        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 600
        [I.D. 070102B]
        Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing Permits (EFPs)

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

          ACTION:
          Notification of a proposal for EFPs to conduct experimental fishing; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) has made a preliminary determination that the subject exempted fishing permit (EFP) application contains all the required information and warrants further consideration.  The Regional Administrator has also made a preliminary determination that the activities authorized under the EFP would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP).  However, further review and consultation may be necessary before a final determination is made to issue the EFP.
          Regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act require publication of this notification to provide interested parties the opportunity to comment on applications for proposed EFPs.

          DATES:
          Comments on this document must be received on or before July 25, 2002.

          ADDRESSES:
          Written comments should be sent to Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, 1 Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.  Mark the outside of the envelope “Comments on UNH Codend Selectivity EFP Proposal.”  Comments may also be sent via facsimile (fax) to (978) 281-9135.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Richard A. Pearson, Fishery Policy Analyst, 978-281-9279.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        NMFS announces that the Regional Administrator proposes to issue an EFP that would allow one commercial vessel to conduct fishing operations that are otherwise restricted by the regulations governing the fisheries of the Northeastern United States.  The EFP would allow for exemptions from the Northeast (NE) multispecies days-at-sea (DAS) notification requirements at 50 CFR 648.10(c) and 648.82(a); the Gulf of Maine (GOM) Rolling Closures specified at 50 CFR 648.81; and the NE multispecies minimum mesh size requirements specified for the GOM Regulated Mesh Area at 50 CFR 648.80, for 5 days of at-sea gear testing.

        This application for an EFP was submitted by the University of New Hampshire (UNH) Cooperative Extension for research funded through the Northeast Consortium.  The applicant proposes to design, develop and test a hydrodynamic trawl-net codend outer "cover" for use in future, long-term, fishing trawl-net codend selectivity studies in the GOM not to exceed 5 days of at-sea trials.  Floats, weights and kites would be positioned outside of the codend to hold a small-mesh net that surrounds the codend.  The objective of the research is to develop a design and methodology for collecting fish that would otherwise escape from the codend of a trawl net.  This would enable the researchers to quantify the amount of fish that escape and are retained by the codend.  The researchers will use alternate tows both with and without the "cover" to evaluate any differences in fish retention.  Also, underwater video technology will be employed to observe the codend, the "cover," and the fish escaping from the codend.
        UNH researchers would be aboard the vessel at all times during the experimental work.  All undersized fish and/or protected species would be returned to the sea as quickly as possible after measurement and examination.  Legal-sized fish that otherwise would have to be discarded would be allowed to be retained and sold.  The participating vessel would be required to report all landings in its Vessel Trip Report.This experimental work is important because large amounts of undersized, regulated fish species may sometimes be caught and  discarded, despite the use of legal-sized mesh.  The successful development of a codend "cover" would facilitate future, long-term, mesh selectivity studies to determine appropriate codend mesh sizes and shapes in the GOM that reduce the catch of undersized fish, yet still retain legal-sized fish.  Improved selectivity of trawl nets could ultimately provide for additional conservation of overfished species, such as GOM cod.
        Regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act require publication of this notification to provide interested parties the opportunity to comment on applications for proposed EFPs.
        Based on the results of this EFP, this action may lead to future rulemaking.

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

          Dated:  July 5, 2002.
          Virginia M. Fay,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 02-17332  Filed 7-9-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
        NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
        48 CFR Parts 19 and 35
        [FAR Case 2012-015, Docket No. FAR-2012-0015, Sequence No. 1]
        RIN 9000-AM33
        Federal Acquisition Regulation: Small Business Set Asides for Research and Development Contracts

          AGENCY:
          Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; withdrawal.

          SUMMARY:
          DoD, GSA, and NASA are withdrawing the proposed rule to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) titled: Small Business Set Asides for Research and Development Contracts. The decision not to proceed with a final rule was made because of the passage of time since the proposed rule was issued, and input from respondents indicating that the proposed changes were, on balance, unnecessary or unhelpful. Accordingly, this proposed rule is withdrawn, and the FAR case is closed.

          DATES:
          The proposed rule published on August 10, 2012, at 77 FR 47797 is withdrawn as of March 19, 2021.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Malissa Jones, Procurement Analyst, at 703-605-2815 or malissa.jones@gsa.gov. Please cite “FAR Case 2012-015”.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        On August 10, 2012, DoD, GSA, and NASA proposed to amend the FAR to clarify that contracting officers shall set aside acquisitions for research and development in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold when the market research conducted in accordance with FAR part 10 indicates there are small businesses capable of providing the best scientific and technological approaches (77 FR 47797). The proposed rule was in response to a request from the Small Business Administration to review whether the language at FAR 19.502-2(b)(2) creates an additional or unique condition that must be met before a contracting officer can proceed with a small business set-aside for research and development.
        A decision was made not to proceed with finalization of the proposed rule. Because of the passage of time, and input from respondents indicating that the proposed changes were, on balance, unnecessary or unhelpful, the FAR Council has concluded that consideration of any future amendments to the FAR related to small business set-asides for research and development should be accomplished under a new FAR case. Accordingly, the proposed rule published at 77 FR 47797 on August 10, 2012, is withdrawn and FAR Case 2012-015 is closed.

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 19 and 35
          Government procurement.

          William F. Clark,
          Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.

      [FR Doc. 2021-05659 Filed 3-18-21; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 140106010-4010-01]
        RIN 0648-XD069
        Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab Fishery; 2014-2016 Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab Specifications

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed specifications; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes specifications for the 2014-2016 Atlantic deep-sea red crab fishery, including an annual catch limit and total allowable landings. The intent of this action is to establish the allowable 2014-2016 harvest levels and other management measures to achieve the target fishing mortality rate, consistent with the Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab Fishery Management Plan.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before March 26, 2014.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2014-0004, by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-0004, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to John Bullard, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.

            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 publically 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 specifications document, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) and other supporting documents for the specifications, are available from Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. The specifications document is also accessible via the Internet at: http://www.nero.noaa.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Carly Bari, Fishery Management Specialist, (978) 281-9224.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background

        The Atlantic deep-sea red crab fishery is managed by the New England Fishery Management Council (Council). Regulations implementing the Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab Fishery Management Plan (FMP) appear at 50 CFR part 648, subparts A and M. The regulations requiring triennial specifications are found at § 648.260.
        The FMP requires the Council to recommend, on a triennial basis, the annual catch limit (ACL) and total allowable landings (TAL) that will control the fishing mortality rate (F). Estimates of stock size, coupled with the target F, allow for a calculation of acceptable biological catch (ABC), which is recommended by the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC). The annual review process for red crab requires that the SSC review and make recommendations based on the best available scientific information, including catch/landing statistics, current estimates of fishing mortality, stock abundance, and juvenile recruitment. Based on the recommendations of the SSC, the Council makes a recommendation to the NMFS Regional Administrator.

        The Council's recommendations must include supporting documentation concerning the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the recommendations. NMFS is responsible for reviewing these recommendations to ensure that they achieve the FMP objectives, and may modify them if they do not. NMFS then publishes proposed specifications in the Federal Register, and after considering public comment, NMFS will publish final specifications in the Federal Register.
        The FMP was implemented in October 2002 and was originally managed under a target total allowable catch (TAC) and days-at-sea (DAS) system that allocated DAS equally across the fleet of limited access permitted vessels. Amendment 3 to the FMP removed trip limit restrictions, and replaced the target TAC and DAS allocation with a TAL in order to ensure consistency with the ACL and accountability measure requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Under Amendment 3, the 2011-2013 red crab specifications were set with an ABC equal to the long-term average landings of the directed red crab fishery (3.91 million lb, 1,775 mt), due to the lack of better scientific information on the red crab stock.
        Proposed Specifications
        Biological and Management Reference Points
        The biological and management reference points currently in the Red Crab FMP are used to determine whether overfishing is occurring or if the stock is overfished. However, these reference points for red crab do not currently meet Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standard 1 criteria. As a result, there is insufficient information on the species to establish the maximum sustainable yield (MSY), optimum yield (OY), or overfishing limit (OFL), and ABC is defined in terms of landings instead of total catch.
        2014-2016 Catch Limits
        The Council's recommendation for the 2014-2016 red crab specifications are based on the results of the most recent peer-reviewed assessment of the red crab fishery carried out by the Data Poor Stocks Working Group in 2009 and recommendations from the SSC. The proposed specifications include a TAL that is the same as levels currently in effect under Amendment 3. Based on this information and the SSC's recommendation, the Council believes the TAL is safely below an undetermined overfishing threshold and adequately accounts for scientific uncertainty.
        Recent landings, landing per unit of effort, port samples, discard information, and economic data suggest there has been no change in the size of the red crab stock since Amendment 3 was implemented in 2011. Therefore, the Council is proposing status quo specifications for the 2014-2016 fishing years:

            mt
            Million lb

            MSY
            undetermined.

            OFL
            undetermined.

            OY
            undetermined.

            ABC
            1,775
            3.91.

            ACL
            1,775
            3.91.

            TAL
            1,775
            3.91.

        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Atlantic Deep-Sea Red Crab FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        These proposed specifications are exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

        An IRFA was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), which describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this preamble and in the SUMMARY. A summary of the analysis follows. A copy of this analysis is available from the Council (see ADDRESSES).
        All of the entities (fishing vessels) affected by this action are considered small entities under the Small Business Administration size standards for small shellfishing businesses (i.e., they have less than $5.0 million in annual gross sales). Therefore, there are no disproportionate effects on small versus large entities.
        This action does not introduce any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. This proposed rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules.
        The participants in the commercial red crab fishery were defined as those vessels issued limited access red crab permits. Information about vessel ownership has been made available for all federal permit holders, which allows for the identification of business entities that comprise multiple fishing vessels. As of December 2013, there are two business entities and four vessels with limited access red crab permits actively operating in the red crab fishery. The total value of landings from all sources from 2010 to 2012 averaged $3.46 million, so all business entities in the harvested sector can be categorized as small businesses for the purpose of the RFA.
        Commercial Fishery Impacts
        The proposed action will affect all business entities and four vessels in the directed red crab fishery. However, it is not expected to have any impact on the gross or average revenues for the fishery because it does not change the total allowable landings level, which is 3.913 million lb (1,775 mt). This harvest level is substantially higher than average landings in recent years (3.097 million lb (1,404 mt) from fishing years 2010-2012), and is not expected to constrain landings unless markets for red crab substantially improve or major new markets develop.

        Information on costs in the fishery is not readily available and individual vessel profitability cannot be determined directly; therefore, expected changes in gross revenues were used as a proxy for profitability. For the four participating vessels in 2010-2012, average total sales were $865,272 per vessel per year. Because the proposed action would retain current harvest levels, it would not directly constrain or reduce the gross revenues per vessel, nor would it impact the profits of individual vessels. Therefore, it is not necessary to analyze impacts according to the dependence of each vessel in the red crab fishery.

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

          Dated: March 5, 2014.
          Eileen Sobeck,
          Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2014-05156 Filed 3-10-14; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [Docket No. 071017601-7812-02]
        RIN 0648-AW17
        Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; 2008 Georges Bank Cod Fixed Gear Sector Operations Plan and Agreement, and Allocation of Georges Bank Cod Total Allowable Catch

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          This proposed rule provides interested parties an opportunity to comment on the proposed Sector Operations Plan and Supplemental Environmental Assessment (EA) prior to final approval or disapproval of the Sector Operations Plan and allocation of Georges Bank (GB) cod total allowable catch (TAC) to the Fixed Gear Sector for fishing year (FY) 2008.
          Framework Adjustment (FW) 42 to the Northeast (NE) Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP) created the Georges Bank (GB) Cod Fixed Gear Sector (Fixed Gear Sector) and authorized allocation of up to 20 percent of the annual GB cod TAC to the Fixed Gear Sector. Pursuant to that authorization, a representative of the Fixed Gear Sector has submitted an Operations Plan and Sector Agreement (Contract), and requested an allocation of GB cod to the Fixed Gear Sector for FY 2008.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received on or before March 26, 2008.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by 0648-AW17, by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov,
          • Fax: (978) 281-9135, Attn: Mark Grant,
          • Mail: One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.

          Instructions: All comments received are part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publically accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
          NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
          Copies of the Sector Agreement and the EA are available from the NE Regional Office at the mailing address specified above.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Mark Grant, Fishery Policy Analyst, phone (978) 281-9145, fax (978) 281-9135, e-mail Mark.Grant@NOAA.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        NMFS announces that the Administrator, NE Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), has made a preliminary determination that the Fixed Gear Sector Agreement, which contains the Sector Contract and Operations Plan, is consistent with the goals of the FMP and other applicable law and is in compliance with the regulations governing the development and operation of a sector as specified under § 648.87. The final rule implementing Amendment 13 (69 FR 22906, April 27, 2004) specified a process for the formation of sectors within the NE multispecies fishery and the allocation of TAC for specific groundfish species (or days-at-sea (DAS)), implemented restrictions that apply to all sectors, and authorized the first sector of the FMP (the GB Cod Hook Sector).
        The Fixed Gear Sector was established by FW 42 (71 FR 62156, October 23, 2006). The FW 42 regulations that apply to the Fixed Gear Sector specify that: (1) All vessels with a valid limited access NE multispecies DAS permit are eligible to participate in the Fixed Gear Sector, provided they have documented landings of GB cod through valid dealer reports submitted to NMFS during FY 1996 through 2001 (regardless of gear fished); (2) membership in the Fixed Gear Sector is voluntary, and each member must remain in the Fixed Gear Sector for the entire fishing year and may not fish outside the NE multispecies DAS program during the fishing year, unless certain conditions are met; (3) vessels fishing in the Fixed Gear Sector (participating vessels) are confined to fishing in the GB Cod Hook Sector Area, which is that portion of the GB cod stock area north of 39° 00′ N. lat. and east of 71° 40′ W. long; and (4) participating vessels must comply with all pertinent Federal fishing regulations, unless specifically exempted by a Letter of Authorization, and the provisions of an approved Operations Plan.
        Although FW 42 established the Fixed Gear Sector, in order for GB cod to be allocated to the Fixed Gear Sector and the Fixed Gear Sector authorized to fish, the Fixed Gear Sector must submit an Operations Plan and Sector Contract to the Regional Administrator annually for approval. The Operations Plan and Sector Contract must contain certain elements, including a contract signed by all Fixed Gear Sector participants and a plan containing the management rules that the Fixed Gear Sector participants agree to abide by in order to avoid exceeding the allocated TAC. An additional analysis of the impacts of the Fixed Gear Sector's proposed operations may be required in order to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. Further, the public must be provided an opportunity to comment on the proposed Operations Plan and Sector Contract. The regulations require that, upon completion of the public comment period, the Regional Administrator will make a determination regarding approval of the Sector Contract and Operations Plan. If approved by the Regional Administrator, participating vessels would be authorized to fish under the terms of the Operations Plan and Sector Contract.
        The Fixed Gear Sector was authorized to fish in FY 2006 and FY 2007, and, based upon the GB cod landings history of its members, was allocated <1.0 and 10.7 percent, respectively, of the annual GB cod TAC.
        On September 28, 2007, the Fixed Gear Sector submitted a draft FY 2008 Operations Plan and Sector Agreement and a Supplemental EA to NMFS. The proposed 2008 Fixed Gear Sector Agreement and Operations Plan contains the same elements and proposed exemptions as the 2007 Fixed Gear Sector Agreement and Operations Plan. The Fixed Gear Sector Agreement would be overseen by a Board of Directors and a Sector Manager. The Fixed Gear Sector Agreement specifies, in accordance with Amendment 13, that the Fixed Gear Sector's GB cod TAC would be based upon the number of Fixed Gear Sector members and their historic landings of GB cod. The GB cod TAC is a “hard” TAC, meaning that, once the TAC is reached, Fixed Gear Sector vessels could not fish under a DAS, possess or land GB cod or other regulated species managed under the FMP (regulated species), or use gear capable of catching groundfish (unless fishing under charter/party or recreational regulations). Should the hard TAC be exceeded, the Fixed Gear Sector's allocation would be reduced by the overharvest in the following year.
        The 2008 Operations Plan proposes exemptions from the following restrictions of the FMP: The GB cod trip limit; the GB Seasonal Closure Area (when fishing with hook gear); the 3,600-hook limit for longline gear in the GB Regulated Mesh Area (RMA); and the 2,000-hook limit for longline gear in the Gulf of Maine (GOM) and Southern New England (SNE) RMAs. Justification for the proposed exemptions and analysis of the potential impacts of the Operations Plan are contained in the EA. A Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) is summarized in the Classification section of this proposed rule.

        In a concurrent proposed rule NMFS proposed to modify the regulations that define eligibility criteria for membership in the GB Cod Hook Sector and the Fixed Gear Sector, in order to be consistent with the New England Fishery Management Council's (Council's) intent. The criterion requiring documented landings of GB cod to be eligible to join the GB cod Hook and Fixed Gear Sectors was not explicitly included in the Council documents that proposed formation of the two sectors, Amendment 13 and FW 42, respectively. The implications of this eligibility criterion (requiring landings history of GB cod) were not apparent at the time of implementation, but became apparent during the evaluation of sector Operations Plans for FY 2008. The proposed roster for the Fixed Gear Sector for FY 2008 contains vessels that did not land GB cod during the period 1996 to 2001. The current regulations would prevent such vessels without GB cod landings from joining a sector. In anticipation of the approval of the proposed change to sector eligibility requirements, the Fixed Gear Sector has included vessels without a history of landing GB cod in its proposed roster for FY 2008.
        Twenty-nine prospective Fixed Gear Sector members signed the 2008 Fixed Gear Sector Contract. The GB cod TAC calculation is based upon the historic GB cod landings of the participating vessels, using all gear. The allocation percentage is calculated by dividing the sum of total landings of GB cod by Sector members for FY 1996 through 2001, by the sum of the total accumulated landings of GB cod harvested by all NE multispecies vessels for the same time period. Based upon the 29 prospective members (and their associated GB cod landings history), the Fixed Gear Sector's share of the overall U.S. portion of the GB cod TAC would be 13.99 percent, or 3,152,802 lb (1,430 mt) (13.99 percent times the fishery-wide GB cod target TAC of 22,535,656 lb (10,222 mt)). If prospective members of the Fixed Gear Sector are deemed ineligible to, or decide not to, participate in the Fixed Gear Sector after the publication of this proposed rule and prior to a final decision by the Regional Administrator, it is possible that the total number of participants in the Sector and the TAC for the Sector may be reduced from the numbers above, but no additional members may join the Fixed Gear Sector for FY 2008. Also, the TAC for the Fixed Gear Sector could be further reduced, should the provision in the GB Cod Hook Sector proposed rule that revises the eligibility criterion for both sectors not be approved.
        The Sector Contract contains procedures for the enforcement of the Operations Plan, a schedule of penalties, and provides the authority to the Fixed Gear Sector Manager to issue stop fishing orders to members of the Fixed Gear Sector. Participating vessels would be required to land fish only in designated landing ports and would be required to provide the Fixed Gear Sector Manager with a copy of the Vessel Trip Report (VTR) within 48 hr of offloading. Dealers purchasing fish from participating vessels would be required to provide the Fixed Gear Sector Manager with a copy of the dealer report on a weekly basis. On a monthly basis, the Fixed Gear Sector Manager would transmit to NMFS aggregate catch data from dealer slips and aggregate discard data from the VTRs. After 90 percent of the Fixed Gear Sector's allocation has been harvested, the Fixed Gear Sector Manager would be required to provide NMFS with aggregate reports on a weekly basis. A total of 1/12 of the Fixed Gear Sector's GB cod TAC, minus a reserve, would be allocated to each month of the fishing year. GB cod quota that is not landed during a given month would be rolled over into the following month. Once the aggregate monthly quota of GB cod is reached, for the remainder of the month participating vessels may not fish under a NE multispecies DAS, possess or land GB cod or other regulated species, or use gear capable of catching regulated NE multispecies. The harvest rules would not preclude a vessel from fishing under the charter/party or recreational regulations, provided the vessel fishes under the applicable charter/party and recreational rules on separate trips. For each fishing trip, participating vessels would be required to fish under the NE multispecies DAS program regulations to account for any incidental groundfish species that they may catch while fishing for GB cod. In addition, participating vessels would be required to call the Sector Manager prior to leaving port. All legal-sized cod caught would be retained and landed and counted against the Fixed Gear Sector's aggregate allocation. Participating vessels would not be allowed to fish with or have on board gear other than jigs, non-automated demersal longline, handgear, or sink gillnets. Participating Fixed Gear Sector vessels fishing with hook gear could use an unlimited number of hooks in the Sector Area and would be exempt from the GB Seasonal Closure Area during May.
        The EA prepared for the Fixed Gear Sector operations concludes that the biological impacts of the Fixed Gear Sector will be positive because the hard TAC and the use of DAS would provide two means of restricting both the landings and effort of the Fixed Gear Sector. Implementation may have a positive impact on essential fish habitat (EFH) and bycatch, if the Fixed Gear Sector's quota is caught prior to the end of the fishing year, by reducing the amount of time that gear would be in the water. The analysis of economic impacts of the Fixed Gear Sector concludes that the members would realize higher economic returns if the Fixed Gear Sector is implemented. The EA asserts that fishing in accordance with the Sector Contract rules enables more efficient harvesting of GB cod with hook and gillnet gear than would be possible if the vessels were fishing in accordance with the common pool (non-sector) rules. The social benefits of the Fixed Gear Sector would accrue to sector members, as well as the Chatham, MA, and Harwichport, MA, communities, which are more dependent upon groundfish revenues as a percentage of fishery-derived landings than many other communities. The EA concludes that the self-governing nature of the Fixed Gear Sector and the member's opportunity to develop rules governing the way in which they harvest their GB cod TAC enables stewardship of the cod resource by the Fixed Gear Sector. The cumulative impacts of the Fixed Gear Sector are expected to be positive due to a positive biological impact, potential positive impact on habitat, and a positive social and economic impact. In contrast, the cumulative impact of the no action alternative is estimated to be neutral, with negative social and economic impacts.
        Should the Regional Administrator approve the Sector Contract as proposed, a Letter of Authorization would be issued to each member of the Fixed Gear Sector exempting them, conditional upon their compliance with the Sector Contract, from the GB cod possession restrictions, the 3,600-hook limit in the GB RMA, the 2,000-hook limit in the GOM and SNE RMAs and the GB Seasonal Closure Area when using hook gear, as specified in §§ 658.86(b)(2), 648.80(a)(4)(v), 648.80(a)(3)(v), 648.80(b)(2)(v) and 648.81(g), respectively.
        Classification

        Pursuant to section 304 (b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Northeast Multispecies FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.

        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.
        This proposed rule does not contain policies with federalism or “takings” implications as those terms are defined in E.O. 13132 and E.O. 12630, respectively.
        An IRFA was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA consists of this section, the preamble and the EA prepared for this action. Below is a summary of the IRFA, which describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained in the preamble to this proposed rule and in sections 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 of the EA prepared for this action. The Small Business Administration size standard for small commercial fishing entities is $4 million in average annual receipts, and the size standard for small charter/party operators is $6.5 million in average annual receipts. All permitted and participating vessels in the groundfish fishery, including prospective Fixed Gear Sector members, are considered to be small entities because gross sales by any one entity (vessel) do not exceed this threshold, and, therefore there is no disproportionate impact between large and small entities. While an entity may own multiple vessels, available data make it difficult to determine which vessels may be controlled by a single entity. For this reason, each vessel is treated as a single entity for purposes of size determination and impact assessment. All permitted and participating vessels in the groundfish fishery, including prospective Fixed Gear Sector members, are considered to be small entities because gross sales by any one entity (vessel) do not exceed this threshold. The number of prospective participants in the Fixed Gear Sector is 29, substantially less than the total number of active vessels in the groundfish fishery. Only these 29 vessels would be subject to the regulatory exemptions and operational restrictions proposed for the Fixed Gear Sector for FY 2008.
        Economic Impacts of the Proposed Action
        The proposed alternative would allocate a GB cod TAC of 1,430 mt to the Fixed Gear Sector. Once the GB cod TAC is harvested, participating vessels would not be allowed to fish under a NE multispecies DAS, possess or land GB cod, or other regulated species managed under the NE multispecies FMP, or use gear capable of catching groundfish (unless fishing under recreational or charter/party regulations). Vessels intending to fish in the Fixed Gear Sector during FY 2008 may only fish with hook gear or gillnet gear and may not fish for NE multispecies under a NE multispecies DAS during FY 2008 until the Sector Operations Plan is approved. Under the proposed Operations Plan, members would be exempt from several restrictions of the FMP described in the preamble to this proposed rule and in the EA.
        The fixed gear fishermen and the Chatham, MA, and Harwichport, MA, communities are dependent upon GB cod and other groundfish. The Amendment 13 restrictions that reduced the GB cod trip limit had a disproportionate affect on these fixed gear fishermen. According to Amendment 13, Chatham's overall community dependence on NE multispecies as a percentage of total fisheries revenues from federally permitted vessels averaged about 71 percent and likely at least some of the active groundfish vessels in Chatham and Harwichport are even more than 71 percent dependent on the NE multispecies fishery. Because the Fixed Gear Sector was implemented late in FY 2006, and data from FY 2007 are not yet complete, only limited quantitative data on the precise economic impact of the Fixed Gear Sector are available. In FY 2006, the Fixed Gear Sector made one trip and landed 5 lb (2.3 kg) of GB cod; preliminary FY 2007 data show that the Sector has made 564 trips and landed 735,355 lb (333,551 kg) of GB cod. However, a qualitative assessment of the Fixed Gear Sector is possible.
        The proposed alternative would positively impact the 29 vessels that have voluntarily joined the Fixed Gear Sector, who are relatively dependent upon cod revenue compared to other participants in the groundfish fishery. The proposed alternative would indirectly benefit the communities of Chatham, MA, and Harwichport, MA, and to a lesser extent other Cape Cod, MA, communities involved in the groundfish fishery. Allocation of cod TAC to a sector and the development of alternative fishing restrictions would mitigate the impacts of Amendment 13 and subsequent framework adjustments. Specifically, the proposed Operations Plan enables Fixed Gear Sector members to fish under a set of rules crafted by Fixed Gear Sector members in order to adapt to current economic and fishing conditions. The Fixed Gear Sector, by fishing under rules that are designed to meet their needs (as well as the conservation requirements of the FMP), is afforded a larger degree of flexibility and efficiency, which result in economic gains. Fixed Gear Sector members are able to plan their fishing activity and income in advance with more certainty due to the fact that there is a cod TAC, which is apportioned to each month of the year. They are able to maximize their efficiency (revenue per trip), by targeting seasonal aggregations of cod, due to the exemption from trip limits and hook numbers. For example, preliminary data from FY 2007 indicate that Fixed Gear Sector members landed 735,355 lb (333,551 kg) of GB cod in 564 trips; however, had the Fixed Gear Sector members been subject to the daily trip limit (1,000 lb/day; 454 kg/day) in place for the common pool vessels (non-sector vessels), they would have been prevented from landing 171,355 lb (77,725 kg) of that total.
        Thus, this proposed rule would enable Fixed Gear Sector members to remain economically viable by maximizing revenues and minimizing expenses in the short term. This would also help to maintain associated shoreside job opportunities.

        No other alternatives beyond the No Action were considered as part of this proposed action. The RFA requires each IRFA to include a description of significant alternatives that accomplish the objectives of applicable statues (in this case, sector provisions) and minimize any significant economic impact to small entities. The objectives of sector management, as originally developed and implemented under Amendment 13 to the FMP, are to provide opportunities for like-minded vessel operators to govern themselves so that they can operate in a more effective and efficient manner. The Fixed Gear Sector developed the proposed operations plan after consultation with prospective members. Prospective members then signed a binding sector contract to abide by the measures specified in the proposed operations plan. As described above, the proposed operations plan minimizes economic impacts to participating vessels by allowing them to operate more efficiently. Accordingly, the proposed operations plan reflects the management measures preferred by vessels participating in the Fixed Gear Sector during FY 2008 and represents all of the significant alternatives that accomplish the objectives of sector provisions and minimize economic impacts to small entities, as required by the RFA. Therefore, in conjunction with the NEPA requirement to consider a reasonable range of alternatives, no other alternatives were considered as part of this proposed action.
        Economic Impacts of Alternative to the Proposed Action
        Under the No Action alternative, all Fixed Gear Sector members would remain in the common pool of vessels and fish under all the rules implemented by Amendment 13 and subsequent Framework Adjustments, and there would be no allocation of GB cod to the Fixed Gear Sector. Because cod usually represents a high proportion of total fishing income for Cape Cod-based gillnet and hookgear vessels, revenues for such vessel owners are very sensitive to regulations that impact how and when they can fish for cod, such as trip limits and restrictions on the number of hooks fished. Under the common pool rules implemented by FW 42 (e.g., differential DAS counting) and Amendment 13 (restrictive daily trip limits for cod), it is likely that Fixed Gear Sector vessels would experience revenue losses. Based on the limited FY 2007 data, assuming a dock-side price of $1.50 per lb ($3.30 per kg) for cod, members of the Fixed Gear Sector would already have lost $257,032.50 (171,355 lb (77,725 kg) X $1.50 per lb ($3.30 per kg)) in revenue if they were not exempt from the cod possession limit. It is more likely under the No Action alternative that disruption to the Chatham/Harwichport communities would occur.
        Description of the Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements of the Proposed Rule
        This proposed rule contains no collection-of-information requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
        Regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act require publication of this notification to provide interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed TAC allocations and plans of operation of sectors.

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

          Dated: March 6, 2008.
          John Oliver,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service

      [FR Doc. E8-4803 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 216
        [Docket No. 040323099-4099-01; I.D. 072699A]
        RIN 0648-AR99
        Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Navy Operations of Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active Sonar

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to amend its regulations governing the taking of marine mammals incidental to operations of the U.S. Navy's Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active (SURTASS LFA) sonar to implement provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2004.

          DATES:
          Comments and information must be received no later than July 29, 2004.

          ADDRESSES:

          Comments should be addressed to P. Michael Payne, Chief, Marine Mammal Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD  20910-3225.  Comments also may be submitted by e-mail.  The e-mail mailbox address is 0648-AR99@noaa.gov.  Include in the subject line of the e-mail the following document identifier:  0648-AR99.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Kenneth R. Hollingshead, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-2055, ext 128.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        SURTASS LFA Sonar Rulemaking History
        On August 12, 1999, NMFS received an application from the U.S. Navy requesting authorization under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA for the taking, by harassment, of marine mammals incidental to deploying the SURTASS LFA sonar system for training, testing, and routine military operations within the world's oceans except Arctic and Antarctic waters (see 64 FR 57026, October 22, 1999).  NMFS issued a proposed rule on March 19, 2001 (66 FR 15375), and a final rule on July 16, 2002, (67 FR 46712), governing the taking of marine mammals incidental to Navy SURTASS LFA sonar operations.  That final rule became effective on August 15, 2002, and remains in effect until August 15, 2007.  Pursuant to the final rule, on August 16, 2002, NMFS issued a 1-year Letter of Authorization (LOA) to the Navy authorizing the taking of specified marine mammals within the specified areas of operation (67 FR 55818; August 30, 2002).  Subsequently, the Navy applied for and received two additional LOAs covering two SURTASS LFA sonar systems from August 16, 2003, to August 15, 2004 (68 FR 50123; August 20, 2003).  Additional information regarding NMFS' decision to authorize the taking of marine mammals incidental to Navy SURTASS LFA sonar operations is contained in the proposed and final rules and the LOAs and is not repeated here.
        National Defense Authorization Act

        On November 24, 2003, the President signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2004 (NDAA) (Public Law 108-136).  Included in this law were amendments to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) that apply where a “military readiness activity” is concerned.  Of specific importance for the SURTASS LFA sonar take authorization, the NDAA amended section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA, which governs the taking of marine mammals incidental to otherwise lawful activities.

        Prior to the NDAA amendments, section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA directed the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental but not intentional taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if the Secretary finds that the total of such taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock of marine mammal for subsistence uses and regulations are issued.  The NDAA amended section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA to exempt military readiness activities from the “specified geographical region” and “small numbers” requirements.  The term “military readiness activity” is defined in Public Law 107-314 (16 U.S.C. 703 note) to include all training and operations of the Armed Forces that relate to combat; and the adequate and realistic testing of military equipment, vehicles, weapons and sensors for proper operation and suitability for combat use.  The term expressly does not include the routine operation of installation operating support functions, such as military offices, military exchanges, commissaries, water treatment facilities, storage facilities, schools, housing, motor pools, laundries, morale, welfare and recreation activities, shops, and mess halls; the operation of industrial activities; or the construction or demolition of facilities used for a military readiness activity.
        Proposed Action
        NMFS and the Navy have determined that the Navy's SURTASS LFA sonar testing and training operations that are the subject of NMFS' July 16, 2002, final rule constitute a military readiness activity because those activities constitute “training and operations of the Armed Forces that relate to combat” and constitute “adequate and realistic testing of military equipment, vehicles, weapons and sensors for proper operation and suitability for combat use.”  Refer also to 67 FR 46712 (“Summary of Request”) and 67 FR 46716-46717 (Comment and Response AC1).  Accordingly, NMFS proposes to amend its rule and regulations governing the taking of marine mammals incidental to SURTASS LFA sonar testing and training operations to remove reference, in 50 CFR part 216, subpart Q, to “small numbers” and “specified geographical region,” as those MMPA 101(a)(5)(A) terms no longer apply to the SURTASS LFA sonar testing and training operations covered by the final rule.  It is necessary to amend the final rule for SURTASS LFA sonar because that rule no longer reflects the current requirements of the MMPA.  Specifically, NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR 216.180(a); 216.184(e)(2) (technical correction only); 216.187(c)(2) and (c)(4); 216.188(b)(2) and (c); and 216.189(a).
        Although the MMPA no longer requires the identification of a “specified geographical region” in which military readiness activities will occur, information regarding where the Navy will operate SURTASS LFA sonar remains necessary for NMFS to make its required negligible impact determination and to prescribe appropriate mitigation and monitoring.  In that regard, this proposed amendment would only make it clear that identification of a “specified geographical region” is no longer a statutory requirement for SURTASS LFA sonar operations covered under the final rule.
        Similarly, although the “small numbers” requirement no longer applies to military readiness activities, information regarding estimates of anticipated take will remain necessary for NMFS' negligible impact determinations.
        Information Solicited
        NMFS requests that interested persons submit comments, information, and suggestions concerning this proposed action. Commenters are requested to restrict comments and recommendations to the scope of this action.  Comments on issues beyond the scope of this proposed rule will not be considered in developing a final determination on this action.
        Determinations
        This proposed rule amendment would not alter the determination that SURTASS LFA sonar operations would have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks of marine mammals made by NMFS in its SURTASS LFA sonar final rule (67 FR 46712, July 16, 2002).  Nor would it change NMFS' determination that the activity covered under the final rule will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses.  These determinations would remain the same because the Navy's activity covered under the final rule has not changed.  Under the proposed rule amendment the Navy must still apply for LOAs, and NMFS must still find that the total taking by the Navy's proposed activity as a whole will have no more than a negligible impact and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of marine mammal species or stocks for subsistence uses.
        National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
        This proposed amendment does not change the activity that was analyzed in the Navy's Final Environmental Impact Statement on SURTASS LFA sonar, approved by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Environment) in the SURTASS LFA sonar Record of Decision (67 FR 48145; July 23, 2002) and adopted by NMFS (67 FR 46712, July 16, 2002).
        Endangered Species Act (ESA)
        This proposed amendment does not change the activity whose effects were analyzed in NMFS' biological opinions on SURTASS LFA sonar.
        Classification
        This action has been determined to be significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
        The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this action, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.  This proposed rule removes some of the regulatory requirements applicable to the Navy.  This proposed rule would affect only the U.S. Navy which is not a small entity.  There may be a few small entities that provide services related to the Navy's SURTASS LFA sonar activities and the requirements under NMFS' original rule, but this proposed rule would not affect those activities as they would all continue to operate in the same manner.  As a result no regulatory flexibility analysis was prepared.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 216
          Exports, Fish, Imports, Indians, Labeling, Marine mammals, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seafood, Transportation.

          Dated:  June 24, 2004.
          Rebecca Lent,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons discussed in the preamble, 50 CFR part 216 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 216—REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKING AND IMPORTING OF MARINE MAMMALS

        1. The authority citation for part 216 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., unless otherwise noted.

        2. In § 216.180, the section heading and paragraph (a) are revised to read as follows:

          § 216.180
          Specified activity.

          (a) Subject to the limitations in § 216.184(e), the incidental taking by harassment may be authorized in the following areas as specified in a Letter of Authorization (see also Figure 1):
          (1) North Atlantic Ocean:
          (i) Western North Atlantic, from 35 deg. N. lat. north to a line between Cape Chidley, Labrador northeast to Nuuk, Greenland, and from the North American continent east to 41 deg. W. long. (Area A); and
          (ii) Eastern North Atlantic, from 35 deg. N. lat. north to 72 deg. N. lat. and 41 deg. W. long. east to the European continent (Area B);
          (2) Mediterranean Sea (Area C);
          (3) North Pacific Ocean:

          (i) Western North Pacific, from 20 deg. N. lat. north to the Aleutian Island chain and the Sea of Okhotsk, and from the Asian continent east to 175 deg. W. long. (Area D); and
          (ii) Eastern North Pacific, from 42 deg. N. lat. north to Alaska and the south side of the Aleutian Islands and from the North American continent west to 175 deg. W. long. (Area E);
          (4) Central Atlantic Ocean:
          (i) Eastern Central Atlantic, from 7 deg. S. lat. north to 35 deg. N. lat. and from the African continent west to 40 deg. W. long. between 5 deg. N. lat. and 35 deg. N. lat., to 30 deg. W. long. between 0 deg. lat. and 5 deg. N. lat., and to 20 deg. W. long. between 7 deg. S. lat. and 0 deg. lat. (Area F); and
          (ii) Western Central Atlantic, from 5 deg. N. lat. north to 35 deg. N. lat., and from the American continent, east to 40 deg. W. long. (Area G);
          (5) Indian Ocean:
          (i) Eastern Indian Ocean, from 60 deg. S. lat. north to the Bay of Bengal, and Asian continent, and from 80 deg. E. long. east to the Asian continent, the Sunda Islands and Australia and to 150 deg. E. long. (Area H1); and
          (ii) Western Indian Ocean, from 60 deg. S. lat. north to the Arabian Sea, and from 30 deg. E. long. east to 80 deg. E. long. (Area H2);
          (6) Central Pacific Ocean:
          (i) Western Central Pacific, from 175 deg. W. long., east to the Asian continent and Indonesia, and from 10 deg. S. lat., north to 20 deg. N. lat. (Area I);
          (ii) Central Pacific, from 10 deg. S. lat., north to 42 deg. N. lat. between 175 deg. W. long. and 130 deg. W. long. (Area J1); and
          (iii) Eastern Central Pacific, from 5 deg. S. lat. north along the American coastline to 42 deg. N. lat., from 130 deg. W. long. along 10 deg. S. lat. to 105 deg. W. long., from 10 deg. S. lat. along 105 deg. W. long. to 5 deg. S. lat., from 105 deg. W. long. along 5 deg. S. lat. to the South American coastline, from 130 deg. W. long. along 42 deg. N. lat. to the North American coastline and from 42 deg. N. lat. to 10 deg. S. lat. along the 130 deg. W. long. line (Area J2);
          (7) South Pacific Ocean:
          (i) Western South Pacific from 60 deg. S. lat. north to 10 deg. S. lat. and from the east coast of Australia in the north and 150 deg. E. long. south of Australia east to 105 deg. W. long. (Area K); and
          (ii) Eastern South Pacific from 60 deg. S. lat. north to 5 deg. S. lat. and from the 105 deg. W. long. east to the South American coastline in the north and 70 deg. W. long. in the south (Area L);
          (8) South Atlantic Ocean:
          (i) Western South Atlantic, from 60 deg. S. lat. north to 5 deg. N. lat. in the area west of 30 deg. W. long., and from 60 deg. S. lat. north to 0 deg. lat. in the area east of 30 deg. W. long. and from the South American continent east to 30 deg. W. long. between 0 deg. And 5 deg. N. lat. and east to 20 deg. W. long. between 0 deg. and 60 deg. S. lat. (Area M); and
          (ii) East South Atlantic from 60 deg. S. lat. north to 7 deg. S. lat. and from 20 deg. W. long. east to the African coastline in the north and 30 deg. E. long. south of the continent (Area N).

        3. In 216.184, paragraph (e)(2) is revised to read as follows:

          § 216.184
          Mitigation.

          (e) * * *
          (2) Within any offshore area that has been designated as biologically important for marine mammals under § 216.184(f), during the biologically important season for that particular area;

        4. In § 216.187, paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2) and (c)(4) are revised to read as follows:

          § 216.187
          Applications for Letters of Authorization.

          (c) * * *
          (1) The date(s), duration, and the area(s) where the vessel's activity will occur;
          (2) The species and/or stock(s) of marine mammals likely to be found within each area;

          (4) The estimated percentage of marine mammal species/stocks potentially affected in each area for the 12-month period of effectiveness of the Letter of Authorization; and

        5. In § 216.188, paragraphs (b)(2) and (c) are revised to read as follows:

          § 216.188
          Letters of Authorization.

          (b) * * *
          (2) The area(s) where the vessel's activities will occur;

          (c) Issuance of each Letter of Authorization will be based on a determination that the total number of marine mammals taken by the activity specified in § 216.180 as a whole will have no more than a negligible impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammal(s), and that the total taking will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of species or stocks of marine mammals for taking for subsistence uses.

        6. In § 216.189, paragraph (a)(5) is revised and a new graphic is added to the end of the section to read as follows:

          § 216.189
          Renewal of Letters of Authorization.

          (a) * * *
          (5) A determination by NMFS that the total number of marine mammals taken by the activity specified in § 216.180 as a whole will have no more than a negligible impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammal(s), and that the total taking will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of species or stocks of marine mammals for taking for subsistence uses.

          BILLING CODE 3510-22-S

            EP29JN04.011

      [FR Doc. 04-14718 Filed 6-28-04; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-C


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
        30 CFR Part 924
        [Docket No. MS-016-FOR]
        State Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Plan

          AGENCY:
          Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; public comment period and opportunity for public hearing.

          SUMMARY:
          We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), are announcing receipt of a partially proposed abandoned mine land reclamation (AMLR) plan under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Mississippi proposes revisions to and addition of statutes to the Mississippi Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Law in order to authorize and establish an AMLR plan. If we approve Mississippi's proposed statutes, our approval will not give Mississippi authority to receive and expend Federal AMLR grant funds. Mississippi would need to submit to us additional information required under 30 CFR 884.13 in order for us to make the findings necessary for full approval of an AMLR plan. The State will be able to receive and spend Federal funds only after we approve its complete State AMLR plan.
          This document gives the times and locations that the Mississippi AMLR plan statutes are available for your inspection, the comment period during which you may submit written comments, and the procedures that will be followed for the public hearing, if one is requested.

          DATES:
          We will accept written comments on the proposed State AMLR plan statutes until 4 p.m., c.t., July 10, 2006. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on the proposed State AMLR plan statutes July 3, 2006. We will accept requests to speak at a hearing until 4 p.m., c.t. on June 23, 2006.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. MS-016-FOR, by any of the following methods:
          • E-mail: aabbs@osmre.gov. Include Docket No. MS-016-FOR in the subject line of the message.
          • Mail/Hand Delivery: Arthur W. Abbs, Director, Birmingham Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 135 Gemini Circle, Suite 215, Homewood, Alabama 35209.
          • Fax: (205) 290-7280.
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

            Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Comment Procedures” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

            Docket: For access to the docket to review copies of the proposed Mississippi AMLR plan statutes, a listing of any scheduled public hearings, and all written comments received in response to this document, you must go to the address listed below during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free copy of the Mississippi AMLR plan statues by contacting OSM's Birmingham Field Office. Arthur W. Abbs, Director, Birmingham Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 135 Gemini Circle, Suite 215, Homewood, Alabama 35209. Telephone: (205) 290-7282. E-mail: aabbs@osmre.gov.

          In addition, you may review a copy of the proposed AMLR plan statutes during regular business hours at the following location: Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Geology, 2380 Highway 80 West, Jackson, Mississippi 39289-1307, Telephone: (601) 961-5500.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Arthur W. Abbs, Director, Birmingham Field Office. Telephone: (205) 290-7282. E-mail: aabbs@osmre.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

          I. Background on the Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Program
          II. Description of the Proposed AMLR Plan Statutes
          III. Public Comment Procedures
          IV. Procedural Determinations

        I. Background on the Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Program

        The Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Program was established by Title IV of the Act (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) in response to concerns over extensive environmental damage caused by past coal mining activities. The program is funded by a reclamation fee collected on each ton of coal that is produced. The money collected is used to finance the reclamation of abandoned coal mines and for other authorized activities. Section 405 of the Act allows States and Indian Tribes to assume exclusive responsibility for reclamation activity within the State or on Indian lands if they develop and submit to the Secretary of the Interior for approval, a program (often referred to as a plan) for the reclamation of abandoned coal mines.
        Currently, Mississippi does not have a federally approved AMLR plan.
        II. Description of the Proposed AMLR Plan Statutes

        By letter dated April 5, 2006 (Administrative Record No. MS-0402), Mississippi sent us its AMLR plan statues under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). The purpose of this submission is to demonstrate both the intent and capability to assume responsibility for administering and conducting the provisions of SMCRA and OSM's Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Program (30 CFR Chapter 7, Subchapter R).
        This notice describes the nature of the proposed AMLR plan statutes and includes information concerning public participation in the Director's determination of whether or not the submitted AMLR plan statutes may be approved. Mississippi's submission of its statutes is the first step the State has taken in the process for establishing a comprehensive program for the reclamation of abandoned mine lands in Mississippi. By submitting its proposed AMLR plan statutes, Mississippi has indicated its wish to be primarily responsible for this program.
        Mississippi's AMLR plan statutes include:
        A. Section 53-9-3 Legislative Findings and Declarations
        Mississippi proposes revisions to Section 53-9-3 to read as follows:

          (k) The provisions of the 2001 amendments to this chapter are to provide for and implement a state program for abandoned mine reclamation which complies with the provisions of Subchapter IV of the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 1231 through 1243.

        B. Section 53-9-7 Definitions
        Mississippi proposes revisions to Section 53-9-7 by adding definitions for “Abandoned mine lands,” “Secretary,” and “State reclamation program.”
        C. Section 53-9-89 Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Fund; Deposit of Funds
        1. Mississippi proposes to revise Section 53-9-89(1)(a) by adding an account entitled “Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account.”
        2. Mississippi proposes to add new Section 53-9-89(1)(c) to read as follows:

          (c) The Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account shall receive all state and federal appropriations, grants and donations for the purposes of the reclamation of abandoned mine lands under this chapter, and such funds shall be made available to the commission to be used as provided in this section for the purposes of abandoned mine reclamation under this chapter and the regulations of the commission. Funds in the Abandoned Mine Land Account may be used for the following purposes:

        3. Mississippi also proposes to add specific purposes at Section 53-9-89(1)(c)(i) through (v) for using the funds in accordance with section 401(c)(1), (c)(4), (c)(8), (c)(9), and (c)(13) of SMCRA.
        D. Section 53-9-101 Priorities for Expenditure of Funds From Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account; Certain Sites and Areas Ineligible for Expenditures; Projects Involving Protection, Repair, Replacement, Construction, or Enhancements of Certain Utilities
        1. At Section 53-9-101(1), Mississippi proposes to add priorities for the expenditure of funds from the Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account on eligible lands and waters. These priorities include those of section 403(a) of SMCRA.
        2. At Section 53-9-101(2), Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 411(a), (b), and (c) of SMCRA, provisions for certifying that all of the priorities stated in subsection (1) for eligible lands and waters have been achieved. Mississippi also added the priorities for expenditure of funds for land, water, and specific facilities after the certification.
        3. At Section 53-9-101(3), Mississippi proposes to add a provision that provides that sites and areas designated for remedial action under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 or which have been listed for remedial action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act shall not be eligible for expenditure from the Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account.
        4. At Section 53-9-101(4), Mississippi added the priorities for noncoal minerals and reclamation projects involving utilities adversely affected by coal or mineral mining.
        E. Section 53-9-103 Only Abandoned Mine Lands Eligible for Program Expenditures
        Mississippi proposes to add the following provision at Section 53-9-103:

          Only abandoned mine lands are eligible for reclamation or drainage abatement expenditures from the Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account.

        F. Section 53-9-105 Program To Comply With Federal Law; Required Filings; Public Hearing and Comment Period; Liability
        1. At Section 53-9-105(1), Mississippi proposes the following new provision:

          The department, through the Office of Geology, shall establish and maintain a state reclamation program for abandoned mines which complies with Subchapter IV of the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 1231 through 1243.

        2. At Section 53-9-105(2), Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 405(f) of SMCRA, provisions for submitting an application to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) for the support of the State program and implementation of specific reclamation projects.
        3. At Section 53-9-105(3), Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 405(g) of SMCRA, a provision regarding the reporting of costs for each proposed project.

        4. At Section 53-9-105(4), Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 405(j) of SMCRA, a provision that provides for reports on operations of the reclamation program as required by the Secretary.

        5. At Section 53-9-105(5), Mississippi proposes to add a provision allowing public participation in the annual grant application and the eligibility, priority ranking, and selection of lands for reclamation.
        6. At Section 53-9-105(6), Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 405(l) of SMCRA, a provision that normally exempts the State from liability for any costs or damages as a result of action taken or omitted in the course of carrying out the State reclamation program except for gross negligence or intentional misconduct.
        G. Section 53-9-107 Right of Entry Upon Property Adversely Affected by Past Coal Mining; Order and Required Findings; Right of Entry Upon Property to Conduct Studies or Exploratory Work
        At Section 53-9-107(1) and (2), Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 407(a) and (b) of SMCRA, provisions allowing right of entry upon the property adversely affected by past coal mining practices and any other property to have access to such property.
        H. Section 53-9-109 Acquisition of Land Adversely Affected by Past Coal Mining; Sale of Acquired Land; Administrative Responsibility for Acquired Land; Grants
        At Section 53-9-109, Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 407(c), (d), (e), (h), and (g) of SMCRA, provisions allowing acquisition and disposition of lands if such land or interest is adversely affected by past coal mining practices and upon a determination that acquisition of such land is necessary for successful reclamation.
        I. Section 53-9-111 Review of Commission Action; Formal Hearing; Landowner Rights and Remedies
        At Section 53-9-111, Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 407(g) of SMCRA, provisions relating to landowner rights in condemnation proceedings, including the right of a formal hearing.
        J. Section 53-9-113 Itemization of Funds Expended; Filing of Statement in County Land Records Detailing Increase in Land Value from Expenditure of Fund; Statement to Constitute Lien Upon Land; Hearing and Appeal
        At Section 53-9-113, Mississippi proposes to add, in accordance with section 408 of SMCRA, provisions allowing liens on completed projects funded by the Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account.
        K. Section 53-9-115 Governor May Request Action Against Certain Hazards Caused by Mining of Minerals Other Than Coal; Limitations on Funds Available; Acquisition of Interest in Land
        At Section 53-9-115, Mississippi proposes, in accordance with section 409 of SMCRA, that the Governor may request the Secretary to authorize the commission to fill voids; seal open or abandoned tunnels, shafts, and entryways; and reclaim surface impacts of underground or surface mining of minerals other than coal which could endanger life and property, constitute a hazard to public health and safety, or degrade the environment. The funds available must be limited to those allocated to the State under section 402(g)(1) and (5) of SMCRA.
        L. Section 53-9-117 Interdepartmental Cooperation; Provision of Technical Expertise, Personnel, Equipment, Materials, and Supplies
        At Section 53-9-117, Mississippi proposes, in accordance with section 414 of SMCRA, the following provision:

          All departments, boards, commissions and agencies of this state shall cooperate with the commission by providing available technical expertise, personnel, equipment, materials and supplies as may be required to implement and administer the provisions of the state abandoned mine lands reclamation program.

        M. Section 53-9-119 Injunctions
        At Section 53-9-119, Mississippi proposes, in accordance with section 413(c) of SMCRA, the following provision:

          The commission, in addition to any other remedies allowed by law, may initiate in the name of the state, in any court of competent jurisdiction, an action in equity for an injunction to restrain any interference with the exercise of the right to enter or to conduct any work provided in this chapter.

        N. Section 53-9-121 Power and Authority to Implement Program; Promulgation of Rules and Regulations; Cooperative Projects
        At Section 53-9-121, Mississippi proposes, in accordance with section 413(a) and (b) of SMCRA, the following provisions:

          The commission shall have the power and authority to engage in any work and to do all things necessary or expedient, including promulgation of rules and regulations, to implement and administer the abandoned mine lands reclamation program in Mississippi. The commission also shall have the power and authority to engage in cooperative projects with any other agency of the United States of America or any state or federal agency to achieve the objectives of the abandoned mine lands reclamation program in Mississippi.

        O. Section 53-9-123 Authority With Regard to Land Affected by Noncoal Mining Practices; Agreement of Landowner; Required Findings; Limitations on Expenditure of Funds
        At Section 53-9-123, Mississippi proposes the following provisions:

          The commission shall have the authority granted in Sections 53-9-107(1) and 53-9-109, as applied to land or water resources that have been adversely affected by mining practices other than coal mining practices, only upon the agreement of the current landowner(s). The commission shall have this authority only after making the findings required by Section 53-9-107(1)(a) and (b), as modified to reflect that the effects were caused by noncoal mining practices. Funds shall not be expended from the Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Account on lands adversely affected by mining or processing practices other than coal mining or processing practices unless and until the landowner(s) agrees to abide with all provisions of Section 53-9-113. This section does not limit the authority of the commission to perform any act authorized by the Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Control Law, Section 49-17-1 et seq., the organic act of the commission, Section 49-2-1 et seq., or the Mississippi Surface Mining and Reclamation Law, Section 53-7-1 et seq.

        III. Public Comment Procedures
        Under the provisions of 30 CFR 884.13(c)(7), we are requesting comments on whether Mississippi's AMLR plan statutes satisfy the applicable State reclamation plan approval criteria of 30 CFR 884.14.
        The proposed Mississippi AMLR plan statutes for abandoned mine land reclamation can be approved if:
        1. The public has been given adequate notice and opportunity to comment and the record does not reflect major unresolved controversies.
        2. Views of other Federal agencies have been solicited and considered.
        3. The State has the legal authority, policies, and administrative structure to carry out the State AMLR plan.
        4. The State AMLR plan meets all requirements of the OSM AMLR program provisions.
        5. The State has an approved regulatory program.
        6. The State AMLR plan is in compliance with all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations.

        If we approve the statutes, this does not authorize Mississippi to receive or spend Federal AMLR grant funds. Mississippi would need to submit to us additional information required under 30 CFR 884.13 in order for us to make the findings necessary for full approval of an AMLR plan. The State will be able to receive and spend Federal funds only after we approve its complete State AMLR plan.
        Written Comments
        Send your written or electronic comments to OSM at the address given above. Your written comments should be specific, pertain only to the issues proposed in this rulemaking, and include explanations in support of your recommendations. We will not consider or respond to your comments when developing the final rule if they are received after the close of the comment period (see DATES). We will make every attempt to log all comments into the administrative record, but comments delivered to an address other than the Birmingham Field Office may not be logged in.
        Electronic Comments
        Please submit Internet comments as an ASCII or Word file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Please also include “Attn: MS-016-FOR” and your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation that we have received your Internet message, contact the Birmingham Field Office at (205) 290-7282.
        Availability of Comments
        We will make comments, including names and addresses of respondents, available for public review during normal business hours. We will not consider anonymous comments. If individual respondents request confidentiality, we will honor their request to the extent allowable by law. Individual respondents who wish to withhold their name or address from public review, except for the city or town, must state this prominently at the beginning of their comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public review in their entirety.
        Public Hearing

        If you wish to speak at the public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 4 p.m., c.t. on June 23, 2006. If you are disabled and need special accommodations to attend a public hearing, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will arrange the location and time of the hearing with those persons requesting the hearing. If no one requests an opportunity to speak, we will not hold a hearing.
        To assist the transcriber and ensure an accurate record, we request, if possible, that each person who speaks at the public hearing provide us with a written copy of his or her comments. The public hearing will continue on the specified date until everyone scheduled to speak has been given an opportunity to be heard. If you are in the audience and have not been scheduled to speak and wish to do so, you will be allowed to speak after those who have been scheduled. We will end the hearing after everyone scheduled to speak and others present in the audience who wish to speak, have been heard.
        Public Meeting

        If only one person requests an opportunity to speak, we may hold a public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with us to discuss Mississippi's proposed AMLR plan, please request a meeting by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings are open to the public and, if possible, we will post notices of meetings at the locations listed under ADDRESSES. We will make a written summary of each meeting a part of the administrative record.
        IV. Procedural Determinations
        Executive Order 12630—Takings
        This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.
        Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Planning and Review
        This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866.
        Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reform
        The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of State and Tribal abandoned mine land reclamation plans because each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State or Tribe, not by OSM. Decisions on proposed abandoned mine land reclamation plans submitted by a State or Tribe are based solely on a determination of whether the submittal meets the requirements of Title IV of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1231-1243) and 30 CFR part 884 of the Federal regulations.
        Executive Order 13132—Federalism
        This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the regulation of abandoned mine land reclamation programs. One of the purposes of SMCRA is to “establish a nationwide program to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations.” Section 405(d) of SMCRA requires State abandoned mine land reclamation programs to be in compliance with the procedures, guidelines, and requirements established under SMCRA.
        Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
        In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated the potential effects of this rule on Federally-recognized Indian tribes and have determined that the rule does not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. This determination is based on the fact that the Mississippi plan does not provide for reclamation and restoration of land and water resources adversely affected by past coal mining on Indian lands. Therefore, the Mississippi plan has no effect on Federally-recognized Indian tribes.
        Executive Order 13211—Regulations That Significantly Affect the Supply, Distribution, or Use of Energy
        On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
        National Environmental Policy Act

        This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because agency decisions on proposed State and Tribal abandoned mine land reclamation plans are categorically excluded from compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332) by the Manual of the Department of the Interior (516 DM 6, appendix 8, paragraph 8.4B(29)).
        Paperwork Reduction Act

        This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.).
        Regulatory Flexibility Act
        The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small entities. In making the determination as to whether this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.
        Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
        This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.
        Unfunded Mandates
        This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate.

          List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 924
          Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.

          Dated: May 30, 2006.
          Brent Wahlquist,
          Acting Director, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.

       [FR Doc. E6-8925 Filed 6-7-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-05-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
         50 CFR Part 635
        [Docket No. 010319074-1104-02; I.D. 022201B]
        RIN 0648-AP13
        Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fisheries; Pelagic Longline Management

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; withdrawal.

          SUMMARY:

          NMFS withdraws its proposal to extend the closure of the Charleston Bump area to pelagic longline fishing through May 31, 2001.  Through a previously issued final rule, the Charleston Bump area remains closed to pelagic longline fishing annually from February 1 through April 30.

          DATES:
          The proposed rule published on March 30, 2001 (66 FR 17389), is withdrawn as of May 2, 2001.

          ADDRESSES:
          Copies of the Final Environmental Assessment and Regulatory Impact Review that accompany this notification of withdrawal can be obtained from Christopher Rogers, Acting Chief, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Karyl Brewster-Geisz, NMFS, at (301) 713-2347 or by email at karyl.brewster-geisz@noaa.gov, or Jill Stevenson, NMFS-Southeast Regional Office at (727) 570-5447 or by email at jill.stevenson@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        A final rule (65 FR 47214, August 1, 2000) to implement a regulatory amendment to the Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks included a provision to close the Charleston Bump area to pelagic longline fishing on an annual basis from February 1 through April 30.  NMFS subsequently delayed the effective date of the closed area for 2001 to March 1 to correct the coordinates of the closed areas and to distribute this information to affected fishermen and law enforcement (66 FR 8903, February 5, 2001).  On March 30, 2001, NMFS proposed to extend the closure period of the Charleston Bump area through May 31, 2001 (66 FR 17389).
        The intent of the proposed action was to partially recover environmental benefits in terms of bycatch reduction that were likely lost when the closure was delayed from February 1, 2001, until March 1, 2001.  In a draft Environmental Assessment prepared in support of the proposed action, NMFS evaluated the costs and benefits of the extension consistent with the objectives of the final rule previously implementing the seasonal closure.  The proposed action would not have affected the closure dates for the Charleston Bump area in future years.  NMFS requested comments from the public and held a public hearing on April 3, 2001.
        NMFS received many comments on the proposed rule.  Some of the comments supported the proposed rule and noticed the environmental benefits in terms of bycatch reduction.  Other comments did not support the proposed rule and stated that the proposed extension would have little impact over the long-term to these fish on a stock-wide basis and that the extension has no scientific basis.  NMFS also received comments stating that the extension should last through the month of June to recoup lost bycatch reduction benefits for the delay of the East Florida Coast closure as well as the delay of the Charleston Bump closure.  Additional comments noted that NMFS’ estimates of the number of vessels that fish in February in the Charleston Bump is high, especially for this year due to bad weather, and that fishermen should not be punished because NMFS made an error.
        NMFS also received comments regarding the economic impacts that the proposed extension could have on the fishermen and dealers in the Charleston Bump area.  These comments included: fishermen fishing in the Charleston Bump in May and June target dolphin fish, not swordfish; dolphin fish fishing costs less (shorter leaders, no lightsticks, less bait, etc.) and, therefore, profits are higher in May than any other time of year;  25 percent of a fisherman’s annual income is received in May;  the Small Business Administration has declared South Carolina a disaster area due to the shrimp fishery failure and an extension would further exacerbate the problem for these communities; the short notice of the extension would not give fishermen sufficient time to adjust fishing patterns to minimize economic and social impacts; fishermen and dealers around both the Charleston Bump and East Florida Coast have been relying on and planning for the area to reopen on May 1 since the closure dates were announced last August; and recreational fishing is economically valuable to the communities and any reduction in longline bycatch could benefit the communities especially given the tournaments that open in May.
        NMFS also received miscellaneous comments that included: the comment period was too short given the length of a longline trip; U.S. fishermen already take voluntary action to reduce bycatch and additional regulations may have negative impacts in negotiating conservation measures internationally; if NMFS closes the Charleston Bump for an extended period, fishermen will be forced to fish offshore even if it is unsafe to do so; NMFS should evaluate the effectiveness of existing closures before proposing new ones; and NMFS needs to research and implement other methods of bycatch reduction and VMS.
        NMFS is concerned about bycatch and bycatch mortality in all Atlantic highly migratory species fisheries and will continue to evaluate existing bycatch reduction measures as well as pursue additional measures as necessary.  However, due to the large economic impacts extending the closure could have, the short time period in which fishermen and dealers would have to adjust fishing patterns to avoid the Charleston Bump, and the fact that NMFS does not know at this time the actual impact on bycatch reduction of both the delay in the Charleston Bump and East Florida coast closures and the actual time/area closures, NMFS has determined that extending the closure of the Charleston Bump area through May 31 is unwarranted.
        Additional analyses described in the final Environmental Assessment indicate that while effort in the Charleston Bump was low compared to past years, the fishermen who did fish in February caught slightly more billfish and sea turtles than the average.  Thus, extending the closure could possibly regain some of the bycatch reductions that may have been lost due to the delay.  However, the degree of bycatch reduction achieved by a May 2001 closure would not contribute significantly to bycatch reduction in the pelagic longline fishery beyond the immediate short-term;  on the other hand, the economic impacts from this one-time extension could be very significant for fishermen, particularly in light of the August 1, 2000, final rule.  In the August 1, 2000, final rule and its accompanying Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, NMFS determined that it was not necessary to close the Charleston Bump in May in order to achieve the objectives of the final rule and reduce bycatch and bycatch reduction.  Despite the delay in the closure of the Charleston Bump, because the objectives of the proposed rule were the same as the August 1, 2000, final rule, NMFS agrees with its earlier decision and feels it is necessary to wait until more data are gathered regarding the result of the existing closures and any bycatch reductions gained before adjusting the August 1, 2000, final rule any further.

        NMFS acknowledges that bycatch in the pelagic longline fishery is an international issue that requires international cooperation.  The United States is working to develop international conservation measures and will continue to negotiate at the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas in support of U.S. fisheries, to the extent that their prosecution is consistent with U.S. domestic legislation.  While NMFS is aware that the comment period for the proposed rule was shorter than 45 days, the timing of the proposal required a short comment period in the event that final regulations and supporting documents needed to be prepared.  Additionally, NMFS agrees that recreational fishing is economically valuable to communities; however, NMFS must manage fisheries consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and its implementing guidelines, which require consideration of traditional fisheries.  Safety is the responsibility of each fisherman.  While NMFS works to reduce safety concerns related to regulatory actions, fishermen should account for the distance from shore if an area is closed and they redistribute their fishing effort.
        Withdrawal of Proposed Rule

        Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble, the proposed rule that was published in the Federal Register on March 30, 2001 (66 FR 17389) is withdrawn.

          Dated:  May 1, 2001.
          John Oliver,
          Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 01-11420 Filed 5-2-01; 4:25 pm]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S