Notices. Notice of Availability of Record of Decision (ROD)

11,243 words·~51 min read·/register/2006/11/17/06-9284

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Natural Resources Conservation Service Little Wood River Irrigation District Gravity Pressurized Delivery System; Blaine County, ID AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of Availability of Record of Decision (ROD). SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; the Council on Environmental Quality Guidelines (40 CFR part 1500); and the Natural Resources Conservation Service Guidelines (7 CFR part 650); the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), gives notice that the record of decision

(ROD)for the Final Environmental Impact Statement

(FEIS)for the Little Wood River Irrigation District Gravity Pressurized Delivery System, Blaine County, Idaho is available. The ROD was signed and made available via the USDA NRCS Idaho Web site ( *http://www.id.nrcs.usda.gov.* ) on November 7, 2006. A Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement

(FEIS)dated April 26, 2004, was published in the **Federal Register** on May 4, 2004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Sims, State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 9173 W. Barnes Dr. Suite C, Boise, Idaho, 83709; telephone

(208)378-5700. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Little Wood River Irrigation District proposes to convert the present open irrigation canal delivery system that serves farmland in the Little Wood River valley surrounding Carey City, Blaine County, Idaho, to a closed gravity pressurized irrigation pipeline system. The Natural Resources Conservation Service prepared an Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed project. NRCS has selected Alternative 2—Gravity Pressurized Irrigation Delivery System with On-Farm Irrigation Systems as the Preferred Alternative for implementation. This Alternative includes conversion of the present open irrigation canal delivery system to a closed gravity pressurized irrigation pipeline system. The purpose and need of this action is to maximize the conservation and use of irrigation water and the energy required to irrigate all of the existing cropland within the project area by providing a reliable water supply, reducing water losses due to seepage in the existing canal delivery system and providing economic stability to the local area. Three alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, were fully developed and analyzed in the FEIS to address significant issues. The full range of foreseeable environmental consequences was assessed. Among the alternatives considered the preferred alternative best provides a combination of limiting impacts and providing needed enhancements. The record of decision includes a statement of the decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, the identification of the environmentally preferred alternative, and the rationale for why the environmentally preferred alternative was not the selected action. The ROD and other NEPA documents are available on the Idaho NRCS Web site at *http://www.id.nrcs.usda.gov* or by contacting the NRCS at the address provided above. Dated: November 7, 2006. Richard Sims, State Conservationist, USDA, NRCS, Idaho. [FR Doc. E6-19480 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-16-P COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Proposed Additions and Deletion AGENCY: Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled. ACTION: Proposed additions to and deletion from procurement list. SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing to add to the Procurement List products and services to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and to delete products previously furnished by such agencies. *Comments Must Be Received on or Before:* December 17, 2006. ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 10800, Arlington, VA 22202. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT COMMENTS CONTACT: Sheryl D. Kennerly, Telephone:

(703)603-7740, Fax:

(703)603-0655, or e-mail *Skennerly@jwod.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions. Additions If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice for each product or service will be required to procure the product and services listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. If approved, the action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the product and services to the Government. 2. If approved, the action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the product and services to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the product and services proposed for addition to the Procurement List. Comments on this certification are invited. Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the certification on which they are providing additional information. End of Certification The following product and services are proposed for addition to Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed: Product *Product/NSN:* Flashlight, Olive Drab, 6230-00-264-8261. *NPA:* Blue Island Citizens for Persons with Developmental Disabilities, Inc., Blue Island, Illinois. *Contracting Activity:* Defense Supply Center Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Services *Service Type/Location:* Janitorial Services, Agricultural Research Service, 1561 Lindig Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota. *NPA:* AccessAbility, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota. *Contracting Activity:* Agricultural Research Service, St. Paul, Minnesota. *Service Type/Location:* Laundry Service, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, Maryland. *NPA:* Jeanne Bussard Center, Inc., Frederick, Maryland. *Contracting Activity:* Army Contracting Agency, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. *Service Type/Location:* Packaging Service, Hurlburt Field AFB, 304 Terry Avenue, Hurlburt Field AFB, Florida. *NPA:* Lakeview Center, Inc., Pensacola, Florida. *Contracting Activity:* AF-Hurlburt Field AFB, Hurlburt Field, Florida. *Service Type/Location:* Switchboard Operation, VA Medical Center-Birmingham, 7100 South 19th Street, Birmingham, Alabama. *NPA:* Alabama Goodwill Industries, Inc., Birmingham, Alabama. *Contracting Activity:* VA Medical Center, Augusta, Georgia. Deletion Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. If approved, the action may result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities. 2. If approved, the action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the product to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the product proposed for deletion from the Procurement List. End of Certification The following product are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List: Product *Product/NSN:* Cross “Solo” Pen and Refill, 7510-01-451-9182, 7510-01-451-9185, 7510-01-451-9187, 7510-01-425-6802. *NPA:* In-Sight, Warwick, Rhode Island. *Contracting Activity:* Office Supplies & Paper Products Acquisition Center, New York, NY. G. John Heyer, General Counsel. [FR Doc. E6-19466 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Utah Advisory Committee Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that two meetings of the Utah Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights will be held in Salt Lake City, Utah 84101. Both meetings will be held at Horizonte Instruction and Training Center, 1234 S. Main Street, Salt Lake City. A planning meeting with procedural briefing will be held on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. (MST); and a community forum will convene on Wednesday, December 13 from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. (MST). The purpose of the planning meeting/procedural briefing on Tuesday, December 12, will be to provide orientation and ethics training for the newly chartered Utah Advisory Committee, brief advisory committee members on Commission and regional activities and plan for future activities. During the procedural briefing portion of the meeting, RMRO staff will review procedures and guidelines for conducting the December 13 forum and share information on the presenters. The purpose of the community forum on Wednesday, December 13, will be to obtain information and perspectives on the status of civil rights for American Indians in Utah. There will be formal presentations from elected officials, tribal representatives, American Indian and community leaders, and other knowledgeable persons. Also, an open session will be conducted. Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation to the Committee, should contact John Dulles, Director of the Rocky Mountain Regional Office,

(303)866-1040 (TDD 303-866-1049). Hearing impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten

(10)working days before the scheduled date of the meeting. The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission. Dated at Washington, DC, November 13, 2006. Ivy L. Davis, Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit. [FR Doc. E6-19435 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [Docket Number: 061113299-6299-01] Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No FEAR Act) Notice AGENCY: Office of Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce publishes this notice to inform current employees, former employees and applicants for Commerce employment of the rights and protections available to these individuals under Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection and retaliation laws. The Department takes this action pursuant to the notification requirements contained in the Office of Personnel Management regulations. The intent of this action is to ensure that Federal agencies are accountable for violations of antidiscrimination and whistleblower protections laws. *Additional Information:* For further information regarding the No FEAR Act regulations, refer to 5 CFR part 724. Additional information regarding Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection and retaliation laws can be found at the EEOC Web site at *http://www.eeoc.gov* and the OSC Web site at *http://www.osc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 15, 2002, Congress enacted the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002, which is known as the No FEAR Act. One purpose of the Act is to “require Federal agencies be accountable for violations of antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws”. Public Law 107-174, Summary. In support of this purpose, Congress found that “agencies cannot be run effectively if those agencies practice or tolerate discrimination.” Public Law 107-174, Title I, General Provisions, section 101 (1). The No FEAR Act requires the President, or his designee, to promulgate regulations implementing the Act. The President delegated these responsibilities to the Office of Personnel Management, who issued a final rule on notification and training (71 FR 41095, July 20, 2006). Pursuant to the Office of Personnel Management's regulations, the Department of Commerce provides this No Fear Act Notice to current employees, former employees and applicants for Commerce employment to inform you of the rights and protections available to you under Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection and retaliation laws. For purposes of the Act, an applicant for Federal employment means an individual applying for employment in or under a Federal agency; a Federal employee means an individual employed in or under a Federal agency; and a former Federal employee means an individual formerly employed in or under a Federal agency. Antidiscrimination Laws A Federal agency cannot discriminate against an employee or applicant with respect to the terms, conditions or privileges of employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status or political affiliation. Discrimination on these bases is prohibited by one or more of the following statutes: 5 U.S.C. 2302(b) (1), 29 U.S.C. 206(d), 29 U.S.C. 631, 29 U.S.C. 633a, 29 U.S.C. 791 and 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or disability, you must contact an Equal Employment Opportunity

(EEO)counselor within 45 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory action, or, in the case of a personnel action, within 45 calendar days of the effective date of the action, before you can file a formal complaint of discrimination with your agency. See, *e.g.* , 29 CFR 1614. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of age, you must either contact an EEO counselor as noted above or give the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

(EEOC)notice of intent to sue within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory action. If you are alleging discrimination based on marital status or political affiliation, you may file a written complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC). In the alternative (or in some cases, in addition), you may pursue a discrimination complaint by filing a grievance through the agency's administrative or negotiated grievance procedures, if such procedures apply and are available. Whistleblower Protection Laws A Federal employee with authority to take, direct others to take, recommend or approve any personnel action must not use that authority to take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action against an employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that individual that is reasonably believed to evidence violations of law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, unless disclosure of such information is specifically prohibited by law and such information is specifically required by Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or the conduct of foreign affairs. Retaliation against an employee or applicant for making a protected disclosure is prohibited by 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8). If you believe that you have been the victim of whistleblower retaliation, you may file a written complaint (Form OSC-11) with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel at 1730 M Street, NW., Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036-4505 or online through the OSC Web site- *http://www.osc.gov.* Retaliation for Engaging in Protected Activity A Federal agency cannot retaliate against an employee or applicant because that individual exercises his or her rights under any of the Federal antidiscrimination or whistleblower protections laws listed above. If you believe that you are the victim of retaliation for engaging in protected activity, you must follow, as appropriate, the procedures described in the Antidiscrimination Laws and Whistleblower Protection Laws sections or, if applicable, the administrative or negotiated grievance procedures in order to pursue any legal remedy. Disciplinary Actions Under existing laws, each agency retains the right, where appropriate, to discipline a Federal employee for conduct that is inconsistent with federal antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws, up to and including removal. If OSC has initiated an investigation under 5 U.S.C. 1214, however, according to 5 U.S.C. 1214(f), agencies must seek approval from the Special Counsel to discipline employees for, among other activities, engaging in prohibited retaliation. Nothing in the No FEAR Act alters existing laws or permits an agency to take unfounded disciplinary action against a Federal employee or to violate the procedural rights of a Federal employee who has been accused of discrimination. Existing Rights Unchanged Pursuant to section 205 of the No FEAR Act, the Act and this notice does not create, expand or reduce any rights otherwise available to any employee, former employee or applicant under the laws of the United States, including the provisions of law specified in 5 U.S.C. 2302(d). Dated: November 14, 2006. Suzan J. Aramaki, Director, Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Commerce. [FR Doc. E6-19490 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-570-851) Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On July 7, 2006, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) for Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd. (“Eastwing”). *See Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review* , 71 FR 38617 (July 7, 2006) (“ *Preliminary Results* ”). We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the *Preliminary Results* . Although no party submitted a case brief, additional surrogate value information has been placed on the record subsequent to the *Preliminary Results* by both Eastwing and the Department. Based on our analysis of the surrogate value information, we made changes to the antidumping duty margin calculations for the final results. We continue to find that Eastwing sold subject merchandise at less than normal value during the period of review (“POR”) February 1, 2005, through August 15, 2005. EFFECTIVE DATE: November 17, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Renkey, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-2312. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Case History Subsequent to the *Preliminary Results* , on July 27, 2006, Eastwing timely submitted publicly available surrogate value information for the Department to consider in valuing the factors of production. Eastwing did not file a case brief. On September 11, 2006, the Department sent Eastwing a letter asking it to clarify certain information contained in its July 27, 2006, filing, and also placed on the record for comment additional surrogate value information. On September 21, 2006, Eastwing submitted a timely response and comments in reply to the Department's September 11, 2006, letter. On September 28, 2006, the Department published in the **Federal Register** a notice extending the deadline for the final results. *See Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of the 2005 Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review* , 71 FR 56954 (September 28, 2006). Also on September 28, 2006, the Department placed on the record additional surrogate value information for consideration in valuing the factors of production. Eastwing did not comment on this information. Scope of the Order The products covered by this order are certain preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species *Agaricus bisporus* and *Agaricus bitorquis* . “Certain Preserved Mushrooms” refer to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms are then packed and heated in containers including, but not limited to, cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including, but not limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Certain preserved mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. Included within the scope of this order are “brined” mushrooms, which are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally preserve them for further processing. Excluded from the scope of this order are the following:

(1)All other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms;

(2)all fresh and chilled mushrooms, including “refrigerated” or “quick blanched mushrooms”;

(3)dried mushrooms;

(4)frozen mushrooms; and

(5)“marinated,” “acidified,” or “pickled” mushrooms, which are prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may contain oil or other additives. 1 1 On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that “marinated,” “acidified,” or “pickled” mushrooms containing less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the antidumping duty order. *See* “Recommendation Memorandum-Final Ruling of Request by Tak Fat, *et al.* for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China,” dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, this decision was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. *See Tak Fat v. United States* , 39C F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005). The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on surrogate value comments received from Eastwing and information placed on the record by the Department subsequent to our *Preliminary Results* , we have made revisions to the margin calculation for the final results. Specifically, we have selected new surrogate values for the manure and straw factors of production because the manure and straw corresponding to these new surrogate values better match the inputs used in the production of the subject merchandise. We have also selected new information to use in calculating the financial ratios for factory overhead, selling, general and administrative expenses, and profit. The new financial information, unlike the data used in the *Preliminary Results* , is contemporaneous with the POR and offers a broader representation of the industry. *See Memorandum from Matthew Renkey, Senior Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to the File; New Shipper Review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China: Surrogate Values for the Final Results* , dated November 9, 2006 (“ *Final Surrogate Values Memo* ”). Our calculation incorporating the new surrogate value data can be found in the *Memorandum from Matthew Renkey, Senior Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to the File; Analysis for the Final Results of the New Shipper Review of Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the Peoples' Republic of China: Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd.* (“ *Final Analysis Memo* ”). Lastly, for the *Preliminary Results* , we inadvertently did not multiply the freight distance and surrogate value by the corresponding factor usage ratio; we have corrected this clerical error in the freight calculation for these final results. *Id* . Final Results of Review We find that the following margin exists during the period February 1, 2005, through August 15, 2005: Exporter/Manufacturer Weighted—Average Margin (Percent) Guangxi Eastwing Trading Co., Ltd./Raoping CXF Foods, Inc. 4.31 Assessment Rates The Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions directly to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) for Eastwing within 15 days of publication of the final results of this review. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we will calculate importer—specific *ad valorem* duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if any importer—specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above *de minimis* . Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of these results of the new shipper review for all shipments of subject merchandise from Eastwing entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date:

(1)For subject merchandise manufactured by Raoping CXF Foods, Inc. (“CXF”) and exported by Eastwing, the cash deposit rate will be the rate shown above;

(2)for subject merchandise exported by Eastwing but not manufactured by CXF, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the PRC—wide rate ( *i.e.* , 198.63 percent); and

(3)for subject merchandise produced by CXF but not exported by Eastwing, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the exporter. These requirements will remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review. Reimbursement of Duties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. Administrative Protective Orders This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. This new shipper review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(h). Dated: November 9, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-19471 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 101906B] Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Conducting Oil and Gas Exploration Activities in the Arctic Ocean off Alaska AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement; request for comments. SUMMARY: NMFS and the Minerals Management Service

(MMS)announce their intention to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

(PEIS)pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). This PEIS is being prepared to assess the impacts of MMS' annual authorizations under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) to the U.S. oil and gas industry to conduct offshore geophysical seismic surveys in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas off Alaska, and NMFS' authorizations under the Marine Mammal Protection Act

(MMPA)to incidentally harass marine mammals while conducting those surveys. Publication of this notice begins the official scoping period that will help clarify previously identified issues and alternatives to be considered in the PEIS. The NMFS and MMS will consider comments received in response to this notice in determining the scope of the PEIS. The public will have additional opportunities to comment on the draft PEIS and any applications received under the MMPA as part of this action. DATES: Written comments and information must be received no later than December 18, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments on the contents of the Draft PEIS should be addressed to Mr. P. Michael Payne, Chief of the Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225. The mailbox address for providing email comments is *PR1.101906B@noaa.gov* . Comments sent via e-mail, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. A copy of MMS' Programmatic Environmental Assessment

(PEA)for seismic survey operations in Arctic Alaska waters for the 2006 open water season is available on-line at: *http://www.mms.gov/alaska/ref/pea_be.htm* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth R. Hollingshead, NMFS, 301-713-2289, ext 128 or Jill Lewandowski, MMS at 703-787-1703 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background In 2006, the MMS prepared a Draft PEA for the 2006 Arctic Outer Continental Shelf

(OCS)Seismic Surveys. The MMS assumed in this PEA that up to eight marine seismic surveys (4 each in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas) were likely to occur in 2006 in the Arctic Ocean. NMFS was a cooperating agency in the preparation of the MMS Draft and Final PEAs and made the Draft PEA available upon request (e.g., 71 FR 26055, May 3, 2006). A Final PEA was published and released on June 20, 2006. In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999), NMFS subsequently determined that the MMS Final PEA contained an in-depth and detailed description of the affected environment, a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed action, mitigation and monitoring measures to reduce impacts on the human environment to non-significant levels, and an analysis of the potential effects of the action and alternatives on the human environment. In view of the information and the analyses contained in the supporting Final PEA, on June 28, 2006, NMFS adopted the Final PEA, issued its own Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and determined that issuance of Incidental Harassment Authorizations (IHAs), under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, to oil-and-gas companies for conducting seismic surveys in 2006 in the Arctic Ocean would have a negligible impact on affected marine mammal stocks and not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence uses of marine mammals. This FONSI determination was predicated on full implementation of standard mitigation measures for preventing injury or mortality to marine mammals, in addition to area-specific mitigation measures, which included but were not limited to:

(1)a 120-dB rms (root-mean-squared) monitored safety zone for fall migrating cow/calf pairs of bowhead whales in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas;

(2)a 160-dB rms monitored safety zone for aggregations of feeding bowhead and gray whales in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas;

(3)a 180-dB rms exclusion zone for all cetaceans and a 190-dB rms exclusion zone for pinnipeds except the walrus;

(4)seismic shut-down criteria to protect bowhead and/or gray whales, under specific circumstances, when inside the 120-dB or 160-dB monitoring-safety zones; and for all cetaceans within the 180-dB zone and all pinnipeds, except walrus, within the 190-dB zone); and,

(5)a joint industry cooperative program on marine mammal research in the Chukchi Sea. These mitigation measures were incorporated into NMFS' Selected Alternative and IHA conditions for the 2006 seismic survey operations. Accordingly, NMFS adopted MMS' Final PEA and determined that the preparation of an EIS for this action was not necessary. Notice of Intent During the public comment period on MMS' Draft PEA, several comments were received recommending preparation of a Draft EIS under NEPA for this action. While preparation of an EIS on this action was considered, NMFS and MMS determined that the goals and objectives of NEPA could be met, given the level of proposed activities for 2006, by completing a Final PEA and implementing a mitigated FONSI for 2006 that would ensure that all authorized activities would not have a significant effect on the human environment. At the time, NMFS also began to explore the need to prepare an EIS for future years, if seismic operations were to continue and expand in scope as anticipated. It is important to note that subsequent to issuance of the IHAs for the 2006 seismic season to Shell (71 FR 50027, August 24, 2006), ConocoPhillips Alaska

(CPAI)(71 FR 43112, July 31, 2006), and GX Technology

(GXT)(71 FR 49418, August 23, 2006), a District Court Judge in Anchorage in the case of *ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc* v. *National Marine Fisheries, et al* . issued an order on September 18, 2006, granting a motion to stay the implementation of the CPAI IHA condition requiring a 120-dB monitoring safety zone to protect bowhead whale cow/calf pairs during their annual fall migration out of the Arctic Ocean. The Court agreed that CPAI raised a “serious question” regarding the propriety of this additional requirement, meaning that the IHA condition requiring a 120-dB monitoring safety zone would be suspended until the Court is able to fully resolve the dispute. However, the 120-dB mitigation measure was essential to allow NMFS to conclude with a FONSI, especially given the level of uncertainty on the effects of seismic surveys on bowhead whales in Arctic waters. This measure, therefore, became a basic condition for NMFS being able to issue IHAs to Shell, CPAI and GXT in the 2006 seismic season. It should be recognized that the MMS PEA analyzed the effects of 4 concurrent seismic surveys in the Chukchi Sea and 4 concurrent seismic surveys in the Beaufort Sea during the bowhead migration while in fact, in 2006, only a single company operated at any one time in the Chukchi Sea during the bowhead migration (CPAI from September 25 - October 12 and GXT from October 13 - present). As a result, this significant reduction in the anticipated amount of seismic activity around the bowhead whale migration reduced NMFS' concern this year that the suspension by the Court of one measure by one company would result in an increase of negative impacts to bowhead whales or subsistence hunters. However, there are indications that a similar (4 and 4) or even an increased level of seismic activity may occur in 2007 and beyond. These events may lead to an increased impact to marine mammals, particularly to fall migrating bowhead whale cow/calf pairs. Moreover, if in 2007 or beyond, the level of seismic survey activity in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas increases, it may exceed the level analyzed in the Final PEA. As a result, NMFS has determined that it needs to analyze impacts resulting from a higher level of potential seismic activity over a longer time frame than was addressed in the Final PEA and to reanalyze the range of practical mitigation measures for protecting marine mammals in more detail through preparation of a Draft PEIS for issuing:

(1)permits for oil and gas exploration in the Arctic Ocean by MMS, and

(2)authorizations to the seismic industry from NMFS to take marine mammals incidental to oil and gas seismic surveys in the Arctic Ocean. Description of the Specified Activity Marine geophysical seismic surveys are conducted to obtain information on surface and near-surface geology (high-resolution surveys) and on subsurface structures and formations (2-D and 3-D seismic surveys and vertical seismic profile surveys). Airguns are the acoustic source for 2D and 3D seismic surveys. Their individual size can range from tens to several hundred cubic inches (in 3 ). A combination of airguns is called an array, and operators vary the source-array size during the seismic survey to optimize the resolution of the geophysical data collected. Airgun array sizes for 2D/3D seismic surveys in Arctic waters have ranged from 1,800-4,000 in 3 but may range up to 6,000 in 3 . These arrays emit pulsed rather than continuous sounds. While most of the energy is directed downward and the short duration of each pulse limits the total energy, the sound can propagate horizontally for several kilometers (Greene and Richardson, 1988; Hall et al., 1994). Marine-streamer 3D seismic surveys vary markedly depending on client specifications, subsurface geology, water depth, and geological target reservoir. The vessels conducting these surveys generally are 70-90 meters

(m)(230-295 ft) long. A 3D source array typically consists of two to three subarrays of six to nine airguns each, and is about 12.5-18 m (41-59 ft) long and 16-36 m (52-118 ft) wide. Vessels tow one to three source arrays, depending on the technical survey-design specifications required for the geologic target, to generate the acoustic energy. The sound-source level (zero-to-peak) associated with 3D seismic surveys ranges between 233 and 240 decibels re 1 microPascal at 1 m. The arrays usually are aligned parallel with one another and towed 50-200 m (164-656 ft) behind the vessel. Following behind the source arrays by another 100-200 m (328-656 ft) are multiple (4-12) streamer-receiver cables, and each streamer can be 3-8 kilometers (km; 1.86-5 mi) long and spread out over a width of 400-900 m (1312-2953 ft). Streamers are passive listening equipment consisting of multiple hydrophone elements. The airgun array produces a burst of underwater sound by releasing compressed air into the water column that creates an acoustic energy pulse. The release of compressed air every several seconds creates a regular series of strong acoustic impulses separated by silent periods lasting 7-16 seconds, depending on survey type and depth to the target formations. Acoustic signals are reflected off the subsurface sedimentary layers and recorded near the water surface by hydrophones spaced within the streamer cables. Some surveys employ ocean-bottom seismometers as the receiving instrument. Vessel speed is typically 4.5-6 knots (about 4-8 mph) with gear deployed. Three-Dimensional (3-D) seismic surveying enables a more accurate assessment of potential hydrocarbon reservoirs to optimally locate exploration and development wells, and minimize the number of wells required to develop a field. State-of-the-art interactive computer mapping systems can handle much denser data coverage than older 2-D seismic surveys. Multiple-source and multiple-streamer technologies are used for 3-D seismic surveys. A typical 3-D survey might employ a dual array of up to 18 guns per array. Each array might emit a 3,000 cubic-inch burst of compressed air at 2,000 kilojoule

(kJ)of acoustic energy for each burst. The hydrophone streamer array might consist of 6-8 parallel cables, each 6-8 km (3.7-5 mi) long, spaced 75 m (246 ft) apart. A series of 3-D surveys collected over time (4-D seismic survey) is used for reservoir monitoring and management (the movement of oil, gas, and water in the reservoirs can be observed over time). The overall energy output for the permitted activity will be the same, but the firing of the source arrays on the individual vessels will be alternated. A source array is activated approximately every 10-15 seconds, depending on vessel speed. The timing between activations varies between surveys to achieve the desired spacing required to meet the geological objectives of the survey; typical spacing is either 25 or 37.5 m (82 or 123 ft). Depending on the shotpoint interval, airguns are fired between 20 and 70 times per mile. Characteristics of Airgun Pulses Discussion on the characteristics of airgun pulses have been provided in the Final PEA and in previous ** Federal Register ** notices (see 69 FR 31792 (June 7, 2004). Reviewers are referred to those documents for additional information. Scoping The environmental review of the offshore seismic industry activity and related IHA applications will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of NEPA, its regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), other appropriate Federal laws and regulations, and the NMFS policies and procedures for compliance with those regulations (NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 -Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999). The activities that will be analyzed in the Draft PEIS will include conducting marine-streamer 3D and 2D seismic surveys, high-resolution site seismic surveys, and ocean-bottom-cable seismic surveys. NMFS and MMS will analyze the effects of seismic noise on marine mammals, fish and fishery resources, and marine birds found in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. An analysis of the potential socioeconomic impacts, including potential impacts on subsistence uses of marine mammal resources, will also be included. The Draft PEIS' cumulative activities scenario and cumulative impact analysis will focus on oil and gas-related and non-oil and gas-related noise-generating events/activities in both Federal and State of Alaska waters that have been authorized or conducted in the past and that are reasonably likely and foreseeable. Noise contributions from community and commercial development, military activities, and arctic warming will also be considered. Additional issues may be identified as a result of written scoping comments. The Draft PEIS will analyze the potential adverse impacts of the proposed activities and other non-seismic related activities on environmental resources, and will identify and describe any mitigation measures that could be adopted to avoid and/or minimize those impacts. The Draft PEIS will include, but not be limited to the following issues and concerns:

(1)Protection of subsistence resources and the Inupiat culture and way of life;

(2)impacts to marine mammals including disturbance to bowhead whale migration patterns;

(3)impacts of seismic survey operations on marine fish reproduction, growth, and development;

(4)harassment and potential harm of wildlife, including marine birds, by vessel operations and movements;

(5)impacts on water and air quality;

(6)changes in the socioeconomic environment;

(7)impacts to threatened and endangered species; (8)risks of oil spills and their potential impacts on area fish and wildlife resources;

(9)incorporation of traditional knowledge in the decision-making process; and,

(10)a description of any potential marine mammal mitigation and monitoring measures and an analysis of their potential effectiveness. PEIS Alternatives NMFS will explore and evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives in the Draft PEIS, including the proposed action and the no-action alternative. At this time, NMFS has identified 7 alternatives for this action:

(1)No seismic-survey permits issued for geophysical exploration activities (No Action);

(2)seismic surveys for geophysical-exploration activities would be permitted with existing Alaska OCS G&G (geological and geophysical) exploration stipulations and guidelines;

(3)seismic surveys for geophysical exploration activities would be permitted incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and guidelines but would include additional protective measures for marine animals, including a 120-dB monitored safety and/or exclusion zone for marine mammals;

(4)seismic surveys for geophysical-exploration activities would be permitted incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and guidelines and additional protective measures for marine animals, including a 160-dB-monitored safety and/or exclusion zone for marine mammals;

(5)seismic surveys for geophysical-exploration activities would be permitted incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and guidelines but would include additional protective measures for marine animals, including 160-dB- and 120-dB monitored safety and/or exclusion zones for marine mammals (Alternatives 3 and 4 combined);

(6)seismic surveys for geophysical exploration activities would be permitted incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and guidelines but would include additional protective measures for marine animals, including a 180/190-dB exclusion zone for marine mammals to prevent acoustic injury; and,

(7)seismic surveys for geophysical exploration activities would be permitted incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and guidelines but would include additional protective measures for marine animals, including a 180/190-dB exclusion zone and 160-dB and 120-dB monitored safety and/or exclusion zones for marine mammals (Alternatives 5 and 6 combined). Alternative 7 was the Selected Alternative by MMS and NMFS in the 2006 PEA. No identification of a preferred or selected alternative has been made at this time. Identified Draft PEIS Mitigation and Monitoring Measures The alternatives in the Draft PEIS will address a suite of potential mitigation and monitoring measures, including:

(1)*Exclusion/Safety Zones* —A 180/190 dB rms isopleth exclusion zone from the sound source that must be free of marine mammals before the survey can begin and must remain free of mammals during the survey. The purpose of an exclusion zone is to protect marine mammals from Level A harassment (injury/harm); the purpose of a safety zone is to prevent interruption of critical natural behaviors that, if significantly disrupted, could result in population level effects, or to avoid an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence resources. The 180 dB (Level A harassment-injury) applies to cetaceans and walrus and 190 dB (Level A harassment-injury) applies to pinnipeds, other than walrus.

(2)*Monitoring exclusion/safety zones* —Trained marine mammal observers

(MMOs)and Inupiat hunters monitor the area around the survey vessel for the presence of marine mammals to maintain a mammal free exclusion zone, monitor for avoidance, or take behaviors. Visual observers monitor the exclusion zone to ensure that marine mammals do not enter the exclusion zone for at least 30 minutes prior to ramp up, during the conduct of the survey, or before resuming seismic-survey work.

(3)*Shut-down/power-down* —The seismic array must be shut-down or powered-down until the exclusion zone is free of marine mammals. All MMOs have the authority to, and will, instruct the vessel operators to immediately stop or de-energize the airgun array whenever a marine mammal is seen within the exclusion zone.

(4)*Ramp-up* —Ramp up is the gradual introduction of sound to deter marine mammals from potentially damaging sound intensities and from approaching the exclusion zone. This technique involves the gradual increase (usually 5-6 dB per 5-minute increment) in emitted sound levels, beginning with firing a single airgun and gradually adding airguns over a period of at least 20-40 minutes, until the desired operating level of the full array is obtained. Ramp-up procedures may begin after MMOs ensure the absence of marine mammals for at least 30 minutes within the exclusion zone.

(5)*Field Verification* —Before conducting the survey, the operator must verify the radii of the exclusion zone within real-time conditions in the field. This provides for a more accurate exclusion-zone radii rather than relying on modeling techniques before entering the field.

(6)*Aerial Surveys* —Aerial surveys are flown in advance of initiating seismic surveys and related ice-breaking activities over an area that includes the area to be surveyed.

(7)*Temporal/Spatial/Operational Restrictions* — Dynamic management approaches to avoid or minimize acoustic exposure, such as temporal or spatial limitations are based on the presence of a marine mammal in a particular place or time, or during a particularly sensitive behavior (such as feeding or maternal care). In the past, these restrictions have included:

(a)A prohibition on surveys in the Chukchi Sea spring-lead system before July 1;

(b)under specific circumstances to protect migrating bowhead cow/calf pairs, the standard 180-dB exclusion zone for cetaceans is extended to a monitored 120-dB safety zone;

(c)under specific circumstances to protect feeding aggregations of bowhead and/or gray whales, the standard 180-dB exclusion zone for cetaceans is extended to a monitored 160-dB safety zone.

(8)*Dedicated aerial and/or vessel surveys* —As appropriate, dedicated aerial and/or vessel surveys are conducted in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas during the fall bowhead whale migration period to detect migrating bowhead cow/calf pairs, and concentrations of feeding bowhead and gray whales. Comments The NMFS requests comments from state, local, and tribal governments; Native Alaskan organizations; Federal agencies; environmental and fish and wildlife organizations; the oil and gas industry; other interested organizations and parties in order to assist in the preparation of a Draft PEIS for the Arctic Ocean OCS Seismic Surveys. In particular, NMFS requests comments on the scope of issues and range of alternatives that should be considered in the Draft PEIS. Additional opportunities for public review and comment will be provided when the Notice of Availability of the Draft PEIS is published in the **Federal Register** . After release of the Draft PEIS, MMS and NMFS intend to hold public information meetings in Anchorage, Barrow, Kaktovik, Nuiqsuk, Wainwright, Point Lay and Point Hope. Dated: November 7, 2006 James H. Lecky, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-19485 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 111406A] Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Application for an Exempted Fishing Permit AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of receipt of an application for an exempted fishing permit. SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of an application for an exempted fishing permit

(EFP)from the Aleut Enterprise Corporation (AEC). If granted, this permit would be used to support a project to assess pollock abundance in a portion of the Aleutian Islands subarea and to test the feasibility of managing pollock harvest at a finer temporal and spatial scale using near real-time acoustic surveying. The project is intended to promote the objectives of the Fishery Management Plan

(FMP)for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area

(BSAI)by improving the use of pollock in the Aleutian Islands subarea. ADDRESSES: Copies of the EFP application and the environmental assessment

(EA)are available by writing to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Alaska Region, NMFS, P. O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Ellen Walsh. The EA also is available from the Alaska Region, NMFS Web site at *http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/index/analyses/analyses.asp* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melanie Brown, 907-586-7228 or *melanie.brown@noaa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the domestic groundfish fisheries in the BSAI under the FMP. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679. The FMP and the implementing regulations at §§ 679.6 and 600.745(b) authorize issuance of EFPs to allow fishing that would otherwise be prohibited. Procedures for issuing EFPs are contained in the implementing regulations. NMFS received an application for an EFP from the AEC. The purpose of the EFP is to support a project to assess pollock abundance in a portion of the Aleutian Islands subarea and to test the feasibility of managing pollock harvest at a finer temporal and spatial scale using near real-time acoustic surveying. The goal of the project is to improve the use of Aleutian Islands pollock. NMFS currently does not have the resources to conduct acoustic surveys of Aleutian Islands subarea pollock. This project has been developed in cooperation with stock assessment scientists at the NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The acoustic and biological information from the project would provide a baseline assessment of pollock biomass and distribution in the area that may be fished by small vessels from Adak, Alaska. This information also would be used to determine if the local aggregations of pollock are stable enough during the spawning season to allow for fine-scale spatial and temporal management. Additionally, genetic samples would be collected for stock structure analysis. Better information may lead to improved conservation and harvest management at finer spatial and temporal scales for the Aleutian Islands subarea pollock. Improved harvest management of the Aleutian Islands subarea pollock is needed based on the high uncertainty in the stock structure and the potential effects of the fishery on Steller sea lion populations. The western distinct population segment

(DPS)of Steller sea lions occurs in the Aleutian Islands subarea and is listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Critical habitat has been designated for this DPS, including waters within 20 nautical miles

(nm)of haulouts and rookeries (50 CFR 226.202) and in the Seguam Foraging Area. Pollock is a principal prey species of Steller sea lions. The U.S. Congress, in Section 803 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-199), required that the directed fishing allowance of pollock in the Aleutian Islands subarea be allocated to the Aleut Corporation. Only fishing vessels approved by the Aleut Corporation or its agents are allowed to harvest this allowance. To harvest the fish, the Aleut Corporation is allowed to contract only with vessels under 60 feet (18.3 m) length overall (LOA), or vessels listed under the American Fisheries Act. The allocation was made to the Aleut Corporation for the purpose of furthering the economic development of Adak, Alaska. Public Law 108-199 requires half of the Aleutian Islands pollock allocation to be harvested by small boats (less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA) in 2013 and beyond. For safety reasons, fishing in waters closer than 20 nm from shore is preferred by the small boat fleet. Aleutian Islands subarea pollock had been harvested primarily in Steller sea lion critical habitat until 1999, when the Aleutian Islands subarea was closed to pollock fishing (64 FR 3437, January 22, 1999). In 2003, the Aleutian Islands subarea was opened to pollock fishing outside of critical habitat under regulations implementing the current Steller sea lion protection measures (68 FR 204, January 2, 2003). Since 2005, pollock is allocated to the Aleut Corporation for a directed pollock fishery in the Aleutian Islands subarea, but only outside of Steller sea lion critical habitat. In 2005 and 2006, the Aleut Corporation harvested only 1.2 percent and 16 percent, respectively of their initial annual total allowable catch

(TAC)due, in part, to difficulty in finding pollock. Based on historical harvests, pollock aggregations necessary to support the proposed EFP likely occur inside Steller sea lion critical habitat. Overall, up to four vessels would harvest no more than 3,000 metric tons

(mt)of groundfish under the EFP. The EFP participants would retain all groundfish species to accurately document the catch amounts by species and compare this information to the acoustic survey data. The EFP would provide an exemption from maximum retainable amounts specified in Table 11 of 50 CFR part 679 so that the participants may retain and sell all groundfish harvested during compensation fishing. The EFP would be necessary to allow the applicants to harvest groundfish in portions of Steller sea lion protection areas closed to pollock fishing to verify the acoustic survey data and to compensate the participants for the cost of carrying out the EFP. This EFP project would continue the 2006 EFP acoustic survey study near Atka Island and Kanaga Island. These islands are located within the proposed EFP study area. The acoustic survey must be conducted in an area that is likely to contain concentrations of pollock. The EFP would provide exemptions to some pollock fishing closures between 173° W and 179° W longitudes in Steller sea lion protection areas and in a portion of the Seguam Foraging Area. No more than 1000 mt of groundfish would be harvested from any one degree block in the survey area, and harvest would be limited to no more than one vessel over 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA in a one degree block. Fishing may occur within 0 nm to 3 nm of Steller sea lion haulouts in the study area only to verify acoustic survey data. No more than 10 mt of groundfish may be harvested in a survey verification tow. No compensation fishing would be allowed in waters 0 nm to 3 nm of haulouts and rookeries. All groundfish harvested will be counted towards the TAC amounts specified for the BSAI in § 679.20 and in the 2007 harvest specifications (71 FR 10894, March 3, 2006), which are scheduled for revision by the end of February 2007. Nearly all groundfish harvested under the EFP would be pollock with minor amounts of Pacific ocean perch. Directed fishing under the EFP would be included in any groundfish fishing closures in the Aleutian Islands subarea due to overfishing concerns. Fishing under the EFP would occur February 15, 2007, through April 30, 2007, for approximately three weeks. The EFP may be modified to extend the effective date for an additional 12 months. Additional pollock abundance and distribution data would be needed to support the stock assessment and the development of potential finer-scale pollock harvest management. Significant impacts on the marine environment are not expected because the harvest under the EFP would be limited to four vessels for approximately three weeks in a discrete area with a 3,000 mt limit. Because the study would be in Steller sea lion critical habitat and would include the harvest of a principal prey species for Steller sea lions, a Section 7 consultation under the ESA has been initiated for this action and must be completed before the issuance of the EFP. In accordance with § 679.6, NMFS has determined that this proposal warrants further consideration and has initiated consultation with the Council by forwarding the application to the Council. The Council will consider the EFP application during its December 4-12, 2006 meeting. The applicant has been invited to appear in support of the application. Interested persons may comment on the application at the Council meeting during public testimony. Information regarding the December 2006 Council meeting is available at the Council's Web site at *http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc/default.htm* . Copies of the application and EA are available for review from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: November 14, 2006. James P. Burgess, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-19427 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 102706C] Marine Mammals; File No. 775-1600; Correction AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; receipt of application for amendment; correction. SUMMARY: On November 2, 2006, a notice was published in the Federal Register announcing that NMFS had received an application for an amendment to Permit No. 775-1600 from the Northeast Fisheries Science Center in Woods Hole, MA. That document inadvertently omitted the DATES section informing the public of when comments would be accepted on the action. This document corrects that oversight. All other information is unchanged. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Hubard or Amy Hapeman, (301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a request for an amendment to scientific research Permit No. 775-1600 (FR 64512; November 2, 2006) contained an error in that it omitted a comment period for the requested action. Accordingly, the DATES section is added to read as follows: DATES: Written, telefaxed, or e-mail comments must be received on or before December 4, 2006. All other information contained in the document is unchanged. Dated: November 13, 2006. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-19483 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 111406D] South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public meetings. SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a joint meeting of its Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), Snapper Grouper Advisory Panel, Snapper Grouper Committee, Controlled Access Committee, a joint meeting of its Habitat Committee and Ecosystem-Based Management Committee, Southeastern Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR) Committee, a joint meeting of its Executive Committee and Finance Committee, a joint meeting of its Law Enforcement Advisory Panel and Committee, King and Spanish Mackerel Committee, Economics Committee, Advisory Panel Selection Committee (Closed Session), Personnel Committee (Closed Session), and a meeting of the full Council. In addition, the Council will also hold a public scoping meeting regarding gag grouper management and a general public input session. DATES: The meeting will be held in December 2006. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific dates and times. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Sheraton Atlantic Beach Oceanfront Hotel, 2717 W. Fort Macon Road, Atlantic Beach, NC 28512; telephone: (1-800) 624-8875 or

(252)240-1155, fax:

(252)240-1452. Copies of documents are available from Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer; telephone:

(843)571-4366 or toll free at

(866)SAFMC-10; fax:

(843)769-4520; e-mail: *kim.iverson@safmc.net* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meeting Dates 1. Scientific and Statistical Committee Meeting: December 3, 2006, 1 p.m. until 6 p.m., December 4, 2006, from 8:30 a.m. until 6 p.m., and December 5, 2006, from 8:30 a.m. until 3 p.m. The Scientific and Statistical Committee

(SSC)meetings will be held concurrently with the Council committee meetings. December 3, 2006 *1 p.m.-4 p.m.* , The SSC will meet to receive an overview and presentations regarding the recent SEDAR assessment for gag grouper. *4 p.m.-6 p.m.* , The SSC Biological Subcommittee and SSC Socioeconomic Subcommittee will meet concurrently to continue discussion of the gag grouper assessment and develop recommendations. December 4, 2006 *8:30 a.m.-12 noon* , The SSC will meet and receive reports and updates on: Amendment 14 to the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan

(FMP)concerning marine protected areas (MPA), and Amendment 15 to the Snapper Grouper FMP regarding rebuilding programs for snowy grouper, black sea bass and red porgy, sale of recreationally caught species in the snapper grouper management complex, permit issues (transferability and renewal times), size limits for queen snapper and silk snapper, and changes to the fishing year for golden tilefish. In addition, the SSC will review the National MPA Framework, Oculina Evaluation Report, Amendment 18 to the Coastal Migratory Pelagic (mackerel) FMP regarding changes in current total allowable catches

(TACs)for king and Spanish mackerel, Amendment 19 to the Coastal Migratory Pelagic FMP concerning options for mackerel management, including separating the current joint FMP from the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, boundaries, and permit issues if such a separation were to occur. The SSC will also receive an update on the development of the Council's Fishery Ecosystem Plan

(FEP)and the FEP Comprehensive Amendment. *1:30 p.m.-2 p.m.* , The SSC will provide a presentation of findings on the gag grouper assessment to the Snapper Grouper Advisory Panel. *2 p.m.-5 p.m.* , The SSC Biological Subcommittee and the Socioeconomic Subcommittee will meet concurrently to continue discussion of Amendments 14 and 15 to the Snapper Grouper FMP and develop recommendations. *5 p.m.-6 p.m.* , The full SSC will meet to receive reports from the subcommittees and to develop recommendations. *December 4, 2006, 6:30 p.m.* —The Council will hold a Public Scoping Session to receive input regarding the management of gag grouper. December 5, 2006 *8:30 a.m. until 9:30 a.m.* , The SSC will provide a presentation of findings and recommendations on the gag grouper assessment and Amendments 14 and 15 to the Snapper Grouper FMP to the Snapper Grouper Committee. *9:30 a.m.-12 noon* , The Biological Subcommittee and Socioeconomic Subcommittee will meet concurrently to discuss Amendments 18 and 19 to the Coastal Migratory Pelagics FMP and develop recommendations. *1:30 p.m. until 3 p.m.* , The full SSC will meet to receive the subcommittee reports. In addition, the SSC will review the SEDAR Research Report, review SSC policy, and hold elections for Chairman and Vice-Chairman. 2. Snapper Grouper Advisory Panel Meeting: December 4, 2006, 1:30 p.m. until 6 p.m. The Snapper Grouper Advisory Panel

(AP)will review and develop recommendations on the following: the SEDAR assessment for gag grouper, Amendment 14 to the Snapper Grouper FMP, the Oculina Evaluation Plan, and the National MPA Framework. The AP will receive a presentation from the SSC regarding its findings and recommendations for the SEDAR gag grouper assessment. The AP will also review Amendment 15 to the Snapper Grouper FMP. 3. Snapper Grouper Committee Meeting: December 5, 2006, 8:30 a.m. until 12 noon The Snapper Grouper Committee will receive an SSC presentation of findings and recommendations on the SEDAR gag grouper assessment, and Amendments 14 and 15 to the Snapper Grouper FMP. The Committee will also receive a presentation on recommendations from the Snapper Grouper AP, then review and develop recommendations to the Council regarding the SEDAR gag grouper assessment. The Committee will receive a report on a Delphi socioeconomic study regarding Amendment 14 to the Snapper Grouper FMP, then review Amendments 14 and 15 to the Snapper Grouper FMP and provide direction to staff. The Committee will also receive a presentation on potential Individual Fishery Quota

(IFQ)and Individual Transferable Quota

(ITQ)programs as possible alternatives for Amendment 16 to the Snapper Grouper FMP, and develop recommendations. The Committee will also discuss the Oculina Evaluation plan and develop comments. 4. Controlled Access Committee Meeting: December 5, 2006, 1:30 p.m. until 2:30 p.m. The Controlled Access Committee will discuss development of and ITQ/IFQ program for the snapper grouper fishery. 5. Joint Habitat and Ecosystem-Based Management Committees Meeting: December 5, 2006, 2:30 p.m. until 4:30 p.m. The Habitat Committee and Ecosystem-Based Management Committee will meet jointly to receive presentations and updates on: policy statements, status of the Deepwater Coral Research Plan, status of and presentations on the Fishery Ecosystem Plan (FEP), and the FEP Comprehensive Amendment. The Committees will make recommendations as appropriate. *December 5, 2006, 4:30 p.m.* —The Council will hold a Public Input Session. Members of the public are invited to address the Council on items listed on the agenda or any other fishery issue that falls under the jurisdiction of the Council. 6. SEDAR Committee Meeting: December 6, 2006, 8:30 a.m. until 10:30 a.m. The SEDAR Committee will receive an update on Committee activities and develop recommendations regarding the SEDAR program. 7. Joint Executive/Finance Committees Meeting, December 6, 2006, 10:30 a.m. until 12 noon The Executive Committee will meet jointly with the Finance Committee and will receive updates on budgets, establish Calendar Year

(CY)2007 timelines regarding FMP, amendment, and framework development, and develop the CY 2007 budget. 8. Joint Law Enforcement Advisory Panel and Committee Meeting, December 6, 2006, 1:30 p.m. until 6 p.m. The Law Enforcement AP and Committee will meet jointly to develop management recommendations for gag grouper, review and develop comments for Amendments 14 and 15 to the Snapper Grouper FMP, the National MPA Framework, and the Oculina Evaluation plan. 9. King and Spanish Mackerel Committee Meeting, December 7, 2006, 8:30 a.m. until 10:30 a.m. The Mackerel Committee will receive reviews and SSC recommendations regarding Amendments 18 and 19 to the Coastal Migratory Pelagics FMP and develop recommendations to the Council as appropriate. 10. Economics Committee Meeting, December 7, 2006, 10:30 a.m. until 12 noon As a newly formed committee, the Economics Committee will meet to discuss its organizational function. 11. Advisory Panel Selection Committee Meeting, December 7, 2006, 1:30 p.m. until 2:30 p.m.(CLOSED SESSION) The Advisory Panel Selection Committee will review advisory panel applications and develop recommendations for Council consideration. 12. Personnel Committee Meeting, December 7, 2006, 2:30 p.m. until 4 p.m. (CLOSED SESSION) The Personnel Committee will meet in closed session to discuss Council personnel matters. Council Session: December 7, 2006, 4 p.m. until 6:15 p.m. and December 8, 2006, 8:30 a.m. until 12 noon Council Session: December 7, 2006, 4 p.m. until 6:15 p.m. *4 p.m.-4:15 p.m.* , The Council will call the meeting to order, adopt the agenda, and approve the September 2006 meeting minutes. *4:15 p.m.-4:45 p.m.* , The Council will receive a report from the Scientific and Statistical Committee. *4:45 p.m.-5 p.m.* , The Council will hear a report from the Snapper Grouper Committee and take action as appropriate. *5 p.m.-5:15 p.m.* , The Council will hear a report from the Controlled Access Committee and take action as appropriate. *5:15 p.m.-5:30 p.m.* , The Council will hear a report from the joint meeting of the Habitat Committee and Ecosystem-Based Management Committee and take action as appropriate. *5:30 p.m.-5:45 p.m.* , The Council will hear a report from the SEDAR Committee and take action as appropriate. *5:45 p.m.-6 p.m.* , The Council will hear a report from the joint meeting of the Executive Committee and Finance Committes and take action as appropriate. *6 p.m.-6:15 p.m.* , The Council will hear a report from the joint meeting of the Law Enforcement Advisory Panel and Committee and take action as appropriate. Council Session: December 8, 2006, 8 a.m.-12 noon. *8 a.m.-9 a.m.* , The Council will receive a NOAA General Counsel briefing on litigation issues (CLOSED SESSION). *9 a.m.-9:30 a.m.* , The Council will receive a report from the Mackerel Committee and take action as appropriate. *9:30 a.m.-9:45 a.m.* , The Council will receive a report from the Economics Committee and take action as appropriate. *9:45 a.m.-10 a.m.* , The Council will receive a report from the Advisory Panel Selection Committee and take action as appropriate. *10 a.m.-10:15 a.m.* , The Council will receive a report on the Council Chairmen/NOAA Fisheries Leadership meeting. *10:15 a.m.-12 noon* , The Council will review requests for Experimental Fishing Permits as necessary, receive status reports from NOAA Fisheries' Southeast Regional Office, NOAA Fisheries' Southeast Fisheries Science Center, agency and liaison reports, and discuss other business including upcoming meetings. Documents regarding these issues are available from the Council office (see ADDRESSES ). Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subjects of formal Council action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305

(c)of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Except for advertised (scheduled) public hearings and public comment, the times and sequence specified on this agenda are subject to change. Special Accommodations These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES ) by December 1, 2006. Dated: November 14, 2006. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-19478 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting Notice TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, December 1, 2006. PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room. STATUS: Closed. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100. Eileen A. Donovan, Acting Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 06-9284 Filed 11-15-06; 3:32 pm]

Connectionstraces to 12

Traces to 12 documents

U.S. Code