009. 

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–7778 Filed 4–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 080404529–81598–02] 

RIN 0648–AW61 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Atlantic Swordfish Quotas 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule would adjust 

the North and South Atlantic swordfish 

quotas for the 2008 fishing year (January 

1, 2008, through December 31, 2008) to 

account for 2007 underharvests, to the 

extent allowable, and transfer 18.8 

metric tons (mt) dressed weight (dw) to 

Canada per the 2006 International 

Commission for the Conservation of 

Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) 

recommendations 06–02 and 06–03. The 

North Atlantic 2008 directed baseline 

quotas plus the 2007 underharvest 

would be divided equally between the 

semiannual periods of January through 

June, and July through December. The 

adjustment of the swordfish quotas, to 

account for underharvests is 

administrative in nature and does not 

require a change to regulatory text. 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 7, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: For copies of the supporting 

documents, including the proposed rule 

(73 FR 68398, November 18, 2008); the 

2007 Environmental Assessment (EA), 

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(FRFA); and the 2006 Consolidated 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

(HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP), 

please write to Highly Migratory Species 

Management Division, 1315 East–West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, visit 

the HMS website at http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/, or 

contact LeAnn Southward Hogan. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

LeAnn Southward Hogan or Karyl 

Brewster–Geisz by phone: 301–713– 

2347 or by fax: 301–713–1917. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. 

Atlantic swordfish fishery is managed 

under the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP. 

Implementing regulations at 50 CFR part 

635 are issued under the authority of the 

Magnuson–Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson–Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 

1801 et seq., and the Atlantic Tunas 

Convention Act (ATCA), 16 U.S.C. 971 

et seq. Regulations issued under the 

authority of ATCA carry out the 

recommendations of ICCAT as 

necessary and appropriate. 

NMFS published a proposed rule on 

November 18, 2008 (73 FR 68398), 

announcing the proposed adjustment of 

the 2008 North and South Atlantic 

swordfish baseline quotas for the 2008 

fishing year to account for 2007 

underharvests per 50 CFR 635.27(c) and 

ICCAT recommendations, and to 

conduct the annual reserve transfer of 

18.8 metric ton (mt) dressed weight (dw) 

to Canada. The proposed rule also 

proposed modifications to the vessel 

chartering regulations. On December 11, 

2008, NMFS published a notice (73 FR 

75382) extending the public comment 

period until January 16, 2009, to give 

the public more time and opportunities 

to comment on the proposed rule. 

Information regarding the proposed rule 

can be found in the preamble of the 

proposed rule and are not repeated here. 

1. Swordfish Quota 

a. North Atlantic 

The final rule adjusts the total 

available quota for the 2008 fishing year 

to account for the 2007 underharvests to 

the maximum extent allowable, 

consistent with ICCAT recommendation 

06–02. The 2008 North Atlantic 

swordfish baseline quota is 2,937.6 mt 

dw. The total North Atlantic swordfish 

underharvest for 2007 was 3,220.1 mt 

dw, which exceeds the maximum 

carryover cap of 1,468.8 mt dw. 

Therefore, NMFS is carrying forward the 

maximum allowable capped amount 

during the defined management period 

(2007–2008) per ICCAT 

recommendation 06–02. Thus, the 

baseline quota plus the underharvest 

carryover maximum of 1,468.8 mt dw 

15670 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

equals an adjusted quota of 4,406.4 mt 

dw for the 2008 fishing year. Per 

regulations at 50 CFR 635.27(c)(3), the 

directed category would be allocated 

3,620.7 mt dw, the incidental category 

would be allocated 300 mt dw, and the 

reserve category would be reduced from 

a quota of 504.5 mt dw to 485.7 due to 

the transfer of 18.8 mt dw to Canada 

(Table 1). 

b. South Atlantic 

As with the North Atlantic swordfish 

recommendation, ICCAT 

recommendation 06–03 establishes a 

cap on the amount of underharvest that 

can be carried forward during the 

defined management period (2007– 

2009). For South Atlantic swordfish, the 

United States is limited to carrying 

forward 100 mt ww (75.2 mt dw). The 

2008 South Atlantic swordfish baseline 

quota is 75.2 mt dw. The total South 

Atlantic swordfish underharvest for 

2007 was 150.4 mt dw, which exceeds 

the maximum carryover cap of 75.2 mt 

dw. Therefore, NMFS is carrying 

forward the capped amount per ICCAT 

recommendation 06–03. As a result, the 

baseline quota plus the underharvest 

carryover maximum of 75.2 mt dw 

equals an adjusted quota of 150.4 mt dw 

for the 2008 fishing year (Table 1). 

TABLE 1 — LANDINGS AND QUOTAS FOR THE ATLANTIC SWORDFISH FISHERIES (2005 – 2008) 

North Atlantic Swordfish Quota (mt dw) 2005 2006 2007 2008 

preliminary 

Baseline Quota 2,937.6 2,937.6 2,937.6 2,937.6 

Quota Carried Over 3,359.1 4,691.2 1,468.8 1,468.8 

Adjusted quota 6,296.7 7,628.8 4,406.4 4,406.4 

Quota Allocation Directed Category 5,895.2 7,246.1 3,601.9 3,620.7 

Incidental 

Category 

300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 

Reserve Category 101.5 82.7 504.5 485.7 

Utilized Quota Landings 1,471.8 1,291.5 1,167.5 1,576.4 as of Dec. 

31, 2008 

Reserve Transfer 

to Canada 

18.8 18.8 18.8 18.8 

Total Underharvest 4,806.1 6,318.5 3,220.1 2,811.2 

Dead Discards 114.9 154.9 149.2 TBD 

Carryover Available+ 4,691.2 1,468.8 1,468.8 TBD 

South Atlantic Swordfish Quota (mt dw) 2005 2006 2007 2008 

preliminary 

Baseline Quota 75.2 90.2 75.2 75.2 

Quota Carried Over 319.3 394.5 75.2 75.2 

Adjusted quota 394.5 484.7 150.4 150.4 

Landings 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 to date 

Carryover Available+ 394.5 75.2 75.2 75.2 

2. Vessel Chartering 

The proposed rule (73 FR 68398, 

November 18, 2008) proposed to modify 

regulations regarding vessel chartering, 

consistent with ICCAT recommendation 

02–21, potentially to allow Atlantic 

HMS limited access permit (LAP) 

holders to charter foreign vessels of 

ICCAT Contracting Parties, non– 

Contracting Cooperating Parties, Entities 

and Fishing Entities (CPC) under a 

chartering arrangement to fish on the 

high seas, where catches taken would 

count against U.S. Atlantic HMS quotas. 

The proposed chartering regulations 

would have established a process and 

criteria for NMFS’s evaluation of 

proposed chartering arrangements and 

established certain limitations that 

would be placed on such chartering 

arrangements. As described below in the 

response to comments, NMFS has 

decided not to finalize the proposed 

changes to the chartering regulations. 

3. Response to Comments 

Comments on the proposed rule are 

summarized below, together with 

NMFS’ responses. 

Comment 1: NMFS received several 

comments in support of and in 

opposition to the adjustment of the 2008 

North and South Atlantic swordfish 

quotas to account for 2007 

underharvests. 

Response: The 2008 annual 

specifications are necessary to 

implement the 2006 ICCAT quota 

recommendations, as implemented 

domestically under ATCA, and to 

achieve domestic management 

objectives under the Magnuson–Stevens 

Act. ICCAT recommendation 06–02 

limits the amount of North Atlantic 

swordfish underharvest that can be 

carried forward by all CPCs to 50 

percent of that entity’s baseline quota 

allocation for 2007 and 2008. This 

action is in accordance with the 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 15671 

framework procedures set forth in the 

2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP, 

and is supported by the analytical 

documents prepared for the 2006 

Consolidated HMS FMP and for the 

2007 North and South Atlantic 

swordfish quota specifications. 

Comment 2: NMFS received several 

comments opposing the proposed 

modifications to the vessel chartering 

regulations. These comments asserted 

that the proposed modification would 

only benefit inactive permit holders and 

would disadvantage the historic and 

active commercial swordfish fleet and 

wholesalers because they believe an 

influx of imported swordfish product 

would result causing the domestic ex– 

vessel prices to decrease and a market 

glut would occur. 

Response: The proposed chartering 

regulations would have allowed all 

Atlantic HMS LAP holders the ability to 

enter into a chartering arrangement with 

an ICCAT CPC. In response to public 

requests to modify regulations allowing 

chartering of foreign vessels, NMFS 

proposed to allow this type of chartering 

arrangement as a way to help utilize 

Atlantic HMS quotas and facilitate 

flexibility within the vessel chartering 

program, which in turn could enhance 

quota management within the Atlantic 

HMS fisheries. The proposed 

regulations described a process and 

criteria for NMFS to approve or deny 

each request for a chartering 

arrangement considering the ecological, 

economic, and social impacts of the 

specific chartering request. Additionally 

under the proposed process, NMFS 

would have evaluated whether the 

proposed chartering arrangement 

provided adequate benefit to the United 

States, the Atlantic HMS fishery 

participants, and the Atlantic HMS 

quota management. However, upon 

further review of the potential 

socioeconomic impacts and due to the 

concerns expressed by the public, 

including concerns from constituents 

who originally requested that HMS 

modify the chartering regulations, 

NMFS has decided not to finalize the 

proposed vessel chartering regulatory 

modifications. 

Comment 3: NMFS received a 

comment stating that NMFS has not put 

enough effort into revitalizing the 

swordfish fishery and that the vessel 

chartering modifications would serve as 

a distraction from other necessary 

revitalization efforts. 

Response: NMFS has initiated and 

implemented a number of regulatory 

and non–regulatory swordfish fishery 

revitalization efforts. In June 2007, 

NMFS published a final rule (72 FR 

31688) that amended vessel upgrading 

restrictions for pelagic longline (PLL) 

vessels, removed a one–time upgrade 

restriction for all LAP holders, and 

among other things, increased 

incidental and recreational swordfish 

retention limits. In July 2008, NMFS 

published a final rule (73 FR 38144) to 

allow Atlantic tunas longline LAPs that 

had been expired for more than one year 

to be renewed by the most recent permit 

holder of record to allow increased use 

of swordfish permits by making 

available more of the required 

associated permits. NMFS has also been 

involved with development of the 

FishWatch website, including swordfish 

outreach materials for the website, 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/fishwatch/, 

participation at regional and 

international seafood shows, 

development of swordfish fact sheets, 

meetings with state representatives and 

industry constituents to discuss 

marketing outreach strategies, and 

development of a swordfish 

revitalization film clip for the 

Smithsonian Sant Ocean Hall exhibit. In 

January 2008, NMFS issued exempted 

fishing permits to conduct research in 

the East Coast and Charleston Bump 

PLL closed areas to evaluate existing 

bycatch reduction measures and collect 

baseline data under current fishery 

conditions. NMFS plans more to work 

with state partners, the swordfish 

industry, and other constituents to 

continue to revitalize the swordfish 

fishery. 

Comment 4: NMFS received a 

comment stating that NMFS did not 

include enough detail in the proposed 

rule regarding limitations that need to 

be imposed on chartering arrangements, 

such as a sunset provision, quota 

allocations, and seasonal closures. 

Response: The proposed chartering 

regulations described a process and 

criteria for NMFS’s evaluation of each 

potential chartering request, as well as 

a detailed list of specific information 

required to be included in any 

chartering arrangement request. The 

proposed regulations stated that NMFS 

would have considered each chartering 

request on a case–by–case basis. If 

NMFS decided to authorize a chartering 

arrangement, the written notification 

from NMFS would have included the 

vessel chartering requirements and the 

terms and conditions of the chartering 

arrangement, including expiration date, 

data submission requirements, and 

quota allocations. Thus, the 

commenter’s concerns would have been 

addressed. 

Comment 5: NMFS received a 

comment stating that the proposed 

chartering modifications would have 

violated National Standard Four of the 

Magnuson–Stevens Act because of the 

proposal to limit chartering 

arrangements to commercial fishermen 

with an Atlantic HMS LAP. 

Response: National Standard 4 

requires that conservation and 

management measures shall not 

discriminate between residents of 

different States. If it becomes necessary 

to allocate or assign fishing privileges 

among various United States fishermen, 

such allocation shall be (A) fair and 

equitable to all such fishermen; (B) 

reasonably calculated to promote 

conservation; and (C) carried out in 

such a manner that no particular 

individual, cooperation, or other entity 

acquires an excessive share of such 

privileges. NMFS proposed to allow all 

Atlantic HMS LAP holders who are 

authorized to commercially harvest 

Atlantic HMS from the U.S. EEZ and on 

the high seas the ability to charter a 

foreign vessel of an ICCAT CPC. With 

regard to chartering, the proposed 

regulations would have only allowed 

such activities on the high seas. The 

Atlantic HMS LAP holders who are 

currently authorized to commercially 

harvest HMS on the high seas would 

have been chartering vessels to, 

essentially, exercise that harvesting 

privilege on their behalf. In addition, 

under the proposed regulations, foreign 

vessel owners who entered into a 

chartering arrangement with an Atlantic 

HMS LAP holder would have been 

required to follow all U.S. regulations 

that would have otherwise applied to 

the Atlantic HMS LAP holder. This 

approach was aimed at keeping any 

resulting chartering arrangements 

within the scope of the existing 

analyzed effects of utilizing Atlantic 

HMS quotas on the high seas and does 

not violate National Standard 4. 

However, as NMFS is not finalizing the 

proposed vessel modifications, the 

concerns have been addressed. 

4. Changes from the Proposed Rule 

Upon further review of potential 

socioeconomic impacts and concerns 

that the proposed regulatory 

modifications would only benefit 

inactive permit holders and would 

disadvantage the historic and active 

commercial swordfish fleet and because 

of the opposition from the public 

regarding the proposed modifications to 

the vessel chartering regulations, NMFS 

has decided not to implement the 

proposed regulatory modifications in 

the final rule. Therefore, the current 

vessel chartering regulations at 50 CFR 

635.5(a)(5) and 635.32(e) remain 

unchanged. 

15672 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

5. Classification 

The Acting Assistant Administrator 

has determined that this final rule is 

consistent with the 2006 Consolidated 

HMS FMP, the Magnuson–Stevens Act, 

ATCA, and other applicable law. 

This final rule has been determined to 

be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of 

the Department of Commerce certified 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration during 

the proposed rule stage that this action 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The factual basis for the 

certification was published in the 

proposed rule and is not repeated here. 

No comments were received regarding 

this certification. As a result, a 

regulatory flexibility analysis was not 

required and none was prepared. 

Dated: April 1, 2009. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–7859 Filed 4–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S