        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 224
        [Docket No. 000303059-1019-02; I.D. No. 021700B]
        RIN  0648-XA49

        Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Endangered Status for a Distinct Population Segment of Smalltooth Sawfish (Pristis pectinata) in the United States

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule, notice of availability; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS has completed a comprehensive status review of smalltooth sawfish and has determined that a petitioned action to list North American populations of smalltooth sawfish as endangered is warranted.  A distinct population segment (DPS) of smalltooth sawfish in the United States is in danger of extinction.  NMFS has reviewed the status of the species and efforts being made to protect the species and is proposing to place the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish on the list of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA).  NMFS has determined that this DPS is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range from a combination of the following four listing factors: The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range; overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.  If this proposed listing is finalized, the protective measures of the ESA will be  extended to the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish, a recovery plan will be prepared and implemented, and critical habitat may be designated.

          DATES:

          Comments on this proposal and on the December 2000 Smalltooth Sawfish Status Review must be received by July 16, 2001.  A public hearing will be held promptly if any person so requests within 45 days of the date of this publication.  Notice of the location and time of any such hearing will be published in the Federal Register not less than 15 days before the hearing is held.

          ADDRESSES:
          Send all comments and materials concerning this proposed rule and the December 2000 Smalltooth Sawfish Status Review (Status Review) to the Chief, Protected Resources Division, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive North, Saint Petersburg, FL 33702.  The Status Review may be obtained by contacting the above individual.  Please note that electronic mail or internet site comments will not be accepted.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Jennifer Lee, NMFS, at the address above (727-570-5312), or Marta Nammack, NMFS, 301-713-1401, ext. 116.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        On November 30, 1999, NMFS received a petition from the Center for Marine Conservation requesting NMFS to list North American populations of smalltooth sawfish and largetooth sawfish as endangered under the ESA.  The petitioner’s request was based on four criteria:  (1) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (3) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (4) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.  On March 10, 2000, NMFS published its determination that the petition presented substantial information indicating that listing may be warranted for smalltooth sawfish, but not for largetooth sawfish.  Concurrently, NMFS announced the initiation of a smalltooth sawfish formal status review (65 FR 12959, March 10, 2000).
        The ESA defines an “endangered species” as “any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range”.  A “threatened species” is defined as “any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range”.  Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA states that a species is threatened or endangered if any one or more of the following factors causes it to be, or likely to become, in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range:  (A) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.  Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires that NMFS make listing determinations based solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available, after conducting a review of the status of the species and after taking into account those efforts, if any, being made by any state or foreign nation to protect such species, whether by predator control, protection of habitat and food supply, or other conservation practices, within any area under its jurisdiction, or on the high seas.
        In order to conduct a comprehensive review of smalltooth sawfish, a status review team was created to investigate the status of the species with regard to the listing criteria provided by the ESA.  In addition to its own resources and data, the status review team gathered all known records and data of smalltooth sawfish by contacting fishery managers, museums and other research collectors.  The status review contains the best scientific and commercial information available on smalltooth sawfish.  The document addresses the status of the species, the five listing determination criteria, and the effect of efforts underway to protect the species.
        The December 2000 Smalltooth Sawfish Status Review is now available.  The findings of the Status Review have been accepted by NMFS and are summarized here.  The Status Review contains a more complete discussion and complete literature citations for the information summarized in this proposed rule.
        Consideration as a “species” under the Endangered Species Act

        The ESA defines species as “any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife that interbreeds when mature”.  16 U.S.C. 1532(15).  This definition allows for the recognition of distinct population segments at levels below taxonomically recognized species or subspecies.  On February 7, 1996, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NMFS published a joint policy to clarify the phrase “distinct population segment (DPS)” for the purposes of listing, delisting and reclassifying species under the ESA (61 FR 4722).  This policy identifies two criteria that must be met for a population segment to be considered a DPS under the ESA:  (1) The discreteness of the population segment in relation to the remainder of the species or subspecies to which it belongs; and (2) the significance of the population segment to the species or subspecies to which it belongs.
        Discreteness of the U.S. Population of Smalltooth Sawfish
        A population segment of a vertebrate species may be considered discrete if it satisfies either one of the following conditions: (1) It is markedly separated from other populations of the same taxon as a consequence of physical, physiological, ecological, or behavioral factors; or (2) it is delimited by international governmental boundaries within which differences in control of exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the ESA.
        The status review team was unable to find any indication that the current U.S. population of smalltooth sawfish interact with smalltooth sawfish elsewhere, suggesting that the U.S. population may be effectively isolated from other populations.  However, there are few scientific data on the biology of smalltooth sawfish; and it is not possible to conclusively subdivide this species into discrete populations on the basis of genetics, morphology, behavior, or other biological characteristics.   However, the DPS policy allows for the delineation of a DPS based on international governmental boundaries within which differences in control of exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist.  The smalltooth sawfish status review team was unable to identify any mechanisms regulating the exploitation of this species anywhere outside of the U.S.  In contrast, several southeastern U.S. states have regulations in place prohibiting fishing for this species.  Based on these differences in control of exploitation and regulatory mechanisms, the U.S. population of smalltooth sawfish meets the requirements of discreteness on an international boundary basis.
        Significance of the U.S. Population of Smalltooth Sawfish

        The DPS policy identifies several factors that may be considered in making a determination of a population’s significance to the taxon to which it belongs.  Among these considerations is evidence that loss of the discrete population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of a taxon.  The smalltooth sawfish has already been wholly or nearly extirpated from large areas of its former range in the North Atlantic (Mediterranean, U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico) and the Southwest Atlantic by fishing and habitat modification; and its status elsewhere is uncertain but likely to be similarly reduced.  In fact, the status review team was unable to find any recent verifiable records of smalltooth sawfish populations outside of the U.S.   Reports of this species from outside the Atlantic may be misidentifications of other pristids.  Therefore smalltooth sawfish populations in U.S. waters, while extremely depleted, may be the largest population of smalltooth sawfish in the Western Atlantic.  As sawfish in general are suffering worldwide declines, the U.S. population of smalltooth sawfish comprises an important component of the sawfishes’ remaining global biological diversity.  The U.S. population of smalltooth sawfish is the northernmost population in the Western Hemisphere (see habits and habitat section).  Because other populations of smalltooth sawfish are apparently relatively scarce compared to the U.S. population, and because the U.S. population is the northernmost population in the western Atlantic, the loss of the U.S. population would result in a significant gap in the range of this species.   For these reasons, the U.S. population of smalltooth sawfish is significant as defined under the DPS policy.
        Based on the above analysis of the discreteness and significance of smalltooth sawfish,, smalltooth sawfish that occur in waters of the eastern United States are both discrete and significant and constitute a DPS.  As such, consideration of the conservation status of the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish in relationship to the ESA's listing standards is appropriate.
        Distribution and Abundance
        Smalltooth sawfish are tropical marine and estuarine fish that have the northwestern terminus of their Atlantic range in the waters of the eastern United States.  In the United States, smalltooth sawfish are generally a shallow water fish of inshore bars, mangrove edges, and seagrass beds, but are occasionally found in deeper coastal waters.
        In order to assess both the historic and the current distribution and abundance of the smalltooth sawfish, the status review team collected and compiled literature accounts, museum collection specimens, and other records of the species.  This information indicates that prior to around 1960, smalltooth sawfish occurred commonly in shallow waters of the Gulf of Mexico and eastern seaboard up to North Carolina, and more rarely as far north as New York.  Subsequently their distribution has contracted to peninsular Florida and, within that area, can only be found with any regularity off the extreme southern portion of the state.  The current distribution is centered in the Everglades National Park (including Florida Bay).
        Although time-series abundance data are lacking, publication and museum records, negative scientific survey results, anecdotal fisher observations, and limited landings per unit effort (from Louisiana) indicate that smalltooth sawfish have declined dramatically in U.S. waters over the last century.  The decline is likely greater than indicated by numbers or frequencies of catches because during the past century, both fishing and scientific sampling effort have increased by orders of magnitude.  The fact that documented smalltooth catch records have declined during this period despite these tremendous increases in fishing effort underscores the population reduction in smalltooth sawfish.  NMFS concludes that the abundance of the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish is at an extremely low level relative to historic levels.
        Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
        Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533) and regulations promulgated to implement the listing provisions of the ESA (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal list.  Section 4 requires that listing determinations be based solely on the best scientific and commercial data available, without consideration of possible economic or other impacts of such determinations.  A species may be determined to be endangered or threatened due to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA.  These factors and their application to the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish are described below.
        (a)  The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of Habitat or Range
        Loss and/or degradation of habitat has contributed to the decline of many marine species, and is unknown, but fully expected, to have impacted the distribution and abundance of smalltooth sawfish.  The continued urbanization of the southeastern coastal states has resulted in substantial loss of coastal habitat through such activities as agricultural and urban development, commercial activities, dredge and fill operations, boating, erosion, and diversions of freshwater run-off. Animal wastes and fertilizers from agricultural runoff contribute large amounts of non-point source nutrient loading and introduce a wide range of toxic chemicals into habitats important to smalltooth sawfish.  Urban development in the southeast coastal zone is more than four times the national average, destroying or degrading significant amounts of coastal and estuarine habitat.  Commercial activities in the southeast eliminate or degrade substantial amounts of marine and estuarine fish habitat   although the exact amount is unknown.  An analysis of 18 major southeastern estuaries recorded over 703 miles (1,131 km) of navigation channels and 9,844 miles (15,842 km) of shoreline modifications.  Profound impacts to hydrological regimes have been produced in South Florida through the construction of a 1,400-mile (2,260-km) network of canals, levees, locks, and other water control structures which modulate freshwater flow from Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades, and other coastal areas.
        Potential detrimental impacts from the activities listed above on smalltooth sawfish habitat within the U.S. DPS include: (1) loss of wetlands, (2) eutrophication, (3) point and non point sources of pollution, (4) increased sedimentation and turbidity, and (5) hydrologic modifications.  Smalltooth sawfish may be especially vulnerable to coastal habitat degradation due to their affinity to shallow, estuarine systems.  The cumulative impacts from habitat degradation discussed above may reduce habitat quality and limit habitat quantity available to the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish.  Given current low levels of abundance, and its current retracted range, it is critical that efforts be undertaken to better understand, avoid, minimize and mitigate these factors.
        (b)  Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Purposes

        Smalltooth sawfish were historically often caught as bycatch in various fishing gears, including gillnet, otter trawl, trammel net, seine, and, to a lesser degree, hand line.  There are frequent accounts in early literature of smalltooth sawfish being entangled in fishing nets from areas where smalltooth sawfish were once common, but are now rare or extirpated.  Their long, toothed rostrum makes it difficult to avoid entanglement in virtually all kinds of large mesh gillnet gear.  The saw penetrates easily though nets and causes the animal to become entangled when it attempts to escape.  Shrimp trawling is another source of incidental mortality on smalltooth sawfish.  Entangled specimens frequently had to be cut free, causing extensive damage to nets and presenting a substantial hazard if brought on board.  For these reasons, most smalltooth sawfish caught by fishermen were either killed outright or released only after removal of their saws.
        Quantitative data are limited, but indicate that smalltooth sawfish historically were commonly taken by commercial fishermen and that this species has experienced severe declines in its abundance over the past several decades.  Large-scale directed fisheries for smalltooth sawfish have not existed; however, smalltooth sawfish bycatch has been commercially landed in various regions, primarily in Louisiana.  Total Gulf of Mexico landings dropped continually from 1950 to 1978 from around 5 metric tons to less than 0.2 metric tons during this time period. NMFS does not have any records of landings since 1978.
        A data set from “Fisheries Statistics of the United States” (1945-1978) of smalltooth sawfish landings in Louisiana by shrimp trawlers, containing both landings data and crude information on effort (number of vessels, vessel tonnage, number of gear units) underscores that landings have dramatically declined, even as fishing effort increased.  Annual smalltooth landings in Louisiana declined from a high of 34,900 lb (15,830 kg) in 1949 to less than 1,500 lbs (680 kg) in most years after 1967.  During this period of time, the number of fishing vessels, the size of the fishing vessels and the amount of gear that they deployed increased substantially.  Landings per unit effort (LPUE) data were calculated using three different units of effort (number of vessels, tonnage of vessels and number of gear units).  All three data series showed dramatic declines in LPUE, from high levels in the 1950s to very low levels in the 1970s.  The magnitude of these declines is such that the LPUE values in the 1970s are less than 1 percent of those in the 1950s, demonstrating a severe decline in the population.  The lack of landings since 1978 shows that smalltooth sawfish have been commercially extinct for over 20 years.
        Anecdotal information collected by NMFS port agents indicates that smalltooth sawfish are now taken very rarely in the shrimp trawl fishery.  The most recent records from Texas are from the 1980s.  Through 1999, smalltooth sawfish were still occasionally documented in shrimp trawls in Florida (4 from 1990 to 1999).
        Historically, smalltooth sawfish have also occasionally occurred as bycatch in recreational fisheries.  Occasional takes with harpoon or hook-and-line by recreational fishers in Florida were recorded during the first half of the 20th century.  In Texas, many sawfish were reportedly taken incidentally by sport fishermen in the bays and surf prior to the 1960s.  Most of these fish were released; however, prior to their live release, the saws of many individuals were removed.  This practice may have contributed to the decline of smalltooth in Texas.
        Today, recreational catches of sawfish are very rare, and poorly documented for the most part, except within the Everglades National Park.  Long-term abundance data are not available, but there are recent (1989-1999) recreational catch per unit effort (CPUE) data for the Everglades.  These CPUE data indicate that a sustaining population still exists there, with consistent annual catches by private recreational anglers and guide boats.
        Direct take of smalltooth sawfish has been of little importance or remains obscure.  Although there is a market for smalltooth sawfish saws, the species is not commonly taken and any captures are apparently incidental.
        Smalltooth sawfish have also been taken by collectors and sold live to aquaria.  The recent high value aquaria are willing to pay for this species ($1,000 per ft; $3,200 per m) may be providing increased incentive for their collection. The smalltooth sawfish has rarely been used for scientific purposes.
        (c) Disease or Predation
        There is no information regarding competition, predation, and disease affecting smalltooth sawfish.  The decline of the species, however, appears to have been one of slow attrition over the course of the twentieth century (primarily from bycatch in fisheries and secondarily by coastal habitat destruction) rather than some acute epizootic event.  The few living specimens examined appear to be in good health.
        (d)  Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
        Numerous Federal, state, and inter-jurisdictional laws, regulations and policies govern activities in U.S. waters and have the potential ability to affect the abundance and survival of smalltooth sawfish and their habitat.  While these laws, regulations, and policies lead to overall environmental enhancements indirectly aiding smalltooth sawfish, very few have been applied specifically for the protection of smalltooth sawfish.  For example, NMFS and FWS consult with other agencies on projects that may impact fish and wildlife and provide recommendations to avoid any adverse impacts, but there has never been a recommendation directed at the protection of sawfish.  Any general recommendations that are implemented and reduce habitat loss in shallow coastal areas may provide some benefit to smalltooth sawfish by curbing increased habitat degradation.
        There are no Federal regulations for the protection of sawfish.  With the exception of Florida, Louisiana, and possibly Alabama in the near future, smalltooth sawfish can also still be legally harvested in state waters.
        As noted in the preceding section, a century of net fisheries combined with the low reproductive potential of the sawfish (typical of most elasmobranchs) resulted in a very severe decline in sawfish populations.  Smalltooth sawfish bycatch in gillnets has likely been reduced due to recent regulations prohibiting or limiting the use of gillnets in some state waters and the depressed abundance of this species, but bycatch in other gears such as trawls may still present a threat to this species.  Recent reports of smalltooth sawfish caught with their saws already removed indicate that smalltooth sawfish are still being harmed by commercial or recreational fishing activities.  Based on this information, existing Federal and state laws, regulations, and policies appear inadequate to protect smalltooth sawfish.
        (e) Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence

        Current and future abundance of smalltooth sawfish is limited by its life history characteristics.  While little is known directly about smalltooth sawfish life history, inferences can be drawn from closely related species for which more information is available, such as the largetooth sawfish and other elasmobranchs.  These species have slow growth, late maturity, a long life span, and low fecundity; and it is highly likely that smalltooth sawfish share these characteristics.  These combined characteristics result in a very low intrinsic rate of population increase and are associated with the life history strategy known as “k-selection”.  K-selected animals are usually successful at maintaining relatively small, persistent population sizes in relatively constant environments.  Conversely, they are not able to respond effectively (rapidly) to additional sources of mortality resulting from changes in their environment.  Such changes include overexploitation and habitat degradation.  Smalltooth sawfish have been (and are currently) subjected to both overexploitation and habitat degradation.
        The intrinsic rate of population growth can be a useful parameter to estimate the capacity of species to withstand exploitation.  Animals with low intrinsic rates of increase are particularly vulnerable to excessive mortalities and rapid stock collapse, after which recovery may take decades.  The estimated intrinsic rate of natural increase for smalltooth sawfish ranges from 0.08/year to 0.13/year, and population doubling times range from 5.4 years to 8.5 years.  These values are considered to be low and to place the species at risk.
        Basis for Determination
        The U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish is at a critically low level of abundance.  The U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish continues to face threats from: (1) loss of wetlands, (2) eutrophication, (3) point and non point sources of pollution, (4) increased sedimentation and turbidity, and (5) hydrologic modifications.  Commercial bycatch has played the primary role in the decline of this DPS.  Quantitative data are limited, but indicate that smalltooth sawfish have been taken by commercial fishermen and that this species has experienced severe declines in their abundance.  While Federal, state, and interjurisdictional laws, regulations, and policies lead to overall environmental enhancements indirectly aiding smalltooth sawfish, very few have been applied specifically for the protection of smalltooth sawfish.  Based on the species’ low intrinsic rate of increase resulting from their slow growth, late maturation, and low fecundity, population recovery potential for the species is limited and the species is at risk of extinction.  Therefore, under current circumstances, the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish is in danger of extinction.
        Protective measures for the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish were examined in combination with the species’ status information  to determine if listing as threatened or endangered was warranted and if there was a need for an emergency listing.  Current protective measures and conservation efforts underway to protect the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish are confined to:  actions directed at increasing general awareness of this species and the risks it faces; possession prohibitions in the state waters of Florida and Louisiana; and research being pursued by the Mote Marine Laboratory’s Center for Shark Research.  There are no Federal or state conservation plans for the smalltooth sawfish.
        Proposed Determination
        The ESA defines an endangered species as any species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(6)), and a threatened species as any species likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(20)).  Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires that determinations regarding whether any species is threatened or endangered be based solely on the best scientific and commercial information available after conducting a review of the status of the species and after taking into account those efforts, if any, being made by a state or foreign nation to protect such species (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(1)(A)).
        Based on results of its status review, NMFS has concluded that the U.S. population segment of smalltooth sawfish constitutes a DPS, or “species,” under the ESA.  After evaluating the status of this DPS, NMFS has determined that it is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.  NMFS proposes to list the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish as endangered under the ESA at this time.  At present, the DPS consists of a single population, with its current distribution centered in the Everglades Park (including Florida Bay).
        Conservation Measures
        Conservation measures provided for species listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA include recovery actions (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)), Federal agency consultation requirements (16 U.S.C. 1536), and prohibitions on taking (16 U.S.C. 1538).  Recognition of the species’ plight through listing promotes conservation actions by Federal and state agencies and private groups and individuals.
        Should the proposed listing be made final, protective regulations under the ESA would take effect, a recovery program would be implemented, and critical habitat may be designated.  NMFS recognizes that to be successful, protective regulations and recovery programs for smalltooth sawfish will need to be developed in the context of conserving aquatic ecosystem health.  Federal, state and the private sectors would need to cooperate to conserve the listed U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish and the ecosystems upon which it depends.
        Sections 10(a)(1)(A) and 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)(B)) provide NMFS with authority to grant exceptions to the ESA's “taking” prohibitions.  Section 10(a)(1)(A) scientific research and enhancement permits may be issued to entities (Federal and non-Federal) conducting research that involves a directed take of listed species.  A directed take refers to the intentional take of listed species.  NMFS has issued section 10(a)(1)(A) research/enhancement permits for other listed species for a number of activities.
        Under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, incidental take permits may be issued to non-Federal entities performing activities that may incidentally take listed species.  The types of activities potentially requiring a section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit include the operation and release of artificially propagated fish by state or privately operated and funded hatcheries, operation of a privately owned power plant in the vicinity of the listed species, and the implementation of state fishing regulations.
        Service Policies on Endangered and Threatened Fish and Wildlife
        On July 1, 1994, the NMFS and FWS published a series of policies regarding listings under the ESA, including a policy for peer review of scientific data (59 FR 34270) and a policy to identify, to the maximum extent possible, those activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9 of the ESA (59 FR 34272).
        (a) Role of peer review
        The intent of the peer review policy is to ensure that listings are based on the best scientific and commercial data available.  Prior to a final listing, NMFS will solicit the expert opinions of three qualified specialists, concurrent with the public comment period.  Independent peer reviewers will be selected from the academic and scientific community, Federal and State agencies, and the private sector.
        (b) Identification of those activities that would constitute a violation of Section 9 of the ESA

        The intent of this policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of this listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the species’ range. NMFS will identify, to the extent known at the time of the final rule, specific activities that will not be considered likely to result in violation of section 9, as well as activities that will be considered likely to result in violation.  Activities that NMFS believes could result in violation of section 9 prohibitions against “take” of the U.S. DPS of smalltooth sawfish include, but are not limited to, the following:
        (1) Bycatch associated with commercial and recreational fisheries;
        (2) Poaching of individuals caught as bycatch in the state of Florida for trade;
        (3) Destruction of coastal habitat through such activities as agricultural and urban development, commercial activities, dredge and fill operations, boating, erosion, and diversions of freshwater run-off; and
        (4) Unauthorized collecting or handling of the species (permits to conduct these activities are available for purposes of scientific research or to enhance the propagation or survival of the DPS).
        NMFS believes that, based on the best available information, the following actions will not result in a violation of section 9:
        (1) Possession of smalltooth sawfish acquired lawfully by permit issued by NMFS pursuant to section 10 of the ESA, or by the terms of an incidental take statement in a biological opinion pursuant to section 7 of the ESA; or
        (2) Federally approved projects that involve activities such as agriculture, managed fisheries, road construction, discharge of fill material, stream channelization or diversion for which consultation under section 7 of the ESA has been completed, and when such activity is conducted in accordance with any terms and conditions given by NMFS in an incidental take statement in a biological opinion pursuant to section 7 of the ESA.
        Critical Habitat
        Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)) as:  (1) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the ESA, in which are found those physical or biological features (a) essential to the conservation of the species and (b) that may require special management considerations or protection; and (2) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at that time it is listed upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.  ‘Conservation’ means the use of all methods and procedures needed to bring the species to the point at which listing under the ESA is no longer necessary.
        Section 4(a)(3)(a) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(A)) requires that, to the extent prudent and determinable, critical habitat be designated concurrently with the listing of a species.  Designations of critical habitat must be based on the best scientific data available and must take into consideration the economic and other relevant impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat.  NMFS is evaluating the prudency of determining critical habitat.  If NMFS determines that critical habitat is determinable and that it is prudent to designate critical habitat, it will publish a proposed designation of critical habitat for the U.S. DPS of smalltooth in a separate rule.
        Public Comments Solicited
        To ensure that the final action resulting from this proposal will be as accurate and effective as possible, NMFS is soliciting comments and information from the public, other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties.  Comments are encouraged on this proposal as well as on the Status Review.  Specifically, NMFS is soliciting information regarding: (1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning any threat (or lack thereof) to this DPS; (2) additional information concerning the range, distribution, and population size of this DPS; (3) current or planned activities in the subject area and their possible impacts on this DPS; and (4) additional efforts being made to protect smalltooth sawfish in the U.S.
        Final promulgation of the regulation(s) on this species will take into consideration the comments and any additional information received by NMFS, and such communications may lead to a final regulation that differs from this proposal.
        Classification
        The Conference Report on the 1982 amendments to the ESA notes that economic considerations have no relevance to determinations regarding the status of species, and that the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not applicable to the listing process.  Similarly, listing actions are not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 12612 and are exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
        National Environmental Policy Act
        NMFS has concluded that ESA listing actions are not subject to the environmental assessment requirements of the NEPA.  See NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.
        Federalism
        Smalltooth sawfish records and data were collected by the status review team from appropriate state fishery managers and incorporated into the Status Review.  In keeping with the intent of the Administration and Congress to provide continuing and meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual state/Federal interest, this proposed rule will be given to the relevant state agencies in each state in which the species is believed to occur, who will be invited to comment.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 224

        Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and record keeping requirements, Transportation.

          Dated: April 9, 2001.
          William T. Hogarth,
          Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

          For reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 224 is proposed to be amended as follows:

            PART 224—MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES

          1. The authority for part 224 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            16 U.S.C. 1531-1543 and 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.

          2. In § 224.101, paragraph (a) is amended by adding the following entry, “Smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata)” before “Shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum)”, to read as follows:

            § 224.101
            Enumeration of endangered marine and anadromous species.
            (a) Marine and anadromous fish.

                Species
                Common Name
                Scientific Name
                Where Listed
                When Listed
                Critical Habitat

                Smalltooth  sawfish

                  Pristis  pectinata

                U.S.A,  Atlantic:  NC  through  FL;   Gulf  of  Mexico:  TX  through  FL
                4/16/01
                NA

                *         *           *           *         *         *         *

          3. In § 224.101, paragraph (a), revise the entry under “Common Name” from “Salmon, Atlantic” to read “Atlantic salmon”, and insert “65 FR 69459, Nov. 17, 2000” in the “When Listed” column for this entry.

      [FR Doc. 01-9387 Filed 4-13-01; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S


        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        40 CFR Part 80
        [EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0091; FRL-9965-00-OAR]
        RIN 2060-AT04
        Public Hearing for Standards for 2018 and Biomass-Based Diesel Volume for 2019 Under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program

          AGENCY:
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

          ACTION:
          Announcement of public hearing.

          SUMMARY:

          The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing a public hearing to be held in Washington, DC on August 1, 2017 for the proposed rule “Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Standards for 2018 and Biomass-Based Diesel Volume for 2019.” This proposed rule will be published separately in the Federal Register. The pre-publication version of this proposal can be found at https://www.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard-program/regulations-and-volume-standards-under-renewable-fuel-standard. In the separate notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA has proposed amendments to the renewable fuel standard program regulations that would establish annual percentage standards for cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and renewable fuels that would apply to all gasoline and diesel produced in the U.S. or imported in the year 2018. In addition, the separate proposal includes a proposed biomass-based diesel applicable volume for 2019.

          DATES:

          The public hearing will be held on August 1, 2017, at the location noted below under ADDRESSES. The hearing will begin at 9 a.m. and end when all parties present who wish to speak have had an opportunity to do so. Parties wishing to testify at the hearing should notify the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by July 25, 2017. Additional information regarding the hearing appears below under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

          ADDRESSES:

          The hearing will be held at the following location: Hyatt Regency Washington on Capitol Hill, 400 New Jersey Avenue NW., Washington, DC, USA, 20001 (phone number 202-737-1234). A complete set of documents related to the proposal will be available for public inspection through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0091. Documents can also be viewed at the EPA Docket Center, located at 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Julia MacAllister, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4131; Fax number: (734) 214-4816; Email address: RFS_Hearing@epa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The proposal for which EPA is holding the public hearing will be published separately in the Federal Register. The pre-publication version can be found at https://www.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard-program/regulations-and-volume-standards-under-renewable-fuel-standard.

          Public Hearing: The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning the proposal (which can be found at https://www.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard-program/regulations-and-volume-standards-under-renewable-fuel-standard). The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations but will not respond to the presentations at that time. Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as any oral comments and supporting information presented at the public hearing. Written comments must be received by the last day of the comment period, as specified in the notice of proposed rulemaking.
        How can I get copies of this document, the proposed rule, and other related information?

        The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0091. The EPA has also developed a Web site for the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program, including the notice of proposed rulemaking, at the address given above. Please refer to the notice of proposed rulemaking for detailed information on accessing information related to the proposal.

          Dated: July 10, 2017.
          Christopher Grundler,
          Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.

      [FR Doc. 2017-14946 Filed 7-17-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6560-50-M


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 73
        [DA 02-2219, MB Docket No. 02-273, RM-10562]
        Digital Television Broadcast Service; Tuscaloosa, AL

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:

          The Commission requests comments on a petition filed by TV Alabama Inc., licensee of station WCFT-TV, proposing the substitution of DTV channel 5 for DTV channel 34c at Tuscaloosas, Alabama. DTC Channel 5 can be allotted to Tuscaloosa at reference coordinates 33-28-48 N. and 87-25-50 W. with a power of 5.4, a height above average terrain HAAT of 641 meters.

          DATES:
          Comments must be filed on or before November 7, 2002, and reply comments on or before November 22, 2002.

          ADDRESSES:

          The Commission permits the electronic filing of all pleadings and comments in proceeding involving petitions for rule making (except in broadcast allotment proceedings). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rule Making Proceedings, GC Docket No. 97-113 (rel. April 6, 1998). Filings by paper can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). The Commission's contractor, Vistronix, Inc., will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commissions, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner, or its counsel or consultant, as follows: Thomas P. Van Wazer, Sidley, Austin, Brown & Wood LLP, 1501 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005 (Counsel for TV Alabama, Inc.).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Pam Blumenthal, Media Bureau, (202) 418-1600.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No. 02-273, adopted September 9, 2002, and released September 16, 2002. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC, 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC, 20554, telephone 202-863-2893, facsimile 202-863-2898, or via e-mail qualexint@aol.com.

        Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this proceeding.

        Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing permissible ex parte contacts.
        For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

          List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
          Digital television broadcasting, Television.

        For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR Part 73 as follows

          PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
          1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

            § 73.622
            [Amended]
            2. Section 73.622(b), the Table of Digital Television Allotments under Alabama is amended by removing DTV channel 34c and adding DTV channel 5 at Tuscaloosa.

            Federal Communications Commission.
            Barbara A. Kreisman,
            Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.

      [FR Doc. 02-24106  Filed 9-20-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-M


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE----National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 229
        [I.D. 060806B]
        Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing Operations; Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of public meeting.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS is announcing a public meeting to provide information about the draft Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan (PLTRP) and potential research and monitoring activities that may be initiated this summer in the Mid-Atlantic Bight involving the pelagic longline fishery.

          DATES:
          The meeting will convene at 1 p.m. on Thursday, June 22, 2006, and will run until approximately 5 p.m.

          ADDRESSES:
          The meeting will be held at Willie R. Etheridge Seafoods, 4561 Mill Landing Road, Wanchese, NC 27981.
        -
          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Vicki Cornish, NMFS, Southeast Region, 727-824-5312, Vicki.Cornish@noaa.gov. Individuals who use telecommunications devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        NMFS established the Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Team in June 2005 to address incidental serious injuries and mortalities of short- and long-finned pilot whales (Globicephala macrorhynchus and Globicephala melas) in the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery, as required by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The team met several times and developed a draft PLTRP for submittal to NMFS. The draft PLTRP contains proposed management measures to reduce serious injuries and mortalities of both pilot whales and Risso's dolphins (Grampus griseus) in the Mid-Atlantic Bight, as well as recommendations for research and data collection. The meeting will provide an opportunity for NMFS staff to meet with fishermen and discuss the draft PLTRP and potential research and monitoring efforts that may be initiated this summer, answer questions, and identify pelagic longline fishermen who may be willing to voluntarily participate in research activities.

          Dated: June 8, 2006.
          Donna Wieting,
          Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. E6-9311 Filed 6-13-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
        Indian Health Service
        42 CFR Part 136a
        [Docket No. IHS-FRDOC-0001]
        RIN 0917-AA13
        Indian Health; Removal of Suspended Regulations

          AGENCY:
          Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:

          The Indian Health Service (IHS) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or “the Department”) is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposing the removal of regulations appearing in the Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations have never been implemented and were referred to as “suspended” in a 1999 Federal Register Notice.

          DATES:
          Send comments on or before August 21, 2020.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments to this proposed rule, identified by RIN 0917-AA14 by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal. You may submit electronic comments at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for the Docket ID number IHS-FRDOC-0001. Follow the instructions http://www.regulations.gov online for submitting comments through this method.
          • Regular, Express, or Overnight Mail: You may mail comments to Indian Health Service, Attention: Evonne Bennett, Acting Director, NPRM, RIN 0917-AA13, Division of Regulatory and Policy Coordination, Office of Management Services, Indian Health Service, 5600 Fishers Lane, Mailstop: 09E70, Rockville, Maryland 20857.

          All comments received by the methods and due date specified above will be posted without change to content to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided about the commenter, and such posting may occur before or after the closing of the comment period.

            Docket: For complete access to background documents or posted comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID number IHS-FRDOC-0001.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Evonne Bennett, Acting Director, Division of Regulatory and Policy Coordination, Office of Management Services, IHS, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, Mail Stop: 09E70. Telephone (301) 443-1116 (This is not a toll-free number).

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        In response to Executive Order 13777, Sec. 3(d), which directs agencies to repeal existing regulations that are “outdated, unnecessary or ineffective” from the CFR, HHS proposes to remove the regulations appearing at 42 CFR part 136a. These regulations were promulgated as a final rule in 1987 and were intended to replace the regulations appearing in the CFR at 42 CFR part 136. The new regulations, however, were never implemented and have since been referred to as “suspended” in the Federal Register
          . In the intervening years, the IHS has continued to follow the regulations appearing at 42 CFR part 136, and the IHS does not propose to alter this practice. Instead, the IHS proposes to remove the duplicative regulations at 42 CFR part 136a from the CFR. Given how much time has passed since these regulations were initially promulgated; the concern on the part of Congress regarding implementation of the regulations; and the confusion caused by having two sets of regulations addressing the same issue published in the CFR, the Agency proposes that the suspended regulations at 42 CFR part 136a be deleted in their entirety.
        Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 13771, and 13777

        Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a “significant regulatory action” as an action that is likely to result in a rule: (1) Having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more in any 1 year, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or Tribal governments or communities (also referred to as “economically significant”); (2) creating a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) must be prepared for major rules with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1 year). HHS submits that this proposed rule is not “economically significant” as measured by the $100 million threshold, and hence not a major rule under the Congressional Review Act. This rule has not been designated as a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Executive Order 13771, titled, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” was issued on January 30, 2017. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to categorize all impacts which generate or alleviate costs associated with regulatory burden and to determine the actions' net incremental effect. HHS identifies this proposed rule as a deregulatory action (removing an obsolete rule from the Code of Federal Regulations) that provides no cost savings.
        Executive Order 13777, titled, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” was issued on February 24, 2017. As required by Section 3 of this Executive Order, HHS established a Regulatory Reform Task Force (HHS Task Force). Pursuant to Section 3(d)(ii), the HHS Task Force evaluated this rulemaking and determined that these regulations are “outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective.” Following this finding, the HHS Task Force advised IHS to initiate this rulemaking to remove the unnecessary regulation from the Code of Federal Regulations.
        Regulatory Flexibility Act
        This action will not have a significant economic impact on Indian health programs. Therefore, the regulatory flexibility analysis provided for under the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not required.
        Paperwork Reduction Act
        This action does not affect any information collections.

          List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 136a
          Government procurement, Government programs—education, Grant programs—education, Grant programs—health, Grant programs—Indians, Health care, Health professions, Indians, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scholarships and fellowships, Student aid.

          PART 136a—[REMOVED]

          For the reasons set forth above, and under the authority of the Snyder Act (25 U.S.C. 13) and the Transfer Act (42 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.), the Department of Health and Human Services proposes to remove 42 CFR part 136a from the Code of Federal Regulations.

            Dated: March 13, 2020.
            Michael D. Weahkee,
            RADM, Assistant Surgeon General, U.S. Public Health Service, Principal Deputy Director, Indian Health Service.
            Approved: April 9, 2020.
            Alex M. Azar II,
            Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.

      [FR Doc. 2020-12754 Filed 6-19-20; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4165-16-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        RIN 0648-AX25
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska Groundfish; Limited Access Privilege Programs

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability of fishery management plan amendments; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          Amendment 90 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area and Amendment 78 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska would modify the Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) to allow unlimited post-delivery transfers of cooperative quota. This action is necessary to mitigate potential overages, reduce enforcement costs, and provide for more precise total allowable catch management. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the FMPs, and other applicable laws.

          DATES:
          Comments on the amendment must be submitted on or before February 17, 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-AX25,” by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the FederaleRulemaking 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 Amendments 90 and 78, the Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analyses (RIR/IRFAs) for this action, and the Categorical Exclusion prepared for the amendments may be obtained from the NMFS Alaska Region at the address above or from the Alaska Region website at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. The proposed rule to implement Amendments 90 and 78 to the FMPs was categorically excluded from the need to prepare an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Glenn Merrill, 907-586-7459, or Julie Scheurer, 907-586-7356.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that each regional fishery management council submit any fishery management plan amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval by the Secretary of Commerce. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving a fishery management plan amendment, immediately publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing that the amendment is available for public review and comment. This notice announces that proposed Amendment 90 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area and proposed Amendment 78 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska are available for public review and comment.
        Amendments 90 and 78 would make minor changes to the FMPs to allow unlimited transfers of cooperative quota (CQ) in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI) Amendment 80 Program and the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program (Rockfish Program) to cover harvesting overages. These two programs are commonly known as limited access privilege programs because the participants in these fisheries may receive exclusive access to fishery resources if specific conditions are met.
        Under the Amendment 80 Program, NMFS issued quota share (QS) to persons based on their qualifying harvest histories using specific trawl catcher/processor vessels in six BSAI non-pollock groundfish fisheries during 1998 through 2004. Under the Rockfish Program, NMFS issued QS to persons based on their qualifying harvest histories using trawl catcher vessel and trawl catcher/processors in several Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish fisheries and associated species that are harvested during those rockfish fisheries based during 1996 through 2002. Each year, the person issued QS may choose to participate in a competitive limited access fishery with all other non-cooperative participants who hold QS, or may participate in a fishery cooperative with other QS holders.
        The total amount of QS assigned to all members of a cooperative yields cooperative quota (CQ), an exclusive annual harvest privilege in specific fisheries. In addition, a cooperative also receives CQ that may be used for the incidental catch of a specific amount crab or halibut. Incidentally caught crab or halibut cannot be retained, processed, or sold, and are commonly called prohibited species catch (PSC).
        The Amendment 80 Program and the Rockfish Program allow cooperatives to transfer their unused CQ among cooperatives. Transfers allow cooperatives to tailor their operations to specific harvesting conditions. All transfers must be approved by NMFS before they become effective. Under existing regulations, a cooperative in either the Amendment 80 Program or the Rockfish Program is prohibited from catching groundfish or PSC that exceeds the amount of CQ that is issued to that cooperative. This prohibits a cooperative and its members from having a negative CQ balance for a given species, and subsequently transferring CQ from another cooperative to rectify a negative CQ balance. A transfer of CQ after fish have been landed is commonly known as a post-delivery transfer.
        If a harvester catches more groundfish or PSC CQ than the amount of CQ that the cooperative holds, that cooperative has violated existing regulations, commonly known as an overage. Overages can occur either through deliberate actions, or more commonly through unintentional errors. Generally, smaller overages are subject to forfeiture of the overage, with larger or repeat violations subject to additional penalties at the discretion of NOAA Office for Law Enforcement.
        Amendments 90 and 78, if approved, would allow post-delivery transfers to cover overages of CQ. There would be no limit on the size of a post-delivery transfer nor on the number of post-delivery transfers a cooperative could undertake. However, a harvester who has assigned his vessel to a cooperative would be prohibited from beginning a new fishing trip if the CQ account for any groundfish or PSC species assigned to a cooperative was zero or negative. A cooperative would be prohibited from having a negative balance in its CQ account after the end of a calendar year. The Council recommended Amendments 90 and 78 to the FMPs to improve the fleet's flexibility, reduce the potential number of violations for overages, reduce enforcement costs, and allow more complete harvest of allocations.

        The RIR/IRFAs prepared for this action describes in detail the costs and benefits of the proposed amendment (see ADDRESSES for availability). All of the directly regulated entities would be expected to benefit from this action relative to the status quo because the proposed amendment would allow greater flexibility and a longer time period over which to account for overages.

        Public comments are being solicited on proposed Amendments 90 and 78 through the end of the comment period (see DATES). NMFS intends to publish in the Federal Register and seek public comment on a proposed rule that would implement Amendments 90 and 78, following NMFS( evaluation of the proposed rule under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by the end of the comment period on Amendments 90 and 78 to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on Amendments 90 and 78. All comments received by the end of the comment period on Amendments 90 and 78, whether specifically directed to the FMP amendments or the proposed rule, will be considered in the decision to approve or disapprove the amendments. Comments received after that date will not be considered in the decision on the amendments. To be considered, comments must be received, not just postmarked or otherwise transmitted, by the close of business on the last day of the comment period.

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

          Dated: December 11, 2008.
          Emily H. Menashes,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. E8-29927 Filed 12-16-08; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 17
        Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Wolverine as Threatened or Endangered

          AGENCY:
          Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Notice; initiation of status review and request for new information.

          SUMMARY:

          We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the opening of a public comment period regarding the status of the wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) in the contiguous United States. We are initiating this status review pursuant to a court order requiring us to prepare a 12-month finding on a petition to list the wolverine in the contiguous United States as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Through this action, we encourage all interested parties to provide us information regarding the status of, and any potential threats to, the wolverine in the contiguous United States.

          DATES:
          To be fully considered in the 12-month finding, comments must be received on or before August 6, 2007. However, new information on the wolverine will be accepted after the official comment period closes.

          ADDRESSES:
          If you wish to provide new information, you may submit your comments and materials by any of the following methods:
          (1) You may mail or hand-deliver written comments and information to Wolverine Status Review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Montana Field Office, 585 Shepard Way, Helena, MT 59601.
          (2) You may e-mail your information to FW6_wolverine@fws.gov. For directions on how to submit comments by email, see the “Public Comments Solicited” section of this notice.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Mark Wilson, Field Supervisor, Montana Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES), or phone 406-449-5225. Additional information is available at http://www.r6.fws.gov/species/mammals/wolverine/.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background

        On July 14, 2000, we received a petition from the Biodiversity Legal Foundation and other petitioners to list the wolverine within the contiguous United States as a threatened or endangered species and to designate critical habitat for the species. We published a 90-day petition finding in the Federal Register on October 21, 2003 (68 FR 60112). The 90-day finding determined that the petition failed to present substantial scientific and commercial information indicating that listing the wolverine may be warranted.
        Defenders of Wildlife and other plaintiffs filed a complaint on June 8, 2005, alleging that we used the wrong standards to assess the wolverine petition. On September 29, 2006, the U.S. District Court, District of Montana, ruled that our 90-day petition finding was in error and ordered us to make a 12-month finding on the status of the wolverine. On April 18, 2007, the U.S. District Court granted our April 5, 2007 (unopposed), motion for a modification to extend the deadline for the status review and 12-month finding for the wolverine by five months, to February 28, 2008.
        Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for any petition to revise the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) that contains substantial scientific or commercial information that the petitioned action may be warranted, we make a finding within 12 months of the date of the receipt of the petition on whether the petitioned action is (a) Not warranted, (b) warranted, or (c) warranted, but that the immediate proposal of a regulation implementing the petitioned action is precluded by other pending proposals to determine whether other species are threatened or endangered, and we are making expeditious progress to add or remove qualified species from the Lists. This current status review process, which will culminate in the 12-month finding on the wolverine, is initiated by court order rather than initiated by a substantial 90-day finding

        At this time, we are soliciting new information on the status of and potential threats to the wolverine. We will base our 12-month finding on a review of the best scientific and commercial information available, including all such information received as a result of this notice. We are aware that several peer-reviewed research manuscripts on the wolverine are currently in preparation for publication in The Journal of Wildlife Management. If they are completed in time, we will consider these papers, in addition to any other works constituting the best scientific and commercial information available, in making our 12-month finding.
        Public Comments Solicited

        Please submit email comments in an ASCII or Microsoft Word file and avoid the use of any special characters or any form of encryption. Also, please include “Attn: wolverine status review” in the subject line of your e-mail message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your e-mail message, please submit your comments in writing using one of the alternate methods described in the ADDRESSES section.
        Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
        Author
        The primary author of this document is staff of the Montana Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Helena, MT.
        Authority

        The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

          Dated: May 24, 2007.
          Randall B. Luthi,
          Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

       [FR Doc. E7-10570 Filed 6-4-07; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-55-P