        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 82
        [EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0084; FRL-10011-84-OAR]
        RIN 2060-AU80
        Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Extension of the Laboratory and Analytical Use Exemption for Essential Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:

          The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revise regulations governing the production and import of class I ozone-depleting substances in the United States to extend indefinitely the global essential laboratory and analytical use exemption. This exemption currently expires on December 31, 2021. This change would allow for continued production and import of class I substances in the United States solely for laboratory and analytical uses that have not been identified by the EPA as nonessential. This action is proposed under the Clean Air Act and is consistent with a decision by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer to extend the global laboratory and analytical use exemption indefinitely beyond 2021.

          DATES:

          Comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking must be received on or before October 6, 2020. Any party requesting a public hearing must notify the contact listed below under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 5 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on August 12, 2020. If a public hearing is requested, the EPA would hold a virtual hearing on August 24, 2020. If a hearing is requested, the date, time, and other relevant information for a hearing will be available at https://www.epa.gov/ods-phaseout/phaseout-exemptions-laboratory-and-analytical-uses.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0084, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room was closed to public visitors on March 31, 2020, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov or email, as there may be a delay in processing mail, and hand deliveries may not be accepted. For further information on EPA Docket Center services and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

          Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (e.g., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Jeremy Arling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Stratospheric Protection Division, telephone number: 202-343-9055; or email address: arling.jeremy@epa.gov. You may also visit the EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/ods-phaseout/phaseout-exemptions-laboratory-and-analytical-uses for further information.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. General Information
        A. Does this proposed action apply to me?
        You may be potentially affected by this proposal if you manufacture, process, import, or distribute into commerce certain ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and mixtures. Potentially affected entities may include but are not limited to:

          • Basic chemical manufacturing (NAICS code 3251)
          • Pharmaceutical preparations manufacturing businesses (NAICS code 325412)
          • Other chemical and allied production merchant wholesalers (NAICS code 424690)
          • Environmental consulting services (NAICS code 541620)
          • Research and development in the physical, engineering, and life sciences (NAICS code 54171)
          • Medical laboratories (NAICS code 621511)

        This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this section could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
        B. What action is the Agency proposing?
        The EPA is proposing to revise regulations governing the production and import of class I 1
           ozone-depleting substances (ODS) in the United States to extend indefinitely the global essential laboratory and analytical use exemption (referred to hereafter as the “L&A exemption”). Laboratory distributors currently supply around 1,000 laboratories, and consumption 2
           for laboratory use was approximately 4.4 ODP-weighted metric tons in 2018 under the L&A exemption.3

           The EPA is proposing this action under the Clean Air Act (CAA) following a recent decision by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol) to extend the global L&A exemption indefinitely.4
           The global exemption is implemented domestically through the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 82 subpart A and is currently in effect in the United States through December 31, 2021. The change proposed in this notice would allow for continued production and import of class I ODS in the United States, after that date, for laboratory and analytical uses that have not been identified by the EPA as nonessential.

            1 Under the CAA, certain ODS are classified as “class I” substances. Class I substances are listed in Appendix A to 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. This includes Groups I, II, III, IV, and V under the Montreal Protocol.

            2 Consumption is defined in § 82.3 as production plus imports minus exports of a controlled substance (other than transshipments or used controlled substances).

            3 These data are available in the docket to this rule as well as on the Montreal Protocol's Ozone Secretariat's Data Centre web page: https://ozone.unep.org/countries/data-table.

            4 Decision XXXI/5: Laboratory and Analytical Use

        C. What is the Agency's authority for this proposed action?

        The CAA grants the EPA the authority to implement the Montreal Protocol's phaseout schedules in the United States. CAA section 604 requires the EPA to issue regulations phasing out production and consumption of class I ODS according to a prescribed schedule. The EPA's phaseout regulations for class I ODS are codified at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A.
        II. Background of the Laboratory and Analytical Use Exemption
        The United States was one of the original signatories to the 1987 Montreal Protocol and ratified it on April 12, 1988. After ratification, Congress enacted, and President George H.W. Bush signed into law, the CAA Amendments of 1990, which included Title VI on Stratospheric Ozone Protection, codified as 42 U.S.C. Chapter 85, Subchapter VI, to ensure, among other things, that the United States could satisfy its obligations under the Montreal Protocol.
        The Montreal Protocol is a multinational environmental agreement to protect Earth's ozone layer by phasing out the consumption and the production of most chemicals that deplete it. The Montreal Protocol provides a set of schedules to phase out ODS and also provides for mechanisms to establish certain specific and limited exemptions. For most class I ODS, the Parties may agree to grant exemptions to the ban on production and import of ODS for uses that they determine to be “essential.” For example, with respect to chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), Article 2A(4) of the Montreal Protocol provides that the phaseout will apply “save to the extent that the Parties decide to permit the level of production or consumption that is necessary to satisfy uses agreed by them to be essential.” Similar language appears in the control provisions for other ODS, such as halons (Article 2B), carbon tetrachloride (Article 2D), and methyl chloroform (Article 2E). As defined by Decision IV/25 of the Parties, “use of a controlled substance should qualify as `essential' only if: it is necessary for the health, safety or is critical for the functioning of society (encompassing cultural and intellectual aspects); and there are no available technically and economically feasible alternatives or substitutes that are acceptable from the standpoint of environment and health.” In addition, Annex II of the report of the Sixth Meeting of the Parties (MOP) from Decision VI/9 describes conditions applied to the exemption for laboratory and analytical uses such as purity, quantity, and specification for cylinders and handling for these controlled substances.

        Decision X/19 under the Montreal Protocol extended the global exemption for essential laboratory and analytical uses through December 31, 2005. Consistent with the flexibility allowed for by the Parties, in 2001, the EPA codified a L&A exemption at 40 CFR 82.4 (see 66 FR 14760, March 13, 2001). In the preamble to that rule, the EPA determined that the statutory language in section 604 of the CAA provided grounds for the creation of a de minimis exemption for essential laboratory and analytical uses of certain class I ODS. Id. at 14764. The 2001 rule explains how the controls in place for laboratory and analytical uses provide adequate assurance that very little, if any, environmental damage will result from the handling and disposal of the small amounts of class I ODS used in such applications due to the Appendix G requirements under 40 CFR part 82, subpart A for small quantity and high purity. For example, class I ODS must be sold in cylinders three liters or smaller or in glass ampoules 10 milliliters or smaller, as per Appendix G. Since issuing the original exemption, the EPA has not received information that would suggest otherwise. As discussed later in this notice, the quantities of class I ODS used for this exemption have declined substantially since the exemption was initially created.
        Decision X/19 under the Montreal Protocol also requested the Montreal Protocol's Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) report annually to the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on laboratory and analytical procedures that could be performed without the use of ODS. It further stated that at future MOPs, the Parties would decide whether such procedures should no longer be eligible for exemptions. Informed by the TEAP's report, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol decided in 1999, under Decision XI/15, that the general exemption no longer applied to the following uses: Testing of oil, grease, and total petroleum hydrocarbons in water; testing of tar in road-paving materials; and forensic finger-printing. The EPA incorporated these exclusions at Appendix G to subpart A of 40 CFR part 82 (see 67 FR 6352, February 11, 2002).
        At the 18th MOP, the Parties acknowledged the need to use methyl bromide for laboratory and analytical procedures and added methyl bromide to the ODS covered by the L&A exemption in Appendix G. Decision XVIII/15 outlined specific uses and exclusions for methyl bromide under the exemption (see 72 FR 73264, December 27, 2007).
        In November 2009, at the 21st MOP, the Parties in Decision XXI/6 extended the global L&A exemption through December 31, 2014. Based on this Decision, the EPA amended the regulation at 40 CFR 82.8(b) to extend the L&A exemption domestically through December 31, 2014 (see 76 FR 77909, December 15, 2011). Decision XXI/6 lists laboratory and analytical uses of ODS for which the TEAP and its Chemicals Technical Options Committee (CTOC) determined that alternative procedures exist. However, the Parties did not exclude any additional procedures from the exemption for laboratory and analytical uses. The Parties asked the TEAP and the CTOC to continue to consider possible alternatives and report back to the Parties.
        Under Decision XXVI/5 at the 26th MOP, the Parties extended the L&A exemption until December 31, 2021, which the EPA implemented domestically through a rulemaking in 2015 (see 80 FR 3885, January 26, 2015). This Decision also requested the TEAP provide a report on the development and availability of laboratory and analytical uses that can be performed without using ODS, and Parties were encouraged to continue to investigate replacements to ODS for laboratory and analytical uses.
        In 2018, the TEAP and its Medical and Chemicals Technical Options Committee (MCTOC) provided a report on alternatives to ODS for laboratory and analytical uses, available in the docket. The report noted that annual data reported to the Ozone Secretariat under Article 7 of the Montreal Protocol show a downward trend with global production of ODS for these uses of only 151 metric tons in 2016.
        Most recently, in November 2019, at the 31st MOP, the Parties agreed in Decision XXXI/5 to “extend the global laboratory and analytical-use exemption indefinitely beyond 2021, without prejudice to the parties deciding to review the exemption at a future meeting.” The Decision also encourages parties to further reduce their production and consumption of ODS for laboratory and analytical uses and to facilitate the introduction of laboratory standards that do not require such substances.
        III. Proposed Rule

        The EPA is proposing to indefinitely extend the L&A exemption for class I ODS in 40 CFR 82.8(b). This proposal would make the regulatory exemption indefinite unless or until it is limited or eliminated through future rulemaking. If the Agency finalizes this action as proposed, the Agency would still have authority to review the scope of and need for the exemption at a future date; however, the regulations would no longer contain an expiration date for the exemption. The EPA could also change the list of uses in Appendix G, as alternatives are identified through new standards.
        This proposed action is consistent with the Montreal Protocol's Decision XXXI/5. Non-ODS replacements for class I ODS may not be identified for all uses given the effort required to establish new analytical procedures for such small quantities of material. While some analytical procedures have transitioned, many ASTM and ISO standards still require small amounts of ODS, and it could take years for standards organizations to develop alternatives and for laboratories to adopt the new standards.
        The Agency is also proposing to add clarifying text to explain that the L&A exemption allows for the production and import of class I ODS that have been phased out in the United States, subject to certain restrictions as described in Appendix G. The text in 40 CFR 82.8(b) establishes the exemption for essential laboratory and analytical uses but does not explicitly state that the exemption is from the prohibitions on production and import of class I ODS, although that is clear from context and the explanation in the 2001 rule (see 66 FR 14760, March 13, 2001).
        Making the L&A exemption indefinite will have little effect on the stratospheric ozone layer. Exempted production and consumption of ODS for laboratory and analytical uses in the United States is on a general decline. Consumption peaked in 2004 at 55 ODP-weighted metric tons and was only 4.4 ODP-weighted metric tons in 2018, which is a negligible amount.5
           This indicates that many users, primarily laboratories, have been able to transition from ODS even with this exemption available to them. However, certain laboratory and analytical procedures continue to require the use of class I ODS in the United States. There are currently ten laboratory distributors that supply around 1,000 laboratories with primarily carbon tetrachloride but also small quantities of chlorobromomethane, CFCs, methyl chloroform, and methyl bromide. Maintaining this exemption would provide laboratories with essential class I ODS for which no alternatives are currently available, with negligible environmental impacts.

            5 These data are available in the docket to this rule as well as on the Ozone Secretariat's Data Centre web page: https://ozone.unep.org/countries/data-table.

        The EPA requests comment on the proposal to indefinitely extend the L&A exemption. The EPA is also seeking comment from standards organizations that either continue to use ODS in their standards or who have developed new standards. For instance, the EPA is seeking comment on which standards still exist that use ODS, if there are any plans or actions underway to replace those existing standards, and whether there are alternatives to using ODS. Likewise, the EPA seeks comment from laboratories that continue to use ODS or that have transitioned to ozone-safe alternatives. The EPA is seeking comments from laboratories on whether they use ODS or have transitioned to alternatives and, if they have not transitioned, which methods are still being employed that require the use of ODS. The EPA encourages laboratories to continue ongoing efforts to transition to methods that do not require the use of ODS, and information provided by commenters could be aggregated and shared to assist others.
        IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
        A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
        This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
        B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs
        This action is expected to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. This proposed rule is expected to provide meaningful burden reduction because it allows for the continued use of ODS for laboratory and analytical use.
        C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
        This action does not impose any new information collection burden under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0170. The laboratory and analytical use exemption currently expires on December 31, 2021, and this action would allow for continued production and import of class I substances in the United States solely for laboratory and analytical uses that have not been identified by the EPA as nonessential, and therefore there are no PRA implications. This action proposes to indefinitely remove the expiration date for the existing exemption from the prohibitions in production and import of class I ODS.
        D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
        I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action does not modify the recordkeeping and reporting requirements that apply to laboratory distributors who utilize the exemption. These requirements will continue to apply to distributors who use the exemption; however, the requirements are minimal and impose no significant burden. Further, nothing in this rule compels any entity to use the exemption. The Agency thus assumes that the burden reduction provided by the exemption from the phaseout on production and import of class I ODS outweighs the limited cost associated with recordkeeping and reporting. Otherwise, laboratory distributors could choose not to use the exemption, removing the need for relevant recordkeeping and reporting.
        E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
        This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector.
        F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
        This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
        G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

        This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. The EPA periodically updates tribal officials on air regulations through the monthly meetings of the National Tribal Air Association and will share information on this rulemaking through this and other fora.

        H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
        This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. Depletion of stratospheric ozone results in greater transmission of the sun's ultraviolet (UV) radiation to the earth's surface. The following studies describe the effects of excessive exposure to UV radiation on children: (1) Westerdahl J, Olsson H, Ingvar C. “At what age do sunburn episodes play a crucial role for the development of malignant melanoma,” Eur J Cancer 1994: 30A: 1647-54; (2) Elwood JM Japson J. “Melanoma and sun exposure: an overview of published studies,” Int J Cancer 1997; 73:198-203; (3) Armstrong BK, “Melanoma: childhood or lifelong sun exposure,” In: Grobb JJ, Stern RS Mackie RM, Weinstock WA, eds. “Epidemiology, causes and prevention of skin diseases,” 1st ed. London, England: Blackwell Science, 1997: 63-6; (4) Whiteman D., Green A. “Melanoma and Sunburn,” Cancer Causes Control, 1994: 5:564-72; (5) Heenan, PJ. “Does intermittent sun exposure cause basal cell carcinoma? A case control study in Western Australia,” Int J Cancer 1995; 60: 489-94; (6) Gallagher, RP, Hill, GB, Bajdik, CD, et al. “Sunlight exposure, pigmentary factors, and risk of nonmelanocytic skin cancer I, Basal cell carcinoma,” Arch Dermatol 1995; 131: 157-63; (7) Armstrong, DK. “How sun exposure causes skin cancer: an epidemiological perspective,” Prevention of Skin Cancer. 2004. 89-116. However, because maintaining the laboratory and analytical exemption would have negligible environmental impacts (as discussed in sections II and III of the preamble), the EPA does not expect any additional risks to children.
        I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
        This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
        J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
        This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
        K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
        The EPA believes that it is not feasible to quantify any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects from this action on minority populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
          Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Chlorofluorocarbons, Imports, Methyl chloroform, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Andrew Wheeler,
          Administrator.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 82—PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

        1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
           42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.

        2. Section 82.8 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

          § 82.8
          Grant of essential use allowances and critical use allowances.

          (b) There is a global exemption for the production and import of class I controlled substances for essential laboratory and analytical uses, subject to the restrictions in appendix G of this subpart, and subject to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements at § 82.13(u) through (x). There is no amount specified for this exemption.

      [FR Doc. 2020-16255 Filed 8-6-20; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Transit Administration
        49 CFR Part 624
        [Docket No. FTA-2006-24708]
        RIN 2132-AA91
        Clean Fuels Grant Program

          AGENCY:
          Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          Section 3010 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), amended section 5308 of title 49 United States Code, commonly referred to as the Clean Fuels Grant Program. SAFETEA-LU changes the program from a formula-based to a discretionary grant program. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) proposes to amend its clean fuels grant program regulations to comport with the provisions of SAFETEA-LU.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before December 15, 2006. Late filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable.

          ADDRESSES:
          Written comments: Submit written comments to the Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. You may submit comments identified by the docket number (FTA-2006-24708) by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
          • Web Site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site.
          • Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
          • Fax: 1-202-493-2478.
          • Hand Delivery: To the Docket Management System, Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

            Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name (Federal Transit Administration) and Docket number (FTA-2006-24708) or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) (2132-AA91) for this notice. Note that all comments received will be posted, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov including any personal identifying information. You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          For program issues, Kimberly Sledge, Office of Program Management, (202) 366-2053 (telephone); (202) 366-7951 (fax); or Kimberly.Sledge@dot.gov (e-mail). For legal issues, Scheryl Portee, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-4011 (telephone); (202) 366-3809 (fax); or Scheryl.Portee@dot.gov (e-mail).

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
         I. Background
        Section 3008 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), Pub. L. 105-178, June 9, 1998, established the Clean Fuels Formula Grant Program (the program) with a two-fold purpose. First, the program was developed to assist nonattainment and maintenance areas in achieving or maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone and carbon monoxide (CO). Second, the program supported emerging clean fuel and advanced propulsion technologies for transit buses and markets for those technologies.
        We promulgated the formula program as a final rule at 49 CFR part 624. (See 67 FR 40100, June 11, 2002 and 67 FR 41579, June 18, 2002). From its inception the program was authorized as a formula program. However, Congress did not fund the program.
         II. Overview and General Discussion of the Proposed Rule
        A. Why is FTA amending the Clean Fuels Grant Program?
        Section 3010 of SAFETEA-LU, Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1572 (2005), changed the grant program from a formula-based to a discretionary grant program; however, the program retains its two-fold purpose as noted above. We propose to revise 49 CFR part 624 to reflect the amendments made by SAFETEA-LU.

        With TEA-21, Congress authorized funding levels for the program at $100 million. Although funding was authorized, appropriation bills for fiscal years 1999 through 2005 directed FTA to transfer and merge all allocated funding for the program to the bus and bus facilities categories of the Capital Investment Grants and Loans Program (49 U.S.C. 5309), which funds the replacement, rehabilitation, and purchase of buses and related equipment and the construction of bus-related facilities.

        In fiscal year 2006, however, Congress provided $17,607,150 to sixteen specific clean fuels projects and transferred the remaining balance of funds to the bus and bus facilities program of 49 U.S.C. 5309(b)(3). (See Department of Transportation Appropriations Act of 2006, Pub. L. 109-115, 119 Stat. 2396, 2417-2418 (2005)).
        To ensure that procedures are in place when funding is appropriated for the program, we propose to establish criteria for the allocation of discretionary program funds in accordance with SAFETEA-LU.
        B. To what revisions of 49 CFR part 624 does FTA seek comments?
        SAFETEA-LU has modified the program by re-establishing it as a discretionary grant program. You are requested to comment on our proposal to implement the provisions of SAFETEA-LU by revising 49 CFR part 624 as follows:
        Eligible Recipients
        1. SAFETEA-LU amended eligible recipients to now include smaller urbanized areas with populations of less than 200,000. Accordingly, we propose to amend section 624.1 to reflect eligible applicants as follows: (1) “designated recipients,” as that term is defined in 49 U.S.C. 5307(a)(2); and (2) recipients in urbanized areas with populations of less than 200,000.
        A “designated recipient” must be an entity designated to receive Federal urbanized formula funds per 49 U.S.C. 5307, in accordance with the applicable metropolitan and statewide transportation planning processes, by the chief executive officer of a State, responsible local officials, and publicly owned operators of public transportation. For an urbanized area with a population of less than 200,000, however, SAFETEA-LU requires the smaller urbanized area's respective State to act as the recipient.
        Further, all recipients must meet one of the following criteria: (1) Be designated as an ozone or CO nonattainment area as established by section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7407(d); or (2) be designated as a maintenance area for ozone or CO. A maintenance area is a previously designated nonattainment area that has been redesignated to attainment status by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
        Eligible Activities
        2. We propose to amend section 624.3 by amending paragraph (a) and removing paragraphs (c)(4) and (c)(5) to exclude repowering and retrofitting of pre-1993 buses as eligible activities. Both activities were specifically authorized as eligible projects under TEA-21; however, SAFETEA-LU repealed those provisions. Accordingly, we have determined that such activities should not be authorized under this program. In addition, we propose to amend paragraph (c) by renumbering the current paragraph (c)(6) as a new (c)(3), and adding new paragraphs (c)(4), (5), and (6) to reflect SAFETEA-LU provisions applicable to eligible projects.
        a. We propose to amend paragraph (a) to reflect the provisions in 49 U.S.C. 5323(i), which SAFETEA-LU amended to include facilities as well as vehicles. Accordingly, the Federal share for eligible projects will not exceed 90 percent of the net cost to comply with or maintain compliance with the Clean Air Act.

        Further, the Administrator is authorized to administratively determine the net cost of such equipment or facilities attributable to compliance with the Clean Air Act. Therefore, for purposes of complying with cross-cutting provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5307, which limit the Federal share to 80 percent, we have administratively determined that the composite Federal share for vehicles and vehicle related equipment shall be 83 percent. For facilities, however, the 90 percent share would apply to the actual incremental costs of improvements for compliance with the Clean Air Act and recipients would be requested to provide supporting documentation.
        We note that the President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2007 proposed that FTA grants awarded during fiscal years 2007 and 2008 should reflect 100 percent of the net capital costs of factory-installed or retrofitted hybrid electric propulsion systems and any equipment related to such systems. This budget proposal also provides for administrative discretion to determine costs attributable to such systems and related-equipment. If Congress enacts the proposal, we will address the issue in the final rule.
        b. Paragraph (c)(5) reflects the congressionally mandated provision limiting available funding for “clean diesel buses” for each fiscal year to not more than 25 percent of funds allocated by 49 U.S.C. 5338(b)(2)(C). On January 18, 2001, EPA published a final rule establishing a comprehensive national control program to regulate heavy-duty vehicles and its fuel as a single system. As part of this program, new emission standards will start to take effect in model year 2007, and will apply to heavy-duty highway engines and vehicles. These standards are based on the use of high-efficiency catalytic exhaust emission control devices or comparably effective advanced technologies. The EPA standards are codified at 40 CFR parts 69, 80, and 86. (See 66 FR 5001 (Jan. 18, 2001)). Accordingly, FTA proposes to interpret “clean diesel” to mean diesel engines certified to meet EPA's heavy-duty engine emissions standards for model-years 2007 and later.
        c. Paragraph (c)(6) proposes to amend section 624.3 to reflect that funds designated for eligible projects will remain available for obligation for three fiscal years, which includes the year of appropriation plus two additional fiscal years.
        Application Process

        3. Since the program is now a discretionary grant program, the pre-application included in Appendix A no longer applies. Accordingly, we propose to remove Appendix A from part 624 and revise § 624.5 to reflect that applications will be requested in a Federal Register notice each fiscal year that discretionary funds are appropriated by Congress for the program.

        Additionally, since technological innovations continue to evolve, we believe the criteria for selecting eligible projects should be flexible. Accordingly, we propose to revise section 624.5 to reflect general criteria for selection of eligible projects. More specific selection criteria may be published in the Federal Register with a Notice of Funding Availability each fiscal year that discretionary funding is appropriated by Congress for the program.
        Certifications

        4. We propose to retain the current certification process noted in section 624.7. Each vehicle purchased with a grant under this program will be operated by the grantee using only clean fuels. The certification would be included with the Federal Register notice announcing our annual certifications and assurances. This is consistent with our policy of one-stop filing for all required certifications and assurances. Transit operators planning to apply for the Clean Fuels Grant Program would indicate compliance with this certification when submitting its annual certifications and assurances. Additionally, grantees purchasing or leasing “clean diesel” buses would certify that the buses would be operated using only ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel.
        Statutory Cross-Cutting Requirements

        5. Since the program is now a discretionary grant program, we propose to amend section 624.9 by removing the grant formula because it no longer applies. SAFETEA-LU requires that a grant under this program be subject to the applicable requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5307. Accordingly, we propose to amend section 624.9 by inserting the applicable statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5307. Many of these requirements are contained in FTA Circular 9030.1C, which is available from the FTA Regional Office nearest you. The circular is also on the FTA Web site at (http://www.fta.dot.gov).

        Further, all FTA grants provided under chapter 53 of title 49 of the United States Code, are subject to applicable requirements of the FTA Master Agreement (MA), which is incorporated by reference in the grant agreement. Additional project management guidelines and requirements may also be found in FTA Circular 5010.1C. The circular and the MA are located on the FTA Web site at (http://www.fta.dot.gov).
        Reporting
        6. We support the development and deployment of clean fuel and advanced propulsion technologies for transit buses. We remain interested in collecting relevant information on the operations and performance of these clean fuel technology buses to help assess the reliability, benefits, and costs of certain technologies compared to conventional vehicle technologies.
        Accordingly, we propose to retain the reporting requirements of § 624.11, which require grantees receiving program funds for hybrid electric, battery electric, and fuel cell vehicles to provide information to us on the operations, performance, and maintenance of those vehicles purchased or leased with program funds.
        We have determined, however, that semiannual instead of quarterly reporting for the first three years of the useful life of the vehicle is sufficient for this objective; thus, we propose to provide administrative relief by amending the reporting requirements in § 624.11 from quarterly to semiannually. Submission of data on the operation of the vehicle beyond the three-year period would continue to be voluntary.

        Likewise, we continue to encourage transit agencies acquiring other types of alternative fuel buses (e.g., compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), etc.) to voluntarily report similar information. However, recipients acquiring clean diesel vehicles are not required to report the data requested under section 624.11 because we believe that sufficient information about this technology has been compiled.
        We will request Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to collect information from recipients receiving Federal financial assistance under the Clean Fuels program. We intend to collect information such as vehicle miles traveled, fuel costs, vehicle fuel/energy consumption and oil consumption, road calls or breakdowns resulting from clean fuel and advanced propulsion technology systems, and maintenance costs associated with these systems. You are invited to comment on our information collection proposal for evaluating the operating costs of clean fuel and advanced propulsion technology vehicles. We will use the data collected to provide more accurate information to transit agencies for future clean fuel and advanced propulsion vehicle acquisitions.
        III. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
        Statutory/Legal Authority for This Proposed Rulemaking
        This rule is authorized pursuant to section 3010 of SAFETEA-LU, which amended section 5308 of Title 49, United States Code. We previously implemented section 5308, referred to as the Clean Fuels Grant Program, as part 624 of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations.
        Executive Order 12866
        Under Executive Order 12866, the Department of Transportation (DOT) must examine whether this proposed rule is a “significant regulatory action.” A significant regulatory action is subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order (E.O.). E.O. 12866 defines “significant regulatory action” as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $120 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the E.O.
        This proposed rule amends an existing grant program and is not expected to impose any new compliance costs. Specifically, we propose amending the existing program from a formula program to a discretionary grant program in accordance with section 3010 of SAFETEA-LU. We believe that the industry costs and benefits of the Clean Fuels Grant Program do not warrant designating this a significant rule under E.O. 12866 because it involves grant application procedures and will not cost more than $120 million annually. Additionally, we propose to provide administrative relief in the reporting criteria by increasing the reporting period from quarterly to semiannually. For these reasons, we have determined that this proposed rule is a nonsignificant regulatory action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by OMB.
        Executive Order 13132
        This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13132 (Federalism). This proposed rule does not include any provisions that have substantial direct effect on the States, the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of E.O. 13132 do not apply because this proposed rule only sets forth application procedures for an existing formula grant program that has been statutorily amended to a discretionary grant program.
        Executive Order 13175
        This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria of E.O. 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments). Because the proposal does not have tribal implications and does not impose direct compliance costs, the funding and consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 do not apply.
        Executive Order 13272 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act

        The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), requires each agency to analyze regulations and proposals to assess their impact on small businesses and other small entities to determine whether the rule or proposal will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
        We evaluated the effects of this proposed rule on small entities and determined that it will not have a significant effect on a substantial number of small entities. This proposal imposes no new costs because it merely modifies the application procedures for an existing grant program.
        Paperwork Reduction Act
        This proposed rule includes information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. OMB previously approved our information collection request under the Clean Fuels Formula Grant Program, 2132-0560. However, that approval expired on August 31, 2003, because funding was not allocated for the program.
        Now that Congress appropriated funding in fiscal year 2006, we will submit a new information collection request to OMB. The affected public under this proposed rulemaking remains public transportation providers who apply for Federal funds under this program. Our new information collection request will not include any new reporting requirements. In fact, if the proposals contained in this NPRM are adopted as final, recipients would experience a decrease in reporting because we intend to extend the reporting period from quarterly to semiannually.

        We solicit comments on the proposed reporting requirements. Comments should address: whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the FTA grant process; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the applicants, including the use of alternative collection techniques (e.g., filing applications and reports via facsimile (fax), electronic mail or other forms of information technology).
        Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
        This rule does not propose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. If the proposals are adopted into a final rule, it will not result in costs of $100 million or more (adjusted for inflation), in the aggregate, to any of the following: State, local, or Native American tribal governments, or the private sector.
        National Environmental Policy Act
        The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347 as amended), requires Federal agencies to consider the consequences of major federal actions and prepare a detailed statement on actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Since this proposed rule promotes the use of clean fuels in vehicles used for public transportation, it potentially may have a positive impact on the environment. Alternatively, there are no significant environmental impacts associated with this proposed rule.

          List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 624
          Grant Programs—Transportation, Mass transportation, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, FTA proposes to amend 49 CFR part 624 as follows:

          PART 624—CLEAN FUELS GRANT PROGRAM
          1. The authority citation for part 624 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            49 U.S.C. 5308; 49 CFR 1.51.

          2. The heading to part 624 is revised to read as set forth above.
          3. Revise § 624.1 to read as follows:

            § 624.1
            Eligible applicant.
            (a) An eligible applicant is:
            (1) A designated recipient (designated recipient has the same meaning as in 49 U.S.C. 5307(a)(2)); or
            (2) A recipient for an urbanized area with a population of less than 200,000 (smaller urbanized area). The State in which the smaller urbanized area is located shall act as the recipient.
            (b) An eligible applicant, as defined in paragraph (a) of this section, shall operate in an area that is either:
            (1) An ozone or carbon monoxide nonattainment area as specified under section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7407(d)); or
            (2) A maintenance area for ozone or carbon monoxide.
            4. Amend § 624.3 by revising paragraphs (a) and (c)(3) through (6) to read as follows:

            § 624.3
            Eligible activities.
            (a) Eligible activities include purchasing or leasing clean fuel buses and constructing new or improving existing public transportation facilities to accommodate clean fuel buses.

            (3) At the discretion of the Administrator, projects relating to clean fuel, biodiesel, hybrid electric, or zero emissions technology buses that exhibit equivalent or superior emissions reductions to existing clean fuel or hybrid electric technologies.
            (4) The Federal share for eligible activities undertaken for the purpose of complying with or maintaining compliance with the Clean Air Act under this program shall be limited to 90 percent of the net (incremental) cost of the activity.
            (i) The Administrator may exercise discretion and determine the percentage of Federal share for eligible activities to be less than 90 percent.
            (ii) An administrative determination per this subsection will be published in accordance with § 624.5(a).
            (5) Funding for clean diesel buses shall be limited to not more than 25 percent of the amount made available or allocated and appropriated each fiscal year to carry out the program.
            (6) Any amount made available or appropriated for this section shall remain available to an eligible activity for two years after the fiscal year for which the amount is made available or appropriated. Any amount that remains unobligated at the end of the three-year-period shall be added to the amount made available in the following fiscal year.
            5. Revise § 624.5 to read as follows:

            § 624.5
            Application process.

            (a) FTA shall publish a Notice of Funding Availability in the Federal Register each fiscal year that funds are appropriated and discretionary funding made available for the Clean Fuels program. The notice shall provide the criteria by which the eligible projects will be evaluated for selection and the Administrator's administrative determination of the net Federal share for projects funded under this part.
            (b) The Administrator shall determine the criteria for selecting proposed projects for funding, which may include, but are not limited to the following factors:
            (1) Whether the proposed project is a transportation control measure in an approved State Implementation Plan;
            (2) The benefits of the proposed project in reducing transportation-related pollutants;
            (3) Consistency with the recipient's fleet management plan;
            (4) The applicant's ability to implement the project and facilities to maintain and fuel the proposed vehicles;

            (5) The applicant's coordination of the proposed project with other public transportation entities or other related projects within the applicant's Metropolitan Planning Organization or the geographic region within which the proposed project will operate.
            (6) The proposed project's ability to support emerging clean fuels technologies or advanced technologies for transit buses.
            6. Revise § 624.9 to read as follows:

            § 624.9
            Grant requirements.
            A grant under this section shall be subject to the following requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5307(d):
            (a) General. All recipients shall maintain and report financial and operating information on an annual basis, as prescribed in 49 CFR part 630 et seq., and the most recent National Transit Database Reporting Manual.
            (b) Labor Standards. As a condition of financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5308, the interests of employees affected by the assistance shall be protected under arrangements that the Secretary of Labor concludes are fair and equitable.
            (c) Satisfactory Continuing Control. (1) An FTA grantee shall:
            (i) Maintain control over federally funded property;
            (ii) Ensure that it is used in transit service; and
            (iii) Dispose of it in accordance with Federal requirements.
            (2) Under this paragraph (c), if the grantee leases federally funded property to another party, the lease must provide the grantee satisfactory continuing control over the use of that property as determined in two areas: real property (land) and facilities; and personal property (equipment and rolling stock, both revenue and non-revenue).
            (d) Maintenance. The grant applicant shall certify annually that pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5307(d)(1)(C), it will maintain (federally funded) facilities and equipment. In addition, the grantee shall keep equipment and facilities acquired with Federal assistance in good operating order, which includes maintenance of rolling stock (revenue and non-revenue), machinery and equipment, and facilities.
            (e) Rates Charged Elderly and Persons with Disabilities during Nonpeak Hours. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5307(d)(1)(D), the grant applicant shall certify that the rates charged the elderly and persons with disabilities during nonpeak hours for fixed-route transportation using facilities and equipment financed with Federal assistance from FTA will not exceed one-half of the rates generally applicable to other persons at peak hours, whether the operation is by the applicant or by another entity under lease or otherwise.
            (f) Use of Competitive Procurements. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5307(d)(1)(E), the grant applicant shall certify that it will use competitive procurements and will not use procurements employing exclusionary or discriminatory specifications.
            (g) Compliance with Buy America Provisions. The grant applicant shall certify that in carrying out a procurement authorized for this program, the applicant will comply with applicable Buy America laws.
            (h) Certification that Local Funds Are Available for the Project. The grant applicant shall certify that the local funds are or will be available to carry out the project.
            (i) Compliance with National Policy Concerning Elderly Persons and Individuals with Disabilities. The grant applicant shall certify that it will comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5301(d) concerning the rights of elderly persons and persons with disabilities.
            (j) FTA Master Agreement. The grant applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the FTA Master Agreement which is incorporated by reference in the grant agreement.
            7. Amend § 624.11 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text and (c) to read as follows:

            § 624.11
            Reporting.
            (a) Recipients of financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5308 who purchase or lease hybrid electric, battery electric and fuel cell vehicles shall report semiannually the following information to the appropriate FTA Regional Office for the first three years of the useful life of the vehicle:

            (c) Recipients of financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5308 that purchase or lease clean diesel vehicles are not required to report information beyond FTA grant reporting requirements for capital projects.
            Appendix A to Part 624 [Removed]
            8. Remove Appendix A to part 624.

            Issued in Washington, DC, this 10th day of October, 2006.
            James S. Simpson,
            Administrator, Federal Transit Administration.

       [FR Doc. E6-17071 Filed 10-13-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-57-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [I.D.  100400F]
        Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of intent to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS); request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) announces its intention to prepare Framework 14 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery Management Plan (FMP).  The intent of this action is to adjust the limited access scallop days-at-sea (DAS) allocations for the next 2 fishing years (March 1, 2001, through February 28, 2003); create a restricted access program for the scallop Mid-Atlantic closed areas (Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach), scheduled to reopen on March 1, 2001; and to close additional areas to scallop fishing to protect concentrations of juvenile scallops, reduce fishing mortality, and increase yield per recruit.  The Council, in coordination with NMFS, also announces its intent to prepare an SEIS for the Atlantic Sea Scallop FMP in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act to analyze the impacts of management alternatives.

          DATES:
          Written comments on the intent to prepare the SEIS must be received on or before 5 p.m., local time, November 13, 2000.

          ADDRESSES:
          Written comments should be sent to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.  Comments may also be sent via fax to (978) 465-0492.  Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or Internet.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, (978) 465-0492.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        Amendment 4 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop FMP, implemented by a final rule published January 19, 1994 (59 FR 2757), established a limited access program and a schedule of annual DAS allocations for full-time, part-time, and occasional vessels with limited access permits.  The primary management tool implemented under Amendment 4 to control fishing mortality was the annual DAS allocation.
        Amendment 7 to the FMP, implemented by a final rule published March 29, 1999 (64 FR 14835), changed the overfishing definition and extended the DAS-reduction schedule through 2008 to achieve a 10-year biomass rebuilding objective.  To comply with the new overfishing definition and implement the rebuilding schedule, Amendment 7 revised the DAS schedule beginning March 1, 1999.  To allow time for industry adjustment to the new regulations, the initial annual DAS allocations in 1999 were 120 days for full-time vessels, 48 days for part-time vessels, and 10 days for occasional vessels.  According to Amendment 7, the DAS allocations in 2000 would be reduced to 51 days for full-time vessels, 20 days for part-time vessels, and 4 days for occasional vessels, and would remain below these levels until 2007, when the biomass rebuilding targets were expected to be met.  The SEIS for Amendment 7 indicated that the 2000 DAS allocations would have negative impacts on the economic viability of the vessels and the scallop fleet.  Amendment 7 also modified the framework adjustment process to allow the Council to consider closing and reopening areas, and closed two areas in the Mid-Atlantic to protect small scallops that were prevalent there, to promote stock rebuilding.
        Shortly after the implementation of Amendment 7, the Council began deliberations on a longer-term process of developing Amendment 10, which would implement an area-based management system for scallops.  In connection with the development of Amendment 10, the Council and NMFS published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an SEIS (65 FR 6975, February 11, 2000).  The NOI announced that the Council is considering, among other things, closing areas with high concentrations of small scallops and opening them later when the scallops reach a certain size.  The Council believes that shifting fishing effort in this manner could promote rebuilding, improve yield, and reduce the economic impacts of the low DAS allocations.
        While Amendment 10 was being developed, the Council, through Framework 11 to the Scallop FMP (64 FR 31144, June 10, 1999) began a short-term strategy to access Closed Area II (CA II) in order to allow fishing on dense concentrations of scallops without compromising multispecies rebuilding or habitat protection.  Framework 11 implemented a 1999 seasonal Georges Bank Sea Scallop Exemption Area (Exemption Area) in and adjacent to CA II and included the following primary measures for vessels fishing in the Exemption Area:  A possession limit of up to 10,000 lb (4,536.0 kg) of scallop meats per trip; a maximum of three trips for full and part-time vessels and a maximum of one trip for occasional vessels; an automatic minimum deduction of 10 DAS for each trip; a minimum mesh twine-top of 10 inches (25.40 cm); a total allowable catch (TAC) of yellowtail flounder of 387 metric tons (mt); and an increase in the regulated species possession limit from 300 lb (136.1 kg) to 500 lb (226.8 kg) per trip.  In addition, Framework 11 implemented a minimum mesh twine-top of 8 inches (20.32 cm) for vessels fishing under a scallop DAS when fishing outside the Exemption Area.
        This strategy occurred in the 1999 and 2000 fishing years. Based on an updated assessment from the 29th Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (September 1999) and the 1999 Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) Report, the Scallop Plan Development Team determined that increasing the Amendment 7 DAS allocations for each of three permit categories to the same amounts as in the 1999 fishing year would meet the 2000 fishing mortality rate (F) target.  This was contingent upon scallops in multispecies CA I, CA II, and the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area (NLCA) remaining protected, or upon maintaining conservation neutrality, if scallopers were allowed access to these closed areas.  Based on this information, Framework 12 to the FMP (65 FR 11478, March 3, 2000) adjusted the limited access scallop DAS allocations for the fishing year March 1, 2000, through February 28, 2001, to 120 days for full-time vessels, 48 days for part-time vessels, and 10 days for occasional vessels.
        Framework 13 to the FMP (65 FR 37903, June 19, 2000) continued the short-term strategy by implementing the 2000 Sea Scallop Exemption Program (Exemption Program), creating Exemption Areas in portions of CA I, CA II, and NLCA, and by including the following management measures:  A possession limit of up to 10,000 lb (4,356.0 kg) of scallop meats per trip; a maximum number of trips for each area; an automatic minimum deduction of 10 DAS for each trip; a minimum mesh twine-top of 10 inches (25.40 cm); a yellowtail flounder TAC of 725 mt for CA I and CA II combined, and 50 mt for the NLCA; and an increase in the regulated species possession limit from 300 lb (136.1 kg) to 1,000 lb (435.6 kg) per trip, among other measures.  In addition, this action modified the scallop dredge gear stowage requirements and corrected and clarified the “end of the year DAS carry-over” provision for vessels participating in the limited access scallop fishery.  The primary intent of this action was to provide a continuation and an expansion of a short-term strategy to allow scallop dredge vessels access to multispecies closed areas without compromising multispecies and sea scallop rebuilding or habitat protection.

        The Council is once again considering development of management measures through Framework 14 to provide for effective conservation and management of sea scallops while Amendment 10 is being developed.  This action proposes to adjust the limited access scallop DAS allocations for the next 2 fishing years (March 1, 2001, through February 28, 2003).  Under this measure annual DAS would remain at 120 days for full-time vessels, 48 days for part-time vessels, and 10 days for occasional vessels.  This action also proposes a restricted access program for the Mid-Atlantic scallop closed areas (Hudson Canyon South and Virginia Beach), which are currently scheduled to reopen to scallop fishing on March 1, 2000, with no restrictions.  Proposed measures and provisions of this action program include: (1) all scallop limited access and open access vessels (dredge, trawl, and General Category vessels) would be allowed access; (2) a scallop TAC for each of the reopened areas; (3) an allowance of five trips per vessel; (4) a possession limit of 15,000 lb (6,804 kg) of meats per trip (400 lb (181.4 kg) of meats for the General Category vessels); (5) an automatic deduction of 10 DAS for each trip; (6) a season of April 1 through February 28, with the provision that the Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS, may allow additional trips for those vessels that made a trip prior to September 1, 2001; (7) an emergency landing provision, whereby vessels would only be charged one DAS for each 1,500 lb (680 kg) of meats landed, provided the vessel has experienced an emergency condition that forces the vessel to come into port earlier than anticipated; (8) a minimum mesh twine-top of 10 inches (25 cm) for scallop dredge vessels; (9) a vessel monitoring system requirement, with double-polling for the duration of the access program; (10) a TAC set-aside to allow cooperative research; and (11) a TAC set-aside to provide for observer coverage.  The Council also may propose additional closed areas to protect concentrations of small scallops.  Options for the closed areas include areas in both the Mid-Atlantic and Georges Bank.
        Because the Mid-Atlantic closed areas are scheduled to reopen on March 1, 2001, the Council is considering in Framework 14 a restricted access program to prevent a rush of effort into the closed areas, which could potentially diminish the benefits achieved by the closures, and to balance fishing effort between the closed and open areas of the scallop fishery.
        Because Framework 14 is the third in a series of short-term measures adopted by the Council during the development of Amendment 10, the Council, in cooperation with NMFS, has determined that it may be necessary to prepare an SEIS to examine the cumulative effects and consequences of the short-term measures on the human environment.  In preparing the SEIS, the Council and NMFS will take into account, in addition to comments received in response to this document, all comments that have already been submitted and all discussions that have occurred in Council meetings before the publication of this document.

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

          Dated: October 5, 2000.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 00-26060 Filed 10-5-00; 3:52 pm]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S