        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 52
        [EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0544, EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0144; FRL-10024-94-Region 5]
        Air Plan Approval; Illinois; National Ambient Air Quality Standards Updates; Reference and Equivalent Methods Updates

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:

          The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve several revisions to the Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP). First, EPA is proposing to approve amendments to the Illinois SIP that incorporate by reference EPA's current national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone, particulate matter, lead, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur oxides. Second, EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Illinois SIP that incorporate by reference current Federal Reference Methods (FRMs) for monitoring carbon monoxide, ozone, particulate matter, lead, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur oxides. Third, EPA is proposing to approve an amendment to the Illinois SIP that reflects a recent update to EPA's List of Designated Reference and Equivalent Methods. Lastly, EPA is also proposing to approve minor revisions and corrections to the Illinois SIP.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before July 21, 2021.

          ADDRESSES:

          Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0544 and EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0144 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Anthony Maietta, Environmental Protection Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8777, maietta.anthony@epa.gov. The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and facility closures due to COVID-19.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows:

          I. Background
          II. EPA's Analysis of the SIP Amendments
          III. What action is EPA taking?
          IV. Incorporation by Reference
          V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

        I. Background

        On October 20, 2020 and February 16, 2021, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) requested that EPA approve amendments to the Illinois SIP. The following sections of Title 35 of the Illinois Administrative Code (IAC), Part 243, Subpart A: General Provisions were amended: 243.101 Definitions, 243.102 Scope, 243.105 Air Quality Monitoring Data Influenced by Exceptional Events, 243.107 Reference Conditions, and 243.108 Incorporations by Reference. The SIP revisions also amend the following sections of 35 IAC Part 243, Subpart B: Standards and Measurement Methods: 243.120 PM
          10
           and PM
          2.5; 243.122 Sulfur Oxides (Sulfur Dioxide); 243.123 Carbon Monoxide; 243.124 Nitrogen Oxides (Nitrogen Dioxide as Indicator); and 243.126 Lead.

        The Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) adopted these SIP amendments in four different state actions. Three of those actions, R19-14 (July 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018), R20-3 (January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019), and R20-11 (July 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019), were consolidated into a single docket by IPCB called R19-14/R20-3/R20-11 (Consolidated) and a proposal of the consolidated amendments was published in the Illinois Register on June 5, 2020. IPCB held a public hearing on the consolidated rulemakings on July 16, 2020, with remote access because of the coronavirus pandemic. A public comment was received requesting clarification on a potential error in the proposed amendment, and in response the error was recognized and corrected by IPCB. A final notice of adopted amendments was published in the Illinois Register on September 4, 2020 with an effective date of August 18, 2020.
        The proposed amendments contained in the fourth state action, R21-1, were published in the Illinois Register on October 2, 2020. IPCB held a public hearing on R21-1 on November 19, 2020, with remote access because of the coronavirus pandemic. A public comment was received requesting to add punctuation to an abbreviation contained in the amended rules, and the request was responded to and fulfilled by the IPCB. A final notice of adopted amendments was published in the Illinois Register on January 4, 2021 with an effective date of December 17, 2020.
        II. EPA's Analysis of the SIP Amendments
        Section 10(H) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act at Chapter 415 of the Illinois Compiled Statutes directs IPCB to adopt ambient air quality standards that are identical in substance to the NAAQS promulgated by EPA. Illinois requested the amendments to 35 IAC Part 243 be approved into the Illinois SIP to meet this state requirement. The amendments contained in the October 20, 2020 and February 16, 2021 submittals update the air quality standards, revise FRMs, and provide corrections and grammatical revisions that increase the clarity of the rules.
        Amendments to 35 IAC 243.101
        There were several amendments to 35 IAC 243.101 Definitions in the February 16, 2021 submittal. Under the definitions of “Exceptional event”, “Federal equivalent method”, and “Federal reference method”, the word “which” has been replaced with “that”. In all three cases, the revisions are grammar corrections and do not change the meaning of the definitions but do help make these definitions clearer to the reader and therefore are approvable.
        Reference years for Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) citations have been removed from the definition of “Federal land manager”, which is approvable because they do not affect the citations listed, instead they will reference the most current edition of the CFR. The definition of “USEPA” was revised to replace “where” with “if” when describing the use of “USEPA” in context of quoting EPA using the word “Administrator”. These revisions are approvable because they simply correct grammar or make the definitions clearer.
        Amendments to 35 IAC 243.102

        In the February 16, 2021 submittal, paragraph (a) of 35 IAC 243.102 Scope contained amended language to make clearer that both Sections 7.2 and 10(H) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act apply to 35 IAC Part 243. The amendment is approvable because the previous wording did not make clear that both Section 7.2 and Section 10(H) are in Chapter 415 of the Illinois Compiled Statutes. In the Board Note at the end of this section, a 2012 reference year in a citation to 40 CFR 50.2 was removed. This is an approvable amendment because it removes a specific edition year and instead points the reader to the current edition of 40 CFR 50.2.
        Amendments to 35 IAC 243.105
        In the Board Note at the end of 35 IAC 243.105 Air Quality Monitoring Data Influenced by Exceptional Events, a 2012 reference year in a citation to 40 CFR 50.14 was removed, thereby indicating the current edition of 40 CFR 50.14. 35 IAC 243.105(a) was revised to improve the grammar of the description of an exceptional event. An incorrect spelling of the word “determination” was corrected in 35 IAC 243.105(b). The grammar and spelling revisions are approvable because they improve the clarity of the rules for the reader.
        Amendments to 35 IAC 243.107
        35 IAC 243.107 Reference Conditions was amended to correct a notation of temperature by placing the degree symbol next to the number of degrees indicated in the rule. This is approvable because it is simply a correction. The Board Note at the end of this section was amended to remove a reference year to a citation to 40 CFR 50.3. This is approvable because it points the reader to the most current edition of the CFR.
        Amendments to 35 IAC 243.108
        In the October 20, 2020 submittal, 35 IAC 243.108 Incorporations by Reference was amended by removing the specific street address and outdated telephone number for the Government Printing Office (GPO) in Washington, DC. An updated telephone number and website have been added. Since the amendment updates outdated information to make the rule clear and current, it is acceptable.
        Incorporations by reference for the following appendices to title 40, part 50 of the CFR have been amended in the October 20, 2020 submittal by changing the reference year of 2018 to 2019 in order to reflect EPA actions taken to sections corresponding to each appendix in 2019. Illinois updated section 243.108 to incorporate by reference appendices A-1, A-2, B, C, D, F, G, J, K, L, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, and U of 40 CFR part 50, to the 2019 edition of the CFR. Because the amendments simply update the reference year for the incorporation of the appendices to 2019, which was the latest version of the CFR available at the time of Illinois' rule adoption, they are approvable.
        In the October 20, 2020 submittal, Illinois also amended the reference year to 2019 for incorporations by reference to 40 CFR 50 appendices H and I. However, in its subsequent February 16, 2021 submittal Illinois removed these two incorporations by reference. Removal of these two incorporations by reference is acceptable because they pertain to the 1979 and 1997 ozone NAAQS, which have been revoked by EPA and references to these NAAQS have already been removed from the Illinois SIP (80 FR 28835 and 82 FR 32771). Therefore, removal of incorporations by reference to 40 CFR 50 appendices H and I from 35 IAC 243.108 from the Illinois SIP is approvable.

        In the October 20, 2020 submittal, the incorporation by reference of definitions contained in the Clean Air Act (CAA) was incorrectly amended from 2016 to 2019. The February 16, 2021 submittal corrected the reference date to 2018 in the state's rule, reflecting the correct date of the latest CAA edition and Definitions section at 35 IAC 243.101. Those changes are approvable because they make clear the correct version of the CAA edition as well as the correct state rule that the definitions incorporated from the CAA apply to within Illinois' rules (35 IAC 243.101). EPA proposes taking no action on the October 20, 2020 submittal's amendment of this incorporation by reference and proposes approval of the February 16, 2021 amendment for the aforementioned reason.

        In the February 16, 2021 submittal, a link to the GPO website was amended to reflect the current www.govinfo.gov address, which is acceptable. As noted in the rule, the latest editions of EPA rules and methods incorporated by reference in 35 IAC 243.108 can currently be found at that web address.
        In the October 20, 2020 submittal, the incorporation by reference of EPA's List of Designated Reference and Equivalent Methods was incorrectly amended for a reference year of June 15, 2018 to December 15, 2019. The February 16, 2021 submittal subsequently amended the reference year to June 15, 2020 which is consistent with the most current revision of the list at the time of the R21-1 final rulemaking. EPA is taking no action on the October 20, 2020 amendment and proposing to approve the subsequent February 16, 2021 amendment.
        Amendments to 35 IAC 243.120

        In the October 20, 2020 submittal, the Board Note at the end of 35 IAC 243.120 PM
          10
           and PM
          2.5 1

           subsection (a) was amended to remove language referencing the 1997 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Reference to the 1997 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS was removed from 35 IAC 243.120(b). Additionally, subsection (b)(4), which identified the St. Louis 1997 PM2.5 nonattainment area, was removed. Subsection (c) was revised to remove language referencing the 2006 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Additionally, paragraph (c)(4), which identified the St. Louis 2006 annual PM2.5 nonattainment area, was removed. The remainder of 35 IAC 243, including references to the 1997 and 2006 secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS, was not revised. The revisions to 35 IAC Part 243 are approvable because they reflect EPA's revocation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS on August 24, 2016 (81 FR 58010) and the subsequent redesignation of the Illinois portion of the St. Louis area to attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS on December 27, 2018 (83 FR 66631).

            1 PM10 refers to particles with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 10 micrometers. PM2.5 refers to particles with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers, oftentimes referred to as “fine” particles.

        Revisions to 35 IAC Part 243.122
        In the October 20, 2020 submittal, 35 IAC 243.122 Sulfur Oxides (Sulfur Dioxide) was revised to remove applicability of the 1971 primary annual average and 24-hour NAAQS for sulfur dioxide (SO2) for all areas in Illinois except for Macon County because EPA has yet to promulgate the attainment status of Macon County (83 FR 1098). This revision is approvable because EPA revoked the 1971 primary annual and 24-hour SO2 NAAQS on June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520).
        Amendments to 35 IAC 243.123, 243.124, and 243.126

        In the October 20, 2020 submittal, Illinois made a minor revision to 35 IAC 243.123 Carbon Monoxide with a cleanup of language in the Board Note within the section. Similar revisions were made to the Board Notes within and at the ends of 35 IAC 243.124 Nitrogen Oxides (Nitrogen Dioxide as Indicator) and 35 IAC 243.126 Lead. These revisions condense the language and remove the reference date to a CFR citation in each section's Board Note. The revisions are approvable because they make clearer to the reader where the regulatory content of the sections come from and direct the reader to the most current edition of the CFR.

        III. What action is EPA taking?
        EPA is proposing to approve the October 20, 2020 submittal, except for 35 IAC 243.108, and the February 16, 2021 submittal, in its entirety.
        IV. Incorporation by Reference

        In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the following rules in Part 243 of the Illinois Administrative Code: Rules 243.120, 243.122, 243.123, 243.124, and 243.126, effective August 18, 2020, and Rules 243.101, 243.102, 243.105, 243.107, and 243.108, effective December 17, 2020, discussed in section II of this preamble. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
        V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
        Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
        • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);

        • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);

        • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
        • Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
        • Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
        • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
        • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
        • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and
        • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
        In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

          List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
          Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

          Dated: June 14, 2021.
          Cheryl Newton,
          Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

      [FR Doc. 2021-12832 Filed 6-17-21; 4:15 pm]
      BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        [Docket No. 070718366-7372-01]
        RIN 0648-AV32
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Maximum Retainable Amounts for Non-American Fisheries Act Trawl Catcher/Processors

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to amend regulations to change the time at which the amount of retained groundfish must be calculated to comply with the maximum retainable amounts (MRAs) of selected groundfish species caught by trawl catcher/processors (C/Ps) that are not eligible under the American Fisheries Act (AFA) to participate in directed fishing for pollock. This proposed action would apply to MRAs for yellowfin sole, rock sole, flathead sole, “other flatfish,” arrowtooth flounder, Pacific cod, and Atka mackerel in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI) and for Pacific ocean perch in the Aleutian Islands (AI). The proposed action is necessary to provide the non-AFA trawl C/Ps the opportunity to reduce discards and increase retention of these groundfish species. The proposed rule is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP).

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received by March 16, 2009.

          ADDRESSES:
          Send comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. You may submit comments, identified by “RIN 0648-AV32”, by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal website at http://www.regulations.gov.
          • Mail: P. O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802.
          • Fax: (907) 586-7557.
          • Hand delivery to the Federal Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK.

          All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
          NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe portable document file (pdf) formats only.

          Copies of the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for this action may be obtained from the mailing address above or from the NMFS Alaska Region website at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov.

          Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be submitted to NMFS at ADDRESSES above and by e-mail to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 202- 395(7285.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Jeff Hartman, 907-586-7442, or jeff.hartman@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        NMFS manages the U.S. groundfish fisheries in the BSAI under the FMP. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR part 679. General regulations that pertain to U.S. fisheries appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600.
        MRAs assist in limiting harvest of a species within its annual total allowable catch (TAC). Once the TAC for a species is reached, retention of that species becomes prohibited and all catch of that species must be discarded. Therefore, NMFS closes a species to directed fishing before the entire TAC is taken to leave sufficient amounts of the TAC available for incidental catch. A species-specific MRA is used to manage the amount of a species left for incidental catch.
        The MRA is the maximum weight of a species closed to directed fishing that may be retained onboard a vessel. MRAs are calculated as a percentage of the weight of catch of each species open to directed fishing that is retained onboard the vessel (the basis species). If the MRA for a species is 35 percent, then the percent of retained incidental species must be no more than 35 percent of the weight of basis species. For example, the MRA for rock sole caught in a directed fishery for yellowfin sole is 35 percent. If yellowfin sole is open to directed fishing (a basis species) and rock sole is closed to directed fishing, a vessel operator may retain rock sole in amounts up to 35 percent of the round weight equivalent of yellowfin sole that is onboard the vessel at any point in time during a fishing trip. All catch of rock sole in excess of the MRA must be discarded. To calculate retained amounts for rock sole and yellowfin sole, the vessel operator would estimate the processed weight of rock sole and yellowfin sole for a trip, convert those processed amounts to round weight equivalent of retained catch, and compare that estimate of retained catch with the 35 percent MRA for rock sole.
        MRAs are applied to all groundfish species in the BSAI to reduce fishing effort on specific species when catch is approaching an annual TAC. MRAs are the primary tool used by NMFS to reduce or slow the catch of species when directed fishing for that species is closed. Directed fishing is defined in 50 CFR part 679 as “any fishing activity that results in the retention of an amount of a species or species group onboard a vessel that is greater than the MRA for that species or species group.( Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679 provides the list of incidental catch and basis species and the MRA of each incidental catch species as a percentage of each basis species.

        Current regulations at § 679.20(e) require, with one exception, that the MRAs apply at any time during a fishing trip. This MRA accounting period is known as “instantaneous,” because the MRA may not be exceeded at any point in time during the fishing trip. The exception to this requirement, implemented in 2004 to reduce regulatory discards of pollock, allows the MRA for pollock retained by non-AFA vessels to apply at the end of each offload rather than at any time during the trip. Regulatory discards of a species occur when regulations prohibit retention of some portion of the catch for a species that is closed to directed fishing.
        The amount and rate of groundfish discards resulting from the non-AFA trawl C/P sector have been a continuing issue with the Council. Compared with other processing sectors participating in the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI, the Council concluded that these vessels consistently have had the highest groundfish discard (and lowest retention) amounts and rates. In 1995, the non-AFA trawl C/P sector retained 59 percent of all groundfish combined. The only other processor sector with a combined retention rate below 90 percent in 1995 was the longline C/P sector at 84 percent. Groundfish retention rates of non-AFA trawl C/Ps have increased somewhat in recent years. For example, in 1999 the non-AFA trawl C/P sector had an overall groundfish retention rate of 67 percent. In 2005, the retention rate for the non-AFA trawl C/P sector improved to 75 percent, but was still lower than the longline C/P and AFA-trawl C/P sectors. In 2006 through 2008, the non-AFA trawl C/P sector increased groundfish retention to between 77 and 78 percent of its total catch.
        In October 2005, the Council received a request from representatives of the non-AFA trawl C/P sector to increase opportunity to reduce regulatory discards by delaying the MRA accounting period to the time of offload of groundfish from a vessel. The requesters noted that substantial portions of groundfish discard in the BSAI are regulatory discards. Representatives for the non-AFA trawl C/P sector testified to the Council that increasing the interval for accounting of an MRA would allow more time to accumulate species open to directed fishing to use as a basis for retaining catch of species closed to directed fishing. Testimony from the sector also suggested that under some conditions this additional time to accumulate basis species may reduce the amount of regulatory discards, particularly in situations when relatively high rates of incidentally caught species were taken early in a fishing trip.
        In December 2006, the Council recommended this proposed action to allow non-AFA trawl C/Ps to apply MRAs at the end of the fishing trip for yellowfin sole, rock sole, flathead sole, “other flatfish,” arrowtooth flounder, Atka mackerel, and Pacific cod in the BSAI, and for Pacific ocean perch in the AI. The Council also recommended that a new fishing trip begin any time a non-AFA trawl C/P enters or leaves a Steller sea lion protection area closed to directed fishing for Atka mackerel or Pacific cod in the BSAI, and that the MRA accounting interval for those two species in Steller sea lion protection areas continue to apply at any time during a fishing trip.
        NMFS proposes to amend MRA accounting for non-AFA trawl C/Ps to increase the interval of time MRAs would apply to the groundfish species recommended by the Council. The proposal would also amend the definition of a fishing trip and retain the current MRA accounting interval for Atka mackerel and Pacific cod in Steller sea lion protection areas, as recommended by the Council.
        The purpose of this proposed action is to provide additional flexibility for the non-AFA trawl C/P sector to increase retention and decrease regulatory discards of certain groundfish species by extending the interval of time required to comply with MRAs, except inside Steller sea lion protection areas where current MRA accounting at any time during a fishing trip would continue to apply. This action is needed because of the less selective nature of the fisheries that the non-AFA trawl C/P sector participates in and its longstanding difficulties increasing its retained catch of groundfish. Other BSAI groundfish sectors can more easily catch higher proportions of a single species or are able to deliver mixed landings of groundfish to shoreside plants that are able to more efficiently utilize groundfish catch by processing a wider variety of fish products, including fish meal. This proposed action is consistent with National Standard 9 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act because it provides an opportunity for the non-AFA trawl C/Ps to minimize bycatch.
        To select groundfish species that were compatible with the purpose and need for this action, the Council reviewed the historical data on catch, TACs, Acceptable Biological Catch, and other biological and population data for a number of groundfish species. Each of the species selected by the Council was intended to provide the non-AFA trawl C/P sector additional opportunities to increase groundfish retention and avoid additional incentives for targeting a species closed to directed fishing, as well as not complicate the enforcement of MRAs. Two species that Council were considered for this action but rejected because they were not consistent with the Council's intent to increase retention of groundfish were Pacific Ocean perch in the BS and Greenland turbot.
        If these proposed MRA accounting revisions were to become effective in combination with the remaining MRA regulations at 50 CFR part 679, three possible MRA accounting methods, shown in the table below, could apply to selected groundfish species listed in Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679. As shown in the table below, MRA accounting for a selected species in the BSAI could (1) apply any time during a fishing trip, (2) apply at the end of a fishing trip, (3) apply at offload, or (4) not apply (no MRA calculation required). Except for species caught outside a Steller sea lion protection area (listed in footnote a to the table below), or species caught inside a Steller sea lion protection area (listed in footnote b to the table below), MRA accounting for species listed in Table 11 to CFR part 679 would not be changed by the proposed action and MRAs for these species would continue to apply to non-AFA trawl C/Ps at any time during a fishing trip. Further, the MRA percentages in Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679 would continue to be used in any calculation of MRAs and no changes to these percentages would be made under this proposed rule.

          Amendment 80 C/Ps, non-Amendment 80 C/Ps, and MRA proposed revisions. Requirements for applying and calculating MRAs to each groundfish species, shown in the table below, would depend upon the Amendment 80 (September 14, 2007; 72 FR 52668) access privileges granted to a non-AFA trawl C/P vessel, previous MRA regulations applicable to groundfish species, groundfish species selected by the Council for this proposed action, and location of retained groundfish product in the BSAI, as specified in this proposed action. Regulations establishing the Amendment 80 program affect how MRAs would apply to BSAI groundfish species, based upon whether a vessel is included in an Amendment 80 cooperative listed at § 679.2 or in the Amendment 80 limited access fishery listed at § 679.2 (see table below). Amendment 80 allocates several Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) non-pollock trawl groundfish species among trawl fishery sectors. The table below also depicts how MRA accounting would vary by existing MRA regulations for pollock and many other groundfish species that would not be revised by this proposal. MRA accounting would be affected by extending the interval of time required to comply with MRAs for yellowfin sole, flathead sole, rock sole, Pacific ocean perch in the AI, Pacific cod, Atka mackerel, “other flatfish,” and arrowtooth flounder (see table below).

        As explained in detail below, the location of retained catch of Atka mackerel and Pacific cod would impact MRA accounting, depending upon whether these species are retained inside or outside a designated Steller sea lion protection area. For example, if a non-AFA trawl C/P, in an Amendment 80 cooperative completed one fishing trip inside a Steller sea lion protection area and a second fishing trip outside a Steller sea lion protection area, two different MRA accounting intervals would apply to retention of Pacific cod, as long as a single haul did not occur on both sides of a Steller sea lion protection area. If Pacific cod was closed to directed fishing both inside and outside the Steller sea lion protection area, MRAs would apply at anytime (i.e. “instantaneously”) during that fishing trip inside the Steller sea lion protection area, and MRAs would apply at the end of a fishing trip outside the Steller sea lion protection area.

          Application (or calculation) of MRAs for the non-AFA trawl C/P sector, based on a vessels membership in an Amendment 80 cooperative and retention of groundfish inside or outside a Steller sea lion (SSL) protection area

            Groundfish species listed in Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679
            Vessels in an Amendment 80 cooperative, and retaining groundfish
            outside a designated SSL protection area,
            inside a designated SSL protection area,
            Vessels not in an Amendment 80 cooperative, and retaining groundfish
            outside a designated SSL protection area,
            inside a designated SSL protection area,

            yellowfin sole flathead sole, rock sole, AI POP
            do not apply
            apply at the end of a fishing trip

            “other flatfish”/arrowtooth flounder
            apply at the end of a fishing trip
            apply at the end of a fishing trip

            Pollock
            apply at offload
            apply at offload

            Species listed in Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679 except as noted
            apply at any time during a fishing trip except for species noted a

            apply at any time during a fishing trip except for species noted b

            apply at any time during a fishing trip except for species noted a

            Apply at any time during a fishing trip except for species noted b

            Pacific codAtka mackerel

            do not apply
            apply at any time during a fishing trip
            apply at the end of a fishing trip
            apply at any time during a fishing trip

            aYellowfin sole, flathead sole, rock sole, pollock, “other flatfish”, arrowtooth flounder, Pacific cod, Atka mackerel and, AI POP.

            bYellowfin sole, flathead sole, rock sole, pollock, “other flatfish”, arrowtooth flounder, and AI POP.

        Regulations governing the application of MRAs at § 679.20(e)(3) would be revised to add a new paragraph (e)(3)(iv) to specify that the calculation of MRAs by non-AFA trawl C/Ps for yellowfin sole, rock sole, flathead sole, Pacific ocean perch in the AI, “other flatfish,” and arrowtooth flounder, would apply at the end of a fishing trip. As shown in the table above, however, MRAs do not apply to yellowfin sole, rock sole, flathead sole and Pacific ocean perch in the AI for vessels in an Amendment 80 cooperative, because these fisheries are not closed to directed fishing for cooperative members under the Amendment 80 program. Members of an Amendment 80 cooperative are prohibited from exceeding the catch amounts assigned to the Amendment 80 cooperative at § 679.7(o)(4)(v). Therefore NMFS does not close the directed fishery for any Amendment 80 species (as defined at § 679.2) to members of an Amendment 80 cooperative except closures to directed fishing for Atka mackerel and Pacific cod inside Steller sea lion protection areas apply to members of an Amendment 80 cooperative as well as all other C/Ps.
        This action would not impact MRA accounting for pollock retained in the BSAI, which would continue to be applied at offload for vessels regardless of whether they are a member of an Amendment 80 cooperative, in the Amendment 80 limited access fishery, or are retaining groundfish inside or outside a Steller sea lion protection area (see table above). The existing regulations for applying pollock MRAs are located at § 679.20(e)(3)(iii).

          MRA accounting revisions for Pacific Cod and Atka mackerel in SSL protection areas. A proposed paragraph (iv) would be added at § 679.20(e)(3) to specify how MRA accounting would apply to Pacific cod and Atka mackerel at the end of a fishing trip, except when inside a Steller sea lion protection area that is closed to directed fishing for these two species. In Steller sea lion protection areas closed to directed fishing, the current “instantaneous” MRA accounting interval would continue to apply at any time during a fishing trip to avoid any increase in catch of these species in the protection areas that are important to foraging Steller sea lions. Atka mackerel and Pacific cod are caught and retained or discarded by the non-AFA trawl C/P sector in these Steller sea lion protection areas. NMFS observer data show that 9 percent of the Atka mackerel caught in the Aleutian Islands subarea (AI) by non-AFA trawl C/Ps are caught inside the Steller sea lion protection areas, and 97 percent of the Atka mackerel caught in the Bering Sea subarea (BS) by these vessels are caught inside the Steller sea lion protection areas. The Council determined that if it adopted the offload MRA accounting interval in Steller sea lion protection areas, Atka mackerel fishing effort in Steller sea lion protection areas could increase. At its August 2007 meeting, the Council affirmed that in its December 2006 recommendations, it had intended to maintain instantaneous MRA accounting for Pacific cod as well as Atka mackerel in both the BS and AI protection areas.

        To further reduce topping-off, the Council also recommended that a new fishing trip begin or end any time a non-AFA trawl C/P enters or leaves a Steller sea lion protection area that is closed to directed fishing for Atka mackerel or Pacific cod. Currently a fishing trip is triggered when a vessel enters or exits an area where a different directed fishing prohibition applies, including Steller sea lion protection areas,. However, when directed fishing for Pacific cod or Atka mackerel is closed both inside and outside a Steller sea lion protection area, entering or exiting the Steller sea lion protection area does not trigger the start of a new fishing trip because the directed fishing prohibitions are the same. This allows vessels to retain Pacific cod or Atka mackerel caught inside a Steller sea lion protection area using target species (basis species) accumulated outside the Steller sea lion protection areas. Requiring that a new fishing trip start each time a vessel enters or leaves a Steller sea lion protection area, regardless of the fishery closures that exist outside the Steller sea lion protection areas, limits the potential to top-off and target Pacific cod or Atka mackerel inside the protection areas. In addition, the new fishing trip trigger would assist NMFS in monitoring the two methods of MRA accounting that would apply inside the Steller sea lion protection areas (at the end of the trip for some species and at any point in time for other species). To institute the Council recommendations, NMFS proposes to revise the definition of a fishing trip at § 679.2 to add two new events that would trigger the end of a fishing trip for non-AFA trawl C/Ps. The proposed rule would amend the definition of a fishing trip at § 679.2 to require that a new fishing trip would start or end when a non-AFA trawl C/P entered or exited a Steller sea lion protection area that was closed to directed fishing for Pacific cod or Atka mackerel at § 679.22(a)(7)(i), (a)(7)(v), (a)(7)(vi), (a)(8)(i), (a)(8)(iv), and (a)(8)(v).
        MRAs would always be applied or accounted for instantaneously during a non-AFA trawl C/P fishing trip to its retention of Atka mackerel and Pacific cod at § 679.20(e)(3)(iv) . This provision would apply to any portion of a haul that occurs inside the Steller sea lion protection area described at § 679.22(a)(7)(i), (a)(7)(v), (a)(7)(vi), (a)(8)(i), (a)(8)(iv), and (a)(8)(v). If any portion of a haul made by a non-AFA trawl C/P occurred inside these Steller sea lion protection areas, then all the catch from that haul would be accounted for as a fishing trip that occurred inside the Steller sea lion protection area for purposes of calculating MRAs.
        The purpose of the proposed MRA accounting requirements at § 679.20(e)(3)(iv) is to provide a verifiable account of retained catch for members of the non-AFA trawl C/P sector and NMFS, consistent with the intent of Steller sea lion protection measures. These proposed requirements would provide clear instructions to operators for calculating retained catch from a tow that occurs wholly or partially in a Steller sea lion protection area. The requirement would also assist NOAA Office for Law Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard in monitoring compliance of retained catch for Pacific cod and Atka mackerel. It would better ensure compliance with Steller sea lion protection measures that prohibit directed fishing for these species in Steller sea lion protection areas because MRA accounting for these species would be applied at any time during a fishing trip inside protection areas. This MRA accounting regulation would continue to provide flexibility for a vessel to haul through a Steller sea lion protection area without retrieving gear and starting a new haul.

          Revision to definition for “fishing trip”. The definition of a fishing trip in § 679.2 would also be amended to require that a new fishing trip would start for a non-AFA trawl C/P when “any( fish or fish products are offloaded or transferred. This requirement would modify the current requirement that a fishing trip is triggered by the offload or transfer of (all( fish or fish product from the vessel, and would prevent partial offloads by non-AFA trawl C/P for purposes of calculating MRA amounts. Because MRA accounting for non-AFA trawl C/Ps would occur at the end of a fishing trip, partial offloads of groundfish that do not trigger a new fishing trip could reduce the effectiveness of MRA accounting for this sector. For example, if the offload consisted predominantly of groundfish that were closed to directed fishing, without offload of sufficient basis species to comply with the MRA, a vessel could then return to the fishing grounds numerous times and avoid matching the designated amount of basis and incidental amounts defined by an MRA. That vessel could continue this practice to avoid complying with an MRA and would not be in violation of MRA regulations.

          Compliance with proposed MRA revisions. Compliance with MRA accounting at the end of a fishing trip would be monitored with the same reporting forms that are used for monitoring current MRA regulations. The trawl C/P Daily Cumulative Production Logbook and processed product onboard a vessel could be audited by enforcement officers during a vessel boarding. The uncertainty associated with unscheduled boardings and audits of retained catch would facilitate C/P compliance with MRA restrictions under the proposed rule. NOAA Office of Law Enforcement also would be able to review logbook and production reports submitted by the vessel operator to track and identify intentional or unintentional MRA violations.

          Conservation issues associated with proposed MRA revisions. Relaxed MRA accounting should not lead to an increase in catch for most groundfish species in the BSAI. The draft Environmental Assessment supporting this action concluded that these MRA proposals would not increase the risk of exceeding a TAC, cause conservation concerns, interfere with associated management objectives, or be unenforceable.

          Other Proposed Regulatory Amendments. At § 679.20(e)(3)(iii), the citation defining which vessels qualify as non-AFA trawl C/Ps, would be revised. When the AFA was authorized by the Secretary of Commerce in FMP Amendments 61/61/13/8 (67 FR 79692, December 30, 2002), most AFA qualified trawl C/Ps were listed at § 679.4(l)(2)(i). For purposes of this action, non-AFA trawl C/Ps would be those trawl C/P vessels that are not listed at § 679.4(l)(2)(i). The proposed rule clarifies this definition of non-AFA trawl C/Ps in both § 679.2 and § 679.20(e)(3)(iii).
        At § 679.20(d)(l)(iii)(B), the list of exceptions to the requirement to calculate MRAs at any time during a fishing trip, is expanded to include the proposed requirements at § 679.20(e)(3).
        The definition of a “fishing trip” would be reorganized at § 679.2(l)(i) to clarify when a catcher/processor vessel or mothership is engaged in a fishing trip. At § 679.2(l)(i)(B) the sentence identifying that offload and transfer of fish product is one trigger for a fishing trip is also reorganized. These are both technical changes that reorganize the presentation of the correct fishing trip triggers but do not make substantive changes in these requirements.
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Regional Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

        An initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, the reasons why it is being considered, and a statement of the objectives of and the legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A summary of the analysis follows. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
        The directly regulated entities are the commercial fishing entities that operate non-AFA trawl C/P vessels in the BSAI groundfish fisheries. Under a conservative application of the Small Business Administration criterion and the best available data, the total number of small entities directly regulated by the proposed action is estimated as three out of a total of 22 vessels participating in 2006.
        Impacts to small entities, while uncertain, are anticipated to be beneficial. This proposed rule is likely to reduce the burden of existing MRA accounting restrictions on the non-AFA trawl C/P sector by increasing the amount of time that these operations have to comply with MRAs for a selected group of species.
        Each of the action alternatives would provide additional opportunity for non-AFA trawl C/P vessels to increase retention of selected groundfish species. Alternative 1 (no action), would continue to apply the current instantaneous MRA accounting regulations. These regulations require that for all groundfish other than pollock, an MRA may not be exceeded at any point during a fishing trip. The existing accounting and enforcement of MRAs may result in some small and large entity non-AFA trawl C/Ps selectively discarding incidentally caught species so as to not exceed the instantaneously enforced MRA. In some years, this constraint could result in additional discards of groundfish that would otherwise be retained.
        The Council also considered Alternatives 2 and 3 for relaxing MRA accounting and several species options to include within these alternatives. Alternative 2 would change the time interval for accounting for selected species that may be retained in the BSAI, including Steller sea lion protection areas, to the end of a fishing trip. This alternative is intended to increase the time allowed for an entity to meet required retention percentages published in regulation, but lacks the instantaneously applied MRA accounting requirements, additional trip triggers, and C/P reporting requirements anytime a non-AFA trawl C/P enters or leaves a Steller sea lion protection area, included in Alternative 4.
        Under Alternative 3, MRA accounting would be extended beyond a weekly reporting period to the time of offload which may increase the amount of species harvested when that species is closed to directed fishing. More frequently, larger vessels in the non-AFA trawl C/P sector offload every 6 to 7 days, while smaller vessels may offload every 7 to 10 days. Absent any other trip ending events, a trip could increase to as many as 10 days. The IRFA discusses a significant monitoring and enforcement issue with Alternative 3. Compliance monitoring of offload-based accounting would depend upon inspection of holds and product by NOAA Office of Law Enforcement primarily at the point of offload. The longer interval of time to comply with an MRA under in this alternative could provide a vessel operator with some incentive to inaccurately report weekly production, if that person believed that no enforcement officer would be present at the point of landing.
        Alternative 4 is the preferred alterative selected by the Council. This alternative would allow non-AFA trawl C/Ps to apply MRAs at the end of a fishing trip for 8 species of groundfish to provide greater flexibility for operators to retain groundfish species in the BSAI without creating some of the enforcement and management concerns associated with Alternatives 2 and 3.
        Small entities may have greater flexibility to improve the value of a fishing trip under Alternative 2 or 3 compared with the preferred alternative; however the EA for this action identified a concern for Steller sea lions under these two alternatives. It is possible that localized depletion of Atka mackerel and Pacific cod in Steller sea lion protected areas could occur under Alternatives 2 and 3 if vessels in the non-AFA trawl C/P sector were to increase catch of these two groundfish species during a fishing trip. This could lead to further consultation under the Endangered Species Act for Steller sea lions. The preferred alternative, in contrast, retains the status quo MRA accounting in Steller sea lion protection areas for Atka mackerel and Pacific cod. NMFS cannot determine the impacts on distribution of catch or impacts on communities of any of the alternatives because these regulatory alternatives are not anticipated to significantly change the total amount of groundfish processed or delivered to communities compared with existing management measures implemented for BSAI groundfish fisheries. Changes in economic activity within a given community could result from slightly larger, or a different, distribution of offloaded products, but the magnitude of the change between any of the alternatives is expected to be small.
        The operator of a non-AFA trawl catcher/processor would be required at § 679.5 to start a new C/P trawl gear daily cumulative production logbook page (logsheet) at the beginning of each fishing trip. This information would be required to properly aggregate production by fishing trip and to assist both the vessel operator and authorized officers to monitor compliance of MRAs.

        This rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which has been approved by OMB under Control Number 0648-0213. Public reporting burden for the catcher/processor trawl gear daily fishing cumulative logbook is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate, or any other aspect of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by e-mail to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 202-395-7285.
        Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection-of-information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

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

          Dated: February 9, 2009.
          Samuel D. Rauch III
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

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

          PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

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

          Authority:
          16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et seq., 3631 et seq.; and Pub. L. 108(199, 118 Stat. 110.

        2. In § 679.2, under the definition of “Fishing trip”, revise paragraphs (1)(i) introductory text, (1)(i)(B), (1)(i)(E), and (1)(ii) and add paragraph (1)(iii) to read as follows:

          § 679.2
          Definitions.

            Fishing trip means:
          (1) * * *
          (i) For all catcher/processor vessels or motherships. Except as provided in paragraph (1)(ii) of this definition, an operator of a catcher/processor or mothership is engaged in a fishing trip from the time the harvesting, receiving, or processing of groundfish is begun or resumed in an area until any of the following events occur:

          (B) All fish or fish product are offloaded or transferred from that vessel;

          (E) The end of a weekly reporting period.
          (ii) For non-AFA trawl catcher/processors. For those catcher/processors using trawl gear and not listed at § 679.4(l)(2)(i), a new fishing trip begins from the time the harvesting, receiving, or processing of groundfish is begun in an area until any of the following events occur:
          (A) Any of the events listed in paragraphs (1)(i)(A) through (E) of this definition;
          (B) The vessel enters or leaves a Steller sea lion protection area described at § 679.22(a)(7)(i), (a)(7)(v), (a)(7)(vi), (a)(8)(i), (a)(8)(iv), and (a)(8)(v); or
          (C) Any fish or fish product are offloaded or transferred from that vessel.
          (iii) Catcher vessels. A catcher vessel is engaged in a fishing trip from the time the harvesting of groundfish is begun until the offload or transfer of all fish or fish product from that vessel.

        3. In § 679.5, paragraph (c)(4)(iv)(B)(3) is added to read as follows:

          § 679.5
          Recordkeeping and reporting (R&R).

          (c) * * *
          (4) * * *
          (iv) * * *
          (B) * * *
          (3) For non-AFA trawl catcher/processors. The operator of a catcher/processor using trawl gear and not listed at § 679.4(l)(2)(i) must start a separate logsheet page at the beginning of a new fishing trip as defined at § 679.2. If a logsheet page represents the start of a new fishing trip, write “Start of a new fishing trip” in the Comments section of the logsheet page.

        4. In § 679.20, revise paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(B), (e)(3)(ii), the first sentence of paragraph (e)(3)(iii) and add paragraph (e)(3)(iv) to read as follows:

          § 679.20
          General limitations.

          (d) * * *
          (1) * * *
          (iii) * * *
          (B) Retention of incidental species. Except as described in paragraphs (e)(3)(iii) and (iv) of this section, if directed fishing for a target species, species group, or the “other species” category is prohibited, a vessel may not retain that incidental species in an amount that exceeds the maximum retainable amount, as calculated under paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, at any time during a fishing trip.

          (e) * * *
          (3) * * *
          (ii) Except as provided in paragraphs (e)(3)(iii) and (iv) of this section, for catcher/processors fishing in an area closed to directed fishing for a species or a species group, the maximum retainable amount applies at any time during a fishing trip.
          (iii) For all vessels not listed in § 679.4(l)(2)(i), the maximum retainable amount for pollock harvested in the BSAI applies at the end of each offload and is based on the basis species harvested since the previous offload. * * *
          (iv) For catcher/processors using trawl gear and not listed in § 679.4(l)(2)(i), the maximum retainable amounts for yellowfin sole, flathead sole, other flatfish, rock sole, arrowtooth flounder, Atka mackerel, and Pacific cod in the BSAI, and Pacific ocean perch in the AI apply at the end of a fishing trip, except the MRA for Pacific cod and Atka mackerel apply at any point in time during a fishing trip inside the Steller sea lion protection areas described at § 679.22(a)(7)(i), (a)(7)(v), (a)(7)(vi), (a)(8)(i), (a)(8)(iv), and (a)(8)(v). In addition, if any portion of a trawl haul is from inside these Steller sea lion protection areas, then all of the catch from that haul must be attributed to the fishing trip that occurred inside the Steller sea lion protection area for purposes of calculating maximum retainable amounts.

      [FR Doc. E9-3184 Filed 2-12-09; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 17
        Endangered Species; Establishment of Manatee Protection Areas

          AGENCY:
          Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Advance notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments.

          SUMMARY:

          The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is considering the preparation of a draft rule that would establish additional protection areas for the endangered West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) within the area of the species' range. These protection areas would be either refuges, areas where waterborne activities are restricted, or sanctuaries, areas where waterborne activities are prohibited. The Service is considering this action as a means to reduce the level of watercraft-related incidental take of manatees.

          DATES:
          We must receive your comments regarding this proposed rulemaking on or before October 16, 2000.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit written comments to the Field Supervisor, Jacksonville Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 6620 Southpoint Drive, South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, Florida 32216 or via electronic mail to fw4_es_jacksonville@fws.gov. Comments and materials received in response to this proposal will be available for public inspection at this address during normal working hours from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Peter Benjamin, Jacksonville Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 6620 Southpoint Drive, South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, Florida 32216, Telephone: (904) 232-2580 extension 106, Facsimile: (904) 232-2404, or Electronic Mail: fw4_es_jacksonville@fws.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The establishment of protection areas for the Florida manatee is provided for under regulations promulgated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended in 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and published in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 17, Subpart J. The Service may, by regulation issued in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553 & 43 CFR part 14, establish manatee protection areas whenever there is substantial evidence showing such establishment is necessary to prevent the taking of one or more manatees (50 CFR 17.103). The ESA prohibits the taking of endangered species. “Take” as defined by the ESA means “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.”
        There are two types of manatee protection areas which may be established: manatee refuges and manatee sanctuaries. A manatee refuge, as defined in 50 CFR 17.102, is an area in which the Director has determined that certain waterborne activities would result in the taking of one or more manatees, or that certain waterborne activities must be restricted to prevent the taking of one or more manatees, including but not limited to a taking by harassment. The designation of an area as a refuge results in the restriction of waterborne access. A manatee sanctuary is an area in which the Director has determined that any waterborne activity would result in the taking of one or more manatees, including but not limited to a taking by harassment. The designation of an area as a sanctuary results in the prohibition of all waterborne activities. A waterborne activity is defined as including, but not limited to, swimming, diving (including skin and SCUBA diving), snorkeling, water skiing, surfing, fishing, the use of water vehicles and dredging and filling activities.
        The Service proposes to evaluate the need for establishment of protection areas. The Service may subsequently establish such protection areas if and where warranted. Areas under consideration for possible designation as either refuges or sanctuaries include, but may not be limited to, areas of importance to manatees such as warm water refuges; areas used for feeding, mating, calving, resting, or traveling; areas with a high incidence of watercraft-related manatee mortality; and areas in which the Service determines that the current protection measures are inadequate.
        Persons wishing to provide relevant information and comments regarding our evaluation of the need for manatee refuges and sanctuaries and the establishment of such protection areas should submit such comments in writing to the address above.
        Our practice is to make comments we receive on this rulemaking, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which we would withhold from the rulemaking a respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. However, we will not consider anonymous 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 inspection in their entirety.

          Dated: August 24, 2000.
          H. Dale Hall,
          Acting Regional Director.

      [FR Doc. 00-22422 Filed 8-31-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-55-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        RIN 0648-BC95
        Fisheries Off West Coast States; West Coast Salmon Fisheries; Notice of Availability for Amendment 18 to the Salmon Fishery Management Plan

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

          ACTION:
          Availability of amendment to a fishery management plan; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:

          NMFS announces that the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has transmitted Amendment 18 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan for Commercial and Recreational Salmon Fisheries off the Coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California (FMP) for Secretarial review. Amendment 18 revises the description and identification of essential fish habitat (EFH) for Pacific salmon, designates habitat areas of particular concern (HAPC), modifies the current information on fishing activities and potential measures to minimize their effects on EFH, and updates the list of non-fishing related activities that may adversely affect EFH and potential conservation and enhancement measures to minimize those effects. Amendment 18 is available on the Council's Web site (www.pcouncil.org).

          DATES:
          Comments on Amendment 18 must be received on or before August 15, 2014.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2014-0071, by any one of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov. To submit comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, enter NOAA-NMFS-2014-0071 in the search box. Locate the document you wish to comment on from the resulting list and click on the “Submit a Comment” icon on the right of that line.
          • Mail: William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115-0070.

            Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above methods to ensure that the comments are received, documented, and considered by NMFS. 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. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on http://www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          Electronic copies of the amendment may be obtained from the Council Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Peggy Mundy at 206-526-4323.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The ocean salmon fisheries in the exclusive economic zone off Washington, Oregon, and California are managed under a framework fishery management plan entitled the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan (FMP). The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) requires that each regional fishery management council submit any FMP or plan amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval. The MSA also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an FMP or amendment, immediately publish a notice that the FMP or amendment is available for public review and comment. NMFS will consider the public comments received during the comment period described above in determining whether to approve Amendment 18 to the FMP.

        Essential fish habitat (EFH) definitions for salmon stocks managed under the FMP were originally developed in Amendment 14 to the FMP, and codified by NMFS in 2008 (73 FR 60987, October 15, 2008). The MSA requires periodic review of EFH provisions, and revision or amendment of those provisions, as warranted, based on available information (50 CFR 600.815(a)(10)). In 2009, the PFMC and NMFS established and staffed a Pacific Salmon EFH Oversight Panel (Panel) to review salmon EFH and new information relevant to salmon EFH, and to make recommendations as to whether revisions would be appropriate. The Panel recommended modifications to Pacific salmon EFH in a final report submitted to the Council (Stadler et al. 2011). At its April 2011 meeting, the Council initiated an FMP amendment to address the Panel's recommendations. The Council adopted modifications to salmon EFH contained in Amendment 18 at their September 2013 meeting, and transmitted the proposed amendment to NMFS on June 10, 2014.
        Freshwater EFH for salmon is described using hydrologic unit codes (HUCs) developed by the US Geological Survey (USGS). The USGS has changed the numbering of some of these HUCs since salmon EFH was originally described under Amendment 14; therefore, Amendment 18 revises Appendix A to the FMP with the updated HUC designations. Additionally, new scientific information has become available on current and historically occupied freshwater salmon habitat; Amendment 18 revises the description and identification of essential fish habitat (EFH) for salmon, based on the latest scientific information available. Amendment 18 also modifies the process for determining whether freshwater habitat above impassable barriers (e.g., dams) should be defined as EFH; designates habitat areas of particular concern; modifies the current information on fishing activities and potential measures to minimize their effects on EFH; and updates the list of non-fishing related activities that may adversely affect EFH and potential conservation and enhancement measures to minimize those effects.

        NMFS welcomes comments on the proposed FMP amendment through the end of the comment period. Amendment 18 is available on the Council's Web site (www.pcouncil.org). The Council also transmitted a proposed rule to implement Amendment 18 for Secretarial review and approval. NMFS expects to publish and request public review and comment on this rule in the near future. Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by the end of the comment period on the amendment to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the amendment. All comments received by the end of the comment period for the amendment, whether specifically directed to the amendment or the proposed rule, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision.

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

          Dated: June 11, 2014.
          Emily H. Menashes,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2014-14033 Filed 6-13-14; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P