        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 050630174-5174-01; ID 062005B]
        RIN 0648-AT08
        Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Framework Adjustment 41

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes regulations to implement Framework Adjustment 41 (FW 41) to the NE Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP). FW 41 management measures were developed by the New England Fishery Management Council (Council) to expand participation in the existing Closed Area (CA) I Hook Gear Haddock Special Access Program (SAP) to all Northeast (NE) multispecies limited access Days-at Sea (DAS) vessels fishing with hook gear. The proposed action would also modify some of the management measures currently applicable to the Georges Bank (GB) Cod Hook Sector (Sector) vessels when declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP by including modification of the season, haddock total allowable catch (TAC), and restricting vessels to fishing only inside the SAP area on trips declared into the SAP. In addition, NMFS proposes to clarify regulations pertaining to fishing in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program Area. Specifically, during the time the SAP is open, eligible vessels could choose to fish in the SAP, and fish in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area west of CA II. This action is intended to mitigate the economic and social impacts resulting from Amendment 13 to the FMP and to meet the conservation and management requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by August 17, 2005.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
          • E-mail: FW41@NOAA.gov. Include in the subject line the following:  Comments on the Proposed Rule for Groundfish Framework 41.
          • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:/www.regulations.gov.
          • Mail:  Paper, disk, or CD-ROM comments should be sent to Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope “Comments on the Proposed Rule for Groundfish Framework 41.”
          • Fax: (978) 281-9135.
          Copies of FW 41, its Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and the Environmental Assessment (EA) are available from Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, The Tannery B Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. A summary of the IRFA is provided in the Classification section of this proposed rule.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Brian Hooker, Fishery Policy Analyst, phone: (978) 281-9220, fax: (978) 281-9135.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        In order to increase the fishing effort on, and yield from healthy stocks, Amendment 13 to the FMP created a structure that allows for development of programs to target healthy fish stocks using Category B DAS. Amendment 13 included four specific SAPs, only two of which were approved and implemented on May 1, 2004. The regulations implementing FW 40-A (69 FR 67780, November 19, 2004) also created opportunities to use Category B DAS, including the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP. However, due to insufficient controls on GB cod mortality, which could have led to undermining fishing mortality objectives necessary to end overfishing and rebuild the GB cod stock, the measures for non-Sector vessels proposed in FW 40-A were found to be inconsistent with National Standard 1 and section 303(a)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and were thus disapproved. Specifically, the portion of the program pertaining to non-Sector vessels proposed to:  Allow participants to fish in the SAP area using either an A or B DAS; count cod catch against the SAP's incidental cod TAC only when fishing on a B DAS; allow participants to fish both inside and outside the SAP area on the same trip under different gear restrictions; and allow non-DAS groundfish vessels to participate in the SAP. In contrast, regulations pertaining to the Sector vessels were relatively straightforward in that all cod caught by Sector vessels count toward the Sector's allocation of GB cod, and the same gear restrictions apply both inside and outside of the SAP area on a single trip. The purpose of this action is to revise the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP rules to allow participation by non-Sector vessels. This special access program would help mitigate the economic and social impacts caused by the fishing effort reductions that resulted from implementation of Amendment 13.

        FW 41 would provide access to the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP for all limited access NE multispecies DAS permit holders, including both Sector and non-Sector vessels. Working together, Sector and non-Sector vessel owners who plan to participate in the program have suggested measures to minimize the potential for a derby (race to catch limited quota) fishery. The Council, in FW 41, has specified that future discussions of measures to minimize the potential of a derby in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP would not necessarily be based on these measures, nor would these proposed measures necessarily constitute a historical basis for future allocation decisions.
        Proposed Measures
        CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP
        Non-Sector Vessels
        FW 41 proposes to modify the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP by allowing access to this SAP when fishing under a B DAS (either Regular B or Reserve B) for vessels with a NE multispecies limited access DAS permit, provided the vessel fishes with demersal longline or tub trawl gear. In order to minimize the potential of a derby fishery, participation in the SAP for non-Sector vessels would be restricted to a participation period of November 16 - December 31 for the 2005 fishing year, unless otherwise notified by NMFS. The participation period would alternate each year between Sector and non-Sector participants such that in fishing year 2006 non-Sector vessels would fish during a participation period of October 1 - November 15. The currently approved haddock TAC of 1,000 mt for the SAP would be divided evenly into two quota periods such that the haddock TAC for each quota period would be 500 mt. The SAP would close to all participants when the Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) projects that the haddock TAC (landings and discards) has been caught. The Regional Administrator may also adjust the start of the second participation period if the 500-mt haddock quota for the first participation period is harvested prior to November 15. Additionally, the Regional Administrator may adjust the 500-mt quota for the second participation period to account for under- or over-harvest of the 500-mt haddock quota (landings and discards) that occurred in the first participation period. Vessels fishing on a trip in which they have declared into the Regular B DAS Pilot Program would be prohibited from fishing in this SAP on the same trip.
        In order to ensure that any catch of GB cod taken while using a Category B DAS would not threaten mortality objectives of Amendment 13, non-Sector vessels in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP would be allocated a portion of the GB cod incidental catch TAC. Under this proposed rule, the GB cod incidental catch TACs would be 50 percent, 34 percent, and 16 percent for the Regular B DAS Pilot Program, the Eastern U.S./Canada SAP, and the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, respectively. Additionally, for the 2005 fishing year the Regional Administrator may estimate any uncaught GB cod incidental catch TAC from the first quarter of the Regular B DAS Pilot Program and add that amount to the second quarter GB cod incidental catch TAC for the Regular B DAS Pilot Program. This action is necessary as the effective date for FW 41, if approved, would occur after the start of the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP, and the first period for the Regular B DAS Pilot Program (i.e., May 1, 2005). This would leave the second period of the Regular B DAS Pilot Program to be reduced by 15.5 mt and allocated to the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP. This figure, 15.5 mt, is equivalent to 16 percent of the GB cod incidental catch TAC at the beginning of the 2005 fishing year (97 mt). This in-season adjustment would only be made for the GB cod incidental catch TAC in the 2005 fishing year.
        In order to enable the NMFS Observer Program to administer the deployment of observers in the SAP, a vessel intending to participate in this SAP would be required to notify NMFS by September 1 of its intention to fish in the program that year. This provision was approved for Sector vessels under FW 40-A and would be extended to non-Sector vessels in FW 41. This information is intended to provide the NMFS Observer Program with an estimate of the total number of vessels that intend to participate in the SAP and to plan observer coverage accordingly. If a vessel does not notify the NMFS Observer Program of its intent to participate in the SAP by the required date, it would not be allowed to participate in the SAP during that fishing year. Vessels would be required to notify the NMFS Observer Program by telephone at least 72 hours prior to leaving on a trip to the SAP, and would be required to provide the following information:  Vessel name; contact name for coordination of observer deployment; telephone number of contact; and date, time and port of departure. The Regional Administrator would retain the authority to close the CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area for the duration of the season if the level of observer coverage is insufficient to project whether continuation of the SAP would undermine the achievement of the objectives of the FMP or the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP.
        Non-Sector vessels participating in the SAP would be required to use Category B (either Regular B or Reserve B) DAS. Similar to the Sector vessels, all non-Sector vessels participating in this SAP would be required to be equipped with an approved Vessel Monitoring System (VMS). Vessels would be required to declare into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP via VMS and specify whether Regular B DAS or Reserve B DAS would be used, prior to leaving port on a trip into the SAP. All non-Sector vessels would be required to report their catches (landings and discards) of haddock and cod daily via VMS. Non-Sector vessels that have declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP would be prohibited from fishing both inside and outside the SAP area on the same trip and would be exempt from the current limitation on the number of hooks fished inside the SAP area. Non-Sector vessels would be subject to a cod possession and landing limit of 1,000 lb (453.6 kg) per trip. Vessels would not be permitted to discard legal-sized cod prior to reaching the catch limit, and would be required to end their trip if the cod trip limit is achieved or exceeded. There is no flipping provision proposed for this SAP (i.e., vessels may not switch from using Category B to Category A DAS on a trip). For species other than cod, non-Sector vessels would be required to comply with the possession and trip limit restrictions currently specified in the regulations. When the Regional Administrator projects that either the cod incidental catch TAC, or the haddock TAC (landings and discards) has been caught for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, the SAP would close for the remainder of the fishing period.
        Sector Vessels

        There are two proposed changes to the current provisions for Sector vessels participating in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP. Under this action, Sector vessels that have declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP would be prohibited from fishing both inside and outside the SAP area on the same trip, and Sector vessels would be restricted to a participation period of October 1 - November 15 in the 2005 fishing year. For subsequent fishing years, starting in fishing year 2006, the participation period would alternate each year between Sector and non-Sector participants so that in fishing year 2006, for example, Sector vessels would fish during a participation period of November 16 - December 31. The purpose of the prohibition on fishing inside and outside of the SAP on the same fishing trip is to ensure proper accounting of where fish are caught and ensure the ability of the regulations to be enforced. The provision also would maintain equity between Sector and non-Sector vessels participating in the SAP. Restricting access to the SAP to a specific period of time within the season is meant to minimize the potential of a derby fishery between Sector and non-Sector vessels. The current haddock TAC of 1,000 mt for the SAP would be divided evenly into two quota periods such that the haddock TAC for each quota period would be 500 mt. This action also proposes to remove the requirement that Sector vessels shall be required to pay for observer coverage if the Regional Administrator determines that funding for observers is inadequate to provide sufficient coverage. This requirement would be removed because it was determined that no additional regulations were necessary to ensure adequate observer coverage for Sector vessels. As stated previously, the Regional Administrator may adjust the start of the second quota period if the 500-mt haddock quota for the first quota period is harvested prior to November 15. Additionally, the Regional Administrator may adjust the 500-mt quota for the second quota period to account for under- or over-harvest of the 500-mt haddock quota (landings and discards) that occurred in the first quota period. Other provisions for Sector vessels fishing in the SAP would remain unchanged.
        Finally, current regulations pertaining to access to the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program and the Eastern U.S./Canada Management Area would be clarified. Regulations at § 648.85(a)(1) and (b)(8) allow fishing in the Eastern U.S./Canada Management Area, and allow fishing in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Area, respectively, and specify rules that pertain to each area. According to these regulations, during the time the SAP is open, eligible vessels may choose to fish in the SAP, and to fish in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area west of CA II. In contrast to these regulations, the regulations at § 648.14(a)(143) and (a)(148) could be broadly interpreted to prohibit fishing in any part of the SAP unless fishing under the SAP rules. The prohibitions were inadvertently written in a broad way that is inconsistent with § 648.85(a)(1) and (b)(8) and the intent of NE Multispecies Framework Adjustment 40-A. These regulations would be clarified through this proposed action.
        Classification
        At this time, NMFS has not determined that the framework adjustment (FW 41) that this proposed rule would implement is consistent with the national standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, in making that determination, will take into account the data, views, and comments received during the comment period.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866.
        Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 603, an IRFA has been prepared, which describes the economic impacts that this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the reasons why this action is being considered, as well as the objectives of and legal basis for this proposed rule is found in the preamble to this document. There are no Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule. The proposed action would modify the existing specification of GB cod incidental catch TACs to the various programs that have such TACs, modify the management measures for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP to allow participation of non-Sector vessels, and implement measures to minimize potential derby fishing behavior. Current regulations under the FMP allow the development of such measures, provided they are consistent with the FMP objectives.
        The proposed alternative to modify the GB cod incidental TACs and provide non-Sector vessel access to the SAP was compared to the No Action alternative. The proposed alternative to minimize derby fishing behavior was compared with both the No Action alternative and an alternative that would limit vessels to starting only two trips into the SAP per week.
        The No Action alternative would result in the continuation of the management measures implemented by FW 40-A. Only Sector vessels would be eligible to fish in the SAP, no incidental GB cod TAC would be allocated to the SAP, and there would be no measures to minimize derby fishing behavior.
        Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to which this Proposed Rule would Apply
        The proposed action would implement changes with the potential to affect any vessel holding a NE multispecies limited access permit (with an allocation of DAS; approximately 1,000 vessels). It is very likely, however, that the proposed measures would impact substantially less than the total number of such permit holders, because the SAP requires participants to use only hook gear, there are relatively few vessels that fish with hook gear, and it is not likely that many vessel owners would switch from using another type of fishing gear to hook gear. Based on this, the EA estimates that there would be about 60 vessels in total (Sector and non-Sector) that would participate in this SAP.
        The Small Business Administration (SBA) size standard for small commercial fishing entities is $ 3.5 million in gross receipts and would apply to NE multispecies limited access permit holders. Data analyzed for Amendment 13 indicated that the maximum gross receipts for any single commercial fishing vessel in the NE multispecies fishery for the period 1998 to 2001 was $ 1.3 million. For this reason, each vessel in this analysis is treated as a single entity for purposes of size determination and impact assessment. All commercial fishing entities would fall under the SBA size standard for small commercial fishing entities, and there would be no disproportionate impacts between small and large entities. For the purposes of Executive Order 12866, the proposed action would not be considered significant, because the annual effect on the economy would not meet the threshold criteria of $100 million and it would not have an adverse material affect on any sector of the economy, productivity, jobs, the environment, public health, or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities.
        Economic Impacts of this Proposed Action
        The proposed action would reduce the allocation of GB cod to the Regular B DAS Pilot Program in order to establish a GB cod incidental catch TAC for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP. This reallocation of incidental TAC could result in increased economic benefits if the SAP results in a higher yield at lower cost than the Regular B DAS Pilot Program. However, unless the same vessels are the beneficiaries of the reallocation, allowing participation by non-Sector vessels in this SAP would result in a transfer of benefits from one group of vessels to another. The magnitude of the impacts will depend upon the amount of GB cod incidental TAC that is harvested under the Regular B DAS Pilot Program and the timing of the implementation of the SAP measures. There are minimal data to determine the specific impacts of the reallocation on the Regular B DAS Pilot Program or the fishery as a whole. During the first quarter of the 2005 fishing year the Regular B DAS Pilot Program caught a substantial portion of the GB cod incidental catch TAC. This suggests that such a reallocation may limit the Regular B DAS Pilot Program, however, the level of incidental catch during the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP season may be different.

        The proposed action would implement measures that would allow non-Sector vessels to use hook gear to target haddock in the SAP. In the short term, this opportunity may be important to the profitability of participating vessels and would provide mitigation of the short-term adverse effects of the DAS reductions implemented by Amendment 13. The beneficiaries of the proposed action would be limited to individuals that already use longline gear and individuals that could profitably convert to the use of bottom longline gear. Based upon an estimate of the number of vessels that would join the Sector in 2005, and empirical information, the EA estimates that 40 Sector vessels and 20 non-Sector vessels would participate in the SAP.
        Estimated total revenue for Sector and non-Sector participants is $ 1.3 million and $ 0.6 million, respectively. Estimated surplus per vessel for Sector and non-Sector participants is $ 19,300 and $ 16,600, respectively. These returns are based upon the assumptions of 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) of haddock kept per trip, an incidental cod catch TAC of 14 mt, a total of 441 total trips into the SAP, and the implementation of measures to mitigate derby fishing behavior.
        The benefits that would accrue to Sector and non-Sector vessels depend in part on whether measures to prevent a derby are implemented. Dividing the SAP into two time periods and limiting fishing in each period to either Sector or non-Sector vessels reduces benefits to Sector vessels, but provides benefits to non-Sector vessels at the same level. Without measures to minimize the potential of derby fishing, the estimated surplus per participating Sector vessel would be $29,300 because the Sector vessels would not be limited to a maximum haddock catch of 500 mt. Sector participants would be foregoing potential economic gains in order to minimize derby fishing behavior and competition for the haddock TAC. The economic analysis also noted that there are potential costs of derby fishing, such as price depression, loss of gear through gear conflicts, and the costs of unsafe fishing practices.
        In contrast, the non-Sector vessels may be limited by the GB cod incidental catch TAC, with or without measures to address derby fishing. In other words, the constraining factor on the catch of non-Sector vessels may be the GB cod incidental catch TAC, and not the haddock TAC. If non-Sector participants are able to reduce incidental catches of cod and take all of the haddock available to them, the estimated net return per vessel would double.
        Dividing the season into two periods has other implications due to the seasonal variations in the availability and price of haddock. Based upon experimental data, catch rates of haddock may be highest in the beginning of the SAP season and subsequently decline, while average haddock prices may increase over the SAP season. The increase in average price may mitigate the effect of a reduced catch rate in the latter part of the SAP season.
        It is likely that most or all participating vessels will experience positive economic results. The potential economic benefits of the proposed measures would represent only a small increase in the total value of the Northeast region groundfish sales, but because the landings would be concentrated on Cape Cod, MA (due to the location of Sector members), the SAP could significantly increase landings in Cape Cod over fishing year 2003 levels. It is unknown where the economic benefits that result from the participation of non-Sector vessels will accrue.
        Economic Impacts of Alternatives to the Proposed Action
        Under the No Action alternative, the regulations for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP would be unchanged, and the only vessels that could participate in the SAP would be members of the Sector. The economic benefits for Sector vessels would be greater under the No Action alternative, but no benefits would accrue to vessels that are not members of the Sector. The net amount of benefits under the No Action alternative would be similar to the amount of economic benefits under the proposed action because, in both cases, the total haddock TAC for the SAP would be the same. Economic benefits of the proposed alternative would be distributed more widely than for the No Action alternative.
        Under the No Action alternative, the allocation of GB cod to the Regular B DAS Pilot Program would not be reduced because there would be no GB cod incidental catch TAC established for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP. The transfer of benefits from one group of vessels to another would not occur.
        With respect to the measures to reduce derby behavior, the No Action alternative would result in greater economic benefits to the Sector vessels, but such benefits may be reduced by the potential costs that result from a derby-style fishery (i.e., price depression, increased costs as a result of gear conflicts, and potential safety costs). The non-selected alternative would have limited all participating vessels to taking no more than two trips into the SAP in a calendar week. This limitation potentially would have created an economic advantage for those vessels that are able to take longer, multi-day trips, and therefore would have tended to favor large vessels.
        Public Reporting Burden
        This proposed rule contains collection of information requirements subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that have been approved by OMB under OMB control numbers 0648-0501 and 0648-0502. The current expiration date for the reporting requirements under this collection is June 30, 2008. Public comment on this collection of information was solicited in the proposed rule to Framework Adjustment 40-A to the NE Multispecies FMP (69 FR 55388, September 14, 2004) and in the renewal of the collection of information for OMB control number 0648-0501 (69 FR 61344, October 18, 2004) and OMB control number 0648-0502 (69 FR 61346, October 18, 2004). The public's reporting burden for the collection-of-information requirements includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection-of-information requirements.
        The approved reporting requirements for this proposed rule and the estimated average time for a response are as follows:
        1. VMS purchase and installation, OMB #0648-0501 (1 hr/response);
        2. VMS proof of installation, OMB #0648-0501 (5 min/response);
        3. Automated VMS polling of vessel position once per hour when fishing in the Regular B DAS pilot program, OMB #0648-0501 (5 sec/response);
        4. Automated VMS polling of vessel position once per hour when fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, OMB #0648-0501 (5 sec/response);
        5. SAP area and DAS use declaration via VMS prior to each trip into a SAP, OMB #0648-0501 (5 min/response);
        6. Revised estimate of the area and DAS use declaration via VMS prior to each trip into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, OMB #0648-0501 (5 min/response);
        7. Revised estimate of the notice requirements for observer deployment prior to every trip into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, OMB #0648-0202 (2 min/response);

        8. Daily electronic catch and discard reports of stocks of concern when fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, OMB #0648-0502, (0.25 hr/response).
        Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no person shall 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 648
          Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: July 13, 2005.
          William T. Hogarth,
          Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons stated in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

        1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:

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

        2. In § 648.10, paragraphs (b)(3)(i)(C) and (b)(3)(i)(D) are revised to read as follows:

          § 648.10
          DAS notification requirements.

          (b) * * *
          (3) * * *
          (i) * * *
          (C) Fish under the Regular B DAS Pilot Program specified at § 648.85(b)(6); or
          (D) Fish in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in § 648.85(b)(7).

        3. In § 648.14, paragraphs (a)(143), (a)(148), (c)(67), (c)(68), (c)(70), and (c)(73) through (c)(77) are revised to read as follows:

          § 648.14
          Prohibitions.
          (a) * * *
          (143) If fishing under a NE multispecies DAS, fish in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program specified in § 648.85(b)(8), unless declared into the program in accordance with § 648.85(b)(8)(v)(D).

          (148) If fishing under a NE multispecies DAS in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program specified in § 648.85(b)(8), in the area specified in § 648.85(b)(8)(ii), during the season specified in § 648.85(b)(8)(iv), fail to comply with the restrictions specified in § 648.85(b)(8)(v).

          (c) * * *
          (67) If fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in § 648.85(b)(7), fail to comply with the requirements and conditions specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(iv), and (b)(7)(v) or (b)(7)(vi), whichever is applicable.
          (68) If fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(ii), fail to comply with the requirements and conditions specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(iv), and (b)(7)(v) or (b)(7) (vi), whichever is applicable.

          (70) If fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in § 648.85(b)(7), fail to comply with the DAS use restrictions specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(iv)(A), and (b)(7)(v)(A) or (b)(7)(vi)(A), whichever is applicable.

          (73) If fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in § 648.85(b)(7), fail to comply with the VMS declaration requirement specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(iv)(D).
          (74) If fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in § 648.85(b)(7), fail to comply with the gear restrictions specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(iv)(E), and (b)(7)(v)(B) or (b)(7)(vi)(B), whichever is applicable.
          (75) If fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in § 648.85(b)(7), fail to comply with the landing limits specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(iv)(H), and (b)(7)(v)(C) or (b)(7)(vi)(C), whichever is applicable.
          (76) If fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in § 648.85(b)(7), fail to comply with the reporting requirement specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(v)(D) or (b)(7)(vi)(D), whichever is applicable.
          (77) Fish in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(ii), if that area is closed as specified in § 648.85(b)(7)(iv)(I) or (b)(7)(vi)(F).

        4. In § 648.85, the introductory paragraph (a) and paragraphs (b)(5)(ii), (b)(7)(i), (b)(7)(iii), (b)(7)(iv), (b)(7)(v), (b)(8)(v)(A)(2), (b)(8)(v)(A)(3), (b)(8)(v)(B), (b)(8)(v)(C), (b)(8)(v)(E), (b)(8)(v)(H), and (b)(8)(v)(L) are revised, and paragraph (b)(7)(vi) is added to read as follows:

          § 648.85
          Special management programs.
          (a) U.S./Canada Resource Sharing Understanding. No NE multispecies fishing vessel, or person on such vessel, may enter, fish in, or be in the U.S./Canada Resource Sharing Understanding Management Areas (U.S./Canada Management Areas), as defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, unless the vessel is fishing in accordance with the restrictions and conditions of this section. These restrictions do not preclude fishing under an approved Special Access Program specified under paragraph (b) of this section.

          (b) * * *
          (5) * * *
          (ii) GB cod. The incidental TAC for GB cod specified in this paragraph (b)(5), shall be subdivided as follows: 50 percent to the Regular B DAS Pilot Program, described in paragraph (b)(6) of this section; 16 percent to the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, described in paragraph (b)(7) of this section; and 34 percent to the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program, described in paragraph (b)(8) of this section.

          (7) * * *
          (i) Eligibility. Vessels issued a valid limited access NE multispecies DAS permit are eligible to participate in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, and may fish in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area, as described in paragraph (b)(7)(ii) of this section, for the season specified in paragraph (b)(7)(iii) of this section, provided such vessels comply with the requirements of this section, and provided the SAP is not closed according to the provisions specified under paragraphs (b)(7)(iv)(I) or (b)(7)(vi)(F) of this section. Copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request.

          (iii) Season. The overall season for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP is October 1 through December 31, which is divided into two participation periods, one for Sector and one for non-Sector vessels. For the 2005 fishing year, the only participation period in which eligible Sector vessels may fish in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP is from October 1 through November 15. For the 2005 fishing year, the only participation period in which eligible non-Sector vessels may fish in the SAP is from November 16 through December 31. For the 2006 fishing year and beyond, these participation periods shall alternate between Sector and non-Sector vessels such that, in fishing year 2006, the participation period for non-Sector vessels is October 1 through November 15 and the participation period for Sector vessels is November 16 through December 31. The Regional Administrator may adjust the start date of the second participation period prior to November 16 if the haddock TAC for the first participation period specified in paragraph (b)(7)(iv)(G) of this section is harvested prior to November 15.
          (iv) General program restrictions. General program restrictions specified in this paragraph (b)(7)(iv) apply to all eligible vessels as specified in paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this section. Further program restrictions specific to Sector and non-Sector vessels are specified in paragraphs (b)(7)(iii), (v), and (vi) of this section.
          (A) DAS use restrictions. A vessel fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP may not initiate a DAS flip. A vessel is prohibited from fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP while making a trip under the Regular B DAS Pilot Program described under paragraph (b)(6) of this section.
          (B) VMS requirement. An eligible NE multispecies DAS vessel fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP specified in this paragraph (b)(7) must have installed on board an operational VMS unit that meets the minimum performance criteria specified in §§ 648.9 and 648.10.
          (C) Observer notifications. To be eligible to participate in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, a vessel must notify the NMFS Observer Program by September 1 of its intent to participate in that year. This notification need not include specific information about the date of the trip. For the purposes of selecting vessels for observer deployment, a vessel must provide notice to NMFS of the vessel name; contact name for coordination of observer deployment; telephone number for contact; and date, time, and port of departure at least 72 hours prior to the beginning of any trip that it declares into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, as required in paragraph (b)(7)(iv)(D) of this section, and in accordance with instructions provided by the Regional Administrator.
          (D) VMS declaration. Prior to departure from port, a vessel intending to participate in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP must declare into the SAP via VMS, and indicate the type of DAS that it intends to fish. A vessel declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP may catch fish only on a declared trip in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock Special Access Area described under paragraph (b)(7)(ii) of this section.
          (E) Gear restrictions. A vessel declared into and fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP may fish with and possess on board demersal longline gear or tub trawl gear only, unless further restricted as specified under paragraph (b)(7)(v)(A) of this section.
          (F) Haddock TAC. The maximum total amount of haddock that may be caught (landings and discards) in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP Area in any fishing year is 1,000 mt. The maximum amount of haddock that may be caught is divided between the two participation periods as follows:  500 mt for the October 1 - November 15 participation period, and 500 mt for the November 16 - December 31 participation period, as specified in paragraph (b)(7)(iii) of this section. The Regional Administrator may adjust the 500-mt quota for the second participation period to account for under- or over-harvest of the 500-mt haddock quota (landings and discards) that occurred in the first participation period, not to exceed the overall haddock TAC specified in this paragraph (b)(7)(iv)(F).
          (G) Trip restrictions. A vessel is prohibited from deploying fishing gear or catching fish outside of the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP Area on the same fishing trip on which it is declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP.
          (H) Landing limits. For all eligible vessels declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP described in paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this section, landing limits for NE multispecies other than cod, which are specified at paragraphs (b)(7)(v)(C) and (b)(7)(vi)(C) of this section, are as specified at § 648.86.
          (I) Mandatory closure of CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area. When the Regional Administrator projects that the haddock TAC specified in paragraph (b)(7)(iv)(G) of this section has been caught, NMFS shall close, through rulemaking consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act, the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP Area to all eligible vessels as specified in paragraph (b)(7)(ii) of this section.
          (v) Sector vessel program restrictions. In addition to the general program restrictions specified at paragraph (b)(7)(iv) of this section, the restrictions specified in this paragraph (b)(7)(v) apply only to Sector vessels declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP.
          (A) DAS use restrictions. Sector vessels fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP may use Category A, Regular B, or Reserve B DAS, in accordance with § 648.82(d).
          (B) Gear restrictions. A vessel enrolled in the Sector is subject to the gear requirements of the Sector Operations Plan as approved under § 648.87(d).
          (C) Landing limits. A Sector vessel declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP described in paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this section is subject to the cod landing limit in effect under the Sector's Operations Plan as approved under § 648.87(d).
          (D) Reporting requirements. The owner or operator of a Sector vessel declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP must submit reports to the Sector Manager, with instructions to be provided by the Sector Manager, for each day fished in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP Area. The Sector Manager will provide daily reports to NMFS, including at least the following information:  Total weight (lb/kg) of cod and haddock kept, and total weight (lb/kg) of cod and haddock discarded.
          (E) GB cod incidental catch TAC. There is no GB cod incidental catch TAC specified for Sector vessels declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP. All cod caught by Sector vessels fishing in the SAP count toward the Sector's annual GB cod TAC, specified in § 648.87(d)(1)(iii).
          (vi) Non-Sector vessel program restrictions. In addition to the general program restrictions specified at paragraph (b)(7(iv) of this section, the restrictions specified in this paragraph (b)(7)(vi) apply only to non-Sector vessels declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP.
          (A) DAS use restrictions. Non-Sector vessels fishing in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP may use Regular B or Reserve B DAS, in accordance with § 648.82(d)(2)(i)(A) and (d)(2)(ii)(A). A non-Sector vessel is prohibited from using A DAS when declared into the SAP.
          (B) Gear restrictions. A non-Sector vessel declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP is exempt from the maximum number of hooks restriction specified in § 648.80(a)(4)(v).
          (C) Landing limits. A non-Sector vessel declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP described in paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this section may not land, fish for, or possess on board more than 1,000 lb (453.6 kg) of cod per trip. A non-Sector vessel is not permitted to discard legal-sized cod prior to reaching the landing limit, and is required to end its trip if the cod trip limit is achieved or exceeded.
          (D) Reporting requirements. The owner or operator of a non-Sector vessel declared into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP must submit reports via VMS, in accordance with instructions to be provided by the Regional Administrator, for each day fished in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP Area. The reports must be submitted in 24-hr intervals for each day, beginning at 0000 hr and ending at 2400 hr. The reports must be submitted by 0900 hr of the following day. The reports must include at least the following information:  Total weight (lb/kg) of cod and haddock kept, and total weight (lb/kg) of cod and haddock discarded.
          (E) GB cod incidental catch TAC. The maximum amount of GB cod (landings and discards) that may be cumulatively caught by non-Sector vessels from the CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area in a fishing year is the amount specified under paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section.
          (F) Mandatory closure of CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area due to catch of GB cod incidental catch TAC. When the Regional Administrator projects that the GB cod incidental catch TAC specified in paragraph (b)(7)(vi)(F) of this section has been caught, NMFS shall close, through rulemaking consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act, the CA I Hook Gear Haddock Access Area to all non-Sector fishing vessels.

          (8) * * *
          (v) * * *
          (A) * * *
          (2) A vessel that is declared into the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program, described in paragraph (b)(8)(ii) of this section, may catch fish, on the same trip, in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Area and in the CA II Yellowtail Flounder Access Area, described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, under either a Category A DAS or a Category B DAS.
          (3) A vessel may choose, on the same trip, to catch fish in either/both the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Program and the CA II Yellowtail Flounder Access Area, and in that portion of the Eastern U.S./Canada Area described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section that lies outside of these two SAPs, provided the vessel fishes under a Category A DAS and abides by the VMS restrictions of paragraph (b)(8)(v)(D) of this section.

          (B) VMS requirement. A NE multispecies DAS vessel fishing in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Program specified under paragraph (b)(8)(ii) of this section, must have installed on board an operational VMS unit that meets the minimum performance criteria specified in §§ 648.9 and 648.10.
          (C) Observer notifications. For the purpose of selecting vessels for observer deployment, a vessel must provide notice to NMFS of the vessel name; contact name for coordination of observer deployment; telephone number for contact; areas to be fished; and date, time, and port of departure at least 72 hours prior to the beginning of any trip that it declares into the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Program specified in paragraph (b)(8)(ii) of this section, as required under paragraph (b)(8)(v)(D) of this section, and in accordance with instructions provided by the Regional Administrator.

          (E) Gear restrictions. A NE multispecies vessel fishing in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program must use one of the haddock separator trawl nets authorized for the Eastern U.S./Canada Area, as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(A) of this section. No other type of fishing gear may be on the vessel when participating on a trip in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Program, with the exception of a flounder net as described in paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of this section, provided the flounder net is stowed in accordance with § 648.23(b).

          (H) Incidental cod TAC. The maximum amount of GB cod (landings and discards) that may be caught when fishing in the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Program in a fishing year, by vessels fishing under a Category B DAS, as authorized in paragraph (b)(8)(v)(A) of this section, is the amount specified in paragraph (b)(5)(i)(B) of this section.

          (L) General closure of the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Area. The Regional Administrator, based upon information required under § 648.7, 648.9, 648.10, or 648.85, and any other relevant information may, through rulemaking consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act, close the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program for the duration of the season, if it is determined that continuation of the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program would undermine the achievement of the objectives of the FMP or the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock SAP Pilot Program.

      [FR Doc. 05-14091 Filed 7-15-05; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [I.D. No. 111500B]
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Commencement of Groundfish Fisheries in 2001

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Notification of 2001 total allowable catch specifications for groundfish

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS notifies the public that the 2001 total allowable catch (TAC) specifications for groundfish in the exclusive economic zone in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI) and in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) will be implemented by emergency rule(s) promulgated pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.  NMFS has determined that the existing regulatory process for publication of annual groundfish TAC specifications is impracticable for establishing the 2001 TACs because NMFS currently is preparing a biological opinion pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) evaluating the effects of groundfish fisheries measures, including the specification of TACs, on endangered and threatened species.  The intended effect of this action is to inform the public of NMFS’ plan to promulgate the 2001 groundfish TAC specifications by emergency rule and to remind fishermen that no groundfish harvest is authorized for the 2001 fishing year until NMFS publishes groundfish TAC specifications for the 2001 fishing year.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Alaska Region, NMFS, 907-586-7228.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the BSAI and the GOA pursuant to the Fishery Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area, and the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska, respectively.  Each of these fishery management plans (FMPs) was prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) and approved by NMFS under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations implementing the FMPs are codified at 50 CFR part 679.  General regulations governing U.S. fisheries are codified at 50 CFR part 600.

        NMFS currently is preparing a comprehensive biological opinion evaluating the effects of the Alaska groundfish fisheries measures, including the specification of TACs, on endangered and threatened species and designated critical habitat, as required by section 7 of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1536.  NMFS is preparing this biological opinion pursuant to an order of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, issued July 19, 2000, holding NMFS in continuing violation of the ESA until NMFS issues a legally adequate biological opinion evaluating the combined, overall effects of the North Pacific groundfish fisheries on Steller sea lions and their critical habitat. Greenpeace v. NMFS, 106 F. Supp.2d 1066 (W.D. Wash. 2000).
        NMFS expects to complete its biological opinion on the effects of the Alaska groundfish fisheries on threatened and endangered species and designated critical habitat by November 30, 2000.  The biological opinion may require implementation of additional fishery management measures, including those affecting specification of TACs, in order to further protect endangered and threatened species and their designated critical habitat from the effects of the groundfish fisheries.  Because the need for and type of additional protective measures will not be known until completion of the biological opinion, and because NMFS may need to implement additional protective measures before the start of the 2001 groundfish fisheries, NMFS has determined that it is impracticable to publish proposed, interim, and final TAC specifications for the 2001 Alaska groundfish fisheries pursuant to the regulatory process provided in § 679.20(c).  Instead, NMFS intends to publish one or more emergency rules establishing TAC specifications for the 2001 groundfish fisheries and implementing any additional protective measures that may be necessary in accordance with the requirements of the biological opinion.  NMFS will endeavor to publish these rules as quickly as possible to diminish disruption to the fisheries.  Fishermen are reminded that no groundfish harvest is authorized for the 2001 fishing year until NMFS publishes 2001 TAC specifications.

          Dated: November 16, 2000.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 00-29883 Filed 11-17-00; 4:20 pm]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Aviation Administration
        14 CFR Part 39
        [Docket No. FAA-2008-0669; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-350-AD]
        RIN 2120-AA64
        Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-600, -700, and -800 Series Airplanes

          AGENCY:
          Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of comment period.

          SUMMARY:
          We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 737-600, -700, and -800 series airplanes. The original NPRM would have required an inspection of the free flange of the lower stringers of the wing center section for drill starts, and applicable related investigative and corrective actions. The original NPRM resulted from drill starts being found on the free flange of the lower stringers of the wing center section during a quality assurance inspection at the final assembly plant. This action revises the original NPRM by expanding the inspection area to include the free flange, the vertical web, and the fillet radius between the vertical web and the free flange. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to prevent cracks from propagating from drill starts in the free flange, vertical web, and radius between the free flange and vertical web of the lower stringers of the wing center section lower stringers, which could cause a loss of structural integrity of the wing center section and may result in a fuel leak.

          DATES:
          We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by March 31, 2009.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may send comments by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Fax: 202-493-2251.
          • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
          • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

          For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-9990; fax 206-766-5682; e-mail DDCS@boeing.com; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221 or 425-227-1152.

        Examining the AD Docket
        You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-6440; fax (425) 917-6590.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Comments Invited

        We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0669; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-350-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments.
        We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.
        Discussion

        We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (the “original NPRM”) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to certain Boeing Model 737-600, -700, and -800 series airplanes. That original NPRM was published in the Federal Register on June 24, 2008 (73 FR 35593). That original NPRM proposed to require inspecting the free flange of the lower stringers of the wing center section for drill starts, and applicable related investigative and corrective actions.
        Comments
        We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We considered the comment received.
        Request To Clarify Inspection Requirements
        Boeing notes that the original NPRM would have required an inspection of the free flange of the stringer, whereas paragraph 3.B.2. of the Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1294, dated April 23, 2007, calls for inspection as given in Figure 1 of the service bulletin. Figure 1 specifies that the free flange, vertical web, and radius between the free flange and vertical web must be inspected. (The original NPRM referred to this service bulletin as the appropriate source of service information for the proposed actions.) The commenter requests that we clarify whether the inspection area is to include the free flange, vertical web, and the fillet radius.
        We agree that the original NPRM is unclear whether the inspection area includes all three parts of the stringer. The service bulletin does not consistently include all three parts of the stringer. The “Background” section, the “Action” section, Paragraph 1.C., “Reason,” Paragraph 1.D., “Description,” and Paragraph 3.B., “Work Instructions,” refer only to the free flange for the inspection. Only a note in Figure 1, Sheet 4, contains any reference to all three areas of inspection—free flange, vertical web, and the fillet radius. We have determined that all three areas must be inspected to adequately address the identified unsafe condition. We have revised paragraph (g) of the supplemental NRPM to explicitly state these three areas of inspection. We have also revised the description of the area in the summary and paragraph (e) of the supplemental NPRM.
        Actions Since the Original NPRM Was Issued
        We have added a new paragraph (d) to this proposed AD to specify the Air Transport Association (ATA) of America code identifying the subject, and re-identified the subsequent paragraphs accordingly.
        FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM
        We are proposing this supplemental NPRM because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. The change described above expands the scope of the original NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on this supplemental NPRM.
        Costs of Compliance
        We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 17 airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take 7 work-hours per product to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD to the U.S. operators to be $9,520, or $560 per product.
        Authority for This Rulemaking
        Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
        We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
        Regulatory Findings
        We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

        For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

        1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
        2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
        3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
        You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of compliance in the AD Docket.

          List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
          Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

        The Proposed Amendment
        Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

          PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
          1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

            § 39.13
            [Amended]
            2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD:

                Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2008-0669; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-350-AD.
              Comments Due Date
              (a) We must receive comments by March 31, 2009.
              Affected ADs
              (b) None.
              Applicability
              (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-600, -700, and -800 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1294, dated April 23, 2007.
              Subject
              (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.
              Unsafe Condition
              (e) This AD results from drill starts being found on the free flange of the lower stringers of the wing center section during a quality assurance inspection at the final assembly plant. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracks from propagating from drill starts in the free flange, vertical web, and radius between the free flange and vertical web of the lower stringers of the wing center section lower stringers, which could cause a loss of structural integrity of the wing center section and may result in a fuel leak.
              Compliance
              (f) Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
              Inspection and Related Investigative and Corrective Actions
              (g) Before the accumulation of 18,000 total flight cycles, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the free flange, vertical web, and radius between the free flange and vertical web of the lower stringers of the wing center section for any drill start, and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, by accomplishing all the applicable actions specified in paragraphs 3.B.2 and 3.B.4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1294, dated April 23, 2007; except as provided in paragraph (h) of this AD. The applicable related investigative and corrective actions must be done before further flight.
              (h) If any crack is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1294, dated April 23, 2007, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the crack using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.
              Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
              (i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-6440; fax (425) 917-6590.
              (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
              (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

            Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 20, 2009.
            Ali Bahrami,
            Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

       [FR Doc. E9-4732 Filed 3-5-09; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 180
        [EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0041; FRL-10005-02]
        Receipt of a Pesticide Petition Filed for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities (October 2019)

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Notice of filing of petition and request for comment.

          SUMMARY:
          This document announces the Agency's receipt of an initial filing of a pesticide petition requesting the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before March 12, 2020.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number by one of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
          • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001.
          • Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Michael Goodis, Registration Division (7505P), main telephone number: (703) 305-7090, email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov; or Robert McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), main telephone number: (703) 305-7090, email address: BPPDFRNotices@epa.gov. The mailing address for each contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's name, division, and mail code. The division to contact is listed at the end of each pesticide petition summary.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        I. General Information
        A. Does this action apply to me?
        You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:
        • Crop production (NAICS code 111).
        • Animal production (NAICS code 112).
        • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
        • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
        B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
        1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
        2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

        3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this document, compared to the general population.
        II. What action is the Agency taking?
        EPA is announcing receipt of a pesticide petition filed under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of regulations in 40 CFR part 174 and/or part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various food commodities. The Agency is taking public comment on the request before responding to the petitioner. EPA is not proposing any particular action at this time. EPA has determined that the pesticide petition described in this document contains data or information prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the pesticide petition. After considering the public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and what action may be warranted. Additional data may be needed before EPA can make a final determination on this pesticide petition.

        Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition that is the subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is included in a docket EPA has created for this rulemaking. The docket for this petition is available at http://www.regulations.gov.

        As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), EPA is publishing notice of the petition so that the public has an opportunity to comment on this request for the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food commodities. Further information on the petition may be obtained through the petition summary referenced in this unit.
        A. Amended Tolerance Exemptions for Inerts (Except PIPS)
        1. PP IN-11306. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0593). Spring Trading Company (203 Dogwood Trail, Magnolia, TX 77354) on behalf of Stepan Company, requests to amend an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of N,N-dimethyl 9-decenamide (CAS Reg. No. 1356964-77-6) and N,N-dimethyldodecanamide (CAS Reg. No. 3007-53-2) by increasing the current limitation from 20% to unlimited when used as a pesticide inert ingredient (solvent/co-solvent) in pesticide formulations. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        2. PP IN-11307. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0601). Ecolab Inc., 1 Ecolab Place, St. Paul, MN 55102, requests to amend an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2,6-pyridinedicarboxylic acid (CAS Reg. No. 499-83-2) by expanding the current exemption to 180.940(a) and increasing the limit to 2 parts per million (ppm) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to hard, non-porous food-contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy processing equipment, and food-processing equipment and utensils and establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 180.910, limited 2 ppm when used in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        B. Amended Tolerances for Inerts

          PP IN-11306. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0593). Spring Trading Company, 203 Dogwood Trail, Magnolia, TX 77354, on behalf of Stepan Company, requests to amend an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of N,N-dimethyl 9-decenamide (CAS Reg. No. 1356964-77-6) and N,N-dimethyldodecanamide (CAS Reg. No. 3007-53-2) by increasing the current limitation from 20% to unlimited when used as a pesticide inert ingredient (solvent/co-solvent) in pesticide formulations. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        C. Amended Tolerances for Non-Inerts
        1. PP 9E8766. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0162). IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of NJ, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to amend 40 CFR 180.566 by removing the established tolerances for residues of fenpyroximate plus its Z-isomer, determined by measuring the sum of fenpyroximate, (E)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4-[[[[(1,3-dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methylene]amino]oxy]methyl]benzoate and its Z-isomer, (Z)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4-[[[[(1,3-dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methylene]amino]oxy]methyl]benzoate, calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of fenpyroximate, in or on the raw agricultural commodities of: Avocado at 0.15 ppm; canistel at 0.15 ppm; mango at 0.15 ppm; papaya at 0.15 ppm; sapote, black at 0.15 ppm; and star apple at 0.15 ppm. Contact: RD.
        2. PP 9E8771. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0460). IR-4, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes upon establishment of tolerances referenced in this document under “New Tolerances” for PP# 9E8771, to remove existing tolerances in 40 CFR 180.679 for residues of the insecticide flupyradifurone, 4-[[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl](2,2-difluoroethyl)amino]- 2(5H)-furanone, including its metabolites and degradates in or on Brassica, head and stem subgroup 5A at 6.0 ppm, Brassica, leafy greens subgroup 5B at 40 ppm; cactus, fruit at 0.30 ppm; cilantro, fresh leaves at 30 ppm; coffee, green bean (import tolerance) at 1.5 ppm; leaf petioles, subgroup 4B at 9.0 ppm; leafy greens, subgroup 4A at 30 ppm; pitaya at 0.30 ppm; and turnip greens at 40 ppm. Contact: RD.
        3. PP 9E8778. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0526). IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of NJ, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to amend 40 CFR 180.635 by removing the following spinetoram tolerances: Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 2.0 ppm; brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 10 ppm; vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4 at 8 ppm; and cranberry at 0.04 ppm. Contact: RD.
        4. PP 9E8779. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0525). IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of NJ, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to amend 40 CFR 180.495 by removing the following spinosad tolerances: Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 2.0 ppm; brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 10 ppm; vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4 at 8 ppm; and cranberry at 0.01 ppm. Contact: RD.
        D. New Tolerance Exemptions for Inerts (Except PIPs)
        1. PP IN-11284. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0591). Spring Trading Company (203 Dogwood Trail, Magnolia, TX 77354) on behalf of Sasol Chemicals (USA) LLC (Sasol) (12120 Wickchester Lane, Houston, TX 77224) requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 1-undecanol (CAS No. 112-42-5), 1-tetradecanol (CAS No. 112-72-1), 1-octadecanol (CAS No. 112-92-5), 1-eicosanol (CAS No. 629-96-0), 1-docosanol (CAS No. 661-19-8), Alcohols, C16-18, distn. Residues (CAS No. 68603-17-8 & CAS No. 1190630-03-5), Alkenes, C18-22, mixed with polyethylene, oxidized, hydrolyzed, distn. Residues from C16-18 alcs. Manuf. (CAS No. 1430895-61-6), Alkenes, C18-22, mixed with polyethylene, oxidized, hydrolyzed, distn. Residues from C20-22 alcs. Manuf. (CAS No. 1430895-62-7) when used as inert ingredients (carriers/adjuvants and as coating agents/binders) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops pre- and post-harvest under 40 CFR 180.910, growing crops pre-harvest under 40 CFR 180.920, in/on animals under 180.930, and in antimicrobial formulations under 40 CFR 180.940(a). The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        2. PP IN-11316. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0594). Verto Solutions, “VS”, 1101 17th Street, NW Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180.940(a) for residues of various fragrances (CAS Nos. multiple) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide formulations for use on food contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy processing equipment, and food processing equipment and utensils at end-use concentrations not to exceed 100 ppm. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        3. PP IN-11339. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0610). Lamberti USA, Incorporated, P.O. Box 1000, Hungerford TX 77448, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180.960 for residues of 2-Propenoic acid, homopolymer, ester with α-methyl-ω-hydroxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) and α-[2,4,6-tris(1-phenylethyl)phenyl]-ω-hydroxypoly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), graft, sodium salt (CAS Reg. No. 2221936-17-8) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations as dispersants, emulsifiers, surfactants and related adjuvants of surfactants. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        4. PP IN-11344. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0602). Solvay USA Inc., c/o SciReg, Inc., 12733 Director's Loop, Woodbridge, VA 22192, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180.960 for residues of Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), α-sulfo-ω-hydroxy-, C10- 16-alkyl ethers, sodium salts (where average number of moles of oxyethylene = 30) (CAS Reg. No. 68585-34-2) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations. The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        5. PP IN-11359. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0607). Milliken Chemical, 920 Milliken Road, Spartanburg, SC 29303, requests to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180.920 for residues of Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), alpha, alpha′-{[[4-[(3-sulfophenyl)azo]phenyl]imino]di-2,1-ethanediyl}bis[omega-hydroxy-, monosodium salt (CAS Reg. No. not available) when used as a pesticide inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied pre-harvest and not to exceed 20% wt/wt (weight/weight). The petitioner believes no analytical method is needed because it is not required for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. Contact: RD.
        E. New Tolerances for Non-Inerts
        1. PP 8F8704. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0560). FMC Corporation, 2929 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the insecticide bifenthrin, in or on sunflower (crop subgroup 20B) at 0.01 ppm. The Gas Chromatography with Electron Capture Detection (GC/ECD) method is used to measure and evaluate the chemical bifenthrin residues. Contact: RD.
        2. PP 8F8710. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0074). SePRO Corporation, 11550 North Meridian Street, Suite 600, Carmel, IN 46032, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the herbicide fluridone in or on avocados, mandarins, pomegranates, pistachios, and the stone fruit group (crop group 12) at 0.1 ppm. The enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA), high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection (HLPC/UV), and liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectroscopy (LC-MSMS) and QuEChERS are used to measure and evaluate the chemical fluridone. Contact: RD.
        3. PP 9E8757. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0492). Nissan Chemical Corporation; 5-1, Nihonbashi 2-Chome Chuo-Ku; Tokyo 101-6119 Japan c/o Lewis and Harrison; 2461 South Clark Street, Suite 710, Arlington, VA 22202 requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the insecticide, fluxametamide, in or on tea at 5 ppm. An independent laboratory validation (ILV) was performed for the methods used to determine residues in crude green tea leaves using a quantification ion transition methodology. Contact: RD.
        4. PP 9E8762. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0389). IR-4, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180.614 for residues of kasugamycin, (3-O-[2-amino-4-[(carboxyimino-methyl)amino]-2,3,4,6-tetradeoxy-α-D-arabino-hexopyranosyl]-D-chiro-inositol), in or on almond at 0.04 ppm, almond, hulls at 0.4 ppm, apricot at 0.6 ppm, and peach subgroup 12-12B at 0.4 ppm. The analytical method # Meth-146, Revision #4 is used to measure and evaluate the chemical. Contact: RD.
        5. PP 9E8766. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0386). IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of NJ, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances for residues of fenpyroximate plus its Z-isomer, determined by measuring the sum of fenpyroximate, (E)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4-[[[[(1,3-dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methylene]amino]oxy]methyl]benzoate and its Z-isomer, (Z)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4-[[[[(1,3-dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)methylene]amino]oxy]methyl]benzoate, calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of fenpyroximate in or on the raw agricultural commodities of peanut at 0.04 ppm; peanut, hay at 30 ppm; and tropical and subtropical, medium to large fruit, smooth, inedible peel, subgroup 24B, except banana at 0.6 ppm. An enforcement method has been developed which involves extraction of fenpyroximate and the M-1 Metabolite from crops with ethyl acetate in the presence of anhydrous sodium sulfate, dilution with methanol, and then analysis by high performance liquid chromatography using tandem mass spectrometric detection (LC/MS/MS). The method has undergone independent laboratory validation as required by PR Notice 88-5 and 96-1. Contact: RD.
        6. PP 9E8771. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0460). IR-4, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180.679 for residues of the insecticide flupyradifurone, 4-[[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl](2,2-difluoroethyl)amino]- 2(5H)-furanone, including its metabolites and degradates in or on brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4-16B at 40 ppm, celtuce at 9 ppm, coffee, green bean at 1.5 ppm, fennel, florence, fresh leaves and stalk at 9 ppm, kohlrabi at 6 ppm, leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 9 ppm, leafy greens subgroup 4-16A at 30 ppm, pineapple at 0.3 ppm, tropical and subtropical, inedible peel, cactus, subgroup 24D at 0.3 ppm, tropical and subtropical, palm fruit, edible peel, subgroup 23C at 8 ppm, sesame, seed at 3 ppm, stalk and stem vegetable subgroup 22A, except prickly pear, pads, and prickly pear, Texas, pads at 0.01 ppm, sunflower subgroup 20B at 0.7 ppm, and vegetable, brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 6 ppm. Additionally, (c) a tolerance with a regional restriction is being proposed for residues of the insecticide flupyradifurone, 4-[[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl](2,2-difluoroethyl)amino]- 2(5H)-furanone, including its metabolites and degradates in or on the raw agricultural commodity: Grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17 at 15 ppm. The high-performance liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization/tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC/MS/MS) is used to measure and evaluate the chemical. Contact: RD.
        7. PP 9E8778. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0526). IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of NJ, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances for residues of the insecticide spinetoram, including its metabolites and degradates in or on the raw agricultural commodities dragon fruit at 1.5 ppm; vegetable, brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 2.0 ppm; kohlrabi at 2.0 ppm; brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4-16B at 10 ppm; leafy greens subgroup 4-16A at 8.0 ppm; leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 8.0 ppm; celtuce at 8.0 ppm; fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk at 8.0 ppm; and berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H at 0.04 ppm. Adequate analytical methods are available for enforcement purposes for spinetoram in plant and animal matrices. Contact: RD.
        8. PP 9E8779. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0525). IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of NJ, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to establish tolerances for residues of the insecticide spinosad, including its metabolites and degradates in or on the raw agricultural commodities dragon fruit at 1.5 ppm; vegetable, brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 2.0 ppm; kohlrabi at 2.0 ppm; vegetable, leafy, group 4-16 at 10.0 ppm; celtuce at 10.0 ppm; fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk at 10.0 ppm; leaf petiole vegetable Subgroup 22B at 10.0 ppm; and berry, low growing, except strawberry, subgroup 13-07H at 0.01 ppm. Adequate analytical methods are available for enforcement purposes for spinosad in plant, ruminant, poultry, fish, and shellfish. Contact: RD.
        9. PP 9F8734. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0416). BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-3528, requests to establish a tolerance for residues of the insecticide afidopyropen in or on the following raw agricultural commodities: Alfalfa seed at 0.30 ppm; animal feed, nongrass, group 18, forage at 4.0 ppm; animal feed, nongrass, group 18, hay at 9.0 ppm; animal feed, nongrass, group 18, straw at 5.0 ppm; egg at 0.02 ppm; grain, aspirated fractions at 20 ppm; grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17 at 10.0 ppm; poultry, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; sorghum, grain, grain at 0.20 ppm; sorghum, grain, forage at 0.30 ppm; sorghum, grain, stover at 0.30 ppm; sorghum, sweet, grain at 0.20 ppm; sorghum, sweet, forage at 0.30 ppm; sorghum, sweet, stalk at 0.30 ppm; sorghum, sweet, stover at 0.30 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.15 ppm; and soybean, hay at 0.40 ppm, and on the following animal commodities: Cattle, meat at 0.25 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts at 0.15 ppm; goat, meat at 0.25 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at 0.15 ppm; hog, meat at 0.02 ppm; hog, meat byproducts at 0.06 ppm; horse, meat at 0.25 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 0.15 ppm; milk at 0.04 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.25 ppm; and sheep, meat byproducts at 0.15 ppm. BASF Corporation is also proposing to raise the existing tolerance for almond, hulls to 0.30 ppm. Suitable tolerance enforcement methods for plants and livestock using LC-MS/MS analyses were submitted for the analysis of afidopyropen. The reported limit of quantitation (LOQ) of each method is 0.01 ppm for afidopyropen. Contact: RD.
        10. PP 9F8737. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0155). Gowan Company, LLC, P.O. Box 556 Yuma, AZ 85366, requests to establish a tolerance for residues of the insecticide hexythiazox and its metabolites in or on the following raw agricultural commodities: Date, dried fruit at 3 ppm and caneberry crop subgroup 13-07A at 3 ppm. The basic analytical method was previously reviewed by the Agency in association with the establishment of the current tolerances with registrations of multiple commodities. The analytical methods used in a new date raw agricultural commodities study and a new raspberry raw agricultural commodities study are described fully in the study report, which is submitted concurrently with this petition. Contact: RD.
        11. PP 9F8774. (EPA-HQ-OPP-20119-0384). FMC Corporation, 2929 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, requests to establish a tolerance for residues of the insecticide indoxacarb in or on the following raw agricultural commodities: Nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.07 ppm and nut, almond, hulls at 9 ppm. The plant residue enforcement method detects and quantitates indoxacarb in various matrices including tree nuts, field corn, sweet corn, lettuce, tomato, broccoli, apple, grape, cottonseed, peanut and soybean commodity samples by LC-MS/MS. The limit of quantification in the method (0.010 ppm) allows monitoring of crops with KN128/KN127 residues at or above the levels proposed in these tolerances. Contact: RD.

          Authority:
           21 U.S.C. 346a.

          Dated: February 6, 2020.
          Delores Barber,
          Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

      [FR Doc. 2020-02700 Filed 2-10-20; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 224
        [Docket No. 080401502-8537-01]
        RIN 0648-XG94
        Endangered And Threatened Species; Endangered Status for the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale

          AGENCY:
           National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Final determination regarding petitioned action; 6-month extension.

          SUMMARY:
          We, NMFS, are extending the date by which a final determination will be made regarding the April 20, 2007, proposed rule to list a Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of beluga whale, Delphinapterus leucas, found in Cook Inlet, Alaska, as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). We believe that substantial disagreement exists regarding the population trend, and that allowing an additional 6 months to obtain the 2008 abundance estimate would better inform our final determination as to whether the Cook Inlet beluga whale should be listed as endangered under the ESA.

          DATES:
          A final determination on this listing action will be made no later than October 20, 2008.

          ADDRESSES:

          The proposed rule, maps, and other materials relating to this proposal can be found on the NMFS Alaska Region website at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Brad Smith, NMFS, 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska 99517, (907) 271-5006, fax (907) 271-3030; Kaja Brix, NMFS, (907) 586-7235, fax (907) 586-7012; or Marta Nammack, NMFS, (301)713-1401.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        We initiated a Status Review for the Cook Inlet beluga whale on March 24, 2006 (71 FR 14836). Subsequently, we received a petition from The Trustees for Alaska to list the Cook Inlet beluga whale as an endangered species on April 20, 2006. In response to the 2006 petition, we published a 90-day finding that the petition presented substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted (71 FR 44614; August 7, 2006). After completion of the Status Review, we re-affirmed that the Cook Inlet beluga whale constitutes a Distinct Population Segment under the ESA, and proposed this population be listed as an endangered species (72 FR 19854; April 20, 2007). We received public comment in response to the proposed rule, and held public hearings in Anchorage, Homer, and Soldotna, Alaska, and in Silver Spring, Maryland. We received approximately 180,000 responses to the proposed listing.
        The majority of comments supported listing the Cook Inlet beluga whale as endangered under the ESA. However, several commenters, including Alaska Department of Fish and Game, questioned the sufficiency or accuracy of the available data used in the rulemaking. We have considered these comments, and we find that substantial disagreement exists over a certain aspect of the data presented in the proposed rule. In particular, there remains disagreement over the population trend of belugas in Cook Inlet, and whether the population is now demonstrating a positive response to the restrictions on subsistence harvest imposed in 1999.
        Extension of Final Listing Determination
        The ESA, section 4(b)(6), requires that we take one of three actions within 1 year of a proposed listing: (1) finalize the proposed listing; (2) withdraw the proposed listing; or (3) extend the final determination by not more than 6 months, if there is substantial disagreement regarding the sufficiency or accuracy of the available data relevant to the determination, for the purposes of soliciting additional data.
        The State of Alaska sent a letter to us outlining its disagreement with the abundance and population trend. The State's letter noted that the June 2007 count of beluga whales was the largest since 2001, indicating, in their estimation, that the population is beginning to recover from the unsustainable harvests in the early 1990s, as had been predicted by State and Federal biologists. An additional 6 months will allow us to complete an additional abundance survey in June 2008, which will provide additional information bearing on the dispute and may be sufficient to resolve it. The annual aerial survey for beluga whales in Cook Inlet will be conducted in June 2008, with the analyses that produce an annual abundance estimate that can be factored into a trend analysis expected to be completed by the end of September 2008. We will, therefore, extend the deadline for the final listing determination to allow for the collection of these data and the completion of the analysis that forms part of the trend in abundance to better inform our final decision and potentially resolve the disagreement over the scientific information upon which it will be based.
        In consideration of the disagreement surrounding the population trend, we extend the timeline for the final determination for an additional 6 months (until October 20, 2008) to resolve the scientific disagreement.

          Authority:
          16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

          Dated: April 16, 2008.
          John Oliver,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. E8-8689 Filed 4-21-08; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S