        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [Docket No. 000511130-0130-01; I.D. 032900C]
        RIN 0648-AN25
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Allocation of Pacific Cod among Vessels Using Hook-and-Line or Pot Gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed Rule; proposed revision to the 2000 harvest specifications for Pacific cod; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 64 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area (FMP). This proposed amendment would also necessitate a revision to the 2000 harvest specifications for Pacific cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI). Amendment 64, submitted by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council), would apportion the hook-and-line or pot gear (fixed gear) allocation of total allowable catch (TAC) of Pacific cod in the BSAI among hook-and-line catcher-processor vessels, hook-and-line catcher vessels, and pot gear vessels. This action is necessary to respond to socio-economic needs of the fishing industry that have been identified by the Council and is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the FMP.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by July 10, 2000.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments must be sent to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Lori Gravel. Hand or courier delivered comments may be sent to the Federal Building, 709 West 9th Street, Room 453, Juneau, AK 99801. Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 907-586-7465. Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or the Internet. Copies of Amendment 64 and the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for the amendments are available from the North Pacific Fishery Management Council at 605 West 4th Ave. Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501, telephone 907-271-2809.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          James Hale, 907-586-7228.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the Exclusive Economic Zone (3 to 200 miles offshore) of the BSAI under the FMP, which the Council prepared and NMFS approved in 1982 under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, P. L. 94-265, 16 U.S.C. 1801 (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

        The Council has submitted Amendment 64 for Secretarial review. NMFS published a Notice of Availability (NOA) of the FMP amendment in the Federal Register on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19354), with comments on the FMP amendment invited through June 12, 2000. Written comments may address the FMP amendment, the proposed rule, or both, but must be received by June 20, 2000 to be considered in the decision to approve or disapprove the FMP amendment.
        Background and Need for Action
        Beginning in 1997, Amendment 46 to the FMP allocated the TAC for BSAI Pacific cod among vessels using jig gear, trawl gear, and hook-and-line or pot gear. Two percent of the TAC is reserved for jig gear, 51 percent for hook-and-line or pot gear, and 47 percent for trawl gear. The amendment further split the trawl allocation equally between catcher vessels and catcher/processor vessels, but no split was adopted for the 51 percent allocated to hook-and-line or pot vessels.
        Since the approval of Amendment 46, increasing competition for Pacific cod among catcher/processor and catcher vessels using pot or hook-and-line gear has given rise to new allocation issues. Increased prices for Pacific cod, reduced crab guideline harvest levels, and shortened or canceled crab seasons due to low resource abundance have resulted in increased harvests of Pacific cod by vessels using pot gear. Fishermen displaced from crab fisheries have expressed ongoing interest in fishing for Pacific cod aggravating the concerns of long-term Pacific cod fishermen about erosion of their gear harvest shares in the cod fishery in favor of new entrants using pot gear who, until very recently, focused harvest activity in the BSAI crab fisheries.
        In response to these concerns, the Council initiated an analysis at its April 1999 meeting of the effects of splitting the hook-and-line or pot gear allocation of Pacific cod in the BSAI among hook-and-line catcher/processor vessels, hook-and-line catcher vessels, and all vessels using pot gear. At its June 1999 meeting, the Council reviewed the analysis and drafted the following problem statement to guide further analysis of alternatives for Amendment 64:

          The hook-and-line and pot fisheries for Pacific cod in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands are fully utilized. Competition for this resource has increased for a variety of reasons, including increased market value of cod products and a declining [acceptable biological catch and total allowable catch.] Longline and pot fishermen who have made significant long-term investments, have long catch histories, and are significantly dependent on the BSAI cod fisheries need protection from others who have little or limited history and wish to increase their participation in the fishery. This requires prompt action to promote stability in the BSAI fixed gear cod fishery until comprehensive rationalization is completed.

        The subsequent analysis reviewed, in addition to the status quo, alternatives for separate Pacific cod allocations for the different hook-and-line and pot gear users that approximate their historical catches over the past 4 years. The options analyzed determined those percentages based on catch histories from (1) 1996 and 1997, (2) 1997 and 1998, (3) 1996 through 1998, and (4) 1995 through 1998. In general, the allocations that would result from these options ranged between 80 and 85 percent to hook-and-line vessels and between 15 and 20 percent to pot vessels.
        At its October 1999 meeting, the Council adopted Amendment 64 to set Pacific cod directed fishing allowances for the different hook-and-line and pot gear users (sectors) in the following percentages: Hook-and-line catcher/processor vessels, 80 percent; hook-and-line catcher vessels, 0.3 percent; pot gear vessels, 18.3 percent; and hook-and-line or pot catcher vessels less than 60 feet length overall (LOA), 1.4 percent. These percentages represent divisions of the hook-and-line or pot gear TAC after a deduction of estimated incidental catch of Pacific cod in other groundfish hook-and-line or pot gear fisheries.
        The proposed amendment also provides that harvests by pot and hook-and-line catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA would accrue against the 1.4 percent allocation only after pot vessels and hook-and-line catcher vessels harvest the respective 18.3 percent and 0.3 percent allocations. Managing the allocations in this manner would ensure that cod is available to the smaller catcher vessels even after the larger vessels in their gear sector have taken their allocation. Nevertheless, if the pot gear fishery lasts longer than the hook-and-line fishery, then the small hook-and-line catcher vessels could begin (and possibly finish) harvesting the 1.4 percent allocation before catcher vessels under 60 feet using pot gear have an opportunity to harvest any of the 1.4 percent set aside for smaller catcher vessels.
        Because a sector of the BSAI Pacific cod fishery may not be able to harvest its entire allocation in a year due to halibut bycatch constraints or, in the case of the jig fishery, insufficient effort in the fishery, the Council also provided direction on how projected unharvested amounts of a gear's directed fishing allowance may be transferred to a different user group. Unharvested amounts (roll-overs) from the jig or trawl gear allocations would be apportioned between catcher-processors using hook-and-line gear and vessels equal to or greater than 60 ft LOA using pot gear according to the actual harvest of roll-overs by these two sectors during the 3-year period from 1996-98. Projections based on information in the analysis for this proposed action indicate that 94.7 percent of the cod would be allocated to the hook-and-line catcher-processor fleet and the remaining 5.3 percent to the pot fleet. In addition, any amounts of Pacific cod annually allocated to catcher vessels using hook-and-line gear or to vessels less than 60 ft (18.3 meters(m)) LOA that are projected to remain unharvested would be rolled over to the hook-and-line catcher-processor fleet in September.
        The Council recommended that the Pacific cod directed fishing allowances proposed under Amendment 64 for the different hook-and-line and pot gear sectors would terminate on December 31, 2003. On that date, Pacific cod allocation would revert to the current regime unless the Council adopts and NMFS approves a new FMP amendment to continue the proposed allocations of Pacific cod or implement new allocation percentages after that date. In adopting an expiration date for the proposed amendment, the Council reasoned that 3 years would be sufficient time to evaluate the impact of this action in light of other impending changes for the BSAI fixed gear fishery, such as, proposed Amendment 67 to require Pacific cod and gear endorsements on permits issued under the License Limitation Program (LLP). Whereas this proposed action would establish allocations for different sectors of the fixed gear cod fishery, proposed Amendment 67 would limit the participants to those who meet certain historical criteria.
        In adopting Amendment 64, the Council recognized that a separate regulatory amendment would be needed to apportion the 900 mt Pacific halibut prohibited species mortality limit established for nontrawl gear in regulations at § 679.21(e)(2) among catcher vessels and catcher/processor vessels fishing for Pacific cod using hook-and-line gear. Current regulations only authorize a separate Pacific halibut bycatch allowance to the “Pacific cod hook-and-line fishery” defined at § 679.21(e)(4)(ii)(A). Thus, catcher/processor vessels using hook-and-line gear to fish for Pacific cod could attain amounts of halibut bycatch mortality that would result in prohibition of directed fishing for Pacific cod by all vessels using hook-and-line gear, including catcher vessels using this gear type under a separate Pacific cod directed fishing allowance.
        To respond to this concern, the Council has requested staff to develop an analysis of regulatory measures that would authorize further allocation of the Pacific halibut mortality limits among vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear. If adopted by the Council in the future, this regulatory amendment would be published as a separate proposed rule for public review and comment.
        Incidental Catch Allowance
        Pacific cod also are taken incidentally in directed fisheries using hook-and-line or pot gear for other species. To the extent practicable, NMFS credits this incidental harvest against the TAC to ensure that Pacific cod are not overharvested. The proposed rule to implement Amendment 64 would require the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, (Regional Administrator), to annually establish an incidental catch allowance for Pacific cod taken in other directed hook-and-line and pot fisheries for groundfish. The incidental catch allowance would be deducted from the overall hook-and-line or pot gear allocation of the Pacific cod TAC before that allocation is divided among the different hook-and-line and pot gear user groups.
        NMFS acknowledges that incidental catch of Pacific cod occurs in non-groundfish fisheries such as the hook-and-line gear fishery for Pacific halibut or crab pot gear fisheries. Sufficient data currently are not collected from these fisheries that would allow NMFS to extrapolate useful estimates of incidental catch for purposes of specifying the annual ICA and deducting these amounts from the Pacific cod TAC allocated to vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear as directed fishing allowances. The total incidental catch amount of Pacific cod in the crab and Pacific halibut fisheries likely exceeds several thousand metric tons (mt) based on (1) anecdotal information on the amount of incidentally caught Pacific cod used as bait in the crab fisheries, (2) the fact that the Pacific halibut fishery during summer months typically occurs in relatively shallow water where Pacific cod are prevalent, and (3) assumptions on amount of gear deployed and incidental catch rates. In the absence of the quantitative data needed to estimate incidental Pacific cod harvests in the halibut and crab fisheries, NMFS intends to estimate the ICA only on the basis of incidental catch estimated for the non-Pacific cod hook-and-line or pot gear groundfish fisheries.

        NMFS recognizes the potential biological significance of not accounting for all incidental catch of Pacific cod in non-trawl fisheries and intends to explore with the State of Alaska and the International Pacific Halibut Commission options to collect better information on incidental catch rates of non-target species in the crab and Pacific halibut fisheries. NMFS further anticipates that improved estimates of incidental catch amounts in these fisheries will be available to the Council when it reassesses BSAI Pacific cod allocation issues prior to the proposed expiration date of Amendment 64. Until then, NMFS' stock assessment scientists believe that, while the amounts of Pacific cod taken in the crab and Pacific halibut fisheries could exceed several thousand mt, this level of mortality does not pose significant concerns for overfishing or sustainable resource management of the Pacific cod resource given the conservative management of this species under the FMP. That being said, NMFS firmly believes that steps must be taken to collect the data necessary to obtain better estimates of overall mortality of Pacific cod in the non-groundfish fisheries.

        Subsequent to the Council's October 1999 adoption of proposed Amendment 64, several owners of catcher/processor vessels using pot gear to participate in a directed fishery for Pacific cod petitioned the Council to initiate a separate FMP amendment that would authorize separate Pacific cod directed fishing allowances for catcher/processor vessels using pot gear and catcher vessels using pot gear. This petition was based on the assumptions that increased fishing effort for Pacific cod with pot gear is due primarily to catcher vessels using pot gear and that the historical harvest share of cod by catcher/processor vessels using pot gear is threatened. In response to these concerns, the Council requested staff to develop a separate FMP amendment that would authorize a further allocation of Pacific cod between these two sectors. If adopted by the Council in the future, the proposed amendment and its implementing rule would be published in the Federal Register for public review and comment.

        In December 1999, the Council recommended seasonal allowances for the 51 percent of the Pacific cod TAC allocated to the hook-and-line or pot gear fisheries. The seasonal allowances are authorized under § 679.20(a)(7)(iv) and are based on the criteria set forth at § 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(B). The final 2000 harvest specifications for BSAI groundfish were approved by NMFS and published in the Federal Register on February 18, 2000 (65 FR 8282).
        If approved by NMFS, the final rule implementing Amendment 64 would revise the final 2000 harvest specifications in concert with the hook-and-line and pot gear allocations proposed under the amendment. The final 2000 harvest specifications set the hook-and-line or pot gear allocation of the 2000 Pacific cod TAC at 91,048 mt. An incidental catch allowance of 500 mt, derived from estimates of incidental catch of Pacific cod in other groundfish fisheries from 1996-1999, would be deducted from the hook-and-line or pot gear allocation of the Pacific cod TAC before the allocation is apportioned to the separate gear sectors. Table 1 lists the proposed revisions to the 2000 allocations and seasonal apportionments of the Pacific cod TAC.
        Consistent with § 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(C), any portion of the first seasonal allowance of the catcher/processor hook-and-line gear allocation that is not harvested by the end of the first season would become available on September 1, the beginning of the third season. No seasonal apportionment of the amounts of Pacific cod allocated to catcher vessels or to vessels using pot gear is proposed for 2000.

            Table 1.—Gear Shares and Seasonal Apportionments of the BSAI Pacific Cod Hook-and-Line and Pot Gear Allocation

            Gear sector
            Percent
            Share (mt)

            Seasonal appointment 1

            Date
            Amount (mt)

            Hook-and-line Catcher-processors
            80
            72,438
            Jan 1-Apr 30
            52,000

            May 1-Aug 31

            Sept 1-Dec 31
            20,438

            Hook-and-Line Catcher Vessels
            0.3
            272
            Jan 1-Dec 31

            Pot Gear Vessels
            18.3
            16,570
            Jan 1-Dec 31 272
            16,570

            Catcher Vessels under 60 feet LOA using Hook-and-line or Pot Gear
            1.4
            1,268
            Jan 1-Dec 31
            1,268

            Sub-total
            100
            90,548

            90,548

            Incidental Catch Allowance

            500

            500

            Total hook-and-line and pot gear allocation of Pacific cod TAC

            91,048

            91,048

            1 Any unused portion of the first seasonal Pacific cod allowance specified for catcher/processors using hook-and-line fishery will be reapportioned to the third seasonal allowance.

        Implementation
        In the event that NMFS approves this action and implements it mid-season during the 2000 fishing year, any overage of a sector's annual allocation of Pacific cod would be deducted proportionately from the other sectors' allocation remaining for the year.
        Classification
        At this time, NMFS has not determined that the FMP amendment this rule would implement is consistent with the national standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, in making that determination, will take into account the data, views, and comments received during the comment period.

        The Council prepared an EA for this FMP amendment that discusses the impact on the environment as a result of this rule. A copy of this EA is available from the Council (see ADDRESSES).

        The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) prepared for this action indicates that the proposed amendment could negatively affect a number of small entities. For purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), all catcher vessels fishing for Pacific cod using hook-and-line or pot gear can be considered small businesses, with annual receipts of less than $3 million. Under the current LLP, approximately 330 catcher vessels would be authorized to participate in the Bering Sea Pacific cod hook-and-line or pot gear fishery. Of the 98 catcher-processor vessels potentially authorized under the LLP to fish for Pacific cod, approximately one-third could be considered small entities. Five of the ten shore-based plants and floating processors operating within Alaskan state waters and processing most of the Pacific cod harvested by hook-and-line or pot gear catcher vessels would be considered small businesses under RFA, processing less than 2 percent of the total shoreside landings of Pacific cod by catcher vessels in 1998. Other small entities affected by the proposed amendment include the three Alaskan communities that are home to processing plants that process limited amounts of BSAI Pacific cod: King Cove, Egegik, and Kenai.
        The proposed amendment would allocate a portion of the Pacific cod resource away from the longline catcher-processor fleet and move it to the catcher vessels delivering to shore-based processors. Because the longline catcher-processor fleet comprises the highest number of large entities of any sector fishing off Alaska, this allocation would tend to favor small entities. By implementing the allocations by gear sector without limiting the number of vessels in any gear sector that may enter the fishery, this action may have the effect of increasing competition among users. However, the Council at its April 2000 meeting took final action to mitigate the effect of this action on competition within gear sectors by recommending for approval by NMFS a proposed amendment to require gear and species endorsements on licenses of those who wish to participate in the fixed gear BSAI Pacific cod fishery.
        The magnitude of the proposed amendment's impact cannot be conclusively determined with the data currently available. Most persons operating in the fishery affected by the proposed action are small entities given their expected annual gross revenues of less than $3 million, and revenues could potentially be decreased by more than 5 percent, but that depends on the level of catch that might have been achieved in the absence of an allocation. Also, impacts of this action on potential revenues cannot be isolated from other factors including price fluctuation, amount of effort exerted by latent permits, and stock fluctuation of alternative fisheries such as crab.
        This action would not limit the number of vessels moving into the Pacific cod fishery from the crab fishery because of downward trends in the Bering Sea crab stocks, and any increase in participation of crab vessels in the Pacific cod pot gear fishery would increase competition for the 18.3 percent of the fixed gear Pacific cod TAC allocated to pot gear vessels and the 1.4 percent allocated to vessels under 60 ft LOA. As noted here, the Council intends to mitigate this impact with proposed Amendment 67, which would require gear and species endorsements based on historical participation in the fishery.
        Nothing in this proposed action would result in any changes in reporting or recordkeeping requirements, or any obvious disproportionment regulatory impacts to small entities relative to large. From one perspective, setting a percentage allocation will keep one sector from increasing its share relative to what it could do under the status quo. From the information in the analysis, and from public testimony before the Council, it appears likely that the pot sector would increase its relative share in the absence of a quota split. From another perspective, adoption of the Council's preferred alternative would serve to increase the current share of the smallest entities. In deliberations on this action, the Council considered alternative allocation options, based on historical percentages of catch by the different gear sectors, that would have had varying degrees of impact on small entities in the fixed gear Pacific cod fishery. For longline catcher processors, the annual average harvests ranged from 80 percent of the fixed gear Pacific cod TAC for the years 1996-97 to 86.5 percent for the years 1997-98. For this gear sector the Council chose the lower end of the range, thus leaving a larger percentage of the TAC remaining for longline catcher vessels, pot vessels, and both longline and pot vessels under 60 ft LOA. The allocation options reviewed for longline catcher vessels ranged from 0 percent in the years 1996-97 to 0.25 percent for the years 1995-98. The Council chose a slightly higher percentage (3.0 percent) than the highest average reviewed in the options. For pot vessels, the options ranged from an average harvest of 13.5 percent for the years 1997-98 to 21 percent for 1996-97. While the higher average would have had less impact on small entities in the pot sector, the Council chose to set the pot allocation at 18.3 percent and provided for small entities that are pot or longline vessels under 60 ft LOA by setting aside for those vessels an allocation that represents a larger percentage of the TAC than vessels under 60 ft LOA have historically harvested.
        This analysis did not reveal any existing Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any to the actions proposed in the alternatives.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of E.O. 12866.
        The President has directed Federal agencies to use plain language in their communications with the public, including regulations. To comply with that directive, we seek public comment on any ambiguity or unnecessary complexity arising from the language used in this rule.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
          Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

          Dated: May 19, 2000.
          Penelope D. Dalton,
          Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
          1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            16 U.S.C. 773 et seq, 1801 et seq., and 3631 et seq.

          2. In § 679.20, paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C) is redesignated as paragraph (a)(7)(i)(D), paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(B) is redesignated as paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(C), redesignated paragraphs (a)(7)(i)(D) and (a)(7)(ii)(C) and paragraphs (a)(7)(iv)(A), (a)(7)(iv)(C) and (b)(1)(v) are revised, paragraph (a)(7)(iii) is removed, and new paragraphs (a)(7)(i)(C) and (a)(7)(ii)(B) are added to read as follows:

            §  679.20
            General limitations.

            (a) * * *
            (7) * * *
            (i) * * *
            (C) Allocations among vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear (Applicable through December 31, 2003). (1) The Regional Administrator annually will estimate the amount of Pacific cod taken as incidental catch in directed fisheries for groundfish other than Pacific cod by vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear and deduct that amount from the portion of Pacific cod TAC annually allocated to hook-and-line or pot gear under paragraph (a)(7)(i)(A) of this section. The remainder will be further allocated as directed fishing allowances as follows:
            (i) 80 percent to catcher/processor vessels using hook-and-line gear;
            (ii) 0.3 percent to catcher vessels using hook-and-line gear;
            (iii) 18.3 percent to vessels using pot gear; and
            (iv) 1.4 percent to catcher vessels less than 60 feet LOA that use either hook-and-line or pot gear.
            (2) Harvests of Pacific cod made by catcher vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA using pot gear will not accrue to the 1.4 percent allocation under paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C)(1)(iv) of this section until vessels using pot gear have harvested the 18.3 percent allocated to all vessels using pot gear under paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C)(1)(iii) of this section.
            (3) Harvests of Pacific cod made by catcher vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA using hook-and-line gear will not accrue to the 1.4 percent allocation under paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C)(1)(iv) of this section until catcher vessels using hook-and-line gear have harvested the 0.3 percent allocated to all catcher vessels using hook-and-line gear under paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C)(1)(ii) of this section.
            (D) The Regional Administrator may establish separate directed fishing allowances and prohibitions authorized under paragraph (d) of this section for vessels harvesting Pacific cod using trawl gear, jig gear, hook-and-line gear, or pot gear.
            (ii) * * *
            (A) * * *
            (B) Reallocation among vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear. If, during a fishing year, the Regional Administrator determines that catcher vessels using hook-and-line gear or vessels less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear will not be able to harvest the directed fishing allowance of Pacific cod allocated to those vessels under paragraphs (a)(7)(i)(C)(1)(ii) or (a)(7)(i)(C)(1)(iv) of this section, NMFS may reallocate the projected unused amount of Pacific cod as a directed fishing allowance to catcher/processor vessels using hook-and-line gear through notification in the Federal Register.
            (C) Reallocation between vessels using trawl or non-trawl gear. If, during a fishing year, the Regional Administrator determines that vessels using trawl gear, hook-and-line gear, pot gear or jig gear will not be able to harvest the entire amount of Pacific cod in the BSAI allocated to those vessels under paragraphs (a)(7)(i)(A), (a)(7)(i)(B) or (a)(7)(i)(C) of this section, NMFS may reallocate the projected unused amount of Pacific cod to vessels harvesting Pacific cod using the other gear type(s) through notification in the Federal Register, except as provided below:
            (1) Reallocation of TAC specified for jig gear. On September 15 of each year, the Regional Administrator will reallocate any projected unused amount of Pacific cod in the BSAI allocated to vessels using jig gear only to vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear through notification in the Federal Register.
            (2) Reallocation of TAC to catcher/processor vessels using hook-and-line gear or vessels using pot gear. Any unharvested amounts of Pacific cod TAC that are reallocated from vessels using trawl or jig gear to catcher/processor vessels using hook-and-line gear or vessels using pot gear to increase directed allowances established under paragraphs (a)(7)(i)(C)(1)(i) or (a)(7)(i)(C)(1) (iii) of this section, will be apportioned so that catcher/processor vessels using hook-and-line gear will receive 95 percent and vessels using pot gear will receive 5 percent of any such reallocation.
            (iv) * * *
            (A) Time periods. NMFS, after consultation with the Council, may divide the directed fishing allowances allocated to vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear under paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C) of this section among the following three periods: January 1 through April 30, May 1 through August 31, and September 1 through December 31.
            (B)* * *
            (C) Unused seasonal allowances. Any unused portion of a seasonal allowance of Pacific cod allocated to vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear under paragraph (a)(7)(i)(C) will be reallocated to the remaining seasons during the current fishing year in a manner determined by NMFS, after consultation with the Council.

            (b) * * *
            (1) * * *
            (v) Pacific cod Any amounts of the BSAI nonspecific reserve that are apportioned to Pacific cod as provided by paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section must be apportioned among vessels using jig, hook-and-line or pot, and trawl gear in the same proportion specified in paragraph (a)(7)(i) of this section, unless the Regional Administrator determines under paragraph (a)(7)(ii) of this section that vessels using a certain gear type will not be able to harvest the additional amount of Pacific cod. In this case, the nonspecific reserve will be apportioned to vessels using the other gear type(s).

      [FR Doc. 00-13188 Filed 5-25-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Railroad Administration
        49 CFR Part 233
        [Docket No. FRA-2012-0104, Notice No. 1]
        RIN 2130-AC44
        Signal System Reporting Requirements

          AGENCY:
          Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

          SUMMARY:
          As part of a paperwork reduction initiative, FRA is proposing to eliminate the regulatory requirement that each carrier must file with FRA a signal system status report every five years. FRA believes the report is no longer necessary because advances in technology have made it possible for more updated information regarding railroad signal systems to be available to FRA through alternative sources. Separately, FRA is proposing to amend the criminal penalty provision in the Signal System Reporting Requirements by updating an outdated statutory citation.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received by August 19, 2013. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent possible without incurring additional delay or expense.

          FRA anticipates being able to resolve this rulemaking without a public, oral hearing. However, if FRA receives a specific request for a public, oral hearing prior to July 19, 2013, one will be scheduled, and FRA will publish a supplemental notice in the Federal Register to inform interested parties of the date, time, and location of any such hearing.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments related to Docket No. FRA-2012-0104, Notice No. 1, by any one of the following methods:
          • Fax: 1-202-493-2251;
          • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590;
          • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays; or
          • Web site: Electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

            Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name, docket name, and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for Privacy Act information related to any submitted comments or materials.

            Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Sean Crain, Electronic Engineer, Signal and Train Control Division, Office of Railroad Safety, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W35-226, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493-6257), sean.crain@dot.gov, or Stephen N. Gordon, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W31-209, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493-6001), stephen.n.gordon@dot.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Explanation of Proposed Regulatory Action
        A. Elimination of the Signal System Five-[Y]ear Report

        On May 14, 2012, President Obama issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13610—Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens, which seeks “to modernize our regulatory system and to reduce unjustified regulatory burdens and costs.” See 77 FR 28469. The Executive Order directs each executive agency to conduct retrospective reviews of its regulatory requirements to identify potentially beneficial modifications to regulations. Executive agencies are to “give priority, consistent with the law, to those initiatives that will produce significant quantifiable monetary savings or significant quantifiable reductions in paperwork burdens while protecting public health, welfare, safety and our environment.” See id. at 28470.

        FRA has initiated a review of its existing regulations in accordance with E.O. 13610 and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., with the goal of identifying regulations that can be amended or eliminated, thereby reducing the paperwork and reporting burden on carriers that are subject to FRA jurisdiction. One area where FRA believes it can help reduce the railroad industry's reporting burden is by eliminating the Signal System Five-Year reporting requirement. See 49 CFR 233.9.
        Section 233.9 currently requires each carrier to complete and submit an FRA Form F6180.47, Signal System Five-Year Report, in accordance with the instructions and definitions on the form. The information reported on FRA Form F6180.47 is intended to update FRA on the status of a railroad's signal system. It historically has been used to monitor changes in the types of signal systems installed and the methods of operation used on the Nation's railroads.

        Prior to 1997, carriers were required to submit a Signal System Annual Report by April 15 of each year. However, based on a regulatory review, FRA extended the reporting requirement to every five years rather than annually. See 61 FR 33871 (July 1, 1996). FRA determined that a five-year reporting period would significantly reduce the reporting burden on the railroads while still meeting the informational needs of the government. Therefore, in July 1996, FRA amended § 233.9 to require that “[n]ot later than April 1, 1997 and every 5 years thereafter, each carrier shall file with FRA a signal system status report “Signal System Five-[Y]ear Report” on a form to be provided by FRA in accordance with instructions and definitions provided on the report.”
        For the 2012 reporting period, FRA transitioned the Signal System Five-Year Report form into an electronic format. The electronic form required all of the same information as the paper form but could be submitted via the Internet. The form was due to be submitted by no later than April 1, 2012, and pertained to signal systems in service on or after January 1, 2012. The next five-year report is not due until April 2017. The present rulemaking would eliminate the reporting requirement in its entirety for April 2017 and thereafter.
        FRA believes that the Signal System Five-Year Report is no longer necessary for several reasons. The data collected in the Signal System Five-Year Report can quickly become outdated. Railroads normally modify signal systems far more frequently than once every five years. Indeed, FRA has generally found that signal system modifications occur with such frequency under 49 CFR §§ 235.5 and 235.7, that the Signal System Five-Year Report often is out-of-date by the time it is received by FRA.

        Moreover, FRA has other viable means to monitor a carrier's signal system. It is better able to monitor the status of a railroad signal system through the use of more frequently collected agency data—such as the Block Signal Application, see 49 CFR 235.5—which provide the agency much more detailed and useful information. The development and expansion of electronic reporting methods also allow railroads to more frequently report to FRA information similar to that which is captured in the Signal System Five-Year Report. This ability gives FRA a better “real-time” understanding of a carrier's signal system than the agency can get from a report that is filed once every five years. As a result, FRA currently relies on the more up-to-date sources for signal system data and has little use for the information collected in the Signal System Five-Year Report.
        Finally, the railroad industry and the general public do not appear to derive any useful benefit or information from the Signal System Five-Year Report. The feedback FRA has received from the industry and the general public indicates that, as expected, the data contained in the report was not useful in providing up-to-date information about railroad signal systems. As a result, FRA is confident that eliminating the report will not result in the railroad industry or the general public being less informed about railroad signal systems.
        B. Updating U.S. Code Citations in Part 233
        Administrative amendments are sometimes necessary to address citations that have become outdated due to the actions of Congress. This is particularly true when the basis for a legal requirement is moved to a different title, chapter, or section of the U.S. Code. Federal regulations do not “auto-correct” for these types of changes. Therefore, it is incumbent on agencies to monitor their regulations and make appropriate changes whenever feasible. FRA has identified a citation in 49 CFR 233.13(b)—referencing 49 U.S.C. 438(e)—that should be amended for this reason, and proposes to make that amendment in this rulemaking.

        The subject statutory provision arises out of the former Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 (FRSA), which was enacted on October 16, 1970. See Public Law 91-458. Section 209 of the FRSA, as originally enacted, contained a civil penalty provision that was codified at 45 U.S.C. 438. While the statute did not contain a criminal penalty provision when it was first enacted, Congress eventually determined that there may be situations where criminal penalties are warranted for violations of the law. Accordingly, the FRSA was amended on October 10, 1980. See Public Law 96-423. Among other things, the 1980 amendment added paragraph (e) to section 209, establishing that criminal penalties may be assessed against any person who knowingly and willfully makes a false entry in a required record or report; destroys, mutilates, changes, or otherwise falsifies a required record or report; fails to enter specified facts or transactions in a required record or report; makes, prepares, or preserves a record or report in violation of an applicable regulation or order; or files a false record or report with the Secretary of Transportation. This revision to the FRSA was codified at 45 U.S.C. 438(e).

        In 1984, FRA amended its Signal and Train Control Regulations, including 49 CFR Part 233. See 49 FR 3374 (Jan. 26, 1984). Section 233.13(b) was amended at this time to read “[w]hoever knowingly and willfully—[f]iles a false report or other document required to be filed by this part is subject to a $5,000 fine and 2 years imprisonment as prescribed by 49 U.S.C. 522(a) and section 209(e) of the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970, as amended (45 U.S.C. 438(e)).” This language reflected the added statutory authority that Congress provided in its 1980 amendment to the FRSA.

        Congress, however, was not done making changes that applied to section 209(e) of the FRSA. In 1994, Congress enacted a law to “revise, codify, and enact without substantive change certain general and permanent laws, related to transportation” under title 49 of the U.S. Code. See Public Law 101-272. As a result, most Federal railroad safety laws were moved from title 45 to title 49. This included the criminal penalty provision of the FRSA, which was repealed at 45 U.S.C. 438(e) and recodified at 49 U.S.C. 21311. This statutory change rendered the citation in 49 CFR 233.13(b) outdated, and FRA has not, prior to this date, sought to amend the regulatory provision. Given that FRA has begun the present rulemaking addressing part 233, it views now as an appropriate time to update the citation in paragraph (b) of section 233.13.
        II. Section-by-Section Analysis
        Part 233—Signal System Reporting Requirements
        Section 233.9 Reports
        FRA proposes eliminating the Signal System Five-Year Report required by this section and reserving the section for future use. Eliminating this reporting requirement will reduce the railroad industry's paperwork burden in a way that does not endanger the public health, welfare, and safety or our environment. FRA has identified three specific reasons supporting the elimination of this reporting requirement. First, the information contained in the Signal System Five-Year Report quickly becomes obsolete. Second, FRA is better able to determine the status of a railroad's signal system through other more frequently collected types of information. Third, the report does not generally appear to contain information that is useful to the railroad industry or the general public.
        Section 233.13 Criminal Penalty
        FRA proposes making an administrative change to paragraph (b) of this section to correct an out-of-date citation to the U.S. Code. Paragraph (b) provides that it is unlawful to knowingly and willfully file a false report required by part 233. Such conduct is punishable with a fine of $5000 and up to two years imprisonment. The paragraph cites to 45 U.S.C. 438(e) as statutory support for the criminal penalties; however, this statutory provision was repealed and recodified under a different title of the U.S. Code as part of a reorganization of the Federal railroad safety statutes by Congress. The provision is currently housed at 49 U.S.C. 21311. The proposed amendment would correct the outdated citation in paragraph (b) by replacing 45 U.S.C. 438(e) with 49 U.S.C. 21311.
        Appendix A to Part 233—Schedule of Civil Penalties

        Appendix A to part 233 contains a schedule of civil penalties for use in connection with this part. Because such penalty schedules are statements of agency policy, notice and comment are not required prior to their issuance. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). Nevertheless, FRA intends to amend this appendix in issuing the final rule to remove and reserve the entry for § 233.9, in accordance with this proposal.
        III. Regulatory Impact
        A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
        This rulemaking proposes eliminating the requirement in 49 CFR 233.9 that each railroad file with FRA a Signal System Five-Year Report. The proposed rule has been evaluated in accordance with existing policies and procedures. It is not considered a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563. This rule also is not significant under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 44 FR 11034 (Feb. 26, 1979). A regulatory impact analysis addressing the economic impact of this proposed rule has been prepared and placed in the docket.
        As part of the regulatory evaluation, FRA has explained the benefits of this proposed rule and provided monetized assessments of the value of such benefits. The proposed rule would eliminate the cost associated with submitting a Signal System Five-Year Report. Each railroad currently expends approximately one hour of labor to prepare and submit the report to FRA every five years. For the 20-year period analyzed, the estimated cost savings would be $234,265. The present value of this is $113,929 (using a 7 percent discount rate). This regulation only reduces the burden on railroads; it does not impose any additional costs. Therefore, the net benefit of this proposed rulemaking would be $113,929 (present value, 7 percent). FRA requests comments on all aspects of this regulatory evaluation and its conclusions.
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., and E.O. 13272, 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), require agency review of proposed and final rules to assess their impact on small entities. An agency must prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) unless it determine and certifies that a rule, if promulgated, would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FRA Administrator certifies that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect all railroads, including small railroads. However, the effect on these railroads would be purely beneficial and not significant, as it would reduce their labor burden by eliminating the need to file a Signal System Five-Year Report.

        “Small entity” is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601 as including a small business concern that is independently owned and operated, and is not dominant in its field of operation. The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) has authority to regulate issues related to small businesses, and stipulates in its size standards that a “small entity” in the railroad industry is a for profit “line-haul railroad” that has fewer than 1,500 employees, a “short line railroad” with fewer than 500 employees, or a “commuter rail system” with annual receipts of less than seven million dollars. See “Size Eligibility Provisions and Standards,” 13 CFR Part 121, subpart A. Additionally, 5 U.S.C. 601(5) defines as “small entities” governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts with populations less than 50,000. Federal agencies may adopt their own size standards for small entities, in consultation with SBA and in conjunction with public comment. Pursuant to that authority, FRA has published a final statement of agency policy that formally establishes “small entities” or “small businesses” as being railroads, contractors, and hazardous materials shippers that meet the revenue requirements of a Class III railroad as set forth in 49 CFR 1201.1-1, which is $20 million or less in inflation-adjusted annual revenues, and commuter railroads or small governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of 50,000 or less. See 68 FR 24891 (May 9, 2003), codified at appendix C to 49 CFR Part 209. The $20-million limit is based on the Surface Transportation Board's revenue threshold for a Class III railroad. Railroad revenue is adjusted for inflation by applying a revenue deflator formula in accordance with 49 CFR 1201.1-1. FRA is using this definition for this rulemaking.
        FRA estimates that there are 719 Class III railroads, all of which would be affected by this proposed rule. However, the impact on these small railroads would not be significant. FRA estimates that each report takes approximately one labor hour to prepare and submit to FRA. The elimination of this reporting requirement would save each railroad one hour of labor every five years. Therefore, this proposed rule would have a positive effect on these railroads, saving each railroad approximately $307 (non-discounted) in labor costs over the 20-year analysis. Since this amount is extremely small and entirely beneficial, FRA concludes that this proposed rule would not have a significant impact on these railroads.
        Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(b), FRA certifies that this proposed rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Although a substantial number of small railroads would be affected by the proposed rule, the impact on these entities would be minimal and positive. FRA requests comments on all aspects of this certification.
        C. Federalism
        Executive Order 13132, “Federalism”, 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999), requires FRA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” are defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects 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.” Under E.O. 13132, the agency may not issue a regulation with federalism implications that imposes substantial direct compliance costs and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, the agency consults with State and local governments, or the agency consults with State and local government officials early in the process of developing the regulation. Where a regulation has federalism implications and preempts State law, the agency seeks to consult with State and local officials in the process of developing the regulation.
        This NPRM has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13132. FRA has determined that, if adopted, the proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects 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. In addition, FRA has determined that this proposed rule will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of E.O. 13132 do not apply.

        However, this proposed rule could have preemptive effect by operation of law under certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety statutes, specifically the former Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 (FRSA), repealed and recodified at 49 U.S.C. 20106, and the former Signal Inspection Act of 1937, repealed and recodified at 49 U.S.C. 20501-20505. See Pub. L. 103-272 (July 5, 1994). The former FRSA provides that States may not adopt or continue in effect any law, regulation, or order related to railroad safety or security that covers the subject matter of a regulation prescribed or order issued by the Secretary of Transportation (with respect to railroad safety matters) or the Secretary of Homeland Security (with respect to railroad security matters), except when the State law, regulation, or order qualifies under the “local safety or security hazard” exception to section 20106.
        In sum, FRA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13132. As explained above, FRA has determined that this proposed rule has no federalism implications, other than the possible preemption of State laws under the former FRSA. Accordingly, FRA has determined that preparation of a federalism summary impact statement for this proposed rule is not required.
        D. International Trade Impact Assessment
        The Trade Agreement Act of 1979, Public Law 96-39, 93 Stat. 144 (July 26, 1979), prohibits Federal agencies from engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international standards and where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. This rulemaking is purely domestic in nature and is not expected to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business overseas or for foreign firms doing business in the United States.
        E. Paperwork Reduction Act

        Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget for each collection of information they conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. FRA has carefully reviewed the proposed rule and any potential PRA implications. Since the present rulemaking would eliminate the reporting requirement associated with § 233.9 in its entirety for April 2017 and thereafter, there is no change to the currently approved burden under OMB No. 2130-0006.

        Organizations and individuals desiring to obtain a copy of the above currently approved collection of information should contact Mr. Robert Brogan or Ms. Kimberly Toone via mail at FRA, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Third Floor, Washington, DC 20590. Copies may also be obtained by telephoning Mr. Brogan at (202) 493-6292 or Ms. Toone at (202) 493-6132. (These numbers are not toll-free). Additionally, copies may be obtained via email by contacting Mr. Brogan or Ms. Toone at the following addresses: Robert.Brogan@dot.gov; Kim.Toone@dot.gov.

        F. Compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

        Pursuant to Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531, each Federal agency “shall, unless otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector (other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate requirements specifically set forth in law).” Section 202 of the Act, see 2 U.S.C. 1532, further requires that “before promulgating any general notice of proposed rulemaking that is likely to result in the promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and before promulgating any final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was published, the agency shall prepare a written statement” detailing the effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. The proposed rule would not result in the expenditure, in the aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted for inflation) in any one year, and thus preparation of such a statement is not required.
        G. Environmental Assessment

        FRA has evaluated this proposed rule in accordance with its “Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts” (FRA's Procedures), 64 FR 28545 (May 26, 1999), as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., other environmental statutes, Executive Orders, and related regulatory requirements. FRA has determined that this proposed rule is not a major FRA action (requiring the preparation of an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment) because it is categorically excluded from detailed environmental review pursuant to section 4(c)(20) of FRA's Procedures. See 64 FR 28547 (May 26, 1999).
        In accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of FRA's Procedures, the agency has further concluded that no extraordinary circumstances exist with respect to this regulation that might trigger the need for a more detailed environmental review. As a result, FRA finds that this proposed rule is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
        H. Energy Impact

        Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any “significant energy action.” See 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001). Under the Executive Order, a “significant energy action” is defined as “any action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking: (1)(i) [t]hat is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or (2) that is designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action.” FRA has evaluated this NPRM in accordance with E.O. 13211. FRA has determined that this NPRM is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Consequently, FRA has determined that this NPRM is not a “significant energy action” within the meaning of E.O. 13211.
        I. Privacy Act

        FRA wishes to inform all potential commenters that anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any agency docket by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, see 65 FR 19477-78, or you may visit http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice.

          List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 233
          Penalties, Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

        The Proposal
        In consideration of the foregoing, FRA proposes to amend part 233 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

          PART 233—[AMENDED]

        1. The authority citation for part 233 is revised to read as follows:

          Authority:
          49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20501-20505, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49 CFR 1.89.

          § 233.9
          [Removed and reserved]

        2. Section 233.9 is removed and reserved.

          § 233.13
          [Amended]

        3. Amend § 233.13 in paragraph (b) by removing the citation “45 U.S.C. 438(e)” and adding “49 U.S.C. 21311” in its place.
        Appendix A to Part 233—[Amended]
        4. Appendix A is amended by removing and reserving the entry for “§ 233.9 Annual reports”.

          Issued in Washington, DC on June 7, 2013.
          Joseph C. Szabo,
          Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.

      [FR Doc. 2013-14602 Filed 6-18-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [Docket No. 000524153-0153-01; I.D. 042100C]
        RIN 0648-AO11
        Fisheries off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Highly Migratory Species Fishery; Control Date

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

          ACTION:
          Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of a control date for Pacific Coast Highly Migratory Species Fisheries; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) is developing a Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Highly Migratory Species (HMS) off the Pacific Coast that would place HMS species such as tuna, billfish, and sharks under Federal management. This document announces a control date of March 9, 2000, after which vessels participating in the commercial (troll, long line, drift gillnet, harpoon, purse seine), and charter boat fisheries for HMS may not be qualified if the Council determines that a program to limit entry to the fisheries is appropriate. The intended effect of this announcement is to discourage speculative entry into the Pacific Coast HMS fisheries while the Council determines whether, it will limit participation in the fisheries in the future. If the Council decides to limit future participation, it will decide on criteria at that time.

          DATES:
          Comments must be submitted by June 30, 2000.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments on this advance notice of proposed rulemaking may be mailed to Jim Lone, Chairman, Pacific Fishery Management Council, 2130 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 224, Portland, OR 97201.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Svein Fougner, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Southwest Region, NMFS, 562-980-4040.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The Council was established under section 302(a)(1)(F)) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Council has concluded that an HMS FMP is needed and has named a plan development team. The Council sponsored scoping sessions to obtain public comment on matters that should be considered in the FMP. Several people strongly supported the development of the FMP, but urged the Council to establish a control date so that there would not be a rush to enter the fishery during the plan development process. These persons were especially concerned that recent tight restrictions in the groundfish fishery and continued restrictions in the ocean salmon fishery might encourage entry to the HMS fisheries. The Council subsequently heard advice from its advisory subpanel in support of a control date and from the public (some of whom supported a control date) at its meeting in March 2000. After considering the comments and weighing the alternatives, the Council agreed that March 9, 2000, should be established as a control date for the commercial and charter boat sectors of the HMS fisheries. The Council requested that NMFS publish a notification of this control date in the Federal Register.
        The Council anticipates that the plan development process will take approximately one year. The Council has not yet determined that limited entry in one or more fishery sectors is necessary or appropriate. However, the Council is aware that there is often a rush to enter any fishery for which a new FMP is being developed, in anticipation that a limited entry program could be proposed that would use historic and recent participation as criteria for eligibility for limited entry permits.

        The implementation of any management measures for the fishery affecting one or more of these fishery sectors will require approval of the FMP and implementation of associated regulations. Any action will require a regulatory proposal with public input and supporting analysis, NMFS approval, and publication of the implementing regulation in the Federal Register. If catch history is used as a basis for eligibility for participation, it is likely that catch by persons entering after the control date will not be considered in determining eligibility for a limited entry permit. The Council also may decide to use participation prior to the control date as a permit eligibility criterion. Fishers are not guaranteed future participation in the HMS fishery, regardless of their date of entry or level of participation in the fishery.
        This advance notice of proposed rulemaking has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

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

          Dated: May 24, 2000.
          Andrew A. Rosenberg,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 00-13570 Filed 5-30-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-F


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 73
        [DA 10-754; MB Docket No. 10-81; RM-11600]
        FM Table of Allotments, Fairbanks, Alaska

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          This document sets forth a proposal to amend the FM Table of Allotments. The Commission requests comment on a petition filed by Educational Media Foundation proposing the allotment of FM Channels 224C2 and 232C2 as the thirteenth and fourteenth local service at Fairbanks, Alaska. Both stations can be allotted at Fairbanks in compliance with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements with a site restriction of 9.4 km (5.9 miles) north of Fairbanks, at 64-55-20 North Latitude and 147-42-49 West Longitude. Concurrence in the allotments by the Government of Canada is required because the proposed allotments are located within 320 kilometers (199 miles) of the U.S.-Canadian border. See Supplementary Information infra.

          DATES:
          The deadline for filing comments is 30 days following publication in the Federal Register. Reply comments must be filed on or before 15 days following the deadline for initial comments.

          ADDRESSES:
          Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve counsel for petitioner as follows: Karen A. Ross, Esq., David D. Oxenford, Esq., Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, 1919 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 200, Washington, D.C. 20006.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Deborah A. Dupont, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 10-81, adopted April 30, 2010, and released May 3, 2010. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW, Room CY-B402, Washington, DC, 20554, (800) 378-3160, or via the company's website, www.bcpiweb.com. This document does not contain proposed information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506 (c)(4).
        The Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding. Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible ex parte contacts.
        For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

          List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
          Radio, Radio broadcasting.

          For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 73 as follows:

            PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

        1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:
        Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.

          § 73.202
          [Amended]
          2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Alaska, is amended by adding Channels 224C2 and 232C2 at Fairbanks.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          John A. Karousos,
          Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.

      [FR Doc. 2010-11965 Filed 5-18-10; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-S


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
        49 CFR Chapter III
        [Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0037]
        Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) Which May Be a Barrier to the Safe Integration of Automated Driving Systems in Commercial Vehicle Operations; Public Meeting

          AGENCY:
          Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Announcement of public listening session.

          SUMMARY:
          FMCSA announces a public listening session on Friday, August 24, 2018, to solicit information on issues relating to the design, development, testing, and integration of automated driving systems (ADS) equipped commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) on our Nation's roadways. The listening session is the third in a series held in 2018 with the first occurring on June 19 in Ann Arbor, MI, and the second occurring on July 12 in San Francisco, CA. The meeting will provide interested parties an opportunity to share their views on the FMCSRs as they relate to the development and safe integration of ADS. Attendees are also encouraged to share any data or analysis on this topic with Agency representatives.

          DATES:
          The meeting will be held on Friday, August 24, 2018, from 1-2:30 p.m. Central Daylight Time (CDT) at the Great American Trucking Show (GATS), Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center, 650 S Griffin Street, Dallas, TX 75202. If all interested participants have had an opportunity to comment, the session may conclude early.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Ms. Shannon L. Watson, Senior Advisor to the Associate Administrator for Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, at (202) 385-2395, or via email: shannon.watson@dot.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background
        On September 12, 2017, the Department published the Automated Driving Systems (ADS): A Vision for Safety 2.0. (Publication No. DOT HS 812 442) (the Voluntary Guidance). The Voluntary Guidance offers a path forward for the safe integration of automated vehicles by:
        • Encouraging new entrants and ideas that deliver safer vehicles;
        • Making the Departmental regulatory processes nimbler to help match the pace of private sector innovation; and
        • Supporting industry innovation and encouraging open communication with the public and with stakeholders.

        The Voluntary Guidance is rooted in the Department's view that ADS-equipped vehicles hold enormous potential benefits for safety, mobility, and the efficiency of our transportation system. The primary focus of the Voluntary Guidance is on levels of ADS that can take full control of the driving tasks in at least some circumstances. Portions of the Voluntary Guidance also apply to lower levels of automation, including some of the driver assistance systems already being deployed by automakers today. The full document can be found at: https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13069a-ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf.

        The Voluntary Guidance adopts the SAE International (SAE) J3016 standard's definitions for levels of automation. The SAE definitions divide vehicles into levels based on “who does what, when.” Generally:
        • SAE Level 0, No Driving Automation; the driver performs all driving tasks.
        • SAE Level 1, Driver Assistance; the vehicle is controlled by the driver, but some driving assist features may be included in the vehicle design.
        • SAE Level 2, Partial Driving Automation; the vehicle has combined automated functions, like acceleration and steering, but the driver must remain engaged with the driving task and monitor the environment at all times.
        • SAE Level 3, Conditional Driving Automation; the driver is a necessity, but is not required to monitor the environment. The driver must be ready to take control of the vehicle at all times with notice.
        • SAE Level 4, High Driving Automation; the vehicle is capable of performing all driving functions under certain conditions. The driver may have the option to control the vehicle.
        • SAE Level 5, Full Driving Automation: the vehicle is capable of performing all driving functions under all conditions.

        Using the SAE levels described above, the Department draws a distinction between Levels 0-2 and 3-5 based on whether the human driver or the automated system is primarily responsible for monitoring the driving environment. For the purposes of this Federal Register notice, the Agency's primary focus is SAE Levels 3-5 ADS.
        FMCSA encourages the development of these advanced safety technologies for use on CMVs, and at the same time, recognizes the need to work with the States to ensure that, from an operations standpoint, all testing and use of these advanced safety systems is conducted in a manner that ensures the safe operation of ADS-equipped commercial vehicles.
        FMCSA is responsible for the safety oversight of motor carriers operating CMVs in interstate commerce, the drivers of CMVs, and the vehicles. The Agency works with its State partners to deliver programs intended to prevent CMV crashes, and the associated injuries and fatalities.
        The FMCSRs provide rules to ensure the safe operation of CMVs, as defined in 49 CFR 390.5, which includes vehicles with a gross vehicle weight/gross combination weight or gross vehicle weight rating/gross combination weight rating, whichever is greater, of 10,001 pounds or more; passenger-carrying vehicles designed or used to transport 9 to 15 passengers for direct compensation; passenger-carrying vehicles designed or used to transport 16 or more passengers; and any size vehicle transporting hazardous materials in a quantity requiring placards.
        FMCSA's 2018 Request for Comments
        On March 26, 2018, FMCSA published “Request for Comments Concerning Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) Which May Be a Barrier to the Safe Testing and Deployment of Automated Driving Systems-Equipped Commercial Motor Vehicles on Public Roads.” (83 FR 12933) The document solicited public comments on existing Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) that may need to be updated, modified, or eliminated to facilitate the safe introduction of automated driving systems (ADS) equipped commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) onto our Nation's roadways. The Agency indicated that it had commissioned the U.S. Department of Transportation's John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe) to conduct a preliminary review of the FMCSRs to identify regulations that may relate to the development and safe introduction of ADS. The Agency requested comments on this report, including whether any of FMCSA's current safety regulations may hinder the testing and safe integration of ADS-equipped CMVs. Further, FMCSA requested comment on certain specific regulatory requirements that are likely to be affected by an increased integration of ADS-equipped CMVs.

        In addition, to support FMCSA's effort to understand future impacts on the FMCSRs, FMCSA requested information, including from companies engaged in the design, development, testing, and integration of ADS-equipped CMVs into the fleet. Specifically, the Agency requested information about: (1) The scenarios and environments where entities expect that ADS will soon be tested and integrated into CMVs operating on public roads or in interstate commerce; (2) the operational design domains (ODD) in which these systems are being operated or would be tested and eventually deployed; and, (3) measures they believe are required to ensure the protection of any proprietary or confidential business information they intend to share with the Agency. The comment period ended on May 10, 2018. Interested parties may view the comments the Agency received at www.regulations.gov (docket number FMCSA-2018-0037).
        Subsequent to the publication of the March 28 notice, FMCSA and other surface transportation agencies have begun planning for the initiation of rulemakings concerning ADS technology. The agencies have been assigned Regulation Identification Numbers (RINs) for their respective Advance Notices of Proposed Rulemakings (ANPRMs). To that end, the public listening session is intended to provide FMCSA the opportunity to engage stakeholders before the Agency begins drafting its ANPRM.
        Meeting Participation
        Oral comments from the public will be heard throughout the meeting. Members of the public may submit written comments to public docket referenced at the beginning of this notice using any of the following methods:
        • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

        • Fax: 202-493-2251.
        • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
        • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., E.T. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

          Issued on: August 17, 2018.
          Cathy F. Gautreaux,
          Deputy Administrator.

      [FR Doc. 2018-18127 Filed 8-21-18; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P