        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [Docket No. 120926497-3269-01]
        RIN 0648-BC62
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska: Fixed-Gear Commercial Halibut and Sablefish Fisheries; Limitations on Use of Quota Share and the Individual Fishing Quota Program

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to amend the hired master regulations of the Individual Fishing Quota Program (IFQ Program) for the fixed-gear commercial Pacific halibut and sablefish fisheries in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) and the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). The IFQ Program allows initial recipients of catcher vessel halibut and sablefish quota share (QS) to hire a vessel master to harvest an annual allocation of individual fishing quota (IFQ) derived from the QS. If this action is approved, an initial QS recipient would not be allowed to use a hired master to harvest IFQ derived from catcher vessel QS that they received by transfer after February 12, 2010, with a limited exception for small amounts of QS. This action is necessary to maintain a predominantly owner-operated fishery. In addition, this action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982, the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the BSAI, the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the GOA, and other applicable laws.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received no later than 5 p.m., Alaska local time, on May 28, 2013.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on this document, identified by FDMS Docket Number NOAA-NMFS-2012-0185, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal Web site at www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2012-0185, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.
          • Fax: (907) 586-7557; Attn: Ellen Sebastian.

            Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, 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). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          An electronic copy of the Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RIR/IRFA) for this proposed regulatory amendment is available from http://www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.

          Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in the proposed rule may be submitted to NMFS and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395-7285.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Peggy Murphy, (907) 586-7228.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background

        NMFS proposes to modify the hired master regulations for management of the IFQ Program for the fixed-gear commercial fisheries for Pacific halibut and sablefish in waters off Alaska (IFQ Program). The IFQ Program is a limited access system for managing the fixed-gear halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) and sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) fisheries off Alaska. The IFQ Program was recommended by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) in 1992 and implementing rules were published by NMFS on November 9, 1993 (58 FR 59375). Fishing under the program began on March 15, 1995.

        The IFQ Program for the halibut fishery is implemented by Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 300, subpart E, and 50 CFR part 679 under the authority of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act). Fishing for Pacific halibut is managed by the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) and the Council under the Halibut Act. Section 773(c) of the Halibut Act authorizes the Council to develop regulations that are in addition to, and not in conflict with, approved IPHC regulations. Such Council-recommended regulations may be implemented by NMFS only after approval by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary).

        The IFQ Program for the sablefish fishery is implemented by the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA FMP), the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI FMP), and Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 679 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). The Council recommended and NMFS approved the GOA FMP in 1978 and the BSAI FMP in 1982. Regulations implementing the FMPs and general regulations governing the IFQ Program appear at 50 CFR part 679.
        The IFQ Program was intended primarily to reduce excessive fishing capacity in the commercial halibut and sablefish fixed-gear fisheries. The Council and NMFS designed the IFQ Program to maintain the social and economic character of the fixed-gear fisheries and the coastal communities where many of these fisheries are based. Access to the halibut and sablefish fisheries is limited to those persons holding QS. The QS holder is the person authorized to exercise the harvesting privilege in specific regulatory areas. Under the program, NMFS initially issued QS to qualified applicants (initial recipients) that owned or leased a vessel that made fixed-gear landings of halibut or sablefish during the qualifying period from 1984 to 1990 for halibut, and from 1985 to 1990 for sablefish. Initial recipients received QS allocations based on their harvest during the qualifying period, the area of the harvest, and the type of vessel used to land the harvest. Quota shares equate to individual harvesting privileges that are given effect on an annual basis through the issuance of IFQ permits. An annual IFQ permit authorizes the permit holder to harvest a specified amount of IFQ halibut or sablefish in a regulatory area.
        All QS are categorized according to the size of the vessel (A, B, C, or D) from which IFQ halibut and sablefish may be fished and whether that IFQ halibut or sablefish may be processed aboard the vessel. The vessel categories were designed to ensure that the IFQ Program did not radically change the structure of the fleet in place at the time the IFQ Program was implemented. These vessel size restrictions prevent the fishery from being dominated by large vessels or by any particular vessel category. A description of the specific vessel size categories is provided in regulation at 50 CFR part 679 and is not repeated here.
        Quota share is transferrable from one person to another. To limit consolidation and maintain diversity of the IFQ fleet, the Council recommended and NMFS implemented limits on the transfer (sale and purchase) and use of QS. For example, the IFQ Program only allows persons who were originally issued catcher vessel QS (category B, C, and D halibut QS and category B and C sablefish QS), or persons who qualify as IFQ crew members, to hold and transfer catcher vessel QS.
        As the IFQ Program developed, the Council recommended, and NMFS implemented, provisions such as QS use caps, vessel use caps, and a block program to limit QS acquisitions. These provisions were intended to maintain a diverse owner-operated fleet and to prevent excessive consolidation of QS. The QS use caps limit the amount of QS that a person may hold, while the vessel use cap limits the total amount of IFQ pounds that can be landed from a vessel during a season. Additionally, all initially issued QS that yielded relatively small amounts of IFQ annually was “blocked” or issued as an inseparable unit. Quota share blocks preserve small amounts of QS that are available at a relatively low cost to promote purchase of QS by crew members and new entrants to the IFQ fisheries. The block program also includes a “sweep-up” (consolidation) provision designed to minimize the number of very small blocks of QS that yield such a small amount of IFQ that they are economically disadvantageous to harvest. The consolidation provision allows small individual QS blocks to be permanently consolidated into larger QS blocks as long as the resulting QS block does not exceed consolidation limits specified in regulation.
        The IFQ program also requires IFQ holders to be onboard the catcher vessel to maintain a predominantly “owner-operated” fishery with a narrow exemption for vessel category A QS holders and initial recipients of QS category B, C, and D QS. Vessel category A QS (catcher/processor QS) are not subject to the owner-operated requirement.
        Vessel category A QS allows operators who had caught and processed catch at-sea during the QS qualifying years to continue to operate as catcher/processors. These catcher/processor vessels were not historically owner-operated prior to the implementation of the IFQ Program. Therefore, the IFQ Program did not seek to change the nature of operations in the catcher/processor fleet to limit the use of hired masters. Overall, only a small proportion of all QS is issued as vessel category A QS.
        The requirement that individual holders of catcher vessel QS (vessel categories B, C, or D) be onboard the vessel during all IFQ fishing ensures that QS remain largely in the hands of active fishermen. However, the IFQ Program allows all initial recipients of QS, including individuals and non-individual entities, to hire masters to fish the IFQ derived from their QS. Prior to the implementation of the IFQ Program, many individual fishermen had conducted their fishing businesses by hiring masters to skipper their fishing vessels. The IFQ Program allows initial recipients of catcher vessel QS to continue to employ hired masters to fish their IFQ, but only if the initial recipient maintains a minimum ownership interest in the vessel on which the IFQ halibut and sablefish are harvested. By limiting this exception to initial recipients, the Council anticipated that individual initial recipients would eventually retire from fishing and that non-individual initial recipients would dissolve or change composition over time. Eventually, QS would be transferred to other qualified individuals and the IFQ fisheries would become almost entirely owner-operated.
        Need for Action

        In February 2010, the Council received public testimony indicating that some QS initial recipients were increasingly using hired masters rather than continuing to personally operate their vessels when fishing with QS. In addition, the Council received information that initial recipients were purchasing increasing amounts of QS, and the IFQ derived from that purchased QS was being fished by hired masters. The Council was concerned about the apparent QS consolidation and reduced opportunity for new entrants to the fishery. The Council determined that the transition to a predominantly owner-operated fishery has been unreasonably delayed because the ability to hire a master applies to the QS holder and not the QS itself. This allows initial recipients to hire masters to harvest IFQ derived not only from their initially issued QS, but also IFQ derived from any QS received by transfer after initial issuance.

        At subsequent meetings, the Council examined IFQ Program data detailing the use of hired masters, changes in QS holdings of initial recipients, QS transfers, and the rate of new entry into the fishery. Section 5.2 of the RIR/IRFA prepared for this proposed action (see ADDRESSES) indicates the use of hired masters has increased significantly above levels that existed at the start of the IFQ Program. Between 1998 and 2009, the number of individual initial recipients who hire masters in the halibut fishery increased from 110 to 210 (a 91 percent increase), while in the sablefish fishery the number of individual initial recipients using hired masters increased from 46 to 91 (a 98 percent increase). The percentage of halibut IFQ landed by hired masters increased from 7.9 percent of the total IFQ landings in 1998 to 19.3 percent in 2009. Similarly, the percentage of sablefish IFQ landed by hired masters increased from 7.7 percent of the total IFQ landings in 1998 to 15.0 percent in 2009. Table 50 in section 5.2 of the RIR/IRFA also shows that QS is being consolidated among individual and non-individual initial recipients in most halibut and sablefish management areas. The number of initial recipients has decreased in the past 10 years, while the average holdings of those QS holders have increased. Thus, QS has consolidated among fewer QS holders who hire masters to fish their QS. In addition, some initial recipients that had not previously hired a master are now doing so, and some that had previously hired a master have increased the amount of QS they hold for use by a hired master or are using masters for a higher percentage of their landings. Finally, section 5.2 of the RIR/IRFA shows that the rates at which initial recipients of halibut and sablefish QS are divesting themselves of QS and exiting the fishery have declined over the last 5 years.
        After receiving public testimony and reviewing the analysis at its April 2011 meeting, the Council determined that it is likely that several factors are inhibiting new entrants from acquiring QS and slowing the transition to a predominantly owner-operated fishery. These factors include the increased use of hired masters, increased holdings of QS by initial recipients, and decreased numbers of initial QS recipients divesting their QS holdings. The Council determined that evolution to an owner-operated program is occurring at a slower pace than was originally envisioned and is therefore inhibiting achievement of the Council's objectives for the IFQ Program. The Council determined that the absence of a limitation on the use of hired masters could further delay this evolution. To address this concern, the Council recommended, and this proposed rule would implement, regulations that would prohibit the use of a hired master to fish IFQ halibut or sablefish derived from vessel category B, C, or D QS received by transfer after February 12, 2010, with some exceptions described later in this proposed rule.
        At final action, the Council set February 12, 2010, as the date because it is the date that the Council adopted its problem statement for the proposed action. At final action, the Council concluded that this date would reduce an initial recipient's incentive to purchase additional QS that could be fished by hired masters. The Council was concerned that QS purchases occurring before the proposed action's implementation would frustrate rather than support the progress toward an owner-operated fleet.
        The Council acknowledged that selecting this date to limit the use of hired masters might affect some individual and non-individual QS holders who may have been unaware of the Council's action or who may have been unable to complete their purchase of QS prior to February 12, 2010. The Council considered alternate dates after February 12, 2010. The Council rejected these alternatives because dates after February 12, 2010, could allow initial recipients to further consolidate their holdings of QS, obstructing the goals of the Council to limit further increases in the amount of IFQ harvested by hired masters. The Council also considered alternatives to delay implementation for the proposed action to provide additional time for affected QS holders to evaluate how it would affect their individual business plans. The Council rejected these alternatives, noting that delaying the implementation of this regulation would also frustrate the Council's overall policy goal of encouraging a transition from initial QS recipients using hired masters to an owner-operated fishery.
        The Council determined that the elapsed time between its recommendation and the implementation of the proposed action would provide a sufficient grace period for initial QS recipients to make any necessary changes to their business plans. The Council noted that under the proposed action, initial QS recipients would have options for using QS received by transfer after February 12, 2010. Specifically, initial recipients who received catcher vessel QS after February 12, 2010, could choose to sell those QS to other halibut and sablefish IFQ fishery participants, or to new entrants into the fishery. Other than selling the QS, the options and associated impacts differ between individual and non-individual initial recipients. An individual initial recipient who receives catcher vessel QS after February 12, 2010, could choose to fish the IFQ derived from that QS as an owner onboard. A non-individual initial recipient who received catcher vessel QS by transfer after February 12, 2010, could also choose to fish the resulting IFQ using a hired master, but only until the effective date of this action. After the effective date, a non-individual initial recipient would be prohibited from fishing QS received by transfer after February 12, 2010, using a hired master, but could, as noted above, sell those QS. Alternatively, a non-individual initial recipient could continue to hold that QS, but the resulting IFQ could not be used because a non-individual entity must hire a master to harvest the IFQ. Section 5.2 of the RIR/IRFA provides additional information on the amount of QS received by initial recipients after February 12, 2010, and the potential effects of this action on those initial recipients.
        The Council anticipated that its recommendation could reduce the economic incentive for initial recipients to increase their QS holdings above the amount they held as of February 12, 2010. This would support the Council's IFQ program objectives by (1) preventing further increase in the use of hired masters while minimizing disruption to operations of small businesses that have historically used hired masters, and (2) discouraging further consolidation of QS among initial recipients who use hired masters. The Council did not expect this action to disrupt existing hired master arrangements because persons who currently qualify for the hired master exemption could continue to use a hired master for QS held on or before February 12, 2010.
        The Council also clarified how the proposed action would affect catcher vessel QS transferred to an initial recipient and consolidated into a block after February 12, 2010. The Council recommended that:

        • if catcher vessel QS is consolidated into a QS block between February 12, 2010 and the effective date of the proposed action, the IFQ resulting from that consolidated QS block could be fished by a hired master, and

        • if catcher vessel QS is consolidated into a QS block after the effective date of the proposed action, the IFQ resulting from that consolidated QS block could not be fished by a hired master, and the QS holder would be required to be onboard the vessel harvesting the IFQ derived from those QS.
        As discussed in section 5.2 of the RIR/IRFA, the Council recommended these QS block provisions because it would be administratively burdensome to track and separate QS blocks consolidated prior to the implementation of this proposed action. NMFS reported to the Council at the February 2011 meeting that a relatively small amount of QS had been transferred to initial recipients and then consolidated into blocks since February 12, 2010. NMFS anticipates that additional QS may be consolidated into blocks by both individual and non-individual initial recipients until the proposed action is implemented. Tracking these QS is administratively burdensome because once a new block of QS is formed, NMFS cannot differentiate what portion of that QS block should be attributed to QS with the hired master privilege as opposed to that without the hired master privilege. Implementation of this action requires all QS to be separated into QS with the hired master privilege and QS without the hired master privilege. To avoid the administrative burden of reversing these consolidations, the Council recommended that initial recipients be allowed to retain the hired master exemption for those QS consolidated into blocks after February 12, 2010, but before the effective date of the amendment. Following the effective date of the proposed action, initial recipients could continue to use the QS block consolidation provision. However, the IFQ derived from the consolidated QS block could not be fished by a hired master.
        The proposed action would not apply under the following circumstances in the IFQ Program:
        • Category A (catcher/processor) QS are excluded from this action because this vessel category of QS is not subject to owner-operator requirements.
        • Individual (persons who, for example, are not corporations or partnerships) initial recipients in IPHC Area 2C (halibut) and the Southeast region (sablefish) are excluded from this action because existing regulations at § 679.42(i)(3) prohibit individuals who are initial recipients from using hired masters to harvest their IFQ halibut or sablefish in these areas.
        • Catcher vessel QS held by Community Development Quota (CDQ) groups are excluded from this action. CDQ groups are not subject to owner-operator requirements.
        Proposed Action
        Three regulatory amendments would be necessary to implement the Council's recommendation for the proposed action. The first two amendments would add regulations at § 679.42(i)(6) and (j)(10) to specify that a hired master could not be used to fish IFQ halibut or sablefish derived from catcher vessel QS that was received by transfer after February 12, 2010, unless the QS was consolidated into a block prior to the effective date of the proposed action. Third, NMFS proposes to add regulations under § 679.41(c)(11) specifying that NMFS would not approve a transfer of catcher vessel QS to a corporation, partnership, association, or other non-individual entity at any time. NMFS proposes these regulatory changes to make the regulations consistent with the Council's intent to discourage further consolidation of catcher vessel QS among initial recipients who use hired masters.
        Under these proposed regulatory changes, IFQ derived from catcher vessel QS received by transfer after February 12, 2010, must not be harvested by a hired master. Because a non-individual entity must hire a master to harvest its IFQ, the proposed change to § 679.41(c)(11) would prevent non-individual entities, such as corporations, from receiving additional catcher vessel QS by transfer after the effective date, with one exception. That exception, found at § 679.41(g)(3), provides that an individual initial catcher vessel QS recipient may transfer initially issued QS to a corporation that is solely owned by the same individual. Otherwise, individuals may not transfer QS received after initial issuance into a solely-owned corporation. NMFS proposes no changes to this existing exception. This exception allows individuals to transfer initially received QS to a solely-owned corporation for tax purposes, limiting liability, or for other business purposes.
        To implement the proposed action, NMFS would redesignate catcher vessel QS as “eligible to be fished by a hired master” if the QS was (1) held by an initial recipient on or before February 12, 2010, or (2) received by transfer and consolidated into a QS block held by an initial recipient prior to the effective date of the proposed action. All other QS that did not meet these requirements would be designated “not eligible to be fished by a hired master”, including (1) category A QS, 2) CDQ QS, (2) individual initial recipient QS designated for areas 2C (halibut) and Southeast (sablefish), (3) individual and non-individual QS not held by an initial recipient, (4) unblocked QS transferred to an initial recipient after February 12, 2010, and (5) blocked QS transferred to an initial recipient after the effective date. Following the redesignation of QS, two types of annual IFQ permits would be issued by NMFS. Quota share designated as eligible to be fished by a hired master would yield IFQ that may be harvested by a hired master. Quota share designated as not eligible to be fished by a hired master would yield IFQ that may not be harvested by a hired master. NMFS proposes to redesignate QS and issue the new types of IFQ permits prior to the beginning of the IFQ fishing year following implementation of this proposed action. The IFQ Program relies on an annual cycle to distribute QS, issue IFQ permits, arrange transfers and adjust IFQ holdings for a previous year's overages and underages. Implementing the proposed action at the beginning of the IFQ fishing season is necessary to avoid a large administrative burden for NMFS and affected participants. Mid-year implementation of the proposed action would require the reissuance of thousands of IFQ permits, increasing the costs of administering the IFQ Program and potentially causing considerable confusion in enforcement of regulations. Therefore, this action, if approved by the Secretary, would not be implemented until the beginning of the next fishing season following publication of the final rule.
        Effects of the Proposed Action

        The proposed action would affect the hired master privileges granted to initial recipients of catcher vessel QS. Under the proposed action, a number of options remain for initial recipients to maintain active and viable businesses in the halibut and sablefish fisheries. Initial recipients could continue to hire a master to harvest IFQ derived from QS held on or before February 12, 2010. Individual initial recipients who acquire QS after February 12, 2010, would need to decide whether to be onboard the vessel fishing the IFQ or transfer the QS to another person eligible to hold QS. Individual initial recipients could continue to purchase additional QS provided they are onboard to harvest the resulting IFQ. Non-individual initial recipients of QS would be prohibited from acquiring additional catcher vessel QS because the proposed regulation would prohibit non-individual entities from using a hired master for QS received by transfer after February 12, 2010. Given the opportunities for initial recipients to continue to use hired masters for QS held before February 12, 2010, NMFS does not expect the proposed action to significantly disrupt existing business operations.
        NMFS does not anticipate that the proposed action would significantly affect market availability or price of B, C, or D QS. It is difficult to predict the outcome of the action because the response of each QS holder will be different; some may choose not to purchase additional QS, some would be unable to purchase additional QS, and others may choose to finance QS purchases by crew or purchase more QS and be onboard to harvest the IFQ. The proposed action could increase opportunities for persons to purchase QS. Provisions of the action recognize business models developed since the inception of the IFQ Program while furthering the original goal of the IFQ program to move towards a predominantly owner-operated fishery.
        Classification
        Pursuant to sections 304(b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent the with the GOA FMP, the BSAI FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Halibut Act, and other applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
        Regulatory Impact Review and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
        A Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) were prepared for this action. The RIR assesses all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives. The RIR considers all quantitative and qualitative measures. The IRFA was prepared as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. The RFA recognizes and defines a business involved in fish harvesting as a small business if it is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field of operation (including affiliates) and if it has combined annual gross receipts not in excess of $4 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide.
        A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). The IRFA describes the action, why this action is being proposed, the objectives and legal basis for the proposed rule, the type and number of small entities to which the proposed rule would apply, and the reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule. The description of the proposed action, its purpose, and its legal basis are described in the preamble and are not repeated here.
        The proposed action could directly regulate a maximum of 1,447 entities holding halibut QS and sablefish QS, which are eligible to hire masters. However, the actual number of such entities that may be directly regulated is expected to be much smaller because many of these participants fish their own IFQ, without a hired master; and some have not and will not acquire additional QS. For purposes of providing a numerical estimate, had the rule been in effect in 2009, as few as 91 eligible entities that transferred QS for use by hired masters after February 12, 2009, would have been directly regulated.
        Small entities regulated by the proposed action may be divided into two mutually exclusive groups to estimate their size relative to the $4 million threshold. There are operations that harvest both halibut and groundfish (sablefish is considered a groundfish species, while halibut is not) for which gross revenue data exist. There are also operations that harvest halibut, but not groundfish, for which gross receipts data exist. These entities may also harvest species such as herring or salmon.

        Section 6 of the RIR/IRFA estimates that in 2009 the total gross revenues for fixed-gear catcher vessels by entity, from all sources off Alaska, were not more than $4 million in gross revenues, which has been the case since 2003. The average gross revenue for the small fixed-gear catcher vessels has been about $500,000. Thus, all of the entities that harvest both halibut and groundfish are under the threshold. This includes all of the entities that harvest any sablefish. Since the IFQ Program limits the amount of annual IFQ that any single vessel may use to harvest halibut and sablefish and the maximum number of QS units an entity may use, NMFS believes that few vessels that harvest halibut, but not groundfish, would exceed the $4 million threshold, either. Based upon gross receipts data for the halibut fishery, and more general information concerning the probable economic activity of vessels in this IFQ fishery, no entity (or at most a de minimis number) directly regulated by these restrictions could have been used to land fish worth more than $4.0 million in combined gross receipts in 2010. Therefore, all halibut and sablefish vessels have been assumed to be “small entities” for purposes of the IRFA. This simplifying assumption may overestimate the number of small entities, since it does not take into account vessel affiliations, owing to an absence of reliable data on the existence and nature of these relationships.
        Based on the low revenues for the average groundfish vessel and the low cap on maximum halibut and sablefish revenues, additional revenues from herring, salmon, crab, or shrimp likely would be relatively small for most of this class of vessels. Therefore, the available data and analysis suggest that there are few, if any, large entities among the directly regulated entities subject to the proposed action.
        The RIR reviews Alternative 1, the status quo, and Alternative 2, the preferred alternative. The Council did not identify any other alternatives that would have been substantially less burdensome. Alternative 1 would maintain the current regulations that allow all initial recipients of catcher vessel QS to hire a master to harvest their IFQ permits for any catcher vessel QS they hold. Current regulations enable initial QS recipients to continue to acquire QS up to IFQ Program caps and harvest accumulated IFQ with a hired master. This has resulted in increased amounts of IFQ being harvested by hired masters, which is contrary to the Council's objectives for the IFQ Program. Under Alternative 2, the preferred alternative, an initial QS recipient would not be allowed to use a hired master to harvest IFQ derived from catcher vessel QS that they received by transfer after February 12, 2010, with a limited exception for small amounts of QS. The preferred alternative may result in a loss of fishing opportunity for hired masters to harvest IFQ pounds. The proposed changes from this alternative would have distributional effects on initial recipients and hired masters, but will not affect production from the fisheries. Under Alternative 2, net benefits to the nation may increase, to the extent that the Council's objectives for an “owner-operated” fishery are more fully realized through this action.

        There were no significant alternatives to the proposed rule identified that would achieve the Council's objectives for the action and minimize adverse impacts on small entities. The Council considered alternative dates after which the use of hired masters would be prohibited. Although those alternative dates could have allowed more small entities to use hired masters, or to use hired masters for more of the QS they now hold or could acquire before another date, the use of hired masters is not necessary to harvest halibut and sablefish IFQ derived from QS held by individuals. None of the alternatives considered would limit the ability of small entities to receive QS by transfer and fish the resulting IFQ as owner-operators. The Council also considered and rejected an alternative to eliminate the hired master exemption from the IFQ Program, but determined that this would not sufficiently accommodate the existing business plans of initial catcher vessel QS recipients that use hired masters to harvest IFQ or their hired masters.
        No Federal rules that might duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed action have been identified.
        Collection-of-Information Requirements
        This proposed rule contains a collection-of-information, OMB Control No. 0648-0272. The IFQ Program requirements are mentioned in this proposed rule; however, the public reporting burden for this collection-of-information is not directly affected by this proposed rule.

        Public reporting burden includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Public comment is sought regarding: whether this proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information to NMFS at the ADDRESSES above, and email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax to (202) 395-7285.

        Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
          Alaska, Fisheries.

          Dated: April 22, 2013.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, performing the functions and duties of the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR part 679 as follows:

          PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

        1. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as follows:

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

        2. In § 679.41, add paragraph (c)(11) to read as follows:

          § 679.41
          Transfer of quota shares and IFQ.

          (c) * * *
          (11) The person applying to receive QS assigned to vessel category B, C, or D is not a corporation partnership, association, or other non-individual entity, except as specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this section.

        3. In § 679.42 add paragraphs (i)(6) and (j)(10) to read as follows:

          § 679.42
          Limitations on use of QS and IFQ.

          (i) * * *

          (6) Paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(4) of this section do not apply to any QS assigned to vessel category B, C, or D received by transfer by any person described in paragraph (i)(1) after February 12, 2010, except a hired master may be used to harvest IFQ derived from QS blocks that were consolidated under § 679.41(e)(2) or (e)(3) after February 12, 2010, and before [INSERT DATE FINAL RULE BECOMES EFFECTIVE].
          (j) * * *

          (10) Paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(9) of this section do not apply to any QS assigned to vessel category B, C, or D received by transfer after February 12, 2010, by an entity described in paragraph (j)(1) except a hired master may be used to harvest IFQ derived from QS that were consolidated under § 679.41(e)(2) or (e)(3) after February 12, 2010, and before [INSERT DATE FINAL RULE BECOMES EFFECTIVE].

      [FR Doc. 2013-09939 Filed 4-25-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
        [EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0734; FRL 9981-28—Region 7]
        Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; MO; Redesignation of the Missouri Portion of the St. Louis Missouri-Illinois Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standards for Fine Particulate Matter and Approval of Associated Maintenance Plan

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:

          On January 5, 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published in the Federal Register an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) specifically requesting early input and comments on the Agency's interpretation that air quality monitoring data from 2015-2017 support a finding that the Missouri Portion of the St. Louis nonattainment area attains the 1997 Annual National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The notice also provided an evaluation of Missouri's 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, which includes the 2008 and 2025 NOX and PM2.5 motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) and established the 2008 base year emissions inventory. EPA received no comments on the ANPR. EPA is now taking direct final action on three items, consistent with the ANPR. First, EPA is approving the state's request to redesignate the Missouri portion of the St. Louis MO-IL nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS as the monitoring values demonstrate the area attains the standard. Second, EPA is approving the state implementation plan (SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for the Missouri portion of the area including the motor vehicle emissions budget. Third, EPA is approving Missouri's 2008 base year emissions inventory in accordance with section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. In the “Rules and Regulations” section of this Federal Register, we are approving the state's SIP revisions as a direct final rule without a prior proposed rule. If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received September 4, 2018.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0734 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Lachala Kemp, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7214, or by email at kemp.lachala@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This document proposes to take action on the State of Missouri request to redesignate the Missouri portion of the St. Louis MO-IL nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 Annual National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and to approve the state's 2008 emissions inventory. We have published a direct final rule approving the State's SIP revision(s) in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this Federal Register, because we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no relevant adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this action in the preamble to the direct final rule. If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule. If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. We would address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. For further information, please see the information provided in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

          List of Subjects
          40 CFR Part 52
          Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
          40 CFR Part 81
          Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Designations and classifications, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

          Dated: July 16, 2018.
          James B. Gulliford,
          Regional Administrator, Region 7.

      [FR Doc. 2018-16004 Filed 8-2-18; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Aviation Administration
        14 CFR Part 39
        [Docket No. FAA-2013-1073; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-039-AD]
        RIN 2120-AA64
        Airworthiness Directives; Airplanes Originally Manufactured by Lockheed for the Military as P-3A and P3A Airplanes

          AGENCY:
          Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

          SUMMARY:
          We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain airplanes, originally manufactured by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company for the military as P-3A or P3A airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a determination that the existing maintenance program must be revised to address fatigue cracking of the airplane. This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate certain limitations. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

          DATES:
          We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 7, 2014.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Fax: 202-493-2251.
          • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
          • Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

          For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Avenger Aircraft and Services, 103 N. Main Street, Suite 106, Greenville, SC 29601-4833; telephone: (864) 232-8073; fax: (864) 232-8074; email: AAS@AvengerAircraft.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

        Examining the AD Docket
        You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-1073; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: (562) 627-5357; fax: (562) 627-5210; email: george.garrido@faa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Comments Invited

        We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2013-1073; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-039-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments.
        We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.
        Discussion

        We reviewed accident investigation reports involving other restricted category firefighting airplanes, specifically Model C-130 and P2V airplanes. Previous accident investigations for these other firefighting airplanes revealed that the existing maintenance programs for airplanes operating under restricted category type certificate data sheets (TCDS) are not adequate to maintain the aircraft for continued safe operation. Therefore, we have determined that it is necessary to incorporate an airworthiness limitation section based on damage tolerance into the Model P-3A airplane maintenance program to ensure continue safe operation in a restricted category. The adverse loading spectrum for the restricted category firefighting airplanes could result in fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
        The initial Model P-3A inspection program was based on the navy usage (or baseline usage) as defined by the U.S. Navy. The new airworthiness limitations addressed in this proposed AD are separated into baseline usage and usage that includes aerial dispensing of liquids. For airplanes with combined baseline and aerial dispersion usage accumulated, the operator must determine the total remaining life and the total remaining hours or flights until inspection is due for the principle structural element (PSE) inspection requirements by combining the fatigue damage accumulated during the baseline and the aerial dispersion of liquids usage.
        Relevant Service Information
        We reviewed Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010, which describes airworthiness limitations that include structural inspection requirements.
        FAA's Determination
        We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
        Proposed AD Requirements
        For Model P3A and P-3A airplanes, this proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate airworthiness limitations of Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010.
        This proposed AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections). Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to the requirements of paragraph (j) of this proposed AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required actions that will ensure the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure.
        Costs of Compliance
        We estimate that this proposed AD affects 8 airplanes of U.S. registry.
        We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

          Estimated Costs

            Action
            Labor cost
            Parts cost
            Cost per product

            Cost on U.S. operators

            Revise the maintenance or inspection program
            1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85
            $0
            $85
            $680

        Authority for This Rulemaking
        Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
        We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
        Regulatory Findings
        We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect 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.
        For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
        (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
        (2) Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
        (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
        (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

          List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
          Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

        The Proposed Amendment
        Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

          PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

        1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
           49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

          § 39.13
          [Amended]

        2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

            Lockheed (Original Manufacturer): Docket No. FAA-2013-1073; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-039-AD.
          (a) Comments Due Date
          We must receive comments by March 7, 2014.
          (b) Affected ADs
          None.
          (c) Applicability

          This AD applies to all P-3A or P3A airplanes, originally manufactured by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company for the military, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category:

          (1) Aero Union Corporation Model P3A airplanes; and
          (2) USDA Forest Service Model P-3A airplanes.
          (d) Subject
          Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers; 57, Wings.
          (e) Unsafe Condition
          This AD was prompted by a determination that the existing maintenance or inspection program must be revised to address fatigue cracking of the airplane. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
          (f) Compliance
          Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
          (g) Maintenance Program Revision
          Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, by incorporating airworthiness limitations specified in Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010.
          (h) Compliance Times for Modifications, Replacements, and Inspections
          For the tasks specified in Part-I, Sections B. through E., of Procedure 01-00-005, of Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010, the compliance times are specified in paragraphs (h)(i) through (h)(iv) of this AD. For airplanes with combined baseline and aerial dispensing usage accumulated, the total remaining life and the total remaining hours or flights until inspection is due for the principle structural element (PSE) inspection requirements is determined by combining the fatigue damage accumulated during the baseline and the aerial dispensing of liquids usage. The usage must be combined in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.
          (i) For the baseline life limits, the compliance time is: At the applicable “flight hours” or “flights,” whichever occurs first, specified in Part-I, Section B, “Life Limitations Baseline Usage,” of Procedure 01-00-005, of Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010; or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD; whichever occurs later.
          (ii) For the baseline principle structural limits (PSE) inspection requirements, the compliance time is: At the applicable “threshold interval hours” or “threshold interval flights” since new, whichever occurs first, as specified in Tables C.1, C.2, and C.3, of Part-I, Section C, “Principle Structural Element Inspection Requirements—Baseline Usage,” of Procedure 01-00-005, of Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010; or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD; whichever occurs later. Where compliance times are specified as “threshold interval hours,” those compliance times are total flight hours. Where the compliance times are specified as “threshold interval flights,” those compliance times are total flight cycles.
          (iii) For the aerial dispensing of liquids life limits, the compliance time is: At the applicable “flight hours” or “flights,” whichever occurs first, specified in Part-I, Section D, “Life Limitations—Aerial Dispensing of Liquids Usage” of Procedure 01-00-005, of Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010; or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD; whichever occurs later.
          (iv) For the aerial dispensing of liquids PSE inspection requirements, the compliance time is: At the applicable “threshold interval hours” or threshold interval flights,” whichever occurs first, as specified in Tables E.1, E2, and E.3, of Part-I, Section E, “Principle Structural Element Inspection Requirements—Aerial Dispensing of Liquids Usage,” of Procedure 01-00-005, of Avenger Aircraft and Services P3A Airworthiness Limitations Section—FAA TCDS A32NM & TCDS T00006LA, Forest and Wildlife Conservation Usage (Includes Aerial Dispensing of Liquids), AAS-ALS-07-001, Revision D, dated August 2, 2010; or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD; whichever occurs later.
          (i) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations
          After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections), and/or intervals may be used unless the actions, and intervals are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
          (j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
          (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
          (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
          (k) Related Information

          (1) For more information about this AD, contact George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: (562) 627-5357; fax: (562) 627-5210; email: george.garrido@faa.gov.

          (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Avenger Aircraft and Services, 103 N. Main Street, Suite 106, Greenville, SC 29601-4833; telephone: (864) 232-8073; fax: (864) 232-8074; email: AAS@AvengerAircraft.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

          Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 9, 2014.
          Jeffrey E. Duven,
          Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

      [FR Doc. 2014-01010 Filed 1-17-14; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [Docket No. 140528460-4460-01]
        RIN 0648-BE25
        Fisheries Off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Fisheries; California Swordfish Drift Gillnet Fishery; Vessel Monitoring System and Pre-Trip Notification Requirement

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS is issuing a proposed rule to require use of a NMFS-approved vessel monitoring system (VMS) and institute a 48-hour pre-trip call-in notification requirement for West Coast Large-mesh Swordfish Drift Gillnet (DGN) vessel owners. The DGN fishery operates under authority of the Federal Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP). The VMS requirement is a mandatory term and condition in the 2013 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 biological opinion (Opinion) that authorizes the DGN fishery to take certain threatened and endangered species incidental to fishing operations. Installing and operating VMS on vessels in this fishery would provide NMFS and law enforcement personnel the ability to monitor the fishery for compliance with time/area closures, facilitate the deployment of agents to inspect vessels for compliance with conservation measures, and more closely examine and compare the distribution of observed and unobserved fishing effort in the fishery. The pre-trip notification would assist NMFS with timely and efficient placement of NMFS observers onboard DGN vessels.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before September 30, 2014.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on the proposed rule, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2014-2013-0131, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-2013-0131, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Craig Heberer, NMFS West Coast Region, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Ste. 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802. Include the identifier “NOAA-NMFS-2014- in the comments.

            Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, 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). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          Copies of the draft Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) and other supporting documents are available via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA-NMFS-140528460-4460-01 or contact with the Regional Administrator, William W. Stelle, Jr., NMFS West Coast Regional Office, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Bldg 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0070, or RegionalAdministrator.WCRHMS@noaa.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Craig Heberer, NMFS, 706-431-9440 (#303), craig.heberer@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The DGN fishery is managed under the HMS FMP, which was prepared by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq., by regulations at 50 CFR part 660.
        Background
        On September 4, 2013, NMFS published in the Federal Register a temporary rule (78 FR 54548) for emergency action to modify the DGN fishery for the 2013-2014 fishing season under authority of section 305(c)(1) of the MSA, 16 U.S.C. 1855(c). NMFS issued the temporary rule as a result of the observed entanglement of two Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed sperm whales by a DGN fishing vessel in 2010 and the recommendations made to NMFS by the Pacific Offshore Cetacean Take Reduction Team (TRT) to reduce sperm whale bycatch in the fishery for the 2013-2014 fishing season, in accordance with the MSA, ESA, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Implementation of the temporary regulations allowed NMFS to issue an MMPA section 101(a)(5)(E) permit authorizing the incidental take of sperm whales by the DGN fishery. The temporary regulations implemented, among other measures, mandatory monitoring (VMS) and observer requirements (pre-trip notification and a 100 percent deep water closure zone unless a NMFS-certified observer was on board), and would have immediately shut down the fishery for the calendar year in the event of a sperm whale interaction.

        The temporary rule expired on January 31, 2014, which corresponded with the traditional end of the DGN fishing season. At its March 2014 meeting, the Council requested that NMFS extend the emergency actions contained in the temporary rule while permanent rulemaking under the MMPA to reduce sperm whale interactions in the DGN fishery is under consideration. NMFS published in the Federal Register a second temporary rule (79 FR 29377, May 22, 2014) renewing the conservation measures contained in the original temporary rule. That rule expired on August 5, 2014. Since publication of the second emergency rule, the stock assessment for sperm whales and the methodology for estimating bycatch rates have been revised. The revisions are based on analyses prepared by scientists from the NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center and included in the proposed draft 2014 Stock Assessment Report presented at the NMFS Scientific Review Group meeting in April, 2014. Based on those revisions, on August 25, 2014, NMFS published in the Federal Register its draft amended Negligible Impact Determination (NID), for the proposed issuance of a MMPA section 101(a)(5)(E) permit for federally managed commercial fisheries off the U.S. West Coast. The Federal Register notice regarding the proposed NID explains the analyses and rationale for determining that mortality and serious injury incidental to commercial fisheries, including the DGN fishery, will have a negligible impact on the stock of sperm whales on which the emergency regulations had been focused. Because the stock assessments and bycatch estimates for sperm whales have been revised, using peer-reviewed and scientifically sound methodology, restrictions on the DGN fishery which had been implemented in the emergency regulations are not required under the draft amended NID. In addition, under section 118 of the MMPA, the Pacific Offshore Cetacean Take Reduction Plan continues to meet its mandated short-term goal of reducing serious injury/mortality of strategic stocks, including sperm whales, to below the Potential Biological Removal levels.
        The revisions to the sperm whale stock assessment and bycatch methodologies also prompted the TRT to reconvene and revisit their February recommendations to NMFS. At their June 2014 meeting, the Council recommended that NMFS move forward with the VMS and pre-trip notification requirements suggested in the original TRT recommendation and promulgate regulations to make those requirements permanent under the MSA. Based on the Council recommendation and because the VMS requirement addresses a mandatory term and condition specified in the Opinion issued on May 2, 2013, NMFS is proposing this rule to make permanent the VMS and the pre-trip notification requirements so that these measures are in place for the 2014-2015 DGN fishing season, which typically commences after August 15 of each year. Certain restrictions on the DGN fishery that had been implemented in the emergency regulations, but are no longer required under the draft amended NID, are not incorporated in this rule. The TRT is continuing to meet and discuss recommendations to NMFS for any additional conservation measures that would further benefit the stocks in question.

        Information for current NMFS type-approved VMS units can be obtained by contacting: NMFS, Office of Law Enforcement (OLE), 1315 East West Hwy, Suite 3301, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282; telephone: (888) 210-9288; fax: (301) 427-0049. Or, by contacting NMFS OLE VMS Helpdesk: telephone: (888) 219-9228; email: ole.helpdesk@noaa.gov. The business hours of the VMS Helpdesk are: Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, 7 a.m. to 11 p.m., Eastern Time.

        The vessel owner would be responsible for all costs associated with the purchase, installation, and maintenance of the VMS mobile transceiver unit (VMS unit), and for all charges levied by the mobile communications service provider as necessary to ensure the transmission of automatic position reports to NMFS. The unit cost, physical size, available features, transmission fees, and service packages vary among the different type-approved VMS mobile transceiver units. Vessel owners may choose the type-approved VMS unit that best fits their needs. Federal funds are currently available for reimbursement of type-approved VMS units up to $3,100, as determined within the VMS Reimbursement Program. The availability of these funds for reimbursement for the cost of purchasing a VMS unit is not guaranteed, but is anticipated to be available on a first-come first-served basis. To be eligible to receive reimbursement, the owner must submit proof of professional installation of the VMS unit to NMFS Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) in compliance with the requirements of the VMS Reimbursement Program. More information on the VMS Reimbursement Program can be obtained by calling the NMFS OLE VMS Helpdesk: telephone: (888) 219-9228, and online: http://www.psmfc.org/program/vessel-monitoring-system-reimbursement-program-vms?pid=17.

        Prior to fishing, the vessel owner, or the vessel operator on the owner's behalf, will be required to send an activation report to NMFS OLE to verify that the VMS unit was installed correctly and has been activated. Activation of a VMS unit would be required any time the unit is installed or reinstalled, any time the mobile communications service provider has changed, and any other time directed by NMFS. Activation would involve submitting to NMFS a report via mail, facsimile or email with information about the vessel, its owner or operator, and the VMS unit, as well as receiving confirmation from NMFS that the VMS unit is transmitting position reports properly. For issues related to day-to-day operation of VMS units, including declaration reports, activation reports and exemption reports, the (Special Agent-in-Charge's (SAC's) designee is the OLE VMS Program Manager's office located at 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115-6349; phone: (888) 585-5518; fax: (206) 526‐6528); and email: wcd.vms@noaa.gov.

        Classification
        Pursuant to the MSA, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the HMS FMP and its amendments, other provisions of the MSA, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        National Environmental Policy Act

        This action is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment in accordance with NAO 216-6. A memorandum for the file that sets forth the decision to use a categorical exclusion will be prepared prior to the issuance of a final rule.
        Executive Order 12866
        Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
        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 that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
        The proposed rule would apply to the large-mesh drift gillnet (DGN) fishery in California. Temporary regulations (78 FR 54548, September 4, 2013, and 79 FR 29377, May 22, 2014) required owners and operators of DGN vessels to install and operate VMS units and to notify NMFS 48 hours in advance of a fishing trip, for which NMFS may assign an observer, during the 2013-2014 fishing season. DGN fishermen complied with the temporary provisions for operating VMS units and notifying NMFS prior to departure. These temporary regulations expired in August of 2014.

        Under the proposed rule, all DGN vessels will be required to install and operate VMS units and notify NMFS 48 hours prior to taking a fishing trip. The small entities that would be affected by the proposed action are all fishing vessels operating as part of the DGN fleet. The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) defines small fishing businesses as vessels with annual revenues of or below $19 million from finfish fishing; however, this definition changed to $20.5 million effective on July 14, 2014 following a recent final rule published by the SBA on June 12, 2014 (79 FR 33647). The vessels in the DGN fleet have never achieved annual revenue of $20.5 million per vessel from finfish fishing whether considering an individual vessel or per vessel average. The aggregate annual ex-vessel revenues for the entire fleet during the last 15 years have been fewer than three million dollars. In recent years (2008 through 2013), about 26 DGN vessels of 65 current permits (active and latent) have been operating annually under the Fishery Management Plan for the U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species. From 2008 through 2013, the average annual per vessel revenue for the DGN fleet from finfish fishing has been about $126,000, a number well below a threshold value of $20.5 million from finfish fishing to be considered a large business per the SBA size definition.
        All of the entities impacted by this proposed rule are considered small business entities. All impacted vessels will be affected in a similar way and disproportional economic effect between small and large businesses will not exist. The VMS units that have been type-approved range in cost and service features. This allows the vessel owner flexibility in choosing the model that best fits the needs of their vessel. Compliance for each of the projected small entities would involve the following approximate annualized costs: $1,000 for the purchase and installation of VMS units (based on $4,000 per unit and a lifespan of 4 years per unit), $250 for VMS unit maintenance, and, based on estimated communication costs of about $1.50 per day (based on hourly reporting cost of some service providers), $547.50 for VMS unit operation (i.e., the transmission of automatic vessel position reports to NOAA). Thus, the total compliance cost (during the 4-year lifespan of VMS unit) and annualized compliance cost would be about $7,190 and $1,797.50 per vessel, respectively. The analysis assumes that vessel owners will pay for the required VMS units. However, Federal funds may be available for reimbursement of certain costs associated with type-approved units up to $3,100 (or $775 annualized amount).1
           The recurring financial burden to a fisherman after a subsidy on the VMS unit will be about $1,025 annually, or about 0.81 percent of the annual average fishing revenue. In the absence of a VMS subsidy, the recurring financial burden to a fisherman would be about 1.42 percent of the annual average fishing revenue. Based on these figures, none of the DGN small business entities will be significantly impacted by the provisions in the proposed rule. Further, NMFS concludes that all of these small business entities will be affected in similar ways. The average revenue of $126,000 per annum during 2008-13 is representative of the fishery. While outlier vessel revenue values have ranged from about three to five times the average annual per vessel revenue during 2008-13, variability among the small entities is not very large since the mean and standard deviation of the annual revenues among fishermen are nearly similar in each year during 2008-13.

            1 The availability of these funds for reimbursement for the cost of purchasing a VMS unit is not guaranteed, but the funds are anticipated to be available on a first-come first-served basis.

        The financial burden of operating a VMS unit is trivial relative to the average annual gross revenue that a DGN fisherman generates from fishing. The financial cost to a fisherman, either with the subsidy or without, is less than two percent of the annual average fishing revenue, which does not constitute a significant impact. In addition, the DGN fleet has already been operating under (now-expired) emergency rules that required the use of VMS units, so vessel owners are already aware of and complying with these requirements.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
          Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: September 9, 2014.
          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 660 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES

        1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 660 continues to read as follows:

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

        2. In § 660.702, the definitions for “Regional Administrator,” “Special-Agent-In-Charge (SAC),” and “Vessel monitoring system unit (VMS unit)” are revised to read as follows:

          § 660.702
          Definitions.

            Regional Administrator means the Regional Administrator for the West Coast Region, National Marine Fisheries Service, or a designee.

            Special Agent-In-Charge (SAC) means the Special Agent-In-Charge, NMFS, Office of Enforcement, West Coast Region, or a designee of the Special Agent-In-Charge.

            Vessel monitoring system unit (VMS unit) means an automated, remote system and mobile transceiver unit that is approved by NMFS and provides information about a vessel's identity, location, and activity for the purposes of routine monitoring, control, surveillance and enforcement of area and time restrictions and other fishery management measures.

        3. In § 660.705, paragraphs (l), (o), and (p) are revised and paragraphs (rr) and (ss) are added to read as follows:

          § 660.705
          Prohibitions.

          (l) Fail to install, activate, repair, replace, carry, operate or maintain a VMS unit as required under § 660.712 and § 660.713.

          (o) Fish for, catch, or harvest HMS with longline or drift gillnet gear without an operating VMS unit on board the vessel after installation of the VMS unit.
          (p) Possess on board a vessel without an operating VMS unit HMS harvested with longline or drift gillnet gear after installation of the VMS unit.

          (rr) Fail to notify NMFS or the NMFS-designated observer provider at least 48 hours prior to departure on a fishing trip using drift gillnet gear as required under § 660.713.
          (ss) Fail to submit a declaration report to the NMFS Office of Law Enforcement prior to departure on a fishing trip using drift gillnet gear as required under § 660.713.

        4. In § 660.713, paragraphs (f) and (g) are added to read as follows:

          § 660.713
          Drift gillnet fishery.

          (f) Pre-trip Notification Requirements. (1) Drift gillnet vessel owners or operators are required to notify NMFS or the NMFS designated observer provider at least 48 hours prior to departing on each fishing trip. The vessel owners or operators must communicate to the observer provider: the owner or operator's name, contact information, vessel name, port of departure, and estimated date and time of departure, and a telephone number at which the owner or operator may be contacted during the business day (Monday through Friday between 0800 and 1700 Pacific Time) to indicate whether an observer will be required on the subject fishing trip. Contact information for the current observer provider can be obtained by calling the NMFS West Coast Region Sustainable Fisheries Division at 562-980-4030.
          (2) The drift gillnet vessel owners or operators must provide the NMFS West Coast Region Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) with a declaration report before the vessel leaves port to fish for thresher shark/swordfish with large-mesh drift gillnet gear in the state and federal waters between 0 and 200 nm offshore of California, Oregon, or Washington. OLE's declaration hotline is 1-888-585-5518. The business hours for the OLE are Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Pacific Standard Time; voice messages left on the hotline will be retrieved at the start of the next business day.
          (g) Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) Requirements. Drift gillnet vessel owners are required to install an OLE type-approved VMS mobile transceiver unit (VMS unit) and to arrange for a OLE type-approved communications service provider to receive and relay transmissions to the OLE prior to fishing for thresher shark/swordfish with large-mesh drift gillnet gear.
          (1) What is a VMS? A VMS consists of an OLE type-approved VMS unit that automatically determines the vessel's position and transmits it to an OLE type-approved communications service provider. The communications service provider receives the transmission and relays it to the OLE.
          (2) What Vessels are Required to Have a VMS? Any vessel registered for use with a limited entry California state large-mesh thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet permit and a federal highly migratory species permit that fishes in state or Federal waters off the coasts of California, Oregon, or Washington (0-200 nm offshore).
          (3) How are VMS Units and Communications Service Providers Approved by OLE?

          (i) VMS unit manufacturers or communication service providers will submit products or services to the OLE for evaluation based on the published specifications.

          (ii) OLE will publish a list of OLE type-approved VMS units and communication service providers for the DGN fishery in the Federal Register or notify the public through other appropriate media; and the OLE may publish amendments to the list as necessary.
          (4) What are the Vessel Owner's Responsibilities? If you are a vessel owner that must participate in the VMS program, you or the vessel operator on your behalf must:
          (i) Obtain an OLE type-approved VMS unit and have it installed on board your vessel in accordance with the instructions provided by the OLE. You may obtain a copy of the VMS installation and operation instructions from the Special-Agent-In-Charge (SAC).
          (ii) Activate the VMS unit, submit an activation report, and receive confirmation from OLE that the VMS transmissions are being received at least 72 hours prior to leaving port on a fishing trip for which VMS is required. Instructions for submitting an activation report may be obtained from the SAC. An activation report must again be submitted to the OLE following reinstallation of a VMS unit or change in service provider before the vessel may be used to fish in a fishery requiring the VMS.
          (A) Activation reports. If you are a vessel owner who must use VMS and you are activating a VMS unit for the first time or reactivating a VMS unit following a reinstallation or change in service provider, you or the vessel operator on your behalf must fax to the OLE an activation report that includes: vessel name, vessel owner's name, address and telephone number, vessel operator's name, address and telephone number, USCG vessel documentation number/state registration number; and, if applicable, the relevant state and federal permit numbers for which vessel or owner is registered, VMS unit manufacturer, VMS communications service provider, VMS unit identification, and a statement signed and dated by the vessel owner confirming compliance with the installation procedures provided by the SAC and identifying whether the VMS unit is primary or backup.
          (B) Transferring ownership of the VMS unit. Ownership of the VMS unit may be transferred from one vessel owner to another vessel owner if all of the following documents are provided to the OLE: a new activation report, which identifies that the VMS unit was previously registered to another vessel, a notarized bill of sale showing proof of ownership of the VMS unit, and documentation from the communications service provider showing proof that the service agreement for the previous vessel was terminated and that a service agreement was established for the new vessel.
          (iii) Continuously operate and maintain the VMS unit in good working order, 24 hours a day throughout the fishing year. The VMS unit must accurately transmit a signal indicating the vessel's position at least once every hour, 24 hours a day throughout the year, unless a valid exemption report, as described in paragraph (g)(4)(iv)(F) of this section, has been confirmed by the OLE. Less frequent position reporting, at least once every 4 hours, may be authorized by OLE when a vessel remains in port for an extended period of time.
          (iv) Submit an exemption report to be confirmed by the OLE as valid, as described at paragraph (g)(4)(iv)(F) of this section, and comply with all conditions and requirements of the VMS exemption identified in this section and specified in the exemption report for a vessel to be exempted from the requirement of continuously operating and maintaining the VMS unit 24 hours a day throughout the fishing year.
          (A) Haul out exemption. When it is anticipated that a vessel will be continuously out of the water for more than 7 consecutive days and the OLE has confirmed a valid exemption report has been received for the vessel, electrical power to the VMS unit may be removed and transmissions may be discontinued. Under this exemption, VMS transmissions can be discontinued from the time the vessel is removed from the water until the time that the vessel is placed back in the water.
          (B) Outside areas exemption. When the vessel will be continuously operating seaward of the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ; beyond 200 nm) off the coasts of California, Oregon, or Washington for more than 7 consecutive days and the OLE has confirmed a valid exemption report has been received for the vessel, the VMS unit transmissions may be reduced or discontinued from the time the vessel leaves the EEZ off the coasts of California, Oregon, or Washington until the time that the vessel re-enters the EEZ off the coasts of California, Oregon, or Washington. If the vessel is equipped with a VMS unit that OLE has approved for this exemption and after the OLE has received an exemption report for the vessel, the vessel owner or operator can request that the OLE reduce or discontinue the VMS transmissions.
          (C) Long-term departure exemption. A vessel participating in the DGN fishery that is required to have VMS under paragraph (g) of this section may be exempted from VMS provisions after the end of the fishing season in which it fished, provided that a completed exemption report including a statement signed by the vessel owner indicating that the vessel will not be used to take and retain or possess or land swordfish taken in state or federal waters off the coasts of California, Oregon, or Washington during the upcoming fishing year is submitted to OLE.
          (D) Emergency exemption. Vessels required to have VMS under paragraph (g) of this section may be exempted from VMS provisions in emergency situations that are beyond the vessel owner's control, including but not limited to: Fire, flooding, or extensive physical damage to critical areas of the vessel. A vessel owner may request an emergency exemption from the VMS requirements specified in paragraph (g) of this section for his/her vessel by contacting the OLE and submitting the following information in writing: The reasons for seeking an exemption including any supporting documents (e.g., repair invoices, photographs showing damage to the vessel, insurance claim forms, etc.), the time period for which the exemption is requested, and the location of the vessel while the exemption is in effect. The OLE will issue a written determination granting or denying the emergency exemption request. A vessel will not be covered by the emergency exemption until the OLE issues a determination granting the exemption. If an exemption is granted, the duration of the exemption will be specified in the OLE determination.
          (E) Submission of exemption reports. Long-term departure exemption reports must be signed by the vessel owner and submitted by fax or by emailing an electronic copy of the actual report to the OLE. If an emergency exemption request will be submitted, initial contact with OLE must be made by telephone, fax or email within 24 hours from when the emergency incident occurred. All emergency exemption requests must be submitted in writing within 72 hours from when the incident occurred. Submission methods for exemption reports, except long-term departures and emergency exemption requests, may include email, facsimile, or telephone. OLE will provide, through appropriate media, instructions to the public on submitting exemption reports. Instructions and other information needed to make exemption reports may be mailed to the vessel owner's address of record. Owners of vessels required to use the VMS who do not receive instructions by mail are responsible for contacting OLE during business hours at least 3 days before the exemption is needed to obtain information necessary for exemption reports. OLE must be contacted during business hours (Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, between 0800 and 1700 Pacific Time). Any other categories of exemptions that have not been specified in paragraph (g) of this section may be submitted to OLE through the VMS unit or another method deemed appropriate by OLE. Before a request for a new category of exemption can be approved by OLE, it must be announced in the Federal Register.

          (F) Valid exemption reports. For an exemption report to be valid, it must be received by OLE at least 2 hours and not more than 24 hours before the exempted activities defined at paragraphs (g)(4)(iv)(A) through (D) of this section occur and confirmed by OLE. An exemption report is valid until NMFS receives a report canceling the exemption. An exemption cancellation must be received at least 2 hours before the vessel re-enters the EEZ following an outside areas exemption; at least 2 hours before the vessel is placed back in the water following a haul out exemption; or at least 2 hours before a vessel resumes fishing with a large-mesh drift gillnet after a long-term departure exemption. If a vessel is required to submit an activation report under paragraph (g)(4)(ii) of this section before returning to fish, that report may substitute for the exemption cancellation. After an emergency situation occurs that disrupts the VMS transmission, initial contact must be made with OLE within 24 hours and a written emergency exemption request submitted within 72 hours from when the incident occurred. If the emergency situation, upon which an emergency exemption is based, is resolved before the exemption expires, an exemption cancellation must be received by OLE at least 2 hours before the vessel resumes fishing.
          (v) When aware that transmission of automatic position reports has been interrupted, or when notified by OLE that automatic position reports are not being received, contact OLE and follow the instructions provided to you. Such instructions may include, but are not limited to, manually communicating the vessel's position to a location designated by OLE or returning to port until the VMS unit is operable.
          (vi) After a fishing trip during which interruption of automatic position reports has occurred, the vessel's owner or operator must replace or repair the VMS unit prior to the vessel's next fishing trip. Repair or reinstallation of a VMS unit or installation of a replacement unit, including any changes in communications service providers shall be in accordance with the instructions provided by OLE.
          (vii) Make the VMS units available for inspection by OLE personnel, USCG personnel, state enforcement personnel or any authorized officer.
          (viii) Ensure that the VMS unit is not tampered with, disabled, destroyed, operated, or maintained improperly.
          (ix) Pay all charges levied by the communication service provider as necessary to ensure continuous operation of the VMS units.
          (5) What is the contact information for the OLE SAC? For issues related to day-to-day operation of VMS units, including declaration reports, activation reports and exemption reports, the SAC's designee is the OLE VMS Program Manager's office located at 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115-6349; phone: (888) 585-5518; fax: (206) 526‐6528); and email: wcd.vms@noaa.gov.

      [FR Doc. 2014-21902 Filed 9-12-14; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P