Proposed Rules. Notice of proposed rulemaking

Agency: Coast Guard, DHS
Action: Notice of proposed rulemaking
Citation: FR Doc. 06-4645 · RIN 1625-AA00 · CGD05-06-048 · 33 CFR 165

Summary

The Coast Guard proposes establishing a 1000 foot safety zone in the vicinity of Newport News, VA centered on position 37-58-30N/076-26-19W on July 4, 2006 in support of the Stars in the Sky Fireworks event. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic on James River as necessary to protect mariners from the hazards associated with fireworks displays.

Dates

Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 15, 2006.

Supplementary Information

Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking CGD05-06-048 and indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the Commander, Sector Hampton Roads at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register . Background and Purpose On July 4, 2006, the Stars in the Sky Fireworks event will be held on the James River in Newport News, VA. Due to the need to protect mariners and spectators from the hazards associated with the fireworks display, vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted within a 1000 foot radius of the display. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard is establishing a 1000 foot safety zone on specified waters of James River in position 37-58-30N/076-26-19W, in the vicinity of Newport News, VA. This regulated area will be established in the interest of public safety during the Stars in the Sky Fireworks event and will be enforced from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 4, 2006. General navigation in the safety zone will be restricted during the event. Except for participants and vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Although this regulation restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this rule will not be significant because: (i) The safety zone will be in effect for a limited duration of time and (ii) the Coast Guard will make notifications via maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the zone will only be in place for a limited duration of time and maritime advisories will be issued allowing the mariners to adjust their plans accordingly. However, this rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners and operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in that portion of the James River from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 4, 2006. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES ) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads at (757) 668-5580. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( e.g. , specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A preliminary “Environmental Analysis Check List” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 subpart C as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add Temporary § 165.T05-048, to read as follows: § 165.T05-048 Safety Zone: Stars in the Sky Fireworks event, James River, Newport News, VA. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters within 1000 feet of position 37-58-30N/076-26-19W in the vicinity of the Newport News on the James River within the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.25-10. (b) Definition. The following definition applies to this section: Captain of the Port Representative: means any U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, Virginia to act on his behalf. (c) Regulation: (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his designated representatives. (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this safety zone shall: (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. ( A ) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads and the Sector Duty Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia can be contacted at telephone number (757) 668-5555 or (757) 484-8192. ( B ) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can be contacted on VHF-FM 13 and 16. (d) Effective date: This regulation is effective from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 4, 2006. Dated: May 2, 2006. Patrick B. Trapp, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads. [FR Doc. E6-7531 Filed 5-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD05-06-049] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone: Mathews County Fireworks Event, East River, Mathews, VA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes establishing a 1200 foot safety zone in the vicinity of Mathews, VA centered on position 37-23-56N/076-20-42W on July 1, 2006 in support of the Mathews County Fireworks Event. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic on the East River as necessary to protect mariners from the hazards associated with fireworks displays. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 15, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander, Sector Hampton Roads, Norfolk Federal Building, 200 Granby St., 7th Floor, Attn: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Norfolk, VA 23510. Sector Hampton Roads maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at the Norfolk Federal Building between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads at (757) 668-5580. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking CGD05-06-049 and indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to the Commander, Sector Hampton Roads at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register . Background and Purpose On July 1, 2006, the Mathews County Fireworks Event will be held on the East River near Mathews, VA. Due to the need to protect mariners and spectators from the hazards associated with the fireworks display, vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted within a 1200 foot radius of the display. Discussion of Proposed Rule The Coast Guard is establishing a 1200 foot safety zone on specified waters of East River in position 37-23-56N/076-20-42W, in the vicinity of the Williams Wharf in Mathews, VA. This regulated area will be established in the interest of public safety during the Mathews County Fireworks Event and will be enforced from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 1, 2006. General navigation in the safety zone will be restricted during the event. Except for participants and vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area. Regulatory Evaluation This proposed rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not “significant” under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary. Although this regulation restricts access to the regulated area, the effect of this rule will not be significant because: (i) The safety zone will be in effect for a limited duration of time and (ii) the Coast Guard will make notifications via maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans accordingly. Small Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the zone will only be in place for a limited duration of time and maritime advisories will be issued allowing the mariners to adjust their plans accordingly. However, this rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners and operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in that portion of the East River from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 1, 2006. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES ) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Bill Clark, Chief, Waterways Management Division, Sector Hampton Roads at (757) 668-5580. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. Collection of Information This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Federalism A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Protection of Children We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( e.g. , specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, we believe that this rule should be categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. A preliminary “Environmental Analysis Check List” is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final decision on whether this rule should be categorically excluded from further environmental review. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 165 subpart C as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add Temporary § 165.T05-049, to read as follows: § 165.T05-049 Safety Zone: Mathews County Fireworks Event, East River, Mathews, VA. (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters within 1200 feet of position 37-23-56N / 076-20-42W in the vicinity of the Williams Wharf on the East River near Mathews, VA within the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.25-10. (b) Definition. The following definition applies to this section: Captain of the Port Representative: means any U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, Virginia to act on his behalf. (c) Regulation: (1) In accordance with the general regulations in 165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his designated representatives. (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this safety zone shall: (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. ( A ) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads and the Sector Duty Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia can be contacted at telephone Number (757) 668-5555 or (757) 484-8192. ( B ) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can be contacted on VHF-FM 13 and 16. (d) Effective date: This regulation is effective from 8:45 p.m. to 10 p.m. on July 1, 2006. Dated: May 2, 2006. Patrick B. Trapp, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads. [FR Doc. E6-7532 Filed 5-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [I.D. 051106B] RIN 0648-AT75 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 13C AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Announcement of availability of an amendment to a fishery management plan; request for comments. SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Amendment 13C to the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP) for review, approval, and implementation by NMFS. The amendment would end overfishing of snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black sea bass, and increase the catch of red porgy consistent with an updated stock assessment. DATES: Comments must be received no later than 5 p.m., eastern time, on July 17, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • E-mail: 0648-AT75.NOA@noaa.gov . Include in the subject line the following document identifier: 0648-AT75. • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Julie Weeder, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. • Fax: 727-824-5308; Attention: Julie Weeder. Copies of Amendment 13C, which includes a Final Environmental Impact Statement, a Regulatory Impact Review, and an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, are available from the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 1 Southpark Circle, Suite 306, Charleston, SC 29407-4699; e-mail: safmc@safmc.net . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Weeder, 727-551-5753; fax: 727-824-5308; e-mail: julie.weeder@noaa.gov . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The snapper-grouper fishery off the southern Atlantic states is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and is implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires a regional fishery management council to submit any amendment to a fishery management plan to NMFS for review, approval, disapproval, or partial approval. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an amendment, publish a notice in the Federal Register stating that the amendment is available for public review and comment. Background The Council began developing the actions in Amendment 13C in 2003 to eliminate or phase out overfishing of snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black sea bass, as mandated by the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The amendment will also allow an increase in the catch of red porgy, consistent with an updated stock assessment. Proposed Actions Amendment 13C, if implemented, would reduce and phase in the snowy grouper quota and trip limit over 3 years and limit possession to one per person per day within the 5-grouper per person per day aggregate recreational bag limit. For golden tilefish, the annual commercial quota and trip limit would be reduced. The golden tilefish commercial trip limit would be further reduced each year if 75 percent of the quota was taken by September 1, in an attempt to achieve a year-round fishery. For the recreational sector, possession would be limited to one per person per day within the 5-grouper per person per day aggregate bag limit. An annual commercial quota would be established for vermilion snapper, and the recreational minimum size limit would increase from 11 inches (27.9 cm) total length (TL) to 12 inches (30.5 cm) TL. For black sea bass, an annual commercial quota would be established and phased in over 3 years; fishermen would be required to use at least 2-inch (5.1-cm) mesh for the entire back panel of black sea bass pots; the commercial and recreational fishing year would change from the calendar year to June 1 through May 31; and black sea bass pots would be required to be removed from the water once the commercial quota is met. A black sea bass recreational allocation would also be established and would be phased in over 3 years; the recreational size limit would increase from 10 inches (25.4 cm) TL to 12 inches (30.5 cm) TL and be phased in over 2 years; and the recreational bag limit would be reduced from 20 to 15 per person per day. For red porgy, a commercial quota would be established, the commercial trip limit would be increased, and the recreational bag limit would increase from 1 to 3 red porgy per person per day. The Council believes these actions provide the most biological, social, and economic benefits while allowing for adaptive management. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the regional fishery management councils and NMFS to implement measures to end overfishing. Recent stock assessments indicated snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black sea bass are undergoing overfishing, and that red porgy is rebuilding from an overfished status and is not undergoing overfishing. This action proposes measures to reduce harvests and end overfishing of these species. Additional background and rationale for the measures discussed above are contained in Amendment 13C. Proposed Rule A proposed rule that would implement the measures in Amendment 13C has been received from the Council. In accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS is evaluating the proposed rule to determine whether it is consistent with the FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law. If that determination is affirmative, NMFS will publish the proposed rule in the Federal Register for public review and comment. Consideration of Public Comments Comments received by the end of the comment period on the notice of availability of the FMP, whether specifically directed to the FMP or the proposed rule, will be considered by NMFS in its decision to approve, disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 13C. Comments received after that date will not be considered by NMFS in this decision. All comments received by NMFS on Amendment 13C or the proposed rule during their respective comment periods will be addressed in the preamble of the final rule. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Dated: May 12, 2006. Alan D. Risenhoover, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-7586 Filed 5-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 622 and 635 [Docket No. 060425111-6111-01; I.D. 041906B] RIN 0648-AN09 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 18A AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed rule to implement Amendment 18A to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (Amendment 18A) prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council). This proposed rule would prohibit vessels from retaining reef fish caught under the recreational size and bag/possession limits when commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish are on board; adjust the number of persons allowed onboard when a vessel with both commercial and charter vessel/headboat reef fish permits and a Certificate of Inspection (COI) is fishing commercially; prohibit use of Gulf reef fish, except sand perch or dwarf sand perch, as bait in any commercial or recreational fishery in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Gulf of Mexico, with a limited exception for crustacean trap fisheries; require a NMFS-approved vessel monitoring system (VMS) on board vessels with Federal commercial permits for Gulf reef fish, including charter vessels/headboats with such commercial permits; and require owners and operators of vessels with Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permits for Gulf reef fish to comply with sea turtle and smalltooth sawfish release protocols, possess on board specific gear to ensure proper release of such species, and comply with guidelines for proper care and release of incidentally caught sawfish and sea turtles. NMFS is also proposing to require annual permit application rather than application every 2 years (biennial). In addition, Amendment 18A would revise the total allowable catch (TAC) framework procedure to reflect current practices and terminology. The intended effects of this proposed rule are to improve enforceability and monitoring in the reef fish fishery in the Gulf of Mexico and to reduce mortality of incidentally caught sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish. DATES: Comments must be received no later than 5 p.m., eastern time, on July 3, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the proposed rule by any of the following methods: • E-mail: 0648-AN09.Proposed@noaa.gov . Include in the subject line the following document identifier: 0648-AN09. • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Peter Hood, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. • Fax: 727-824-5308; Attention: Peter Hood. Copies of the Amendment 18A, which includes a Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and an Environmental Assessment, may be obtained from the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 2203 N. Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607; telephone: 813-348-1630; fax: 813-348-1711; e-mail: gulfcouncil@gulfcouncil.org . Copies of the amendments may also be downloaded from the Council's Web site at www.gulfcouncil.org . Comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be submitted in writing to Jason Rueter at the Southeast Regional Office address and to David Rostker, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), by e-mail at David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov , or by fax to 202-395-7285. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Hood, telephone: 727-824-5305; fax: 727-824-5308; e-mail: Peter.Hood@noaa.gov . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The fishery for reef fish is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP) that was prepared by the Council. The FMP was approved by NMFS and implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622. Background This proposed rule is intended to resolve several issues related to monitoring and enforcement of existing regulations and to reduce bycatch mortality of incidentally caught endangered sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish. In addition, Amendment 18A would update the framework procedure for setting TAC to reflect current terminology and stock assessment procedures. Simultaneous Commercial and Recreational Harvest on a Vessel This proposed rule would improve enforceability of the prohibition on sale of reef fish caught under the recreational bag limit by prohibiting persons aboard a vessel with a commercial reef fish permit from retaining reef fish species caught under recreational size and possession limits when the vessel has commercial quantities, i.e., fish in excess of applicable bag/possession limits, of any Gulf reef fish species aboard. By prohibiting retention of recreational reef fish catches on a commercial fishing trip, this alternative adds an at-sea component to enforcement of the prohibition on sale of recreationally caught reef fish. This measure also makes consistent across all reef fish the rules regarding retention of recreationally harvested fish on a commercial fishing vessel. Regulations for red grouper, gag, and black grouper specifically prohibit commercial reef fish vessels from possessing those species during the February 15 to March 15 closed season, but possession of recreational bag limits is allowed during a quota closure for those species, and for other reef fish during any commercial closure of that species. This action explicitly prohibits retention of recreational bag limits of Gulf reef fish on board a vessel that possesses commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish. Maximum Crew Size on a Charter Vessel/Headboat When Fishing Commercially This proposed rule would resolve the discrepancy between United States Coast Guard (USCG) minimum crew size regulations and NMFS' maximum crew size regulations, and address potential safety issues related to spearfishing under the maximum crew size restrictions of the existing NMFS regulations. The USCG regulations currently require a minimum of four persons (two captains and two crew) when a vessel with a COI is out over 12 hours. NMFS' current fishing regulations limit the maximum number of persons on board to three when a vessel with both a commercial and charter vessel/headboat permit is fishing commercially. Since some charter vessels and headboats must have a COI in order to carry passengers for hire, this creates a discrepancy in the regulations for dual-permitted vessels, and there is a need to resolve this discrepancy. In addition, the Council received a request from the operator of a dual-permitted vessel who spearfishes commercially to allow a crew size of four persons when commercially spearfishing, so that for safety purposes, there could be two persons in the boat while there are two divers in the water. This proposed rule would address these crew size issues by revising the definitions of “Charter vessel” and “Headboat” to clarify that a vessel that has a charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf reef fish, a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, and a valid COI issued by the USCG to carry passengers for hire will not be considered to be operating as a charter vessel/headboat provided: (1) It is not carrying a passenger who pays a fee; and (2) When underway for more than 12 hours, that vessel meets but does not exceed the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels underway over 12 hours; or when underway for not more than 12 hours, that vessel meets the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels underway for not more than 12-hours (if any), and does not exceed the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels that are underway for more than 12 hours. A vessel with a commercial vessel permit for king mackerel and/or Spanish mackerel and a charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf coastal migratory pelagic fish would still be subject to the 3-person maximum crew size limit if the vessel has commercial quantities of mackerel onboard, regardless of whether the vessel also has a Gulf reef fish charter vessel/headboat permit, a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, or commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish onboard. Use of Reef Fish in or from the EEZ for Bait It is illegal to cut up reef fish at sea for use as bait. However, it is not illegal to use cut up reef fish that were purchased as bait on shore, nor is it illegal to use a whole reef fish provided it complies with applicable size and bag limits. Allowing cut up reef fish to be used when purchased compromises enforcement of the rules prohibiting the cutting up of reef fish caught at sea because it is difficult to differentiate between the two. This proposed rule would prohibit using any species in the reef fish management unit or parts thereof, except sand perch and dwarf sand perch, as bait in any commercial or recreational fishery. A limited exception to this prohibition would be provided for reef fish carcasses and offal to be used for bait in trap fisheries for blue crab, stone crab, deep-water crab, and spiny lobster, unless such use was otherwise restricted. Vessel Monitoring System The Reef Fish FMP contains several area-specific regulations where fishing is restricted or prohibited to protect habitat or spawning aggregations, or to reduce fishing pressure in areas that are heavily fished. Unlike size, bag, and trip limits, where the catch can be monitored onshore when a vessel returns to port, area restrictions require at-sea enforcement. However, at-sea enforcement of offshore area restrictions is difficult due to the distance from shore and limited number of patrol vessels. There is a need to improve enforceability of area fishing restrictions through electronic methods. This proposed rule would require permitted commercial reef fish vessels, including charter vessel/headboats with commercial reef fish vessel permits even when under charter, to be equipped with an operating VMS approved by NMFS for the Gulf reef fish fishery. An operating VMS includes an operating mobile transmitting unit on the vessel and a functioning communication link between the unit and NMFS as provided by a NMFS-approved communication service provider. NMFS would publish in the Federal Register a list of approved VMS mobile transmitting units and associated communication service providers that meet the minimum standards for the Gulf reef fish fishery. Upon installation of an approved transmitting unit by a qualified marine electrician and activation of the communication services, a vessel owner or operator would be required to submit to NMFS, Office of Enforcement, Southeast Region, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, a statement certifying compliance with an installation and activation checklist and a vendor-completed installation certification checklist that would be available from NMFS. The VMS would be required to transmit a signal indicating the vessel's accurate position at least once per hour and must function 7 days a week, 24 hours a day unless exempted by NMFS under the power down exemption of the NOAA Enforcement Draft Vessel Monitoring System Requirements that is included as Appendix E to Amendment 18A. Prior to departure for each trip, a vessel owner or operator would be required to report to NMFS any fishery the vessel would participate in on that trip and the specific type(s) of fishing gear, using NMFS-defined gear codes, that would be on board the vessel. This information could be reported via NMFS' toll-free number, 888-219-9228, or via an attached VMS terminal. The vessel owner would be responsible for the cost of the VMS equipment, installation, maintenance, and month-to-month communications. These VMS requirements would apply throughout the Gulf of Mexico. Compliance with the VMS requirements would be required 120 days after publication of the final rule implementing Amendment 18A. Vessels fishing exclusively with fish traps would be exempted from the VMS requirement through February 7, 2007, but would remain subject to mandatory trip origination and termination reporting requirements through February 7, 2007. The use of fish traps in the Gulf reef fishery is prohibited after February 7, 2007. Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Bycatch NMFS concluded in a biological opinion that reasonable and prudent measures should be taken to minimize stress and increase survival rates of any sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish taken in the reef fish fishery. Therefore, measures are needed to comply with the biological opinion and to enhance the protection of endangered sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish. This proposed rule would require vessels with commercial or charter vessel/headboat permits for Gulf reef fish to possess a document provided by NMFS titled, “Careful Release Protocols for Sea Turtle Release With Minimal Injury”; post the sea turtle handling and release guidelines provided by NMFS on the vessel; follow specified release handling measures for any smalltooth sawfish that are caught incidentally; and have sea turtle release gear onboard. Measure Proposed by NMFS NMFS is proposing to revise the renewal requirements applicable to all Magnuson-Stevens Act vessel permits, licenses, endorsements, and dealer permits issued by NMFS' Southeast Regional Office, including applicable highly migratory species permits, to require submission of an application every year rather than requiring submission only every two years (i.e., biennial application). NMFS believes that requiring an annual application would: Provide better permit accountability, particularly regarding permit transfers; provide for better verification of permit application data; and simplify permit financial accounting through annual application payments. Fees for annual application would be half of the current biennial fee; therefore, there would be no increased cost to applicants. Modifications to the TAC Framework Procedure In addition to the measures contained in this proposed rule as discussed above, Amendment 18A proposes to modify the framework procedure for setting TAC by incorporating the Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) process and adopting minor wording changes to update the terminology in the framework. The administrative procedures for setting TAC have changed with the development of SEDAR to assess stock status. The framework procedure currently specifies that the Reef Fish Stock Assessment Panel (RFSAP) evaluate stock assessments and recommend acceptable biological catch (ABC) ranges. However, the RFSAP has been discontinued, and stock assessments and ABC recommendations are now conducted through the SEDAR process. In addition, some of the terminology and agency or department names have changed since the last revision of the framework procedure and must be updated accordingly. Classification At this time, NMFS has not determined whether Amendment 18A, which this proposed rule would implement, is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, in making that determination, will take into account the data, views, and comments received during the comment periods on this amendment and on this proposed rule. This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. NMFS prepared an IRFA, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A copy of the full analysis is available from the Council office (see ADDRESSES ). A summary of the analysis follows. The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for the proposed rule. The proposed rule would: (1) Continue allowing vessels to possess both commercial and for-hire vessel permits but disallow retention of reef fish species caught under recreational size and possession limits when the vessel has commercial harvests of any reef fish species aboard; (2) allow a charter vessel/headboat with a USCG COI to increase its crew size but not in excess of its minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI when fishing for reef fish under its commercial fishing license; (3) prohibit the use of any species in the reef fish management unit or parts thereof as bait, with certain exceptions; (4) require the use of VMS systems Gulf-wide for all commercially permitted reef fish vessels, including charter vessels with commercial reef fish permits; and (5) require vessels with commercial and/or charter vessel/headboat reef fish permits to comply with sea turtle and smalltooth sawfish release protocols, possess a set of release gear required by the NMFS' Office of Protected Resources (OPR), and comply with specific guidelines for the proper care of incidentally caught sawfish. The main objectives of the proposed rule are to resolve certain issues related to monitoring and enforcement of existing regulations and reduce bycatch mortality of incidentally caught endangered sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish. The proposed rule would impact three types of businesses in the Gulf reef fish fishery, namely, commercial fishing vessels, recreational for-hire vessels, and fish dealers. At present, the commercial reef fish permits are under a license limitation program, and for-hire reef fish permits are under a moratorium, which is proposed to be converted into a license limitation under a separate amendment. Hence, no new commercial or for-hire reef fish permits will be issued when Amendment 18A is implemented. Currently, there are 1,145 commercial and 1,574 for-hire active vessel permits for the Gulf reef fish fishery. Of these permittees, 237 vessels have both commercial and for-hire vessel permits. Reef fish dealers in the Gulf are required to obtain permits to handle reef fish caught in the Gulf. There are currently 227 dealers permitted to buy and sell reef fish caught in the Gulf. The proposed rule is expected to affect these commercial vessels, for-hire vessels, and fish dealers. The direct effects on dealers would mainly come from the restriction of bait use and only to the extent that dealers supply bait to some fishermen. Data are not available to quantify the extent of this impact. Average annual gross receipts of commercial reef fish vessels in the Gulf range from $24,095 for low-volume vertical line vessels to $116,989 for high-volume longline vessels. The corresponding annual net incomes range from $4,479 for low-volume vertical line vessels to $28,466 for high-volume vertical line vessels. Permit records indicate that the maximum number of commercial reef fish permits owned by any single entity is six, so at the maximum this entity would generate a total of $701,934 in gross receipts. For the for-hire vessels, gross annual receipts range from $76,960 for charter vessels to $404,172 for headboats. The corresponding annual operating profits range from $36,758 for charter vessels to $338,209 for headboats. Permit records indicate a maximum of 12 permits held by any single entity. At a maximum, this entity would generate a total of $4,850,064 in gross receipts. A fishing business is considered a small entity if it is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field of operation, and if it has annual receipts not in excess of $4.0 million in the case of commercial harvesting entities or $6.5 million in the case of for-hire entities. Relative to these thresholds, both the commercial vessel and for-hire vessel entities affected by the proposed rule are determined to be small business entities. According to a survey of reef fish processors, employment (both part and full time) by all reef fish processors in the Southeast totaled 700 individuals. There is no information regarding employment by fish dealers, although it is safe to assume that dealers employ fewer individuals than processors. A seafood processor (fish dealer) is a small business if it is independently owned and operated, not dominant in its field of operation, and employs 500 (100) or fewer persons on a full-time, part-time, temporary, or other basis. Given the employment information, it is very unlikely for any processor that holds a reef fish dealer permit to employ 500 or more persons. Although there are no actual data on employment by fish dealers, between 1997 and 2000, on average, in excess of 100 reef fish dealers operated in the Gulf. It is assumed that all processors must be dealers, yet a dealer need not be a processor. Total dealer employment, therefore, is expected to be slightly more than 700 individuals. Given the number of reef fish dealers and estimates of dealer employment, it is unlikely any dealer employs more than 100 persons. Based on earnings information, the commercial and recreational fishing business entities affected by the proposed rule are determined to be small business entities. It is also very likely that most, if not all, permitted fish dealers affected by the proposed rule are also small business entities. However, as previously noted, this proposed rule's direct effects on dealers would mainly come from the restriction of bait use and only to the extent that dealers supply bait to some fishermen. Data are not available to quantify the extent of this impact. Allowing vessels to be dually permitted (commercial and for-hire) would enable some 227 vessels to continue their usual operations. Disallowing these vessels to possess recreationally caught reef fish when commercial quantities of reef fish are aboard would improve enforcement without significantly impacting the operations of these dually permitted vessels. Allowing a for-hire vessel to increase its crew size but not in excess of its minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI affords flexibility in operation and helps to assure safety at sea of the crew, particularly for vessels using spearfish gear. This would also eliminate the discrepancy between current fishing rules and USCG requirements with respect to crew size of for-hire vessels. The prohibition on the use of reef fish, except sand perch and dwarf sand perch, as bait reinforces the current ban on cutting up reef fish at sea and regulations on bait. The economic impact of this provision on commercial and for-hire vessels cannot be estimated but is expected to be relatively small. The VMS requirement is expected to improve the efficacy of enforcement efforts and the effectiveness and timeliness of at-sea rescue efforts. One-time and recurring costs would be incurred by all commercial reef fish vessels, including for-hire vessels with commercial reef fish permits. First-year compliance costs range from $2,032 to $3,651 per vessel. These costs could be substantial, particularly relative to the profits of small-time vessel operations. The various requirements addressing the bycatch issue relative to sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish would affect all commercial and for-hire vessels in the reef fish fishery. Out-of-pocket expenses are estimated between $267 and $459 per vessel. These are mainly costs for equipping vessels with the required gear. Because some of the gear would last for some time, costs would in effect be spread over a number of years. The proposed rule would alter some reporting, record-keeping, and other compliance requirements. The VMS requirement would affect all vessels with commercial and/or for-hire reef fish permits. Including installation by a qualified marine electrician, equipment costs range from $1,600 to $2,900 per vessel. In addition, yearly communication costs range from $432 to $751 per vessel. The proposed rule also contains changes to the application process for renewal of permits. However, the new requirement for yearly application is not expected to alter burden time or costs to respondents. The availability of the permit renewal application as an on-line document, as well as the reduced burden time attributable to the changes of the income qualification affidavit, should offset any increases in burden hours generated by the yearly renewal. Permit applications would cost half of their previous amount, but would be required twice as often, thereby off-setting any changes in overall cost. Compliance with sea turtle and smalltooth sawfish release protocols would also affect all vessels with commercial and/or for-hire reef fish permits. Costs range from $267 to $459 per vessel. Other than the provision on vessel manning requirements, which removes the conflict between NMFS and USCG regulations, no other Federal rules have been identified that would duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule. The proposed rule is expected to affect a substantial number of small entities. A total of 908 commercial vessels only, 1,337 for-hire vessels only, and 237 commercial/for-hire vessels would be affected. Since practically all entities affected by the proposed rule are small entities, the issue of disproportional effects on small versus large entities does not arise. Mainly because of the VMS requirement, for which compliance costs range from $1,600 to $2,900 per vessel, and the sea turtle and smalltooth sawfish release protocols, for which compliance costs range from $267 to $459 per vessel, the proposed rule would have substantial adverse impacts on the profitability of affected vessels, particularly the smaller and marginal operations. This amendment considered several alternatives to the proposed rule. For vessels with both commercial and for-hire reef fish permits (dual-permitted vessels), two other alternatives have been considered. Alternative 1 (status quo) continues to allow vessels to be dually permitted, but it does not resolve the problem of identifying whether caught fish are saleable (commercial trip) or not (charter trip). Alternative 3, which would preclude a vessel from being dual-permitted, would adversely affect the fishing operations of dual-permitted vessels by forcing them to divest of either the commercial or for-hire permit. Regarding crew size of for-hire vessels fishing under their commercial permits, four other alternatives have been considered. Alternative 1 (status quo), which limits for-hire vessel crew size to 3 persons, would not be compatible with minimum USCG manning requirements. Alternative 3, which is similar to the proposed rule except for spearfishing vessels, would benefit the spearfishing vessels but at the same time make the crew size for these vessels incompatible with USCG manning requirements. Alternative 4, which allows a maximum crew size of 4 persons, would also be incompatible with USCG manning requirements. Alternative 5, which removes the maximum crew size requirements for dual-permitted vessels, creates the same enforcement problem as the status quo and also allows a potential increase in fishing effort. Regarding use of reef fish as bait, two other alternatives (with various sub-alternatives) have been considered. Alternative 1 (status quo), which allows whole reef fish that meet the specified requirements for bait or cut-up reef fish purchased at shore for bait, complicates the enforcement of the ban on cutting up reef fish at sea and potentially increases the mortality of certain reef fish species. Alternative 3, which effectively requires enforcement officials to identify reef fish species used as bait before assessing any potential violation, would tend to complicate enforcement. For the VMS requirement, two other alternatives have been considered. Alternative 1 (status quo), which does not require VMS, is the least costly to small entities, but it does not address vital enforcement and rescue-at-sea issues. Similar to the proposed rule, Alternative 3 requires VMS, but vessel owners would shoulder only the yearly communication costs. If government resources are available, this alternative would be better for the industry than the proposed rule. Regarding sea turtle and smalltooth sawfish bycatch, five other alternatives have been considered. Alternative 1 (status quo) is the least costly of all alternatives to small entities, but it would not address the bycatch of sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish in commercial and for-hire reef fish vessels. Alternative 2, which requires commercial vessels to abide by the release protocols in effect in the HMS bottom longline fishery, would impose a compliance cost ranging from $202 to $380. Alternative 3, which requires the commercial reef fish fleet to comply with the more stringent requirement in place in the HMS pelagic longline fishery, would carry a compliance cost of $712 to $1,282 per vessel. Alternative 4 requires for-hire reef fish vessels to comply with either the less stringent release protocol as in Alternative 2 or the more stringent release protocol as in Alternative 3. The corresponding compliance costs per vessel would be similar to those in Alternative 2 or 3. Alternative 5, which requires commercial and for-hire reef fish vessels to comply with the sea turtle release protocols in place for the Atlantic HMS bottom longline vessels, would impose a compliance cost of $202 to $380 per vessel. This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)--namely, requirements for: (1) VMS installation; (2) completion and submission of certification of VMS installation and activation; (3) transmission of position reports; (4) fishing activity reports; (5) annual maintenance of VMS; (6) submission of requests for power down exemptions; and (7) annual renewal of all permits. These requirements have been submitted to OMB for approval. The public reporting burdens per response for these collections of information are estimated to average 4 hours, 15 minutes, 24 seconds, 1 minute, 2 hours, 10 minutes, and 15 minutes respectively. These estimates of the public reporting burdens include the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collections of information. Public comment is sought regarding: Whether these proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimates; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information to NMFS and to OMB (see ADDRESSES ) and by e-mail to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov or fax to 202-395-7285. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number. List of Subjects 50 CFR Part 622 Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Virgin Islands. 50 CFR Part 635 Endangered and threatened species, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Statistics, Treaties. Dated: May 12, 2006. John Oliver, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 622 and 635 are proposed to be amended as follows: PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC 1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 2. In § 622.2, the definitions of “Charter vessel” and “Headboat” are revised in alphabetical order to read as follows: § 622.2 Definitions and acronyms. Charter vessel means a vessel less than 100 gross tons (90.8 mt) that is subject to the requirements of the USCG to carry six or fewer passengers for hire and that engages in charter fishing at any time during the calendar year. A charter vessel with a commercial permit, as required under § 622.4(a)(2), is considered to be operating as a charter vessel when it carries a passenger who pays a fee or when there are more than three persons aboard, including operator and crew. However, a charter vessel that has a charter vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, and a valid Certificate of Inspection (COI) issued by the USCG to carry passengers for hire will not be considered to be operating as a charter vessel provided— (1) It is not carrying a passenger who pays a fee; and (2) When underway for more than 12 hours, that vessel meets, but does not exceed the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels underway over 12 hours; or when underway for not more than 12 hours, that vessel meets the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels underway for not more than 12-hours (if any), and does not exceed the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels that are underway for more than 12 hours. Headboat means a vessel that holds a valid Certificate of Inspection (COI) issued by the USCG to carry more than six passengers for hire. (1) A headboat with a commercial vessel permit, as required under § 622.4(a)(2), is considered to be operating as a headboat when it carries a passenger who pays a fee or— (i) In the case of persons aboard fishing for or possessing South Atlantic snapper-grouper, when there are more persons aboard than the number of crew specified in the vessel's COI; or (ii) In the case of persons aboard fishing for or possessing coastal migratory pelagic fish, when there are more than three persons aboard, including operator and crew. (2)However a vessel that has a headboat permit for Gulf reef fish, a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, and a valid COI issued by the USCG to carry passengers for hire will not be considered to be operating as a headboat provided— (i) It is not carrying a passenger who pays a fee; and (ii) When underway for more than 12 hours, that vessel meets, but does not exceed the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels underway over 12 hours; or when underway for not more than 12 hours, that vessel meets the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels underway for not more than 12-hours (if any), and does not exceed the minimum manning requirements outlined in its COI for vessels that are underway for more than 12 hours. 3. In § 622.4, paragraph (h)(1) is revised, and a sentence is added at the end of paragraph (m)(1) to read as follows: § 622.4 Permits and fees. (h) * * * (1) Vessel permits, licenses, and endorsements and dealer permits. A vessel owner or dealer who has been issued a permit, license, or endorsement under this section must renew such permit, license, or endorsement on an annual basis. The RA will mail a vessel owner or dealer whose permit, license, or endorsement is expiring an application for renewal approximately 2 months prior to the expiration date. A vessel owner or dealer who does not receive a renewal application from the RA by 45 days prior to the expiration date of the permit, license, or endorsement must contact the RA and request a renewal application. The applicant must submit a completed renewal application form and all required supporting documents to the RA prior to the applicable deadline for renewal of the permit, license, or endorsement and at least 30 days prior to the date on which the applicant desires to have the permit made effective. If the RA receives an incomplete application, the RA will notify the applicant of the deficiency. If the applicant fails to correct the deficiency within 30 days of the date of the RA's letter of notification, the application will be considered abandoned. A permit, license, or endorsement that is not renewed within the applicable deadline will not be reissued. (m) * * * (1) * * * An application for renewal or transfer of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish will not be considered complete until proof of purchase, installation, activation, and operational status of an approved VMS for the vessel receiving the permit has been verified by NMFS VMS personnel. 4. In § 622.7, paragraph (ff) is added to read as follows: § 622.7 Prohibitions. (ff) Fail to comply with the protected species conservation measures as specified in § 622.10. 5. Section 622.9 is revised to read as follows: § 622.9 Vessel monitoring systems (VMSs). (a) Requirements for use of a VMS —(1) South Atlantic rock shrimp. An owner or operator of a vessel that has been issued a limited access endorsement for South Atlantic rock shrimp must ensure that such vessel has an operating VMS approved by NMFS for use in the South Atlantic rock shrimp fishery on board when on a trip in the South Atlantic. An operating VMS includes an operating mobile transmitting unit on the vessel and a functioning communication link between the unit and NMFS as provided by a NMFS-approved communication service provider. (2) Gulf reef fish. An owner or operator of a vessel that has been issued a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, including a charter vessel/headboat issued such a permit even when under charter, must ensure that such vessel has an operating VMS approved by NMFS for use in the Gulf reef fish fishery on board at all times whether or not the vessel is underway, unless exempted by NMFS under the power down exemption of the NOAA Enforcement Draft Vessel Monitoring System Requirements as included in Appendix E to Final Amendment 18A to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico. The NOAA Enforcement Draft Vessel Monitoring System Requirements document is available from NMFS, Office of Enforcement, Southeast Region, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701; phone: 800-758-4833. An operating VMS includes an operating mobile transmitting unit on the vessel and a functioning communication link between the unit and NMFS as provided by a NMFS-approved communication service provider. Unless exempted under the power down exemption, a VMS must transmit a signal indicating the vessel's accurate position at least once an hour, 24 hours a day every day. Prior to departure for each trip, a vessel owner or operator must report to NMFS any fishery the vessel will participate in on that trip and the specific type(s) of fishing gear, using NMFS-defined gear codes, that will be on board the vessel. This information may be reported to NMFS using the toll-free number, 888-219-9228, or via an attached VMS terminal. The VMS requirements of this paragraph apply throughout the Gulf of Mexico. An owner or operator of a vessel that has been issued a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish with a fish trap endorsement and that fishes exclusively with fish traps is exempt from the VMS requirements of this paragraph through February 7, 2007. (b) Installation and activation of a VMS. Only a VMS that has been approved by NMFS for the applicable fishery may be used, and the VMS must be installed by a qualified marine electrician. When installing and activating the NMFS-approved VMS, or when reinstalling and reactivating such VMS, the vessel owner or operator must— (1) Follow procedures indicated on a NMFS-approved installation and activation checklist for the applicable fishery, which is available from NMFS, Office of Enforcement, Southeast Region, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701; phone: 800-758-4833; and (2) Submit to NMFS, Office of Enforcement, Southeast Region, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, a statement certifying compliance with the checklist, as prescribed on the checklist. (3) Submit to NMFS, Office of Enforcement, Southeast Region, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, a vendor-completed installation certification checklist, which is available from NMFS, Office of Enforcement, Southeast Region, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701; phone: 800-758-4833. (c) Interference with the VMS. No person may interfere with, tamper with, alter, damage, disable, or impede the operation of the VMS, or attempt any of the same. (d) Interruption of operation of the VMS. When a vessel's VMS is not operating properly, the owner or operator must immediately contact NMFS, Office of Enforcement, Southeast Region, 263 13 th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, phone: 800-758-4833, and follow instructions from that office. If notified by NMFS that a vessel's VMS is not operating properly, the owner and operator must follow instructions from that office. In either event, such instructions may include, but are not limited to, manually communicating to a location designated by NMFS the vessel's positions or returning to port until the VMS is operable. (e) Access to position data. As a condition of authorized fishing for or possession of fish in a fishery subject to VMS requirements in this section, a vessel owner or operator subject to the requirements for a VMS in this section must allow NMFS, the USCG, and their authorized officers and designees access to the vessel's position data obtained from the VMS. 6. In subpart A, § 622.10 is added to read as follows: § 622.10 Conservation measures for protected resources. (a) Atlantic dolphin and wahoo pelagic longliners. The owner or operator of a vessel for which a commercial permit for Atlantic dolphin and wahoo has been issued, as required under § 622.4(a)(2)(xii), and that has on board a pelagic longline must post inside the wheelhouse the sea turtle handling and release guidelines provided by NMFS. Such owner or operator must also comply with the sea turtle bycatch mitigation measures, including gear requirements and sea turtle handling requirements, as specified in § 635.21(c)(5)(i) and (ii) of this chapter, respectively. For the purpose of this paragraph, a vessel is considered to have pelagic longline gear on board when a power-operated longline hauler, a mainline, floats capable of supporting the mainline, and leaders (gangions) with hooks are on board. Removal of any one of these elements constitutes removal of pelagic longline gear. (b) Gulf reef fish commercial vessels and charter vessels/headboats —(1) Sea turtle conservation measures. The owner or operator of a vessel for which a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish or a charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued, as required under §§ 622.4(a)(2)(v) and 622.4(a)(1)(i), respectively, must post inside the wheelhouse, or within a waterproof case if no wheelhouse, a copy of the document provided by NMFS titled, “Careful Release Protocols for Sea Turtle Release With Minimal Injury,” and must post inside the wheelhouse, or in an easily viewable area if no wheelhouse, the sea turtle handling and release guidelines provided by NMFS. Those permitted vessels with a freeboard height of 4 ft (1.2 m) or less must have on board a dipnet, short-handled dehooker, long-nose or needle-nose pliers, bolt cutters, monofilament line cutters, and at least two types of mouth openers/mouth gags. This equipment must meet the specifications described in 50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i)(E-L) with the following modifications: the dipnet handle can be of variable length, only one NMFS approved short-handled dehooker is required (i.e., CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i)(G or H)); and life rings, seat cushions, life jackets, and life vests may be used as alternatives to tires for cushioned surfaces as specified in 50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i)(F). Those permitted vessels with a freeboard height of greater than 4 ft (1.2 m) must have on board a dipnet, long-handled line clipper, a short-handled and a long-handled dehooker, long-nose or needle-nose pliers, bolt cutters, monofilament line cutters, and at least two types of mouth openers/mouth gags. This equipment must meet the specifications described in 50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i) (A-L) with the following modifications: only one NMFS approved long-handled dehooker (50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i)(B or C)) and one NMFS-approved short-handled dehooker (50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i)(G or H)) are required; and life rings, seat cushions, life jackets, and life vests may be used as alternatives to tires for cushioned surfaces as specified in 50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i)(F). (2) Smalltooth sawfish conservation measures. The owner or operator of a vessel for which a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish or a charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued, as required under §§ 622.4(a)(2)(v) and 622.4(a)(1)(i), respectively, that incidentally catches a smalltooth sawfish must-- (i) Keep the sawfish in the water at all times; (ii) If it can be done safely, untangle the line if it is wrapped around the saw; (iii) Cut the line as close to the hook as possible; and (iv) Not handle the animal or attempt to remove any hooks on the saw, except for with a long-handled dehooker. 7. In § 622.31, paragraph (n) is added to read as follows: § 622.31 Prohibited gear and methods. (n) Gulf reef fish other than sand perch or dwarf sand perch may not be used as bait in any fishery, except that, when purchased from a fish processor, the filleted carcasses and offal of Gulf reef fish may be used as bait in trap fisheries for blue crab, stone crab, deep-water crab, and spiny lobster. 8. In § 622.34, a sentence is added at the end of paragraph (l) to read as follows: § 622.34 Gulf EEZ seasonal and/or area closures. (l) * * * Also note that if commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish, i.e., Gulf reef fish in excess of applicable bag/possession limits, are on board the vessel, no bag limit of Gulf reef fish may be possessed, as specified in § 622.39(a)(5). 9. In § 622.36, a sentence is added at the end of paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 622.36 Seasonal harvest limitations. (a) * * * Also note that if commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish, i.e., Gulf reef fish in excess of applicable bag/possession limits, are on board the vessel, no bag limit of Gulf reef fish may be possessed, as specified in § 622.39(a)(5). 10. In § 622.37, paragraph (d)(4) is added to read as follows: § 622.37 Size limits. (d) * * * (4) A person aboard a vessel that has a Federal commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish and commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish, i.e., Gulf reef fish in excess of applicable bag/possession limits, may not possess any Gulf reef fish that do not comply with the applicable commercial minimum size limit. 11. In § 622.38, a sentence is added at the end of paragraph (d)(1) introductory text to read as follows: § 622.38 Landing fish intact. (d) * * * (1) * * * See § 622.31(m) regarding a prohibition on the use of Gulf reef fish as bait. 12. In § 622.39, paragraph (a)(2)(iii) is revised, and paragraph (a)(5) is added to read as follows: § 622.39 Bag and possession limits. (a) * * * (2) * * * (iii) For a species/species group when its quota has been reached and closure has been effected, provided that no commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish, i.e., Gulf reef fish in excess of applicable bag/possession limits, are on board as specified in § 622.39(a)(5). (5) A person aboard a vessel that has a Federal commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish and commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish, i.e., Gulf reef fish in excess of applicable bag/possession limits, may not possess Gulf reef fish caught under a bag limit. § 622.41 [Amended] 13. In § 622.41, paragraph (l)(2) is removed and reserved. 14. In § 622.43, paragraph (a)(1)(iii) is removed; the suspension of paragraph (a)(1)(i) is lifted; and paragraph (a)(1)(i) is revised to read as follows: § 622.43 Closures. (a) * * * (1) * * * (i) Commercial quotas. The application of bag limits described in this paragraph (a)(1)(i) notwithstanding, bag limits of Gulf reef fish may not be possessed on board a vessel with commercial quantities of Gulf reef fish, i.e., Gulf reef fish in excess of applicable bag/possession limits, on board, as specified in § 622.39(a)(5). (A) If the recreational fishery for the indicated species is open, the bag and possession limits specified in § 622.39(b) apply to all harvest or possession in or from the Gulf EEZ of the indicated species, and the sale or purchase of the indicated species taken from the Gulf EEZ is prohibited. In addition, the bag and possession limits for red snapper, when applicable, apply on board a vessel for which a commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued, as required under § 622.4(a)(2)(v), without regard to where such red snapper were harvested. (B) If the recreational fishery for the indicated species is closed, all harvest or possession in or from the Gulf EEZ of the indicated species is prohibited. PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES 15. The authority citation for part 635 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. ; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 16. In § 635.4, the second sentence of paragraph (m)(1) is revised to read as follows: § 635.4 Permits and fees. (m) * * * (1) * * * A renewal application must be submitted to NMFS, at an address designated by NMFS, at least 30 days before a permit's expiration to avoid a lapse of permitted status. * * * [FR Doc. E6-7587 Filed 5-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S 71 96 Thursday, May 18, 2006 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Little Doe and Low Gulch Timber Sale Project EIS—Six Rivers National Forest AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact statement on a proposal to harvest timber from the Little Doe and Low Gulch project area, which is located on National Forest System lands administered by the Six Rivers National Forest in Northern California. If approved, the project would harvest approximately 7.9 million board feet (MMBF) of timber from approximately 923 acres of conifer stands through intermediate and regeneration cutting methods. Logging systems employed would include ground-based skidding, skyline cable yarding, and helicopter logging. Post-harvest treatments within the proposed treatment units include fuel reduction, site preparation, and reforestation treatments. Connected actions associated with the project proposal include landing construction and reconstruction, temporary road construction with subsequent decommissioning, and road maintenance. There is a need to provide timber volume that would contribute to the economic base of the local communities. Within the context of meeting this need, an opportunity exists to maintain oaks as an important component within Douglas-fir/black oak conifer stands and oak woodlands within the project area. DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received on or before 30 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be released in November 2006 and the final environmental impact statement is expected to be released in April 2007. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to William Metz, Acting Forest Supervisor, Six Rivers National Forest, 1330 Bayshore Way, Eureka, CA 95501-3834. Electronic mail may be sent to comments-pacificsouthwest-six-rivers-mad-river@fs.fed.us. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruben Escatell, EIS Team Leader, (707) 574-6233, Ext. 225. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Action The Forest Service proposes to harvest approximately 7.9 million board feet (MMBF) of timber from approximately 923 acres of conifer stands within the Little Doe and Low Gulch planning areas in the form of 87 harvest units. The planning areas are located on National Forest System lands administered by the Mad River Ranger District of the Six Rivers National Forest in Trinity County, California. The project area is located in all or portions of the following townships: T.26 N., R.11 W.; T.26 N., R.12 W.; T.27 N., R11 W.; and T.27 N., R.12 W.; Mount Diablo Meridian. The project area occurs on lands allocated to Management Areas that support a programmed timber harvest under the Six Rivers Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). Silvicultural treatments prescribed on the proposed harvest units include 709 acres of intermediate harvest treatments (low thinning, thinning/sanitation cutting, and oak release) and 214 acres of regeneration cutting treatments (regeneration with green tree legacy and shelterwood cutting). Of the 923 acres proposed for commercial harvest, approximately 730 acres would be tractor logged, 14 acres would be tractor swung to skyline corridors, 82 acres would be skyline logged, and 97 acres would be helicopter logged. Twenty-five (25) new landings would be constructed, and 127 existing landings would be utilized. Fuel treatments prescribed would include one or a combination of the following treatments: hand or machine piling and subsequent burning of piles, yarding of tops out of the units and piling at existing landings for future disposal, yarding unutilized material out of harvest units, felling of unutilized material less than 8 inches in diameter, and underburning. Reforestation would take place after logging and fuels treatments are completed on 214 acres in harvest units proposed for regeneration cutting. Connected actions include approximately 1,213 feet (0.23 miles) of new temporary road construction and 3,443 feet (0.65 miles) of existing non-system roads used to access landings in harvest units. These roads would be decommissioned upon project completion. Road maintenance would occur as needed on Forest system roads used to haul commercial timber. These activities may include blading, scarification, spot rocking, brushing, ditch cleaning, culvert cleaning, dust abatement, water bars, minor slide and slump repair, and water source deferred maintenance. Purpose and Need for Action There is a need for the Six Rivers National Forest to provide timber volume to contribute to the economic base of the local communities. Within the context of meeting this need, vegetation management within the project area also provides an opportunity to maintain oaks as a component within Douglas-fir/black oak conifer stands and oak woodlands. The project area encompasses vegetative communities where oaks are becoming over-topped, shaded out, and encroached upon by conifers. There is an opportunity to remove competing conifers from treatment units exhibiting these characteristics. This opportunity serves to maintain oaks and the specialized habitats they provide over the long term. Responsible Official William Metz, Acting Forest Supervisor, Six Rivers National Forest, 1330 Bayshore Way, Eureka, CA 95501-3834, is the Responsible Official for making any decisions relative to this proposal. He will document his decisions and rationale in a Record of Decision. Decisions To Be Made The Forest Supervisor of the Six Rivers National Forest will decide on whether the proposed action will proceed as proposed, or as modified by an alternative. If it proceeds he will also decide on what project design features and monitoring requirements will be applied to the project. Estimated Dates for Filing The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by November 2006. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of Availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in the management of this area participate at that time. The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by April 2007. In the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and responses received during the comment period that pertain to the environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision regarding the proposal. Comment Requested This notice of intent continues the scoping process which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments and assistance from Federal, State and local agencies and other individuals or organization that may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed action. While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time, comments received within 30 days of the publication of this notice will be especially useful in the preparation of the EIS. Electronic Access and Filing Addresses Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to comments-pacificsouthwest-six-rivers-mad-river@fs.fed.us. Please reference the Little Doe and Low Gulch Timber Sale Project on the subject line. Also, include your name and mailing address with your comments so documents pertaining to this project may be mailed to you. Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent Environmental Review A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register. The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 45-day comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final environmental impact statement. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal and will be available for public inspection. (Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 21) Dated: May 12, 2006. William Metz, Acting Forest Supervisor, Six Rivers National Forest. [FR Doc. E6-7556 Filed 5-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Ravalli County Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: The Ravalli County Resource Advisory Committee will be meeting to discuss 2006 projects, several guest speakers, and hold a short public forum (question and answer session). The meeting is being held pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393). The meeting is open to the public. DATES: The meeting will be held on May 23, 2006, 6:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Bitterroot National Forest Supervisor Office, Conference Room, 1801 North First Street, Hamilton, Montana. Send written comments to Dan Ritter, District Ranger, Stevensville Ranger District, 88 Main Street, Stevensville, MT 59870, by facsimile (406) 777-7423, or electronically to dritter@fs.fed.us. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel G. Ritter, Stevensville District Ranger and Designated Federal Officer, Phone: (406) 777-5461. Dated: May 11, 2006. David T. Bull, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 06-4645 Filed 5-17-06; 8:45 am]