        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [Docket No. 190925-0043]
        RIN 0648-BJ03
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Rockfish Management in the Groundfish Fisheries of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and the Gulf of Alaska

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:

          NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 119 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI FMP) and Amendment 107 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA FMP). This proposed rule would require that the operator of a federally permitted catcher vessel using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska retain and land all rockfish (Sebastes and Sebastolobus species) caught while fishing for groundfish or Pacific halibut. This action is necessary to improve identification of rockfish species catch by vessels using electronic monitoring, provide more precise estimates of rockfish catch, reduce waste and incentives to discard rockfish, reduce overall enforcement burden, and promote more consistent management between State and Federal fisheries. This proposed rule is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the BSAI FMP, the GOA FMP, and other applicable laws.

          DATES:
          Submit comments on or before November 1, 2019.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit your comments, identified by FDMS Docket Number NOAA-NMFS-2019-0068, by either of the following methods:
          • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2019-0068, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region NMFS. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.

            Instructions: NMFS may not consider comments if they are sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the comment period ends. All comments received are a part of the public record and NMFS will post the comments 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 Amendment 119 to the BSAI FMP, Amendment 107 to the GOA FMP (collectively Amendments 119/107), the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR; referred to as the Analysis), and the National Environmental Policy Act Categorical Exclusion evaluation document prepared for this action may be obtained from www.regulations.gov.

          Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this rule may be submitted by mail to NMFS at the above address; and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or by fax to (202)-395-5806.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Josh Keaton (907) 586-7228.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Authority for Action

        NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic zone of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) and Gulf of Alaska (GOA) under the BSAI FMP and GOA FMP. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the BSAI FMP and GOA FMP under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and implementing the BSAI FMP and GOA FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679.

        This proposed rule would implement Amendments 119/107. The Council submitted Amendments 119/107 for review by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), and a Notice of Availability (NOA) of Amendments 119/107 was published in the Federal Register on August 22, 2019 (84 FR 43783), with comments invited through October 21, 2019. Comments submitted on this proposed rule by the end of the comment period (see DATES) will be considered by NMFS and addressed in the response to comments in the final rule. Comments submitted on this proposed rule may address Amendments 119/107 or this proposed rule. However, all comments addressing Amendments 119/107 must be received by October 21, 2019, to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on Amendments 119/107. Commenters do not need to submit the same comments on both the NOA and this proposed rule. All relevant written comments received by October 21, 2019, whether specifically directed to the FMP amendments, this proposed rule, or both, will be considered by NMFS in the approval/disapproval decision for Amendments 119/107 and addressed in the response to comments in the final rule.
        Background
        In April 2019, the Council adopted Amendments 119/107. If approved by the Secretary, Amendments 119/107 would require that catcher vessels (CVs) using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in groundfish and halibut fisheries of the Federal exclusive economic zone (EEZ) retain and land all rockfish. This proposed rule would also establish a means to limit the amount of rockfish that can enter commerce through barter, sale, or trade through the implementation of a maximum commerce allowance. Additionally, this proposed rule would require full retention of rockfish by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear even if the rockfish species is prohibited for directed fishing or on prohibited species status (as defined in § 679.20(d)(2)). When on prohibited species status, these retained rockfish would be prohibited from entering commerce, except as fish meal.

        In this proposed rule “rockfish” is defined as any species of the genera Sebastes or Sebastolobus except Sebastes ciliates (dark rockfish) in the BSAI and GOA and Sebastes melanops (black rockfish) and Sebastes mystinus (blue rockfish) in the GOA (see § 679.2). This preamble also uses the term “prohibited species status” to mean status conferred by a NMFS management action issued under § 679.20(d)(2) that prohibits retention of a species.
        The following sections of this preamble provide a brief description of (1) rockfish management for CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear; (2) the need for the action; (3) the elements of this proposed rule; and (4) the regulatory changes made by this proposed rule.
        Description of Rockfish Management and Fisheries for CVs Using Hook-and-Line, Pot, or Jig Gear
        Rockfish Management

        Rockfish are commercially important groundfish comprising 29 commonly caught species. Most of these species inhabit rocky areas in shallow to moderately deep waters that overlap with groundfish and halibut fisheries. Many rockfish species are sought for their commercial value. Except for thornyhead rockfish (Sebastolobus spp.), rockfish have a closed swim bladder, which regulates buoyancy. Quick changes in pressure that occur when rockfish are caught and brought to the surface damage internal organs, therefore rockfish are susceptible to high mortality when brought to the surface from depth. Virtually no rockfish survive once caught without using special handling procedures to return the rockfish to depth as soon as possible.
        Many rockfish species are commonly caught as incidental catch by vessels directed fishing for other species using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear. NMFS prohibits directed fishing for most rockfish species at the beginning of the year because the amount of the total allowable catch (TAC) for rockfish species or species groups do not support directed fishing. If a TAC is reached, NMFS prohibits retention of the species.
        Since directed fishing by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear is already prohibited for nearly all species of rockfish, NMFS limits retention as the primary tool to regulate rockfish catch. These retention limits are referred to as the maximum retainable amount (MRA). The MRA is the proportion or percentage of retained catch of a species prohibited for directed fishing (incidental catch species) to the retained catch of a species open for directed fishing (basis species). When NMFS prohibits directed fishing for a groundfish species, retention of the catch of that species is allowed up to an MRA based on percentages set forth in Table 10 and Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679. Section 679.20(d)(iii)(B) requires vessel operators to discard at sea any rockfish that exceeds the MRA. For the individual fishing quota (IFQ) halibut and IFQ sablefish fisheries, when IFQ halibut or IFQ sablefish is on board, discarding rockfish is prohibited unless rockfish are required to be discarded (§ 679.7(f)(8)). Rockfish must be discarded for two reasons: (1) When rockfish catch is in excess of an MRA; and (2) when a rockfish species is prohibited from being retained (in a prohibited species status) because the TAC for that species has been reached.
        The MRA percentages were established to discourage vessel operators from targeting rockfish and other species while fishing for halibut or groundfish species open to directed fishing. However, in some fishing areas the natural incidental catch rate of rockfish may be much higher than the specified MRA, forcing vessel operators to discard rockfish that they cannot avoid catching. MRA calculations can be challenging for a vessel operator to compute correctly, since rates for different rockfish species vary depending on the target fishery and the management area in which a vessel is fishing. The inconsistency of MRA regulations between Federal and State of Alaska (State) fisheries, between different rockfish species, and different management areas makes it difficult for a vessel operator to ensure their compliance with retention and discard requirements.
        Since almost no rockfish survive being caught and brought to the surface, for CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear, at-sea discards are estimated and then deducted from that species TAC. Because some species are infrequently caught, accurate estimation of catch for those species is difficult. This results in high variance in the estimates of at-sea discards on smaller CVs. High variance most commonly occurs on smaller CVs that deploy hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear. This high variance can result in less accurate estimates of total catch of rockfish species, and can result in more restrictive management measures.
        Overall, this action would not affect the status of a rockfish stock in the BSAI or GOA. The acceptable biological catch and TAC for rockfish species would continue to be established through the annual harvest specifications process. The processes by which NMFS manages the catch of a rockfish species to stay within its TAC would not change under the alternatives considered for this action.
        Fisheries for CVs Using Hook-and-Line, Pot, or Jig Gear
        Hook-and-line gear, pot gear, and jig gear are commonly used in groundfish fisheries in the BSAI and GOA. Hook-and-line gear is a stationary, buoyed, and anchored line with hooks attached. Pot gear is a portable structure designed to capture and retain fish alive in the water. Jig gear is a single, non-buoyed, non-anchored line with hooks attached. CVs that operate in the BSAI and GOA use hook-and-line, pot, and jig gear to prosecute primarily Pacific cod, Pacific halibut, and sablefish. There is also some directed fishing for rockfish using hook-and-line and jig gear. Many other species are caught with hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear; however, most of these species are incidental to the four main target species.
        CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear fish throughout the year. As discussed in Section 2.7.1.1 of the Analysis, approximately 200 CVs use hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the BSAI, and approximately 950 CVs use hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the GOA. Some CVs participate in all three main target fisheries, and some operate in both the BSAI and GOA.
        Pacific cod fisheries using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear mostly occur in January through March and September through December. Rockfish incidental catch in these fisheries is generally low, at less than one percent of total groundfish catch, in the BSAI, and approximately one percent of total groundfish catch in the GOA (see Section 2.7.1.3 of the Analysis).
        IFQ Pacific halibut and sablefish fisheries occur from March through November. Rockfish incidental catch in the Pacific halibut fishery in the BSAI is approximately three percent of the total groundfish and halibut catch. Rockfish incidental catch in the Pacific halibut fishery of the GOA is approximately five percent of total groundfish and halibut catch. The IFQ sablefish fishery in the BSAI and GOA has a rockfish incidental catch rate of approximately 10 percent. These are average rates across the entire fleet and a broad geographic area. Depending on where a vessel operator is fishing, the rate can be higher or lower.
        Need for This Action
        The Council recommended, and NMFS proposes, requiring full retention of all rockfish caught by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear targeting groundfish and halibut in the GOA and BSAI for a number of reasons. These reasons include (1) improving the identification of rockfish species catch by vessels using electronic monitoring (EM); (2) providing more precise estimates of rockfish catch; (3) reducing waste and incentives to discard rockfish; (4) reducing overall enforcement burden; and (5) promoting more consistent management between State and Federal fisheries.
        Improve Identification of Rockfish Species Catch by Vessels Using EM
        In 2018, NMFS developed regulations to allow small fixed gear CVs in partial observer coverage to opt into EM coverage for the calendar year rather than carrying an observer. The data collected from EM systems deployed on CVs is used to obtain catch and discard information from these CVs. NMFS approved 168 CVs for EM coverage for 2019.

        EM studies focused on the accuracy of species identification have shown that in most cases it is possible to identify fish to the species or species group required for management. However, some rockfish species are difficult to identify and continue to be challenging for EM to identify. These rockfish species include shortraker rockfish (Sebastes borealis), rougheye rockfish (Sebastes aleutianus), blackspotted rockfish (Sebastes melanostictus), and various other rockfish species that are less commonly caught. This proposed rule could improve the identification of rockfish species by requiring all catch to be retained and landed where it could be verified, thereby reducing potential errors in catch composition.
        Provide More Precise Estimates of Rockfish Catch

        Under § 679.5(e), all groundfish and halibut that is landed (i.e., caught, retained and delivered) in the EEZ must be sorted, weighed, and reported through the Interagency Electronic Reporting System (eLandings) or other NMFS approved software. Information about the at-sea discard of rockfish are collected through the North Pacific Observer Program. Estimates of rockfish discarded at-sea are recorded by fisheries observers or EM and used to calculate the at-sea discard rate. NMFS applies these rates to the catch made by vessels fishing in groundfish and halibut fisheries in the same reporting area, target fishery, and time period.
        Most rockfish species have specialized habitat needs, which means they are more sparsely distributed than most other groundfish species. As a result, at-sea discard rates can be variable, which results in less precise estimates of total rockfish removals (see Section 2.7.1.3 of the Analysis). Requiring the complete retention of all rockfish caught by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear would allow the total catch of rockfish to be sorted, weighed, and reported via eLandings instead of extrapolated from at-sea discard rates. Therefore, this proposed rule would likely result in much better information on the incidental catch of rockfish by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear.
        Reduce Waste and Incentives To Discard Rockfish
        As discussed in Section 2.7.1.4 of the Analysis, more rockfish catch is retained than discarded. Since the majority of rockfish do not survive being caught, discards of rockfish increases waste. Many factors affect why a vessel operator discards rockfish. The most common reason for discards, inferred by available data, is regulatory discard. These discards occur when an MRA is exceeded during a fishing trip or if a rockfish species is on prohibited species status. Some vessel operators have expressed dissatisfaction with the current regulations requiring them to discard dead fish that could otherwise be used for human consumption. These concerns were consistently mentioned during public comment during the development of this proposed action.
        The existing MRA regulations may result in vessel operators discarding rockfish to avoid enforcement actions resulting from MRA overages. Removing the MRA regulations associated with rockfish caught by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear and requiring full retention could reduce waste.
        Reduce Overall Enforcement Burden
        This proposed rule would no longer require CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear to comply with MRA regulations for rockfish. This would likely reduce the number of enforcement cases associated with rockfish MRA violations, and therefore, allow the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement (NMFS OLE) to pursue other priorities. Overall, this proposed rule simplifies current regulations and promotes more consistency in the regulations. This alone is likely to increase compliance and reduce enforcement burden (see Section 2.7.2.11 of the Analysis).
        Federal fisheries in the BSAI and GOA have many regulations that require vessel operators to retain certain species. Due to the broad geographic area in which fisheries occur in the BSAI and GOA, monitoring vessels while they are actively fishing presents logistical challenges. However, the use of at-sea observers, EM, vessel boarding, and monitoring of offloads can assist in monitoring compliance of full retention requirements.
        Promote More Consistent Management Between State and Federal Fisheries
        Rockfish retention requirements for CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear differ between fisheries in Federal waters and State waters. Vessel operators that fish in both Federal waters and State waters are subject to two different sets of regulations concerning management of rockfish incidental catch. Sections 2.6.4 and 2.7.2.5 of the Analysis illustrates the complexity of rockfish retention requirements. A vessel operator may fish in multiple areas and have differing retention requirements in a single trip. This creates confusion that may result in unintentional non-compliance or unnecessary rockfish discards.
        The State already has full retention requirements for all rockfish in some areas, which include parts of the Eastern GOA, Prince William Sound, and Cook Inlet. This proposed rule would establish Federal regulations that are very similar, although not identical, to existing State regulations on management of rockfish incidental catch in these management areas. Federal and State management inconsistencies may be eliminated, if the State mirrors Federal full retention requirements in all areas.
        Elements of This Proposed Rule
        The Analysis for this proposed rule is based on the most recent and best scientific information available, consistent with National Standard 2 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, recognizing that some information (such as operational costs) are unavailable (see Section 3.1 of the Analysis).
        This proposed rule has two main provisions. The first provision would require the operator of a CV required to have a federal fishery permit using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear to retain and land all rockfish that are caught while fishing for groundfish or halibut in the EEZ of the BSAI and GOA, even if a species of rockfish is on prohibited species status.
        The second provision addresses the disposition of retained amounts of rockfish. There is a need to establish a limit or allowance on the sale of rockfish caught as incidental catch that both provides an incentive for vessel operators to retain all rockfish and avoids elevated rates of rockfish incidental catch because rockfish MRAs would not apply under the proposed full retention requirement. This proposed rule would implement a limit called the maximum commerce allowance (MCA). The MCA would be calculated at each rockfish landing, and would limit the amount of rockfish allowed to enter commerce. The MCA for rockfish would be calculated as a percentage of the total retained groundfish and halibut landed during each delivery. Section 2.7.2.4 of the Analysis discusses establishing an MCA in detail.
        The selection of the appropriate MCA percentage has some trade-offs. Low MCA percentages prioritize the avoidance of rockfish while fishing, but increases the number of trips that may have retained rockfish that cannot be sold. This could affect a vessel operator's compliance with full rockfish retention. Higher MCA percentages could result in more retention compliance. However, higher MCA percentages could also result in increased rockfish catch as vessel operators could seek areas with higher rockfish incidental catch, or change fishing behavior to engage in top-off fishing. “Top-off fishing” occurs when a vessel operator deliberately targets a valuable species that is closed to directed fishing in an attempt to reach the full MRA of that species.

        The Council and NMFS considered a range of MCA percentages, and this rule proposes an MCA of 15 percent. This percentage balances the concern that an MCA that is too restrictive could increase effects on vessels and processors and create incentives to discard rockfish, with the concern that a less restrictive MCA could incentivize vessel operators to engage in top-off fishing of rockfish species and increase rockfish catch. Section 2.7.2.4 of the Analysis identified that a 15-percent MCA would allow vessel operators, for 84 to 89 percent of the trips that were analyzed, to sell all rockfish caught. The 15-percent MCA could limit financial incentives for vessel operators to catch more rockfish (Section 2.7.2.4 of the Analysis). For the remaining 11 to 16 percent of the trips that were analyzed, vessel operators would be able to sell most rockfish that were caught. Amounts in excess of the MCA would not be allowed to enter commerce, with the exception of fish meal.
        Fish meal is considered a processed fish product that enters commerce. The Council recommended allowing rockfish in excess of the selected MCA to be processed into meal to address concerns raised by processors in communities such as Kodiak, Alaska. Vessel operators delivering fish to Kodiak and similar Alaska communities have limited options for discarding fish delivered to a processor that is unable to process retained rockfish or other species for human consumption. Allowing rockfish in excess of the MCA to be processed into meal is unlikely to provide any financial incentives to target rockfish, due to the low value of fish meal. Section 2.7.2.2 of the Analysis discusses fish meal and the impacts of full retention on processors in more detail.
        This proposed rule would require full retention of rockfish even if NMFS prohibits retention of a rockfish species. When NMFS prohibits retention of a rockfish species, the MCA for that rockfish species would be zero percent. This is discussed in detail in Section 2.7.2.6 of the Analysis. The NMFS OLE expressed concern that there could be compliance issues if the Council did not recommend full retention when a rockfish species is on prohibited species status. The lack of a full retention requirement when a rockfish species is on prohibited species status could increase non-compliance of the retention limits by creating confusion and potential loopholes that would affect the ability to enforce the limits established under this proposed action. The primary goal of an action to prohibit retention is to remove financial incentives for vessel operators to continue to harvest a species. To remove some of the financial incentives that may result in top-off fishing when a rockfish species is placed on prohibited species status, the MCA for that species would be set to zero. This would remove financial incentives to harvest more rockfish than the true incidental catch and could result in CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear avoiding areas that have high incidental catch rates of those species.
        Amounts of rockfish that are retained, but in excess of the MCA, could not be sold. However, this surplus rockfish could be used by vessel crew, donated, processed into fish meal, or discarded by processing plant personnel. The Council anticipates that most rockfish landed are likely to be processed; however, the decision to purchase, process, or discard rockfish is at the discretion of each individual processor. The Council also anticipates that most rockfish caught in excess of the MCA will be used in some way through personal use or charitable donations, thereby reducing waste and increasing the use of incidentally caught rockfish. Providing options such as retaining rockfish for personal use or donating it to charitable organizations would give vessel operators who dislike discarding dead fish an incentive for complying with the regulations associated with full retention of rockfish.

        During the February 2019 Council meeting, public comments identified a concern about the potential for increased retention of yelloweye rockfish (S. ruberrimus) due to its relatively high value compared to other rockfish species. Yelloweye rockfish has a value that is two to three times more than other rockfish species. Potentially, vessel operators could change their fishing behavior to target yelloweye rockfish up to the 15-percent MCA. Section 2.7.2.4.1 of the Analysis provides additional detail on yelloweye rockfish value and retention rates. Based on these concerns, this proposed rule would establish a separate limit for yelloweye rockfish of 5 percent MCA in all areas, except the Southeast Outside District of the GOA (SEO) defined in Figure 3 of part 679. This limit would be established within the 15-percent overall MCA for all rockfish species. This more restrictive MCA for yelloweye rockfish, within the overall 15-percent MCA for all other rockfish, is intended to limit the incentive for vessel operators to target yelloweye rockfish. To aid the reader in understanding this provision, we provide the following example of how an MCA would be calculated and applied:
        A vessel operator retains all rockfish during an IFQ halibut trip and delivers 1,000 pounds of halibut and 200 pounds of various rockfish species, of which 50 pounds is yelloweye rockfish. The MCA for rockfish is 150 pounds (1,000 * 0.15). The MCA for yelloweye rockfish is 50 pounds (1,000 * 0.05). The vessel operator could sell all yelloweye rockfish and 100 pounds of other rockfish species. Fifty pounds of rockfish could not enter commerce but could be donated or used by vessel crew.
        To assist in resolving inconsistencies in management between State and Federal fisheries in the SEO, the Council recommended that current full retention requirements for demersal shelf rockfish (DSR) in the SEO remain unchanged. In the SEO (one of seven area in the GOA), vessel operators would be required to retain all rockfish, however the MCA would be different in the SEO from other areas of the GOA. The MCA for DSR species in the SEO would be limited to 10 percent of the aggregate round weight of retained IFQ halibut and groundfish, excluding sablefish, and one percent of the aggregate round weight of retained sablefish. This is necessary to avoid inconsistency in management between Federal and State fisheries as discussed in Sections 2.6.5 and 2.6.6 of the Analysis.
        Regulatory Changes Made by the Proposed Rule
        The following provides a brief summary of the regulatory changes that would be made by this proposed rule. This proposed rule would—
        • Revise § 679.5(c)(3)(iv)(A)(3) to clarify that CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear are not required to record MRAs for rockfish since MRAs do not apply in full retention requirements.
        • Add § 679.7(a)(5) to prohibit discard of rockfish from CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear.
        • Revise § 679.7(f)(8) to clarify that rockfish are not required to be discarded.
        • Revise § 679.20(d)(1)(iii)(B) to clarify that rockfish are not required to be discarded when rockfish are closed to directed fishing.
        • Revise § 679.20(d)(2) to clarify that rockfish are still required to be retained by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear, even if a species is on prohibited species status.
        • Revise § 679.20(j) to include the full retention requirement, description of the MCA, and requirements for disposal of rockfish in excess of the MCA.
        • Revise Table 10 and Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679 by adding a footnote to the rockfish column referencing §  679.20(j).
        Classification

        Pursuant to Sections 304(b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with Amendments 119/107, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration of comments received during the public comment period.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866.
        Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)

        An RIR was prepared to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). NMFS is recommending Amendments 119/107 and the regulatory revisions in this proposed rule based on those measures that maximized net benefits to the Nation. Specific aspects of the economic analysis are discussed below in the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis section.
        Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
        This Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was prepared for this action, as required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) to describe the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. The IRFA describes the action; the reasons why this action is proposed; the objectives and legal basis for this proposed rule; the number and description of directly regulated small entities to which this proposed rule would apply; the recordkeeping, reporting, and other compliance requirements of this proposed rule; and the relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule. The IRFA also describes significant alternatives to this proposed rule that would accomplish the stated objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and any other applicable statutes, and that would minimize any significant economic impact of this proposed rule on small entities. The description of the proposed action, its purpose, and the legal basis are explained in the preamble and are not repeated here.
        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 its affiliates), and has combined annual receipts not in excess of $11 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide.
        Number and Description of Small Entities Directly Regulated by the Proposed Action
        NMFS estimates that the entities directly regulated by this proposed rule are CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the BSAI and GOA. The thresholds applied to determine if an entity or group of entities are “small” under the RFA depend on the industry classification for the entity or entities. Based on the 2016 fishing season, 169 CVs were active using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the BSAI, and 949 CVs were active using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the GOA. Of these CVs, 136 in the BSAI and 932 in the GOA are considered small entities.
        Description of Significant Alternatives That Minimize Adverse Impacts on Small Entities
        Several aspects of this rule directly regulate small entities. Small entities would be required to comply with the requirements to retain rockfish. A full retention requirement for CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear could have operational implications for vessel operators. Since a CV using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear would be required to retain all incidental catch of rockfish, this could reduce the CV's hold space, thereby displacing more valuable target species. Because this action would allow most of a CV's rockfish catch to enter commerce, the cost of requiring retention is estimated to be largely offset by the value of the rockfish. Therefore, the costs are expected to be minimal.
        Section 2.7.2 of the Analysis describes the proposed requirements for requiring rockfish retention. The Council and NMFS determined that the benefits of the proposed revised regulations outweigh the costs of these additional requirements on the existing fleet. This proposed rule would meet the objectives of the action while minimizing adverse impacts on fishery participants.

        This proposed rule would require full retention of all rockfish species by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the BSAI and GOA. The management measures include full retention of rockfish even if the species is on prohibited species status, but these retained rockfish would be prohibited from entering commerce (i.e., being sold). Most of the expected effects sections in the Analysis focus on hook-and-line gear due to the amount of rockfish incidental catch encountered by hook-and-line gear compared to pot and jig gears. Section 2.7.2.1 of the Analysis indicates that the impact of requiring CVs using pot or jig gear to retain and land all rockfish catch would likely be minimal in relation to CVs using hook-and-line gear.
        There are no significant alternatives to this proposed rule that would accomplish the objectives of requiring full retention of all rockfish species by CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear in the BSAI and GOA.
        Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance Requirements
        The proposed rule contains no new recordkeeping or recording requirements. As explained in the “Provide More Precise Estimates of Rockfish Catch” section of this proposed rule, landed fish must be reported under existing Federal and State regulations. A more detailed explanation of current recordkeeping and reporting requirements for CVs using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear can be found at § 679.5. Therefore, this proposed rule would meet the objectives of the action while minimizing the reporting burden for fishery participants.
        Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflict With the Proposed Action
        No duplication, overlap, or conflict between this proposed action and existing Federal rules has been identified.
        This proposed rule references collection-of-information requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Number 0648-0515 (Alaska Interagency Electronic Reporting System (IERS)).
        The response time includes time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

        Send comments regarding this burden estimate, or any other aspect of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES), and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax to (202) 395-5806. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number. All currently approved NOAA collections of information may be viewed at: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
          Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: September 25, 2019.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For 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 part 679 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281.

        2. In § 679.5, revise paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(A)(3) to read as follows:

          § 679.5
          Recordkeeping and reporting (R&R).

          (c) * * *
          (3) * * *
          (iv) * * *
          (A) * * *
          (3) Retain and record discard quantities over the MRA. When a CV is fishing in an IFQ fishery and the fishery for Pacific cod is closed to directed fishing but not in PSC status in that reporting area as described in § 679.20, the operator must retain and record up to and including the maximum retainable amount (MRA) for Pacific cod as defined in Tables 10 or 11 to this part. Quantities over this amount must be discarded and recorded as discard in the logbook.

        3. In § 679.7, add paragraph (a)(5), and remove and reserve paragraphs (f)(8)(i)(A) and (f)(8)(ii)(A) to read as follows:

          § 679.7
          Prohibitions.

          (a) * * *
          (5) Rockfish by catcher vessels using hook-and-line, jig, or pot gear.

          (i) For any person, to discard rockfish from a catcher vessel required to have a Federal fisheries permit that is fishing for groundfish or IFQ or CDQ halibut using hook-and-line, jig, or pot gear in the BSAI and GOA until that fish has been landed.
          (ii) Exceed the maximum commerce allowance amount established under § 679.20(j).

          (f) * * *
          (8) * * *
          (i) * * *
          (A) [Reserved]

          (ii) * * *
          (A) [Reserved]

         4. In § 679.20, revise paragraphs (d)(1)(iii)(B), (d)(2), and (j) to read as follows:

          § 679.20
          General limitations.

          (d) * * *
          (1) * * *
          (iii) * * *
          (B) Retention of incidental species. Except as described in § 679.20(e)(3)(iii) and § 679.20(j), if directed fishing for a target species or species group is prohibited, a vessel may not retain that incidental species in an amount that exceeds the maximum retainable amount, as calculated under paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, at any time during a fishing trip.

          (2) Groundfish as prohibited species closure. When the Regional Administrator determines that the TAC of any target species specified under paragraph (c) of this section, or the share of any TAC assigned to any type of gear, has been or will be achieved prior to the end of a year, NMFS will publish notification in the Federal Register requiring that target species be treated in the same manner as a prohibited species, as described under § 679.21(a), for the remainder of the year, except rockfish species caught by catcher vessels using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear as described in § 679.20(j)

          (j) Full retention of rockfish by catcher vessels using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear—(1) Retention and landing requirements. The operator of a catcher vessel that is required to have a Federal fisheries permit using hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear, must retain and land all rockfish that is caught while fishing for groundfish or IFQ or CDQ halibut in the BSAI and GOA.
          (2) Maximum commerce allowance (MCA) for rockfish in the BSAI and GOA. Except as described in § 679.20(j)(4), when rockfish is closed to directed fishing, the operator of a catcher vessel that is required to have a Federal fisheries permit under § 679.4(b), or the manager of a shoreside processor that is required to have a Federal processor permit under § 679.4(f), must dispose of rockfish retained and landed in accordance with paragraph (j)(1) of this section as follows:
          (i) A person may sell, barter, or trade a round weight equivalent amount of rockfish that is less than or equal to 15 percent of the aggregate round weight equivalent of IFQ halibut and groundfish species, other than rockfish, that are landed during the same fishing trip.
          (ii) A person may sell, barter, or trade a round weight equivalent amount of yelloweye rockfish that is less than or equal to 5 percent of the aggregate round weight equivalent of IFQ halibut and groundfish species, other than rockfish, that are landed during the same fishing trip. The aggregate amount of all rockfish species sold, bartered, or traded cannot exceed the MCA established under paragraph (j)(2)(i) of this section.
          (iii) Amounts of rockfish retained by catcher vessels under paragraphs (j)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section that are in excess of the limits specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section may be put to any use, including but not limited to personal consumption or donation, but must not enter commerce through sale, barter, or trade except as fish meal.
          (3) MCA of DSR in Southeast Outside District of the GOA (SEO) when closed to directed fishing. When DSR is closed to directed fishing in the SEO, the operator of a catcher vessel that is required to have a Federal fisheries permit under § 679.4(b), or the manager of a shoreside processor that is required to have a Federal processor permit under § 679.4(f), must dispose of DSR retained and landed in accordance with paragraph (j)(1) of this section as follows:
          (i) A person may sell, barter, or trade a round weight equivalent amount of DSR that is less than or equal to 10 percent of the aggregate round weight equivalent of IFQ halibut and groundfish species, other than sablefish, that are landed during the same fishing trip. The aggregate amount of all rockfish species sold, bartered, or traded cannot exceed the MCA established under paragraph (j)(2)(i) of this section.
          (ii) A person may sell, barter, or trade a round weight equivalent amount of DSR that is less than or equal to 1 percent of the aggregate round weight equivalent of IFQ sablefish that are landed during the same fishing trip. The aggregate amount of all rockfish species sold, bartered, or traded cannot exceed the MCA established under paragraph (j)(2)(i) of this section.

          (iii) Amounts of DSR retained by catcher vessels under paragraph (j)(1) of this section that are in excess of the limits specified in paragraphs (j)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section may be put to any use, including but not limited to personal consumption or donation, but must not enter commerce through sale, barter, or trade except as fish meal.

          (4) MCA for rockfish when on prohibited species status. When a rockfish species is placed on prohibited species status under § 679.20(d)(2), the MCA is set to 0 percent and no amount of that rockfish species may enter commerce through sale, barter, or trade except as fish meal. The operator of a catcher vessel that is required to have a Federal fisheries permit under § 679.4(b), or the manager of a shoreside processor that is required to have a Federal processor permit under § 679.4(f), may put rockfish retained and landed in excess of the MCA specified in this paragraph to any use, including but not limited to personal consumption or donation, but such rockfish must not enter commerce through sale, barter, or trade except as fish meal.

        5. Revise Table 10 to part 679 to read as follows:
        BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

          EP02OC19.027

          EP02OC19.028

          EP02OC19.029

        6. Revise Table 11 to part 679 to read as follows:

          EP02OC19.030

      [FR Doc. 2019-21262 Filed 10-1-19; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-C


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [Docket No. 100201056-0076-01]
        RIN 0648-AY65
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Revisions to Pacific Cod Fishing in the Parallel Fishery in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:

          NMFS proposes a regulatory amendment that would limit access of Federally permitted pot and hook-and-line catcher/processors (C/P) to the Pacific cod fishery in State of Alaska waters adjacent to the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI). The affected fishery is commonly known as the “parallel” fishery. The parallel fishery occurs off the coast of Alaska, within 3 nautical miles of shore and is managed by the State of Alaska concurrent with the Federal pot and hook-and-line fishery for Pacific cod in the BSAI. This proposed rule would limit access to the parallel fishery for Pacific cod in three ways. First, it would require that an owner of a Federally permitted pot or hook-and-line C/P vessel used to catch Pacific cod in the State of Alaska parallel fishery be issued the same endorsements on their Federal fisheries permit (FFP) or license limitation program (LLP) license as currently are required for catching Pacific cod in the Federal waters of the BSAI. Second, an operator of any Federally permitted pot or hook-and-line C/P vessel used to catch Pacific cod in the parallel fishery would also be required to comply with the same seasonal closures of Pacific cod that apply in the Federal fishery. Third, an owner of a pot or hook-and-line C/P vessel who surrenders an FFP would not be reissued a new FFP within the 3-year term of the permit. These three measures are necessary to limit some C/Ps from catching a greater amount of Pacific cod in the parallel fishery than have been allocated to their sector from the BSAI Total Allowable Catch. Maintaining Pacific cod catch amounts within sector allocations would also reduce the potential for shortened Pacific cod seasons for C/Ps in the Federal fishery. These three measures also would improve the coverage of NMFS catch accounting and monitoring requirements on vessels participating in the parallel fishery. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Fisheries Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutians Islands Management Area, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and other applicable laws.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received by April 11, 2011.

          ADDRESSES:
          Send comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. You may submit comments, identified by RIN number 0648-AY65, by any one of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at http://www.regulations.gov.

          • Mail: P. O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802.
          • Fax: (907) 586-7557.
          • Hand delivery to the Federal Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK.

          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 (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
          NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe portable document file (pdf) formats only.

          Electronic copies of the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for this action may be obtained from http://www.regulations.gov or from the Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.

          Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be submitted to NMFS at the above address, e-mailed to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or faxed to 202-395-7285.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Jeff Hartman, 907-586-7442.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI) under the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP). The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR part 679. General regulations that pertain to U.S. fisheries appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600.
        Background
        The Council and NMFS annually establish biological thresholds and annual total allowable catch limits (TACs) for groundfish species to ensure the sustainability of the groundfish fisheries in the BSAI and to assist in the allocation of groundfish TACs among various user groups. To achieve these objectives, NMFS requires vessel operators participating in groundfish fisheries in the BSAI to comply with various restrictions, such as fishery closures to maintain catch within specified TACs and prohibited species catch limits, and associated sector and seasonal allocation apportionments. NMFS also requires various permits that authorize or limit access to the groundfish fisheries, such as a Federal fisheries permit (FFP) and a license limitation program (LLP) license. Many of the catch monitoring regulations that apply to vessels designated on an FFP or an LLP license while participating in Federal fisheries also apply to these vessels when fishing in parallel fisheries in State of Alaska (State) waters. Parallel fisheries are open concurrently with Federal fisheries, and groundfish catch in the parallel fisheries is deducted from Federal TACs and any sector and seasonal allocations of the Federal TACs. State waters fisheries that are not parallel are referred to as “non-parallel State fisheries”. Targeted groundfish catch in the non-parallel State fisheries are deducted from a State guideline harvest level (GHL), rather than a Federal TAC. Currently, non-parallel State fisheries for BSAI groundfish are established only for pollock, Pacific cod, and sablefish in specified areas shoreward of the Aleutian Islands Subarea (AI).
        Federal groundfish fisheries in the EEZ from 3 to 200 nm off the coast of Alaska may be opened by NMFS to directed fishing for selected groundfish species. Parallel fisheries for groundfish species in State waters (from 0 nm to 3 nm) may be opened by the Commissioner for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) through emergency order under the authority of State regulations at 5 AAC 28.086. Non-parallel-State fisheries (also occurring from 0 to 3 nm) may be opened and closed by the ADF&G to fishing but during distinct seasons that generally do not overlap with the parallel and Federal groundfish seasons.
        Federal Fisheries Permit Requirements
        All vessels used to fish for groundfish in the Federal groundfish fisheries of the BSAI must be designated by name on an FFP. Operators of a vessel designated on an FFP must comply with NMFS observer and recordkeeping and reporting requirements in both Federal groundfish and parallel fisheries. In addition, operators of vessels designated on an FFP must comply with NMFS vessel monitoring system (VMS) reporting requirements if they participate in the directed Atka mackerel, Pacific cod, or pollock fisheries in Federal EEZ or Alaska State waters. However, a vessel used to fish exclusively in Alaska State waters is not required to be designated on an FFP, and the operator of a vessel that is not designated on an FFP is not subject to NMFS observer, VMS, or recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
        An FFP is issued on a 3-year cycle and is in effect from the date of issuance through the end of the current 3-year cycle. A person issued an FFP may surrender it at any time and have the FFP reissued at any time later in the 3-year cycle. There is no limit on the number of times an FFP may be surrendered and reissued within the 3-year permit cycle. The flexibility provided by allowing a vessel owner to surrender an FFP and have it reissued in a short period of time is intended to provide a vessel opportunities to participate in Alaska State waters fisheries, for which no FFP is required, without having to comply with all the Federal requirements associated with an FFP.

        FFPs may include many endorsements, such as, type of gear (pot, hook-and-line, and trawl), vessel operation category (catcher/processor (C/P) or catcher vessel (CV)), and management area (BSAI or Gulf of Alaska (GOA)) in which a licensed vessel may fish, and in some cases a species endorsement. These endorsements are required for a vessel to participate in a particular fishery. For example, vessels used to participate in Federal fisheries for Atka mackerel, Pacific cod, or pollock must be designated on an FFP with endorsements that indicate the use of pot, trawl, or hook-and-line gear in these fisheries. With the exception of the GOA inshore processing endorsement, an FFP may be amended to remove an endorsement any number of times during a year. While any vessel owner may apply for an FFP with a C/P or CV endorsement (or both) as well as any area, gear, or species endorsements, an FFP with a specific set of endorsements, by itself, does not authorize the operator of the vessel to participate in the Pacific cod fishery in the BSAI. In most cases, an LLP license also is required to participate in this fishery.
        License Limitation Program Requirements
        Most vessels deployed in a directed fishery for groundfish in the BSAI are required to be named on an LLP license. The LLP authorizes a vessel to be used in a particular directed groundfish fishery under specified vessel operation, gear, area, and (where applicable) species and operation type endorsements. For some groundfish species, such as Pacific cod, additional endorsements may be required. For example, if the operator of a pot C/P wished to participate in a directed fishery for groundfish in the AI, the C/P must be named on an LLP with endorsements for C/P vessel operation, non-trawl gear, and AI area. In addition, to engage in the AI directed fishery for Pacific cod, the vessel also must be designated on an LLP license with an endorsement for Pacific cod in the AI for a C/P using pot gear. Unlike the FFP, the endorsements on an LLP license are not severable from the license. An LLP license with its associated endorsements may be assigned to a different vessel only once per year.
        There are several exceptions to the requirement for a vessel to be designated on an LLP license to fish for groundfish in the BSAI: (1) Vessels less than 32 ft length overall (LOA); (2) vessels not directed fishing for LLP groundfish species that may retain incidentally caught groundfish up to the maximum retainable amounts (including individual fishing quota halibut or sablefish); and (3) catcher vessels less than 60 ft LOA that are exempted from having a Pacific cod endorsement on their LLP license to participate in the fixed gear BSAI Pacific cod fishery. In addition, vessels fishing in the parallel fisheries are not required to be designated on an LLP license because these fisheries occur only in State waters.
        Sectors and Sector Allocations
        The TAC for BSAI Pacific cod is divided into sector allocations, which include allocations of separate portions of the TAC to pot C/Ps, pot CVs, hook-and-line C/Ps and hook-and-line CVs. Each sector allocation for Pacific cod is further divided into two or more seasonal allocations. These sector and seasonal allocations were implemented under Amendment 67 to the BSAI FMP (67 FR 18129, April 15, 2002) and Amendment 85 to the BSAI FMP (72 FR 50788, September 4, 2007). These two FMP amendments limited the number of vessels in each sector and implemented sector allocations of Pacific cod to vessels in each sector. These amendments limited access and reduced competition in the derby-style Pacific cod fishery that has existed throughout much of the last two decades.
        Amendment 67 to the BSAI FMP was intended to limit vessel participation with hook-and-line and pot gear in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery, and thus authorized exclusive participation in the hook-and-line and pot gear BSAI Pacific cod fisheries. It was implemented by issuing LLP license endorsements to LLP holders demonstrating historic and recent participation, and economic dependence in the Pacific cod fishery. Of four separate Pacific cod endorsements, one was created for Pacific cod pot C/P and one for Pacific cod hook-and-line C/P.
        Amendment 85 to the BSAI FMP modified previously established allocations of Pacific cod among ten fishery sectors created in Amendment 67, to better reflect the historical dependency and use of Pacific cod by each sector. Two of the industry sectors that received modified allocations under Amendment 85 were the pot C/P sector and the hook-and-line C/P sector.
        There is a substantial difference in the amount of Pacific cod allocated between the pot and hook-and-line sectors. The pot C/P sector has historically caught a small amount of Pacific cod. The Amendment 85 allocation to the pot C/P sector is only 1.5 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC after subtraction of the allocation to the Western Alaska Community Development Quota (CDQ) reserve. The C/P hook-and-line allocation of Pacific cod is substantially larger at 48.5 percent of the TAC after subtraction of the allocation to the CDQ reserve. The hook-and-line C/P sector recently completed a voluntary capacity reduction program, and in January 2008 the owners of vessels in this fleet began repaying a $35 million Federal loan. The hook-and-line C/P sector's ability to repay the loan is based on a secure annual allocation of Pacific cod to the sector participants who have been issued the appropriate Amendment 67 endorsed LLP licenses.
        Statement of Problem
        At the October 2008 Council meeting, the members of the BSAI groundfish pot and hook-and-line C/P sectors informed the Council that following the implementation of Amendment 85, Federally-permitted pot and hook-and-line C/Ps have been participating in increasing numbers in the Pacific cod parallel fishery. Owners of several of these C/Ps have not been issued FFPs and LLP licenses with the endorsements necessary to fish in the Pacific cod fishery in the BSAI EEZ. However, the catch of Pacific cod in the parallel fishery from these C/P vessels accrues against the sector allocations in the Federal fishery that were designed to be available only to vessels with the appropriate Pacific cod endorsements issued under Amendment 67.
        In April 2009, information prepared for the EA/RIR/IRFA (See
          ADDRESSES) confirmed that several operators of hook-and-line C/Ps that have been participating in the parallel Pacific cod fishery have not been issued all the FFP and LLP licenses and endorsements that are necessary to participate in the Federal Pacific cod fishery. The EA/RIR/IRFA also confirmed that hook-and-line C/Ps that have been issued all the FFP and LLP license endorsements required to fish as C/Ps in the Federal Pacific cod fishery, also fish as C/Ps in the parallel fishery. However, if the hook-and-line C/P sector's season closes in the Federal fishery and vessels in the hook-and-line C/P sector continue to fish in the parallel fishery as hook-and-line C/Ps, NMFS continues to credit that catch in the parallel fishery to the hook-and-line C/P sector allocation. That additional amount credited to the C/P sector allocation in the current season could result in a reduction in the allocation available to the C/P sector participants during a subsequent season of that year. The Council concluded that the additional catch of Pacific cod resulting from this activity, while only a fraction of a percent of the BSAI Pacific cod allocation, may be circumventing the intent of previous decisions made by the Council regarding license limitation and endorsements, sector allocations, and catch reporting. While the additional fishing activity had not violated Federal permit and license regulations, the Council concluded that additional fishing activity in the Pacific cod parallel fishery has reduced “or circumvented” the intended effectiveness of Pacific cod sector allocations and the capacity reduction program.
        The EA/RIR/IRFA prepared for this action (See
          ADDRESSES) highlighted how increased participation in BSAI C/P hook-and-line sector in recent parallel fisheries has undermined the capacity reduction program undertaken by particular members of that sector. The increased participation has eroded the opportunity of historical participants to harvest the Pacific cod allocated to the C/P sector under Amendment 85. The increased participation in the parallel fishery involved Federally-permitted C/Ps without an Amendment 67 Pacific cod endorsement, or an AI area endorsement. These vessel owners and operators are recent entrants to the Pacific cod fishery and have not demonstrated long-term economic dependence on the fishery.
        An increase in recent parallel fishery participation by vessels in the pot and hook-and-line C/P sectors has correspondingly increased fishing competition in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. This increased fishing pressure has resulted in shortened Federal seasons, has exacerbated the race for fish, and has increased the concentration of Pacific cod harvest in State waters relative to catch in the Federal waters. The increased fishing competition and catch from these sectors in the parallel Pacific cod fishery have also increased the complexity and difficulty in managing sector allocations and seasonal apportionments. Furthermore, owners of some vessels used to fish for Pacific cod in a Federal groundfish fishery have surrendered their FFPs before fishing in a parallel fishery or in the non-parallel-State waters Pacific cod fishery to avoid NMFS observer and recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Operators of vessels designated on an FFP are subject to NMFS observer, VMS, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements while fishing in Federal and State water groundfish fisheries. Some Pacific cod C/Ps may have avoided complying with these important NMFS enforcement and recordkeeping tools while fishing in the State waters by surrendering or amending their FFP. As a consequence, these vessels may be degrading the quality of information available to NMFS to manage the Pacific cod fishery.
        The Proposed Action
        In consideration of the effects of these practices on the allocation of Pacific cod and data quality, the Council recommended three actions at its June 2009 meeting to further restrict participation of pot or hook-and-line C/Ps in the Pacific cod parallel fishery. These three actions would amend regulations for pot and hook-and-line C/Ps by extending FFP and LLP endorsement requirements that apply in Federal fisheries to the Pacific cod parallel fishery: placing restrictions on reissuing or amending an FFP, and requiring operators of these pot and hook-and-line C/Ps participating in the parallel fishery to comply with seasonal closures of Pacific cod in the BSAI.
        Endorsements for the State Parallel Fishery
        The first of three actions recommended by the Council would add requirements for additional endorsements on an FFP and LLP license. The endorsements would apply to vessels designated on an FFP that fish for Pacific cod in the parallel fishery, use pot or hook-and-line gear, and catch and process Pacific cod. The proposed rule would implement this recommendation by amending § 679.7(c)(3) to prohibit a person from using pot or hook-and-line gear from a vessel designated on an FFP to catch and process Pacific cod in the parallel fishery in the BSAI unless:
        1. The FFP has a C/P vessel operation endorsement; a pot or hook-and-line gear endorsement; and a BSAI area endorsement; and
        2. The LLP license has a C/P vessel operation endorsement; a non-trawl gear endorsement; an Aleutian Islands area endorsement or a Bering Sea area endorsement; and a BSAI C/P Pacific cod hook-and-line or BSAI C/P Pacific cod pot endorsement.
        The prohibitions would clarify that under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the endorsements listed in 1 and 2, and any conditions of these FFP and LLP endorsements, apply to Federally permitted pot or hook-and-line C/P vessels fishing for Pacific cod in the parallel fishery.
        Reissuing and Amending an FFP
        The second action recommended by the Council is to prohibit the owner of a C/P using pot or hook-and-line gear in the BSAI from surrendering his or her FFP during the 3-year term of the FFP. Rather than prohibiting surrender of an FFP, NMFS proposes to implement the Council's recommendation by not reissuing an FFP once it is surrendered. The proposed rule would add paragraph (B) at § 679.4(b)(4)(ii) to state that, once surrendered, NMFS will not reissue an FFP to the owner of a vessel with a C/P vessel operation, pot or hook-and-line gear type, and BSAI area endorsement during the remainder of the 3-year term of the original FFP.
        This approach would be more efficient for NMFS to administer because it would only require NMFS to track the number of vessel owners applying for a new FFP with a pot or hook-and-line C/P endorsement who had previously surrendered an FFP rather than track whether each permit holder who submitted a request to surrender an FFP had participated as a pot or hook-and-line C/P in the BSAI within the 3-year term of the surrendered permit.
        The proposed rule also would add paragraph (B) to § 679.4(b)(4)(iii) to prohibit the owner of a vessel named on an FFP with endorsements for C/P vessel operation category, pot or hook-and-line gear, and BSAI area groundfish endorsement from amending the FFP by removing the C/P operation, pot or hook-and-line gear, or BSAI area endorsements.
        The proposed rule also would revise § 679.4(b)(4)(iii) to refer to the “owner” of a vessel who applied for and held an FFP rather than to the “owner or operator”. The term operator would be removed because FFPs may only be issued to vessel owners.
        Seasonal Closures
        The third action recommended by the Council is to clarify that Pacific cod seasonal closure requirements for Federally permitted pot and hook-and-line C/Ps apply in both Federal and parallel Pacific cod fisheries. The proposed rule would implement this recommendation by adding paragraph (4) to § 679.7(c), to prohibit operators of vessels in the pot or hook-and-line C/P sector that are named on an FFP from fishing for Pacific cod in the parallel fishery once the directed fishery for Pacific cod for their sector is closed in Federal waters.
        Notice; Pacific Cod Caught in Parallel Fisheries Are Deducted From the TAC

        Owners of Federally permitted pot or hook-and-line C/Ps, intending to catch and process Pacific cod from the parallel fishery, would receive actual and/or constructive notice from NMFS that any Pacific cod caught by that vessel in parallel fisheries will be deducted from the Federal TAC. The notice would improve enforceability of regulations proposed under § 679.7(c)(3) and (c)(4), by clarifying that a Federally permitted pot or hook-and-line C/P would be in violation of these prohibitions for catching and processing Pacific cod in parallel fisheries without the required FFP and LLP license endorsements or during a Pacific cod seasonal closure.
        What the Amendments Accomplish
        The requirements in this proposed action for pot and hook-and-line C/Ps to be issued specific permits and endorsements to fish for Pacific cod in the parallel fishery, combined with proposed restrictions on surrendering and reissuing an FFP would address the Council's problem statement by requiring that, once a vessel owner of a pot or hook-and-line C/P is issued an FFP, he or she must choose to fish for Pacific cod predominantly in the Federal fishery or surrender his or her FFP and fish in State waters for the remainder of the 3-year term of the FFP. Owners of pot or hook-and-line C/Ps eligible to participate in the Federal fisheries are unlikely to surrender their FFP and give up the opportunity to continue to fish Pacific cod in the Federal fishery, unless they are close to the end of the 3-year term of the FFP. Relying exclusively on Pacific cod catch in parallel and non-parallel State fisheries for up to 3 years would represent a significant loss in revenue for many C/Ps because most Pacific cod are located in and caught in the Federal waters of the BSAI. Although these proposed regulatory amendments would not prohibit a C/P without an FFP or LLP license from participating in the parallel fishery, it would discourage the current practice of surrendering an FFP or removing an endorsement from an FFP before participating in the parallel fishery to avoid NMFS observer, VMS, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
        Conservation and Management
        This action implements the conservation and management of Federal fisheries as provided by Amendments 67 and 85 to the BSAI FMP. Amendment 67 created exclusive pot C/P and hook-and-line C/P sectors for participating in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery through a license limitation program (LLP). The creation of sectors effectively removed some vessels that did not historically participate in these Pacific cod fisheries, and reduced competition that contributed to the race for fish. Some of the C/Ps that did not qualify for the necessary LLP endorsement in Amendment 67 continue to fish for Pacific cod in the parallel fishery off of allocations for the C/P pot and hook-and-line sectors created by Amendment 85. This proposed rule would apply the same LLP endorsements required for Federally permitted pot or hook-and-line C/Ps to participate in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery to the parallel Pacific cod fishery, limiting ability of C/Ps without an LLP or the appropriate LLP endorsements to fish off of these Pacific cod sector allocations in the parallel fishery. Thus, this proposed action would contribute to conservation and management objectives by preventing C/Ps without an LLP or the appropriate endorsements to continue to participate in parallel fishery, reducing the pool of vessels competing for limited allocations to the C/P pot and hook-and-line sectors, and limiting the race for fish in the BSAI.
        The interim final rule for Steller sea lion (SSL) protection measures (75 FR 77535, December 13, 2010, corrected 75 FR 81921, December 29, 2010) establish closures in critical habitat waters 0 nm to 3 nm around certain rookeries and haulouts in the Aleutian Islands subarea. The harvest of Pacific cod in the parallel fisheries was included in the action considered in the November 2010 biological opinion on the Alaska Federal groundfish fisheries. In the analysis of the action in the biological opinion, the parallel fisheries were expected to be managed with the same closures as specific for the Federal Pacific cod fisheries as shown in Table 12 to 50 CFR part 679. The interim final rule closed State waters occurring inside Steller sea lion critical habitat. On January 11, 2011, the State issued an emergency order that allows for Pacific cod harvest by hook-and-line vessels 58 ft or less and by pot vessels 60 feet or less in State waters critical habitat between 175 degrees W longitude and 178 degrees W longitude that are closed to Federally permitted vessels. NMFS has initiated an Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation on the State's emergency order. This proposed action would discourage a pot or hook-and-line C/P from surrendering its FFP and fishing in the parallel fisheries in those areas closed in Table 12 to 50 CFR part 679 but open under State parallel management. This proposed action would facilitate implementation of the closure areas for the protection of Steller sea lion critical habitat, as provided in the interim final rule (75 FR 77535, December 13, 2010, corrected 75 FR 81921, December 29, 2010) and required by the biological opinion.
        Classification
        Pursuant to sections 304(b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the FMP, other provisions of 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.

        An initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as required by section 603 of the RFA (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A summary of the remainder of the IRFA follows. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS (see
          ADDRESSES).
        The directly regulated entities for this proposed action are the members of the commercial fishing industry that operate groundfish pot or hook-and-line C/Ps in the BSAI and State parallel waters. Under a conservative application of the Small Business Administration criterion and the best available data, there are four small entities out of a total of 44 vessels in 2008 that would be directly regulated by the proposed action. To provide these estimates, earnings from all Alaskan fisheries for 2008 were matched with the vessels that participated in the BSAI pot or hook-and-line fishery for that year.
        To minimize impacts on small entities, this action would not apply to pot or hook-and-line C/Ps of less than 32 ft LOA, or to pot or hook-and-line CVs. The CVs participating in these fisheries are generally operating in non-parallel-State and parallel fisheries only, and are not required by NMFS to be designated on an LLP license or FFP to participate in these groundfish fisheries.
        In addition to the proposed alternative, the Council evaluated an alternative to prohibit any vessel with a C/P endorsement on its FFP from amending the C/P endorsement, and only allow surrender or reactivation of the FFP at the end of the FFP permit cycle. That alterative was rejected because it would have applied to jig and trawl C/Ps, and was beyond the scope of the Council's problem statement and analysis.
        The Council also evaluated the no action alternative, which would maintain the fishery under the status quo, but it was rejected because it would not address the problem statement.

        The majority of the directly regulated entities under this action are not considered small entities, as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. Within the universe of small entities that are the subject of this IRFA, impacts may accrue differently (i.e., some small entities would be negatively affected and others positively affected). Thus, the proposed action represents tradeoffs in terms of impacts on small entities. However, the Council deliberately sought to provide options for the smallest of the small entities under this amendment by excluding CVs from the proposed regulatory changes. The restrictions on participation in the BSAI Pacific cod parallel fishery would only apply to pot and hook-and-line C/Ps; therefore only these C/Ps are considered here.
        Overall, it is unlikely that the combination of these proposed restrictions would preclude vessels with a high degree of economic dependence upon the pot or hook-and-line groundfish fisheries from participating in the Pacific cod parallel fishery. Most of the vessel owners who are highly dependent on these fisheries were issued an LLP license with pot or hook-and-line Pacific cod endorsements, in 2003 under Amendment 67 by demonstrating recent catch history in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. Most of the vessel owners who have not been issued an LLP license with a Pacific cod endorsement, and who have fished in parallel fisheries, are recent entrants to the fishery and have not demonstrated long-term economic dependence on the fishery. These vessel owners would continue to have access to the State Pacific cod fishery after implementation of the proposed action.
        Based upon the best available scientific data, and consideration of the objectives of this action, it appears that there are no alternatives to the proposed action that have the potential to accomplish the stated objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and any other applicable statutes and that have the potential to minimize any significant adverse economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities. The analysis did not identify any Federal rules that would duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule. This rule requires revisions to some existing recordkeeping and reporting requirements but imposes no new requirements on the effected vessel owners or operators.
        Collection-of-Information Requirements
        This proposed rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject to review and approval by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been submitted to OMB for approval under OMB Control No. 0648-0206. Public reporting burden for an Application for a Federal Fisheries Permit is estimated to average 21 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. This rule also contains a collection-of-information that has been approved by OMB under OMB Control No. 0334. Total public reporting burden for the License Limitation Program is estimated at 268 hours.

        Public comment is sought regarding: whether this proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information to NMFS Alaska Region at the ADDRESSES above, and by e-mail to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 202-395-7285.
        Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
          Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: March 8, 2011.
          John Oliver,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, 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 part 679 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108-447.

          2. In § 679.4, paragraphs (b)(4)(ii) and (iii) are revised to read as follows:

            § 679.4
            Permits.
            (b) * * *
            (4) * * *
            (ii) Surrendered permit. (A) An FFP permit may be voluntarily surrendered in accordance with paragraph (a)(9) of this section. Except as provided under paragraph (b)(4)(ii)(B) of this section, if surrendered, an FFP may be reissued to the permit holder of record in the same fishing year in which it was surrendered. Contact NMFS/RAM by telephone, at 907-586-7202 (Option #2) or toll-free at 800-304-4846 (Option #2).
            (B) NMFS will not reissue an FFP to the owner of a vessel named on an FFP that has been issued with endorsements for catcher/processor vessel operation type, pot or hook-and-line gear type, and the BSAI area, until after the expiration date of the surrendered FFP.
            (iii) Amended permit. (A) An owner who applied for and received an FFP must notify NMFS of any change in the permit information by submitting an FFP application found at the NMFS Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. The owner must submit the application as instructed on the application form. Except as provided under paragraph (b)(4)(iii)(B) of this section, upon receipt and approval of a permit amendment, the Program Administrator, RAM, will issue an amended FFP.
            (B) NMFS will not approve an application to amend an FFP to remove a catcher/processor vessel operation endorsement, pot gear type endorsement, hook-and-line gear type endorsement or BSAI area endorsement from an FFP that has been issued with endorsements for catcher/processor vessel operation type, pot or hook-and-line gear type, and the BSAI area.

            3. In § 679.7, paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) are added to read as follows:

            § 679.7
            Prohibitions.

            (c) * * *
            (3) Parallel fisheries. Use a vessel designated or required to be designated on an FFP to catch and process Pacific cod from waters adjacent to the BSAI when Pacific cod caught by that vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC specified under section 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(4) of this part for pot gear or (a)(7)(ii)(A)(6) of this part for hook-and-line gear unless that vessel is designated on both:
            (i) An LLP license issued under section 679.4(k) of this part with the following endorsements:
            (A) A catcher/processor endorsement;

            (B) A BSAI catcher/processor Pacific cod hook-and-line, or a BSAI catcher/processor Pacific cod pot endorsement;

            (C) An Aleutian Islands area endorsement or Bering Sea area endorsement; and
            (D) A non-trawl endorsement; and
            (ii) An FFP issued under section 679.4(b) of this part with the following endorsements:
            (A) A catcher/processor endorsement;
            (B) A BSAI endorsement; and
            (C) A pot or hook-and-line gear type endorsement.
            (4) Parallel fishery closures. (i) Use a vessel designated or required to be designated on an FFP to catch and process Pacific cod with pot gear from waters adjacent to the BSAI when Pacific cod caught by that vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC specified under section 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(4) of this part for pot gear if the BSAI is open to directed fishing for Pacific cod but is not open to directed fishing for Pacific cod by a catcher/processor using pot gear.

            (ii) Use a vessel designated or required to be designated on an FFP, to catch and process Pacific cod with hook-and-line gear from waters adjacent to the BSAI when Pacific cod caught by that vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC specified under section 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(6) of this part for hook-and-line gear, if the BSAI is open to directed fishing for Pacific cod but is not open to directed fishing for Pacific cod by a catcher/processor using hook-and-line gear.

      [FR Doc. 2011-5667 Filed 3-10-11; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Transit Administration
        49 CFR Part 665
        [Docket No. FTA-2011-0015]
        RIN 2132-AB01
        Bus Testing: Calculation of Average Passenger Weight and Test Vehicle Weight, and Public Meeting and Extension of Comment Period

          AGENCY:
          Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Notice announcing conference call and extension of comment period of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is hosting a conference call to address issues concerning its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding the calculation of average passenger weights and test vehicle weights. The purpose of this conference call is to allow the public to ask questions and to clarify any misunderstandings regarding the NPRM published on March 14, 2011 (76 FR 13580). Furthermore, due to the complexity of the issues proposed in the NPRM, FTA is extending the comment period to June 15, 2011, to allow interested parties time to carefully review the actual changes proposed in the NPRM and the information presented during the conference call.

          DATES:
          Comments should be submitted before June 15, 2011. Late-filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable.

            Conference Call Date: FTA will hold the conference call on Wednesday, June 1, 2011, commencing at 2 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time. Interested parties are invited to call 1-877-407-0183 and enter Participant Code 681759. Note that the conference call is only for information purposes and commenters must submit their comments to the official docket in order to have them considered by FTA.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments to DOT Docket ID Number FTA-2011-0015 by any of the following methods:

            Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and 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. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

            Fax: 202-493-2251.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          For technical information, Gregory Rymarz, Bus Testing Program Manager, Office of Research, Demonstration, and Innovation (TRI), (202) 366-6410, gregory.rymarz@dot.gov. For legal information, Richard Wong, Office of the Chief Counsel (TCC), (202) 366-0675, richard.wong@dot.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        On March 14, 2011, FTA published an NPRM in the Federal Register (76 FR 13850) proposing to amend its bus testing procedures to more accurately reflect average passenger weights and actual transit vehicle loads. Specifically, FTA proposed to change the average passenger weight from 150 lbs to 175 lbs. In addition, FTA proposed to change the floor space occupied per standing passenger from 1.5 to 1.75 square feet, and update the Structural Strength and Distortion test procedures.

        FTA is aware that the proposal has been the subject of some mischaracterizations, causing interested parties to have misperceptions regarding the NPRM's actual impact and intent. During the conference call, FTA staff will summarize its proposals in the NPRM and will be available to answer questions regarding those proposals. This is an opportunity for affected parties to receive clarification regarding the content of the NPRM. The conference call is not, however, an opportunity to submit comments to FTA regarding the proposals contained in the NPRM. Rather, interested parties should submit their comments to the docket for this rulemaking as described in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
        In addition, because of the scheduling of the conference call and the apparent confusion regarding the issues proposed in the NPRM, FTA is extending the comment period until June 15, 2011. This additional time should be sufficient to allow interested parties to review and submit final comments following information conveyed during the conference call.

          Issued this 12th day of May 2011.
          Therese McMillan,
          Deputy Administrator.

      [FR Doc. 2011-12292 Filed 5-18-11; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE P