        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 52
        [EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0644; FRL-9941-66-Region 7]

        Approval of Missouri's Air Quality Implementation Plans; Americold Logistics, LLC 24-Hour Particulate Matter (PM10) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Consent Judgment

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:

          The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Missouri on June 2, 2014. This proposed SIP revision will incorporate a consent judgment to address violations of the 24-hour particulate matter (PM10) NAAQS near the Americold Logistics, LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone (CCL) facility near Carthage, Missouri. CCL is a limestone quarry operations. The consent judgment between the State of Missouri and CCL includes measures that will control PM10 emissions from the facility. This proposed approval will make the consent judgment Federally-enforceable.

          DATES:
          Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by February 29, 2016.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0644, to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7039, or by email at hamilton.heather@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        In the final rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the states SIP revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse comments to this action. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comments on part of this rule and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as a final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
          Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

          Dated: January 11, 2016.
          Mark Hague,
          Regional Administrator, Region 7.

      [FR Doc. 2016-01661 Filed 1-27-16; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        [Docket No. 1206013412-2211-01]
        RIN 0648-BB97
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 35

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to implement management measures described in Amendment 35 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP) prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council). If implemented, this rule would establish sector annual catch limits (ACLs) and sector annual catch targets (ACTs) for greater amberjack; revise the sector accountability measures (AMs) for greater amberjack; and establish a commercial trip limit for greater amberjack. Additionally, Amendment 35 would modify the greater amberjack rebuilding plan. The intent of Amendment 35 is to end overfishing of greater amberjack, modify the greater amberjack rebuilding plan and help achieve optimum yield (OY) for the greater amberjack resource in accordance with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received on or before August 20, 2012.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on the proposed rule identified by “NOAA-NMFS-2012-0107” by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic submissions: Submit electronic comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the “Instructions” for submitting comments.
          • Mail: Rich Malinowski, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

            Instructions: 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 field if you wish to remain anonymous).

          To submit comments through the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov, enter “NOAA-NMFS-2012-0107” in the search field and click on “search.” After you locate the document “Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 35,” click the “Submit a Comment” link in that row. This will display the comment Web form. You can then enter your submitter information (unless you prefer to remain anonymous), and type your comment on the Web form. You can also attach additional files (up to 10MB) in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
          Comments received through means not specified in this rule will not be considered.

          For further assistance with submitting a comment, see the “Commenting” section at http://www.regulations.gov/#!faqs or the Help section at http://www.regulations.gov.

          Electronic copies of Amendment 35, which includes a draft environmental assessment, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), and a regulatory impact review, may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office Web site at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sf/GrouperSnapperandReefFish.htm.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Rich Malinowski, Southeast Regional Office, telephone 727-824-5305, email rich.malinowski@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The reef fish fishery of the Gulf is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and is implemented through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. All greater amberjack weights discussed in this proposed rule are in round weight.
        Background
        Since 1990, the Council and NMFS have implemented a series of management measures to prevent overfishing of the greater amberjack stock and achieve OY. Amendment 1 to the FMP added greater amberjack to the list of species in the FMP, set a recreational minimum size limit of 28 inches (71 cm), established a three-fish recreational bag limit, and set a commercial minimum size limit of 36 inches (91 cm) (55 FR 2079, January 22, 1990). Amendment 12 to the FMP reduced the greater amberjack recreational bag limit to one fish per person per day (61 FR 65983, December 16, 1996).
        Greater amberjack were first determined to be overfished and undergoing overfishing in 2000. Secretarial Amendment 2 established a rebuilding plan for greater amberjack, starting in 2003, based on a stock assessment conducted in 2000 (68 FR 39898, July 3, 2003). A 2006 SEDAR benchmark stock assessment (SEDAR 9 2006c) determined that the greater amberjack stock was still overfished and undergoing overfishing. Amendment 30A to the FMP set the greater amberjack stock total allowable catch at 1,871,000 lb (848,671 kg), for the 2008 through 2010 fishing years. Using an allocation of 73 percent for the recreational sector and 27 percent for the commercial sector, Amendment 30A to the FMP established a recreational quota of 1,368,000 lb (620,514 kg), and a commercial quota of 503,000 lb (228,157 kg) (73 FR 38139, July 3, 2008). Amendment 30A also established greater amberjack AMs. These AMs state that if a sector's landings reaches, or is projected to reach, the applicable quota, the sector will close for the remainder of the fishing year. Additionally, in the event of a quota overage, the respective sector's quota will be reduced in the following fishing year by the amount of the respective sector's quota overage in the prior fishing year.
        Status of Stock
        In 2010, the Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) stock assessment update (SEDAR 9 Update) was conducted for greater amberjack. The SEDAR 9 Update (2010) indicated that the greater amberjack stock was both overfished and undergoing overfishing.
        In March 2011, the Council's Science and Statistical Committee (SSC) reviewed the update assessment, determined the assessment to be the best scientific information available, and accepted its conclusions that the stock was undergoing overfishing and is overfished. However, the SSC rejected as unreliable the absolute values that resulted in the conclusions and rejected the assessment's yield projections. The SSC believed that the yield projections were unreliable because they showed large sensitivity to small changes in initial conditions, fishing mortality rates, and catch. Therefore, the SSC did not use the stock assessment to set the overfishing limit (OFL) or the acceptable biological catch (ABC) but instead used Tier 3b of the ABC control rule that the Council was developing in the Generic Annual Catch Limit/Accountability Measure Amendment (Generic ACL Amendment). NMFS approved the Generic ACL Amendment and published a final rule implementing the management measures in that amendment in December 2011 (76 FR 82044, December 29, 2011).
        Both Tier 1 and Tier 2 of the ABC control rule require stable yield projections, which were not available for greater amberjack. Tier 3 of the control rule applies when no assessment is available but landings data exist. Tier 3a applies when the stock is unlikely to undergo overfishing if future landings are equal to or moderately higher than the mean of recent landings. Tier 3b applies when expert evaluation of the best scientific information available indicates that recent landings may be unsustainable. Tier 3b uses the average of recent annual catches to set the OFL and the ABC is set as a percentage of the OFL. The ABC control rule states that the default is to set the ABC equal to 75 percent of the OFL. The SSC decided that, given the likelihood of ongoing overfishing, Tier 3b was appropriate for greater amberjack. Therefore, instead of relying on assessment projections, the SSC set the OFL for greater amberjack equal to the weight of the mean landings for the most recent ten years (2000-2009) and recommended the ABC for three years (2011-2013) be set at 75 percent of that 10-year mean.
        The Council accepted the SSC's recommendations, set the ACL equal to the ABC, and consistent with the Generic ACL Amendment, set the ACT approximately 15 percent below the ACL. Although the ACL adopted by the Council was based on landings recorded during a time period when overfishing is believed to have been occurring, in the Generic ACL Amendment the Council determined that the Tier 3b methodology would end overfishing where applicable. NMFS approved this approach when approving the Generic ACL Amendment, and finds that following this approach in Amendment 35 is consistent with the FMP as amended.
        Further, greater amberjack landings are somewhat variable over the 10-year period of 2000 through 2009, and there is no discernible trend in these landings. The lack of a discernible trend in landings data supports the conclusion that the stock size is more likely than not stable enough that the ABC recommendation (i.e., 75 percent of the OFL) and management measures implemented by the Council (setting the ACT approximately 15 percent below the ACL) will provide the reduction in greater amberjack fishing mortality necessary to end overfishing and rebuild the greater amberjack stock. A new benchmark assessment for greater amberjack is scheduled to occur in 2013. When the new assessment is completed, NMFS and the Council will be able to confirm that greater amberjack has met its rebuilding schedule.
        Management Measures Contained in This Proposed Rule

        This proposed rule would establish greater amberjack sector ACLs and sector ACTs (which are expressed as quotas in the regulatory text), revise the sector AMs, and establish a commercial trip limit for greater amberjack.

        ACLs and ACTs
        This rule would define specific ACLs for the greater amberjack commercial and recreational sectors. This proposed rule would also establish the ACTs (expressed as quotas in the regulatory text) for both sectors.
        The National Standard 1 Guidelines (74 FR 3178, June 16, 2009) require the establishment of a mechanism for specifying ACLs in the FMP at a level such that overfishing does not occur in the fishery. Within Amendment 30A to the FMP, the Council and NMFS established greater amberjack commercial and recreational quotas that functioned as ACLs. An ACT is a management target established to account for management uncertainty in controlling the actual catch at or below the ACL. An ACT is used in the system of AMs so that the ACL is not exceeded. Therefore, a sector ACT should be set below the sector ACL to allow the sector to be closed when the ACT is projected to be reached. Amendment 35 would establish the greater amberjack ACL equal to the greater amberjack stock ABC at 1,780,000 lb (807,394 kg), and set the greater amberjack stock ACT at 1,539,000 lb (698,079 kg) based on the ACT Control Rule developed in the Generic ACL Amendment (76 FR 82044, December 29, 2011).
        Sector allocations were established in Amendment 30A to the FMP and were not changed in Amendment 35. For greater amberjack, 27 percent of the ACL is allocated to the commercial sector and 73 percent of the ACL is allocated to the recreational sector.
        This proposed rule would establish the greater amberjack commercial ACL at 481,000 lb (218,178 kg). The commercial ACT, which is equivalent to the greater amberjack commercial quota, would be reduced from 503,000 lb (228,157 kg), to 409,000 lb (185,519 kg). The commercial ACT would be set 15 percent below the ACL to account for management uncertainty.
        This proposed rule would establish the greater amberjack recreational ACL at 1,299,000 lb (589,116 kg). The recreational ACT, which is equivalent to the greater amberjack recreational quota, would be reduced from 1,368,000 lb (620,514 kg), to 1,130,000 lb (512,559 kg). The recreational ACT would be set 13 percent below the ACL to account for management uncertainty.
        AMs
        This proposed rule would revise the AMs for both the greater amberjack commercial and recreational sectors. AMs are management controls that are implemented to prevent ACLs from being exceeded, and to correct or mitigate overages of the ACL if they occur. There are two categories of AMs, in-season AMs (when the ACL is met or projected to be met) and post-season AMs (when the ACL is exceeded).
        The current in-season AM for the greater amberjack commercial sector closes the sector when commercial landings reach or are projected to reach the applicable quota. In addition, if despite such closure the commercial landings exceed the quota, the following year's quota is reduced by the amount of the quota overage in the prior fishing year (post-season AM). This rule would implement an ACT that is less than the ACL, creating a buffer between the two. The ACT would be the quota and this rule would require that the commercial sector close when the ACT is reached or projected to be reached. By closing the commercial sector when the ACT is reached or projected to be reached, there is less probability of exceeding the ACL. In addition to this revision of the in-season AM, this rule would revise the post-season AM as follows: If commercial landings exceed the commercial ACL, then during the following fishing year, both the commercial ACT (commercial quota) and the commercial ACL will be reduced by the amount of the prior years' commercial ACL overage.
        The current in-season AM for the greater amberjack recreational sector closes the sector when recreational landings reach or are projected to reach the applicable quota. In addition, if despite such closure the recreational landings exceed the quota, the following year's recreational quota is reduced by the amount of the quota overage in the prior fishing year, and the recreational fishing season is reduced by the amount necessary to recover the overage from the prior fishing year (post-season AMs). This rule would implement an ACT that is less than the ACL, creating a buffer between the two. The ACT would act as the quota and this rule would require that the recreational sector close when the ACT is reached or projected to be reached. By closing the recreational sector when the ACT is reached or projected to be reached, there is less probability of exceeding the ACL. In addition to this revision of the in-season AM, this rule would revise the post-season AMs as follows: If recreational landings exceed the recreational ACL, then during the following fishing year, both the recreational ACT (recreational quota) and the recreational ACL will be reduced by the amount of the prior year's recreational ACL overage.
        Commercial Trip Limit
        Currently, there is no trip limit for the commercial sector. This rule would establish a commercial trip limit for greater amberjack of 2,000 lb (907 kg). This trip limit would be applicable until the commercial ACT (commercial quota) is reached or projected to be reached during a fishing year and the commercial sector is closed.
        Other Action Contained in Amendment 35
        Amendment 35 would revise the rebuilding plan for greater amberjack. The greater amberjack stock is currently in its last year of a 10-year rebuilding plan that began in 2003 and ends in 2012. Amendment 35 would modify the rebuilding plan in response to the results from the SEDAR 9 Update and subsequent SSC review and recommendations for the greater amberjack ABC.
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the AA has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with Amendment 35, the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

        NMFS prepared an IRFA, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 603, for this rule. The IRFA describes the economic impact that this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the proposed rule, why it is being considered, and the objectives of, and legal basis for the rule are contained at the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A copy of the full analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the IRFA follows.
        This proposed rule would establish greater amberjack sector ACLs and sector ACTs, revise the sector AMs, and establish a commercial trip limit for greater amberjack.
        The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for this rule. No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been identified. This proposed rule would not introduce any changes to current reporting, record-keeping, and other compliance requirements.

        NMFS expects the proposed rule to directly affect commercial fishers and for-hire operators. The Small Business Administration established size criteria for all major industry sectors in the U.S. including fish harvesters and for-hire operations. A business involved in fish harvesting is classified as a small business if independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and its combined annual receipts are not in excess of $4.0 million (NAICS code 114111, finfish fishing) for all of its affiliated operations worldwide. For for-hire vessels, other qualifiers apply and the annual receipts threshold is $7.0 million (NAICS code 713990, recreational industries).
        From 2005-2010, an average of 1,096 vessels had Federal commercial Gulf reef fish permits. Based on home port states reported in their permit applications, these vessels were distributed as follows: 897 vessels in Florida, 34 vessels in Alabama, 19 vessels in Mississippi, 58 vessels in Louisiana, 79 vessels in Texas, and 9 vessels in other states. Of the total number of federally permitted vessels, 750 vessels reported landings of at least 1 lb (0.6 kg) of reef fish. These vessels generated total dockside revenues of approximately $41.5 million dollars (2010 dollars), or an average of $55,000 per vessel. An average of 325 vessels reported landings of at least 1 lb (0.6 kg) of greater amberjack, with these vessels distributed as follows: 259 vessels in Florida, 15 vessels in Alabama/Mississippi, 32 in Louisiana, 32 in Texas, and 2 in other states. Dockside revenues from greater amberjack were approximately $600,000 (2010 dollars). Based on this information, all commercial fishing vessels expected to be directly affected by this proposed rule are determined for the purpose of this analysis to be small business entities.
        The for-hire fleet is comprised of charterboats, which charge a fee on a vessel basis, and headboats, which charge a fee on an individual angler (head) basis. From 2005-2010, an average of 1,493 vessels had Federal Gulf reef fish charter/headboat permits, and based on homeport states reported in their permit applications these vessels were distributed as follows: 921 vessels in Florida, 147 vessels in Alabama, 61 vessels in Mississippi, 104 vessels in Louisiana, 238 vessels in Texas, and 22 in other states. There is no information available as to how many for-hire vessels harvested or targeted greater amberjack. The Federal Gulf charter/headboat permit does not distinguish between headboats and charterboats, but in 2010, the headboat survey program included 79 headboats. The majority of headboats were located in Florida (43), followed by Texas (19), Alabama (8), and Louisiana (4). The average charterboat is estimated to earn approximately $89,000 (2010 dollars) in annual revenues, while the average headboat is estimated to earn approximately $466,000 (2010 dollars). Based on these average annual revenue figures, all for-hire vessels expected to be directly affected by this proposed rule are determined for the purpose of this analysis to be small business entities.
        Some fleet activity, i.e., multiple vessels owned by a single entity, may exist in both the commercial sector and the for-hire component of the recreational sector by an unknown extent, and NMFS treats all vessels as independent entities in this analysis.
        NMFS expects the proposed rule to directly affect all federally permitted commercial vessels harvesting greater amberjack and for-hire vessels that operate in the Gulf reef fish fishery. All directly affected entities have been determined, for the purpose of this analysis, to be small entities. Therefore, NMFS determined that this proposed rule would affect a substantial number of small entities.
        NMFS considers all entities expected to be affected by the proposed rule as small entities, so the issue of disproportional effects on small versus large entities does not arise in the present case.
        Modifying the greater amberjack rebuilding plan by establishing sector ACLs and ACTs would result in a total annual revenue reduction of $99,000 (part of which would be profits) for the entire reef fish commercial sector's vessel operations because the proposed commercial ACT is less than average commercial landings. This revenue reduction takes into account the proposed AM revision that would close the commercial sector if the ACT is reached or projected to be reached. However, it does not account for the effects of the post-season AM that would reduce the applicable sector's ACT and ACL if the ACL were exceeded in the previous year. This post-season AM would be expected to reduce vessel revenues and profits by an unknown amount. The for-hire component of the recreational sector would largely remain unaffected by the proposed ACL/ACT and AM revisions, at least in the short term. The for-hire component of the recreational sector is not expected to reach its proposed ACL/ACT, implying that there would be no trip cancellations that would lead to for-hire profit reductions.
        The proposed trip limit on commercial vessels that harvest greater amberjack would result in a revenue reduction (part of which would be profits) of $96,000 for the entire commercial harvesting operation. Because this estimated revenue reduction presupposed the adoption of the proposed ACL/ACT, it should not be considered in addition to the reduction from the proposed ACL/ACT. The smaller reduction appears to show that because the trip limit may allow for an extension of the commercial season it would slightly mitigate the adverse effects of a lower ACL/ACT.
        The negative effects of the proposed action on the profits of commercial vessels are minimal when compared to the overall industry profits from harvesting reef fish. It is possible that some vessels may rely on greater amberjack for a sizeable portion of their overall harvesting operations so their profit reductions may be relatively large, but how many vessels there are in the fishery cannot be ascertained.
        Four alternatives, including the preferred alternative, and two sub-options, of which one is the preferred option, were considered for modifying the greater amberjack rebuilding plan. The first alternative, the no action alternative, would retain the greater amberjack stock ACL. This is not a viable alternative because the current stock ACL is higher than the ABC being set for greater amberjack.
        Like the preferred alternative, the second alternative would set a stock ACL equal to the ABC, which is about 5 percent lower than the current stock ACL. However, this alternative would not set an ACT below the level of the ACL. Among the alternatives, this would provide the best scenario for short-term profitability of small entities. Without an ACT, however, this ACL level may be exceeded, particularly since the stock ACL has been exceeded in the last 2 years (2009 and 2010). Exceeding this ACL would lower the probability of protecting and rebuilding the overfished stock. The sub-option which was not selected would set the stock ACL at 18 percent below the current ACL. This would have the same impacts on profits as the preferred option for the current year, but it would potentially result in a worse profit condition in the subsequent year because it would require post-season overage adjustments if the quotas were exceeded. The third alternative, which would establish a stock ACL of zero, would result in the largest profit reductions to both the commercial sector and for-hire component of the recreational sector.

        Two alternatives, including the preferred alternative, were considered for revising the commercial AM. The only alternative to the preferred alternative is the no action alternative. This would result in lesser short-term profit reductions than the preferred alternative. The downside of the no action alternative is that it would subject the commercial sector to a greater likelihood of facing a post-season AM that would reduce the succeeding year's ACL and ACT and therefore commercial vessel profits as well.
        Two alternatives, including the preferred alternative, were considered for revising the recreational AM. The only alternative to the preferred alternative is the no action alternative. The no action alternative would result in greater short-term profits than the preferred alternative. Its downside is that it would subject the sector to a greater likelihood of facing a post-season AM that would reduce the succeeding year's ACL and ACT and therefore for-hire vessel profits as well.
        Three alternatives, including the preferred alternative, were considered for commercial management measures. The first alternative is the no action alternative and would have no effects on vessel profits. The second alternative, which would establish a vessel trip limit, while maintaining the March 1-May 31 seasonal closure, includes four options. The preferred option would establish a commercial trip limit of 2,000 lb (907 kg), which as noted above would result in a revenue reduction of $96,000. The other options would establish a trip limit of 1,500 lb (680 kg), 1,000 lb (454 kg), or 500 lb (227 kg). Given the preferred ACL/ACT alternative, these other options would result in revenue reductions of $95,000, $97,000, and $198,000, respectively. These other trip limit options would result in a longer fishing season than the preferred option. The commercial trip limit of 1,500 lb (680 kg) would result in a lower revenue reduction than the preferred option because revenue gains from a longer fishing season would outweigh revenue losses from a lower trip limit. For the other two trip limit options however, the trip limits are so low that revenue gains from a longer fishing season would not outweigh revenue losses from a lower trip limit. Profit reductions would also likely occur with these other options.
        The third alternative, which would eliminate the March 1—May 31 seasonal closure, includes 4 trip limit options. The trip limit options are 2,000 lb (907 kg), 1,500 lb (680 kg), 1,000 lb (454 kg), or 500 lb (227 kg). Given the preferred ACL/ACT alternative, these options would result in revenue reductions of $123,000, $120,000, $115,000, and $110,000 respectively. These revenue reductions for trip limits not linked with a seasonal closure are greater when compared to trip limits linked with a seasonal closure because they would result in a longer quota closure during the fishing year. Profit reductions would also likely occur with these options.
        In Amendment 35, the Council considered several actions for which the no-action alternative was the preferred alternative.
        Four alternatives were considered for modifying the recreational minimum size limit for greater amberjack. The first alternative is the no action alternative, which will not affect the profits of for-hire vessels. The other alternatives would raise the recreational minimum size limit to 32 in (81 cm), 34 in (86 cm), or 36 in (91 cm), fork length. These other alternatives would possibly result in for-hire vessel profit reductions to the extent that some trips would be cancelled.
        Five alternatives were considered for modifying the recreational closed season for greater amberjack. The preferred alternative is the no action alternative, and so would not affect the profits of for-hire vessels. The second alternative would remove the fixed closed season so that the recreational sector would open on January 1 and would remain open until the recreational ACT (recreational quota) is reached. This alternative would result in a short-term profit increase of $75,000 to charterboats and an unknown profit increase to headboats under the preferred ACL/ACT alternative. These profit increases hinge on the assumption that displaced effort due to the quota closure would not shift to the open season. Any effort shift would likely negate such profit increases.
        The third alternative would modify the recreational sector's seasonal closure to March 1-May 31. This alternative would result in a profit loss of approximately $300,000 to charterboats and an unknown profit loss to headboats. Profit losses would be less if displaced effort from the closed months shifted to the open months. The fourth alternative would modify the recreational seasonal closure to January 1-May 31. This alternative would result in a profit loss of approximately $400,000 to charterboats and an unknown profit loss to headboats. Profit losses would be less if displaced effort from the closed months shifted to the open months. The fifth alternative would modify the recreational seasonal closure to June 1-July 23. In the absence of effort shifting, this alternative would result in a short-term profit increase of approximately $80,000 to charterboats and an unknown profit increase to headboats. Any effort shift would tend to negate these profit increases.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
          Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Virgin Islands.

          Dated: July 12, 2012.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, performing the functions and duties of the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC
          1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows:

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

          2. In § 622.42, paragraphs (a)(1)(v) and (a)(2)(ii) are revised to read as follows:

            § 622.42
            Quotas.

            (a) * * * (1) * * *
            (v) Greater amberjack—409,000 lb (185,519 kg), round weight.

            (2) * * *
            (ii) Recreational quota for greater amberjack. The recreational quota for greater amberjack is 1,130,000 lb (512,559 kg), round weight.

            3. In § 622.44, paragraph (d) is added to read as follows:

            § 622.44
            Commercial trip limits.

            (d) Gulf greater amberjack. Until the quota specified in § 622.42(a)(1)(v) is reached, 2,000 lb (907 kg), round weight. See § 622.43(a)(1)(i) for the limitations regarding greater amberjack after the quota is reached.

            4. In § 622.49, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:

            § 622.49
            Annual catch limits (ACLs) and accountability measures (AMs).
            (a) * * * (1) Greater amberjack. (i) Commercial sector—(A) If commercial landings, as estimated by the SRD, reach or are projected to reach the annual catch target (ACT) specified in § 622.42(a)(1)(v) (commercial quota), the AA will file a notification with the Office of the Federal Register to close the commercial sector for the remainder of the fishing year.

            (B) In addition to the measures specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) of this section, if commercial landings, as estimated by the SRD, exceed the commercial ACL, as specified in (a)(1)(i)(C) of this section, the AA will file a notification with the Office of the Federal Register, at or near the beginning of the following fishing year to reduce the commercial ACT (commercial quota) and the commercial ACL for that following year by the amount of any commercial ACL overage in the prior fishing year.
            (C) The commercial ACL for greater amberjack is 481,000 lb (218,178 kg), round weight.
            (ii) Recreational sector—(A) If recreational landings, as estimated by the SRD, reach or are projected to reach the ACT specified in § 622.42(a)(2)(ii) (recreational quota), the AA will file a notification with the Office of the Federal Register to close the recreational sector for the remainder of the fishing year.
            (B) In addition to the measures specified in paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(A) of this section, if recreational landings, as estimated by the SRD, exceed the recreational ACL, as specified in (a)(1)(ii)(C) of this section, the AA will file a notification with the Office of the Federal Register, at or near the beginning of the following fishing year to reduce the recreational ACT (recreational quota) and the recreational ACL for that following year by the amount of any recreational ACL overage in the prior fishing year.
            (C) The recreational ACL for greater amberjack is 1,299,000 lb (589,216 kg), round weight.

      [FR Doc. 2012-17491 Filed 7-18-12; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
        49 CFR Part 381
        [Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0097]
        Physical Qualification of Drivers; Standards; Changes to Vision Exemption Program Criteria

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed change to criteria; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          FMCSA proposes changes to the eligibility requirements for the Agency's Vision Exemption Program. Obtaining an exemption enables an individual to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce without satisfying all of the prescribed vision standards. The Agency has determined that these proposed changes in the eligibility criteria and conditions for the Vision Exemption Program will continue to ensure a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained under the existing criteria.

          DATES:
          Send your comments on or before January 17, 2014.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-2013-0097 by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
          • Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
          • Fax: 202-493-2251.
          To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.

            Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and docket number. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information, see the Public Participation heading below, as well as the Request for Information and Comments heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. 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 below.

            Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets, or go to the street address listed above.

            Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket Management System published in the Federal Register on January17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008-01-17/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

            Public participation: The Federal eRulemaking Portal is generally available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can obtain electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the “help” section of the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site. If you would like us to notify you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
          Comments received after the comment closing date will be included in the docket and we will consider late comments to the extent practicable.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Ms. Elaine Papp, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov, U.S. Department of Transportation, FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Business hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        A. FMCSA's Vision Standard
        FMCSA's primary mission is to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities involving large trucks and buses. Under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 31136(a) and 31502(b), FMCSA is authorized to establish minimum qualification standards for drivers of CMVs operating in interstate commerce. To ensure the medical fitness of CMV drivers for duty, the Agency established a number of physical qualifications for drivers under 49 CFR 391.41(b). Adequate visual function is necessary for safe driving. The current vision standard pertains to acuity (the ability to see at a distance), field of vision (the ability to see peripherally), and the ability to detect and distinguish colors. Specifically, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV in interstate commerce if that person has:

          (1) distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses;
          (2) distant binocular acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses;
          (3) field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye; and
          (4) the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing standard red, green, and amber.

        B. FMCSA's Vision Exemption Program and Criteria
        Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may exempt a CMV driver from application of the vision standards if it finds “such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.” The current Vision Exemption Program was established in 1998, following the enactment of amendments to the statutes governing exemptions made by § 4007 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), Public Law 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, 401 (June 9, 1998). Applications are now handled in accordance with 49 CFR part 381 subpart C. Qualifying individuals may apply for an exemption for up to two years from specified provisions of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, including physical qualification standards specified under § 391.41(b) (see 49 CFR 381.300(c)). Vision exemptions are considered under the procedures established in 49 CFR part 381 subpart C, on a case-by-case basis upon application by CMV drivers who do not meet the vision standards of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
        Current Criteria and Conditions
        A. Current Criteria for Considering Exemptions From the Vision Standards

        The criteria currently considered when reviewing an application for an exemption have been in place since the program began in 1998. They are consistent with criteria used in the preceding Vision Waiver Program. In July 1992, the Agency first published the criteria for the Vision Waiver Program, which listed the conditions and reporting standards that CMV drivers approved for participation would need to meet (“Qualification of Drivers; Vision Waivers,” 57 FR 31458, July 16, 1992). In 1998, FMCSA subsequently adopted those criteria and conditions, with revisions, for consideration in the current Vision Exemption Program.
        The Agency developed an example or template that drivers could use to apply for a vision exemption. The template outlines all information and documents the applicant should include to be considered for an exemption and the criteria for approval. FMCSA has docketed a copy of the template for reference, along with two additional instructional letters for applicants residing in Florida or Indiana.1

           These current application materials are available on FMCSA's Web site at: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/topics/medical/exemptions.htm.

            1 Applicants from Florida and Indiana are required to submit a full driving record. This is because Florida and Indiana have different content in their motor vehicle reports. Florida does not include citations or accidents on motor vehicle reports that were withheld (adjudication withheld) because of attendance at court or traffic school. Therefore, the applicant must provide a current official copy of his/her complete driving record from the state of Florida, covering their entire record. Indiana does not include accidents on motor vehicle reports unless the driver did not have insurance at the time of the accident or the accident resulted in a suspension of driving privileges. Therefore, the applicant must request that a search be done to verify whether he or she has been involved in any accidents during the 3-year driving period from the Indiana State Police.

        Exemptions from the vision standards in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) are considered only for those individuals with visual deficiencies who:
        (1) hold a valid license;
        (2) are at least 21 years old; and
        (3) have 3 years of intrastate CMV driving experience immediately preceding the date of the application, driving at least 10 hours per week in intrastate commerce with the visual deficiency;
        (4) have had a driving record for the same period listed above that contains the following:
        (a) no suspensions or revocations of a driver's license for the operation of any motor vehicle (including a personal vehicle);
        (b) no involvement in an accident where the driver's actions were a contributing factor or the driver received a citation for a moving traffic violation;
        (c) no convictions for a serious traffic violation, as defined in 49 CFR 383.51(c);
        (d) no more than one serious traffic violation, as defined in 49 CFR 383.51, driving a CMV during the 3-year period that disqualified or should have disqualified the driver in accordance with the driver disqualification provisions of 49 CFR 383.51; and
        (e) no more than two convictions for any other moving traffic violations in a CMV;
        (5) provide a signed statement that reads, “I acknowledge that I must be otherwise qualified under 49 CFR 391.41(b)(1)-(13) or hold another valid medical exemption before I can legally operate a commercial motor vehicle in interstate commerce.”;
        (6) have visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen), corrected or uncorrected, in the better eye;
        (7) have field of vision in each eye, including central and peripheral fields, of at least 70° utilizing a testing modality which tests to at least 120° in the horizontal [Formal perimetry is required. The doctor must submit the formal perimetry for each eye and interpret the results in degrees of field of vision.];
        (8) have the ability to recognize the colors of traffic control signals and devices showing red, green, and amber; and
        (9) have been examined by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who signs a statement on letterhead in which the ophthalmologist or optometrist:
        (a) identifies the visual condition;
        (b) defines the nature of the vision deficiency, including how long the person has had the deficiency;
        (c) states the date of the examination;
        (d) certifies that the visual deficiency has been stable for the 3-year period preceding the date of application; and
        (e) provides an opinion that the person can perform the driving tasks required to operate a CMV.
        B. Current Conditions for Holding an Exemption to the Vision Standards
        FMCSA is aware that vision conditions can deteriorate over time and affect the driver's ability to operate a CMV safely. The following conditions for holding an exemption from the vision standards under 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) are imposed on exempted CMV drivers and include all of the following,
        (1) The exempted driver must be examined every year by
        (a) an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests to the fact that the driver's vision continues to measure a visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) and a field of vision in the horizontal meridian of at least 70°, both in the better eye; and
        (b) a medical examiner who attests to the fact that the driver is otherwise qualified under 49 CFR 391.41;
        (2) the driver must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist or optometrist report to his or her medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination;
        (3) the driver must keep a copy of the annual medical certification in his or her qualification file as long as the driver is self-employed or provide a copy to the driver's employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and retain a copy of the exemption certificate on his or her person while driving for presentation to an authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official; and
        (4) the driver must report any changes in personal information (i.e., address, telephone number, employment status) to FMCSA immediately, as well as changes in the type of vehicle driven. He or she may be required at any time during the authorized exemption period to provide information to the Agency regarding driving experience and performance as it relates to citations, accidents or crashes, suspensions or revocations, and medical status. Each driver will be subject to periodic monitoring by FMCSA of his or her driving performance while operating a CMV.
        Proposed Criteria Changes
        A. Criterion for Length of Driving Experience With a Stable Vision Condition
        FMCSA proposes to change the current 3-year driving experience criterion to one of two options discussed below. The Agency requests comments as to whether it should continue to require driving experience but decrease the period from 3 years to 1 year of operating with the vision deficiency, or eliminate the driving experience criterion. The basis for this change is derived from the Medical Exemption Program Study by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. (October 13, 2006), which found the following:
        • The collision rates of visually impaired drivers in the Vision Program were not higher than non-impaired drivers in the control subset over the previous three years;
        • Compensatory viewing behavior is developed in order to mitigate visual loss; and

        • Monocular commercial drivers did not have significant differences in the performance of tasks involving safe driving and the location of the monocular eye is not significant.
        Option One: Driving With a Stable Vision Condition for at Least 1 Year While Operating a CMV in Intrastate Commerce
        This change would allow FMCSA to continue evaluating the CMV driver's safety record against his or her intrastate CMV driving experience and is consistent with the Agency's rationale for implementing the experience criterion. Though this option would reduce the length of driving experience with vision deficiency by two years, it would provide a timeframe that facilitates the verification of accurate and safe driving and medical records.
        However, not all CMV drivers are operating in States that allow intrastate driving with a visual deficiency. Thus, unless the driver experience criterion were removed entirely, it would continue to be an obstacle for those CMV drivers who may actually be safe but cannot accumulate the necessary one year of experience because of State driver qualification policies. FMCSA would continue to use the driver's entire motor vehicle record as opposed to only the CMV record as a way to evaluate safety performance.
        Option Two: The Driving Experience Criterion Would Be Removed
        Removing the driving experience requirement would be consistent with the principles of FMCSA's Diabetes Exemption Program. FMCSA would continue to consider the driver's entire motor vehicle record but would not require a specific amount of driving experience.
        FMCSA would ask for an examination by the ophthalmologist or optometrist to be reported within the last 3 months from the date of application. FMCSA believes that this would avoid the risk of recent deterioration.
        B. Driving and Crash Record
        The current criterion discussed above states that a driver must have no convictions for a serious traffic violation, as defined in 49 CFR 383.51(c). The Agency proposes to change this to include all provisions of 49 CFR 383.51 (b) and (c).
        The current criteria, discussed above, recommend denial of an exemption for any driver who was involved in a crash, whether the crash occurred while driving a CMV, a personal automobile or a motorcycle, where the driver's actions were a contributing factor or the driver received a citation for a moving traffic violation in a CMV. In this context, FMCSA proposes using the following definition of “accident” from 49 CFR 390.5 as being synonymous with “crash”:
        1. An occurrence involving a CMV operating on a highway in interstate or intrastate commerce which results in:
        (i) A fatality;
        (ii) Bodily injury to a person who, as a result of the injury, receives immediate medical treatment away from the scene of the accident; or
        (iii) One or more motor vehicles incurring disabling damage as a result of the accident, requiring the motor vehicle(s) to be transported away from the scene by a tow truck or other motor vehicle.
        In addition, during the period the CMV driver's application or renewal is pending, the driver and the employer would be required to report immediately to FMCSA any arrests, citations, or convictions for any disqualifying offense or other moving violation, or if the driver were involved in a crash. Convictions occurring during the processing of an exemption application would be considered in the CMV driver's overall driving record. Since all CMV driver applications and histories are unique, FMCSA would continue to conduct reviews on an individual basis.
        C. Otherwise Qualified Physical Qualification Determination
        FMCSA proposes to change the current signed driver's statement criterion. The existing application requests the applicant to provide a signed statement that reads, “I acknowledge that I must be otherwise qualified under 49 CFR 391.41(b)(1)-(13) or hold another valid medical exemption before I can legally operate a commercial motor vehicle in interstate commerce.” It does not require a completed Medical Examination Report or an accompanying completed Medical Examiner's Certificate.
        Rather than rely on a driver's statement, FMCSA proposes that the driver undergo an examination by a medical examiner and receive a Medical Examiner's Certificate declaring that the driver is physically qualified to drive if the medical certificate is accompanied by a Federal Vision Exemption. This change would be consistent with the FMCSA Diabetes Exemption Program and the current Medical Examiner's Certificate. The Medical Examiner's Certificate has a check box for the Medical Examiner to indicate that the certificate must be accompanied by an exemption or waiver.
        Currently, medical examiners terminate the examination process when the driver is unable to pass the visual acuity portion of the examination. This practice leads to additional cost for the driver, repeated trips to the medical examiner, and uncertainty of the driver's actual physical qualifications. If, after undergoing the process for the Vision Exemption, the driver returns to the medical examiner and is denied a Medical Examiner's Certificate due to a different medical condition, he or she would have expended unnecessary resources. Requiring an appropriately completed Medical Examiner's Certificate would ensure that the driver is otherwise physically qualified to drive and allow both the driver and the Agency to avoid expending resources unnecessarily.
        Request for Information and Comments

        One of the Agency's purposes for publishing this notice is to acquire feedback to ensure we have all of the information necessary to make a sound decision when making changes to the Vision Exemption Program criteria. Therefore, FMCSA invites interested persons to comment on any and all aspects of these proposed changes by submitting data, views, arguments, or recommendations concerning any proposed changes to the Federal Vision Exemption Program application approval criteria. See the ADDRESSES heading above for information on submitting comments.

          Issued on: December 2, 2013.
          Anne S. Ferro,
          Administrator.

      [FR Doc. 2013-29651 Filed 12-17-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        [Docket No. 191213-0113]
        RIN 0648-BJ08
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Greater Amberjack Management Measures

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to implement management measures described in a framework action to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP), as prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council). If implemented, this proposed rule would revise the commercial trip limit in the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) exclusive economic zone (EEZ) for greater amberjack. In addition, this proposed rule would revise the boundaries of several Gulf reef fish management areas to reflect a change in the seaward boundary of Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi for purposes of management under the FMP to 9 nautical miles (nm). The purpose of this proposed rule and the framework action is to extend the commercial fishing season for greater amberjack by constraining the harvest rate while continuing to prevent overfishing and rebuild the stock in the Gulf, and to update the boundaries of reef fish management areas to reflect the current state boundaries.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received on or before January 21, 2020.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on the proposed rule, identified by “NOAA-NMFS-2019-0088” by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2019-0088, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Kelli O'Donnell, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

            Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

          Electronic copies of the framework action, which includes an environmental assessment, a regulatory impact review, and a Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) analysis may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office website at 6https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/framework-action-greater-amberjack-commercial-trip-limits.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Kelli O'Donnell, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, telephone: 727-824-5305, email: Kelli.ODonnell@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The Gulf reef fish fishery, which includes greater amberjack, is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and is implemented by NMFS through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

        Background
        The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires NMFS and regional fishery management councils to prevent overfishing and to achieve, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from federally managed fish stocks to ensure that fishery resources are managed for the greatest overall benefit to the nation.
        The greater amberjack stock in the Gulf has been overfished since 2001. To help rebuild the stock NMFS has implemented several modifications to the rebuilding plan, including changes to the commercial and recreational catch levels, and changes to management measures intended to constrain harvest and extend the commercial and recreational seasons. Most recently, NMFS implemented a framework action that modified the greater amberjack rebuilding time period, and modified the sector-specific annual catch limits (ACLs) and annual catch targets (ACTs) (82 FR 61485; December 28, 2017). NMFS also implemented another framework action that was expected to extend the greater amberjack recreational fishing season by modifying the recreational fishing year and the fixed closed season (83 FR 13426; March 29, 2018).
        This proposed rule would implement a framework action that is expected to extend the fishing season for the commercial sector by reducing the commercial trip limit. Greater amberjack is not a common target species for the reef fish commercial sector, with the majority of trips landing less than 500 lb (227 kg), gutted weight, 520 lb (236 kg), round weight, of the species. However, some directed trips with higher harvest levels do occur. When commercial landings for greater amberjack are projected to meet the commercial annual catch target, which is codified as the commercial quota, NMFS prohibits harvest for the remainder of the fishing year and any overage of the annual catch limit is paid back the following year (50 CFR 622.41). Harvest for Gulf commercial greater amberjack has closed before the end of the fishing year every year since 2009.
        In 2012, NMFS implemented Amendment 35 to the FMP, which established a greater amberjack commercial trip limit of 2,000 lb (907 kg), round weight (77 FR 67574; November 13, 2012). In 2015, the greater amberjack commercial trip limit was reduced to 1,500 lb (680 kg), gutted weight; 1,560 lb (708 kg), round weight, (80 FR 75432; December 2, 2015).
        The Council decided to reduce the trip limit further to a level that is expected to lengthen the fishing season while continuing to allow enough harvest per trip to support the current small number of vessels that engage in directed trips.
        Management Measure Contained in This Proposed Rule
        Commercial Trip Limit
        This proposed rule would reduce the Gulf greater amberjack commercial trip limit from 1,500 lb (680 kg), gutted weight, 1,560 lb (708 kg), round weight, to 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight, 1,040 lb (472 kg), round weight. Additionally, there would be a reduction in the trip limit to 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight, 260 lb (118 kg), round weight, when 75 percent of the commercial ACT has been landed.
        As described in the framework action, the proposed trip limit reduction is expected to extend the length of the commercial fishing season beyond June, the month when recent closures have occurred. However, an in-season closure is still expected to occur sometime in September.
        The Council considered three other trip limit alternatives which ranged from 750 lb (340 kg), gutted weight (780 lb (354 kg), round weight), to 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight (260 lb (118 kg), round weight). However, the Council determined that these trip limits were too small to allow for directed commercial greater amberjack trips. Additionally, the 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight, alternative was not expected to allow fishers to harvest all of the commercial ACT.
        Changes in This Proposed Rule Not in the Framework Action
        State/Federal Waters Boundary
        This proposed rule would revise the boundaries of three Gulf reef fish management areas to reflect a change in the seaward boundary of Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi for purposes of management under the FMP. Generally, the state/Federal waters boundary for fisheries management is 3 nm off the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama and 9 nm off the coasts of Texas and Florida. However, language included in the 2016 and 2017 Consolidated Appropriations Acts (P.L. 114-113, December 18, 2015, and P.L. 115-31, May 5, 2017), changed the state/Federal waters boundary for purposes of management under the FMP to 9 nm off the coasts of all of the Gulf states. Therefore, some existing Federal reef fish management areas that were exclusively in Federal waters now extend into state waters.
        This proposed rule would update the regulations to revise the coordinates of the inshore boundaries for the reef fish stressed area (Table 2 of Appendix B to 50 CFR part 622), the reef fish longline and buoy gear restricted area (Table 1 of Appendix B to 50 CFR part 622), and the recreational shallow-water grouper closure (50 CFR 622.34(d)). This rule would also update the terminology in the coordinate tables to reflect that this is boundary specific to Gulf reef fish management. This rule would not change the management measures associated with each area.
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Framework Action to the FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. This proposed rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this proposed rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
        The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for this determination follows.

        A description of the proposed rule, why it is being considered, and the objectives of, and legal basis for this proposed rule are contained in the preamble of this proposed rule at the beginning of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section and in the SUMMARY section. The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for this proposed rule. No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been identified. In addition, no new reporting, record keeping, or other compliance requirements are introduced by this proposed rule. Accordingly, the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act do not apply to this proposed rule.

        The proposed action would reduce the commercial trip limit for Gulf greater amberjack from 1,500 lb (680 kg), gutted weight, 1,560 lb (708 kg), round weight, to 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight, 1,040 lb (472 kg), round weight, with an added measure that the trip limit would reduce to 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight, 260 lb (118 kg), round weight, when 75 percent of the commercial ACT had been reached. As a result, this action would directly affect federally permitted commercial fishers fishing for greater amberjack in the Gulf. For RFA purposes only, NMFS has established a small business size standard for businesses, including their affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing (see 50 CFR 200.2). A business primarily engaged in commercial fishing (NAICS code 11411) is classified as a small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including affiliates), and has combined annual receipts not in excess of $11 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide.
        To determine whether the proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, NMFS first describes the characteristics of the federal commercial reef fish vessels that harvest greater amberjack in the Gulf. NMFS then estimates the number of commercial vessels to which the reduction in the trip limit reduction would apply, as well the average revenue of these vessels. Last, NMFS estimates to what extent the proposed rule would reduce the revenue or profits of these vessels.
        Commercial vessels in the Gulf used a variety of gear types in harvesting reef fish, including greater amberjack. Most vessels used hook-and-line gear in harvesting greater amberjack, with a few using longline or some other fishing gear types, such as spear or powerhead while diving. All vessels, regardless of gear type used, depended more on species other than greater amberjack for their revenues. Relative to total revenues, greater amberjack accounted for approximately 2.24 percent, 0.25 percent, and 9.75 percent for vessels using hook-and-line, longline, and other gear types, respectively. Although greater amberjack is a minor revenue generator for an average vessel, it appears that vessels using other gear types, such as diving gear, depend on greater amberjack more than other vessels.
        Florida is the dominant state in the harvest of Gulf greater amberjack, both in terms of landings and revenues. The number of Florida vessels that harvested greater amberjack is the key factor that places Florida above the level of other states. Although Louisiana registered a much lower number of vessels than Florida, greater amberjack landings and revenues from the species appear to be relatively substantial. The other three Gulf states have relatively minor commercial landings of greater amberjack. Although Florida ranks first in terms of total revenues from all sources, Texas ranks first in terms of revenues per vessel, with Alabama/Mississippi (combined for confidentiality purposes) ranking last.
        From 2013 through 2017, on average, 204 vessels per year landed greater amberjack from the entire Gulf. These vessels, combined, averaged 628 trips per year in the Gulf on which greater amberjack was landed and 3,167 other trips, which were taken either in the Gulf and no greater amberjack were harvested, or in the South Atlantic regardless of species caught. The average annual total dockside revenue (2017 dollars) was approximately $0.66 million from greater amberjack, $5.68 million from other species co-harvested with greater amberjack (on the same trips), and $32.53 million from other trips by these vessels in the Gulf on which no greater amberjack were harvested or occurred in the South Atlantic. Total average annual revenue from all species harvested by vessels harvesting greater amberjack in the Gulf was approximately $38.87 million or approximately $190,000 per vessel. Revenues from greater amberjack accounted for approximately 1.7 percent of total revenues from all species, indicating that greater amberjack is a minor revenue generator for an average vessel.
        Based on the foregoing revenue information, all commercial vessels affected by the proposed action may be considered to be small entities. Because all entities that are expected to be affected by this proposed rule are considered small entities, the issue of disproportional effects on small versus large entities does not arise.
        Based on 2016-2018 data, the proposed action would extend the commercial fishing season from 85 days (closure date of June 27) under the no action alternative to, potentially, 170 days (closure date of September 20), but the entire commercial greater amberjack ACT would still be reached in a fishing year, resulting in about the same total revenues from greater amberjack as the no action alternative. Compared to the current trip limit, the 1,000-lb (454-kg), gutted weight, 1,040-lb (472-kg), round weight, trip limit would reduce harvest of greater amberjack per trip by about 18 percent and the 250-lb (113-kg), gutted weight, 260-lb (118-kg), round weight, trip limit would further reduce harvest per trip to about 71 percent. The reduced trip limit would therefore be expected to reduce revenue per trip and possibly lower profits per trip given the same fishing cost. As noted above, greater amberjack accounts for only 1.7 percent of total reef fish vessel revenues indicating that the resulting reduction in revenues per trip would be relatively small. In addition, an extended commercial fishing season would likely provide a better pricing condition for greater amberjack, further mitigating the reduced harvest per trip. Moreover, commercial vessels can make some adjustments as to species composition of catch to make up for whatever is lost as a result of a reduced trip limit for greater amberjack. Although the proposed action would possibly reduce revenues per trip, total annual revenues would remain the same. Therefore, NMFS does not expect the economic impacts of the reduced trip limit on revenues to be significant. Additionally, the updated 9 nm state/Federal boundary coordinates would not affect the analysis done for this proposed rule.
        The information provided above supports a determination that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Because this proposed rule, if implemented, is not expected to have a significant economic impact on any small entities, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

          List of subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
          Boundary, Commercial, Coordinates, Fisheries, Fishing, Greater amberjack, Gulf, Trip limits.

          Dated: December 13, 2019.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC

        1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows:

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

        2. In § 622.34, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:

          § 622.34
          Seasonal and area closures designed to protect Gulf reef fish.

          (d) Seasonal closure of the recreational sector for shallow-water grouper (SWG). The recreational sector for SWG, in or from the Gulf EEZ, is closed each year from February 1 through March 31, in the portion of the Gulf EEZ seaward of rhumb lines connecting, in order, the points in the following table. During the closure, the bag and possession limit for SWG in or from the Gulf EEZ seaward of the following rhumb lines is zero.

            Table 1 to paragraph (d)

              Point
              North latitude

              Westlongitude

              1
              24°48.0′
              82°48.0′

              2
              25°07.5′
              82°34.0′

              3
              26°26.0′
              82°59.0′

              4
              27°30.0′
              83°21.5′

              5
              28°10.0′
              83°45.0′

              6
              28°11.0′
              84°00.0′

              7
              28°11.0′
              84°07.0′

              8
              28°26.6′
              84°24.8′

              9
              28°42.5′
              84°24.8′

              10
              29°05.0′
              84°47.0′

              11
              29°02.5′
              85°09.0′

              12
              29°21.0′
              85°30.0′

              13
              29°27.9′
              85°51.7′

              14
              29°45.8′
              85°51.0′

              15
              30°05.6′
              86°18.5′

              16
              30°07.5′
              86°56.5′

              17
              29°43.9′
              87°33.8′

              18
              29°43.0′
              88°18.5′

              19
              29°18.9′
              88°50.7′ at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary, follow Reef Fish Management Boundary to point 20

              20
              28°58.98′
              89°35.1′ at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary

              21
              29°02.0′
              89°45.5′

              22
              28°32.7′
              90°21.5′

              23
              28°24.8′
              90°52.7′

              24
              28°42.3′
              92°14.4′

              25
              28°34.2′
              92°30.4′

              26
              28°27.6′
              95°00.0′

              27
              28°20.0′
              95°06.9′

              28
              28°02.2′
              96°11.1′

              29
              27°46.5′
              96°38.1′

              30
              27°15.0′
              97°00.0′

              31
              26°45.5′
              97°01.4′

              32
              At EEZ
              96°51.0′

        3. In § 622.43, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

          § 622.43
          Commercial trip limits.

          (a) Gulf greater amberjack. (i) Until 75 percent of the quota specified in § 622.39(a)(1)(v) is reached, 1000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight; 1040 lb (472 kg), round weight.
          (ii) After 75 percent of the quota is reached or projected to be reached, 250 lb (113 kg), gutted weight; 260 lb (118 kg), round weight. See § 622.39(b) for the limitations regarding greater amberjack after the quota is reached. When the conditions in this paragraph (a)(ii) have been reached, the Assistant Administrator will implement this trip limit change by filing a notification with the Office of the Federal Register.

        4. Revise Appendix B to Part 622, to read as follows:

          Appendix B to Part 622—Gulf Areas

            Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 622—Seaward Coordinates of the Longline and Buoy Gear Restricted Area

              Point number and reference location 1

              North lat.
              West long.

              1 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary north of Dry Tortugas
              24°48.0′
              82°48.0′

              2 North of Rebecca Shoal
              25°07.5′
              82°34.0′.

              3 Off Sanibel Island—Offshore
              26°26.0′
              82°59.0′.

              4 West of Egmont Key
              27°30.0′
              83°21.5′.

              5 Off Anclote Keys—Offshore
              28°10.0'′
              83°45.0′.

              6 Southeast corner of Florida Middle Ground
              28°11.0′
              84°00.0′.

              7 Southwest corner of Florida Middle Ground
              28°11.0′
              84°07.0′.

              8 West corner of Florida Middle Ground
              28°26.6′
              84°24.8′.

              9 Northwest corner of Florida Middle Ground
              28°42.5′
              84°24.8′.

              10 South of Carrabelle
              29°05.0′
              84°47.0′.

              11 South of Cape St. George
              29°02.5′
              85°09.0′.

              12 South of Cape San Blas lighted bell buoy—20 fathoms
              29°21.0′
              85°30.0′.

              13 South of Cape San Blas lighted bell buoy—50 fathoms
              28°58.7′
              85°30.0′.

              14 De Soto Canyon
              30°06.0′
              86°55.0′.

              15 South of Pensacola
              29°46.0′
              87°19.0′.

              16 South of Perdido Bay
              29°29.0′
              87°27.5′.

              17 East of North Pass of the Mississippi River
              29°14.5′
              88°28.0′.

              18 East of South Pass of the Mississippi River
              29°04.0′
              88°49.7′ at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary.

              Thence westerly along the seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary to:

              19 South of Southwest Pass of the Mississippi River
              28°46.5′
              89°26.0′.

              20 Northwest tip of Mississippi Canyon
              28°38.5′
              90°08.5′.

              21 West side of Mississippi Canyon
              28°34.5′
              89°59.5′.

              22 South of Timbalier Bay
              28°22.5′
              90°02.5′.

              23 South of Terrebonne Bay
              28°10.5′
              90°31.5′.

              24 South of Freeport
              27°58.0′
              95°00.0′.

              25 Off Matagorda Island
              27°43.0′
              96°02.0′.

              26 Off Aransas Pass
              27°30.0′
              96°23.5′.

              27 Northeast of Port Mansfield
              27°00.0′
              96°39.0′.

              28 East of Port Mansfield
              26°44.0′
              96°37.5′.

              29 Northeast of Port Isabel
              26°22.0′
              96°21.0′.

              30 U.S./Mexico EEZ boundary
              26°00.5′
              96°24.5′.

              Thence westerly along U.S./Mexico EEZ boundary to the seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary

              1 Nearest identifiable landfall, boundary, navigational aid, or submarine area.

            Table 2 of Appendix B to Part 622—Seaward Coordinates of the Stressed Area

              Point Number and reference location 1

              North lat.
              West long.

              1 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary northeast of Dry Tortugas
              24°45.5′
              82°41.5′.

              2 North of Marquesas Keys
              24°48.0′
              82°06.5′.

              3 Off Cape Sable
              25°15.0′
              82°02.0′.

              4 Off Sanibel Island—Inshore
              26°26.0′
              82°29.0′.

              5 Off Sanibel Island—Offshore
              26°26.0′
              82°59.0′.

              6 West of Egmont Key
              27°30.0′
              83°21.5′.

              7 Off Anclote Keys—Offshore
              28°10.0′
              83°45.0′.

              8 Off Anclote Keys—Inshore
              28°10.0′
              83°14.0′.

              9 Off Deadman Bay
              29°38.0′
              84°00.0′.

              10 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary east of Cape St. George
              29°35.5′
              84°38.6′.

              Thence westerly along the seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary to:

              11 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary south of Cape San Blas
              29°32.2′
              85°27.1′.

              12 Southwest of Cape San Blas
              29°30.5′
              85°52.0′.

              13 Off St. Andrew Bay
              29°53.0′
              86°10.0′.

              14 De Soto Canyon
              30°06.0′
              86°55.0′.

              15 South of Florida/Alabama border
              29°34.5′
              87°38.0′.

              16 Off Mobile Bay
              29°41.0′
              88°00.0′.

              17 South of Alabama/Mississippi border
              30°01.5′
              88°23.7′.

              18 Horn/Chandeleur Islands
              30°01.5′
              88°39.8' at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary.

              Thence southerly along the seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary to:

              19 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary off Chandeleur Islands
              29°50.8'
              88°39.07' at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary.

              20 Chandeleur Islands
              29°35.5′
              88°37.0′.

              21 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary off North Pass of the Mississippi River
              29°21.0′
              88°54.43′ at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary.

              Thence southerly and westerly along the seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary to:

              22 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary off Southwest Pass of the Mississippi River
              29°01.3′
              89°34.67′ at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary.

              23 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary west of the Mississippi
              29°5.24′ at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary
              89°41.0′.

              Thence westerly along the seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary to:

              24 Seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary south of Grand Isle
              29°3.03′ at State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary
              89°56.0′.

              25 Quick flashing horn buoy south of Isles Dernieres
              28°32.5′
              90°42.0′.

              26 Southeast of Calcasieu Pass
              29°10.0′
              92°37.0′.

              27 South of Sabine Pass—10 fathoms
              29°09.0′
              93°41.0′.

              28 South of Sabine Pass—30 fathoms
              28°21.5′
              93°28.0′.

              29 East of Aransas Pass
              27°49.0′
              96°19.5′.

              30 East of Baffin Bay
              27°12.0′
              96°51.0′.

              31 Northeast of Port Mansfield
              26°46.5′
              96°52.0′.

              32 Northeast of Port Isabel
              26°21.5′
              96°35.0′.

              33 U.S./Mexico EEZ boundary
              26°00.5′
              96°36.0′.

              Thence westerly along U.S./Mexico EEZ boundary to the seaward limit of the State/Federal Reef Fish Management Boundary

              1 Nearest identifiable landfall, boundary, navigational aid, or submarine area.

       [FR Doc. 2019-27356 Filed 12-18-19; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P