53390 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

statement. The proposal would require 

an amendment to FTA’s school bus 

operations regulations, not its 

interpretation of those regulations, and 

FTA would have to adopt such a 

scheme through a rulemaking. 

With respect to the proposed 

exemptions, FTA believes that, if 

adopted, these proposals would 

constitute substantive changes to the 

text of FTA’s school bus operations 

regulations. FTA already lists a series of 

allowable exemptions at 49 CFR 605.11. 

Thus, FTA believes that it cannot 

appropriately consider these 

exemptions within the rubric of this 

final policy statement. 

Finally, FTA believes that the 

comments suggesting a negotiated 

rulemaking fall outside the scope of this 

policy statement. FTA will 

appropriately address any comments 

regarding a notice of proposed 

rulemaking in that forum. 

IV. Final FTA Policy 

A. Purpose of Final FTA Policy 

In the final policy set forth below, 

FTA clarifies its guidance regarding 

FTA’s interpretation of its school bus 

operations regulations under 49 CFR 

part 605 in light of the Court’s decision 

in Rochester-Genesee Regional 

Transportation Authority. FTA respects 

the Court’s decision in the Western 

District of New York. However, FTA 

finds that the Court’s decision is 

problematic because, if applied 

elsewhere in the United States, it could 

obstruct FTA’s ability to execute and 

implement Congress’s school bus 

prohibition and Congress’s express 

intent regarding that prohibition. 

Therefore, FTA issues this final policy 

statement to clarify the status of FTA’s 

guidance regarding its interpretation of 

its school bus operations regulations 

under 49 CFR part 605, and to resolve, 

for jurisdictions outside of the Western 

District of New York, conflicting issues 

between FTA’s school bus operations 

policy and the Court’s decision in 

Rochester-Genesee Regional 

Transportation Authority. 

Additionally, FTA intends to issue 

expeditiously a notice of proposed 

rulemaking to provide clearer 

definitions of ‘‘tripper service’’ and 

‘‘school bus operations,’’ as well as 

generally to update the existing school 

bus regulation. 

B. Tripper Service 

With respect to a grantee’s regularly 

scheduled public transportation service, 

FTA shall interpret the definition of 

‘‘tripper service’’ under 49 CFR 605.3(b), 

as it historically has interpreted that 

definition, to allow a grantee to (1) 

utilize ‘‘various fare collections or 

subsidy systems,’’ (2) modify the 

frequency of service, and (3) make de 

minimis route alterations from route 

paths in the immediate vicinity of 

schools to stops located at or in close 

proximity to the schools. For example, 

a grantee may provide more frequent 

service on an existing route to 

accommodate increased student 

ridership before and after school. 

Furthermore, a grantee may alter route 

paths to accommodate the needs of 

school students by making de minimis 

route alterations from route paths to 

drop off and pick up students at stops 

located on school grounds or in close 

proximity to the schools. 

FTA believes that this policy 

regarding its interpretation of the 

definition of ‘‘tripper service’’ is 

consistent with both the statutory 

language and the language of 49 CFR 

605.3(b). This policy permits only the 

type of design or modification 

accommodations that FTA historically 

has allowed and does not represent a 

departure from FTA’s prior guidance on 

this matter. 

C. ‘‘Exclusive’’ School Bus Operations 

To effectuate the intent of Congress 

when it enacted its school bus 

operations prohibition now codified at 

49 U.S.C. 5323(f), FTA shall interpret 

the term ‘‘exclusively’’ in the definition 

of ‘‘school bus operations’’ under 49 

CFR 605.3(b) to encompass any service 

that a reasonable person would 

conclude was primarily designed to 

accommodate students and school 

personnel, and only incidentally to 

serve the nonstudent general public. 

Additionally, grantees may create new 

routes to serve school students and 

personnel if a reasonable person would 

conclude that the grantees designed the 

routes to serve some segment of the 

nonstudent general public. 

FTA believes that maintaining this 

interpretation of ‘‘exclusively’’ is 

consistent with the legislative history on 

the issue and would allow FTA 

effectively to implement the express 

intent of Congress, which is to prevent 

unfair competition between Federally 

funded grantees and private school bus 

operators. This policy does not 

represent a departure from FTA’s prior 

guidance on this matter, and is merely 

intended to provide FTA with 

additional flexibility when interpreting 

49 U.S.C. 5323(f) and 49 CFR 605.3(b) 

and effectuating the intent of Congress. 

Issued in Washington, DC on this 11th day 

of September 2008. 

James S. Simpson, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E8–21601 Filed 9–15–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 080225265–81165–02] 

RIN 0648–AW28 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Recordkeeping and 

Reporting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues regulations to 

exempt groundfish catcher/processors 

and motherships equipped with an 

operational vessel monitoring system 

transmitter from check–in/check–out 

requirements. This action reduces 

paperwork requirements for certain 

catcher/processors and motherships and 

changes the definitions for ‘‘active’’ 

period for motherships and trawl, 

longline, and pot gear catcher/ 

processors. This action reduces 

administrative costs for both the fishing 

industry and NMFS. 

DATES: Effective October 16, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments 

regarding the burden-hour estimates or 

other aspects of the collection–of– 

information requirements contained in 

this final rule may be submitted to 

NMFS Alaska Region, P. O. Box 21668, 

Juneau, AK 99802 or the Alaska Region 

NMFS website at http:// 

alaskafisheries.noaa.gov and by email to 

DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 

202–395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patsy A. Bearden, 907–586–7008. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

NMFS manages the U.S. groundfish 

fisheries of the exclusive economic zone 

(EEZ) off Alaska under the Fishery 

Management Plan for Groundfish of the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

Management Area and the Fishery 

Management Plan for Groundfish of the 

Gulf of Alaska (FMPs). The North 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 53391 

prepared the FMPs pursuant to the 

Magnuson–Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act, 16 

U.S.C. 1801 et seq. (Magnuson–Stevens 

Act). Regulations implementing the 

FMPs appear at 50 CFR part 679. 

General regulations that pertain to U.S. 

fisheries appear at subpart H of 50 CFR 

part 600. 

Check–in/check–out Reports 

A fish processor uses a check–in/ 

check–out report to notify NMFS that it 

will participate or cease participation in 

a groundfish fishery. The check–in/ 

check–out report also tells NMFS where 

fishing will occur (if a catcher/ 

processor) or where groundfish will be 

received (if a mothership). NMFS 

inseason managers originally used the 

check–in/check–out information to 

monitor fishing capacity and effort. The 

information also was used by the United 

States Coast Guard to monitor catcher/ 

processor and mothership vessel 

location. 

According to regulations at § 679.5(h), 

catcher/processor and mothership 

operators, and shoreside processor and 

stationary floating processor managers 

must submit check–in/check–out 

reports on behalf of the processor. This 

action exempts operators of catcher/ 

processors and motherships equipped 

with an operational vessel monitoring 

system (VMS) transmitter from 

submitting a check–in/check–out report 

to NMFS. Specifically, this action 

revises the text at § 679.5(h) to state that 

a catcher/processor or mothership that 

is not carrying onboard an operational 

VMS transmitter that meets the 

requirements of § 679.28(f) must submit 

check–in/check–out reports. 

This action does not change the 

check–in/check–out report submission 

requirement for shoreside processors 

and stationary floating processors. 

Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) 

Over the past ten years, NMFS has 

added the requirement for VMS use in 

many fishery management programs to 

monitor vessel location. VMS 

transmitters combine global positioning 

systems and satellite communications to 

automatically provide precise location 

reports to NMFS several times each 

hour. NMFS requires VMS 

transmissions when a vessel is operating 

in: 

• Any reporting area off Alaska while 

any fishery requiring VMS for which the 

vessel has a species and gear 

endorsement on its Federal Fisheries 

Permit is open; 

•The Aleutian Islands subarea; 

•The Gulf of Alaska (GOA) and 

mobile bottom contact gear is onboard; 

and 

•The Central GOA Rockfish Pilot 

Program. 

Active and Inactive Status 

NMFS’ current recordkeeping and 

reporting regulations are based on the 

active/inactive status of fishery 

participants. Processors, including 

motherships and trawl, longline, and 

pot gear catcher/processors, must record 

the occurrence of active and inactive 

periods. If inactive, a processor is 

required to do minimum recordkeeping 

and is not required to submit a check– 

in/check–out report. If active, a 

processor must submit a check–in/ 

check–out report in addition to 

recording and reporting detailed catch 

information in logbooks and electronic 

and non–electronic reports. 

The definition for an active period for 

a mothership and catcher/processor 

currently means ‘‘when checked–in or 

processing.’’ Because this action 

eliminates the check–in/check–out 

report submittal requirement for certain 

of the motherships and catcher/ 

processors, these processors would not 

qualify as being active and therefore 

would not need to report catch 

information. Therefore, the definition 

for an active period must change by 

removing ‘‘checked–in’’ as a reason for 

being active. 

For a catcher/processor using longline 

or pot gear, the definition for ‘‘active’’ 

status is revised at § 679.5(a)(7)(i)(D)(1) 

to describe that ‘‘active’’ status starts 

when all or part of the longline or pot 

gear is in the water. For a catcher/ 

processor using trawl gear, the 

definition for ‘‘active’’ status is revised 

at § 679.5(a)(7)(i)(D)(2) to describe that 

‘‘active’’ status starts when all or part of 

the trawl net is in the water. Further, for 

a mothership, the definition for ‘‘active’’ 

status is revised at § 679.5(a)(7)(i)(C) to 

describe that an ‘‘active’’ status is when 

a mothership is receiving or processing 

groundfish. 

A proposed rule was published in the 

Federal Register on May 29, 2008 (73 

FR 30876), and the public review and 

comment period closed on June 30, 

2008. No comments were received, and 

no changes have been made to the 

proposed rule. Please refer to the 

proposed rule for more detailed 

background information. 

Classification 

The Administrator, Alaska Region, 

NMFS, determined that this regulatory 

amendment is necessary for the 

conservation and management of the 

groundfish fishery and that it is 

consistent with the Magnuson–Stevens 

Act and other applicable laws. 

This final rule has been determined to 

be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

The Chief Council for Regulation of 

the Department of Commerce certified 

to the Chief Council 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, and no changes have 

been made to the proposed rule. As a 

result, a regulatory flexibility analysis 

was not required and none was 

prepared. 

Collection–of–Information 

This rule contains a collection–of– 

information requirement subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that 

has been approved by OMB under 

Control Number 0648–0213. Public 

reporting burden for the check–in/ 

check–out report is estimated to average 

seven minutes per response including 

the time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data 

needed, and completing and reviewing 

the collection–of–information. The 

removal of the requirement for check–in 

and check–out reports by catcher/ 

processors and motherships will result 

in an estimated annual savings of 248 

burden hours per year, $6,200 in 

personnel costs, and $3,928 in 

miscellaneous costs. 

Send comments regarding this burden 

estimate, or any other aspect of this data 

collection, including suggestions for 

reducing the burden, to NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES) and by e–mail to 

DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 

202–395–7285. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679 

Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with RULES
53392 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: September 10, 2008. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE 

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF 

ALASKA 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 679 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et 

seq.; 3631 et seq.; and Pub. L. 108–447. 

■ 2. In § 679.5: 

■ a. Paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(3) are 

redesignated as paragraphs (h)(3) and 

(h)(4), respectively. 

■ b. Paragraph (h)(2) heading and 

paragraph (h)(2)(i) are added. 

■ c. Paragraph (h)(1)(iii) is redesignated 

as paragraph (h)(2)(ii). 

■ d. Paragraphs (a)(7)(i)(C), (a)(7)(i)(D), 

and (h)(1) introductory text, and the 

heading for newly redesignated 

paragraph (h)(2)(ii) are revised. 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting 

(R&R). 

(a) * * * 

(7) * * * 

(i) * * * 

If participant 

is. . . And fishing activity is. . . An active period is. . . An inactive period is. . . 

* * * * * * * 

(C) MS Receipt, discard, or processing of groundfish When receiving or processing groundfish. When not active 

(D) C/P Harvest, discard, or processing groundfish A longline or pot gear catcher/processor is active 

when processing groundfish or when all or part of the 

longline or pot gear is in the water. 

When not active 

A trawl gear catcher/processor is active when processing groundfish or when all or part of the trawl net is 

in the water. 

When not active 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(1) Requirement. Except as noted in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this section, the 

operator of a catcher/processor or 

mothership and the manager of a 

shoreside processor or stationary 

floating processor must submit to NMFS 

a check–in report (BEGIN message) prior 

to becoming active and a check–out 

report (CEASE message) for every 

check–in report submitted. The check– 

in report and check–out report must be 

submitted by fax to 907–586–7131, or by 

e–mail to 

erreports.alaskafisheries@noaa.gov. 

* * * * * 

(2) Exceptions—(i) VMS onboard. The 

operator of a catcher/processor or 

mothership is not required to submit to 

NMFS a check–in report or check–out 

report if the vessel is carrying onboard 

a transmitting VMS that meets the 

requirements of § 679.28(f). 

(ii) Two adjacent reporting areas. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E8–21597 Filed 9–15–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with RULES