Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 96 / Thursday, May 18, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 26691

persons who begin commercial

manufacture, import, or processing of a

significant new use before the effective

date of the SNUR, has promulgated

provisions to allow such persons to

comply with this proposed SNUR before

it is promulgated. If a person were to

meet the conditions of advance

compliance as codified at § 721.45(h),

the person would be considered to have

met the requirements of the final SNUR

for those activities. If persons who begin

commercial manufacture, import, or

processing of the substance between

proposal and the effective date of the

final SNUR do not meet the conditions

of advance compliance, they must cease

that activity before the effective date of

the rule. To resume their activities,

these persons would have to comply

with all applicable SNUR notice

requirements and wait until the notice

review period, including all extensions,

expires.

VI. Economic Analysis

EPA has evaluated the potential costs

of establishing significant new use

notice requirements for potential

manufacturers, importers, and

processors of the chemical substance

subject to this rule. EPA’s complete

economic analysis is available in the

public record for this final rule (OPPTS–

50611).

VII. Rulemaking Record

EPA has established a record for this

rulemaking (docket control number

OPPTS–50611) which includes

information considered by the Agency

in developing this rule. The record

includes the following information:

1. The economic analysis of this rule.

2. The environmental test data review

support document.

3. Issue Summary Report.

4. The Federal Register notice

pertaining to this rule.

A public version of the record,

without any Confidential Business

Information, is available in the TSCA

Nonconfidential Information Center

(NCIC) from 12 noon to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except legal holidays.

The TSCA NCIC is located in Rm. NE–

B607, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC.

VIII. Regulatory Assessment

Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to all the requirements of the

Executive Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact

Analysis, review by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)). Under

section 3(f), the Executive Order defines

a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as an

action likely to lead to a rule:

(1) Having an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more, or

adversely and materially affecting a

sector of the economy, productivity,

competition, jobs, the environment,

public health of safety, or State, local or

tribal governments or communities (also

referred to as ‘‘economically

significant’’).

(2) Creating serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfering with an action

taken or planned by another agency.

(3) Materially altering the budgetary

impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof.

(4) Raising novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in this Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive

Order 12866, it has been determined

that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is

therefore not subject to OMB review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 605(b)), EPA has determined

that this rule would not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small businesses. EPA has

determined that approximately 10

percent of the parties affected by this

rule could be small businesses.

However, EPA expects to receive few

significant new use notices for these

substances. Therefore, EPA believes that

the number of small businesses affected

by this rule will not be substantial, even

if all of the SNUR notice submitters

were small firms.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements contained in this rule have

been approved by OMB under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), and have

been assigned OMB control number

2070–0012.

Public reporting burden for this

collection of information is estimated to

vary from 30 to 170 hours per response,

with an average of 100 hours per

response, including time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data

sources, gathering and maintaining the

data needed, and completing and

reviewing the collection of information.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

Environmental protection, Chemicals,

Hazardous materials, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Significant

new uses.

Dated: May 5, 1995.

Charles M. Auer,

Director, Chemical Control Division, Office

of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

Accordingly, 40 CFR part 721 is

amended as set forth below:

PART 721—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 721

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and

2625(c).

2. By adding new § 721.5540 to

subpart E to read as follows:

§ 721.5540 1H,3H,5H-oxazolo [3,4-c]

oxazole, dihydro-7a-methyl-.

(a) Chemical substances and

significant new uses subject to reporting.

(1) The chemical substance identified as

1H,3H,5H-oxazolo [3,4-c] oxazole,

dihydro-7a-methyl- (PMN P–91–1324) is

subject to reporting under this section

for the significant new uses described in

paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(2) The significant new uses are:

(i) Protection in the workplace.

Requirements as specified in § 721.63

(a)(2)(iii) and (a)(3).

(ii) Release to water. Requirements as

specified in § 721.90 (a)(4), (b)(4), and

(c)(4) (where N = 500 ppb).

(b) Specific requirements. The

provisions of subpart A of this part

apply to this section except as modified

by this paragraph.

(1) Recordkeeping requirements. The

following recordkeeping requirements

specified in § 721.125 (a), (b), (c), (d),

(e), and (k) are applicable to

manufacturers, importers, and

processors of this substance.

(2) Limitations or revocation of

certain notification requirements. The

provisions of § 721.185 apply to this

section.

[FR Doc. 95–12142 Filed 5–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Parts 217 and 227

[Docket No. 950427119–5314–02; I.D.

051195A]

RIN 0648–AH98

Sea Turtle Conservation: Restrictions

Applicable to Shrimp Trawling

Activities; Modification of Additional

Turtle Excluder Device Requirements

Within Certain Statistical Zones

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
26692 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 96 / Thursday, May 18, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Modification of temporary

requirements; request for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS is modifying the

temporary requirements effective April

30, and published on May 3, 1995, to

protect sea turtles from shrimp trawling

activities in some portions of the Gulf of

Mexico. This modification to the

temporary requirements is being made

to ease a burdensome requirement on

shrimp trawlers while still providing

protection for sea turtles. The

modification partially rescinds the

temporary prohibition on the use of try

nets by shrimp trawlers in the areas

subject to the temporary requirements,

unless the try nets are equipped with

NMFS-approved TEDs other than soft or

bottom-opening TEDs, by allowing try

nets with a headrope length of 12 feet

(3.6 m) or less and a footrope length of

15 feet (4.5 m) or less to be used without

a TED installed. All other requirements,

including the boundary of the affected

areas remain unchanged.

DATES: This action is effective May 12,

1995 through 11:59 p.m. (local time) on

May 29, 1995. Comments on this action

must be submitted by June 12, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this action

and requests for a copy of the

environmental assessment (EA)

prepared for this action should be

addressed to the Chief, Endangered

Species Division, Office of Protected

Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles A. Oravetz, 813–570–5312, or

Russell Bellmer, 301–713–1401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On April 30, 1995 (60 FR 21741; May

3, 1995), temporary requirements were

placed on shrimp trawling in nearshore

waters along two sections of the Texas

and Louisiana coast in order to conserve

listed species of sea turtles, especially

the severely endangered Kemp’s ridley.

These requirements were necessitated

by the continued high rates of sea turtle

strandings occurring along areas of the

Texas coast, and the measures

implemented were consistent with

NMFS’ November 14, 1994 Biological

Opinion on the shrimp trawl fishery and

the NMFS Shrimp Fishery Emergency

Response Plan (ERP). The ERP was

signed by the Assistant Administrator

for Fisheries, NOAA, (AA) on March 14,

1995 and was immediately distributed

widely among industry and

environmental groups. A notice of

availability for the ERP was published

on April 21, 1995 (60 FR 19885).

A complete discussion of sea turtle

strandings in Texas was contained in

the temporary requirements (60 FR

21741; May 3, 1995), and a summary of

strandings is provided here. For the 3

consecutive weeks beginning April 9

and ending April 29, strandings in Zone

20 were 3, 3, and 15 turtles per week.

Of these 21 turtles, 7 were Kemp’s

ridleys. In Zone 18 for the same period,

12, 16, and 6 turtles stranded per week.

Of these 34 turtles, 28 were Kemp’s

ridleys. Restrictions to the shrimp

fishery went into effect on April 30,

1995, and in the following week

strandings fell to 2 turtles, including 1

Kemp’s ridley, in Zone 20, but rose to

8 turtles, including 5 Kemp’s ridleys in

Zone 18. With the exception of Zone 20

during the week following

implementation of the restrictions, all

these strandings approach or exceed the

incidental take levels (ITLs) established

for those zones.

The Biological Opinion provides that

conservation measures be implemented

as mortality levels approach ITLs

established in the Incidental Take

Statement in order to ensure that

shrimping is not likely to jeopardize the

continued existence of Kemp’s ridley.

The Biological Opinion specifically

provides that such measures be

implemented immediately when sea

turtle takings, indicated or documented,

reach 75 percent of the established

levels. The conservation measures are

intended to allow shrimp fishing to

continue while reducing the likelihood

of further sea turtle strandings. The ERP

provides further guidance on the nature

and geographic scope of such measures.

A description of the sea turtle

stranding events, temporary

requirements, and the areas in which

they apply are detailed in the temporary

requirements (60 FR 21741; May 3,

1995) and are not repeated here.

Pursuant to 50 CFR

227.72(e)(2)(ii)(B)(1), try nets of up to 20

feet (6.1 m) in headrope length have

been exempted from the TED

requirements, because they are only

intended for use in brief sampling tows

not likely to result in turtle mortality.

Turtles are, however, caught in try nets,

and either through repeated captures or

long tows, try nets can contribute to the

mortality of sea turtles. Takes of sea

turtles in try nets, including one

mortality, have been documented by

NMFS, and in the NMFS bycatch

observer program from 1992 through

1995, try nets accounted for 43% of the

observed turtle captures.

Preliminary Comments

NMFS made the ERP available to all

concerned parties for their information

and to solicit comments on the ERP.

NMFS distributed the ERP widely

among shrimp industry and

environmental organizations

immediately upon the ERP’s completion

in March, 1995. In addition, formal

notice of availability for the ERP was

published on April 21, 1995 (60 FR

19885). Furthermore, NMFS widely

distributes weekly reports of stranding

events and distributed the ERP

implementation, in which fishermen

were reminded of the specific

restrictions that would be implemented

if continued, elevated sea turtle

strandings occurred. All of the

restrictive measures imposed by NMFS

in response to elevated sea turtle

strandings were identified in the ERP

and weekly implementation notices.

Nonetheless, while NMFS received

general comments regarding the

necessity of the ERP, only one comment

was received from any segment of the

shrimp industry concerning the

potential restrictions discussed in the

ERP. This commenter objected to the

possible restrictions on soft TEDs and

asked that NMFS assess alternatives for

flap restrictions. The required use of

TEDs in try nets was acceptable and the

commenter stated that many local

fishermen already used TEDs in try nets.

Among the general comments, NMFS

has also received proposals from several

segments of the shrimp fishery which

contain alternative means to limit

nearshore fishing pressure and resulting

levels of turtle capture. NMFS is

evaluating these proposals and may

revise the ERP to incorporate the

alternative conservation measures.

Since the temporary requirements

have been implemented, however,

NMFS has received numerous

comments on this action. These have

come primarily by telephone and at a

meeting hosted by shrimp industry

representatives and attended by the

NMFS personnel on May 5, 1995.

Although the official comment period

for the April 30, 1995 temporary

requirements does not end until May 27,

1995, NMFS believes that the

overwhelming number of comments

regarding a particular aspect of the

restrictions warrants immediate agency

response.

Many shrimpers have stated that the

prohibition on all try nets without TEDs

is unreasonable. Try nets are small nets

that are intended for very short tows—

usually less than 15 minutes—to sample

shrimp abundance before or during

trawling with the main nets. Shrimp

fishermen have complained, however,

that NMFS has not provided any

alternative to the prohibition that would

allow them to monitor their catch rates
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 96 / Thursday, May 18, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 26693

and catch composition, forcing them to

fish inefficiently, to their own detriment

and that of turtles. NMFS now believes

that the prohibition of all try nets is

burdensome and that an alternative

exists that will allow fishermen to work

efficiently, while reducing the

likelihood of turtle entrapment in

shrimp trawl gear.

Alternatives for Try Net Use

Under the existing sea turtle

conservation regulations, try nets with a

headrope length of 20 feet (6.1 m) or less

are exempt from the required use of

TEDs. A 20–foot (6.1–m) headrope try

net can have a fairly wide spread of 15

to 16 feet (4.5 to 4.8 m), and its mouth

may open up several feet (approx. 1 m)

off the bottom. By attaching extra

webbing called a ‘‘tongue’’ or a ‘‘bib’’ to

the center of the headrope and attaching

an additional towing wire to this bib,

the try net’s mouth can be made to open

even higher. These large try nets are

certainly capable of capturing sea

turtles. Indeed, a 20–foot (6.1–m) try net

is little different from the 25– and 30–

foot (7.6– and 9.1–m) headrope length

nets that are commonly used as main

trawl nets on smaller trawlers, and

which are subject to TED requirements.

The larger try nets are also capable of

retaining larger catches, which may

provide an incentive to tow them for

longer periods, increasing the

possibility of lethally taking a sea turtle.

NMFS originally allowed the try net

TED exemption based on the

presumption that try nets would be

fished for no more than 20–30 minutes.

As the size of the try net decreases, so

does the potential for adversely affecting

sea turtles. A small try net, with a

headrope length of 12 feet (3.6 m),

would only have a spread of about 8–

9 feet (2.4–2.7 m) and would only open

1–2 feet (0.3–0.6 m) high. Such a net

would also have a very small tail bag to

accumulate shrimp catch, and there

would be little incentive to use it longer

than necessary to monitor shrimp catch

rate. NMFS believes that a try net of this

size is less likely to capture a sea turtle,

and is unlikely to be fished long enough

to kill a turtle if it were captured. This

size net, however, would still be large

enough for shrimp trawlers to monitor

their shrimp catch rates.

In order to provide an alternative that

will allow fishermen to sample their

shrimp catch rates, while providing sea

turtles with needed protection from

entrapment in shrimp trawl nets, NMFS

is partially rescinding the prohibition

on the use of try nets without a topopening, hard TED installed. The

temporary prohibition on the use of try

nets, unless equipped with NMFSapproved TEDs other than soft or

bottom-opening TEDs, as described in

the temporary requirements (60 FR

21741; May 3, 1995) is being modified

and still apply to try nets with a

headrope length greater than 12 feet (3.6

m) or a footrope length greater than 15

feet (4.5 m). However, try nets with a

headrope length of 12 feet (3.6 m) or less

and a footrope length of 15 feet (4.5 m)

or less may be used without a TED

installed. Footrope length is defined in

50 CFR 217.12 as ‘‘the distance between

the points at which the ends of the

footrope are attached to the trawl net,

measured along the forwardmost

webbing.’’ Headrope length is defined in

50 CFR 217.12 as ‘‘the distance between

the points at which the ends of the

headrope are attached to the trawl net,

measured along the forewardmost

webbing.’’ Any bibs or tongues added to

a net would be included in the

measurement and add to overall

headrope length.

This modification to the temporary

requirement affects only the prohibition

relating to try nets. The other

prohibitions, the affected area, and the

effective dates remain unchanged. For

clarity, however, all the restrictions in

effect, including the one modification,

will be set forth in the requirements

section below.

Requirements

This action is authorized by 50 CFR

227.72(e)(6). The definitions in 50 CFR

217.12 are applicable to this action, as

well as all relevant provisions in 50 CFR

parts 217 and 227. For example,

§ 227.71(b)(3) provides that it is

unlawful to fish for or possess fish or

wildlife contrary to a restriction

specified or issued under § 227.72(e)(3)

or (e)(6).

NMFS hereby notifies owners and

operators of shrimp trawlers (as defined

in 50 CFR 217.12) that, starting May 12,

1995, and ending 11:59 p.m. (local time)

on May 30, 1995, fishing by shrimp

trawlers in offshore waters, seaward to

10 nm (18.5 km) from the COLREGS

line, along 2 sections of the Texas and

Louisiana coast, the first bounded

between 27° N. lat. and 28° N. lat. and

the second bounded between 95°13′ W.

long. and 93°20.5′ W. long., is

prohibited unless shrimp trawlers

comply with the following restrictions

to the exceptions for incidental taking in

50 CFR 227.72(e):

1. Use of soft TEDs described in 50

CFR 227.72(e)(4)(iii) is prohibited.

2. Use of hard TEDs with bottom

escape openings and special hard TEDs

with bottom escape openings is

prohibited. Approved hard TEDs and

special hard TEDs must be configured

with the slope of the deflector bars

upward from forward to aft and with the

escape opening at the top of the trawl.

3. Use of try nets with a headrope

length greater than 12 ft (3.6 m) or a

footrope length greater than 15 ft (4.5 m)

is prohibited unless a NMFS-approved

top-opening, hard TED or special hard

TED is installed when the try nets are

rigged for fishing. Try nets with a

headrope length 12 ft (3.6 m) or less and

a footrope length 15 ft (4.5 m) or less are

exempt from the TED use requirement

in accordance with the specifications of

50 CFR 227.72(e)(2)(ii)(B)(1).

4. Use of a webbing flap that

completely covers the escape opening in

the trawl is prohibited. Any webbing

which is attached to the trawl, forward

of the escape opening, must be cut to a

length so that the trailing edge of such

webbing does not approach to within 2

inches (5.1 cm) of the posterior edge of

the TED grid. The requirements for the

size of the escape opening are

unchanged.

All provisions in 50 CFR 227.72(e),

including, but not limited to 50 CFR

227.72(e)(2)(ii)(B)(1) (use of try nets), 50

CFR 227.72(e)(4)(iii) (approval of soft

TEDs), 50 CFR 227.72(e)(4)(i)(F)

(position of escape opening), and 50

CFR 227.72(e)(4)(iv)(C) (webbing flap),

that do not conform to these

requirements are hereby suspended for

the duration of this action.

Owners and operators of shrimp

trawlers in the area subject to

restrictions that they may be required to

carry a NMFS-approved observer aboard

such vessel(s) if selected to do so by the

Director, Southeast Region, NMFS,

(Regional Director) upon written

notification sent to either the address

specified for the vessel registration or

documentation purposes, or otherwise

served on the owner or operator of the

vessel. Shrimp trawlers must comply

with the and conditions specified in

such written notification.

Additional Conservation Measures

The AA may withdraw or modify the

requirement for specific conservation

measures or any restriction on

shrimping activities if the AA

determines that such action is

warranted. Notification of any

additional sea turtle conservation

measures, including any extension of

this 30-day emergency action, will be

published in the Federal Register

pursuant to 50 CFR 227.72(e)(6).

Classification

Because neither section 553 of the

Administrative Procedure Act (APA),

nor any other law requires that general

notice of proposed rulemaking be

published for this action, and under
26694 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 96 / Thursday, May 18, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

section 603(b) of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, an initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis is not required.

This action has been determined to be

not significant for purposes of E.O.

12866.

Pursuant to section 553(b)(B) of the

APA, the AA finds there is good cause

to waive prior notice and opportunity to

comment on this action. It is

unnecessary because this action is in

response to comments received on the

temporary requirement published May

3, 1995 (60 FR 21741). It is also

impracticable and contrary to the public

interest because current restrictions

placed upon fishermen are

unnecessarily burdensome, and any

delay in this action imposes additional

unnecessary fishing restrictions.

Because this rule relieves a

restriction, under section 553(d) of the

APA a 30-day delay in effective date is

not required.

The AA prepared an EA for the final

rule (57 FR 57348, December 4, 1992)

requiring TED use in shrimp trawls and

establishing the 30-day notice

procedures. An EA has been prepared

for this action. Copies of the EA and the

supplemental EA are available (see

ADDRESSES).

Dated: May 12, 1995.

Gary Matlock,

Program Management Officer, National

Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12180 Filed 5–12–95; 3:47 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

50 CFR Part 672

[Docket No. 95020641–5041–01; I.D.

050495A]

Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska;

Vessels Using Hook-and-Line Gear

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the entire

Gulf of Alaska (GOA) to directed fishing

with hook-and-line gear for all species

that compose the ‘‘other hook-and-line

gear fishery’’. This action is necessary

because the bycatch allowance of Pacific

halibut apportioned to the ‘‘other hookand-line gear fishery’’ in the GOA for

the 1995 fishing year has been caught.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local

time (A.l.t.), May 18, 1995, until 12

midnight, A.l.t., December 31, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew N. Smoker, 907–586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive

economic zone is managed by NMFS

according to the Fishery Management

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of

Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North

Pacific Fishery Management Council

under authority of the Magnuson

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is governed

by regulations implementing the FMP at

50 CFR parts 620 and 672.

In accordance with

§ 672.20(f)(1)(ii)(A), the 1995 Pacific

halibut bycatch allowance apportioned

to the ‘‘other hook-and-line gear

fishery,’’ which is defined at

§ 672.20(f)(1)(ii)(B)(3), is 290 metric tons

(60 FR 12149, March 6, 1995).

The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS,

has determined in accordance with

§ 672.20(f)(3)(ii) that U.S. fishing vessels

participating in the ‘‘other hook-andline gear fishery’’ have caught the entire

Pacific halibut bycatch allowance for

1995. Therefore, NMFS is closing the

entire GOA to directed fishing with

hook-and-line gear for each species and/

or species group composing the ‘‘other

hook-and-line gear fishery’’.

Directed fishing standards for

applicable gear types may be found in

the regulations at § 672.20(g).

Classification

This action is taken under 50 CFR

672.20 and is exempt from OMB review

under E.O. 12866.

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

Dated: May 12, 1995.

Richard W. Surdi,

Acting Director, Office of Fisheries

Conservation and Management, National

Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12212 Filed 5–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

50 CFR Part 675

[Docket No. 950206040–5040–01; I.D.

051595C]

Groundfish of the Bering Sea and

Aleutian Islands Area; Sharpchin/

Northern Rockfish Species Category in

the Aleutian Islands Subarea

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the directed

fishery for the sharpchin/northern

rockfish species category in the Aleutian

Islands subarea (AI) of the Bering Sea

and Aleutian Islands management area

(BSAI). This action is necessary to

prevent exceeding the sharpchin/

northern rockfish species category total

allowable catch (TAC) in the AI.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local

time (A.l.t.), May 17, 1995, until 12

midnight, A.l.t., December 31, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew N. Smoker, 907–586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

groundfish fishery in the BSAI exclusive

economic zone is managed by NMFS

according to the Fishery Management

Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (FMP)

prepared by the North Pacific Fishery

Management Council under authority of

the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and

Management Act. Fishing by U.S.

vessels is governed by regulations

implementing the FMP at 50 CFR parts

620 and 675.

In accordance with § 675.20(a)(7)(ii)

the sharpchin/northern rockfish species

category TAC for the AI was established

by the final groundfish specifications

(60 FR 8479, February 14, 1995) as 4,338

metric tons (mt).

The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS

(Regional Director), has determined, in

accordance with § 675.20(a)(8), that the

sharpchin/northern rockfish species

category TAC in the AI soon will be

reached. Therefore, the Regional

Director has established a directed

fishing allowance of 4,038 mt, with

consideration that 300 mt will be taken

as incidental catch in directed fishing

for other species in the AI. The Regional

Director has determined that the

directed fishing allowance has been

reached. Consequently, NMFS is

prohibiting directed fishing for the

sharpchin/northern rockfish species

category in the AI.

Directed fishing standards for

applicable gear types may be found in

the regulations at § 675.20(h).

Classification

This action is taken under 50 CFR

675.20 and is exempt from review under

E.O. 12866.

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

Dated: May 15, 1995.

Richard W. Surdi,

Acting Director, Office of Fisheries

Conservation and Management, National

Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12276 Filed 5–15–95; 2:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F