        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 100830405-0405-02]
        RIN 0648-BA09
        Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast (NE) Multispecies Fishery; Charter/Party Fishery Control Date

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

          ACTION:
           Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR).

          SUMMARY:
           NMFS and the New England Fishery Management Council (Council) announce that they are seeking public comment on the reaffirmation of the current control date of March 30, 2006, in anticipation of developing a limited access program for the NE multispecies open access charter and party boat (charter/party) fishery. This component of the fishery includes vessels with open access charter/party permits, as well as limited access NE multispecies permits, while not on a NE multispecies day-at-sea (DAS) or fishing under the sector management program. The Council has not made a determination that limiting the number of participants in this fishery is necessary, but reaffirming the current control date keeps the stakeholders informed of possible future consideration of the issue and promotes awareness of potential eligibility criteria for future access so as to discourage speculative entry into the fishery, while the Council considers whether and how access to the charter/party fishery should be controlled. By this notification, NMFS reaffirms, on behalf of the Council, that March 30, 2006, may be used as a “control date” to establish eligibility criteria for determining levels of future access to the fishery.

          DATES:
           Written comments must be received by 5p.m., local time October 20, 2010.

          ADDRESSES:
           You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
          Written comments (paper, disk, or CD ROM) should be sent to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. Mark the outside of the envelope, “Comments- Multispecies Charter/Party Control Date.”
          Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to (978) 465 3116.
          Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

          Instructions: No comments will be posted for public viewing until after the comment period has closed. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://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 (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
           Travis Ford, Fishery Management Specialist, (978) 281-9233; fax (978) 281-9135.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The charter/party industry targets the following species: Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), pollock (Pollachius virens); haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus); and winter flounder (Pleuronectes americanus); and, to a lesser extent, white hake (Urophycis tenuis) and wolffish (Anarhichas lupus). In light of the restrictions imposed by Framework 42 to the FMP in 2006 and their impacts, members of the charter/party industry and the Council's Recreational Advisory Panel recommended at that time that the Council restrict new entrants to the charter/party fishery to reduce the need for further restrictions on the recreational catch of cod and other groundfish. The Council did not take action to restrict entrants but, instead, established a control date of March 30, 2006. A “control date” is a time certain that may be used to limit access to a future limited access fishery by vessel owners who enter the fishery after the control date, versus those that entered the fishery before the control date. One of the purposes of the control date is to discourage speculative entry into the fishery by vessels hoping to qualify under any new limited access program, thereby ramping up fishing effort during the period the limited access program is being developed. The control date also serves as notice to any new entrants into the fishery that their financial investment to participate in the fishery may be jeopardized if they do not qualify to fully participate in any new limited access program that is adopted.
        With the implementation of Amendment 16, many participants in the recreational fishery have expressed concern that the number of party/charter operators will increase due to low allocation of some stocks to the commercial fishery. The Council has decided to reaffirm the original control date in order to discourage further speculative entry while it takes time to develop appropriate measures for the recreational fishery.

        This notification reiterates that March 30, 2006, is the control date for potential use in determining historical or traditional participation in the NE multispecies charter/party fishery. Consideration of a control date does not commit the Council or NMFS to develop any particular management system or criteria for participation in this fishery. The Council may choose a different control date, or may choose a management program that does not make use of such a date. Fishers are not guaranteed future participation in the fishery, regardless of their entry dates or level of participation in this fishery before or after the control date. The Council may choose to give variably weighted consideration to fishers active in the fishery before and after the control date. The Council may also choose to take no further action to control entry or access to the fishery, in which case the control date may be rescinded. Any action by the Council will be taken pursuant to the requirements for the development of FMP amendments established under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This notification also gives the public notice that interested participants should locate and preserve records that substantiate and verify their participation in the NE multispecies charter/party fishery in Federal waters.
        Classification
        This ANPR has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

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

          Dated: September 15, 2010.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2010-23444 Filed 9-17-10; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
        Coast Guard
        33 CFR Part 165
        [USCG-2006-25767 formerly CGD09-06-123]
        RIN 1625-AB11
        Safety Zones; U.S. Coast Guard Water Training Areas, Great Lakes

          AGENCY:
          Coast Guard, DHS.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.

          SUMMARY:
          The Coast Guard is withdrawing its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) concerning the establishment of safety zones throughout the Great Lakes for the purpose of conducting gunnery training. The Coast Guard is authorized to conduct training in realistic conditions and in locations including in, on, and over the internal waters of the United States. In order to maximize safety, the NPRM proposed establishing safety zones in order to maintain Coast Guard control over the training area during training periods. This NPRM is being withdrawn, however, because of comments received from the public regarding the number and location of the proposed safety zones, the frequency of use, notification procedures as well as other concerns raised by the public. There will be no further gunnery training on the Great Lakes to satisfy non-emergency training requirements unless we first propose to the public and then publish a final rule. Because the Coast Guard is mandated to provide for the safety and security of the more than 30 million people in Great Lakes region, the critical infrastructure that make up the Great Lakes system, and the vessels that use it, we are evaluating all available options, including a new NPRM for gunnery training.

          DATES:
          The notice of proposed rulemaking is withdrawn on January 5, 2007.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Commander Gustav Wulfkuhle, Enforcement Branch, Response Division, Ninth Coast Guard District, Cleveland, OH at (216) 902-6091.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Regulatory History
        On August 1, 2006, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (71 FR 43402) to establish permanent safety zones throughout the Great Lakes which would restrict vessels from portions of the Great Lakes during live-fire gun exercises that would be conducted by Coast Guard cutters and small boats. The initial comment period for the NPRM ended on August 31, 2006. In response to public requests, the Coast Guard re-opened the comment period (71 FR 53629, September 12, 2006) from September 12, 2006 to November 13, 2006, in order to provide the public more time to submit comments and recommendations. On September 19 and 27, 2006, the Coast Guard published brief documents announcing the dates and other information on public meetings regarding the NPRM and the gunnery exercises. (71 FR 54792, 56420).
        On October 12, 2006, the Coast Guard announced the addition of three more public meetings and again stated that more detailed information related to the meetings would be published at a later date. (71 FR 60094). On October 23, the Coast Guard published a document containing detailed information about five additional public meetings. (71 FR 62075).
        Background
        Thirty-four safety zones were to be located throughout the Great Lakes in order to accommodate 56 separate Coast Guard units. The proposed safety zones were all located at least three nautical miles from the shoreline.
        The Coast Guard proposed to establish permanent zones on the Great Lakes to provide the public with more notice and predictability when conducting infrequent periodic training exercises of brief duration, and to give the public an opportunity to comment on the proposals. The proposed safety zones would have appeared on National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration nautical charts, which would have provided a permanent reference for mariners.

        The proposed safety zones would have been utilized only upon notice by the cognizant Captain of the Port for the area involved in the exercise. Under the procedure outlined in the NPRM, the cognizant Captain of the Port would have issued notice of the enforcement of a live-fire exercise safety zone by all appropriate means to effect the widest publicity among the affected segments of the public including publication in the Federal Register as practicable, in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7(a). Such means of notification would have included, but not been limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners or Local Notice to Mariners before, during, and at the conclusion of training exercises.

        The coordinates of the proposed safety zones were published on August 1, 2006 at 71 FR 43402. All coordinates used to determine the zones were based upon North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83).
        Withdrawal
        The Coast Guard is withdrawing the NPRM published on August 1, 2006 concerning the establishment of safety zones throughout the Great Lakes, but will examine options for future consideration which may include a new NPRM. The Coast Guard will reevaluate the proposal in light of issues raised in the comments the Coast Guard received during the course of this rulemaking. Whatever option the Coast Guard pursues, it intends to address the concerns of the Great Lakes community and to work with the region's stakeholders to develop an acceptable solution that meets the readiness needs of Coast Guard Forces and addresses the public's concerns.
        Discussion of the Comments
        The Coast Guard received over 900 comments regarding this NPRM. The Coast Guard received comments from Members of Congress, state and local government representatives, environmentalists, recreational boaters, commercial users, Native American tribes, local businesses, and members of the general public in the Great Lakes region.
        Several commenters unconditionally supported the Coast Guard's proposal and recognized the Coast Guard's need to be trained in order to carry out its law enforcement and homeland security missions. Several other commenters supported the Coast Guard's proposal but like many commenters raised concerns about the number, size, and location of the proposed safety zones and whether they would impede recreational and commercial activity, including tourism. Some stated that the water training areas would negatively impact the economy, and some ferry operators commented that the locations of the areas would negatively impact their operations.
        Commenters also expressed concerns related to safety and notification issues surrounding the establishment of the water training areas. For example, there were questions on the distance that bullets can travel if they ricochet off the surface of the water and how far they could travel generally. Notification questions included how small craft and vessels without radios would be notified that a live-fire exercise was being conducted in their area. Some people stated that the 2 hour broadcast notice to mariners was insufficient and suggested additional notification procedures, including the use of local media or announcements on the emergency broadcast system. While some commenters suggested that notification begin two weeks before the scheduled exercise, others requested that training be limited to particular days of the week and seasons of the year. In particular, commenters requested that the training schedule avoid peak boating season to accommodate safety and notification concerns.
        Many commenters mentioned environmental concerns, including the potential for lead to find its way into their drinking water. Native American tribes, along with other groups, also expressed concerns regarding subsistence fishing and the impact of lead on the food supply.
        Other environmental comments related to the Preliminary Health Risk Assessment.1
           Based upon standard risk evaluation procedures and “realistic worst case” assumptions, the Risk Assessment concluded that the proposed training would result in no elevated risks for the Great Lakes/freshwater, estuarine/Chesapeake Bay, and riverine systems scenarios. Commenters raised concerns, among others that the Risk Assessment did not consider current levels of contamination or contemplate potential cumulative effects beyond 5 years.

            1 This study, entitled “Preliminary Health Risk Assessment for Proposed U.S. Coast Guard Weapons Training Exercises,” is publicly available as part of electronic docket number 25767. You may electronically access the public docket by performing a “Simple Search” for docket number 25767 on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. The Risk Assessment is the third document in the docket.

        Some commenters raised concerns over the Rush-Bagot Agreement of 1817 that limits naval forces on the Great Lakes, and the impact of the training exercises on the relationship between the United States and Canada. Other commenters expressed general concern over the perceived militarization of the Great Lakes.
        Commenters suggested a variety of alternatives. Some commenters suggested limiting the number of zones and reducing their size. Other suggestions included using “green” ammunition, simulators and/or lasers, and conducting the training in areas other than the Great Lakes.
        In light of these comments and input received during the public meetings, the Coast Guard is withdrawing the current NRPM. The Coast Guard will not conduct further gunnery training on the Great Lakes to satisfy non-emergency training requirements unless the Coast Guard publishes notice of its proposed action, allows the public an opportunity to comment, and publishes a final rule. A terrorist attack or other emergency may alter these plans. The Coast Guard will ensure that any live-fire training is conducted responsibly, safely, and in accordance with applicable legal requirements.
        Future Proposals/Training Areas
        The threat against our Nation remains very real, and vulnerabilities within the Great Lakes system are extensive, diverse, and significant. The Coast Guard is mandated to provide for the safety and security of the more than 30 million people in the Great Lakes Basin, as well as the 11 major ports, 13 nuclear power plants, 348 regulated terminals and facilities, 22 high capacity passenger vessels and ferries, and the hundreds of locks, dams, bridges and other critical infrastructure that make up the Great Lakes system. The Coast Guard is also responsible for the safety and security of several thousand annual Great Lakes commercial vessel transits.
        The Coast Guard must be prepared to counter overseas, cross-border, or domestic threats. This includes protecting the citizens of the Great Lakes as well as vessels, ports, waterways and critical infrastructure in the Great Lakes. The Coast Guard must be trained and prepared to meet all threats and all hazards. In order to be proficient, the Coast Guard must train in the maritime environment in which it operates. Operating in the maritime environment is inherently different from land operations, and Coast Guard personnel must be able to shoot safely and effectively from vessels at moving targets in the water.
        While the Coast Guard must be ready to confront threats to homeland security originating in the maritime domain, training in the environment must be conducted with due regard for public safety and in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment.

        To properly consider the many equities involved, the Coast Guard is withdrawing the NPRM. The Coast Guard is analyzing temporary options to ensure that Coast Guard boat crews obtain training outside the Great Lakes that they require to retain current gunnery qualifications. Maintaining these qualifications is imperative to the Coast Guard mission of providing adequate levels of maritime security in the Great Lakes. The Coast Guard will evaluate all available options including whether to issue a new NPRM prior to conducting non-emergency training exercises on the Great Lakes.

        Authority
        This action is taken under the authority of 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

          Dated: December 28, 2006.
          John E. Crowley, Jr.,
          Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.

      [FR Doc. E6-22632 Filed 1-4-07; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 52
        [FL-83-200009c; FRL-6719-4]
        Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida: Approval of Revisions to the Florida State Implementation Plan; Reopening of Comment Period and Notice of Public Hearing

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; announcement of public hearing and reopening of the comment period.

          SUMMARY:
          EPA is announcing the date, time, and location of a public hearing to accept oral comments on EPA's proposed approval of revisions to the Florida State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning revisions to the ozone air quality maintenance plans for the Jacksonville (Duval County) and Southeast Florida (Broward, Dade, and Palm Beach Counties) areas. This proposed revision removes the emission reduction credits attributable to the Motor Vehicle Inspection Program from the future year emission projections contained in those plans. EPA is also reopening the comment period for a proposed rule published March 17, 2000 (65 FR 14506) concerning this Florida SIP revision.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received by EPA on or before August 4, 2000. EPA will hold a public hearing at the following time and at the address listed below: July 20, 2000, at the South Florida Water Management District Auditorium, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida, starting at 6:00 p.m.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments should be submitted to Joey Levasseur at the EPA, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
           Joey Levasseur at 404/562-9035 (email at levasseur.joey@epa.gov).

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        On March 17, 2000, we solicited public comment on a proposal for approval of revisions to the Florida SIP concerning revisions to the ozone air quality maintenance plans for the Jacksonville (Duval County) and Southeast Florida (Broward, Dade, and Palm Beach Counties) areas. This proposed revision removes the emission reduction credits attributable to the Motor Vehicle Inspection Program from the future year emission projections contained in those plans. In response to requests from the American Lung Association of Florida, Inc., Environmental Defense, and David B. Rivkin, Jr. as counsel for Environmental Systems Products, Inc., on April 13, 2000 (65 FR 19865), EPA extended the comment period until May 17, 2000. EPA subsequently received requests to extend the comment period further and to hold a public hearing.
        Based on letters received in response to proposal, we believe there is significant public interest in the proposed Florida SIP revision. EPA has therefore decided to hold a public hearing on the proposed revision to the Florida SIP. The public hearing will be held on July 20, 2000, at the South Florida Water Management District Auditorium, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida, starting at 6:00 p.m.

        Persons planning to present oral testimony at the hearing should notify Joey Levasseur, EPA Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303, telephone 404/562-9035, email levasseur.joey@epa.gov no later than July 17, 2000. Oral testimony will be limited to five minutes for each presenter. Any member of the public may file a written statement before, during, or by the close of the comment period. Written statements (duplicate copies preferred) should be submitted to Joey Levasseur referencing Docket FL-83-200009c at the above address. A verbatim transcript of the hearing and written statements will be made available for copying during normal working hours at the Region 4 office listed in the address section. A reasonable charge may be assessed for copying of docket materials.
        To accommodate the public hearing, we are also extending the deadline for receiving written public comments on the proposal until August 4, 2000, 15 days after the public hearing. Interested persons are invited to attend the public hearing and to comment on all aspects of EPA's proposed rulemaking.

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
          Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: June 8, 2000.
          Phyllis Harris,
          Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

      [FR Doc. 00-15506 Filed 6-19-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
        Transportation Security Administration
        49 CFR Parts 1515, 1570, and 1572
        Coast Guard
        33 CFR Parts 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, and 125; 46 CFR Parts 10, 12, and 15
        [Docket Nos. TSA-2006-24191; USCG-2006-24196]
        RIN 1652-AA41
        Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License

          AGENCY:
          Transportation Security Administration, United States Coast Guard, DHS.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; notice of comment.

          SUMMARY:
          The Department of Homeland Security, through the Transportation Security Administration and the United States Coast Guard, published an Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled “Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License” on May 22, 2006. In response to letters from Congress about the proposed rule, we sent out the letter below and want to make the public aware of this correspondence.

          ADDRESSES:

          Copies of this Notice as well as the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments received are all available in the dockets for this rulemaking. The dockets are available electronically at http://dms.dot.gov as well as at the Docket Management Facility located in the U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. The dockets may be located by the following docket numbers: TSA docket number TSA-2006-24191 or Coast Guard docket number USCG-2006-24196.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          For questions related to TSA's proposed TWIC standards: Greg Fisher, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220, TWIC Program, 571-227-4545; e-mail: credentialing@dhs.gov.

          For legal questions regarding the proposed TWIC rule: Christine Beyer, TSA-2, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220; telephone (571) 227-2657; facsimile (571) 571-1380; e-mail Christine.Beyer@dhs.gov.
          For questions concerning the Coast Guard provisions of the proposed TWIC rule: LCDR Jonathan Maiorine, Commandant (G-PCP-2), United States Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593; telephone 1-877-687-2243.
          For questions concerning viewing or submitting material to the docket: Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001; telephone (202) 493-0402.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        On May 22, 2006, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) published a joint Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register titled “Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License.” 71 FR 29396. This NPRM included a 45-day comment period and announced four public meetings to be held in Newark, NJ, Tampa, FL, St. Louis, MO, and Long Beach, CA.
        Since that time, TSA and Coast Guard have received several letters from Members of Congress on the NPRM. We recently responded to these letters and wanted to share our response with the public. The body of the letter, which can also be found in the dockets for this rulemaking, reads as follows:

          Thank you for your comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled “Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) Implementation in the Maritime Sector; Hazardous Materials Endorsement for a Commercial Driver's License” and “Consolidation of Merchant Mariner Qualification Credentials” published in the Federal Register on May 22, 2006. Your comments, perspectives and recommendations are very important in the consideration of these rulemakings and in determining the best way forward with the TWIC and associated requirements.
          The Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) received a number of requests similar to yours seeking additional time to comment on the proposed rules. Many of these comments also voiced concern regarding card and reader technology, analysis of economic impact, potential negative impacts to commerce, and uncertainty as to how TWIC requirements for facilities and vessels could be met.
          After a review of the comments received during the comment period and the requests for extension, TSA and the Coast Guard decided not to extend the comment period for the NPRM. However, TSA and Coast Guard have concluded that facility and vessel owners and operators will not be required to purchase or install card readers during the first phase of the TWIC implementation. Additionally, a requirement to purchase and install card readers will not be implemented until the public is afforded further opportunity to comment on that aspect of the TWIC program. The details of this approach will be explained in the next rulemaking.
          Thank you again for your comments on these proposed rulemakings. The views expressed by you and your constituents will assist and inform us in our decision-making process on this important effort.

          Dated: August 16, 2006.
          Craig Bone,
          Rear Admiral, Assistant Commandant for Prevention, United States Coast Guard.

          Dated: August 16, 2006.
          Stephanie Rowe,
          Assistant Administrator, Transportation Security Administration.

      [FR Doc. 06-7055 Filed 8-17-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-15-P