        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 181022971-01]
        RIN 0648-BI57
        Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Mid-Atlantic Blueline Tilefish Fishery; 2019 and Projected 2020-2021 Specifications

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes specifications for the 2019 blueline tilefish fishery north of the North Carolina/Virginia border and projected specifications for 2020 and 2021. The proposed action is intended to establish allowable harvest levels and other management measures to prevent overfishing while allowing optimum yield, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the Tilefish Fishery Management Plan. It is also intended to inform the public of these proposed specifications for the 2019 fishing year and projected specifications for 2020-2021.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by 5 p.m. local time, on December 4, 2018.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2018-0115, 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-2018-0115,

          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, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope: “Comments on the Proposed Rule for Blueline Tilefish 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 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 Dr. Christopher M. Moore, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Suite 201, 800 North State Street, Dover, DE 19901. These documents are also accessible via the internet at www.mafmc.org.

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

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        The blueline tilefish fishery north of the North Carolina/Virginia border is managed by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council under the Tilefish Fishery Management Plan (FMP), which outlines the Council's process for establishing annual specifications. Blueline tilefish south of the North Carolina/Virginia border are managed by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council under the Snapper Grouper FMP.

        The Tilefish FMP requires the Mid-Atlantic Council to recommend acceptable biological catch (ABC), annual catch limit (ACL), annual catch target (ACT), total allowable landings (TAL), and other management measures for the commercial and recreational sectors of the fishery, for up to three years at a time. The Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) provides an ABC recommendation to the Council to derive these catch limits. The Council makes recommendations to NMFS that cannot exceed the recommendation of its SSC. The Council's recommendations must include supporting documentation concerning the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the recommendations. We are responsible for reviewing these recommendations to ensure that they achieve the FMP objectives and are consistent with all applicable laws. Following review, NMFS publishes the final specifications in the Federal Register.

        A benchmark stock assessment was completed in late 2017 for the blueline tilefish population along the entire East Coast through the Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review process (SEDAR 50). Within the assessment, the coast-wide population was modeled separately north and south of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, because of data limitations within the northern area. To assist in developing an ABC recommendation, the Mid- and South Atlantic Councils' SSCs, as well as staff from the NMFS Northeast and Southeast Fisheries Science Centers formed a joint subcommittee to examine available information for the region north of Cape Hatteras, and to develop separate catch advice for each Councils' jurisdiction.
        At its March 2018 meeting, the Mid-Atlantic SSC reviewed the results from the SEDAR 50 benchmark stock assessment as well as additional work using the Data-Limited Methods Toolkit and derived a recommendation for acceptable biological catch (ABC) using the Mid-Atlantic Council's risk policy. The resulting ABC was 179,500 lb (81.4 mt) annually for 2019-2021 for the region north of Cape Hatteras. The SSC then followed the recommendation of the Joint Mid- and South Atlantic Blueline Tilefish Subcommittee to assign 56 percent of that ABC to the Mid-Atlantic Council (north of the VA/NC border) and 44 percent to the South Atlantic Council. This percentage breakdown is based on the catch distribution from the 2017 Pilot Blueline Tilefish Longline Survey.
        The Mid-Atlantic Council took final action on 2019-2021 quota specifications for the blueline tilefish fishery at its April 2018 meeting, and submitted its recommended specifications to us on August 17, 2018. A summary of the Council's recommended specifications is shown below in Table 1.
        Proposed Specifications
        The Council's recommendations are consistent with the SSC's recommended ABC, and represent an approximate 15-percent increase in ABC from 2018.

          Table 1—Proposed and Projected Blueline Tilefish Specifications

            2018
            Proposed2019

            Projected2020-2021

            ABC—North of NC/VA line
            87,031 lb (39.5 mt)
            100,520 lb (45.6 mt)
            100,520 lb (45.6 mt)

            Recreational ACL/ACT
            63,533 (28.8 mt)
            73,380 (33.3 mt)
            73,380 (33.3 mt)

            Commercial ACL/ACT
            23,498 lb (10.6 mt)
            27,140 lb (12.3 mt)
            27,140 lb (12.3 mt)

            Recreational TAL
            62,262 lb (28.2 mt)
            71,912 lb (32.6 mt)
            71,912 lb (32.6 mt)

            Commercial TAL
            23,263 lb (10.5 mt)
            26,869 lb (12.2 mt)
            26,869 lb (12.2 mt)

        The Mid-Atlantic Council recommended increasing the commercial possession limit from 300 (136 kg) to 500 lb (227 kg) to assist the commercial fishery in harvesting the full commercial TAL. The Council was concerned that if fishing effort increases substantially, the small commercial TAL could be landed quickly at the 500-lb (227-kg) limit. To mitigate that concern, the Council included an inseason trigger, authorizing the Regional Administrator to reduce the possession limit to 300 lb (136 kg) per trip when 70 percent of the TAL has been landed.
        The Council proposed no change to the recreational fishery beyond the increase to the recreational TAL (Table 1). The recreational fishery is open from May 1 through October 31 of each year and closed from November 1 through April 30. The bag limit for blueline tilefish depends on the type of fishing vessel being used. On a private boat, each angler may keep up to three blueline tilefish. On an U.S. Coast Guard uninspected for-hire vessel (charter boat), each angler may keep up to five blueline tilefish. On an U.S. Coast Guard inspected for-hire vessel (party boat), each angler may keep up to seven blueline tilefish.
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Tilefish FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
        The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Council prepared an analysis of the potential economic impacts of the action, which is included in the draft EA for this action and supplemented by information contained in the preamble of this proposed rule.
        For Regulatory Flexibility Act purposes, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service has established a size standard for small businesses, including their affiliated operations, whose primary industry is commercial fishing (see 50 CFR 200.2). A business primarily engaged in commercial fishing (NAICS code 11411) is classified as small if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual receipts not in excess of $11.0 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide. The Small Business Administration has established size standards for all other major industry sectors in the U.S., including defining for-hire fishing firms (NAICS code 487210) as small when their receipts are less than $7.5 million.
        The measures proposed in this action apply to vessels that hold a Federal permit for blueline tilefish. Some entities own multiple vessels with tilefish permits. In 2017, 2,028 separate vessels held tilefish permits. Those vessels were owned by 1,519 entities. Using the size definitions above, 1,508 are small business entities, comprised of 886 small commercial fishing entities, 242 small for-hire entities, and 380 had no revenue in 2017 (but are considered small businesses). For those small businesses with revenues, their average total revenues were $0.55 million in 2017.
        This action would increase the blueline tilefish commercial total allowable landings (TAL) from 23,263 lb (10.5 mt) to 26,869 lb (12.2 mt) (about 15 percent) and increase the commercial trip limit from 300 lb (136 kg) to 500 lb (227 kg) per trip. The trip limit would reduce to 300 lb (136 kg) when 70 percent of the commercial quota has been landed. The recreational TAL would increase from 62,262 lb (28.2 mt) to 71,912 lb (32.6 mt) (about 15 percent). Therefore, the potential impact of this action on small entities is positive, but limited by the relatively low TAL.
        Given the small potential economic impact of the management measures proposed, this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
          Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: November 13, 2018.
          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 § 648.295, paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) are revised to read as follows:

          § 648.295
          Tilefish commercial trip limits and landing condition.

          (b) * * *
          (1) Commercial possession limit. Any vessel of the United States fishing under a tilefish permit, as described at § 648.4(a)(12), is prohibited from possessing more than 500 lb (227 kg) of gutted blueline tilefish per trip in or from the Tilefish Management Unit.
          (2) In-season adjustment of possession limit. The Regional Administrator will monitor the harvest of the blueline tilefish commercial TAL based on dealer reports and other available information.

          (i) When 70 percent of the blueline tilefish commercial TAL will be landed, the Regional Administrator will publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying vessel and dealer permit holders that, effective upon a specific date, the blueline tilefish commercial possession limit is reduced to 300 lb (136 kg) of gutted blueline tilefish per trip in or from the Tilefish Management Unit.

          (ii) When 100 percent of the blueline tilefish commercial TAL will be landed, the Regional Administrator will publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying vessel and dealer permit holders that, effective upon a specific date, the blueline tilefish commercial fishery is closed for the remainder of the fishing year. No vessel may retain or land blueline tilefish in or from the Tilefish Management Unit.

      [FR Doc. 2018-25089 Filed 11-16-18; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        RIN 0648-AV14
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Revisions to Allowable Bycatch Reduction Devices

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

          ACTION:
           Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

          SUMMARY:
           Due to a request from the Gulf of Mexico shrimp industry, and based on new information collected through a NMFS-funded cooperative research proposal, NMFS is reopening the comment period on the proposed rule that would revise the list of allowable bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) certified for use in the shrimp fishery of the Gulf of Mexico.  Reopening the comment period would allow interested constituents adequate time to prepare comments based on the new information regarding the performance of BRDs.  NMFS is reopening the comment period for the proposed rule on July 7, 2008 and it will remain open through August 6, 2008.  The proposed rule is intended to improve bycatch reduction in the shrimp fishery and better meet the requirements of national standard 9.

          DATES:

           The comment period for the proposed rule that published on June 3, 2008 (73 FR 31669) and closed on July 3, 2008, will reopen on July 7, 2008, and remain open through 4:30 p.m., eastern time, on August 6, 2008.

          ADDRESSES:
           You may submit comments, identified by 0648-AV14, by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions:   Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
          • Fax:   727-824-5308, Attn:   Steve Branstetter.
          • Mail:   Steve Branstetter, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL  33701.

          Instructions:   All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change.  All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible.  Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
          NMFS will accept anonymous comments.  Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, Wordperfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
          Copies of an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) completed in support of the proposed rule are available from the Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL  33701; phone:   727-824-5305; fax:   727-824-5308.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
           Steve Branstetter, telephone:   727-824-5305.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The fishery for shrimp in the exclusive economic zone of the Gulf is managed under the FMP prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council.  The FMP is implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
        On June 3, 2008 (73 FR 31669), NMFS published a proposed rule to revise the list of allowable BRDs used in the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery and requested comment by July 3, 2008.  The Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation, Inc. (Foundation) recently conducted analyses regarding the efficacy of these BRDs under a Cooperative Research Program grant funded by NMFS.  The new information from these analyses is currently being reviewed by the shrimp industry.  The shrimp industry has requested a reopning of the comment period to allow sufficient time to review this new information and to comment on the proposed rule.  Due to this request, NMFS will reopen the public comment period on the proposed rule on July 7, 2008 and it will remain open through August 6, 2008.

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

          Dated:  July 1, 2008.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator For Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 08-1411 Filed 7-1-08; 4:05 pm]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [I.D.  121800E]
        Pelagics Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region; Public Meetings

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of public meetings.

          SUMMARY:
          On October 6, 1999, and on October 20, 1999, NMFS announced its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Federal management of the fishery for pelagic species in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) waters of the western Pacific Region.  The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has been prepared and is available to the public.  The scope of the DEIS includes all activities related to the conduct of the fishery authorized by and managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Pelagics Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (FMP) and all amendments thereto.  NMFS is holding public meetings to solicit public input on the range of actions, alternatives, and impacts addressed in the DEIS.  In addition to holding the public meetings, NMFS is also accepting written comments on the DEIS.

          DATES:

          Written comments will be accepted through January 29, 2001.  See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for meeting times.

          ADDRESSES:

          Written comments and requests to be included on a mailing list of persons interested in the DEIS/EIS should be sent to Marilyn Luipold, Pacific Islands Area Office, NMFS, 1601 Kapiolani Blvd., Suite 1110, Honolulu, HI  96814-4700.  Comments also may be faxed to 808-973-2941.  Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or the Internet.  Public meetings will be held in Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa (AS), and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).  For specific meeting locations, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Marilyn Luipold (see ADDRESSES).

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        On October 6, 1999 (64 FR 54272), and on October 20, 1999 (64 FR 56479), NMFS announced its intent to prepare an EIS on Federal management of the fishery for pelagic species in the U.S. EEZ waters of the western Pacific Region.  NMFS has prepared the DEIS and made it available to the public.  The Notice of Availability of the DEIS was published on December 15, 2000, (65 FR 78485).
        Dates, Times, and Locations for Public Meetings
        1.  Kahului, Maui, HI:  January 3, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Maui Beach Hotel, Maui Room, 170 Kaahumanu Avenue, Kahului, Maui, HI  96732.
        2.  Lihue, Kauai, HI:  January 4, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Wilcox Elementary School, 4319 Hardy St., Lihue, HI 96766.
         3.  Fagatogo, AS:  January 6, 2001, 9 a.m. to noon, Department of Marine and Wildlife Resources (DMWR) conference room (behind market), Faratogo, AS.  Phone contact c/o DMWR (684-633-4456).
        4.  Waianae, Oahu, HI:  January 10, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Waianae Public Library, 85-625 Farrington Highway, Waianae, HI,  96792.
        5.  Haleiwa, Oahu, HI:  January 11, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Haleiwa Alii Beach Park, Haleiwa, HI  96712.
        6.  Honolulu, Oahu, HI:  January 12, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Ala Moana Hotel, Carnation Room, 410 Atkinson Boulevard, Honolulu, HI   96814.
        7.  Agana (Hagatna), Guam:  January 16, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Guam Fishermen’s Cooperative Association, Hagatna Boat Basin, Agana (Hagatna), Guam.
        8.  Susupe Village, Saipan, CNMI:  January 17, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Saipan Diamond Hotel, Hibiscus Room.  No street address, Susupe Village, P.O. Box 66, CNMI.
        9.  Kaunakakai, Molokai, HI:  January 22, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Mitchell Pauole Center, 90 Ainoa St., Kaunakakai, HI  96748.
        10.  Kona, Hawaii, HI:  January 23, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., King Kamehameha Hotel, 75-5660 Palani Road, Kona, HI  96740.
        11.  Hilo, Hawaii, HI:  January 24, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m.  Cooperative Extension Services, College of Agriculture, Conference Room B, 875 Komohana Street, Hilo, HI  96720.
        12.  Lanai, HI:  January 26, 2001, 6 to 9 p.m., Lanai Airport Conference Room, Lanai, HI  96763.
        Special Accommodations

        Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Marilyn Luipold (see ADDRESSES), 808-973-2937 (voice) or 808-973-2941 (facsimile), at least 5 days prior to meeting date.

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

          Dated: December 19, 2000.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 00-32727  Filed 12-21-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [I.D. 022502A]
        New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

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

          ACTION:
          Public meeting.

          SUMMARY:
          The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a 2-day Council meeting on March 19 and 20, 2002, to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

          DATES:
          The meeting will be held on Tuesday and Wednesday, March 19  and 20, 2002.  The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. on Tuesday and 8:30 a.m. on Wednesday.

          ADDRESSES:
          The meeting will be held at the Mystic Hilton Hotel, 20 Coogan Boulevard, Mystic, CT 06355; telephone (860) 572-0731.  Requests for special accommodations should be addressed to the New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950; telephone (978) 465-0492.

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

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Tuesday, March 19, 2002
        Following introductions, the Council will consider fishing effort  capacity reduction proposals for inclusion in draft Amendment 13 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP).  The Council will consider proposals for modifying permit transfer provisions, reducing latent effort (unused groundfish days-at-sea) and the consolidation of fishing effort.  Following this report, the Council will provide time on the agenda for public comments on any issues that are relevant to fisheries management and Council business.  The Groundfish Committee will discuss progress on the development of Amendment 13.  They will also recommend and possibly approve changes to the groundfish status determination criteria for inclusion in Amendment 13.
        Wednesday, March 20, 2002

        The meeting will reconvene with reports on recent activities from the Council Chairman and Executive Director, the NMFS Regional Administrator, Northeast Fisheries Science Center and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council liaisons, NOAA General Counsel and representatives of the U.S. Coast Guard, NMFS Enforcement and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.  A discussion of implementation issues concerning the U.S./ Canada Shared Resources Agreement is then scheduled, followed by a vote on whether to adopt the agreement, the contents of which were presented at the January Council meeting.  There will be a discussion of possible future action related to the annual evaluation of whiting management measures.  The Council will discuss whether it will complete a Framework Adjustment to implement alternatives to the year 4 default measures for whiting scheduled to become effective on May 1, 2003.  During the Monkfish Committee Report the Council will consider approval of goals and objectives for Amendment 2 to the Monkfish FMP for the purpose of providing a basis for the development of management measures.  There also will be an update on a timetable for the amendment and progress to develop management alternatives.  The Scallop Committee will provide an overview of alternatives under consideration for inclusion into Draft Amendment 10 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop FMP.
        Although other non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subjects of formal action during this meeting.  Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided that the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

        The New England Council will consider public comments at a minimum of two Council meetings before making recommendations to the NMFS Regional Administrator on any framework adjustment to a fishery management plan.  If the Regional Administrator concurs with the adjustment proposed by the Council, the Regional Administrator may publish the action either as proposed or final regulations in the Federal Register.  Documents pertaining to framework adjustments are available for public review 7 days prior to a final vote by the Council.
        Special Accommodations

        This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities.  Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

          Dated: February 26, 2002.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service

      [FR Doc. 02-5099  Filed 3-1-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 697
        [Docket No. 0912011421-0200-01]
        RIN 0648-AY41
        Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; Weakfish Fishery

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; re-opening of comment period.

          SUMMARY:
           NMFS is reopening the comment period on the proposed rule to set the commercial possession limit for weakfish caught in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) at 100 lb (45 kg) per day or trip, whichever is longer in duration, and set the recreational possession limit at 1 fish per person per day or trip, whichever is longer in duration. The intent of the proposed rule is to modify regulations for the Atlantic coast stock of weakfish to be more compatible with Addendum IV to Amendment 4 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's (Commission) Interstate Fishery Management Plan (ISFMP) for weakfish. Such action is authorized under the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act).

          DATES:
           The deadline for written comments on the May 12, 2010 (75 FR 26703), proposed rule is re-opened. Comments will be accepted through June 30, 2010.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0648-AY41, by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
          • Mail: Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Suite 13317, Silver Spring, MD 20910, Attn: State-Federal Team. Mark the outside of the envelope: AComments on Weakfish Addendum IV.@
          • Fax: (301) 713-0596, Attn: State-Federal Team.

          Instructions: No comments will be posted for public viewing until after the comment period has closed. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
          NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
           Brian Hooker, (301) 713-2334.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        On November 3, 2009, the Commission adopted Addendum IV to Amendment 4 to the ISFMP for Weakfish (Addendum IV), in response to the stock status of weakfish. A recent peer-reviewed assessment found the weakfish stock to be depleted, with spawning stock biomass estimated to be three percent of an unfished stock, well below the 20-percent threshold and 30-percent target reference points approved by the Commission's Weakfish Management Board as part of Addendum IV. The decline in biomass reflects a sustained rise in natural mortality after 1995, rather than an increase in fishing mortality, which has been modest and stable over the same time period. In response to these findings, the Commission's Weakfish Management Board approved management measures to reduce exploitation of weakfish by more than 50-percent in both the recreational and commercial sectors. Addendum IV requires states to implement a one-fish recreational creel limit, 100 lb (45 kg) commercial trip limit, and 100 lb (45 kg) commercial bycatch limit during closed seasons. Addendum IV maintains the current 12-inch (30.5 cm) minimum size for weakfish, and reduces the number of undersized fish that may be retained per commercial trip from 300 to 100 fish. The sale of undersized fish continues to be prohibited. In implementing Amendment 4 to the weakfish plan, NMFS never adopted the 300 undersized fish exception to the 12-inch (30.5 cm) minimum fish size in Federal waters. NMFS continues the policy of no exemptions to the minimum size limit in the weakfish fishery here by not proposing a 100 undersized fish exception to the current minimum size limit in Federal waters. The Commission recommended in Addendum IV that NMFS promulgate all necessary regulations to implement complementary measures to those approved in the addendum.

        On May 12, 2010, NMFS published a proposed rule that would implement compatible management measures in the EEZ in the Federal Register (75 FR 26703) with a 30-day comment period that ended on June 11, 2010. NMFS received a request from the State of North Carolina to extend the comment period for the proposed rule so that they could complete an analysis of the economic impacts of the proposed rule on North Carolina fisheries and submit that information as part of the State's comments on the rule. This additional information would be beneficial to our analysis of economic impacts of the proposed rule. Therefore, to allow for additional public comment to be submitted beyond the initial 30-day deadline, NMFS is reopening the comment period on the proposed rule through June 30, 2010.

          Dated: June 11, 2010.
          Eric C. Schwab,
          Assistant Administrator for Fisheies, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2010-14541 Filed 6-11-10; 4:15 pm]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 52
        [EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0438; FRL-8773-01-Region 9]
        Limited Approval and Limited Disapproval of California Air Quality Implementation Plan Revisions; Amador Air District; Stationary Source Permits

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of a revision to the Amador Air District's (AAD or “District”) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision governs the District's issuance of permits for stationary sources, and focuses on the preconstruction review and permitting of major sources and major modifications under part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or “the Act”). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before September 22, 2021.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0438 at http://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Amber Batchelder, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105; by phone: (415) 947-4174, or by email to batchelder.amber@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the EPA.
        Table of Contents

          I. The State's Submittal
          A. What rule did the State submit?
          B. Are there other versions of this rule?
          C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
          II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
          A. What is the background for this proposal?
          B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
          C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
          D. What are the rule deficiencies?
          E. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
          F. Proposed Action and Public Comment
          III. Incorporation by Reference
          IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

        I. The State's Submittal
        A. What rule did the State submit?
        Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal, including the date on which it was adopted by the District and the date on which it was submitted to the EPA by the California Air Resources Board (CARB or “the State”). The AAD is the air pollution control agency for Amador County in California.

          Table 1—Submitted Rule

            Local agency
            Rule No.
            Rule title
            Adopted
            Submitted 1

            AAD
            400
            NSR Requirements for New and Modified Major Sources in Nonattainment Areas
            08/20/19
            11/05/19

            1 The submittal was transmitted to the EPA via a letter from CARB dated October 31, 2019.

        On May 5, 2020, the submittal for AAD Rule 400 was deemed by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.
        B. Are there other versions of this rule?
        There are no previous versions of Rule 400 in the SIP.
        C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
        Rule 400 is intended to address the CAA's statutory and regulatory requirements for Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permit programs for major sources emitting nonattainment air pollutants and their precursors.
        II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
        A. What is the background for this proposal?
        The EPA's April 2004 designation of Amador County as a nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) triggered the requirement for the AAD to develop and submit an NNSR program to the EPA for SIP approval.2
           Although the EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS effective April 6, 2015,3
           the NNSR requirements applicable to Amador County based on its designation and classification for the revoked 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS remain applicable in order to prevent future emissions from new and modified major stationary sources from increasing beyond the levels allowed, based on the area's prior designation and classification for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Thus, because Amador County was designated and classified as Moderate nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the District's NNSR program must satisfy the NNSR requirements applicable to Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, including the offset ratios identified in CAA section 182(b)(5).4
           Amador County is also designated and classified as Marginal nonattainment for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS and, therefore, subject to the NNSR requirements applicable to Marginal ozone nonattainment areas.5
           Submission of an NNSR program that satisfies the requirements of the Act and the EPA's regulations for Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, however, would satisfy the NNSR program requirements for Marginal ozone nonattainment areas.6

            2 CAA section 172(b) and 40 CFR 51.914.

            3 80 FR 12264, 12265 (March 6, 2015).

            4 The EPA's determination that the Amador County area had attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date suspended the requirements to submit those SIP elements related to attainment of these NAAQS for so long as the area continues to attain but did not suspend the requirement to submit an NNSR program. 40 CFR 51.918; see also 77 FR 71551, 71553-71554 (Dec. 3, 2012) (noting that the EPA's attainment determination does not redesignate the area to attainment or relax control requirements).

            5 40 CFR 51.1314.

            6 The NNSR requirements applicable to Moderate ozone nonattainment areas are identical to those that apply to Marginal ozone nonattainment areas, except that Moderate nonattainment areas are subject to a more stringent offset ratio than Marginal nonattainment areas. CAA sections 182(a)(2)(C) (requiring permit programs consistent with CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173 for ozone nonattainment areas), 182(a)(4) (establishing 1.1 to 1 offset ratio for Marginal nonattainment areas), and 182(b)(5) (establishing 1.15 to 1 offset ratio for Moderate nonattainment areas) and 40 CFR 51.165.

        Additional information regarding the District's nonattainment status for each pollutant is included in our Technical Support Document (TSD), which may be found in the docket for this rule.
        B. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
        The EPA reviewed Rule 400 for compliance with CAA requirements for: (1) Stationary source preconstruction permitting programs as set forth in CAA part D, including CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173; (2) the review and modification of major sources in accordance with 40 CFR 51.160-51.165 as applicable in Moderate ozone nonattainment areas; (3) the review of new major stationary sources or major modifications in a designated nonattainment area that may have an impact on visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal Area in accordance with 40 CFR 51.307; (4) SIPs in general as set forth in CAA section 110(a)(2), including 110(a)(2)(A) and 110(a)(2)(E)(i); 7
           and (5) SIP revisions as set forth in CAA section 110(l) 8
           and 193.9
           Our review evaluated the submittal for compliance with the NNSR requirements applicable to Moderate ozone nonattainment areas, and ensured that the submittal addressed the NNSR requirements for the 1997 and 2015 ozone NAAQS.

            7 CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally enforceable, and CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires that states have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out their proposed SIP revisions.

            8 Per CAA section 110(l), SIP revisions are subject to reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption and submittal by states to the EPA. Additionally, CAA section 110(l) prohibits the EPA from approving any SIP revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.

            9 CAA section 193 prohibits the modification of any SIP-approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990 in a nonattainment area unless the modification ensures equivalent or greater emission reductions of the relevant pollutants.

        C. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
        With respect to procedural requirements, CAA sections 110(a)(2) and 110(l) require that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the state after reasonable notice and public hearing. Based on our review of the public process documentation included in the November 5, 2019 submittal of Rule 400, we find that the AAD has provided sufficient evidence of public notice, opportunity for comment and a public hearing prior to adoption and submittal of these rules to the EPA.
        With respect to the substantive requirements found in CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173, and 40 CFR 51.160-51.165, we have evaluated Rule 400 in accordance with the applicable CAA and regulatory requirements that apply to NNSR permit programs under part D of title I of the Act for all relevant ozone NAAQS, including the 2015 ozone NAAQS. With the exceptions noted below in Section II.D, we find that Rule 400 satisfies these requirements as they apply to sources subject to the NNSR permit program requirements applicable to Moderate ozone nonattainment areas. We have also determined that this rule satisfies the related visibility requirements in 40 CFR 51.307. In addition, we have determined that Rule 400 satisfies the requirement in CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) that regulations submitted to the EPA for SIP approval be clear and legally enforceable, and have determined that the submittal demonstrates, in accordance with CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i), that the District has adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out these proposed SIP revisions.
        Regarding the additional substantive requirements of CAA sections 110(l) and 193, our action will result in a more stringent SIP, while not relaxing any existing provision contained in the SIP. We have concluded that our action would comply with section 110(l) because our limited approval of Rule 400 will not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other CAA applicable requirement. In addition, our limited approval of Rule 400 will not relax any pre-November 15, 1990 requirement in the SIP, and therefore changes to the SIP resulting from this action ensure greater or equivalent emission reductions of ozone and its precursors in the District. Accordingly, we have concluded that our action is consistent with the requirements of CAA section 193.
        D. What are the rule deficiencies?

        The EPA identified five deficiencies in Rule 400. First, Section 4.5 of Rule 400 allows for the District to approve interprecursor trading (IPT) of ozone precursors to satisfy emission offset requirements, provided certain conditions are satisfied. However, on January 29, 2021, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Sierra Club v. EPA, 984 F.3d 1055, issued a decision holding that the CAA does not allow IPT for ozone precursors and vacating the provisions in the EPA's NNSR regulations allowing IPT for ozone precursors. In light of the Court's decision, the provision in Section 4.5 allowing for IPT for ozone precursors is no longer permissible. Second, Section 9.1(b)(iii) of Rule 400 fails to reference Section 7.4 (Relaxation in Enforceable Limitations). This apparent typographical error creates a deficiency in Section 9.1(b)(iii) of the rule, because it suggests that the source and the District need not adhere to the General requirements for establishing Plant-wide Applicability Limitations (PALs) in Section 9.4, which are required by 40 CFR 51.165(f)(4). Third, due to an apparent typographical error, Section 9.5 of the rule does not require the District to implement the public participation provisions of Section 8 for purposes of processing a request for a PAL to be established, renewed or increased in accordance with 40 CFR 51.165(f)(5). Therefore, the provisions of Section 9.5 are deficient. This error also causes a related deficiency in Sections 9.4(a)(ii), 9.8(b)(iii), 9.10(a), and 9.11(c), because these rule sections cross-reference Section 9.5, which refers to the wrong section of the rule for public participation requirements. Fourth, Section 9.10(d)(i) references Section 9.5 when it should reference Section 9.6. This error appears typographical in nature. However, this error creates a deficiency because it does not provide the correct reference for how to perform the emissions level calculation in accordance with 40 CFR 51.165(f)(10)(iv)(A). Fifth, Section 9.12(a)(iii) includes a reference to Section 7.12 of the rule (which does not exist), instead of Section 9.12. This apparent typographical error creates a deficiency in Section 9.12(a)(iii), because it does not include the requirement to comply with the provisions of Section 9.12 in accordance with 40 CFR 51.165(f)(12)(i)(C).
        Our TSD, which can be found in the docket for this rule, contains a more detailed discussion of our analysis of Rule 400.
        E. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule
        The TSD also includes recommendations for additional clarifying revisions to consider for adoption when the AAD next modifies Rule 400.
        F. Proposed Action and Public Comment
        As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of the submitted rule because it fulfills most of the relevant CAA requirements, and strengthens the SIP, but also contains five deficiencies. We have concluded that our limited approval of the submitted rule would comply with the relevant provisions of CAA sections 110(a)(2), 110(l), 172(c)(5), 173, and 193, 40 CFR 51.160-51.165, and 40 CFR 51.307.
        If we finalize this action as proposed, our action will be codified through revisions to 40 CFR 52.220a (Identification of plan—in part). This action would incorporate the submitted rule into the SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. This approval is limited because the EPA is simultaneously proposing a limited disapproval of the rule under CAA section 110(k)(3).

        If finalized as proposed, our limited disapproval action would trigger an obligation on the EPA to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) unless the State corrects the deficiencies, and the EPA approves the related plan revisions, within two years of the final action. Additionally, because the deficiencies relate to NNSR requirements under part D of title I of the Act, the offset sanction in CAA section 179(b)(2) would apply in Amador County 18 months after the effective date of a final limited disapproval, and the highway funding sanctions in CAA section 179(b)(1) would apply in the area six months after the offset sanction is imposed. Section 179 sanctions will not be imposed under the CAA if the State submits, and we approve, prior to the implementation of the sanctions, a SIP revision that corrects the deficiencies that we identify in our final action. The EPA intends to work with the District to correct the deficiencies in a timely manner.

        We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until September 22, 2021.
        III. Incorporation by Reference

        In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the AAD rule described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
        IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

        Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

        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. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
        This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA because this action does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
        C. 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 will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond those imposed by state law.
        D. 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. This action does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will result from this action.
        E. 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.
        F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
        This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175, because the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
        G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
        The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
        H. 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.
        I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
        Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA.
        J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population
        The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental justice in this rulemaking.

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
          Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

          Authority:
          42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

          Dated: August 9, 2021.
          Deborah Jordan,
          Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

      [FR Doc. 2021-17312 Filed 8-20-21; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P