        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [I.D. 042307E]
        Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Hearings; Correction

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of public hearings; correction.

          SUMMARY:
          The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council will hold hearings to allow for public input on Amendment 9 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery (FMP).

          DATES:
          Written comments will be accepted until May 27, 2007. All meetings begin at 7 p.m.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments may be submitted through any of the following methods:
          • Mail: Daniel T. Furlong, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115 Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, Delaware 19904.
          • FAX: 302-674-5399.
          • E-mail: info@mafmc.org. Please indicate the subject as SMB 9 Comments.
          • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Daniel T. Furlong, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115 Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, Delaware 19904, 302-674-2331, ext. 19.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Need for Correction

        On April 30, 2007, a document announcing public hearings on Amendment 9 to the Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery (FMP) was published (FR Doc. E7-8197). That document incorrectly listed the meeting times for the hearings. This document corrects the meeting times see DATES section. All other information remains unchanged and will not be repeated in this correction.

          Dated: May 1, 2007.
          Tracey Thompson,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. E7-8575 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 64
        [WC Docket No. 12-375; DA 13-2379]
        Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

          SUMMARY:
          In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau grants in part the Motion for Extension of Time to File Comments and Reply Comments filed on December 6, 2013 by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction in WC Docket No. 12-375. Specifically, the Bureau agreed that a modest extension of time will facilitate a more complete record in this proceeding.

          DATES:
          Comments are due on or before December 20, 2013; reply comments are due on or before January 13, 2014.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket No. 12-375, by any of the following methods:
          • Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
          • U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.
          • People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone: 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.

          For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Lynne Engledow, Wireline Competition Bureau, Pricing Policy Division, (202) 418-1520 or lynne.engledow@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a summary of the Commission's Order, in WC Docket No. 12-375, DA 13-2379, adopted and released December 12, 2013. The complete text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. It is also available on the Commission's Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.

        1. On September 26, 2013, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) released the Inmate Calling Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (R&O and FNPRM). See 78 FR 68005, November 13, 2013. In that item, the Commission adopted reforms of interstate inmate calling service rates, requiring that all providers' rates and charges be cost-based. In the FNPRM portion of the item, the Commission sought comment on a number of outstanding issues. The FNPRM set dates for comments and reply comments as December 13 and December 30, 2013 respectively.
        2. The Ohio DRC requests that parties be allowed an extension of time to file comments to those questions raised in the FNPRM portion of the item: January 13, 2014 for initial comments and until February 12, 2014 for reply comments. The Ohio DRC asserts that an additional grant of time would allow for “a more complete factual and legal record in this proceeding.” Three parties filed comments in support of the Ohio DRC motion, and none opposed it.
        3. Section 1.46 of the Commission's rules provides that “[i]t is the policy of the Commission that extensions of time shall not be routinely granted.” Upon review, however, we agree with the commenters that a modest time extension will more fully allow parties to provide us with more fulsome comments that will facilitate the compilation of a complete record in this proceeding, without causing undue delay to the Commission's consideration of these issues.
        4. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), and 303(r) of the Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), and 303(r); and §§ 0.91, 0.291, 1.45, and 1.415 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.91, 0.291, 1.45, and 1.415 that the Motion for Extension of Time to File Comments and Reply Comments filed by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction on December 6, 2013 is granted in part to the extent described herein and is otherwise denied, and the deadline for filing comments to the FNPRM is December 20, 2013 and reply comments is January 13, 2014.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Lynne H. Engledow,
          Assistant Division Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau.

      [FR Doc. 2013-30826 Filed 12-26-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        RIN 0648-AW64
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 16

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of Availability of Amendment 16 to the South Atlantic Snapper-Grouper Fishery Management Plan; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Amendment 16 to the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (Amendment 16) for review, approval, and implementation by NMFS. Amendment 16 was developed to address overfishing and other management issues in the snapper-grouper fishery. Amendment 16 would establish management reference points and specify interim allocations for the commercial and recreational sectors for gag and vermilion snapper, as well as implement management measures which would be applied to the commercial and recreational sectors of the snapper-grouper fishery. These management measures include: a four-month spawning season closure of the recreational and commercial shallow water grouper fisheries; a five-month closure of the recreational vermilion snapper fishery; commercial quotas for gag and vermilion snapper; a reduced recreational grouper aggregate bag limit (including tilefish) and vermilion snapper bag limit; and a requirement to use dehooking and venting tools to reduce bycatch mortality of snapper-grouper species.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received no later than 5 p.m., eastern time, on February 23, 2009.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments on Amendment 16, identified by 0648-AW64, may be sent to either of the following addresses:

          • Electronic submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal rule-making portal: www.regulations.gov

          • Mail: John McGovern, NMFS, Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Ave. South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701
          • Fax: (727) 824-8308 Attn: John McGovern

          Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

          NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only. Copies of Amendment 16, which includes a final environmental impact statement, a regulatory impact review, a regulatory flexibility analysis, and a fishery impact statement are available from the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405; telephone 843-571-4366; fax 843-769-4520; e-mail safmc@safmc.net.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          John McGovern, telephone: 727-824-5305; fax: 727-824-5308; e-mail: John.McGovern@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery is managed under the Snapper-Grouper FMP of the South Atlantic Region (Snapper-Grouper FMP). The Snapper-Grouper FMP was prepared by the Council and implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
        Background
        South Atlantic stocks of gag, vermilion snapper, red grouper and black grouper are classified as experiencing overfishing, and gag is classified as approaching an overfished condition. The proposed amendment would implement new management measures designed to address overfishing of these species and to protect all shallow-water grouper species (gag, black grouper, red grouper, scamp, rock hind, red hind, coney, graysby, yellowfin grouper, red grouper, yellowmouth grouper, and tiger grouper) during their spawning season. Also, the amendment would authorize NMFS' Southeast Regional Administrator to adjust vermilion snapper management measures to achieve optimum yield (OY) in the fishery based on the results of the recently completed stock assessment.
        The amendment includes alternatives that specify interim allocations between the commercial and recreational sectors for the gag and vermilion snapper fisheries. This amendment also would implement new management reference points for gag and vermilion snapper, including maximum sustainable yield and OY, which reflect current scientific information as provided by the assessments and approved by the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee. In addition, Amendment 16 includes alternatives that would establish a four-month spawning season closure of the recreational and commercial shallow-water grouper fisheries, a five-month closure of the recreational vermilion snapper fishery, specify commercial quotas for gag and vermilion snapper, reduce the recreational grouper aggregate bag limit (including tilefish) and the vermilion snapper bag limit, and require the use of venting tools and dehooking devices to reduce bycatch mortality of incidentally caught snapper-grouper species.
        Procedural Aspects of Amendment 16

        The Council has submitted Amendment 16 for Secretarial review, approval and implementation. NMFS' decision to approve, partially approve or disapprove Amendment 16 will be based, in part, on consideration of comments, recommendations, and information received during the comment period on this notice of availability (NOA). A proposed rule will be published in the Federal Register for public comment. After considering public comment on the NOA, and consistency with Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws, NMFS will publish a notice of agency action in the Federal Register announcing the Agency's decision to approve, partially approve or disapprove Amendment 16, and the associated rationale. If approved, the provisions of Amendment 16 would be specified in a final rule published in the Federal Register.

        Consideration of Public Comments
        Public comments received by 5 p.m. eastern time on February 23, 2009 will be considered by NMFS in the approval/disapproval decision regarding Amendment 16.

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

          Dated: December 19, 2008.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Office Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. E8-30714 Filed 12-23-08; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [I.D. 091203B]
        Public Scoping Meetings on the Management of Bottomfish Fishery Resources within the Exclusive Economic Zone around the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS); notice of scoping meetings; request for written comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Western Pacific Council) and NMFS announce their intent to prepare a comprehensive EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) on the Federal management of bottomfish fishery resources in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) around the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).
          The Council will convene public scoping meetings in the CNMI to solicit comments on bottomfish fishery issues and potential management options related to those resources.  The scope of the EIS analysis will, among other things, describe activities related to the management, monitoring, and conduct of the fisheries; examine the impacts of bottomfish harvest on archipelagic and localized stocks; and consider the potential impacts to protected species, non-target species, and essential fish habitat. The scoping meetings will provide for public input on the issues, range of alternatives, and impacts the EIS should consider.  Written comments will also be accepted concerning the various management options the EIS should consider.

          DATES:

          Public scoping meetings will be held in Saipan, CNMI, on September 24, 2003; in Tinian, CNMI, on September 24, 2003; in Rota, CNMI, September 25, 2003; in Agana, Guam on September 26, 2003.  Written comments must be submitted by October 27, 2003.  See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific dates, times, and locations.

          ADDRESSES:
          Written comments on the issues, range of alternatives, and impacts that should be discussed in the EIS may be sent to Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, or to Sam Pooley, Acting Regional Administrator, NMFS, Pacific Islands Regional Office, 1601 Kapiolani Blvd., Suite 1110, Honolulu HI 96814.  Comments may be sent to the Council via facsimile (fax) at 808-522-8226 and must be received by October 27, 2003.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, 808-522-8220.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), the United States has exclusive management authority over all living marine resources found within the EEZ.  The management of these marine resources found within the EEZ with the exception of sea birds and some marine mammals, is vested in the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary).  Eight Regional Fishery Management Councils prepare fishery management plans for approval and implementation by the Secretary.  The Western Pacific Council has the responsibility to prepare fishery management plans for fishery resources in the EEZ of the Western Pacific Region, which include the Federal waters surrounding the CNMI.
        NEPA requires preparation of an EIS for major Federal actions significantly impacting the quality of the human environment. Regulations implementing NEPA at 40 CFR 1502. 4(b) state:

          “Environmental impact statements may be prepared, and are sometimes required, for broad Federal actions such as adoption of new agency programs or regulations.  Agencies shall prepare statements on broad actions so that they are relevant to policy and are timed to coincide with meaningful points in agency planning and decision making.”

        The bottomfish fishery resources that occur in the EEZ waters surrounding CNMI are not currently managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (FMP), which was developed by the Council and approved by NOAA, becoming effective August 27, 1986 (51 FR 27413).  There have been six amendments to the FMP since 1986, and recently, a comprehensive draft EIS describing the environmental effects of the existing fishery activities conducted under the FMP was developed. The draft EIS, which is currently being finalized for transmittal to NOAA, presents an overall picture of the existing management framework for the bottomfish resources occurring in the EEZ of the Western Pacific region.

        In order for the bottomfish fishery resources in the EEZ of the CNMI to be managed under the FMP, an amendment to the existing FMP is required.  The Council has recently adopted Amendment 8 to the FMP, which if approved, would allow the bottomfish resources in the EEZ waters of the CNMI to be managed under the FMP. Amendment 8 is currently being finalized for transmittal to NOAA.
        The FMP provides a management framework for which the Secretary has promulgated corresponding regulations at 50 CFR 660.61.  For example, if Amendment 8 is approved, the CFR regulations that would apply to the bottomfish fishery in the EEZ waters of CNMI include, among other things, gear restrictions (50 CFR 660.64) and vessel identification requirements (50 CFR 660.16)
        Background
        The bottomfish fishery resources occurring in the EEZ waters of Guam are managed under the FMP. Recently, Guam's bottomfish fishery has experienced an increase in effort due to the entry and participation of large-scale vessels (> 50 ft)(15.2 m).  This has concerned the Council for multiple reasons:  (1) there is a lack of information regarding Guam's bottomfish fishery resources, (2) local catch rates might decline to levels not viable to support the small-vessel component of the fishery, (3) community participation in the fishery may be threatened, and (4) traditional patterns of supply for bottomfish products in the local markets may be disrupted.
        These concerns prompted the Council to recommend the development of Amendment 9 to the FMP that would address the apparent increase in effort occurring in Guam's bottomfish fishery. An environmental assessment prepared for the amendment described the various management needs and options to effectively manage the fishery, in addition to the costs of no action.  On June 12, 2003, the Council chose the preferred alternative which excludes large-scale vessels (> 50 ft)(15.2 m) from fishing for bottomfish within 50 nm of Guam, the implementation a permit system, and logbook reporting requirements.  Reflecting the preferred alternative, Amendment 9 is currently being finalized for transmittal to NOAA.
        CNMI
        For several years, there has been bottomfish fishing in the EEZ waters of CNMI.  A significant portion of the effort in the CNMI's bottomfish fishery is from larger vessels (> 50 ft), which  account for sixty percent of the total bottomfish landings in the  CNMI.
        As a response to the Council's development of Amendment 9, which addresses the emergence of large-scale vessels in Guam's bottomfish fishery, the CNMI is concerned that large-scale vessels displaced from Guam's bottomfish fishery will subsequently fish and exploit the nearby bottomfish resources in the EEZ waters around the CNMI.  For this reason, the Council has recommended the development of a comprehensive EIS that describes various options  for effective management of the bottomfish fishery around the CNMI.
        Alternatives
        The Council is scoping to establish a reasonable range of alternatives, which may include gear restrictions, limited access, closed areas, seasonal closures, permits and reporting requirements, and catch limits.  In addition to developing possible alternatives, the scoping meetings will serve to identify and eliminate the issues which are not significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review.
        Public Involvement
        Public scoping is an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed.  A principle objective of the scoping and public involvement process is to identify a reasonable range of management alternatives that, with adequate analysis, will delineate critical issues and provide a clear basis for distinguishing between those alternatives and selecting a preferred alternative.
        Dates, Times, and Locations for Public Scoping Meetings
        1. Tinian, CNMI — Wednesday, September 24, 2003, from 2-4 p.m. at the Tinian Gaming Commission Conference Room, San Jose, Tinian 96952.
        2. Saipan, CNMI — Wednesday, September 24, 2003, from 7-9 p.m. at the Pedro P. Tenorio Multipursoe Building, Susupe, Saipan 96950;
        3. Rota, CNMI — Thursday, September 25, 2003, from 1-3 p.m. at the Department of Lands and Natural Resources Building, Songsong, Rota 96951.
        4. Agana, Guam  - Friday, September 26, 2003, from 7-9 p.m. at the G. D. Perez Marina, Agana, Guam 96910.
        Special Accommodations
        These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities.  Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, 808-522-8220 (voice) or 808-522-8226 (fax), at least five days prior to the meeting date.

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

          Dated:  September 17, 2003.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 03-24115 Filed 9-22-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [I.D. 050602B]
        RIN  0648-AP79
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Prohibition of Non-pelagic Trawl Gear in Cook Inlet in the Gulf of Alaska

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of Availability (NOA); request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Amendment 60 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska Area (FMP).  This amendment would prohibit the use of non-pelagic trawl gear in Cook Inlet.

          DATES:
          Comments on Amendment 60 must be received by July 15, 2002.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments on the FMP amendment may be mailed to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668, Attn: Lori Gravel-Durall.  Hand delivery or courier delivery of comments may be sent to the Federal Building, 709 West 9th St., Room 453, Juneau, AK, 99801.  Copies of Amendment 60 to the FMP and the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for this action by the Council and NMFS are available from NMFS at the above address, or by calling the Alaska Region, NMFS, at (907) 586-7228.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Glenn Merrill, (907) 586-7228, glenn.merrill@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that each regional fishery management council submit any FMP or FMP amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval.  The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an FMP or amendment, immediately publish a notification in the Federal Register that the FMP or amendment is available for public review and comment.
        Amendment 60 was adopted by the Council in September 2000.  If approved by NMFS, this amendment would prohibit the use of non-pelagic trawl gear in Cook Inlet north of a line from Cape Douglas (58°51.10′ N. lat.) to Point Adam (59°15.27′ N. lat.).  Amendment 60 is necessary to comply with the Magnuson-Stevens Act mandate that regional councils must take measures to reduce bycatch in the nation’s fisheries.

        Public comments are being solicited on the amendment through the end of the comment period stated in this NOA.  A proposed rule that would implement the amendment may be published in the Federal Register for public comment following NMFS’ evaluation under the Magnuson-Stevens Act procedures.  Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by the end of the comment period on the amendment to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the amendment.  All comments received by the end of the comment period on the amendment, whether specifically directed to the amendment or the proposed rule, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision;   comments received after that date will not be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the amendment.

          Dated: May 8, 2002.
          Virginia M. Fay,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 02-12033 Filed 5-13-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
        Coast Guard
        33 CFR Part 100
        [Docket Number USCG-2021-0266]
        RIN 1625-AA08
        Special Local Regulation; Back River, Baltimore County, MD

          AGENCY:
          Coast Guard, DHS.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          The Coast Guard is proposing to establish temporary special local regulations for certain waters of Back River. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters located in Baltimore County, MD, during a high-speed power boat event on July 10, 2021, and July 11, 2021. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from entering the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or the Coast Guard Event Patrol Commander. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

          DATES:
          Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 9, 2021.

          ADDRESSES:

          You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2021-0266 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. Ron Houck, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region; telephone 410-576-2674, email D05-DG-SectorMD-NCR-MarineEvents@uscg.mil.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Table of Abbreviations

          CFR Code of Federal Regulations
          COTP Captain of the Port
          DHS Department of Homeland Security
          FR Federal Register
          NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
          PATCOM Patrol Commander
          § Section
          U.S.C. United States Code

        II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

        On April 16, 2021, the Chesapeake Bay Power Boat Association of Edgewater, MD, notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting the 1st Annual Shootout on the River 2021 from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 10, 2021, and from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 11, 2021. The individually-timed power boat speed runs event consists of approximately 50 participants competing on a designated, marked linear course located on Back River, between Lynch Point to the south and Walnut Point to the north. The event is being staged out of Tiki Lee's Dock Bar, 4309 Shore Road, Sparrows Point, in Baltimore County, MD. Details of the event were provided to the Coast Guard by the sponsoring organization on May 3, 2021. Hazards from the high-speed power boat competition include participants operating within and adjacent to the designated navigation channel and interfering with vessels intending to operate within that channel, as well as operating within approaches to local marinas and boat facilities and waterfront residents. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland-National Capital Region has determined that potential hazards associated with the high-speed power boat competition would be a safety concern for anyone intending to operate within certain waters of Back River in Baltimore County, MD, operating in or near the event area.
        The Coast Guard is requesting that interested parties provide comments within a shortened comment period of 15 days instead of the more typical 30 days for this notice of proposed rulemaking. The Coast Guard believes a shortened comment period is necessary and reasonable to ensure the Coast Guard has time to review and respond to any significant comments submitted by the public in response to the NPRM and has final rule in effect in time for the scheduled event.
        The purpose of this rulemaking is to protect event participants, non-participants, and transiting vessels before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).
        III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
        The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region is proposing to establish special local regulations from 9 a.m. on July 10, 2021, through 6 p.m. on July 11, 2021. There is no alternate date planned for this event. The regulated area would cover all navigable waters of Back River, within an area bounded by a line connecting the following points: From the shoreline at Lynch Point at latitude 39°14′46″ N, longitude 076°26′23” W, thence northeast to Porter Point at latitude 39°15′13″ N, longitude 076°26′11″ W, thence north along the shoreline to Walnut Point at latitude 39°17′06″ N, longitude 076°27′04″ W, thence southwest to the shoreline at latitude 39°16′41″ N, longitude 076°27′31″ W, thence south along the shoreline to the point of origin, located in Baltimore County, MD. The regulated area is approximately 4,200 yards in length and 1,200 yards in width.
        This proposed rule provides additional information about areas within the regulated area and their definitions. These areas include “Course Area,” “Buffer Area,” and “Spectator Area.”
        The proposed size of the regulated area is intended to ensure the safety of life on these navigable waters before, during, and after the high-speed power boat competition, scheduled from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 10, 2021, and from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 11, 2021. The COTP and the Coast Guard Event Patrol Commander (PATCOM) would have authority to forbid and control the movement of all vessels and persons, including event participants, in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person in the regulated area would be required to immediately comply with the directions given by the COTP or Event PATCOM. If a person or vessel fails to follow such directions, the Coast Guard may expel them from the area, issue them a citation for failure to comply, or both.
        Except for 1st Annual Shootout on the River participants and vessels already at berth, a vessel or person would be required to get permission from the COTP or Event PATCOM before entering the regulated area. Vessel operators would be able to request permission to enter and transit through the regulated area by contacting the Event PATCOM on VHF-FM channel 16. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit the regulated area once the Event PATCOM deems it safe to do so. A vessel within the regulated area must operate at safe speed that minimizes wake. A person or vessel not registered with the event sponsor as a participant or assigned as official patrols would be considered a spectator. Official Patrols are any vessel assigned or approved by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign. Official Patrols enforcing this regulated area can be contacted on VHF-FM channel 16 and channel 22A.
        If permission is granted by the COTP or Event PATCOM, a person or vessel would be allowed to enter the regulated area or pass directly through the regulated area as instructed. Vessels would be required to operate at a safe speed that minimizes wake while within the regulated area. A spectator vessel must not loiter within the navigable channel while within the regulated area. Official patrol vessels would direct spectators to the designated spectator area. Only participant vessels and official patrol vessels would be allowed to enter the course area. The Coast Guard would publish a notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners and issue a marine information broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio announcing specific event dates and times.
        The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.
        IV. Regulatory Analyses
        We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
        A. Regulatory Planning and Review
        Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
        This regulatory action determination is based on the location, size and duration of the regulated area, which would impact a small designated area of Back River for 18 total enforcement hours. The Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the status of the regulated area. Moreover, the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the regulated area, and vessel traffic would be able to safely transit the regulated area once the Event PATCOM deems it safe to do so.
        B. Impact on Small Entities

        The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
        While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

        If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.

        Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
        C. Collection of Information
        This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
        D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments
        A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.

        Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
        E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
        The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
        F. Environment
        We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves implementation of regulations within 33 CFR part 100 applicable to organized marine events on the navigable waters of the United States that could negatively impact the safety of waterway users and shore side activities in the event area lasting for 18 total enforcement hours. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.
        G. Protest Activities

        The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places, or vessels.
        V. Public Participation and Request for Comments
        We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

        We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
        We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

        Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's instructions. We review all comments received, but we will only post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive. If you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

          List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
          Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways.

        For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

          PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

        1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          46 U.S.C. 70034;33 CFR 1.05-1.

        2. Add § 100.501T05-0266 to read as follows:

          § 100.501T05-0266
          1st Annual Shootout on the River, Back River, Baltimore County, MD.
          (a) Locations. All coordinates are based on datum WGS 1984.
          (1) Regulated area. All navigable waters of Back River, within an area bounded by a line connecting the following points: From the shoreline at Lynch Point at latitude 39°14′46″ N, longitude 076°26′23″ W, thence northeast to Porter Point at latitude 39°15′13″ N, longitude 076°26′11″ W, thence north along the shoreline to Walnut Point at latitude 39°17′06″ N, longitude 076°27′04″ W, thence southwest to the shoreline at latitude 39°16′41″ N, longitude 076°27′31″ W, thence south along the shoreline to the point of origin, located in Baltimore County, MD. The course area, buffer area, and spectator area are within the regulated area.
          (2) Course Area. The course area is a polygon in shape measuring approximately 2.2 statute miles in length by 500 feet in width. The area is bounded by a line commencing at position latitude 39°16′53.5″ N, longitude 076°26′53.4″ W, thence east to latitude 39°16′54.4″ N, longitude 076°26′47.1″ W, thence south to latitude 39°15′01.1″ N, longitude 076°26′33.8″ W, thence west to latitude 39°14′59.4″ N, longitude 076°26′39.4″ W, thence north to the point of origin.
          (3) Buffer Area. The buffer area is a polygon in shape measuring approximately 300 feet in all directions surrounding the entire course area described in the preceding paragraph of this section. The area is bounded by a line commencing at position latitude 39°16′56.2″ N, longitude 076°26′57.7″ W, thence east to latitude 39°16′57.7″ N, longitude 076°26′43.7″ W, thence south to latitude 39°14′59.0″ N, longitude 076°26′29.7″ W, thence west to latitude 39°14′55.8″ N, longitude 076°26′42.7″ W, thence north to the point of origin.
          (4) Spectator Area. The designated spectator area is a polygon in shape measuring approximately 1,000 yards in length by 500 feet in width. The area is bounded by a line commencing at position latitude 39°16′33.7″ N, longitude 076°26′40.7″ W, thence east to latitude 39°16′34.5″ N, longitude 076°26′34.7″ W, thence south to latitude 39°16′05.0″ N, longitude 076°26′31.1″ W, thence west to latitude 39°16′04.4″ N, longitude 076°26′37.4″ W, thence north to the point of origin.
          (b) Definitions. As used in this section—

            Buffer Area is a neutral area that surrounds the perimeter of the Course Area within the regulated area described by this section. The purpose of a buffer area is to minimize potential collision conflicts with marine event participants or high-speed power boats and spectator vessels or nearby transiting vessels. This area provides separation between a Course Area and a specified Spectator Area or other vessels that are operating in the vicinity of the regulated area established by the special local regulations.

            Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland-National Capital Region means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the COTP to act on his behalf.

            Course Area is an area described by a line bound by coordinates provided in latitude and longitude that outlines the boundary of a course area within the regulated area defined by this section.

            Event Patrol Commander or Event PATCOM means a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has been designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.

            Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign.

            Participant means all persons and vessels registered with the event sponsor as participating in the “1st Annual Shootout on the River” speed runs event, or otherwise designated by the event sponsor as having a function tied to the event.

            Spectator means a person or vessel not registered with the event sponsor as participants or assigned as official patrols.

            Spectator Area is an area described by a line bound by coordinates provided in latitude and longitude that outlines the boundary of a spectator area within the regulated area defined by this part.
          (c) Special local regulations. (1) The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or Event PATCOM may forbid and control the movement of all vessels and persons, including event participants, in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person in the regulated area shall immediately comply with the directions given by the patrol. Failure to do so may result in the Coast Guard expelling the person or vessel from the area, issuing a citation for failure to comply, or both. The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or Event PATCOM may terminate the event, or a participant's operations at any time the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or Event PATCOM believes it necessary to do so for the protection of life or property.
          (2) Except for participants and vessels already at berth, a person or vessel within the regulated area at the start of enforcement of this section must immediately depart the regulated area.
          (3) A spectator must contact the Event PATCOM to request permission to either enter or pass through the regulated area. The Event PATCOM, and official patrol vessels enforcing this regulated area, can be contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and channel 22A (157.1 MHz). If permission is granted, the spectator must enter the designated Spectator Area or pass directly through the regulated area as instructed by Event PATCOM. A vessel within the regulated area must operate at safe speed that minimizes wake. A spectator vessel must not loiter within the navigable channel while within the regulated area.
          (4) Only participant vessels and official patrol vessels are allowed to enter the race area.
          (5) A person or vessel that desires to transit, moor, or anchor within the regulated area must obtain authorization from the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or Event PATCOM. A person or vessel seeking such permission can contact the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region at telephone number 410-576-2693 or on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or the Event PATCOM on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
          (6) The Coast Guard will publish a notice in the Fifth Coast Guard District Local Notice to Mariners and issue a marine information broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio announcing specific event dates and times.
          (d) Enforcement officials. The Coast Guard may be assisted with marine event patrol and enforcement of the regulated area by other federal, state, and local agencies.
          (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on July 10, 2021, and, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on July 11, 2021.

          Dated: May 19, 2021.
          David E. O'Connell,
          Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region.

      [FR Doc. 2021-11016 Filed 5-24-21; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 635
        [Docket No. 120706221-2481-01]
        RIN 0648-XC106
        Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 2013 Atlantic Shark Commercial Fishing Season

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:

          This proposed rule would establish opening dates and adjust quotas for the 2013 fishing season for the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries. Quotas would be adjusted as allowable based on any over- and/or underharvests experienced during the 2011 and 2012 Atlantic commercial shark fishing seasons. We propose to keep the porbeagle shark fishery closed in 2013 due to the small quota and difficulties in accurately monitoring such a small quota. In addition, NMFS proposes season openings based on previously implemented adaptive management measures to provide, to the extent practicable, fishing opportunities for commercial shark fishermen in all regions and areas. The proposed measures could affect fishing opportunities for commercial shark fishermen in the northwestern Atlantic, including the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean.

          DATES:
          Written comments will be accepted until October 28, 2012.

          ADDRESSES:
           You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2012-0175, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal www.regulations.gov. To submit comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, first click the “submit a comment” icon, then enter NOAA-NMFS-2012-0175 in the keyword search. Locate the document you wish to comment on from the resulting list and click on the “Submit a Comment” icon on the right of that line.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Please mark the outside of the envelope “Comments on the Proposed Rule to Establish Quotas and Opening Dates for the 2013 Atlantic Shark Commercial Fishing Season.”
          • Fax: 301-427-8503, Attn: Karyl Brewster-Geisz or Guy DuBeck.

            Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above methods to ensure that the comments are received, documented, and considered by NMFS. Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Guý DuBeck or Karyl Brewster-Geisz at 301-427-8503.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background
        The Atlantic commercial shark fisheries are managed under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The 2006 Consolidated HMS Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and its amendments under the Magnuson-Stevens Act are implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635. For the Atlantic commercial shark fisheries, the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments established, among other things, commercial quotas for species and species complexes, accounting measures for under- and overharvests for the shark fisheries, and adaptive management measures such as flexible opening dates for the fishing season and inseason adjustments to shark trip limits, which provide flexibility in management in the furtherance of equitable fishing opportunities, to the extent practicable, for commercial shark fishermen in all regions and areas.
        Accounting for Under- and Overharvests
        This proposed rule would adjust the quota levels for the different shark species and complexes for the 2013 Atlantic commercial shark fishing season based on over- and underharvests that occurred during the 2011 and 2012 fishing seasons, consistent with existing regulations at § 635.27(b)(1)(i). Over- and underharvests are accounted for in the same region and/or fishery in which they occurred the following year, depending on stock status. Shark stocks that are overfished, have overfishing occurring, or that have an unknown stock status, or complexes that contain one or more stocks that are overfished, have overfishing occurring, or that have an unknown stock status, will not have underharvest carried over in the following year. Stocks that are not overfished and have no overfishing occurring will have any underharvest carried over in the following year, up to 50 percent of the base quota.
        Although there were underharvests in the sandbar shark, non-sandbar large coastal shark, blacknose shark, blue shark, and pelagic shark (other than porbeagle or blue sharks) fisheries, those underharvests cannot be carried over to the 2013 fishing season because those stocks have been determined to be overfished, overfished with overfishing occurring, or have an unknown status. Porbeagle sharks have been declared to be overfished with overfishing occurring, and the quota was overharvested in 2011 and 2012. Thus, for all of these species, the 2013 proposed quota would be equal to the appropriate base quota minus any overharvests that occurred in the 2011 and 2012 fishing seasons.
        However, since the non-blacknose small coastal shark complex has been determined not to be overfished and has no overfishing occurring, the underharvest (up to 50 percent of the base quota) from the 2012 fishing season can be applied to the 2013 quota.
        2013 Proposed Quotas
        This rule proposes adjustments to the base commercial quotas due to over- and underharvests that occurred in 2011 and 2012, where allowable, taking into consideration the stock status as required under existing regulations.
        The quotas in this proposed rule are based on dealer reports received as of August 22, 2012. In the final rule, we will adjust the quotas based on dealer reports received as of October 31, 2012. Thus, all of the 2013 proposed quotas for the respective shark complexes/species are subject to further adjustment for any overharvests reflected after considering the October 31 dealer reports. All dealer reports that are received after October 31, 2012, will be used to adjust the 2014 quotas, as appropriate. In addition, the 5-year quota reduction to account for overharvest of the non-sandbar large coastal shark and sandbar shark fisheries established in Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP ends on December 31, 2012, and quotas will increase to annual base levels established in Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP. We also propose to adjust the non-blacknose small coastal shark quota due to underharvest from the 2012 fishing season, and to adjust the porbeagle shark quota to account for overharvest from the 2011 and 2012 fishing season.

        Due to the small quota and difficulties in accurately monitoring such a small quota, we propose to keep the porbeagle shark fishery closed in 2013. The porbeagle shark fishery landings in 2012 exceeded the quota by 259 percent with the addition of late reports in December 2011, which must be accounted for in 2013. The combined overharvest in 2011 and 2012 for the porbeagle shark fishery would result in a very small quota (0.5 mt dw; 1,001 lb dw). The proposed 2013 quotas by species and species group are summarized in Table 1.

          Table 1—2013 Proposed Quotas and Opening Dates for the Atlantic Shark Fisheries *

            Species group
            Region
            2012 Annual quota
            Preliminary 2012 landings 1

            Overharvest/Underharvest
            2013 Base annual quota

            2013 Proposed quota
            Season opening dates

            (A)
            (B)
            (C)
            (D)
            (D+C)

            Non-Sandbar Large Coastal Sharks
            Gulf of Mexico
            392.8 (866,063 lb dw)
            369.8 (815,236 lb dw)

            439.5 (968,922 lb dw)
            439.5 (968,922 lb dw)
            On or about January 1, 2013.

            Atlantic
            183.2 (403,889 lb dw)
            32.9 (72,648 lb dw)

            188.3 (415,126 lb dw)
            188.3 (415,126 lb dw).

            Non-Sandbar Large Coastal Shark Research Quota
            No regional quotas
            37.5 (82,673 lb dw)
            9.1 (20,015 lb dw)

            50.0 (110,230 lb dw)
            50.0 (110,230 lb dw).

            Sandbar Research Quota

            87.9 (193,784 lb dw)
            24.7 (54,439 lb dw)

            116.6 (257,056 lb dw)
            116.6 (257,056 lb dw).

            Non-Blacknose Small Coastal Sharks

            332.4 (732,808 lb dw)
            133.8 (294,871 lb dw)
            110.8 2 (244,269 lb dw)
            221.6 (488,539 lb dw)
            332.4 (732,808 lb dw).

            Blacknose Sharks

            19.9 (43,872 lb dw)
            10.9 (23,991 lb dw)

            19.9 (43,872 lb dw)
            19.9 (43,872 lb dw).

            Blue Sharks

            273.0 (601,856 lb dw)
            8.6 (18,868 lb dw)

            273.0 (601,856 lb dw)
            273.0 (601,856 lb dw).

            Porbeagle Sharks

            0.7 (1,585 lb dw)
            1.9 (4,105 lb dw)
            −1.2 3 (2,747 lb dw)
            1.7 (3,748 lb dw)
            0.5 (1,001 lb dw)
            Closed for 2013.

            Pelagic Sharks Other Than Porbeagle or Blue

            488 (1,075,856 lb dw)
            99.7 (219,691 lb dw)

            488.0 (1,075,856 lb dw)
            488.0 (1,075,856 lb dw)
            On or about January 1, 2013.

          *All quotas and landings are dressed weight (dw), in metric tons (mt), unless specified otherwise. Table includes landings data through August 22, 2012, and quotas are subject to change based on landings through October 31, 2012.

            1 Landings are from January 1, 2012, until August 22, 2012, and are subject to change.

            2 This adjustment accounts for the underharvest in 2012. While the total underharvest is 198.6 mt dw, we may account for underharvest only up to 50 percent of the base annual quota or 110.8 mt dw (244,269 lb dw).

            3 This adjustment accounts for overharvest in 2011 and 2012. After the final rule establishing the 2012 quotas, the porbeagle shark quota was overharvested by an additional <0.1 mt dw (227 lb dw). As of August 22, 2012, 1.1 mt dw (2,520 lb dw) was harvested above the 2012 porbeagle shark quota. The combined overharvest from 2011 and 2012 is 1.2 mt dw (2,747 lb dw).

        1. Proposed 2013 Quotas for Non-Sandbar Large Coastal Sharks and Sandbar Sharks Within the Shark Research Fishery
        The 2013 proposed commercial quotas within the shark research fishery are 50.0 mt dw (110,230 lb dw) for non-sandbar large coastal sharks and 116.6 mt dw (257,056 lb dw) for sandbar sharks. Since the 5-year quota reduction to account for overharvest of the non-sandbar large coastal shark and sandbar shark fisheries ends on December 31, 2012, the 2013 proposed quotas increase to the levels established in Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP.
        Within the shark research fishery, as of August 22, 2012, preliminary reported landings of non-sandbar large coastal sharks were at 24 percent (9.1 mt dw) of their 2012 quota levels, and sandbar shark reported landings were at 28 percent (24.7 mt dw) of their 2012 quota levels. Reported landings have not exceeded the 2012 quota to date. Therefore, based on preliminary estimates and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(1)(vii), we are not proposing to adjust 2013 quotas in the shark research fishery based on any overharvests.
        Under § 635.27(b)(1)(i), because sandbar sharks and scalloped hammerhead sharks within the non-sandbar large coastal shark complex have been determined to be either overfished or overfished with overfishing occurring, underharvests for these species and/or complexes would not be applied to the 2013 quotas. Therefore, we propose 2013 quotas for non-sandbar large coastal sharks and sandbar sharks within the shark research fishery of 50.0 mt dw (110,230 lb dw) and 116.6 mt dw (257,056 lb dw), respectively. NMFS has analyzed the environmental effects of this base quota in the Environmental Impact Statement for Amendment 2. This base quota of 116.6 mt dw was implemented in Amendment 2, but the quota was reduced to 87.9 mt dw for 5 years to account for large overharvest in 2007.
        2. Proposed 2013 Quotas for the Non-Sandbar Large Coastal Sharks in the Gulf of Mexico Region
        The 2013 proposed quota for non-sandbar large coastal sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region is 439.5 mt dw (968,922 lb dw). Since the 5-year quota reduction for overharvest of the non-sandbar large coastal shark fishery ends on December 31, 2012, the 2013 quotas would revert to the levels established in Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP.
        As of August 22, 2012, preliminary reported landings for non-sandbar large coastal sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region were at 94 percent (369.8 mt dw) of their 2012 quota levels. Reported landings have not exceeded the 2012 quota to date. Therefore, based on preliminary estimates and consistent with the current regulations at § 635.27(b)(1)(vii), we are not proposing to adjust 2013 quotas in the non-sandbar large coastal sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region, because there have not been any overharvests.

        Given the status of scalloped hammerhead sharks within the non-sandbar large coastal shark complex, any underharvests cannot be accounted for pursuant to § 635.27(b)(1)(iii). Therefore, we propose 2013 quotas for non-sandbar large coastal sharks in the Gulf of Mexico region of 439.5 mt dw (968,922 lb dw), consistent with Amendment 2 levels.

        3. Proposed 2013 Quotas for the Non-Sandbar Large Coastal Sharks in the Atlantic Region
        The 2013 proposed quota for non-sandbar large coastal sharks in the Atlantic region is 188.3 mt dw (415,126 lb dw). Since the 5-year quota reduction for overharvest of the non-sandbar large coastal shark fishery ends on December 31, 2012, the 2013 quotas would increase to the levels established in Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP.
        As of August 22, 2012, preliminary reported landings for non-sandbar large coastal sharks in the Atlantic region were at 18 percent (32.9 mt dw) of their 2012 quota levels. To date, reported landings do not exceed the quota. As such, we propose a 2013 commercial non-sandbar large coastal sharks quota in the Atlantic region of 188.3 mt dw (415,126 lb dw).
        4. Proposed 2013 Quotas for Small Coastal Sharks and Pelagic Sharks
        The 2013 proposed annual commercial quotas for non-blacknose small coastal sharks, blacknose sharks, blue sharks, porbeagle sharks, and pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle or blue sharks) are 332.4 mt dw (732,809 lb dw), 19.9 mt dw (43,872 lb dw), 273 mt dw (601,856 lb dw), 0.5 mt dw (1,001 lb dw), and 488 mt dw (1,075,856 lb dw), respectively.
        As of August 22, 2012, preliminary reported landings of non-blacknose small coastal sharks, blacknose sharks, blue sharks, porbeagle sharks, and pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle and blue sharks) were at 40 percent (133.8 mt dw), 55 percent (10.9 mt dw), 3 percent (8.6 mt dw), 259 percent (1.9 mt dw), and 20 percent (99.7 mt dw), of their 2012 quota levels, respectively. As described above, while we may adjust quotas for underharvests only when allowable depending on the stock status, we will adjust quotas for overharvests.
        Non-blacknose small coastal sharks have not been declared to be overfished, to have overfishing occurring, or to have an unknown status. Pursuant to § 635.27(b)(1)(i), any underharvests for the non-blacknose small coastal sharks therefore could be applied to the 2013 quotas. During the 2012 fishing season to date, the non-blacknose small coastal shark quota has been underharvested by 110.8 mt dw (244,269 lb dw). Accordingly, we propose to increase the 2013 non-blacknose small coastal shark quota to adjust for anticipated underharvests in 2012 as allowed. The proposed 2013 adjusted base annual quota for non-blacknose small coastal sharks is 332.4 mt dw (732,809 lb dw) (221.6 mt dw annual base quota + 110.8 mt dw 2012 underharvest = 332.4 mt dw 2013 adjusted annual quota).
        Porbeagle sharks have been declared to be overfished with overfishing occurring. Pursuant to § 635.27(b)(1)(i), any overharvests of porbeagle sharks would be applied to the 2013 quotas. In the final rule establishing the 2012 quotas, we accounted for an overharvest of porbeagle sharks of 1.0 mt dw (2,163 lb dw) using data that was reported as of October 31, 2011. Between that date and December 31, 2011, porbeagle sharks were overharvested by an additional 227 lb dw (less than 0.1 mt dw). As of August 22, 2012, an additional 1.1 mt dw (2,520 lb dw) has been overharvested above the 2012 porbeagle shark quota. The proposed 2013 adjusted annual commercial porbeagle quota is 0.5 mt dw (1,001 lb dw) (1.7 mt dw annual base quota − < 0.1 mt dw 2011 overharvest − 1.1 mt dw 2012 overharvest = 0.5 mt dw 2012 adjusted annual quota), but we propose to keep the fishery closed in 2013 due to the small quota and difficulties in accurately monitoring such a small quota.
        Blacknose sharks and other pelagic species are overfished, have overfishing occurring, or have an unknown status. As of August 22, 2012, the 2012 commercial quota had not been reached or exceeded. Therefore, the 2013 proposed quotas would be the base annual quotas for blacknose sharks, blue sharks, and pelagic sharks (other than blue and porbeagle sharks), or (19.9 mt dw (43,872 lb dw), 273 mt dw (601,856 lb dw), and 488 mt dw (1,075,856 lb dw), respectively.
        Proposed Fishing Season Notification for the 2013 Atlantic Commercial Shark Fishing Season
        For each fishery, we considered the seven “Opening Fishing Season Criteria” listed at § 635.27(b)(1)(ii). These include:
        (A) The available annual quotas for the current fishing season for the different species/complexes based on any over- and/or underharvests experienced during the previous commercial shark fishing seasons; (B) Estimated season length based on available quota(s) and average weekly catch rates of different species/complexes in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions from the previous years; (C) Length of the season for the different species/complexes in the previous years and whether fishermen were able to participate in the fishery in those years; (D) Variations in seasonal distribution, abundance, or migratory patterns of the different species/complexes based on scientific and fishery information; (E) Effects of catch rates in one part of a region precluding vessels in another part of that region from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a portion of the different species/complexes quotas; (F) Effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments; and/or, (G) Effects of a delayed opening with regard to fishing opportunities in other fisheries.
        Thus, we examined the 2011 and 2012 over- and/or underharvests of the different species/complexes to determine the effects of the 2013 proposed quotas on fishermen across regional fishing area. The potential season length and previous catch rates were examined to ensure that equitable fishing opportunities would be provided to fishermen. Lastly, we examined the seasonal variation of the different species/complex and the effects on fishing opportunities.
        In addition to these criteria, we also considered other relevant factors, such as general input from the public and potential management measures in Amendment 5 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP before arriving at the proposed opening dates for the 2013 Atlantic shark fisheries.
        We propose that the 2013 Atlantic commercial shark fishing season for the non-sandbar large coastal sharks fishery in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic, shark research, non-blacknose small coastal sharks, blacknose sharks, blue sharks, and pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle and blue sharks) in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea, open on or about January 1, 2013, with the publication of the final rule for this action.
        In the Gulf of Mexico non-sandbar large coastal shark fishery, opening the fishing season again on or about January 1 would provide, to the extent practicable, equitable opportunities across the fisheries management region as it did for the 2012 fishing season. This opening date is consistent with all the criteria listed in § 635.27(b)(1)(ii), but particularly with the requirement that we consider the length of the season for the different species/complexes in the previous years and whether fishermen were able to participate in the fishery in those years (§ 635.27(b)(1)(ii)(C)).

        In the Atlantic region, we delayed the opening of the non-sandbar large coastal shark fishery until July 15 in 2010, 2011, and 2012, in order to allow for more equitably distributed shark fishing opportunities, as intended by Amendment 2 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP. In 2012, we proposed to open the Atlantic non-sandbar large coastal shark fishery on the effective date of the final rule implementing the Atlantic HMS Electronic Dealer Reporting System (76 FR 37750) or July 15, 2012, whichever occurred first. Because the Atlantic HMS Electronic Dealer Reporting System was delayed, the fishery opened on July 15. The HMS Electronic Dealer Reporting System final rule has now published and the system will be implemented on January 1, 2013 (77 FR 47303). As such, we are proposing to use the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria in the regulations per § 635.24(a)(8) for the first time. The inseason trip limit adjustment criteria would allow more equitable fishing opportunities across the fishery. The proposed opening date of January 1 would allow fishermen to harvest some of the 2013 quota at the beginning of the year, when sharks are more prevalent in the South Atlantic area. If it appears that the quota will be taken too quickly to allow fishermen throughout the entire region an opportunity to fish, we could reduce the commercial retention limits per while being consistent with § 635.27(b)(1)(ii)(A), (B), (C) and (E). This management measure is consistent with all the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria listed in § 635.24(a)(8), but particularly with the requirement that catch rates in one part of a region not preclude vessels in another part of that region from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a portion of the relevant quota (§ 635.24(a)(8)(vi)).
        If that occurs, we would file with the Office of the Federal Register for publication notification of any inseason adjustments to reduce retention limits to between 0-36 sharks per trip. We could later increase the commercial retention limits per trip, such as on or about July 15, 2013, to provide fishermen in the North Atlantic area an opportunity to retain non-sandbar large coastal sharks when they are prevalent in that area, if warranted considering all relevant factors. Based on the fishing rates in the 2009 fishing season, if we open the fishery earlier than July 15 and do not adjust the commercial retention limits throughout the season, then fishermen in the South Atlantic area would likely catch the entire Atlantic quota before the sharks migrate to the North Atlantic area.
        We also propose not to open the porbeagle fishery in 2013. The porbeagle fishery landings in 2012 exceeded the quota by 259 percent with the addition of late reports in December 2011, which must be accounted for in 2013. The combined overharvest in 2011 and 2012 for the porbeagle fishery would result in a very small quota (0.5 mt dw; 1,001 lb dw). Due to the small quota and difficulties in accurately monitoring such a small quota, we propose to keep the fishery closed in 2013. This proposal is based on the availability of the annual quota based on overharvests in the previous fishing seasons (§ 635.27(b)(1)(ii)(A)).
        At this time, we would be implementing the proposed quotas based on current regulations. Other future actions, such as the anticipated Amendment 5 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP, which would address several recent shark stock assessments, could affect the quotas implemented in the 2013 shark season rule. Any changes to the quotas would be addressed in any such later Amendment.

        All of the shark fisheries, except for porbeagle sharks (which would remain closed the entire year), would remain open until December 31, 2013, or until we determine that the fishing season landings for sandbar shark, non-sandbar large coastal sharks, blacknose sharks, non-blacknose small coastal sharks, blue sharks, or pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle or blue sharks) have reached, or are projected to reach, 80 percent of the available quota. At that time, consistent with § 635.28(b)(1), we will file for publication with the Office of the Federal Register a notice of closure for that shark species group and/or region that will be effective no fewer than 5 days from date of filing. From the effective date and time of the closure until we announce, via a notice in the Federal Register, that additional quota is available, the fishery for the shark species group and, for non-sandbar large coastal sharks, region, would remain closed, even across fishing years, consistent with § 635.28(b)(2).
        Request for Comments
        Comments on this proposed rule may be submitted via http://www.regulations.gov, mail, or fax. We solicit comments on this proposed rule by October 28, 2012 (see DATES and ADDRESSES).
        Public Hearings
        Public hearings on this proposed rule are not currently scheduled. If you would like to request a public hearing, please contact Guý DuBeck or Karyl Brewster-Geisz by phone at 301-427-8503.
        Classification
        The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments, other provisions of the MSA, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        These proposed specifications are exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

        An initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. The IRFA analysis follows.
        In compliance with section 603(b)(1) of the RFA, section 603(b)(1) of the RFA requires that we explain the purpose of the rule. This rule, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments, is being proposed to adjust the 2013 proposed quotas for non-sandbar large coastal sharks, sandbar sharks, blacknose sharks, non-blacknose small coastal sharks, blue sharks, porbeagle sharks, or pelagic sharks (other than porbeagle or blue sharks) based on any over- and/or underharvests from the previous fishing year. These adjustments are being implemented according to the regulations implementing the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments. Thus, we would expect few, if any, economic impacts to fishermen other than those already analyzed in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments, based on the quota adjustments. Not opening the porbeagle shark fishery in 2013 is due to the difficulties in accurately monitoring the small quota. This would have beneficial ecological impacts for porbeagle sharks, while the negative economic impacts are described below. An additional purpose is to use implemented management measures to allow inseason adjustments in the trip limits to slow the fishery down during the season, as necessary. This management measure would provide, to the extent practicable, equitable opportunities across the fishing management region while also considering the ecological needs of the species.

        Under section 603(b)(2) of the RFA, we must explain the rule's objectives, which are to: (1) Adjust the annual quotas for porbeagle sharks due to overharvests in 2011 and 2012, and for non-blacknose small coastal sharks due to underharvests in 2012; (2) establish the opening dates for all of the shark fisheries in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions; and, (3) consider the need to adjust the trip limits inseason for non-sandbar large coastal sharks.
        Section 603(b)(3) of the RFA requires Federal agencies to provide an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule would apply. We consider all HMS permit holders to be small entities because they either had average annual receipts of less than $4.0 million for fish-harvesting, average annual receipts of less than $6.5 million for Charter/headboat, 100 or fewer employees for wholesale dealers, or 500 or fewer employees for seafood processors. These are the Small Business Administration (SBA) size standards for defining a small versus large business entity in this industry.
        The commercial shark fisheries are comprised of fishermen who hold shark directed or incidental limited access permits (LAP) and the related industries, including processors, bait houses, and equipment suppliers, all of which we consider to be small entities according to the size standards set by the SBA. The proposed rule would apply to the approximately 213 directed commercial shark permit holders, 265 incidental commercial shark permit holders, and 96 commercial shark dealers as of August 2012.
        This proposed rule does not contain any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements (5 U.S.C. 603 (b)(4)). Similarly, this proposed rule would not conflict, duplicate, or overlap with other relevant Federal rules (5 U.S.C. 603(b)(5)). Fishermen, dealers, and managers in these fisheries must comply with a number of international agreements as domestically implemented, domestic laws, and FMPs. These include, but are not limited to, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act, the High Seas Fishing Compliance Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the National Environmental Policy Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act.
        In compliance with section 603(c) of the RFA, each IRFA must also contain a description of any significant alternatives to the proposed rule which would accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities. Additionally, the RFA (5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(4)) lists four general categories of significant alternatives that would assist an agency in the development of significant alternatives. These categories of alternatives are: (1) Establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) exemptions from coverage of the rule for small entities. In order to meet the objectives of this final rule, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the ESA, we cannot exempt small entities or change the reporting requirements only for small entities because all the entities affected are considered small entities. We do not know of any performance or design standards that would satisfy the aforementioned objectives of this rulemaking while, concurrently, complying with the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
        This rulemaking does not establish management measures to be implemented, but rather implements previously adopted and analyzed measures with adjustments, as specified in Amendment 2 and Amendment 3 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and the Environmental Assessment (EA) that accompanied the 2011 shark quota specifications rule (75 FR 76302; December 8, 2010). Thus, NMFS proposes to adjust quotas established and analyzed in Amendment 2 and Amendment 3 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP by subtracting the underharvest or adding the overharvest as allowable. Similarly, the ranges of management measures are consistent with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act that were previously analyzed in the EA with the 2011 shark quota specifications rule. Thus, NMFS has limited flexibility to modify the management measures or quotas in this rule, the impacts of which were analyzed in previous regulatory flexibility analyses.
        Based on the 2010 ex-vessel price ($0.67/large coastal shark lb, $0.68/small coastal shark lb, $1.21/pelagic lb, and $13.48/lb for shark fins), fully harvesting the unadjusted 2013 Atlantic shark commercial baseline quotas could result in total fleet revenues of $6,242,548. We propose to keep the porbeagle shark fishery closed in 2013, which results in the total revenue loss of $7,061 (if we kept it open, but reduced it by the overharvests of 2011 and 2012, the net revenue loss in the fishery would amount to $5,175). The upward adjustment due to the underharvests in 2012 non-blacknose small coastal shark fishery would result in a $330,740 gain in revenues. These revenues are similar to the gross revenues analyzed in Amendment 2 and Amendment 3 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP. The IRFAs for those amendments concluded that the economic impacts on these small entities, resulting from rules such as this one that adjust the trip limits inseason through proposed and final rulemaking, are expected to be minimal. Amendments 2 and 3 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and the EA with the 2011 shark quota specifications rule assumed we would be conducting annual rulemakings and considered the IRFAs in the economic and other analyses at the time.
        For this rule, we reviewed the criteria at § 635.27(b)(ii) to determine when opening each fishery would provide equitable opportunities for fishermen while also considering the ecological needs of the different species. The opening of the fishing season could vary depending upon the available annual quota, catch rates, and number of fishing participants during the year. For the 2013 fishing season, we are proposing to open the non-sandbar large coastal shark fishery in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic, shark research, blacknose shark, non-blacknose small coastal shark, and pelagic shark fisheries on the effective date of the final rule for this action (expected to be on or about January 1). The direct and indirect economic impacts would be neutral on a short- and long-term basis, because we are proposing not to change the opening dates of these fisheries from the status quo.

        Opening the non-sandbar large coastal sharks in the Atlantic region on the effective date of the final rule for this action (expected to be on or about January 1) would result in short-term, direct, moderate, beneficial economic impacts as fishermen and dealers in the south Atlantic would be able to fish for non-sandbar large coastal sharks starting on or about January. South Atlantic fishermen would be able to fish earlier in the 2013 fishing season compared to the 2010, 2011, and 2012 fishing seasons, which did not start until July 15. South Atlantic fishermen commented during the public comment period for the 2011 and 2012 shark specification rulemaking that they felt that opening the fishery in July was not fair to them because, by July, the sharks have migrated north and are no longer available. With the implementation of the HMS electronic reporting system in 2013, we should be able to monitor the quota on a real-time basis. This ability, along with the inseason adjustment criteria in § 635.24(a)(8), should allow us the flexibility to further provide equitable fishing opportunities for fishermen across all regions, to the extent practicable. Depending on how quickly the quota is being harvested, we could reduce the retention limits to 0-36 sharks per trip to ensure that fishermen farther north have sufficient quota for a fishery later in the 2013 fishing season. The direct impacts to shark fishermen in the Atlantic region of reducing the trip limit will depend on the needed reduction in the trip limit and the timing of such a reduction. Therefore, such a reduction in the trip limit is only anticipated to have minor adverse direct economic impacts to fishermen in the short-term; long-term impacts are not anticipated as these reductions would not be permanent.
        In the North Atlantic area, a potential January 1 and July 15 opening for the non-sandbar large coastal sharks would have direct, minor, beneficial economic impacts in the short-term for fishermen as they would have access to the non-sandbar large coastal shark quota in 2013. Fishermen in the North Atlantic area did not have or had limited access to the non-sandbar large coastal shark quota in 2009. There would be indirect, minor, beneficial economic impacts in the short- and long-term for shark dealers and other entities that deal with shark products in this region as they would also have access to non-sandbar large coastal shark products in 2013. Thus, allowing the split season in 2013 would cause neutral cumulative economic impacts, since it would allow for a more equitable distribution of the quotas among constituents in this region, which was the original intent of Amendment 2.
        We also propose to keep the porbeagle fishery closed in 2013. This action would cause direct and indirect moderate, adverse, short-term economic impacts on shark fishermen and other entities that rely on porbeagle sharks. The long-term economic impacts would be neutral if we open the porbeagle shark fishery in 2014 because the fishery would open in 2014 under the annual base quota of 1.7 mt dw.

          Authority:
          16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

          Dated: October 3, 2012.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, performing the functions and duties of the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2012-24936 Filed 10-9-12; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P