        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [I.D. 050101D]
        RIN 0648-Al50
        Fisheries off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Amendment 14

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability of an amendment to a fishery management plan; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS announces that the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Secretarial review.  Amendment 14 would implement a permit stacking program for limited entry permits with sablefish endorsements.  This permit stacking program would lengthen the limited entry, fixed gear primary sablefish fishery.  It is intended to increase safety in that fishery and provide flexibility to participants.  The permit stacking program would also associate sablefish cumulative limits with permits, rather than with vessels, so that a single vessel could carry multiple permits and harvest multiple sablefish cumulative limits during the primary sablefish fishery.

          DATES:
          Comments on Amendment 14 must be received on or before July 9, 2001.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments on Amendment 14 or supporting documents should be sent to Donna Darm, Acting Administrator, Northwest Region, NMFS, Sand Point Way NE., BIN C15700, Seattle, WA 98115-0070; or to Rebecca Lent,  Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213.
          Copies of Amendment 14 and the environmental assessment/ regulatory impact review (EA/RIR) are available from Donald McIsaac, Executive Director, Pacific Fishery Management Council, 2130 SW Fifth Ave., Suite 224, Portland, OR 97201.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Yvonne deReynier or Becky Renko (Northwest Region, NMFS), phone: 206-526-6140; fax: 206-526-6736 and; e-mail: yvonne.dereynier@noaa.gov, becky.renko@noaa.gov or  Svein Fougner (Southwest Region, NMFS) phone: 562-980-4000; fax: 562-980-4047 and; e-mail: svein.fougner@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Electronic Access
        This Federal Registerdocument is also accessible via the Internet at the website of the Office of the Federal Register: <<http://www.access.gpo.gov/su-docs/aces/aces140.html.>>

        The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that each regional fishery management council submit any FMP or plan amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval.  The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an FMP or amendment, immediately publish a notification in the Federal Register that the FMP or amendment is available for public review and comment.  NMFS will consider the public comments received during the comment period described here in determining whether to approve the FMP or amendment.  Amendment 14 would expand on Amendment 9 to the FMP, which restricted participation in the limited entry, regular fixed gear fishery to permits that met historical landings qualifications.  Permit holders who met the landings qualifications were issued sablefish endorsements.  The regulations that implemented Amendment 9 require that vessels hold permits with sablefish endorsements to participate in the regular sablefish fishery.  Under a 1998 rulemaking following Amendment 9, permits with sablefish endorsements were assigned to one of three tiers based on their landings histories.  During the regular fishery, a vessel is allowed to fish up to the cumulative limit associated with its particular tier.  Cumulative limits are graduated so that permits associated with higher historic landings are in tiers that receive higher cumulative landings limits for current fisheries.
        Under the current FMP, cumulative limits are associated with vessels, which means that a vessel may land no more of a particular species than its cumulative limit for a given period.  Amendment 14 would allow sablefish cumulative limits in the regular fishery to be associated with permits rather than vessels, and would allow a single vessel to carry multiple permits.  As a result, a single vessel could land multiple cumulative limits of sablefish during the period of the regular fishery.  Allowing vessels to “stack” permits to harvest multiple cumulative limits of sablefish is expected to improve fleet efficiency by reducing the number of vessels participating in the fishery.  Pub. L. 106-554 has also granted this fishery exemption from the ongoing Magnuson-Stevens Act moratorium on implementing new  individual quota programs to allow the Council to set a season of several months duration.  For the past several years, the regular fishery has been brief, 5-10 days duration.  Amendment 14 is intended to take advantage of this new exemption from Congress to improve the safety of this derby fishery by giving participants sufficient time to fully harvest their cumulative limits.
        Public comments on Amendment 14 must be received by July 9, 2001,  to be considered by NMFS in the decision whether to approve Amendment 14.  A proposed rule to implement Amendment 14 has been submitted for Secretarial review and approval.  NMFS expects to publish and request public comment on the proposed regulations to implement Amendment 14 in the near future.

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

          Dated: May 3, 2001.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 01-11700 Filed 5-8-01; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Parts 86 and 600
        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
        49 CFR Parts 531, 533, 537, and 538
        [EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472; FRL-8966-9; NHTSA-2009-0059]
        RIN 2060-AP58; 2127-AK90
        Public Hearing Locations for the Proposed Rulemaking To Establish Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

          ACTION:
          Notice of public hearings.

          SUMMARY:

          EPA and NHTSA are announcing the location addresses for the joint public hearings to be held for the “Proposed Rulemaking to Establish Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards,” published in the Federal Register on September 28, 2009. This joint proposed rulemaking is consistent with the National Fuel Efficiency Policy announced by President Obama on May 19, 2009, responding to the country's critical need to address global climate change and to reduce oil consumption. As described in the joint proposed rule, EPA is proposing greenhouse gas emissions standards under the Clean Air Act, and NHTSA is proposing Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended. These standards apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, covering model years 2012 through 2016, and represent a harmonized and consistent National Program. The joint proposed rule provides the dates, times, cities, instructions and other information for the public hearings and these details have not changed.

          DATES:

          NHTSA and EPA will jointly hold three public hearings on the following dates: October 21, 2009, in Detroit, Michigan, October 23, 2009 in New York, New York, and October 27, 2009 in Los Angeles, California. The hearings will start at 9 a.m. local time and continue until everyone has had a chance to speak. If you would like to present testimony at the public hearings, we ask that you notify the EPA and NHTSA contact persons listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT at least ten days before the hearing.

          ADDRESSES:
          NHTSA and EPA will jointly hold three public hearings at the following locations: Detroit Metro Airport Marriott, 30559 Flynn Drive, Romulus, Michigan 48174 on October 21, 2009; New York LaGuardia Airport Marriott, 102-05 Ditmars Boulevard, East Elmhurst, New York 11369 on October 23, 2009; and Renaissance Los Angeles Airport Hotel, 9620 Airport Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90045 on October 27, 2009. Please see the proposed rule for addresses and detailed instructions for submitting comments.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          EPA: Tad Wysor, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: 734-214-4332; fax number: 734-214-4816; e-mail address: wysor.tad@epa.gov, or Assessment and Standards Division Hotline; telephone number (734) 214-4636; e-mail address asdinfo@epa.gov. NHTSA: Rebecca Yoon, Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The proposal for which NHTSA and EPA are jointly holding the public hearings was published in the Federal Register on September 28, 2009.1

           The proposed rule provides the dates, times, cities, instructions for how to participate and other information on the public hearings and these details have not changed. If you would like to present testimony at the public hearings, we ask that you notify the EPA and NHTSA contact persons listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT at least ten days before the hearing. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section on “Public Participation” in the proposed rule for more information about the public hearings.2
           Also, please refer to the proposed rule for addresses and detailed instructions for submitting comments.

            1 74 FR 49454, September 28, 2009.

            2 74 FR 49455, September 28, 2009.

        This notice of public hearings further provides the location addresses for the hearings, shown below:

          October 21, 2009: Detroit Metro Airport Marriott, 30559 Flynn Drive, Romulus, Michigan 48174, 734-214-7555.

          October 23, 2009: New York LaGuardia Airport Marriott, 102-05 Ditmars Boulevard, East Elmhurst, New York 11369, 718-565-8900.

          October 27, 2009: Renaissance Los Angeles Airport Hotel, 9620 Airport Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90045, 310-337-2800.

          Dated: October 1, 2009.
          Paul N. Argyropoulos,
          Acting Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency.
          Dated: October 1, 2009.
          Stephen R. Kratzke,
          Associate Administrator for Rulemaking, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

      [FR Doc. E9-24159 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 190909-0024]
        RIN 0648-BI77
        Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Habitat Clam Dredge Exemption Framework

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to implement the New England Fishery Management Council's Habitat Clam Dredge Exemption Framework Adjustment to its Fishery Management Plans. The proposed action is intended to establish areas within the Great South Channel Habitat Management Area where vessels could fish for Atlantic surfclams or mussels with dredge gear, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the Omnibus Habitat Amendment 2. This action is necessary in order for the fishing industry to access part of the surfclam and mussel resource within the Habitat Management Area.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by October 17, 2019.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2019-0043, by either of the following methods:

            Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal.
          1. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-;NMFS-2019-0043,

          2. Click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields
          3. Enter or attach your comments.

          -OR-

            Mail: Submit written comments to Michael Pentony, Regional Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope: “Comments on the Proposed Rule for Habitat Clam Dredge Exemption Framework.”

            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 part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), 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).

          A draft environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared for this action that describes the proposed measures and other considered alternatives, as well as provides an analysis of the impacts of the proposed measures and alternatives. Copies of the specifications document, including the EA and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are available on request from Thomas Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. These documents are also accessible via the internet at www.nefmc.org.

          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 the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395-7285.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Douglas Potts, Fishery Policy Analyst, 978-281-9341.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        The Great South Channel Habitat Management Area (GSC HMA) was created by the final rule to implement the New England Fishery Management Council's Omnibus Habitat Amendment 2 (OHA2) (83 FR 15240; April 9, 2018), which prohibited the use of all mobile bottom-tending fishing gear in the GSC HMA. The GSC HMA contains complex benthic habitat that is important for juvenile cod and other fish species, and it is susceptible to the adverse impacts of fishing gear. The OHA2 included a 1-year delay of the GSC HMA closure that allowed the surfclam fishery to continue fishing with hydraulic clam dredges in the GSC HMA. This delay was intended to give the Council time to determine if a long-term exemption is warranted. The 1-year delay ended on April 9, 2019, and the GSC HMA is now closed to all mobile bottom-tending fishing gear.
        The Council initiated the Habitat Clam Dredge Exemption Framework Adjustment in 2015 as a following action to OHA2. Development of the framework was guided by a problem statement approved by the Council in October 2015:

          The Council intends through this action to identify areas within the Great South Channel and Georges Shoal Habitat Management Areas that are currently fished or contain high energy sand and gravel that could be suitable for a hydraulic clam dredging exemption that balances achieving optimum yield for the surfclam/ocean quahog fishery with the requirement to minimize adverse fishing effects on habitat to the extent practicable and is consistent with the underlying objectives of [OHA2].

        In the final stages of OHA2 development, the Council was also approached by parties interested in developing a mussel dredge fishery in the GSC HMA. Currently there is no Federal mussel fishery management plan.
        The Georges Shoal HMA was disapproved by NMFS, and the framework became solely focused on the GSC HMA. Development of the Habitat Clam Dredge Exemption Framework occurred over several meetings of Council's Habitat Plan Development Team, with input from the Council's Habitat Committee and the full Council. While the primary focus of the framework was an exemption for the existing surfclam fishery, most of the alternatives considered could be implemented with or without the exemption applying to the mussel fishery as well. The Council took final action at its December 2018 meeting selecting preferred alternatives and approving the action for submission to NMFS. This rule proposes management measures necessary to implement the Framework.
        Proposed Measures
        This action would establish three dredge exemption areas (McBlair, Old South, and Fishing Rip) within the GSC HMA where a vessel could potentially fish for surfclams or blue mussels. Tables 1 through 3 contain the coordinates for the proposed exemption areas and are illustrated in Figure 1. Each area would be defined by the following points connected in the order listed by straight lines.

          Table 1—Coordinates for McBlair Dredge Exemption Area

            Point
            Longitude
            Latitude

            1
            69° 49.255′ W
            41° 25.878′ N

            2
            69° 46.951′ W
            41° 25.878′ N

            3
            69° 46.951′ W
            41° 19.34′ N

            4
            69° 49.187′ W
            41° 19.34′ N

            1
            69° 49.255′ W
            41° 25.878′ N

          Table 2—Coordinates for Old South Dredge Exemption Area

            Point
            Longitude
            Latitude

            1
            69° 47′ W
            41° 15′ N

            2
            69° 44′ W
            41° 15′ N

            3
            69° 44.22′ W
            41° 10.432′ N

            4
            69° 45′ W
            41° 7′ N

            5
            69° 47′ W
            41° 7′ N

            6
            69° 47′ W
            41° 11′ N

            7
            69° 49.101′ W
            41° 11′ N

            8
            69° 49.116′ W
            41° 12.5′ N

            9
            69° 47′ W
            41° 12.5′ N

            1
            69° 47′ W
            41° 15′ N

          Table 3—Coordinates for Fishing Rip Dredge Exemption Area

            Point
            Longitude
            Latitude

            1
            69° 28.829′ W
            41° 10.963′ N

            2
            69° 27.106′ W
            41° 10.485′ N

            3
            69° 29.311′ W
            41° 6.699′ N

            4
            69° 27.034′ W
            41° 6.609′ N

            5
            69° 27.376′ W
            41° 3.198′ N

            6
            69° 29.905′ W
            41° 1.297′ N

            7
            69° 32.579′ W
            41° 5.368′ N

            8
            69° 31.193′ W
            41° 7.356′ N

            1
            69° 28.829′ W
            41° 10.963′ N

        These exemption areas were chosen to allow limited access to some historical surfclam fishing grounds while protecting the majority of the HMA. The three exemption areas total only 6.9 percent of the total area of the HMA and do not include the areas most clearly identified as containing complex and vulnerable habitats. Because of the small area being considered for this exemption, this action would not affect the overall conservation benefit of the HMA. The McBlair and Fishing Rip Dredge Exemption Areas would be open to fishing for surfclams or mussels year round. The Old South Dredge Exemption Area would be closed to all mobile bottom-tending gear from November 1 through April 30 and open for surfclam or mussel fishing from May 1 through October 31 each year. The Old South Dredge Exemption Area overlaps with an area identified in OHA2 as a historical cod spawning area. The annual closure from November through April is meant to avoid times when cod are expected to spawn and to reduce the potential for dredge fishing to disturb spawning aggregations of cod.

          EP17SE19.002

        In addition to the proposed exemption areas of McBlair, Old South, and Fishing Rip, the Council tasked its Habitat Plan Development Team to work with the surfclam industry to develop a prioritized list of research needs concerning two other areas of the HMA (Rose and Crown and Davis Bank East). The intent of the Council was to develop an exempted fishing permit program for these areas that could support the potential development of additional exemptions in the future. Industry members have been working with research organizations on potential exempted fishing permits (EFP) to conduct research in these areas. Requests for EFPs will be evaluated consistent with our normal practice and are separate from this rulemaking.
        To facilitate enforcement of the small exemption areas, participating vessels would be required to obtain a letter of authorization (LOA) from the NMFS Regional Administrator. Similar LOAs are used to grant access to specific areas or programs in other fisheries and may be applied for using a common form available from NMFS' Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO). If a vessel violates any of the requirements of the exemption areas, the LOA may be canceled, prohibiting future access to the GSC HMA.
        To receive the LOA, a vessel must hold a Federal commercial surfclam permit, which comes with requirements including reporting each fishing trip, using a vessel monitoring system (VMS), and selling catch exclusively to a federally permitted dealer. The LOA would require the vessel have a NMFS-approved VMS unit that can automatically adjust the frequency of position information sent to NMFS. A list of qualifying VMS units is available from GARFO. While within the GSC HMA, vessels would be subject to an increased VMS position polling rate from once per hour to once every 5 minutes. This would provide finer scale resolution on the location of the vessel and allow NMFS to monitor compliance with the small exemption areas. The increased polling rate would begin automatically as the vessel approaches the GSC HMA and would continue until after the vessel leaves the area. Vessels fishing in the GSC HMA would be required to use new VMS trip declaration codes that would allow law enforcement to know they intend to fish in the GSC HMA for surfclams or blue mussels.

        Vessels fishing for surfclams within the GSC HMA would still be subject to the requirements of the individual transferable quota system and other provisions of the surfclam regulations. This includes restrictions on retention of other species of fish caught incidentally while using hydraulic clam dredge gear, which are typically determined by the other Federal fishing permits the vessel holds.
        To fish for mussels in the GSC HMA, a vessel would be required to hold a surfclam vessel permit. This permit can be obtained from GARFO. By holding a surfclam permit, mussel fishing vessels in the GSC HMA would be subject to permit reporting and monitoring requirements that would not normally apply to vessels fishing for mussels in Federal waters. Mussel fishing vessels would also need to obtain the new LOA and use the VMS trip declaration code for any trip in the GSC HMA. Vessels would be required to use a non-hydraulic mussel dredges (also called a dry dredge), which could not exceed 8 ft (2.4 m) in width. Vessels fishing for mussels could not fish for, harvest, or land any species of fish other than blue mussels. Any violation of permit, reporting, monitoring, or LOA requirements for fishing in the GSC HMA could result in NMFS revoking the vessel's LOA, which would prevent further fishing by that vessel in the HMA.
        Pursuant to section 303(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the Council has deemed that this proposed rule is necessary and appropriate for the purpose of implementing the Habitat Clam Dredge Exemption Framework Adjustment, with the exception of the measure noted below as proposed under the Secretary's authority under section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, we are required to publish proposed rules for comment after preliminarily determining whether they are consistent with applicable law. The Magnuson-Stevens Act permits us to approve, partially approve, or disapprove measures proposed by the Council based only on whether the measures are consistent with the fishery management plan, plan amendment, the Magnuson-Stevens Act and its National Standards, and other applicable law. Otherwise, we must defer to the Council's policy choices. We are seeking comment on the Council's proposed measures in the Habitat Clam Dredge Exemption Framework Adjustment and whether they are consistent with the Council's FMPs and the OHA2, the Magnuson-Stevens Act and its National Standards, and other applicable law.
        Clarification

        This action also proposes a minor modification to the regulations under authority granted the Secretary under section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to ensure that Fishery Management Plans (FMP) are implemented as intended and consistent with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This action proposes to define a “straight line” with regard to regulated areas, as a rhumb line, unless explicitly stated otherwise. When fishery managers develop regulated areas (e.g., scallop access areas or Northeast multispecies closed areas), the areas are defined by a series of points of latitude and longitude connected by straight lines when drawn on a standard nautical chart. Nautical charts use a Mercator projection so straight lines drawn on a chart are lines of constant compass bearing, also known as rhumb lines. To make the regulations as unambiguous as possible, we propose to add this definition and invite the public to comment on this proposal.
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has preliminarily determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the New England Council's FMPs, 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.

        The Council prepared a draft EA for this action that analyzes the impacts of this proposed rule. The EA includes an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this section and in the preamble to this proposed rule. A summary of the RFA analysis follows. A copy of the detailed RFA analysis is available from the Council (see ADDRESSES).
        Description of the Reasons Why Action Is Being Considered
        This action proposes management measures to allow fishing with dredge gear for Atlantic surfclams or blue mussels in three exemption areas within the Great South Channel HMA. The measures seek to minimize to the extent practicable the adverse effects on complex habitat within the HMA by fishing for surfclams and mussels in the area.
        Statement of the Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, This Proposed Rule
        This action is taken under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and regulations at 50 CFR part 648. A complete description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained in the Clam Dredge Exemption Framework document, and elsewhere in the preamble to this proposed rule, and are not repeated here.
        Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which This Proposed Rule Would Apply
        This proposed rule affects small entities engaged in commercial fishing operations in the Federal waters off Southern New England, Georges Bank, and the Gulf of Maine, and permitted to fish for either surfclams or mussels. In 2017, eight large commercial fishing businesses and 377 small commercial fishing businesses held either a surfclam or ocean quahog federal permit. The number of fishermen actively engaged in the surfclam and ocean quahog fishery is much smaller than the number of individuals permitted for those two fisheries. This is because there is an individual transferrable quota associated with both species, meaning only individuals holding or leasing quota can land surfclam and ocean quahog. Over the last 3 years, the number of businesses that have been active in the areas proposed for exemption areas has been between 10 (8 small and 2 large) and 12 (10 small and 2 large).
        Between 10 (2015) and 11 (2016, 2017) vessels were permitted and active in the Massachusetts mussel fishery in the most recent 3-year period, although only one or two are expected to fish in the HMA. The current status of the mussel fishery in the Great South Channel is exploratory, and ownership data is not available from which to assess business size for state-permitted vessels. This situation precludes a more thorough investigation into the number and size of mussel businesses regulated under the Clam Dredge Framework.

        Small businesses have historically generated a higher percentage of their revenue within the Great South Channel HMA and are expected to benefit more from any exemption than large businesses, relatively speaking.

        Description of the Projected Reporting, Record-Keeping, and Other Compliance Requirements of This Proposed Rule
        This action would require an annual letter of authorization for fishermen accessing the Great South Channel HMA exemption areas and each trip into the exemption areas would require vessels use a new Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) trip declaration code and be subject to additional position polling when inside the HMA.
        Federal Rules Which May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With This Proposed Rule
        NMFS is not aware of any relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.
        Description of Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Action Which Accomplish the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes and Which Minimize Any Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities
        This action proposes a set of three discrete exemption areas within the GSC HMA where dredge fishing for surfclams and mussels would be allowed. The Council considered three other options. The Council also evaluated taking no action thereby keeping the entire GSC HMA closed to dredge fishing for surfclams and blue mussels. All of the action alternatives would result in some level of increased revenue for vessels fishing in the exemption areas. While this action does not affect the overall quota for surfclams, the catch rate in the exemption areas is potentially higher than in other open areas. Therefore, the opening of these areas may not affect the total harvest of surfclams, but may improve the efficiency with which part of the quota is harvested. Moreover, within the affected entities, some may have had a disproportionate historic harvest from areas now closed to hydraulic dredges in the GSC HMA. In choosing a preferred alternative, the Council considered the tradeoffs between short-term economic benefit to the surfclam and mussel industries and potential long-term benefit to other fisheries through the protection of essential fish habitat from the adverse impacts of fishing gear.
        This proposed rule contains an addition to a collection-of-information requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and which has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under control number 0648-0202. Public reporting burden for obtaining a letter of authorization to fish within the GSC HMA is estimated to average five 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. The public reporting burden for increasing the VMS location data from once per hour to once every five minutes is estimated to cost participating fishermen $0.84 per hour while a vessel is within 3 nm (5.6 km) of the HMA and subject to the higher position polling rate. Based on historical fishing effort, this would translate to an average annual cost of $8,639 spread across all vessels active in the HMA.

        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 the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office at the ADDRESSES above, and by email 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 648
          Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: September 9, 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 648 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

        1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:

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

        2. In § 648.2, add, in alphabetical order, a definition for “Straight line.”

          § 648.2
          Definitions.

            Straight line, with regard to regulated areas, means a rhumb line, unless explicitly stated otherwise.

        3. In 648.370, revise paragraph (h)(2) to read as follows:

          § 648.370
          Habitat Management Areas.

          (h)  * * *
          (2) Atlantic Surfclam and Mussel Dredge Exemption Areas. (i) Dredge Exemption Area Requirements. A vessel may fish in one or more of the Dredge Exemption Areas below, provided the area is open and the vessel meets the following requirements:
          (A) Holds a federal Atlantic surfclam vessel permit.
          (B) Has been issued a Letter of Authorization to fish in the Great South Channel HMA from the Regional Administrator.
          (C) Has a NMFS-approved VMS unit capable of automatically transmitting a signal indicating the vessel's accurate position at least once every 5 minutes while in or near the Great South Channel HMA.
          (D) Declares each trip into the HMA through the VMS and fishes exclusively inside HMA dredge exemption areas on such trips.
          (E) When fishing for surfclams in an HMA exemption area, uses only hydraulic clam dredge gear.
          (F) When fishing for mussels in an HMA exemption area, any dredge on board the vessel does not exceed 8 ft (2.4 m), measured at the widest point in the bail of the dredge, and the vessel does not possess, or land any species of fish other than blue mussels.
          (ii) McBlair Dredge Exemption Area. (A) The McBlair Dredge Exemption Area is defined by the following points connected in the order listed by straight lines:

            McBlair Dredge Exemption Area

              Point
              Longitude
              Latitude

              1
              69° 49.255′ W
              41° 25.878′ N

              2
              69° 46.951′ W
              41° 25.878′ N

              3
              69° 46.951′ W
              41° 19.34′ N

              4
              69° 49.187′ W
              41° 19.34′ N

              1
              69° 49.255′ W
              41° 25.878′ N

          (B) The McBlair Dredge Exemption Area is open year-round.
          (iii) Old South Dredge Exemption Area. (A) The Old South Dredge Exemption Area is defined by the following points connected in the order listed by straight lines:

            Old South Dredge Exemption Area

              Point
              Longitude
              Latitude

              1
              69° 47′ W
              41° 15′ N

              2
              69° 44′ W
              41° 15′ N

              3
              69° 44.22′ W
              41° 10.432′ N

              4
              69° 45′ W
              41° 7′ N

              5
              69° 47′ W
              41° 7′ N

              6
              69° 47′ W
              41° 11′ N

              7
              69° 49.101′ W
              41° 11′ N

              8
              69° 49.116′ W
              41° 12.5′ N

              9
              69° 47′ W
              41° 12.5′ N

              1
              69° 47′ W
              41° 15′ N

          (B) The Old South Dredge Exemption Area is open from May 1-October 31, and closed to all mobile bottom-tending gear November 1-April 30.
          (iv) Fishing Rip Dredge Exemption Area. (A) The Fishing Rip Dredge Exemption Area is defined by the following points connected in the order listed by straight lines:

            Fishing Rip Dredge Exemption Area

              Point
              Longitude
              Latitude

              1
              69° 28.829′ W
              41° 10.963′ N

              2
              69° 27.106′ W
              41° 10.485′ N

              3
              69° 29.311′ W
              41° 6.699′ N

              4
              69° 27.034′ W
              41° 6.609′ N

              5
              69° 27.376′ W
              41° 3.198′ N

              6
              69° 29.905′ W
              41° 1.297′ N

              7
              69° 32.579′ W
              41° 5.368′ N

              8
              69° 31.193′ W
              41° 7.356′ N

              1
              69° 28.829′ W
              41° 10.963′ N

          (B) The Fishing Rip Dredge Exemption Area is open year-round.

      [FR Doc. 2019-19815 Filed 9-16-19; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        [Docket No. 051114298-5298-01; I.D. 110105C]
        RIN 0648-AT12
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Gulf of Mexico Commercial Grouper Fishery; Trip Limit

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS issues this proposed rule to implement a regulatory amendment 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). This proposed rule would establish a 6,000-lb (2,722-kg) commercial trip limit for shallow-water and deep-water grouper, combined, in the exclusive economic zone of the Gulf of Mexico. The intended effect of this proposed rule is to minimize the effects of derby fishing and prolong the fishing season.

          DATES:
          Written comments on the proposed rule must be received no later than 5 p.m., eastern time, on December 7, 2005.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on the proposed rule by any of the following methods:
          • E-mail: 0648-AT12.Proposed@noaa.gov. Include in the subject line the following document identifier: 0648-AT12.
          • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: Andy Strelcheck, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
          • Fax: 727-824-5308; Attention: Andy Strelcheck.

          Copies of the regulatory amendment, which includes a Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and an Environmental Assessment (EA), may be obtained from the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 2203 N. Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607; telephone: 813-348-1630; fax: 813-348-1711; e-mail: gulfcouncil@gulfcouncil.org. Copies of the regulatory amendment may also be downloaded from the Council's website at www.gulfcouncil.org.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Andy Strelcheck, telephone: 727-824-5374; fax: 727-824-5308; e-mail: andy.stelcheck@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and is implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
        On July 15, 2004 (69 FR 33315, June 15, 2004), NMFS implemented Secretarial Amendment 1 to the FMP to establish a red grouper rebuilding plan, including a 5.31 million-lb (2.42 million-kg), gutted weight, commercial quota and a 1.25 million-lb (0.57 million-kg), gutted weight, recreational target catch level for red grouper. Secretarial Amendment 1 also reduced the commercial quotas for deep-water grouper (i.e., speckled hind and yellowedge, misty, warsaw, and snowy grouper) and shallow-water grouper (i.e., all grouper other than deep-water grouper, goliath grouper, and Nassau grouper and including scamp before the quota for shallow-water grouper is reached). In 2004, the commercial deep-water grouper and shallow-water grouper quotas were reached prior to the end of the fishing year, and the fisheries were closed on July 15, 2004 (69 FR 41433, July 9, 2004), and November 15, 2004 (69 FR 65092, November 10, 2004), respectively. In November 2004, the Council, at the request of representatives of the commercial grouper fishing industry, asked NMFS to develop an emergency or interim rule establishing trip limits for the commercial grouper fishery in 2005. Trip limits, which began at 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) and stepped down to 7,500 lb (3,402 kg) and then to 5,500 lb (2,495 kg) at defined trigger points, were implemented by NMFS through an emergency rule that was effective from March 3 through August 16, 2005 (70 FR 8037, February 17, 2005). NMFS extended the emergency rule and trip limits for an additional 180 days effective August 17, 2005, through February 12, 2006 (70 FR 48323, August 17, 2005). These trip limits were implemented to prolong the shallow-water grouper and deep-water grouper fishing seasons in 2005 and to reduce the adverse effects associated with derby fishing. However, the emergency trip limits were not restrictive enough to achieve the intended objectives. In fact, the deep-water and shallow-water grouper fisheries closed earlier in 2005 (June 23, 2005, and October 10, 2005, respectively) than they had in 2004.
        The Council prepared a regulatory amendment to evaluate alternatives and establish more permanent trip limits for the commercial grouper fishery. After considering the effectiveness of existing trip limits, management alternatives, and public testimony, the Council adopted a 6,000-lb (2,722-kg) commercial trip limit for shallow-water grouper and deep-water grouper, combined. This proposed rule would implement the 6,000-lb (2,722-kg) trip limit. To maximize the effectiveness of this more restrictive trip limit, the Council and NMFS have agreed the existing trip limits implemented via emergency rule (70 FR 48323, August 17, 2005) would terminate upon implementation of the 6,000-lb (2,722-kg) trip limit proposed in this rule.
        Classification
        NMFS has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the FMP and preliminarily determined that the rule is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other applicable laws.
        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. 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 analysis follows.
        This proposed rule would establish a 6,000-lb (2,722-kg) trip limit for the commercial grouper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. The purpose for this regulatory amendment is to reduce the adverse socioeconomic effects of derby fishing in the commercial sector and prolong the fishing season. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act provides the statutory basis for the proposed rule.
        No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been identified.
        An estimated 1,129 vessels were permitted to engage in commercial fishing for Gulf reef fish (which include grouper) in early 2004, down from 1,718 vessels in 1993. Although a permit moratorium has limited access in this fishery since 1992, transfer of permits is not restricted. Those seeking to enter the fishery can purchase a permit from those seeking to exit the fishery, provided they meet income and other requirements. However, total participation in terms of both the number of permits and the number of vessels landing Gulf reef fish has consistently declined since 1993.
        An estimated 1,157 vessels had permits to fish commercially for Gulf reef fish from 2002-2004, and 1,021 vessels had historical, logbook-reported landings of Gulf reef fish. This total includes 928 vessels with landings of Gulf grouper, for which the median estimated gross revenue for all reported landings of fish was approximately $20,000 per vessel per year, and for which the maximum revenue ranged from $478,000-$543,000. For the longline fleet (162 vessels per year, on average), the median annual gross revenue ranged from $96,000-$102,000 (84-90 percent from grouper). The handline fleet (765 vessels per year, on average) had median annual gross revenue of under $17,000 (44-48 percent from grouper). Some vessels use both gears, so the numbers of vessels cannot be added across gear types.
        For the 928 vessels with reported landings of Gulf grouper, historical fishery performance resulted in estimated annual average gross revenue of $46 million for all logbook-reported fish in 2002-2004. This includes gross revenue of $39 million for all fish on trips with grouper landings ($25 million from red grouper). The net revenue for these trips was approximately $29 million (annual averages per vessel for 928 vessels are $41,000 for gross revenue and $31,000 for net revenue). Net revenue for the commercial fishing sector, computed as trip revenue minus trip costs, includes returns to all labor and capital.
        Simulation of fishery performance under status quo conditions produced estimates that are slightly lower than historical fishery performance: gross revenue of approximately $37 million for all fish on trips with grouper landings and $27 million for net revenue (annual averages per vessel for 922 vessels are $40,000 for gross revenue and $29,000 for net revenue). Projected net revenue is approximately $10.7 million for the longline fleet (average, $66,000 per vessel per year for 161 vessels), and $14.5 million for the vertical line fleet (average, $19,000 per vessel per year for 748 vessels).
        Between 1997-2000, there were on average 123 reef fish dealers actively buying and selling in the grouper market. Of these, 101 dealers (82 percent) sold more than $30,000 per year worth of domestic grouper on a regular basis. These dealers may hold multiple types of permits. Because the extent of business operation for these dealers is unknown, it is not possible to determine what percentage of their business comes from grouper. Average employment information per reef fish dealer is not known, but total employment in 1997 for reef fish processors in the Southeast was estimated at approximately 700 individuals, both part and full time. It is assumed that all processors must be dealers, yet a dealer need not be a processor. Therefore, total dealer employment is expected to be slightly more than 700 individuals. Since none of the reef fish processors meet the SBA employment threshold, it is unlikely that any of the dealers will meet that threshold.
        The proposed rule would not change current reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements under the FMP. These requirements include qualification criteria for the commercial permits, landing reports for vessels with commercial permits, and participation in additional data collection programs if selected by NMFS. All of the information elements required for these requirements are standard elements essential to the successful operation of a fishing business and should, therefore, already be collected and maintained as standard operating practice by the business. The requirements do not require professional skills and, therefore, are deemed not to be onerous.
        The Small Business Administration defines a small business in the commercial fishery sector as a firm that is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation, and has annual receipts up to $3.5 million per year. For support industries, the appropriate thresholds are a firm with fewer than 500 employees in the case of fish processors, or fewer than 100 employees in the case of fish dealers. Given the profiles presented above, it is determined that all commercial fishing entities and dealers that will be affected by the proposed action are small business entities. Because all said entities would be potentially affected, it is determined that the proposed action will affect a substantial number of small entities.
        The outcome of “significant economic impact” can be ascertained by examining two issues: disproportionality and profitability. The disproportionality question is do the regulations place a substantial number of small entities at a significant competitive disadvantage to large entities? All the commercial fishing or dealer entities affected by the proposed rule are considered small entities, so the issue of disproportionality does not arise in the present case. The profitability question is do the regulations significantly reduce profit for a substantial number of small entities? The proposed rule is projected to reduce net revenues by $760,000 to $1.09 million for the bottom longline sector. Compared with projected annual net revenue of $10.7 million for this sector under the status quo ($66,000 per vessel per year for 161 vessels), the projected net revenue reduction equates to approximately $4,700-$6,700, or approximately 7-10 percent, per vessel per year, on average.
        For the vertical line sector, the proposed rule is projected to increase net revenues by $81,000-$112,000 per year. Compared with projected annual net revenue of $14.5 million for this sector under the status quo ($19,000 per vessel per year for 748 vessels), the projected increase in net revenue equates to approximately $100-$150 per vessel, or less than a 1 percent increase.

        The proposed commercial trip limits are expected to reduce the adverse but unquantifiable economic effects of derby fishing that are expected to develop under the status quo. Although the direct impacts of derby fishing cannot be quantified using current data and models, they are expected to be substantial, and reduction of those derby effects is expected to mitigate any losses in net revenue to the fishery associated with the implementation of trip limits.
        Five alternatives, including the status quo, were considered relative to the proposed commercial action. The status quo alternative would eliminate the short-term adverse impacts of the proposed action but would not address the potential development of a derby fishery and would not, therefore, achieve the Council's objectives.
        A second alternative to the proposed action would establish a step-down trip limit consisting of trip limits of 10,000, 7,500, and 5,500 lb (4,536, 3,402, and 2,495 kg), gutted weight, based on target dates and accumulated landing totals. This alternative, while resulting in lower short-term reductions in net revenues relative to the proposed action, does not appear to sufficiently constrain commercial landings, as evidenced by 2005 fishery performance. Therefore, this alternative is not sufficient to lessen derby conditions and reduce the length of the quota closure.
        The third alternative to the proposed action would start the commercial trip limit at 7,500 lb (3,402 kg) with step-down to 5,000 lb (2,268 kg). This alternative would potentially reduce the short-term reduction in net revenues relative to the proposed action. However, based on preliminary 2005 fishery performance, the starting limit appears insufficient to counter derby pressure.
        The fourth alternative would also start with an initial trip limit of 7,500 lb (3,402 kg) with a step-down to 3,500 lb (1,588 kg). The short-term adverse impacts of this alternative, however, exceed those of the proposed action.
        The fifth alternative to the proposed commercial action would begin the fishery with a 4,000-lb (1,814-kg) trip limit and allow the trip limit to either be increased, decreased, or remain the same depending upon fishery performance. Although this scenario cannot be fully analyzed due to the absence of a clearly specified step up/down decision rule, the initial limit is so low that it is expected to generate excessive negative impacts, particularly on the bottom longline sector.
        Copies of the IRFA are available from the Council (see ADDRESSES).

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

          Dated: November 17, 2005.
          John Oliver,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, 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 § 622.44, introductory text and paragraph (g) are revised to read as follows:

          § 622.44
          Commercial trip limits.
          Commercial trip limits are limits on the amount of the applicable species that may be possessed on board or landed, purchased, or sold from a vessel per day. A person who fishes in the EEZ may not combine a trip limit specified in this section with any trip or possession limit applicable to state waters. A species subject to a trip limit specified in this section taken in the EEZ may not be transferred at sea, regardless of where such transfer takes place, and such species may not be transferred in the EEZ. For fisheries governed by this part, commercial trip limits apply as follows (all weights are round or eviscerated weights unless specified otherwise):

          (g) Gulf deep-water and shallow-water grouper, combined. For vessels operating under the quotas in § 622.42(a)(1)(ii) or (a)(1)(iii), the trip limit for Gulf deep-water and shallow-water grouper combined is 6,000 lb (2,722 kg), gutted weight. However, when the quotas in § 622.42(a)(1)(ii) or (a)(1)(iii) are reached and the respective fishery is closed, the commercial trip limit for the species subject to the closure is zero. (See § 622.42(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(1)(iii) for the species included in the deep-water and shallow-water grouper categories, respectively.)

      [FR Doc. 05-23102 Filed 11-17-05; 2:58 pm]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 170818784-7784-01]
        RIN 0648-XF641
        Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Surfclam and Ocean Quahog Fishery; Proposed 2018-2020 Fishing Quotas

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes status quo commercial quotas for the Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog fisheries for 2018 and projected status quo quotas for 2019 and 2020. This action is necessary to establish allowable harvest levels of Atlantic surfclams and ocean quahogs that will prevent overfishing and allow harvesting of optimum yield. This action would also continue to suspend the minimum shell size for Atlantic surfclams for the 2018 fishing year. The intended effect of this action is to provide benefit to the industry from stable quotas to maintain a consistent market.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by December 26, 2017.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2017-0118, by any of the following methods:
          • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to John K. Bullard, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope: “Comments on the 2018-2020 Surflcam/Ocean Quahog Specifications.”

            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 part of the public record and will generally be posted to www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publically accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
          Copies of the Environmental Assessment (EA), Supplemental Information Request (SIR), and other supporting documents for these proposed specifications are available from the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 North State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Erin Wilkinson, Fishery Management Specialist, 301-427-8561.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

         The Atlantic Surfclam and Ocean Quahog Fishery Management Plan (FMP) requires that NMFS, in consultation with the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, specify quotas for surfclam and ocean quahog for up to a three-year period, with annual review. It is the policy of the Council that the catch limit selected allow for sustainable fishing to continue at that level for at least 10 years for surfclams, and 30 years for ocean quahogs. In addition to this, the Council policy also considers the economic impact of the quotas. Regulations implementing Amendment 10 to the FMP (63 FR 27481; May 19, 1998) added Maine ocean quahogs (locally known as Maine mahogany quahogs) to the management unit and provided for a small artisanal fishery for ocean quahogs in the waters north of 43°50′ N. lat, with an annual quota within a range of 17,000 to 100,000 Maine bu (0.6 to 3.52 million L). As specified in Amendment 10, the Maine ocean quahog quota is allocated separately from the quota specified for the ocean quahog fishery. Regulations implementing Amendment 13 to the FMP (68 FR 69970; December 16, 2003) established the authority to propose multi-year quotas with an annual quota review to be conducted by the Council to determine if the multi-year quota specifications remain appropriate for each year. NMFS then publishes the annual final quotas in the Federal Register. The fishing quotas must ensure overfishing will not occur. In recommending these quotas, the Council considered the most recent stock assessments and other relevant scientific information.
        In June 2017, the Council voted to recommend maintaining for 2018-2020 the status quo quota levels of 5.33 million bu (288 million L) for the ocean quahog fishery, 3.40 million bu (181 million L) for the Atlantic surfclam fishery, and 100,000 Maine bu (3.52 million L) for the Maine ocean quahog fishery.

        We propose to implement the Council's recommended specifications for 2018 and project that the Council's recommended specifications for 2019 and 2020 will be implemented in those years. Because the Council will review available information in the interim years and adjustments to quotas may occur to account for annual catch limit (ACL) overages, the 2019 and 2020 quotas proposed are considered the projected specifications. We will provide notice in the Federal Register before the 2019 and 2020 fishing years announcing the final quotas being implemented.
        Tables 1 and 2 show proposed and projected quotas for the 2018-2020 Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog fishery.

          Table 1—Proposed Atlantic Surfclam Measures

            Atlantic surfclam
            Year
            Allowable biological
              catch (ABC)
              (mt)

            Annual catch limit (ACL)(mt)

            Annual catch target (ACT)
              (mt)

            Commercial quota

            2017 (current)
            44,469
            44,469
            29,364
            3.4 million bushels (181 million L).

            2018
            29,363
            29,363
            29,363
            3.4 million bushels (181 million L).

            2019-2020 (Projected)
            29,363
            29,363
            29,363
            3.4 million bushels (181 million L).

          Table 2—Proposed Ocean Quahog Measures

            Ocean quahog
            Year
            ABC(mt)

            ACL(mt)

            ACT(mt)

            Commercial quota

            2017 (current)
            26,100
            26,100
            26,035
            Maine quota: 100,000 Maine bu (3.52 million L) Non-Maine quota: 5.33 million bu (288 million L).

            2018
            44,695
            44,695
            25,924
            Maine quota: 100,000 Maine bu (3.52 million L) Non-Maine quota: 5.33 million bu (288 million L).

            2019 (Projected)
            46,146
            46,146
            25,924
            Maine quota: 100,000 Maine bu (3.52 million L) Non-Maine quota: 5.33 million bu (288 million L).

            2020 (Projected)
            45,783
            45,783
            25,924
            Maine quota: 100,000 Maine bu (3.52 million L) Non-Maine quota: 5.33 million bu (288 million L).

        The Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog quotas are specified in “industry” bushels of 1.88 ft3 (53.24 L) per bushel, while the Maine ocean quahog quota is specified in Maine bushels of 1.24 ft3 (35.24 L) per bushel. Because Maine ocean quahogs are the same species as ocean quahogs, both fisheries are assessed under the same overfishing definition. When the two quota amounts (ocean quahog and Maine ocean quahog) are added, the total allowable harvest is below the level that would result in overfishing for the entire stock. The 2018-2020 quotas are nearly identical (within 100 mt) to those implemented in the 2014-2016 specifications, which were carried over for 2017.

        Surfclam
        The proposed 2018-2020 status quo surfclam quota was developed in June 2017 after reviewing the results of the Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW) 61 for Atlantic surfclam. The surfclam quota recommendation is consistent with the SAW 61 finding that the Atlantic surfclam stock is not overfished, and overfishing is not occurring. Based on this information, the Council is recommending, and NMFS is proposing, to maintain the status quo surfclam quota of 3.40 million bu (181 million L) for 2018-2020 (see table 1).
        Ocean Quahog
        Consistent with the Council recommendation, we are proposing the following for ocean quahog. The proposed 2018-2020 non-Maine quota for ocean quahog is the status quo quota of 5.33 million bu (288 million L).
        The 2018-2020 proposed quota for Maine ocean quahogs is the status quo level of 100,000 Maine bu (3.52 million L). The proposed quota represents the maximum allowable quota under the FMP.
        Surfclam Minimum Size
        In June 2017, the Council voted to recommend that the minimum size limit for surfclams continue to be suspended for 2018. The minimum size limit has been suspended annually since 2005. Minimum size suspension may not be taken unless discard, catch, and biological sampling data indicate that 30 percent or more of the Atlantic surfclam resource have a shell length less than 4.75 inches (120 mm), and the overall reduced size is not attributable to harvest from beds where growth of the individual clams has been reduced because of density-dependent factors.
        Commercial surfclam data for 2017 were analyzed to determine the percentage of surfclams that were smaller than the minimum size requirement. The analysis indicated that 10.4 percent of the overall commercial landings, to date, were composed of surfclams that were less than the 4.75-inch (120-mm) default minimum size. Based on the information available, the Regional Administrator concurs with the Council's recommendation, and is proposing to suspend the minimum size limit for Atlantic surfclams in the upcoming fishing year (January 1 through December 31, 2018).
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Atlantic Surfclam and Ocean Quahog FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        This action does not introduce any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. This proposed rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules.
        This proposed rule is exempt from the requirements of E.O. 12866.
        This proposed rule is not expected to be an E.O. 13771 regulatory action because this proposed rule is not significant under E.O. 12866.
        The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 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 certification is as follows:
        For Regulatory Flexibility Analysis purposes only, NMFS has established a uniform size standard for small businesses, including their affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing (see 50 CFR 200.2). A business primarily engaged in commercial fishing 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 of less than $11 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide. In 2016, 349 fishing firms held at least one surfclam or ocean quahog permit. Using the $11 million cutoff for firms, there are 341 entities that are small and 8 that are large. In order to provide a more accurate count and description of the small directly regulated entities, landings data were evaluated to select only firms that were active in either the surfclam or the ocean quahog fishery. There are 24 active fishing firms, of which 22 are small entities and 2 are large entities.
        Because the proposed quotas are status quo, the action would have no impacts on the way the fishery operates. These measures are expected to provide similar fishing opportunities in 2018-2020 when compared to earlier years. As such, revenue changes are not expected in 2018-2020 when compared to landings and revenues in 2017. Therefore, adoption of the proposed specifications are not expected to have impacts on entities participating in the fishery if landings are similar to those that occurred in 2017.
        Maintaining the suspension of the surfclam minimum shell length requirement would result in no change when compared to 2014-2016. The minimum shell length requirement has been suspended each year since 2005. The proposed action would have no impact on the way the fishery operates, and is not expected to disproportionately affect small entities.
        As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

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

          Dated: December 6, 2017.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Progams, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2017-26577 Filed 12-8-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [I.D. 091900B]
        RIN 0648-A027
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Rebuilding Overfished Fisheries

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability of an amendment to a fishery management plan; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted for Secretarial review Amendment 14 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs (FMP).  This amendment contains a rebuilding plan for the overfished stock of Bering Sea snow crab.  It is an action intended to ensure that conservation and management measures continue to be based upon the best scientific information available and enhance the Council’s ability to achieve, on a continuing basis, optimum yield from fisheries under its authority.

          DATES:
          Comments on the amendment must be submitted on or before November 28, 2000.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments may be submitted to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK  99802-1668, Attn:  Lori Gravel.  Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 907-586-7465.  Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or Internet.  Courier or hand delivery of comments may be made to NMFS in the Federal Building, Room 453, Juneau, AK  99801. Copies of Amendment 14 to the FMP, and the Environmental Assessment prepared for the amendment are available from the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 West 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK  99501-2252; telephone 907-271-2809.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Gretchen Harrington, 907-586-7228 or gretchen.harrington@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        NMFS declared the Bering Sea stock of snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) overfished on September 24, 1999, because the spawning stock biomass was below the minimum stock size threshold defined in Amendment 7 to the FMP (64 FR 11390, March 9, 1999).  Amendment 7 specified objective and measurable criteria for identifying when all of the crab fisheries covered by the FMP are overfished or when overfishing is occurring.
        On September 24, 1999, NMFS notified the Council that the stock was overfished (64 FR 54791, October 8, 1999).  The Council then took action to develop a rebuilding plan within 1 year of notification as required by section 304(e)(3) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act  (Magnuson-Stevens Act).  In June 2000, the Council adopted Amendment 14, the rebuilding plan, to accomplish the purposes outlined in the national standard guidelines to rebuild the overfished stock.  Amendment 14 specifies a time period for rebuilding the stock intended to satisfy the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.  Under the rebuilding plan, the Bering Sea snow crab stock is estimated to rebuild, with a 50 percent probability, within 10 years.  The stock will be considered “rebuilt” when it attains the maximum sustainable yield stock size level for 2 consecutive years.
        The rebuilding plan consists of a framework that references the State of Alaska’s harvest strategy, bycatch control measures, and habitat protection measures.  The plan uses the harvest strategy developed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.  The harvest strategy was reviewed and adopted by the Alaska Board of Fisheries.  Section 8.3 of the FMP defers development of harvest strategies to the State of Alaska, with oversight by NMFS and the Council.  The rebuilding harvest strategy should result in more spawning biomass because more large male crab would be conserved and fewer juveniles and females would die due to incidental catch and discard mortality.  More spawning biomass would be expected to produce larger year-classes when environmental conditions are favorable.  Protection of habitat and reduction of bycatch may reduce mortality of juvenile crabs, thus allowing a higher percentage of each year-class to contribute to spawning and future landings.

        The Council prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for Amendment 14 that describes the management background, the purpose and need for action, the management alternatives, and the environmental and the socio-economic impacts of the alternatives.  A copy of the EA can be obtained from the Council (see ADDRESSES).

        The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that each regional fishery management council submit each FMP or FMP amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval.  The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an FMP or FMP amendment, immediately publish a notification in the Federal Register that the amendment is available for public review and comment.  This action constitutes such notice for FMP Amendment 14.  NMFS will consider the public comments received during the comment period in determining whether to approve this FMP amendment.  To be considered, a comment must be received by close of business on the last day of the comment period (see DATES), regardless of the comment’s postmark or transmission date.

          Dated:   September 25, 2000.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 00-25036 Filed 9-28-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 1510-22-S


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 73
        [MB Docket No. 21-10; RM-11873; DA 21-41; FR ID 17400]
        Television Broadcasting Services Jefferson City, Missouri

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          The Commission has before it a petition for rulemaking filed by KRCG Licensee, LLC, (Licensee), licensee of KRCG, channel 12, Jefferson City, Missouri, requesting the substitution of channel 29 for channel 12 at Jefferson City in the DTV Table of Allotments. The Licensee states that the Commission has recognized that VHF channels have certain propagation characteristics which may cause reception issues for some viewers, and also that reception of VHF signals require larger antennas that are generally not well suited to the mobile applications expected under flexible use, relative to UHF channels. KRCG has received numerous complaints from viewers unable to receive the Station's over-the-air signal, despite being able to receive signals from other stations and that its channel substitution proposal will result in more effective building penetration for indoor antenna reception and will also greatly improve the Station's ability to provide ATSC 3.0 service to homes, vehicles and portable devices, etc. Licensee further states that operation on channel 29 will not result in any predicted loss of service and would result in a substantial increase in signal receivability for KRCG viewers.

          DATES:
          Comments must be filed on or before March 22, 2021 and reply comments on or before April 5, 2021.

          ADDRESSES:
          Federal Communications Commission, Office of the Secretary, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve counsel for petitioner as follows: Paul A. Cicelski, Esq., Lerman Senter PLLC, 2001 L Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC, 20036.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Joyce Bernstein, Media Bureau, at (202) 418-1647; or Joyce Bernstein, Media Bureau, at Joyce.Bernstein@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 21-10; RM-11873; DA 21-41, adopted January 12, 2021, and released January 12, 2021. The full text of this document is available for download at https://www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request materials in accessible formats (braille, large print, computer diskettes, or audio recordings), please send an email to FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Government Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (VOICE), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

        This document does not contain information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, do not apply to this proceeding.
        Members of the public should note that all ex parte contacts are prohibited from the time a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is issued to the time the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are, however, exceptions to this prohibition, which can be found in Section 1.1204(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a).
        See Sections 1.415 and 1.420 of the Commission's rules for information regarding the proper filing procedures for comments, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

          List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
          Television.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Thomas Horan,
          Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.

          Editorial Note:
           This document was received at the Office of the Federal Register on January 19, 2021.

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

          PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICE

        1. The authority citation for part 73 is revised to read as follows:

          Authority:
          47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339.

        2. In § 73.622 in paragraph (i) amend the Post-Transition Table of DTV Allotments under Missouri by revising the entry for Jefferson to read as follows:

          § 73.622
          Digital television table of allotments.

          (i)  * * *

              Community
              Channel No.

              *    *    *    *    *

                MISSOURI

              *    *    *    *    *

              Jefferson City
              20, 29

              *    *    *    *    *

      [FR Doc. 2021-01492 Filed 2-17-21; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P