Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 208 / Friday, October 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 62087 

a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except for Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

non-legal issues, you may call Mr. 

William D. Evans, Office of Crash 

Avoidance Standards at (202) 366–2272. 

His FAX number is (202) 366–7002. 

For legal issues, you may call Ms. 

Dorothy Nakama, Office of the Chief 

Counsel at (202) 366–2992. Her FAX 

number is (202) 366–3820. 

You may send mail to both of these 

officials at National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., 

SW., Washington, DC 20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

31, 2005 (70 FR 51707), NHTSA 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking to amend Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 120 Tire 

selection and rims for motor vehicles 

other than passenger cars, and 110, Tire 

selection and rims. We proposed to 

require manufacturers of motor homes 

and travel trailers over 4,536 kilograms 

(10,000 pounds) GVWR to provide 

information to consumers in a label that 

is intended to inform the consumer 

about the vehicle’s cargo carrying 

capacity (CCC). This information would 

be helpful both at the time the consumer 

is making a purchase decision and also 

as the consumer uses his or her vehicle. 

We also proposed to require that the 

size of tires on the same motor homes 

and travel trailers be the same as the 

size of the tires listed on the tire 

information label required by FMVSS 

No. 120. 

We proposed to limit our CCC label to 

motor homes and travel trailers with a 

GVWR greater than 4,536 kilograms 

(10,000 pounds) as these are the 

vehicles that have large open interior 

areas that consumers fill with cargo. We 

noted that Recreational vehicles (RV) 

with GVWRs equal to or less than 4,536 

kilograms (10,000 pounds) will be 

required to have less detailed CCC 

information as a result of an amendment 

to FMVSS No. 110, which took effect on 

September 1, 2005. It should be noted 

that on September 1, 2005, FMVSS No. 

120 was changed to apply to vehicles 

with a GVWR greater than 4,536 

kilograms (10,000 pounds) and FMVSS 

No. 110 was changed to apply to 

vehicles with a GVWR equal to or less 

than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). 

It is our belief that the proposed rule 

complements the efforts of the 

recreational vehicle industry to provide 

consumers with information in order to 

help reduce overloading in motor homes 

and travel trailers. 

In addition, we stated our belief that 

the proposed rule would provide 

regulatory relief for dealers from a 

labeling requirement in FMVSS No. 110. 

The standard’s requirement may 

currently require dealers that add even 

small amounts of weight to re-label the 

vehicles. Under the proposed 

amendment, dealers that add weight in 

excess of 0.5 percent of the vehicles’

gross vehicle weight ratings would be 

required to disclose this extra weight on 

labels affixed to the vehicles. Dealers 

could add lesser amounts of weight 

without needing to change or add labels. 

The NPRM announced a comment 

due date of October 31, 2005. 

In a joint letter dated October 14, 

2005, the National Truck and 

Equipment Dealers Association, the 

National Automobile Dealers 

Association, the National Association of 

Trailer Manufacturers, the National 

Marine Manufacturers Association, the 

Recreational Vehicle Dealers 

Association, the Tire Industries 

Association, the Service Station Dealers 

of America and Allied Trades, the 

Specialty Equipment Market 

Association, the National Trailer Dealers 

Association, the Automotive Service 

Association, and the Automotive 

Aftermarket Industry Association asked 

for an extension of time to comment on 

the NPRM. The stated rationale was that 

additional time was necessary ‘‘to allow 

for appropriate, well-reasoned 

comments addressing an array of 

practical technical issues associated 

with the cargo carrying capacity 

proposal.’’

After considering the rationale 

explaining the need for extra time to 

consider the NPRM as well as that these 

groups are primarily small businesses 

and the parties most directly affected by 

the proposal, NHTSA has decided that 

it is in the public interest to grant the 

submitters’ request. Therefore, NHTSA 

grants until November 30, 2005, 

submission of public comments on the 

NPRM of August 31, 2005. 

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

30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at 

49 CFR 1.50. 

Issued on: October 24, 2005. 

Stephen R. Kratzke, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 05–21500 Filed 10–27–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 660 

[I.D. 102105A] 

RIN 0648–AT11 

Fisheries Off West Coast States and in 

the Western Pacific; Coastal Pelagic 

Species Fishery; Amendment 11 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of an 

amendment to a fishery management 

plan; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 

(Council) has submitted Amendment 11 

to the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery 

Management Plan (FMP) for Secretarial 

review. Amendment 11 would change 

the framework for the annual 

apportionment of the Pacific sardine 

harvest guideline along the U.S. Pacific 

coast. The purpose of Amendment 11 is 

to achieve optimal utilization of the 

Pacific sardine resource and equitable 

allocation of the harvest opportunity for 

Pacific sardine. 

DATES: Comments on Amendment 11 

must be received on or before December 

27, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the NOA identified by I.D. 102105A 

by any of the following methods: 

• E-mail: 0648–AT11.SWR@noaa.gov. 

Include I.D. 102105 in the subject line 

of the message. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Rodney R. McInnis, Regional 

Administrator, Southwest Region, 

NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, 

Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802. 

• Fax: (562)980–4047 

Copies of Amendment 11, which 

includes an Environmental Assessment/ 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis/ 

Regulatory Impact Review, are available 

from Donald O. McIssac, Executive 

Director, Pacific Fishery Management 

Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, 

Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97220–

1384. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joshua B. Lindsay, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, NMFS, at 562–980–4034 or 

Mike Burner, Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, at 503–820–2280. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

62088 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 208 / Friday, October 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each 

Regional Fishery Management Council 

to submit any amendment to an FMP to 

NMFS for review and approval, 

disapproval, or partial approval. The 

Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires 

that NMFS, upon receiving an 

amendment to an FMP, immediately 

publish notification in the Federal 

Register that the amendment is 

available for public review and 

comment. NMFS will consider the 

public comments received during the 

comment period described above in 

determining whether to approve, 

disapprove, or partially approve 

Amendment 11. 

Amendment 11 establishes an 

allocation framework that would help to 

achieve optimal utilization and 

equitable allocation between the 

different sectors of the Pacific sardine 

fishery. The Council tasked the CPS 

Advisory Subpanel (Subpanel) to 

develop an initial range of allocation 

alternatives for a longer-term allocation 

framework. The Subpanel adopted a 

range of alternatives for the allocation of 

Pacific sardine at their meetings in 

August and September 2004. At the 

November 2004 meeting the Council 

reviewed the range of alternatives, and 

with some modification and additions 

forwarded nine alternatives to the CPS 

Management Team (Team) for 

preliminary analysis. When adopting a 

range of alternatives for long-term 

allocation in April 2005, the Council 

expressed an interest in having the 

flexibility to revisit the proposed action 

in the near-term as the Pacific sardine 

resource and the fisheries and markets 

that rely on it are dynamic and difficult 

to predict. 

At the April 2005 Council meeting the 

Council adopted seven of the nine 

alternatives and sent those to the Team 

for further analysis. Below is a summary 

of the seven forwarded alternatives 

given to the Team for analysis including 

both a no action alternative and a status 

quo alternative. If the Council chose to 

take no action, the allocation framework 

would revert to original FMP (64 FR 

69888, December 15, 1999) formula that 

was in place before the regulatory 

amendment (69 FR 8572, February 25, 

2003) was implemented in 2003. Under 

status quo the Council would have 

chosen to take action to extend the 

interim allocation. The order of 

alternatives does not indicate rank or 

priority. All alternatives (except No 

Action) used Point Arena, California 

(39° N. lat.) as the dividing line between 

the allocation subareas. In order to 

present the alternatives in a clear and 

comparable fashion the descriptions for 

the fishing season, the initial allocation, 

and reallocations made at different 

points during the fishing season are 

summarized in bullet form. 

No Action: FMP Allocation Framework 

The allocation subareas are divided at 

Point Piedras Blancas, California (35° 

40′ N. lat.). 

Season: January 1 – December 31 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 

percent of the harvest guideline is 

allocated to the Subarea A (north, which 

includes Monterey) and 66 percent to 

the Subarea B (Southern California). 

Reallocation: On October 1, remaining 

unharvested portion of the harvest 

guideline is pooled and reallocated 50 

percent to Subarea A (north) and 50 

percent to Subarea B (south). 

Status Quo: Interim Allocation 

Framework 

Season: January 1 – December 31 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 

percent of the harvest guideline is 

allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 

66 percent to Subarea B (south). 

Reallocation: On September 1, 20 

percent of the remaining unharvested 

portion of the harvest guideline is 

reallocated to the Subarea A (north) and 

80 percent to Subarea B (south). 

Second reallocation: On December 1, 

the remaining unharvested portion of 

the harvest guideline is reallocated 

coastwide. 

Alternative 1: Coastwide Allocation In 

Two Periods 

Season: January 1 – December 31 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 50 

percent of the harvest guideline is 

allocated coastwide. 

Reallocation: On July 1, the remaining 

harvest guideline (50 percent plus any 

unharvested portion from the initial 

allocation) is allocated coastwide. 

Alternative 2: Rejected by the Council 

Alternative 3: Coastwide Allocation In 

Three Periods 

Season: January 1 – December 31 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 

percent of the harvest guideline is 

allocated coastwide. 

Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of 

the harvest guideline (plus any 

unharvested portion from the initial 

allocation) is allocated coastwide. 

Second reallocation: On October 1, 20 

percent of the harvest guideline (plus 

any unharvested portion from the first 

reallocation) is reallocated coastwide. 

Alternative 4: Allocation Formula 

Depends on the Size of the Harvest 

Guideline 

Season: January 1 – December 31 

(a) The coastwide harvest guideline is 

greater than 100,000 mt: 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 

percent of the coastwide harvest 

guideline is allocated to the Subarea A 

(north) and 60 percent to the Subarea B 

(south). 

Reallocation: On September 1, the 

remaining unharvested portion of the 

harvest guideline is pooled and 

allocated coastwide. 

(b) The coastwide harvest guideline is 

less than 100,000 mt: 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 

percent of the coastwide harvest 

guideline is allocated to Subarea A 

(north) and 66 percent to the Subarea B 

(south). 

Reallocation: On September 1, the 

remaining unharvested portion of the 

coastwide harvest guideline is pooled 

and 20 percent is allocated to Subarea 

A (north) and 80 percent to the Subarea 

B (south). 

Second reallocation: On November 1, 

any remaining unharvested portion of 

the harvest guideline is again pooled 

and reallocated coastwide. 

Alternative 5: Rejected by the Council 

Alternative 6: Transfer of Unused 

Allocations Between Subareas 

Season: January 1 – December 31 

Initial allocation (for 2006 only): On 

January 1, 40 percent of the harvest 

guideline is allocated to the Subarea A 

(north) and 60 percent to the Subarea B 

(south). 

Reallocation: On September 1, the 

remaining harvest guideline is pooled 

and allocated coastwide. 

Transfer Rules For Computing 

Subsequent-Year Allocations 

After the initial year (2006) these 

rules dictate the allocations to each 

subarea in each subsequent year: 

Rule 1: The transfer of a portion of the 

harvest guideline from one subarea to 

the other, for the purpose of 

recomputing allocation percentages for 

the next year, occurs if the portion of a 

subarea’s allocation remaining uncaught 

at the end of the year is greater than the 

transfer limits described in Rule 2. 

Rule 2: If the harvest guideline is 

greater than 100,000 mt, the transfer 

amount will be equal to 10 percent of 

the coastwide harvest guideline for that 

year. When the coastwide harvest 

guideline is 100,000 mt or less, the 

transfer amount will be 5,000 mt. 

Rule 3: The transfer amount is applied 

to the current-year allocation for each 

subarea. The resulting numerical values 

are then converted to percentages of the 

current-year coastwide harvest 

guideline and used to determine the 

initial allocation for the following year. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 208 / Friday, October 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules 62089 

Rule 4: No subarea may initially be 

allocated more than 75 percent of the 

coastwide harvest guideline. 

Rule 5: The September 1 coastwide 

reallocation always applies. 

Alternative 7: Equal Reallocation 

Season: January 1 December 31 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 

percent of the harvest guideline is 

allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 

66 percent to the Subarea B (south). 

Reallocation: On September 1, 

remaining harvest guideline is pooled 

and 50 percent of the harvest guideline 

is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 

50 percent to the Subarea B (south). 

Second Reallocation: On November 1, 

any remaining unharvested portion of 

the harvest guideline is again pooled 

and reallocated coastwide.At the June 

2005 Council meeting in Foster City, 

CA, the Council adopted a preferred 

option for the allocation of Pacific 

sardine that creates a seasonal, 

coastwide allocation scheme. This 

preferred alternative is a modified 

version of Alternative 3, which provides 

the following allocation formula for the 

non-tribal share of the harvest guideline: 

Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods 

Season: January 1 – December 31 

Initial allocation: On January 1, 35 

percent of the harvest guideline is 

allocated coastwide. 

Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of 

the harvest guideline (plus any 

unharvested portion from the initial 

allocation) is allocated coastwide. 

Second reallocation: On September 

15, 25 percent of the harvest guideline 

(plus any unharvested portion from the 

first reallocation) is reallocated 

coastwide. 

The Council also recommended a 

review of the allocation formula in 

2008. 

Public comments on Amendment 11 

must be received by December 27, 2005, 

to be considered by NMFS in the 

decision whether to approve, 

disapprove, or partially approve 

Amendment 11. A proposed rule to 

implement Amendment 11 has been 

submitted for Secretarial review and 

approval. NMFS expects to publish and 

request public comment on the 

proposed regulation to implement 

Amendment 11 in the near future. 

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

Dated: October 24, 2005. 

Ann M. Lange, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–21561 Filed 10–27–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S