Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2008-04-04 · PROPOSED RULES · AID Agency for International Development NOTICES Meetings: Proposed Partner Vetting System, 18490 E8-6987 Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act, 18490-18491 E8-6990 · Unknown

Unknown. Final rule

30,454 words·~138 min read·/register/2008/04/04/08-1093·

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

--- schema: federal-register doc_type: fedreg source_file: FR-2008-04-04.xml --- 73 66 Friday, April 4, 2008 Contents AID Agency for International Development NOTICES Meetings: Proposed Partner Vetting System, 18490 E8-6987 Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act, 18490-18491 E8-6990 Agricultural Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES Meetings: National Organic Standards Board, 18491-18492 08-1097 Agricultural Agricultural Research Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18492-18493 E8-7048 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Agricultural Marketing Service See Agricultural Research Service See Forest Service RULES Rules of Practice Governing Formal Adjudicatory Proceedings Instituted by the Secretary Under Various Statues, 18433 E8-6764 Alcohol Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, E8-7087 18563-18564 E8-7088 Antitrust Antitrust Division NOTICES Public Comment and Response on Proposed Final Judgment, 18564-18570 E8-6875 Public Comments and Response on Proposed Final Judgment:
United States v. Monsanto Company and Delta and Pine Land Company, 18612-18674 E8-5578 Blind Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From People Who Are See Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Meetings: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel; Mining Occupational Safety and Health Research, E8-7032 18536 E8-7033 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Initial Review Group, 18537 E8-7031 Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services PROPOSED RULES Medicaid Program:
Home and Community-Based State Plan Services, 18676-18700 08-1084 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Meetings: President's Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities, 18537 E8-7072 Coast Guard Coast Guard NOTICES Application; Review for Inclusion in the Shipboard Technology Evaluation Program; Draft Environmental Assessment: Containerized Cargo Ship ATLANTIC COMPASS, 18543-18544 E8-6988 Applications; Review for Inclusion in the Shipboard Technology Evaluation Program;
Draft Environmental Assessment: Cruise Ship CORAL PRINCESS, 18544-18545 E8-6995 Integrated Tug and Barge MOKU PAHU, 18545-18546 E8-6986 Imposition of Conditions of Entry for Certain Vessels Arriving to the United States, Cuba, 18546 E8-6985 Commerce Commerce Department See International Trade Administration See National Institute of Standards and Technology See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Patent and Trademark Office Committee for Purchase Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled NOTICES Procurement List;
Additions and Deletions, 18495-18497 E8-7064 E8-7065 Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18520-18521 E8-7061 Defense Defense Department See Navy Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18521-18522 E8-7051 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Application: Rhodes Technologies; Manufacturer of Controlled Substances, 18570 E8-7037 Siegfried (USA), Inc.;
Manufacturer of Controlled Substances, 18570 E8-7039 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18572-18573 E8-6963 Energy Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission EPA Environmental Protection Agency PROPOSED RULES Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans Florida: Prevention of Significant Deterioration, 18466-18473 E8-7073 NOTICES Environmental Impacts Statements;
Availability, etc., 18527-18528 E8-7036 Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 18526-18527 E8-7055 Meetings: Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee, 18528 E8-7059 Executive Executive Office for Immigration Review NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18570-18572 E8-7089 E8-7090 FAA Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Model PC-12, PC-12/45, and PC-12/47 Airplanes, 18433-18436 E8-6958 Class E Airspace:
Anvik, AK; Revision, 18436-18437 E8-6933 Class E Airspace: Bettles, AK Bettles, AK, 18437-18438 E8-6932 Establishment of Low Altitude Area Navigation Route T-209; GA, 18438-18439 E8-6922 Revision of Class E Airspace; New Stuyahok, AK, 18439-18440 E8-6921 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Honeywell International Inc.; TFE731 4, 4R, 5, 5AR, 5BR, and 5R Series Turbofan Engines, 18461-18462 E8-6993 NOTICES Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Renewal, 18602 E8-7075 Intent to use the Airport Improvement Program Sponsor, Cargo, and Nonprimary Entitlement Funds for 2008 Fiscal Year, 18602-18603 E8-6943 Meetings:
RTCA Special Committee 159: Global Positioning System, 18603 E8-6928 RTCA Special Committee 186: Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, 18603-18604 E8-6929 RTCA Special Committee 207/Airport Security Access, 18604 E8-6945 Special Committee 215 Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Services Next Generation Satellite Services and Equipment, 18605 E8-6927 Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received, 18605 E8-7083 FCC Federal Communications Commission RULES Fixed Microwave Services;
Correction, 18443 E8-7008 NOTICES Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act and Modernization of Competitive Bidding Rules and Procedures; Implementation, 18528-18529 E8-7058 FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18529-18531 E8-7003 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Emergency Declaration: Texas, 18546-18547 E8-7040 Emergency Declarations: Texas, 18547 E8-7016 Major Disaster and Related Determinations:
Arkansas, 18547-18548 E8-7042 Georgia, 18548 E8-7044 Missouri, 18548-18549 E8-7021 Major Disaster Declaration: Arkansas, 18549 E8-7041 Georgia, 18549-18550 E8-7045 Missouri, 18550 E8-7047 Major Disaster Declarations: Kentucky, 18550 E8-7024 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Notice of Filings, 18523-18525 E8-7018 Filings: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Co., 18525-18526 E8-7017 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18531-18532 E8-6991 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Comprehensive Conservation Plans and Environmental Assessment; Request for Comments: Piedmont National Wildlife Refuge, Jones and Jasper Counties, GA, 18552-18553 E8-7000 Food Food and Drug Administration RULES Technical Amendment; Withdrawal of Approval of NADAs: Animal Drugs, Feeds, and Related Products, 18441-18442 E8-7103 Withdrawal: Amendment to the Current Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations for Finished Pharmaceuticals, 18440-18441 E8-7107 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Intent To Prepare An Environmental Impact Statement:
Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District; Deschutes National Forest; Oregon; Dead Log, 18493-18494 E8-6899 New Fee Site: Ochoco National Forest, 18494-18495 E8-6900 E8-6902 GSA General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18521-18522 E8-7051 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Children and Families Administration See Food and Drug Administration See National Institutes of Health NOTICES Privacy Act;
Systems of Records, 18532-18535 E8-7034 Request for Nominations for an Independent Expert Panel and Submission of Relevant Data: Non-Animal Methods and Approach for Evaluating Eye Irritation Potential for Antimicrobial Cleaning Products, 18535-18536 E8-6969 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See Federal Emergency Management Agency See Transportation Security Administration See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, E8-7077 18542-18543 E8-7081 Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Federal Property Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless, 18552 E8-6717 Indian Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, 18553-18557 E8-6968 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Indian Affairs Bureau See Land Management Bureau See National Park Service IRS Internal Revenue Service RULES Simplification of Entity Classification Rules;
Correction, 18442-18443 E8-6734 International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping: Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 18510-18511 E8-7084 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission: Certain Tissue Paper Products from the People's Republic of China, 18497-18503 E8-7102 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial Rescission; Preliminary Results: Glycine from the People's Republic of China, 18503-18510 E8-7099 Postponement of Preliminary Determination;
Countervailing Duty Investigation: Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure Pipe; People's Republic of China, 18511 E8-7100 International International Trade Commission NOTICES Antidumping: Persulfates from China, 18561 E8-7010 Steel Wire Garment Hangers From China, 18560-18561 E8-7011 Investigation: Certain Cigarettes and Packaging Thereof, 18561-18562 E8-7005 Investigation; Correction: Certain Catheters, Consoles and Other Apparatus for Cryosurgery, and Components Thereof, 18562 E8-6998 Justice Justice Department See Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau See Antitrust Division See Drug Enforcement Administration See Executive Office for Immigration Review NOTICES Lodging of Settlement Agreement Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, and Liability Act, 18562-18563 E8-6954 Labor Labor Department See Employment and Training Administration See Labor Statistics Bureau See Veterans Employment and Training Service MISSING FOR:
Labor Statistics Bureau Labor Statistics Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18573-18574 E8-6965 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals; Correction, 18558 E8-6957 Filings: Plats of Survey; Colorado, 18558 E8-7057 Proposed Withdrawal Extension and Opportunity for Public Meeting; Wyoming, 18558-18559 E8-7050 Legal Legal Services Corporation NOTICES Calendar Year 2009 Competitive Grant Funds;
Availability, 18574-18575 E8-7177 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18521-18522 E8-7051 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration PROPOSED RULES Use of Meeting Rooms and Public Space, 18462-18465 E8-7126 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18575 E8-6970 National Credit National Credit Union Administration NOTICES Guidance Regarding Prohibitions Imposed by Section 205(d) of the Federal Credit Union Act, 18576-18583 E8-6031 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard:
Volkswagen, 18606-18607 E8-7098 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Meetings: Manufacturing Extension Partnership Advisory Board, 18511-18512 E8-7052 National Fire Codes; Request for Comments, 18512-18513 E8-7056 National Fire Codes; Request for Proposals for Revision of Codes and Standards, 18513-18515 E8-7054 NIH National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Board of Scientific Counselors, 18537-18538 E8-6978 National Advisory Council on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 18538 E8-6973 National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Special Emphasis Panel, 18538 E8-6974 National Eye Institute Special Emphasis Panel Training and Scientific Meeting Reviews, 18538 E8-6976 National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel, 18539 E8-6975 National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel, 18539 E8-6977 Surgical Sciences, Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Integrated Review Group, 18539-18542 E8-6979 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries in the Western Pacific:
Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries; Management Measures in the Main Hawaiian Islands, 18450-18460 08-1093 Specifications and Management Measures: Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries, 18443-18450 E8-7062 PROPOSED RULES Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries, 18483-18489 E8-7025 International Fisheries; Atlantic Highly Migratory Species, 18473-18483 E8-7068 NOTICES Marine Mammals, 18515-18516 E8-7022 E8-7023 Meetings:
Fisheries of the South Atlantic; Southeastern Data, Assessment, and Review, 18516-18517 E8-6980 Fisheries of the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico; South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Correction, 18517-18518 E8-6982 E8-6983 Fisheries of the South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean; Southeastern Data, Assessment, and Review, 18517 E8-6981 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 18518 E8-6962 National Park National Park Service NOTICES National Register of Historic Places:
Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 18559-18560 E8-7117 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee for Polar Programs, 18584 E8-7066 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Hearings: Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement; Southern California Range Complex, 18522-18523 E8-7085 Meetings: Secretary of the Navy Advisory Panel, 18523 E8-6967 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Draft Regulatory Guide; Availability, 18584 E8-7053 License Termination and Site Release for Unrestricted Use;
Cabot Site, Reading, PA, 18584-18585 E8-7049 Office Office of the Special Counsel NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18600-18601 E8-7030 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18519-18520 E8-7019 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Applications: Franklin California Tax-Free Income Fund, et al., 18585-18586 E8-6966 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 18586 E8-7069 Order of Suspension of Trading:
Alternative Energy Technology Center, Inc., 18587 08-1103 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: American Stock Exchange LLC, 18592-18596 E8-7026 E8-7027 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 18596-18598 E8-7028 Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 18598-18599 E8-7029 Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 18589-18592 E8-6961 The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 18587-18589 E8-6960 SBA Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declaration: Arkansas, 18599 E8-6992 Iowa, 18599-18600 E8-7002 Liquidation and Debt Collection Activities;
Fees for Liquidation Activities Performed By Authorized CDC Liquidators, 18600 E8-7067 Meetings: Region II Buffalo District Advisory Council, 18600 E8-7063 Special Special Counsel Office See Office of the Special Counsel State State Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18601-18602 E8-6989 Surface Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Quarterly Rail Cost Adjustment Factor, 18607 E8-7079 Temporary Trackage Rights Exemption:
Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 18607 E8-6865 Thrift Thrift Supervision Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, E8-6971 18608-18609 E8-6972 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration See Surface Transportation Board Transportation Transportation Security Administration NOTICES Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC): Enrollment Dates for the Ports of Ponce, PR and Laporte, TX, 18550-18551 E8-7101 Treasury Treasury Department See Internal Revenue Service See Thrift Supervision Office MISSING FOR:
U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission NOTICES Open Public Hearing: April 24-25 2008, New Orleans, LA, 18609 E8-7014 MISSING FOR: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18551 E8-7127 Veterans Veterans Employment and Training Service NOTICES Veteran Employment Services Survey Proposed Collection;
Correction, 18574 E8-6964 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Justice Department, Antitrust Division, 18612-18674 E8-5578 Part III Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 18676-18700 08-1084 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws. To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 73 66 Friday, April 4, 2008 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Office of the Secretary 7 CFR Part 1 [Docket No.
AMS-L&RRS-08-0015] Rules of Practice Governing Formal Adjudicatory Proceedings Instituted by the Secretary Under Various Statutes AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, USDA. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This amendment expands the scope and applicability of the Department's uniform rules of practice governing adjudicatory proceedings to include actions initiated under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. DATES: *Effective Date:* April 4, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine M.
Sarcone, Director, Legislative and Regulatory Review Staff, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 2622-South, Washington, DC 20250-1417. Telephone:
(202)720-3203; Facsimile:
(202)690-3767. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, as amended (7 U.S.C. 6501-6522)
(OFPA)authorizes enforcement actions against, among other things, any person found to be in violation of the OFPA or a regulation issued thereunder. The Department's uniform rules of practice (7 CFR part 1, subpart H), which govern the conduct of adjudicatory proceedings under numerous statutes, have been in effect since February 1, 1977. Accordingly, to insure consistency and uniformity in the conduct of the Department's administrative proceedings, it has been determined that proceedings initiated under the OFPA should also be governed by these uniform procedures. This rule relates to internal agency management. Therefore, this rule is exempt from the provisions of Executive Orders 12866 and 12988. Moreover, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for comment are not required for this rule, and it may be made effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . In addition, under 5 U.S.C. 804, this rule is not subject to congressional review under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121. Finally, this action is not a rule as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.,* and thus is exempt from the provisions of that Act. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule contains no information collections or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1 Administrative practice and procedure, Agriculture, Antitrust, Claims, Concessions, Cooperatives, Equal access to justice, Federal buildings and facilities, Freedom of Information, Lawyers, Privacy. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Title 7 subtitle A is amended as follows: PART 1—ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, unless otherwise noted. 2. The authority citation for part 1, subpart H is revised to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 7 U.S.C. 61, 87e, 228, 268, 499o, 608c(14), 1592, 1624(b), 2151, 2279e, 2621, 2714, 2908, 3812, 4610, 4815, 4910, 6009, 6107, 6207, 6307, 6411, 6519, 6520, 6808, 7107, 7734, 8313; 15 U.S.C. 1828; 16 U.S.C. 620d, 1540(f), 3373; 21 U.S.C. 104, 111, 117, 120, 122, 127, 134e, 134f, 135a, 154, 463(b), 621, 1043; 43 U.S.C. 1740; 7 CFR 2.35, 2.41. 3. In § 1.131, paragraph (a), the following statutory reference is added in alphabetical order: § 1.131 Scope and applicability of this subpart.
(a)* * * Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, sections 2119 and 2120 (7 U.S.C. 6519, 6520). Dated: March 27, 2008. Edward T. Schafer, Secretary of Agriculture. [FR Doc. E8-6764 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0070; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-098-AD; Amendment 39-15452; AD 2008-07-11] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. Model PC-12, PC-12/45, and PC-12/47 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final Rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. This AD requires inserting changes into the airworthiness limitations of the FAA-approved maintenance program. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD becomes effective May 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* or in person at Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4059; fax:
(816)329-4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was published in the **Federal Register** on January 25, 2008 (73 FR 4497). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The NPRM proposed to require incorporating new limitations into the Airworthiness Limitations section of the Pilatus PC-12 Airplane Maintenance Manual
(AMM)12-A/AMP-04. The revisions to the Airworthiness Limitations section of AMM 12-A/AMP-04 incorporate the following: • Time between overhaul
(TBO)for the pitch trim actuator is reduced from 6,000 hours TIS or 5 years, whichever occurs first, to 5,000 hours time-in-service
(TIS)or 5 years, whichever occurs first; • The life limit for the pitch trim actuator is increased from 10,000 hours TIS or 13,500 flights, whichever occurs first, to 20,000 hours TIS or 27,000 flights, whichever occurs first; and • A life limit of 10,000 hours TIS is introduced for the pitch trim actuator attachment parts. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We considered the comments received. Comment Issue No. 1: Unable To Comply With AD Scott R. Lania of Alpha Flying Inc./Atlas Aircraft Center, Inc. and Tim Kitzmann state that incorporating limitations and making pen and ink changes to the airworthiness limitations section of the FAA-approved maintenance manual are impractical and impossible. The commenters state that each affected airplane does not have its own maintenance manual, which makes compliance with paragraph
(f)of the NPRM implausible. They state that most maintenance manuals for Pilatus PC-12 airplanes are now on compact disk (CD), which makes the pen and ink changes required in paragraph (f)(2) of the NPRM impossible. The commenters believe it would be easier to state the part numbers of the affected pitch trim actuators and their new TBO interval into the AD to address the unsafe condition. We partially agree with the commenters. We agree that making the pen and ink changes to the CD version of the FAA-approved maintenance manual would be impossible. However, we do not agree that incorporating just the part numbers of the affected pitch trim actuators and their new TBO interval into the AD addresses the unsafe condition. That approach could cause confusion with the latest version of the airworthiness limitations section of the FAA-approved maintenance manual and would not follow the State of Design Authority's actions. To address this issue, we will allow using the CD version of the FAA-approved maintenance manual that incorporates the November 20, 2007, version of chapter 4 and the corresponding version of chapter 5 as an option for complying with the AD. In accordance with 14 CFR 21.50 and 23.1529, the holder of a design approval for which application was made after January 28, 1981, is required to include an Airworthiness Limitations section in their FAA-approved maintenance manual or maintenance program (Instructions for Continued Airworthiness). In this case, the manufacturer issued chapter 4 to Pilatus PC-12 AMM 12-A/AMP-04, which is the Airworthiness Limitations section, and it must be incorporated into the airplane maintenance manual or maintenance program. This AD incorporates the November 20, 2007, version of these limitations. The only way for us to mandate a version of the airworthiness limitations section, other than what was in place at delivery of the airplane, is through rulemaking, e.g., AD. We will change the final rule AD action to incorporate the changes mentioned above. Comment Issue No. 2: Change Compliance Time for TBO Scott R. Lania of Alpha Flying Inc./Atlas Aircraft Center, Inc. believes that the calendar time for the TBO interval is too early for low-time users. He suggests 8 to 10 years as a more realistic time for the 400- to 500-hour-a-year users. He believes this would be more in line with the high-time users. We do not agree. We have no data that allows us to deviate from the compliance time decision of both the type certificate
(TC)holder and the State of Design Authority. The TC holder did not provide a conversion for the low-time users; therefore, we are relying on the compliance time decision of the TC holder and State of Design Authority. Owners/operators may request an alternative method of compliance
(AMOC)following the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19, and the AD. We will coordinate all requests with the TC holder and State of Design Authority. We are not changing the final rule AD action based on this comment. Comment Issue No. 3: Request for Test Result Data Dan P. Johnson states that the reduction of the hourly limit for the TBO may be acceptable provided there is evidence supporting it. The proposed AD states: “based on full-scale fatigue test, the life limit has been extended, but the TBO reduced.” The commenter requests to see the actual test results that prove a 5-year calendar limit is warranted. The commenter notes that the current chapter 4 component entry for this actuator has no calendar limitation. These actuators are overhauled in the United States by Derco Repair Services, Inc. in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The commenter states that he contacted this repair station last year for a quote to overhaul one of these and was quoted a price of around $4,500. The commenter states that he was also told that, due to a proprietary agreement with Pilatus, they would not accept direct requests for overhaul and only Pilatus could provide service. The commenter states that this is a common practice of Pilatus to control U.S. parts distribution. The commenter states that he understands the FAA does not get involved with costs incurred by operators. He also states that he understands the purpose of an AD is to detect and correct unsafe conditions and prevent them from happening in the future. The commenter believes that the FAA is assisting the TC holder in the “gouging of American operators by agreeing to an unsubstantiated calendar limit.” The commenter believes that the hourly TBO reduction is sufficient for 14 CFR part 91 operators. We issued the NPRM based on full-scale fatigue tests conducted by the TC holder. The actual data is held by Pilatus, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and the Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA). We have no data to show that the State of Design Authority's determination of the life limits specified in the NPRM is not valid. We evaluated the State of Design Authority's information and determined that AD action was necessary in the United States to address an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on airplanes of the same type design that are type certificated for operation in the United States. The life limit of the component is being added to the Airworthiness Limitations section along with the TBO interval in order to maintain the safe operation of this component. We are not changing the final rule AD action based on this comment. Comment Issue No. 4: AD Unnecessary Tim Kitzmann questions why the AD is necessary if these new limitations are FAA-approved. The commenter points out that 14 CFR 91.403(c) requires compliance with airworthiness limitations issued by the TC holder. The commenter believes that the AD is unnecessary since the new limitations are part of chapter 4. We do not agree with the commenter. While 14 CFR 91.403(c) requires compliance with FAA-approved limitations issued by the TC holder, the FAA's regulations do not require future incorporations of limitation section revisions, unless additional rulemaking action is taken, e.g., AD action. By taking AD action, we can mandate change to the airworthiness limitations section of an FAA-approved maintenance program for airplanes operating in both 14 CFR part 91 and part 135 operations. If these new limitations are not mandated, the pitch trim actuator and the pitch trim actuator components could fail. We are not changing the final rule AD action based on these comments. Comment Issue No. 5: Update Reference to the AMM Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. states that the reference to Pilatus PC-12 AMM, Chapter 4 is not correct. Due to the implementation of a new software publication system, Pilatus requests for the AMM reference to be changed to Report No. 02049, issue 1, revision 0, dated November 20, 2007. We partially agree with the commenter. In order to avoid confusion, we will incorporate the date of the new document. Based on the documents we have, we cannot change the way Pilatus PC-12 AMM, Chapter 4 is referenced in this AD. However, to accommodate Pilatus' new software publication system, we will add a parenthetical to the Pilatus PC-12 AMM, Chapter 4 reference to include Report No. 02049, issue 1, revision 0. We will change the final rule AD action based on this comment. Conclusion We reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have required different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD will affect about 500 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about .5 work-hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $20,000, or $40 per product. In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions (the replacements required by the limitations changes) will take about 3.5 work-hours and require parts costing $11,960, for a cost of $12,240 per product. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3)Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **2008-07-11 Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.:** Amendment 39-15452; Docket No. FAA-2008-0070; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-098-AD. Effective Date
(a)This airworthiness directive
(AD)becomes effective May 9, 2008. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Models PC-12, PC-12/45, and PC-12/47 airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category. Subject
(d)Air Transport Association of America
(ATA)Code 27: Flight Controls. Reason
(e)This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. We are issuing this AD to mandate new life limits for the pitch trim actuator and pitch trim actuator attachment parts. If these new limitations are not mandated, the pitch trim actuator and the pitch trim actuator components could fail. This failure could lead to an unsafe flying configuration. Actions and Compliance Note 1: Pilatus has implemented a new software publication system. During the implementation of this new system, the airplane maintenance manual revision number was reset to 0. For the purposes of this AD, the date of issue takes prescedence over the revision level.
(f)Unless already done, do the following within the next 30 days after May 9, 2008 (the effective date of this AD).
(1)Insert unclassified document 12-A/AMP-04, Structural, Component and Miscellaneous—Airworthiness Limitations, 12-A-04-00-00-00A-000A-A, dated October 26, 2007 (Pilatus PC-12 Airplane Maintenance Manual, Chapter 4, Report No. 02049, Issue 1, Revision 0, dated November 20, 2007), into the airworthiness limitations section of the FAA-approved maintenance program (e.g., maintenance manual) or use the CD version that incorporates the November 20, 2007, version of chapter 4 and the corresponding version of chapter 5. You may use any future amendment to this Airworthiness Limitations section provided it does not change the inspection intervals, requirements, or the life limits for the pitch trim actuator and pitch trim actuator attachment parts of the document referenced above. The owner/operator holding at least a private pilot certificate as authorized by 14 CFR 43.7 may do this action. Make an entry in the aircraft records showing compliance with this portion of the AD following 14 CFR 43.9.
(2)In order to avoid confusion with the new pitch trim actuator limitations now contained in chapter 4 (previously contained in chapter 5), make pen and ink changes in chapter 5 and line through references to limitations for the pitch trim actuator. You do not have to make these pen and ink changes if you are using the CD version that incorporates the November 20, 2007, version of chapter 4 and the corresponding version of chapter 5. FAA AD Differences Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions
(g)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4059; fax:
(816)329-4090. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 27, 2008. John Colomy, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-6958 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-0343; Airspace Docket No. 07-AAL-21] Revision of Class E Airspace; Anvik, AK AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action revises Class E airspace at Anvik, AK to provide adequate controlled airspace to contain aircraft executing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs). Two new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and a textual departure procedure
(DP)are being developed for the Anvik Airport. Additionally, one SIAP is being amended. This action revises existing Class E airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at Anvik Airport, Anvik, AK. EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, June 5, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, AAL-538G, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587; telephone number
(907)271-5898; fax:
(907)271-2850; e-mail: *gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov* . Internet address: *http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On Friday, February 1, 2008, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to revise Class E airspace upward from 700 ft. above the surface and from 1,200 ft. above the surface at Anvik, AK (73 FR 6058). The action was proposed in order to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft while executing SIAPs for the Anvik Airport. Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft. above the surface and from 1,200 ft. above the surface in the Anvik Airport area is revised by this action. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. The rule is adopted as proposed. The area will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1,200 ft. transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9R, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. The Rule This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 revises Class E airspace at the Anvik Airport, Alaska. This Class E airspace is revised to accommodate aircraft executing new and amended SIAPs, and a new DP, and will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The intended effect of this rule is to provide adequate controlled airspace for Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR)operations at the Anvik Airport, Anvik, Alaska. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it creates Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures for the Anvik Airport and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable airspace. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: *Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending Upward from 700 feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth* . AAL AK E5 Anvik, AK [Revised] Anvik, Anvik Airport, AK (Lat. 62°38′48″ N., long. 160°11′26″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within an 8.0-mile radius of the Anvik Airport; and that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 73-mile radius of the Anvik Airport. Issued in Anchorage, AK, on March 24, 2008. Anthony M. Wylie, Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information Area Group. [FR Doc. E8-6933 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-0342; Airspace Docket No. 07-AAL-20] Revision of Class E Airspace; Bettles, AK AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action revises Class E airspace at Bettles, AK to provide adequate controlled airspace to contain aircraft executing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs). Two Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) are being developed for the Bettles Airport. Additionally, two SIAPs and a textual departure procedure
(DP)are being amended. This action revises existing Class E airspace upward from the surface and from 700 feet (ft.) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at the Bettles Airport, Bettles, AK. EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, June 5, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, AAL-538G, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587; telephone number
(907)271-5898; fax:
(907)271-2850; e-mail: *gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov* . Internet address: *http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On Friday, February 1, 2008, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to revise Class E airspace upward from the surface and from 700 ft. above the surface and from 1,200 ft. above the surface at Bettles, AK (73 FR 6060). The action was proposed in order to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft while executing SIAPs for the Bettles Airport. Class E controlled airspace extending upward from the surface and from 700 ft. above the surface and from 1,200 ft. above the surface, in the Bettles Airport area is revised by this action. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. The rule is adopted as proposed. The area will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as surface areas are published in paragraph 6002 of FAA Order 7400.9R, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1,200 ft. transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9R, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. The Rule This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 revises Class E airspace at the Bettles Airport, Alaska. This Class E airspace is revised to accommodate aircraft executing new and amended DPs and SIAPs, and will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The intended effect of this rule is to provide adequate controlled airspace for Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR)operations at the Bettles Airport, Bettles, Alaska. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it creates Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures for the Bettles Airport and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable airspace. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: *Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas* . AAL AK E2 Bettles, AK [Revised] Bettles Airport, AK (Lat. 66°54′50″ N., long. 151°31′44″ W.) Within a 5.7-mile radius of the Bettles Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Supplement Alaska Airport/Facility Directory. Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth. AAL AK E5 Bettles, AK [Revised] Bettles Airport, AK (Lat. 66°54′50″ N., long. 151°31′44″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within an 8.2-mile radius of the Bettles Airport, and within 3.9 miles either side of the 212° bearing from the Bettles Airport, extending from the 8.2-mile radius to 11.3 miles southwest of the Bettles Airport; and that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 72-mile radius of the Bettles Airport. Issued in Anchorage, AK, on March 24, 2008. Anthony M. Wylie, Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information Area Group. [FR Doc. E8-6932 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-28161; Airspace Docket No. 07-ASO-6] RIN 2120-AA66 Establishment of Low Altitude Area Navigation Route T-209; GA AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action establishes a low altitude Global Positioning System (GPS)/Global Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS)area navigation route, designated T-209, in the vicinity of Augusta, GA. This route allows for more effective utilization of airspace and enhances the management of aircraft operations in the vicinity of Augusta, GA. EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, June 5, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace and Rules Group, Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone:
(202)267-8783. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 22, 2007, the FAA published in the **Federal Register** a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)to establish T-209 in the vicinity of Augusta, GA (72 FR 28630). The purpose of the route is to provide a more direct route for north and southbound traffic west of Augusta, GA, and establish a published route to assist pilots navigating around the Bulldog A Military Operations Area (MOA). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal. Comments were received from the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
(AOPA)and the U.S. Air Force (USAF). AOPA wrote in support of the proposal. The USAF expressed concerns about the impact of the route on current use of the Bulldog B Military Operations Area (MOA), and the potential impact of the route on a special use airspace proposal previously submitted to, and now under review by, the FAA. Currently, there are two MOAs situated in the vicinity of the airspace through which T-209 passes. These existing MOAs are the Bulldog A MOA, which is located to the west of the T-209 airspace and extends from 500 feet above ground level up to but not including 10,000 feet MSL; and the Bulldog B MOA, which extends from 10,000 feet MSL up to but not including 18,000 feet MSL. The Bulldog B MOA overlies Bulldog A and it also extends beyond the Bulldog A boundaries on the east and south sides. The FAA has determined that the new route will not disrupt current military flight training operations in the Bulldog MOAs. T-209 passes through the airspace to the east of the Bulldog A MOA boundary and beneath the Bulldog B MOA. Currently, when the Bulldog A and B MOAs are used in conjunction with each other, ATC will clear military aircraft using the MOAs to operate at or above 11,000 feet MSL in that portion of Bulldog B, which extends beyond the lateral confines of Bulldog A. In those cases, T-209 will only be utilized at and below 10,000 feet MSL; therefore, the new route will not have any impact on the current Bulldog A or B MOA operations. It is estimated that 13,000 to 15,000 IFR general aviation overflights per year are vectored by ATC through the existing corridor that will encompass T-209. The establishment of T-209 will not significantly change this traffic volume. The USAF also expressed concern about the possible impact of the new route on a proposal to modify the Bulldog MOAs that it previously submitted to the FAA. That proposal is still under review by the FAA. It should be noted that the FAA has not made a determination on the USAF's MOA proposal at this time. However, to facilitate real-time use of the Bulldog MOAs, and ensure separation of T-209 from MOA airspace, the FAA has moved the NASDE waypoint 4.2 NM to the east of the position proposed in the NPRM. The modified NASDE position also results in a straighter T-209 route segment between the EHEJO fix and the YASLO waypoint. In this rule, the geographic coordinates for two points in the T-209 description differ slightly from those proposed in the NPRM. First, the proposed latitude/longitude position for the EHEJO, GA, fix contained a minor error amounting to approximately two seconds of latitude and one second of longitude. The correct position for the EHEJO fix is lat. 32°23′28″ N., long. 82°05′11″ W. Second, the NASDE, GA, waypoint is moved 4.2 NM to the east of the original proposed position, as discussed above. The revised position for NASDE is lat. 32°33′16″ N., long. 82°00′50″ W. In addition, this rule corrects the spelling of the JAMTA waypoint, which was incorrectly stated as JAMITA in the NPRM. With the exception of above mentioned changes, this amendment is the same as that proposed in the NPRM. The Rule This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by establishing area navigation route T-209 in the vicinity of Augusta, GA. The new route extends between the Colliers, SC, very high frequency omnidirectional range/tactical air navigation (VORTAC) aid and the EHEJO, GA, navigation fix. T-209 provides a more direct route for northbound and southbound traffic and establishes a published route to assist aircraft navigating around the Bulldog A MOA. Area navigation routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order 7400.9R, signed August 15, 2007 and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The area navigation route listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation:
(1)Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation
(DOT)Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes area navigation route T-209 in the vicinity of Augusta, GA. Environmental Review The FAA has reviewed the above referenced action and determined that it is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation according to FAA Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, in accordance with paragraphs 311a. Additionally, the implementation of this action will not result in any extraordinary circumstances in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E paragraph 304. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). The Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6011 Contiguous United States Area Navigation Routes. T-209 EHEJO, GA to Colliers, SC [New] EHEJO, GA Fix (lat. 32°23′28″ N., long. 82°05′11″ W.) NASDE, GA WP (lat. 32°33′16″ N., long. 82°00′50″ W.) YASLU, GA WP (lat. 32°49′42″ N., long. 81°56′52″ W.) JAMTA, GA WP (lat. 33°06′41″ N., long. 82°00′27″ W.) Colliers, SC VORTAC (lat. 33°42′26″ N., long. 82°09′43″ W.) Issued in Washington, DC, on March 25, 2008. Paul Gallant, Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules Group. [FR Doc. E8-6922 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2007-29008; Airspace Docket No. 07-AAL-11] Revision of Class E Airspace; New Stuyahok, AK AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action revises Class E airspace at New Stuyahok, AK to provide adequate controlled airspace to contain aircraft executing Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs). Two new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) are being developed for the New Stuyahok Airport. This action revises existing Class E airspace upward from 700 feet (ft.) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at New Stuyahok Airport, New Stuyahok, AK. EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, June 5, 2008. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, AAL-538G, Federal Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587; telephone number
(907)271-5898; fax:
(907)271-2850; e-mail: *gary.ctr.rolf@faa.gov* . Internet address: *http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: History On Friday, February 1, 2008, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to revise Class E airspace upward from 700 ft. above the surface and from 1,200 ft. above the surface at New Stuyahok, AK (73 FR 6057). The action was proposed in order to create Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft while executing SIAPs for the New Stuyahok Airport. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking contained airport location data, which has since been updated. The revised airport location coordinates are listed in this rule. Class E controlled airspace extending upward from 700 ft. above the surface and from 1,200 ft. above the surface in the New Stuyahok Airport area is revised by this action. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. The rule is adopted as proposed. The area will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North American Datum 83. The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1,200 ft. transition areas are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9R, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. The Rule This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 revises Class E airspace at the New Stuyahok Airport, Alaska. This Class E airspace is revised to accommodate aircraft executing new SIAPs, and will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The intended effect of this rule is to provide adequate controlled airspace for Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR)operations at the New Stuyahok Airport, New Stuyahok, Alaska. The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore—(1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
(2)is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and
(3)does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it creates Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft executing instrument procedures for the New Stuyahok Airport and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable airspace. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air). Adoption of the Amendment In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389. § 71.1 [Amended] 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, *Airspace Designations and Reporting Points* , signed August 15, 2007, and effective September 15, 2007, is amended as follows: *Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending Upward from 700 feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.* AAL AK E5 New Stuyahok, AK [Revised] New Stuyahok, New Stuyahok Airport, AK (Lat. 59°27′06″ N., long. 157°22′23″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.9-mile radius of the New Stuyahok Airport; and that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 71-mile radius of the New Stuyahok Airport. Issued in Anchorage, AK, on March 24, 2008. Anthony M. Wylie, Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information Area Group. [FR Doc. E8-6921 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 210 and 211 [Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0179] (formerly Docket No. 2007N-0280) Amendment to the Current Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations for Finished Pharmaceuticals; Withdrawal AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Direct final rule; withdrawal. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is withdrawing a direct final rule that published in the **Federal Register** of December 4, 2007 (72 FR 68064), to amend certain regulations as the first phase of an incremental approach to modernize or clarify some of the current good manufacturing practice
(CGMP)regulations for finished pharmaceuticals, as well as harmonize some of the CGMP requirements with those of other foreign regulators and other FDA regulations. The comment period closed February 19, 2008. FDA is withdrawing the direct final rule because the agency received significant adverse comments. FDA will consider the comments received under our usual procedures for notice and comment in connection with the notice of proposed rulemaking that was published in the **Federal Register** of December 4, 2007, as a companion to the direct final rule (72 FR 68113). DATES: The direct final rule published at 72 FR 68064 on December 4, 2007, is withdrawn as of April 4, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Malarkey, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (HFM-600), Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, 301-827-6190, or Dennis Bensley, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-140), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276- 8268, or Brian Hasselbalch, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (HFD-320), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3279. Authority: Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, the direct final rule published on December 4, 2007 (72 FR 68064) is withdrawn. Dated: March 24, 2008. Jeffrey Shuren, Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning. [FR Doc. E8-7107 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510, 520, 526, and 558 Animal Drugs, Feeds, and Related Products; Withdrawal of Approval of NADAs; Technical Amendment AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is amending the animal drug regulations by removing those portions that reflect approval of seven new animal drug applications (NADAs) because FDA is withdrawing approval of the NADAs. DATES: This rule is effective April 4, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela K. Esposito, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-212), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276-9067; e-mail: *pamela.esposito@fda.hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following sponsors have requested that FDA withdraw approval of the seven NADAs listed below because the products are no longer manufactured or marketed: Sponsor NADA Number Product
(Drug)21 CFR Cite Affected (Sponsor Drug Labeler Code) Eon Labs Manufacturing, Inc., 227-15 North Conduit Ave., Laurelton, NY 11413 NADA 65-063, Tetracycline capsules 520.2345a (000185) NADA 65-345, Chloramphenicol capsules 520.390b (000185) G.C. Hanford Manufacturing Co., P.O. Box 1017, Syracuse, NY 13201 NADA 65-465, AQUA-MAST (penicillin G procaine) 526.1696a (010515) International Nutrition, Inc., 7706 “I” Plaza, Omaha, NE 68127 NADA 95-551, TYLAN 5 Premix (tylosin phosphate) 558.625 (043733) NADA 109-688, HYGROMIX 2.4 Premix (hygromycin B) 558.274 (043733) NADA 109-816, TYLAN 10 SULFA-G Premix (tylosin phosphate and sulfamethazine) 558.630 (043733) Pfizer, Inc., 235 East 42d St., New York, NY 10017 NADA 103-758, TERAMIX-10 Premix (oxytetracycline) Not codified Following the withdrawal of approval of these NADAs, Eon Labs Manufacturing, Inc., is no longer sponsor of an approved application. Therefore, 21 CFR 510.600(c) is amended to remove entries for this sponsor. As provided below, the animal drug regulations are amended to reflect the withdrawal of approvals. The regulations for penicillin G procaine intramammary dosage forms (21 CFR 526.1696a) are also amended to correct several errors and to reflect a current format. This rule does not meet the definition of “rule” in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because it is a rule of “particular applicability.” Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements in 5 U.S.C. 801-808. List of Subjects 21 CFR Part 510 Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 21 CFR Parts 520 and 526 Animal drugs. 21 CFR Part 558 Animal drugs, Animal feeds. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR parts 510, 520, 526, and 558 are amended as follows: PART 510—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 510 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 360b, 371, 379e. § 510.600 [Amended] 2. In § 510.600, in the table in paragraph (c)(1), remove the entry for “Eon Labs Manufacturing, Inc.”; and in the table in paragraph (c)(2) remove the entry for “000185”. PART 520—ORAL DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 3. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 520 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. § 520.390b [Amended] 4. In § 520.390b, in paragraph (b)(1), remove “, 000185,”. § 520.2345a [Amended] 5. In § 520.2345a, remove paragraph (b)(3). PART 526—INTRAMAMMARY DOSAGE FORMS 6. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 526 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. 7. Revise § 526.1696a to read as follows: § 526.1696a Penicillin G procaine.
(a)*Specifications* . Each 10-milliliter single-dose syringe contains penicillin G procaine equivalent to 100,000 units of penicillin G.
(b)*Related tolerances* . See § 556.510 of this chapter.
(c)*Sponsors* . See Nos. 010515 and 050604 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(d)*Conditions of use in lactating cows* —(1) *Amount* . Infuse one 10-milliliter dose into each infected quarter. Treatment may be repeated at 12-hour intervals for not more than three doses, as indicated by clinical response.
(2)*Indications for use* . For the treatment of mastitis caused by *Streptococcus agalactiae* , *S. dysgalactiae* , and *S. uberus* in lactating cows.
(3)*Limitations* . Milk that has been taken from animals during treatment and for 60 hours after the latest treatment must not be used for food. Animals must not be slaughtered for food during treatment or within 3 days after the latest treatment.
(e)*Conditions of use in dry cows* —(1) *Amount* . Infuse one 10-milliliter dose into each infected quarter at time of drying-off.
(2)*Indications of use* . For the treatment of mastitis caused by *Streptococcus agalactiae* in dry cows.
(3)*Limitations* . Discard all milk for 72 hours (6 milkings) following calving, or later as indicated by the marketable quality of the milk. Animals must not be slaughtered for food within 14 days postinfusion. PART 558—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR USE IN ANIMAL FEEDS 8. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 558 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b, 371. § 558.274 [Amended] 9. In § 558.274, amend paragraph (a)(2) by removing “Nos. 043733 and” and adding in its place “No.”. § 558.625 [Amended] 10. In § 558.625, remove and reserve paragraph (b)(3). § 558.630 [Amended] 11. In § 558.630, amend paragraph (b)(10) by removing “043733,”. Dated: March 26, 2008. Bernadette Dunham, Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine. [FR Doc. E8-7103 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 301 [TD 8697] RIN 1545-AT91 Simplification of Entity Classification Rules; Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correcting amendment. SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to final regulations (TD 8697), that were published in the **Federal Register** on Wednesday, December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66584). The final regulations classify certain business organizations under an elective regime. DATES: This correction is effective on April 4, 2008 and is applicable on January 1, 1997. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen J. Hawes,
(202)622-3860 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The final regulations (TD 8697) that is the subject of this correction is under section 7701 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, TD 8697 contains an error that may prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification. List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 301 Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Correction of Publication Accordingly, 26 CFR part 301 is corrected by making the following correcting amendment: PART 301—PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTATION **Paragraph 1** . The authority citation for part 301 continues to read in part as follows: Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * * **Par. 2** . Section 301.7701-2(b)(8)(i) is amended by revising the entry for “Romania, Societe pe Actiuni” to read as follows: § 301.7701-2 Business entities; definitions.
(b)* * *
(8)* * *
(i)* * * Romania, Societate pe Actiuni Cynthia E. Grigsby, Senior Federal Register Liaison Officer, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel, (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E8-6734 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 101 Fixed Microwave Services CFR Correction In Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 80 to End, revised as of October 1, 2007, in § 101.113, on page 660, the following two entries are reinstated in numerical order in the table in paragraph (a): § 101.113 Transmitter power limitations.
(a)* * * Frequency band
(MHz)Maximum allowable EIRP 1,2 Fixed 1 , 2
(dBW)Mobile
(dBW)* * * * * 71,000-76,000 13 +55 +55 81,000-86,000 13 +55 +55 * * * * * 1 Per polarization. 2 For multiple address operations, see § 101.147. Remote alarm units that are part of a multiple address central station projection system are authorized a maximum of 2 watts. * * * * * 13 The maximum transmitter power is limited to 3 watts (5 dBW) unless a proportional reduction in maximum authorized EIRP is required under § 101.115. The maximum transmitter power spectral density is limited to 150 mW per 100 MHz. [FR Doc. E8-7008 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505-01-D DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 070717340-8451-02] RIN 0648-AV40 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Specifications and Management Measures AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This action implements 2008 specifications and management measures for Atlantic mackerel, squid, and butterfish
(MSB)and modifies existing management measures. Specifically, it clarifies gear requirements for the *Loligo* squid fishery, standardizes procedures for closing the Atlantic mackerel (mackerel) and butterfish fisheries, modifies incidental possession limits for mackerel and butterfish, and establishes a butterfish possession limit. These specifications and management measures promote the utilization and conservation of the MSB resource. DATES: Effective May 5, 2008. ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting documents used by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council), including the Environmental Assessment
(EA)and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are available from: Daniel Furlong, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, DE 19904-6790. The EA/RIR/IRFA is accessible via the Internet at *http://www.nero.nmfs.gov* . NMFS prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), which is contained in the Classification section of the preamble of this rule. Copies of the FRFA and the Small Entity Compliance Guide are available from the Regional Administrator, Northeast Regional Office, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2298, and are also available via the Internet at *http://www.nero.nmfs.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Nordeen, Fishery Policy Analyst, 978-281-9272, fax 978-281-9135. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Regulations implementing the Fishery Management Plan for the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries
(FMP)appear at 50 CFR part 648, subpart B. Regulations governing foreign fishing appear at 50 CFR part 600, subpart F. These regulations, at § 648.21 and § 600.516(c), require that NMFS, based on the maximum optimum yield (Max OY) of each fishery as established by the regulations, annually publish a rule specifying the amounts of the initial optimum yield (IOY), allowable biological catch (ABC), domestic annual harvest (DAH), and domestic annual processing (DAP), as well as, where applicable, the amounts for total allowable level of foreign fishing (TALFF) and joint venture processing
(JVP)for the affected species managed under the FMP. In addition, these regulations allow *Loligo* squid specifications to be specified for up to 3 years, subject to annual review. The regulations found in § 648.21 also specify that IOY for squid is equal to the combination of research quota
(RQ)and DAH, with no TALFF specified for squid. For butterfish, the regulations specify that a butterfish bycatch TALFF will be specified only if TALFF is specified for mackerel. The Council adopted 2008 MSB specifications and management measures at its June 2007 meeting and submitted them to NMFS for review and approval. Initial submission was on August 1, 2007, and final submission was on November 9, 2007. A proposed rule for 2008 MSB specifications and management measures was published on December 28, 2007 (72 FR 73749), and a notice to re-open the public comment period on the proposed rule was published on January 29, 2008 (73 FR 5153). The public comment period for the proposed rule ended on February 5, 2008. Details concerning the Council's development of these measures were presented in the preamble of the proposed rule and are not repeated here. Disapproval of Increased Incidental Loligo Squid Possession Limit for Illex Squid Vessels The issue of incidental catch of *Loligo* squid in the *Illex* squid fishery was identified several years ago when large amounts of *Loligo* squid discards were reported in vessel trip reports by *Illex* squid vessels during closures of the directed *Loligo* squid fishery in the summer and fall of 2000. Analyses developed for Amendment 9 to the FMP indicated that the *Illex* squid fishery occurs primarily during June-November in offshore waters and that both squid species can co-occur during September-November on the *Illex* squid fishery grounds, when the *Loligo* squid begin to move offshore. Because of the seasonal co-occurrence of the two squid species, members of the directed *Illex* squid fishery testified at Council meetings that the 2,500-lb (1.13-mt) incidental *Loligo* squid possession limit during closures of the *Loligo* squid fishery creates compliance problems for the *Illex* squid fishery because vessels catch more than 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) of *Loligo* squid when the species mix. In an effort to reduce regulatory discarding and allow more accurate quantification of the removals of *Loligo* squid taken in the directed *Illex* squid fishery, the Council recommended increasing the incidental *Loligo* squid possession limit for vessels engaged in the directed *Illex* squid fishery during *Loligo* squid fishery closures. Specifically, during closures of the *Loligo* squid fishery in August-October, *Illex* squid moratorium vessels fishing seaward of the small mesh exemption line (approximately the 50-fm (91-m) depth contour) would be permitted to possess and land up to 5,000 lb (2.27 mt) of *Loligo* squid, provided they possess a minimum of 10,000 lb (4.54 mt) of *Illex* squid on board. This measure is similar to the measure proposed by the Council in the 2007 MSB specifications, but not implemented due to concerns about NMFS's ability to administer the measure effectively. The small mesh exemption line, which approximates the 50-fm (91-m) depth contour, was implemented for the *Illex* squid fishery because *Illex* squid are not generally available to the fishery shoreward of this line. The *Illex* squid fishery is exempt from the 1 7/8 -inches (48-mm) minimum mesh requirement for the *Loligo* squid fishery in the exemption area. However, *Loligo* squid are widely distributed shoreward of this line, which would make it difficult to determine if the *Loligo* squid is truly incidentally caught within the *Illex* squid exemption area. Currently, there is no mechanism to determine if *Illex* squid moratorium vessels fish for *Loligo* squid shoreward of the small mesh exemption line. Tools to collect spatial effort information on the *Illex* squid fleet were discussed by the Council, but implementation of those tools would require an FMP amendment or framework adjustment. Therefore, for 2008, the incidental *Loligo* squid possession limit for *Illex* squid moratorium vessels, during closures of the *Loligo* squid fishery, will remain at 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) per trip per day. Final MSB Specifications and Management Measures for the 2008 Fishing Year This action implements the following MSB specifications and management measures for the 2008 fishing year, which are described in detail below. Table 1.—Final Specifications, in Metric Tons (mt), for Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish for 2008 Fishing Year Specifications *Loligo* *Illex* Mackerel Butterfish Max OY 26,000 24,000 N/A 12,175 ABC 17,000 24,000 156,000 1,500 IOY 1 16,977 24,000 2 115,000 500 DAH 16,977 24,000 3 115,000 500 DAP 16,977 24,000 100,000 500 JVP 0 0 0 0 TALFF 0 0 0 0 1 Excludes 23 mt for Research Quota (RQ). 2 IOY may be increased during the year, but the total ABC will not exceed 156,000 mt. 3 Includes a 15,000 mt catch of Atlantic mackerel by the recreational fishery. Atlantic Mackerel This action specifies the mackerel ABC at 156,000 mt, based on the formula ABC = T−C. T is the yield (211,000 mt) associated with a fishing mortality rate
(F)that is equal to target F (F = 0.12); C is the estimated catch of mackerel in Canadian waters (52,000 mt) for the upcoming fishing year. Thus, 211,000 mt minus 52,000 mt results in the 2008 mackerel ABC of 156,000 mt. This action also specifies the mackerel IOY at 115,000 mt, a level that can be fully harvested by the domestic fleet, thereby precluding the specification of TALFF, while allowing the U.S. mackerel industry to expand. Given the trends in increasing mackerel landings, NMFS believes that it is reasonable to assume that, in 2008, the commercial fishery will harvest 100,000 mt of mackerel. Therefore, this action specifies the mackerel DAH at 115,000 mt, which is the commercial harvest plus the 15,000 mt anticipated to be harvested by the recreational fishery. Because IOY = DAH, this specification is consistent with the Council's recommendation that the level of IOY should not provide for TALFF. As recommended by the Council, this action specifies the mackerel DAP at 100,000 mt and the mackerel JVP at zero. In previous years, the Council recommended a JVP greater than zero because it believed U.S. processors lacked the capability to process the total amount of mackerel that U.S. harvesters could land. However, for the past several years, the Council has recommended zero JVP because the surplus between DAH and DAP has been declining as U.S. shore-based processing capacity for mackerel has expanded. The Council also heard from the industry that the availability of mackerel to the fishery, rather than processing capacity, has curtailed catch in recent years. Based on this information, the Council concluded, and NMFS concurs, that processing capacity is no longer a limiting factor relative to domestic production of mackerel. Consequently, if U.S. harvesters land mackerel in excess of 100,000 mt, should the IOY be adjusted upward, U.S. processors have the capacity and intent to process it. Closure of the Mackerel Fishery Regulations at § 648.22(a)(1) specify that NMFS shall close the directed mackerel fishery when the Regional Administrator projects that 80 percent of the mackerel DAH is landed, if such a closure is necessary to prevent the DAH from being exceeded. To facilitate achieving the mackerel DAH and consistent with the Council's recommendation, this action specifies that NMFS will close the mackerel fishery when 90 percent of the mackerel DAH is projected to be landed in 2008. Mackerel Incidental Possession Limit Regulations at § 648.22(c) specify that, during closures of the mackerel fishery, the incidental possession limit for mackerel is 10 percent, by weight, of the total amount of fish on board. In general, possession limits that are a percent of the total catch on board are difficult to estimate and enforce. This action modifies the incidental possession limit for mackerel such that: It is easier to estimate and enforce, and it is more similar to incidental possession limits for squid and butterfish; it is low enough to ensure that the mackerel ABC would not be exceeded; it is high enough to minimize regulatory discarding of mackerel in fisheries where mackerel is taken incidentally, but not so high as to encourage directed fishing; and it is high enough to allow small-scale fisheries to continue after the directed fishery is closed. Consistent with these factors and the Council's recommendation, this action specifies the mackerel incidental possession limit at 20,000 lb (4.54 mt). Inseason Adjustment of the Mackerel IOY Regulations at § 648.21(e) provide that specifications may be adjusted inseason during the fishing year by the Regional Administrator, in consultation with the Council, by publishing a notice in the **Federal Register** and providing a 30-day public comment period. At the June 2007 Council meeting, in response to recent growth in the domestic harvesting and processing sectors of the mackerel fishery, both the mackerel industry and the Council voiced interest in increasing the 2008 mackerel IOY if landings approach 115,000 mt during the most active part of the fishing year (January-April). However, the mackerel fishing season is short and it would be difficult to implement a separate inseason action during the fishing season. To facilitate a timely inseason adjustment to the mackerel IOY, if necessary, public comment was solicited as part of the 2008 MSB specifications, and this action implements a protocol for an inseason adjustment in 2008. The protocol specifies that, if using landings projections and all other available information, the Regional Administrator determines that 70 percent of the Atlantic mackerel IOY will be landed during the 2008 fishing year, the Regional Administrator will make available additional quota for a total IOY of 156,000 mt of Atlantic mackerel for harvest during 2008. NMFS's Northeast Fishery Statistic Office
(FSO)will summarize mackerel landings from dealer reports on a weekly basis and post this information on the Northeast Regional Office Web site ( *http://www.nero.noaa.gov/* ). NMFS staff will closely monitor these landings and industry trends to determine if an inseason adjustment is necessary. Additionally, if an inseason adjustment of the IOY is warranted, the Regional Administrator will notify the Council and the inseason adjustment will be published in the **Federal Register** . Atlantic Squids Loligo Squid For 2008, this action specifies the *Loligo* squid Max OY at 26,000 mt; the ABC at 17,000 mt; and the research quota
(RQ)for up to 3 percent (510 mt) of the ABC. One scientific research project proposal requesting *Loligo* squid RQ was recommended for approval and will be forwarded to the NOAA Grants Office for award. The proposed *Loligo* squid IOY, DAH, and DAP were adjusted to reflect the RQ and equal 16,977 mt. The FMP does not authorize the specification of JVP and TALFF for the *Loligo* squid fishery because of the domestic industry's capacity to harvest and process the OY for this fishery; therefore, there would be no JVP and TALFF in 2008. Distribution of the Loligo Squid DAH For 2008, this action specifies that the *Loligo* squid DAH will be allocated by trimester. Managing the DAH by trimesters, rather than quarters, results in allocations that are the same or higher than the quarterly allocations. Higher allocations may increase the length of time the fishery is open and allow closure projections to be based on more information and, perhaps, to be more accurate. Additionally, managing by trimesters rather than quarters is administratively streamlined because only three, rather than four, closures of the directed fishery could occur during a fishing year. The 2008 trimester allocations are as follows: Table 2.—Trimester Allocation of Loligo Squid Quota in 2008 Trimester Percent Metric tons 1 RQ
(mt)I (Jan-Apr) 43 7,300 NA II (May-Aug) 17 2,886 NA III (Sep-Dec) 40 6,791 NA Total 100 16,977 23 1 Trimester allocations after 23 mt RQ deduction. For 2008, the Council recommended that the percentage at which the directed *Loligo* squid fishery would close and the handling of quota overages and underages would be the same as in 2007. Therefore, this action specifies the directed *Loligo* squid fishery would close when 90 percent of the DAH is harvested in Trimesters I and II, and when 95 percent of the DAH is harvested in Trimester III. Additionally, it specifies that any underages from Trimesters I and II would be applied to Trimester III, and any overages from Trimesters I and II would be subtracted from Trimester III. Clarification of Loligo Squid Gear Requirements Regulations at § 648.23(d) specify that net strengtheners have a minimum mesh size of 4 1/2 inches (11.43 cm) and that any device, including net strengtheners, may not be used on the top 50 percent of a codend (i.e., the portion of the codend that is not in contact with the ocean floor when the net is fishing) if it constricts the minimum mesh size to less than the required 1 7/8 inch (48 mm). However, any time a 1 7/8 -inch (48-mm) codend is used with a 4 1/2 -inches (11.43-cm) net strengthener, the actual mesh size will be less than 1 7/8 inches (48 mm) because the meshes from the codend and the net strengthener will not be in alignment and will overlap. The U.S. Coast Guard brought it to NMFS's attention that *Loligo* squid vessels have net strengtheners covering the top 50 percent of the codend. When questioned about the need for and use of net strengtheners, members of the *Loligo* squid fishing industry explained that codends with a minimum mesh size of 1 7/8 inches (48 mm) are of such fine gauge that they will burst if a net strengthener does not surround the entire circumference of the codend. To ensure gear regulations are consistent with the way the *Loligo* squid fishery needs to operate, this action specifies that net strengtheners, splitting straps, and/or bull ropes or wire may be used around the entire circumference of the codend, provided they do not have a mesh opening of less than 4 1/2 inches (11.43 cm), diamond mesh, inside stretch measure. Illex Squid This action specifies the *Illex* squid Max OY, IOY, ABC, and DAH at 24,000 mt. The FMP does not authorize the specification of JVP and TALFF for the *Illex* squid fishery because of the domestic fishing industry's capacity to harvest and to process the IOY from this fishery. Butterfish The status of the butterfish stock was most recently assessed in late 2004 and that assessment concluded that, while overfishing of the stock is not occurring, the stock is overfished. Based on this information, the Council was notified by NMFS on February 11, 2005, that the butterfish stock was designated as overfished, pursuant to the requirements of section 304(e) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), and the Council is developing a rebuilding plan for the butterfish stock in Amendment 10 to the FMP (Amendment 10). While a butterfish rebuilding program is being developed in Amendment 10, the Council recommended restricting butterfish landings to recent landings levels to prevent an expansion of the fishery and to protect the rebuilding stock. Therefore, this action specifies the butterfish Max OY at 12,175 mt, ABC at 1,500 mt, and IOY, DAH, and DAP at 500 mt. Consistent with MSB regulations, this action specifies zero TALFF for butterfish in 2008 because zero TALFF is established for mackerel. Closure of the Butterfish Fishery and the Incidental Butterfish Possession Limit Existing regulations specify that NMFS shall close the butterfish fishery when the Regional Administrator projects that 95 percent of the butterfish DAH is projected to be landed, and once the butterfish fishery is closed, the incidental butterfish possession limit is 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) per day. Consistent with the lower butterfish DAH for 2008, this action modifies both the butterfish fishery closure threshold and incidental possession limit. As such, if 80 percent of the butterfish DAH is projected to be landed prior to October 1, a 250-lb (0.11-mt) incidental butterfish possession limit would be in effect for the remainder of the year and if 80 percent of the butterfish DAH is projected to be landed on or after October 1, a 600-lb (0.27-mt) incidental butterfish possession limit would be in effect for the remainder of the year. These measures should prevent the 500-mt butterfish DAH from being exceeded, while allowing for butterfish taken incidentally in other fisheries to be landed, thus reducing discards. Incidental possession limits for butterfish apply not only during a fishery closure but also year-round to vessels issued incidental catch permits. Because the Council did not explicitly recommend a butterfish possession limit for vessels issued a butterfish incidental catch permit during its June 2007 meeting, the proposed rule for the 2008 MSB specifications and management measures proposed a year-round, 250-lb (0.11-mt) butterfish possession limit for vessels issued incidental butterfish catch permits. In response to this proposed measure, the Council discussed this measure at its January 2008 meeting and recommended a revised butterfish incidental possession limit in a letter to NMFS during public comment on the proposed rule. The Council's recommendation was that the butterfish incidental possession limit for incidental permit holders be set at 600 lb (0.27 mt) per day, unless the butterfish fishery closes prior to October 1, then a 250-lb (0.11-mt) butterfish possession limit would be in effect for the remainder of the year. The Council believes this measure provides consistency for all butterfish permit holders (i.e., limited access and incidental), improves the enforcability of the measure, and would reduce regulatory discarding while limiting directed fishing on butterfish by incidental permit holders. NMFS concurs with the butterfish possession limit recommended by the Council in its comment letter; therefore, this action implements that Council-recommended measure. Butterfish Possession Limits Regulations at § 648.23(a)(2) specify that trawl vessels possessing 5,000 lb (2.27 mt) or more of butterfish may only fish with nets having a minimum codend mesh size of 3 inches (76 mm). Consistent with the Council's intent to prevent expansion of the butterfish fishery and protect the rebuilding stock as Amendment 10 is being developed, this action specifies that a trawl vessel possessing 1,000 lb (0.45 mt) or more of butterfish may only fish with nets having a minimum codend mesh size of 3 inches (76 mm) and that a vessel issued a butterfish moratorium permit may not fish for, possess, or land more than 5,000 lb (2.27 mt) of butterfish per trip per day. Comments and Responses NMFS received five comment letters on the proposed 2008 MSB specifications and management measures; one letter was from the Council, three letters were from industry representatives, and one letter was from an individual. Comments on the FMP that were not specific to the 2008 specifications and management measures described in the proposed rule are not responded to in this final rule. *Comment 1:* One commenter indicated general support for a reduction of commercial quotas, the use of accurate harvest information to develop quotas, and the need for protection of the public fishery resource. *Response:* NMFS acknowledges the importance of the issues raised by the commenter, which relate generally to 2008 MSB specifications and management measures. As specified in the FMP, the Council developed the 2008 MSB specifications and management measures using the best available data regarding the resource and the fishery. Additionally, the 2008 MSB specifications and management measures are consistent with the rules specified in the FMP to promote utilization and conservation of the MSB resource. *Comment 2:* Three industry representatives expressed support for the proposed 2008 MSB specifications, indicating that they are consistent with the best available science and status of the fishery resources. *Response:* NMFS concurs with the commenters. *Comment 3:* Three industry representatives expressed support for an inseason adjustment of the mackerel IOY, up to the ABC, if landings projections indicate that 70 percent of the IOY will be landed during the fishing year. Additionally, these industry representatives stressed the importance of speedy implementation of an inseason action, if warranted, to prevent any interruption of the fishery. *Response:* If information demonstrates an inseason adjustment is necessary, NMFS will make the adjustment in a manner that will avoid interruption in the fishery, as specified in this final rule. *Comment 4:* One industry representative supported the proposed change of the mackerel incidental possession limit from an allowable percentage of catch (10 percent, by weight, of all fish on board) to a fixed limit (20,000 lb (4.54 mt)), while two industry representatives opposed this change. Of those opposed, one industry representative contended that it is not feasible to eliminate mackerel bycatch in the Atlantic herring fishery to conform with a fixed weight standard, and recommended a thorough sampling of both herring and mackerel fisheries, before a 20,000-lb (4.54-mt) mackerel incidental possession limit is established, to ensure the herring fishery is not negatively impacted by the 2008 MSB specifications and management measures. The other industry representative critical of the proposed change argued that the herring fishery is a high-volume fishery, where catch is pumped aboard the vessel, and crew do not have the ability to sort and weigh incidentally caught mackerel, but they can estimate a catch ratio. This commenter believes the enforceability of a limit that is a percentage of catch or a fixed value are equal, and the only feasible way to determine the amount of bycatch is through statistical sub-sampling of the catch and an extrapolation of those data. *Response:* At its June 2007 meeting, the Council discussed revising the mackerel incidental possession limit from a percentage of catch to a fixed limit. Council discussion focused on the issue that possession limits that are a percent of the total catch on board are difficult to estimate and enforce because the relative amounts of all species (i.e., target and bycatch) must be known. Therefore, there was support during the meeting to revise the mackerel incidental possession limit, such that it would be easier to estimate and enforce, because it would require only knowing the amount of mackerel bycatch on board, and that it would be similar to the fixed value incidental possession limits for squid and butterfish. The Council considered several competing objectives in the development of a revised incidental possession limit for mackerel. First, the possession limit needed to be low enough to ensure that the mackerel ABC would not be exceeded. Secondly, the possession limit needed to be set high enough to minimize regulatory discarding of mackerel in fisheries where mackerel is taken incidentally, but not so high as to encourage directed fishing. Lastly, because small-scale mackerel fisheries contribute only minimally to the overall mackerel harvest, the Council wanted the incidental possession limit to be high enough to allow small-scale fisheries to continue after the directed fishery was closed. After considering these factors, the Council recommended a mackerel incidental possession limit of 20,000 lb (4.54 mt) for 2008. According to the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS either approves or disapproves a management measure recommended by the Council, but NMFS cannot implement a measure not considered by the Council. Since NMFS concurs with the Council that a possession limit that is a fixed value is easier to estimate and enforce than a percentage of catch, this action implements the Council-recommended mackerel incidental possession limit of 20,000 lb (4.54 mt) rather than disapproving that measure and maintaining the mackerel incidental possession limit of 10 percent, by weight, of all fish on board. *Comment 5:* One industry representative expressed support for the measure to clarify the gear requirement for *Loligo* squid, specifically, the provisions that a net strengthener could be used around the entire circumference of the codend and that the minimum mesh size of the net strengthener was 4.5 inches (11.43 cm). *Response:* NMFS believes this clarification is appropriate and necessary. Allowing the net strengthener to be used around the entire circumference of the codend, instead of just on the lower 50 percent of the net, is not expected to significantly affect the escapement of small *Loligo* squid from the codend, but it does ensure that *Loligo* squid gear requirements are consistent with the way the fishery is operated. Changes From the Proposed Rule In the proposed rule, § 648.25(d)(1) specified that if a vessel has been issued a butterfish incidental catch permit (as specified at § 648.4(a)(5)(ii)), then it may not fish for, possess, or land more than 250 lb (0.11 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day. In response to the Council's comment letter on this limit, NMFS reconsidered this limit, and this action is revising the limit consistent with the Council's recommendation. Therefore, § 648.25(d)(1) will specify that if a vessel has been issued a butterfish incidental catch permit (as specified at § 648.4(a)(5)(ii)), then it may not fish for, possess, or land more than 600 lb (0.27 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day, unless the directed fishery for butterfish closes prior to October 1, then a vessel that has been issued a butterfish incidental catch permit may not fish for, possess, or land more than 250 lb (0.11 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day. Classification Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Acting Assistant Administrator has determined that this rule is consistent with the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law. This action is authorized by 50 CFR part 648 and has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). NMFS, pursuant to section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, has prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA), included in this final rule, in support of the 2008 MSB specifications and management measures. The FRFA describes the economic impact that this final rule, along with other non-preferred alternatives, will have on small entities. The FRFA incorporates the economic impacts and analysis summarized in the IRFA, a summary of the significant issues raised by the public, and a summary of analyses prepared to support the action (i.e., the EA and the RIR). The contents of these documents are not repeated in detail here. A copy of the IRFA, the RIR, and the EA are available upon request (see ADDRESSES ). A complete description of the reasons why this action is being considered, and the objectives of and legal basis for this action, is contained in the preamble to the proposed and final rules and is not repeated here. Statement of Need for This Action This action specifies 2008 specifications and management measures for MSB fisheries and modifies existing management measures to improve the monitoring and management of MSB fisheries. A Summary of the Significant Issues Raised by the Public Comments in Response to the IRFA, a Summary of the Assessment of the Agency of Such Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes Made in the Proposed Rule as a Result of Such Comments A summary of the comments received and NMFS' responses thereto is contained in the preamble and is not repeated here. Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply *Based on permit data for 2006, the number of potential fishing vessels in the 2008 fisheries are as follows:* 383 for *Loligo* squid/butterfish; 78 for *Illex* squid; 2,495 for mackerel; and 2,016 vessels with incidental catch permits for squid/butterfish. There are no large entities participating in this fishery, as defined in section 601 of the RFA. Therefore, there are no disproportionate economic impacts on small entities. Many vessels participate in more than one of these fisheries; therefore, permit numbers are not additive. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements This action does not contain any new collection-of-information, reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. It does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules. Description of the Steps the Agency Has taken to Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities Consistent With the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes, Including a Statement of the Factual, Policy, and Legal Reasons for Selecting the Alternative Adopted in the Final Rule and Why Each One of the Other Significant Alternatives to the Rule Considered by the Agency Which Affect the Impact on Small Entities Was Rejected Actions Implemented With the Final Rule The mackerel IOY specified in this action (115,000 mt, with 15,000 mt allocated to recreational catch) represents no constraint on vessels in this fishery. This level of landings has not been achieved by vessels in this fishery in recent years. Mackerel landings for 2001-2003 averaged 24,294 mt. Landings in 2004 were 55,528 mt, landings in 2005 were 43,246 mt, and landings for 2006 were 58,279 mt. This action also specifies an inseason adjustment, if landings approach the IOY early in the fishing year, to increase the IOY up to the ABC (156,000 mt). Therefore, no reductions in revenues for the mackerel fishery are expected as a result of this action; in fact, an increase in revenues as a result of the action is possible. Based on 2006 data, the mackerel fishery could increase its landings by 56,721 mt in 2008, if it takes the entire IOY. In 2006, the last year with complete financial data, the average value for mackerel was $418 per mt. Using this value, the mackerel fishery could see an increase in revenues of $23,709,378 as a result of the 2008 IOY (115,000 mt), and an additional increase in revenues of $17,138,000 as a result of the inseason adjustment to increase the IOY up to the ABC (156,000 mt). Additionally, this action changes the percentage at which the directed mackerel fishery would close (from 80 percent to 90 percent of OY) and the incidental mackerel possession limit after the directed fishery is closed (from 10 percent, by weight, of the total fish on board to a fixed possession limit of 20,000 lb (4.54 mt)). Under these changes, it is likely that a higher level of revenue could be realized by vessels engaged in the directed mackerel fishery compared to the other alternatives. An increase in revenues of 10 percent of OY in the directed fishery could be realized, amounting to a potential increase in landings in the directed fishery on the order about 10,000 mt. Given recent prices, this would translate into increased revenues of about $4.2 million, or $15,000 per vessel. The *Loligo* squid IOY (17,000 mt) specified in this action represents status quo as compared to 2007. *Loligo* squid landings for 2001-2003 averaged 14,092 mt. Landings in 2004 were 15,447, landings in 2005 were 16,984 mt, and landings in 2006 were 15,880 mt. In 2006, the last year for which complete financial data are available, the average value for *Loligo* squid was $1,751 per mt. Implementation of this action would not result in a reduction in revenue or a constraint on restraint on the fishery in 2008. The *Illex* squid IOY (24,000 mt) specified in this action represents status quo as compared to 2007. *Illex* squid landings for 2001-2003 averaged 4,350 mt. Landings in 2004 were 26,098 mt, landings in 2005 were 12,032 mt, and landings in 2006 were 13,944 mt. In 2006, the last year for which complete financial data are available, the average value for *Illex* squid was $578 per mt. Implementation of this action would not result in a reduction in revenue or a constraint on the fishery in 2008. The butterfish IOY (500 mt) specified in this action represents no constraint to vessels relative to the landings in recent years. Due to market conditions, there has not been a directed butterfish fishery in recent years; therefore, recent landings have been low. Landings in 2004 were 537 mt, landings in 2005 were 437 mt, and landings in 2006 were 554 mt. Given the lack of a directed butterfish fishery and low butterfish landings, this action is not expected to reduce revenues in this fishery. Based on 2006 data, the value of butterfish was $1,472 per mt. This action also modifies the trigger for closing the directed butterfish fishery and reduces butterfish possession limits. Specifically, this action changes the percentage at which the directed butterfish fishery would close (from 95 percent to 80 percent of DAH) and the incidental butterfish possession limit after the directed fishery is closed (from 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) to either 600 lb (0.27 mt) or 250 lb (0.11 mt)). Additionally, this action implements a 5,000-lb (2.27-mt) butterfish possession limit for all trips and reduces the possession limit for trips using small mesh (i.e., less than 3 inches (76 mm)) from 5,000 lb (4.54 mt) to 1,000 lb (0.45 mt). These measures potentially limit the amount of fishing effort for butterfish as the stock rebuilds compared to the other alternatives. Therefore, there could be some minor losses in revenue for vessels that wanted to direct on butterfish in the short term (i.e., during the rebuilding period). Alternatives to the Actions in the Final Rule The Council analysis evaluated three alternatives for mackerel, and all of them would have set IOY at 115,000 mt, maintained the status quo trigger for closing the directed fishery, and maintained the status quo incidental mackerel possession limit. This IOY and these management measures do not represent a constraint on vessels in this fishery, so no negative impacts on revenues in this fishery are expected as a result of these alternatives. One of these alternatives (status quo) would have set the ABC at 186,000 mt, and the other could have set the ABC at 335,000 mt. These alternatives were not adopted by the Council because that level of ABC is not consistent with the overfishing definition in the FMP, as updated by the most recent stock assessment. Furthermore, alternatives that would set a higher harvest were not adopted because they proposed harvest that was too high in light of social and economic concerns relating to TALFF. The specification of TALFF would have limited the opportunities for the domestic fishery to expand, and therefore would have resulted in negative social and economic impacts to both U.S. harvesters and processors (for a full discussion of the TALFF issue, see the earlier section on Atlantic mackerel). For *Loligo* squid, all alternatives would have set Max OY at 26,000 mt and ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP at 17,000 mt. While the annual quota under all alternatives represents status quo, alternatives differ in their allocation of the annual quota and incidental *Loligo* squid possession limit for *Illex* squid vessels. Two alternatives would have allocated quotas by trimester. Of these, both include an increase of the *Loligo* squid incidental possession limit for *Illex* squid vessels during August-October closures of the *Loligo* squid fishery; one alternative specifies a 5,000-lb (2.27-mt) limit for vessels fishing seaward of the small-mesh exemption line (approximating the 50-fm (91-m) depth contour), and the other specifies a 10,000-lb (4.54-mt) limit for vessels fishing seaward of a boundary approximating the 80-fm (146-m) depth contour. As described in the preamble of this rule, there are no tools in place for NMFS to monitor spatial activities of the *Illex* squid fleet; therefore, this possession limit provision of these alternatives will not be implemented because it cannot be administered effectively. The third alternative would allocate quota by quarters (status quo). Difference in seasonal quota distribution may have distributive effects on seasonal participants in the fishery; however, all alternatives are expected to result in the same total landings for 2008. For *Illex* squid, one alternative considered would have set Max OY, ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP at 30,000 mt. This alternative would allow harvest far in excess of recent landings in this fishery. Therefore, there would be no constraints and, thus, no revenue reductions, associated with this alternative. However, the Council considered this alternative unacceptable because an ABC specification of 30,000 mt may not prevent overfishing in years of moderate to low abundance of *Illex* squid. Another alternative considered would have set MAX OY at 24,000 mt and ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP at 19,000 mt. The Council considered this alternative unacceptable because it was unnecessarily restrictive. For butterfish, one alternative considered would have set the ABC at 4,525 mt and IOY, DAH, and DAP at 1,861 mt, while another would have set ABC at 12,175 mt and IOY, DAH, and DAP 9,131 mt. These amounts exceed the landings of this species in recent years. Both alternatives would have maintained the status quo trigger for closing the directed fishery, incidental possession limit, and possession limit for trips using mesh smaller than 3 inches (76 mm). Therefore, neither alternative represents a constraint on vessels in this fishery or would reduce revenues in the fishery. However, neither of these alternatives were adopted because they would likely result in overfishing and the additional depletion of the spawning stock biomass of an overfished species. Small Entity Compliance Guide Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule, and shall designate such publications as “small entity compliance guides.” The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. As part of this rulemaking process, a small entity compliance guide was prepared. The guide will be sent to all holders of permits issued for the MSB fisheries. In addition, copies of this final rule and guide (i.e., permit holder letter) are available from the Regional Administrator and are also available from NMFS, Northeast Region (see ADDRESSES ). List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648 Fisheries, Fishing, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Dated: March 31, 2008. Samuel D. Rauch, III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is amended as follows: PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES 1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* 2. In § 648.14, paragraphs (a)(73), (p)(3), (p)(5), and (p)(11) are revised to read as follows: § 648.14 Prohibitions.
(a)* * *
(73)Take, retain, possess, or land more mackerel, squid, or butterfish than as specified at § 648.25.
(p)* * *
(3)Take, retain, possess, or land mackerel, squid, or butterfish in excess of a possession allowance specified at § 648.25.
(5)Fish with or possess nets or netting that do not meet the minimum mesh requirements for *Loligo* or butterfish specified in § 648.23, or that are modified, obstructed, or constricted, if subject to the minimum mesh requirements, unless nets or netting are stowed in accordance with § 648.23(b) or the vessel is fishing under an exemption specified in § 648.23(a)(3)(ii).
(11)Possess 1,000 lb (0.45 mt) or more of butterfish, unless the vessel meets the minimum mesh size requirement specified in § 648.23(a)(2). 3. In § 648.22, paragraph
(c)is removed and paragraph
(a)is revised to read as follows: § 648.22 Closure of the fishery.
(a)*Closing procedures* .
(1)NMFS shall close the directed mackerel fishery in the EEZ when the Regional Administrator projects that 90 percent of the mackerel DAH is harvested, if such a closure is necessary to prevent the DAH from being exceeded. The closure of the directed fishery shall be in effect for the remainder of that fishing period, with incidental catches allowed as specified at § 648.25. When the Regional Administrator projects that the DAH for mackerel shall be landed, NMFS shall close the mackerel fishery in the EEZ and the incidental catches specified for mackerel at § 648.25 will be prohibited.
(2)NMFS shall close the directed fishery in the EEZ for *Loligo* when the Regional Administrator projects that 90 percent of the *Loligo* quota is harvested in Trimesters I and II, and when 95 percent of the *Loligo* DAH has been harvested in Trimester III. The closure of the directed fishery shall be in effect for the remainder of that fishing period, with incidental catches allowed as specified at § 648.25.
(3)NMFS shall close the directed *Illex* fishery in the EEZ when the Regional Administrator projects that 95 percent of the *Illex* DAH is harvested. The closure of the directed fishery shall be in effect for the remainder of that fishing period, with incidental catches allowed as specified at § 648.25.
(4)NMFS shall close the directed butterfish fishery in the EEZ when the Regional Administrator projects that 80 percent of the butterfish DAH is harvested. The closure of the directed fishery shall be in effect for the remainder of that fishing period, with incidental catches allowed as specified at § 648.25. 4. In § 648.23, paragraphs (a)(4) and
(d)are removed and paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) are revised to read as follows: § 648.23 Gear restrictions.
(a)* * *
(2)Owners or operators of otter trawl vessels possessing 1,000 lb (0.45 mt) or more of butterfish harvested in or from the EEZ may only fish with nets having a minimum codend mesh of 3 inches (76 mm) diamond mesh, inside stretch measure, applied throughout the codend for at least 100 continuous meshes forward of the terminus of the net, or for codends with less than 100 meshes, the minimum mesh size codend shall be a minimum of one-third of the net, measured from the terminus of the codend to the headrope.
(3)Owners or operators of otter trawl vessels possessing *Loligo* harvested in or from the EEZ may only fish with nets having a minimum mesh size of 1 7/8 inches (48 mm) diamond mesh, inside stretch measure, applied throughout the codend for at least 150 continuous meshes forward of the terminus of the net, or for codends with less than 150 meshes, the minimum mesh size codend shall be a minimum of one-third of the net measured from the terminus of the codend to the headrope, unless they are fishing consistent with exceptions specified in paragraph
(b)of this section.
(i)*Net obstruction or constriction* . Owners or operators of otter trawl vessels fishing for and/or possessing *Loligo* shall not use any device, gear, or material, including, but not limited to, nets, net strengtheners, ropes, lines, or chafing gear, on the top of the regulated portion of a trawl net that results in an effective mesh opening of less than 1 7/8 inches (48 mm) diamond mesh, inside stretch measure. “Top of the regulated portion of the net” means the 50 percent of the entire regulated portion of the net that would not be in contact with the ocean bottom if, during a tow, the regulated portion of the net were laid flat on the ocean floor. However, owners or operators of otter trawl vessels fishing for and/or possessing *Loligo* may use net strengtheners (covers), splitting straps, and/or bull ropes or wire around the entire circumference of the codend, provided they do not have a mesh opening of less than 4 1/2 inches (11.43 cm) diamond mesh, inside stretch measure. For the purpose of this requirement, head ropes are not to be considered part of the top of the regulated portion of a trawl net.
(ii)*Illex fishery* . Owners or operators of otter trawl vessels possessing *Loligo* harvested in or from the EEZ and fishing during the months of June, July, August, and September for *Illex* seaward of the following coordinates (copies of a map depicting this area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request) are exempt from the *Loligo* gear requirements specified at paragraph (a)(3) of this section, provided they do not have available for immediate use, as defined in paragraph
(b)of this section, any net, or any piece of net, with a mesh size less than 1 7/8 inches (48 mm) diamond mesh or any net, or any piece of net, with mesh that is rigged in a manner that is prohibited by paragraph (a)(3) of this section, when the vessel is landward of the specified coordinates. Point N. Lat. W. Long. M1 43°58.0′ 67°22.0′ M2 43°50.0′ 68°35.0′ M3 43°30.0′ 69°40.0′ M4 43°20.0′ 70°00.0′ M5 42°45.0′ 70°10.0′ M6 42°13.0′ 69°55.0′ M7 41°00.0′ 69°00.0′ M8 41°45.0′ 68°15.0′ M9 42°10.0′ 67°10.0′ M10 41°18.6′ 66°24.8′ M11 40°55.5′ 66°38.0′ M12 40°45.5′ 68°00.0′ M13 40°37.0′ 68°00.0′ M14 40°30.0′ 69°00.0′ M15 40°22.7′ 69°00.0′ M16 40°18.7′ 69°40.0′ M17 40°21.0′ 71°03.0′ M18 39°41.0′ 72°32.0′ M19 38°47.0′ 73°11.0′ M20 38°04.0′ 74°06.0′ M21 37°08.0′ 74°46.0′ M22 36°00.0′ 74°52.0′ M23 35°45.0′ 74°53.0′ M24 35°28.0′ 74°52.0′ 5. Section 648.25 is added to read as follows: § 648.25 Possession restrictions.
(a)*Atlantic mackerel* . During a closure of the directed Atlantic mackerel fishery, vessels may not fish for, possess, or land more than 20,000 lb (9.08 mt) of mackerel per trip at any time, and may only land mackerel once on any calendar day, which is defined as the 24-hr period beginning at 0001 hours and ending at 2400 hours.
(b)*Loligo* . During a closure of the directed fishery for *Loligo* , vessels may not fish for, possess, or land more than 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) of *Loligo* per trip at any time, and may only land *Loligo* once on any calendar day, which is defined as the 24-hr period beginning at 0001 hours and ending at 2400 hours. If a vessel has been issued a *Loligo* incidental catch permit (as specified at § 648.4(a)(5)(ii)), then it may not fish for, possess, or land more than 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) of *Loligo* per trip at any time and may only land Loligo once on any calendar day.
(c)*Illex* . During a closure of the directed fishery for *Illex* , vessels may not fish for, possess, or land more than 10,000 lb (4.54 mt) of *Illex* per trip at any time, and may only land *Illex* once on any calendar day, which is defined as the 24-hr period beginning at 0001 hours and ending at 2400 hours. If a vessel has been issued an *Illex* incidental catch permit (as specified at § 648.4(a)(5)(ii)), then it may not fish for, possess, or land more than 10,000 lb (4.54 mt) of *Illex* per trip at any time, and may only land *Illex* once on any calendar day.
(d)*Butterfish* .
(1)During a closure of the directed fishery for butterfish that occurs prior to October 1, vessels may not fish for, possess, or land more than 250 lb (0.11 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day, which is defined as the 24-hr period beginning at 0001 hours and ending at 2400 hours. During a closure of the directed fishery for butterfish that occurs on or after October 1, vessels may not fish for, possess, or land more than 600 lb (0.27 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day. If a vessel has been issued a butterfish incidental catch permit (as specified at § 648.4(a)(5)(ii)), then it may not fish for, possess, or land more than 600 lb (0.27 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day, unless the directed fishery for butterfish closes prior to October 1, then a vessel that has been issued a butterfish incidental catch permit may not fish for, possess, or land more than 250 lb (0.11 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day.
(2)A vessel issued a butterfish moratorium permit (as specified at § 648.4(a)(5)(i)) may not fish for, possess, or land more than 5,000 lb (2.27 mt) of butterfish per trip at any time, and may only land butterfish once on any calendar day, which is defined as the 24-hr period beginning at 0001 hours and ending at 2400 hours. [FR Doc. E8-7062 Filed 4-3-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 665 [Docket No. 071211828-8448-02] RIN 0648-AU22 Fisheries in the Western Pacific; Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries; Management Measures in the Main Hawaiian Islands AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This final rule implements management measures for the vessel-based bottomfish fishery in the Main Hawaiian Islands, including requirements for non-commercial (recreational and subsistence) permits and data reporting, a closed season, annual total allowable catch limits, and non-commercial bag limits. This action is intended to end the overfishing of bottomfish in the Hawaiian Archipelago. DATES: This final rule is effective April 1, 2008, with the following exceptions: 1. The following amendments are effective until September 1, 2008: a. In § 665.12, the definition of *Hawaii restricted bottomfish species fishing year 2007-08* ; b. Paragraph
(g)in § 665.72 (the TAC for the 2007-08 fishing year); and c. § 665.74 (the closed season). 2. The amendments to §§ 665.13, 665.14, and 665.61, which require approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). When OMB approval is received, the effective date will be announced in the **Federal Register** . ADDRESSES: This final rule implements Amendment 14 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (including a final environmental impact statement, regulatory impact review, and initial regulatory flexibility analysis). Copies of Amendment 14 are available from the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council), 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, tel 808-522-8220, fax 808-522-8226. A Record of Decision
(ROD)identifying the selected alternative was prepared for this final rule and is available from William L. Robinson, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Pacific Islands Region (PIR), 1601 Kapiolani Blvd, Suite 1110, Honolulu, HI 96814-4700. Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this final rule may be submitted to William L. Robinson (see ADDRESSES ), or to David Rostker, OMB, by e-mail to *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* , or by fax to 202-395-7285. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karla Gore, NMFS PIR, 808-944-2273. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule is accessible at the Office of the **Federal Register** 's web site: *www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/* . Bottomfish fishing in Hawaii is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (Bottomfish FMP), which was developed by the Council and implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Hawaii bottomfish are managed as a single archipelago-wide multi-species stock complex (bottomfish complex). The bottomfish complex is comprised of certain deep-slope snappers, groupers, and jacks. Fisheries and management programs for Hawaiian bottomfish operate in two large geographic areas—the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands
(NWHI)and the main Hawaiian Islands (MHI). There is currently no mandatory permitting or data reporting requirement for non-commercial fishing. Some data on the non-commercial bottomfish fishery are collected through surveys. NMFS estimates that, based on the State boat registration program and independent surveys, 800-5,000 fishermen participate in the non-commercial bottomfish fishery. NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, determined that overfishing is occurring on the bottomfish complex in the Hawaiian Archipelago, with the primary problem being excessive fishing mortality on seven deep water species (the “Deep 7” species) in the MHI. The Deep 7 species are onaga ( *Etelis coruscans* ), ehu ( *E. carbunculus* ), gindai ( *Pristipomoides zonatus* ), kalekale ( *P. sieboldii* ), opakapaka ( *P. filamentosus* ), lehi ( *Aphareus rutilans* ), and hapu'upu'u ( *Epinephelus quernus* ). On May 27, 2005, NMFS notified the Council of the overfishing and requested the Council to take appropriate action to end the overfishing (70 FR 34452, June 14, 2005). In response, the Council developed Amendment 14 and management measures, which this final rule implements. This final rule will reduce the fishing mortality for the Deep 7 species in the MHI by approximately 24 percent in 2008, will establish a mechanism (annual TAC) to respond to future changes in stock status, and will improve data collection from non-commercial bottomfish fisheries in Federal waters around the MHI. The final rule implements several management measures for vessel-based bottomfish fishing in the MHI. First, a Federal bottomfish permit is required for vessel owners and fishermen to conduct vessel-based non-commercial fishing for any bottomfish management unit species (BMUS), not just Deep 7 species, in Federal waters around the MHI (except customers of charter fishing trips). Second, the final rule requires operators of non-commercial fishing vessels to submit daily Federal logbooks that document bottomfish fishing effort and catch for each fishing trip, and vessel owners share the responsibility for submitting the logbooks in a timely manner. The data from these logbooks will be the basis for calculating non-commercial fishing effort and harvest of BMUS, bycatch, and interactions with protected species. Third, the final rule implements a closed season from May through August 2008. During this closure, fishing for Deep 7 species will be prohibited in Federal waters. Fishing for bottomfish species other than Deep 7 species will not be prohibited during the closed season. Fourth, the final rule establishes an annual total allowable catch
(TAC)for the MHI bottomfish fishery. The TAC will be determined each fishing year using the best available scientific information, commercial and non-commercial fishing data, and other information, and will consider the associated risk of overfishing. NMFS will publish in the **Federal Register** by August 31 the TAC for the upcoming fishing year, and will use other means to notify permit holders of the TAC. When the TAC is projected to be reached, NMFS will publish notification in the **Federal Register** and use other means to notify permit holders that the fishery will be closed on a specified date, providing fishermen with two weeks advance notice of the closure. The TAC for the 2007-08 fishing year (October 2007 through April 2008) is set at 178,000 lb (80,740 kg) of Deep 7 species. Progress toward the 2007-08 TAC is determined by the catch reported by holders of Hawaii commercial marine license (CML). When the 2007-08 TAC is projected to be reached, the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for Deep 7 bottomfish will be closed. There is no prohibition on fishing for other bottomfish species throughout the year. NMFS intends to repeal the Federal non-commercial bag limits once the data collected from the non-commercial bottomfish fishery are determined to be adequate to include in the annual TAC calculation. The final rule implements Federal bottomfish bag limits for non-commercial fishing. Non-commercial fishermen are allowed to catch, possess, and land as many as five Deep 7 fish combined, per person, per fishing trip in Federal waters. The State of Hawaii also has a similar bag limit for non-commercial fishing. Additional background information on this final rule may be found in the preamble to the proposed rule published on February 1, 2008 (73 FR 6101), and is not repeated here. Comments and Responses On December 22, 2007, NMFS announced in the **Federal Register** the availability of Amendment 14 (72 FR 73308), and on February 1, 2008, NMFS published a notice of the proposed rule (73 FR 6101). The public comment period for the amendment ended on February 25, 2008, and the proposed rule comment period ended on March 7, 2008. NMFS received comments from 17 entities, including the State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources, and non-commercial and commercial bottomfish fishermen, and responds as follows: *Comment 1:* NMFS should post online the available portion of the TAC to allow fishermen access to information in a timely manner. *Response:* NMFS will post the catch trends on the PIRO website at *www.fpir.noaa.gov* to allow tracking of harvests to be counted toward the TAC. *Comment 2:* A real cause for the decline in Hawaii bottomfish is that kahala (amberjacks) and other non-Deep 7 bottomfish species may be out-competing the Deep 7 bottomfish species. *Response:* NMFS does not have data to determine whether or not the comment is correct. The final rule will allow for better collection of information from non-commercial bottomfish fishermen which will give fishery managers a better understanding of the catch composition and relative abundance of all BMUS. With improved data, fishery managers can make effective bottomfish management decisions to address these concerns, such as interspecific competition, in the future. *Comment 3:* Any new data collection requirement for commercial fishermen will lead to duplication of effort and unnecessary expense. *Response:* The final rule implements new permitting and reporting requirements only for non-commercial bottomfish fishermen. There are no new reporting requirements for any commercial fishermen, who must continue to report their catch to the State of Hawaii. The final rule clarifies the reporting requirements for “mixed” fishing trips where some fishermen hold non-commercial bottomfish permits and some hold State Commercial Marine Licenses (State CMLs), and for bottomfish charter fishing customers, to minimize redundant reporting. *Comment 4:* The State's closed areas (bottomfish restricted fishing areas, or BRFAs) should be removed because they reduce suitable fishing grounds and are too restrictive when combined with the new Federal regulations. *Response:* The BRFAs are under the management purview of the State of Hawaii, and any changes to this management program must be done by the State, not NMFS. The Federal measures implemented by this final rule and the State's BRFAs are both intended to conserve Hawaiian bottomfish. *Comment 5:* Bag limits should not apply to commercial fishermen, only to non-commercial fishermen. *Response:* This final rule establishes bag limits only for non-commercial bottomfish fishermen. State-licensed commercial fishermen are not currently subject to bag limits. *Comment 6:* More enforcement of current State bottomfish regulations is needed. *Response:* NMFS agrees that more enforcement is generally needed for effective fishery management, whether it is for State or Federal regulations. NOAA's Office for Law Enforcement (NOAA OLE), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the State of Hawaii's Division of Conservation and Resources Enforcement will work together to enforce the new regulations. *Comment 7:* All buyers and sellers of bottomfish should be required to submit reports to eliminate the selling of bottomfish by non-commercial fishermen. *Response:* This final rule requires bottomfish fishermen to be permitted as either commercial or non-commercial, and requires both categories of permits to report their catch. Under current State law, all fish buyers are required to submit State dealer reports for any fish that they purchase. Dealers must purchase fish only from State-licensed commercial fishermen. The dealer report provides a way to cross-reference fish sales by fishermen. *Comment 8:* The closed season should be the only management measure implemented as it would achieve the desired reduction in catch levels, but be less burdensome to fishermen because it would not require non-commercial permits or reporting. *Response:* The 2008 closed season is intended to reduce fishing mortality to the target level to end overfishing in the first year. A TAC is more effective and less-burdensome than seasonal closures for preventing overfishing in the long term. To establish a TAC each year, information about commercial and non-commercial fishing is essential. This management strategy requires that both commercial and non-commercial fishermen hold fishing permits and submit reports on their catch and effort to the State and/or NMFS, as appropriate. *Comment 9:* The regulations should not include jacks with the other BMUS. *Response:* Jacks, such as ulua, are BMUS, but they are not Deep 7 species, and fishing for jacks is not restricted by this final rule. Only vessel-based fishing for Deep 7 species is subject to the 2008 closed season and the TAC. Information on the catches of jacks and other BMUS by non-commercial vessel-based fishermen will be collected under the new reporting requirements for comprehensive monitoring of the fishery overall. *Comment 10:* Many commercial fishermen have relinquished their State CML because of stringent USCG regulations that apply to commercial fishing vessels. The proposed regulations that require all fishing vessels to have permits would be too burdensome on fishermen. *Response:* This final rule creates permit requirements only for non-commercial bottomfish fishermen. As such, the USCG requirements governing commercial fishing vessels are not within the purview of this final rule. *Comment 11:* Enforcement of bag limits is difficult and should not be applied to commercial fishermen because it would impact their livelihood. *Response:* This final rule establishes bag limits only for non-commercial bottomfish fishermen. State-licensed commercial fishermen are not currently subject to bag limits. NOAA OLE, the USCG, and the State of Hawaii Division of Conservation and Resources Enforcement will work together to enforce the new requirements, including non-commercial bag limits. *Comment 12:* The commercial fishery should be limited to operating twice a week and the non-commercial fishery should operate the remainder of the week with the non-commercial bag limit in place. *Response:* Daily restrictions and rotating closures were not considered by the Council and NMFS for this final rule. The effectiveness of the rule in ending bottomfish overfishing will be periodically reevaluated, and may be adjusted in the future, if necessary. Alternative management measures, such as daily restrictions and rotating closures, could be considered for future implementation. *Comment 13:* The TAC should be used to manage the commercial fleet, and the non-commercial fishery should be managed only through bag limits. *Response:* NMFS has determined that a TAC for both the commercial and non-commercial fleet is the most effective way to ensure that bottomfish stocks do not continue to experience overfishing. Non-commercial bag limits will also help to relieve fishing pressure on the stocks. The effect of these measures will be monitored and adjustments made in the future, if necessary. *Comment 14:* Non-commercial and commercial vessels should use different colors for vessel marking to make enforcement easier. *Response:* The final rule establishes requirements for non-commercial bottomfish fishing, while current State regulations continue to apply to commercial fishing. Because the State already has requirements for the identification of bottomfish vessels, this final rule will exempt non-commercial vessels that are compliant with State's vessel marking requirements from the Federal requirements. Special color-coding of vessel markings to facilitate the identification of bottomfish vessels is a good idea, and NMFS will raise the idea with enforcement officials for consideration in future rulemakings. *Comment 15:* The reporting requirement should be voluntary due to the financial burden that mandatory reporting would impose. *Response:* Permits and reporting are essential to ensure that accurate and complete information about non-commercial bottomfish fishing is collected for the purposes of setting an appropriate TAC on an annual basis. NMFS estimates that the time burden for completing non-commercial permit applications to be 30 minutes per year, and 20 minutes for reporting catch and effort information in the logbooks after each fishing trip. The logbooks are free to fishermen, and the reporting cost is limited to mailing the reports to NMFS. The permit will cost less than $80 (probably in the range $25-40), and NMFS determined the costs associated with permitting and reporting are nominal. *Comment 16:* The closed season should be five months rather than four months. *Response:* The Council and NMFS chose a four-month closed season because the best available scientific information indicates that it will provide a balance between reducing fishing effort to levels sufficient to end the overfishing, and providing continued opportunities for bottomfish fishing. *Comment 17:* A fleet-wide TAC and seasonal closure are the only management measures that should implemented. *Response:* The closed season will address overfishing only in 2008. In the long term, a TAC will be the primary measure to end and prevent overfishing of bottomfish. To implement an effective TAC program, information on the numbers of bottomfish fishermen and their effort and catch is needed. Thus, non-commercial permits and data reporting are essential for the overall management program. Currently, information is collected only for one sector, commercial bottomfish fishing. Therefore, collecting information about non-commercial fishing is necessary, and best accomplished through non-commercial permits and data reporting. The non-commercial information will give us a better understanding of the interplay between the bottomfish fishery and other fishing activities. This information will be combined with the commercial data to set an annual TAC to end and prevent overfishing of Hawaiian bottomfish. *Comment 18:* A TAC will create a “race to the fish,” will cause high-grading, and may put smaller vessels at risk as they attempt to catch their share of the TAC fish, possibly in unsafe sea conditions, before the fishery closes. *Response:* There may be a “race to the fish” early in the open season as fishermen try to ensure that they catch their share of the TAC. However, this final rule adjusts the fishing year to start late in the calendar year so the fishery would likely remain open during the winter holiday season, a time of increased demand for bottomfish. This may reduce some of the incentive to fish during especially unsafe sea conditions. High-grading should not be an issue, as all Deep 7 bottomfish caught, whether kept or discarded, will be counted toward the TAC. *Comment 19:* The vessel marking requirements for non-commercial fishermen are impractical and onerous. Vessels are already required to be registered and marked according to the State of Hawaii regulations. *Response:* NMFS agrees, and in the final rule has amended the regulations to exempt from the Federal requirements those vessels that are in compliance with State bottomfish vessel marking requirements. *Comment 20:* NMFS is asking for comment, but the decisions have already been made regarding the proposed rule. *Response:* NMFS reads and considers every comment received, and uses these comments to consider whether to implement or change the proposed regulations, consistent with Amendment 14. Comments received on its proposed rule led NMFS to reconsider several aspect of the rule, and resulted in changes from the proposed rule for several regulations, such as vessel marking requirements. *Comment 21:* Fishing is not the only cause of the reduced fish population. Pollution, development, and global warming should be considered as they are larger threats against the ecosystem. *Response:* The final supplementary EIS (FSEIS) considered and analyzed both fishing and non-fishing impacts on bottomfish resources. In addition, the Council is developing fishery ecosystem management plans that would address such non-fishing impacts on the Hawaii ecosystem. Nonetheless, fishing has been identified as a major cause of bottomfish overfishing and, as such, the final rule will control bottomfish fishing mortality so that bottomfish stocks are sustained for future generations. *Comment 22:* A bag limit of five Deep 7 species is too low. *Response:* This final rule implements Federal non-commercial bag limits that complement existing State bag limits. The non-commercial bag limit of five Deep 7 bottomfish is consistent with existing State regulations for non-commercial bottomfish fishing. NMFS intends to repeal the Federal non-commercial bag limits once the data collected from the non-commercial bottomfish fishery are determined to be adequate to include in the annual TAC calculation. *Comment 23:* There should be BRFAs or a seasonal closure, not both. *Response:* The 2008 closed season is being implemented to immediately end bottomfish overfishing, and the other Federal provisions implemented by this final rule, and the BRFAs, are intended to conserve Hawaiian bottomfish over the long term. *Comment 24:* Non-commercial bag limits should be eliminated because non-commercial fishermen are already limited by the size of their vessels, storage capacity, and weather. *Response:* This final rule implements Federal non-commercial bag limits that complement existing State bag limits. NMFS intends to repeal the Federal non-commercial bag limits once the data collected from the non-commercial bottomfish fishery are determined to be adequate to include in the annual TAC calculation. *Comment 25:* The non-commercial permit and reporting requirement should be on a one-year trial basis. If at the end of one year, non-commercial fishermen are significantly contributing to the bottomfish catch the permit and reporting would continue. If not, it could be eliminated. *Response:* NMFS and the Council will monitor the fishery and evaluate the effectiveness of these measures in ending and preventing overfishing of Hawaiian bottomfish. The Council and NMFS may consider adjustments to the fishery management regime in the future, if necessary. *Comment 26:* Reporting requirements for non-commercial fishermen should be kept simple to reduce the burden to fishermen. *Response:* The reporting forms have been designed to record only the basic information required to effectively monitor the fishery. The forms will come with instructions and contact information for further questions about the forms. Comments on the form and the reporting burden can be sent to William L. Robinson (see ADDRESSES ) and by email to *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* or by fax to 202-395-7285. *Comment 27:* Clarify how the permit requirement and associated fee differ from the recreational fishermen registry created under the reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Act and which is not able to charge a fee until 2011. *Response:* This final rule implements non-commercial bottomfish permits and data collection under section 303 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, specifically to collect fishery information to be used by managers to end overfishing of bottomfish in Hawaii. That section of the Act authorizes the collection of fees for the issuance of such permits. The recreational fishermen registry is authorized under Section 401 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act as a national registration program for recreational fishing in all regions (not specifically the Hawaiian bottomfish fishery) and the Magnuson-Stevens Act authorizes the collection of fees for that program beginning in 2011. *Comment 28:* The non-commercial fee is higher than the commercial fee which might make fishermen more inclined to get the commercial permit. *Response:* Holding either a Federal non-commercial permit or State CML satisfies the requirements of this final rule. The fee for the non-commercial permit has not yet been determined, as it is dependent on the number of permits issued. The preamble to the proposed rule noted that the fee would not exceed $80 per person, and it will probably be in the range of $25-40. *Comment 29:* Federal reporting requirements will require fishermen to report all BMUS while the State of Hawaii requires reporting of Deep 7 species only. These inconsistent requirements make reporting confusing to fishermen who fish in both State and Federal waters. *Response:* The State requires commercial fishermen (State CML holders) to report all species caught, and NMFS believes that the collection of information regarding all BMUS is essential to understand the combined impact of commercial and non-commercial fishing on Hawaiian bottomfish stocks. *Comment 30:* If fishermen report interactions with protected species, as indicated on the reporting requirements, they may be held liable under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). *Response:* NMFS completed a biological opinion under section 7 of the ESA that analyzed the impacts of implementing this final rule on endangered and threatened species. That opinion, dated March 18, 2008, concluded that this action is not likely to adversely affect the Hawaiian monk seal, and is likely to adversely affect the endangered/threatened green sea turtle. The incidental take of up to two green sea turtles per year is authorized for the Hawaii bottomfish fishery. The Federal logbooks will provide fishermen the opportunity to report protected species interactions, including sea turtles and marine mammals. NOAA OLE will investigate reported interactions on a case-by-case basis to ascertain the nature of the interaction and whether or not it was authorized. *Comment 31:* The preamble of the proposed rule noted that the non-commercial bag limit would be eliminated in 2008, but that is not reflected in the regulatory text. *Response:* The preamble to the proposed rule inadvertently indicated that the bag limits would be repealed in 2008, but should have read that NMFS will repeal the Federal non-commercial bag limits once the data collected from the non-commercial bottomfish fishery are determined to be adequate to include in the annual TAC calculation. The final rule clarifies this point. *Comment 32:* It is unrealistic to believe that fish suffering from barotrauma can be resuscitated. *Response:* Reduction of bottomfish barotrauma is possible with correct handling procedures, and NMFS plans to work with the State and Council to provide information to fishermen on effective ways to handle fish to reduce barotrauma. *Comment 33:* Fishermen will not honestly report their non-target fish and bycatch for fear of reaching the TAC sooner. *Response:* The TAC will be calculated only for the reported catch of Deep 7 bottomfish species, and once the TAC is reached, only the fishery for Deep 7 will be closed; fishing for other species may continue. Information on other bottomfish and pelagic species caught will provide NMFS and the Council with a comprehensive picture of the non-commercial bottomfish fishery, its interplay with related fisheries, and the biological, social, and economic impacts of fishermen switching among gear types and target species. Honest reporting, and effective enforcement of reporting requirements, is essential to the calculation of an effective TAC, and if the bottomfish stocks continue to experience overfishing, more restrictive management measures may become necessary in the future. *Comment 34:* The regulations do not take into account the fact that during the closed season fishing supply stores, many of which are “mom and pop” operations, and the fish auction will lose revenues as the market shifts to imports. *Response:* NMFS recognizes that certain businesses will be affected by this final rule related to effort restrictions in the bottomfish fishery, and may experience a temporary downturn in revenues. This downturn may be offset, however, by increased fishing activity for non-Deep 7 bottomfish, and in the pelagic and other fisheries. In addition, the closed season is scheduled to take place during the months of historically low bottomfish fishing effort and lower demand. The expected result of this management regime is to increase the productivity of the bottomfish fishery in the long run which will lead to an increase in profitability to vessels, fishing gear suppliers, vessel support operations, fish markets, food and fuel providers, and other related businesses. *Comment 35:* The requirement for holders of the non-commercial permit to report all catch, regardless of whether it is caught within Federal or State waters, exceeds the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. *Response:* Hawaiian bottomfish stocks and habitat are shared between State and Federal jurisdictions. As such, in response to the demonstrated conservation and management need to end overfishing of Hawaiian bottomfish stocks, it is essential that comprehensive information about the fishery be collected to effectively implement this rule. *Comment 36:* The wording of the regulations makes it sound as if the State CML can permit non-commercial fishing. This language needs clarification. *Response:* Holding a State CML satisfies the permitting requirements for non-commercial bottomfish fishing in Federal waters. However, commercial fishing in Federal or State waters requires a State CML. With regard to reporting, if the vessel operator holds a non-commercial permit, the operator must report the entire catch and effort for the fishing day to NMFS. If the vessel operator holds a State CML, the operator must report the entire catch and effort for the fishing day to the State. The compliance guide and Federal non-commercial logbook instructions will provide further direction to assist fishermen with these reporting requirements. *Comment 37:* Section 665.72(e) needs to be clarified by removing the word “commercially” because the closure applied to both commercial and non-commercial fishing. *Response:* The final rule clarifies that when the fishery is closed, Deep 7 bottomfish may not be harvested or sold, except as otherwise authorized by law. *Comment 38:* Explain why the rule requires reporting of all catch by holders of the non-commercial bottomfish permit, but the permit is only required for those that fish for BMUS. *Response:* The requirement to report all catch from bottomfish trips will provide a complete profile of the non-commercial bottomfish fishery, its interplay with related fisheries (e.g., troll and handline fishing for tunas and related species), and the biological, social, and economic effects of fishermen switching among gear types and target species. *Comment 39:* Explain why it would be unlawful to fail to report relative to § 665.3. *Response:* Holding either a Federal non-commercial permit or State CML satisfies the permit requirements of this final rule. Section 665.3 reinforces the existing requirement for State CML holders to report their catch and effort to the State, as required by applicable State law or regulation. *Comment 40:* This final rule unfairly targets the bottomfish fishermen. The activities of divers, shore-casters and kayakers should also be regulated. *Response:* The final rule applies only to vessel-based bottomfish fishing in U.S. EEZ waters (3-200 nm offshore) with the objective to reduce bottomfish overfishing in the Hawaiian Archipelago. Divers, shore-casters and kayakers fish primarily in State waters (0-3 nm) and, as such, they are subject to State of Hawaii regulations including the BRFAs, gear restrictions, recreational bag limits, and commercial permits and reporting, as appropriate. *Comment 41:* Stock assessments should be based on scientific information. *Response:* Fishery scientists have conducted stock assessments using a combination of the State of Hawaii commercial fishing database and fishery-independent information. The most recent stock assessment indicated that the current level of bottomfish fishing effort in the main Hawaiian Islands is not sustainable in the long term, and must be reduced by 24 percent in 2008. State and PIFSC scientists will continue to monitor the bottomfish fishery through commercial information reported by State CML holders. Also, NMFS independent research and information reported by non-commercial bottomfish permit holders will be used by the Council and NMFS to set the annual bottomfish TAC. Bottomfish stock assessments and TAC are based on the best scientific information available. *Comment 42:* The proposed regulations are redundant to existing State of Hawaii requirements, adding unnecessary costs and paperwork burdens. *Response:* Current State of Hawaii CML and data reporting only apply to commercial fishing. This final rule is intended to obtain information on the non-commercial bottomfish fishery in Hawaii. The Federal permit requirement is satisfied with a State CML, so the permit requirement is not redundant. A fee is required for a non-commercial permit and the fee amount is limited to the administrative cost to process the permit application. If the vessel operator holds a non-commercial permit, the operator must report the entire catch and effort for the fishing day to NMFS. If the vessel operator holds a State CML, the operator must report the entire catch and effort for the fishing day to the State. Thus, there is no redundant reporting requirement. Vessels that are marked according to State requirements are exempt from Federal vessel identification requirements, so there is no redundancy in the vessel identification requirements. The Federal non-commercial bag limit of five fish is consistent with existing State requirements. *Comment 43:* Regarding the Federal non-commercial bag limits, it would be difficult to determine how many fish are caught in State waters and how many are caught in Federal waters; the rule is unclear whether both bag limits would apply, i.e., five State and five Federal. *Response:* The holder of a Federal non-commercial bottomfish permit is limited to five Deep 7 fish, regardless of where the fish are caught. The State of Hawaii recreational bag limit of five fish applies to other non-commercial fishermen. Thus, a limit of five bottomfish applies to all non-commercial fishing. *Comment 44:* Relatively few dedicated commercial fishermen catch the majority of bottomfish, so by not limiting commercial bottomfish fishermen to a specific amount of fish is counter-productive to ending overfishing of bottomfish in the MHI. *Response:* The final rule limits catches by commercial fishermen through an annual TAC. When the TAC is reached in any given year, both commercial and non-commercial fisheries for Deep 7 bottomfish are closed for the remainder of the fishing year. *Comment 45:* A comprehensive review of alternative measures to maintain an adequate level of bottomfish stock needs to be done before changes are made to the regulations. *Response:* The Council, in its FSEIS, analyzed the potential impacts of a range of management alternatives related to ending overfishing in the MHI. The preferred alternative was chosen because it reduces fishing effort by the required amount to end overfishing, provides a mechanism for data collection from the non-commercial sector, and allows for the establishment of a total allowable catch limit that can be adjusted each year based on stock assessments. Copies the FSEIS are available from the Council (see ADDRESSES ). Changes from the Proposed Rule In this final rule, several changes were made from the proposed rule to provide clarification of the requirements. The proposed rule would have established an expiration date of August 31 for Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permits. NMFS notes that there is no administrative or management necessity or advantage to setting a specific permit expiration date. NMFS estimates that it will process up to 5,000 applications per year, and a specific expiration date would disproportionately concentrate administrative burdens to certain times of the year, potentially causing significant and unacceptable delays in the processing of permits. Authorizing permits to be valid for one year from the date of issuance will allow for operational efficiency on a long-term basis. The final rule clarifies that permits are valid for the time specified on the permit, i.e., one year from the date of issuance, and also clarifies that, while 15 CFR 904 relates to permit revocation and suspension, such revocations and suspensions may also occur as other types of administrative actions. The requirements for the new Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial permit include provisions regarding catch reporting, bag limits, etc. The proposed rule was unclear about “mixed” fishing trips, where some fishermen on the trip hold Federal Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial permits, and some hold State of Hawaii Commercial Marine Licenses. The State of Hawaii defines these mixed trips to be non-commercial. To be consistent with State rules, the final rule clarifies that, if any participant on the trip is non-commercial, then the entire trip is non-commercial, and participants are subject to non-commercial requirements, including reporting and bag limits. The proposed rule would require all non-commercial fishermen on a fishing trip to have either a Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial permit or a State CML, ostensibly including charter boat patrons. The State of Hawaii requires any person providing vessel charter services in the State for the taking of marine life in or outside of the State to obtain a State CML. The charter operator does not need to sell any fish--merely offering the charter service triggers the requirement. Licensed charter vessel operators are also required to submit State commercial fishing reports in which all the effort and catch on the trips are to be reported, including catch by patrons. Only two percent of charter fishing vessels statewide use some bottomfish fishing gear; charter fishing is primarily pelagic fishing. The few vessels that occasionally offer charter bottomfish fishing usually target inshore reef slope or shallow bottomfish species, not the Deep 7 species. Additionally, most studies indicate that the majority of charter patrons are out-of-state visitors, and not residents, and it would be difficult for most visitors to apply for and obtain a Federal permit during the short time of their visit. The final rule will clarify that customers on bottomfish charter fishing trips are exempt from the non-commercial bottomfish permit requirement where the charter vessel operator is compliant with state laws and regulations. Additionally, since charter boat customers are considered to be non-commercial fishermen, and non-commercial fishermen are subject to bag limits under State requirements, this final rule requires Deep 7 bottomfish charter boat customers to comply with bag limits when fishing for Deep 7. The proposed rule would require operators of vessels registered for use under Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permits to report the catch, effort, and other data from each fishing trip to NMFS. Additionally, the State of Hawaii requires State CML holders to report their catch and effort to the State. On mixed trips, where some fishermen on the trip hold Federal non-commercial permits, and some hold State CMLs, there is a potential for double-reporting of the catch because both permit holders are required to report but to different agencies. No change will be made to the final rule, but the compliance guide and the Federal non-commercial logsheet instructions will clarify that non-commercial vessel operators need to report only the catch made by holders of Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permits, and not that of the holders of State CMLs. The implementation of the new Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial permit creates a link to the Federal vessel identification requirement in § 665.16 that requires Federal permit holders to mark their vessels in a specific way for aerial and at-sea identification purposes. The existing Federal vessel identification requirements were created for the larger commercial fishing vessel to assist in aerial and at-sea enforcement of fishing regulations. Current State-registered bottomfish vessels are marked with an official HA number, with the addition of the letters “BF,” but the typical Hawaii-based non-commercial bottomfish vessel is not large enough to have the superstructure or deckhouse to support Federal vessel identification markings. Also, the bottomfish closed season and other restrictions for bottomfish are specific to Deep 7 species, not all bottomfish fishing. Enforcement of and compliance with this final rule are best addressed dockside, not at sea or from the air, so large lettering of the vessel's official number is not essential. Furthermore, imposing on the public a duplicative Federal vessel marking (collection-of-information) requirement with existing State's requirement is inconsistent with the purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act. The final rule will clarify that those non-commercial bottomfish vessels that are in compliance with state bottomfish vessel registration and marking requirements are exempt from the Federal vessel identification requirements. The Magunson Act authorizes NMFS to collect fees for all permits. The preamble to the proposed rule noted that fees would be collected for Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permits, but the regulatory text was not included. The final rule clarifies that fees will be charged for Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permits, and that the fees are non-refundable and are collected to offset the administrative costs associated with issuing the permits. The proposed rule would have established a prohibition against owning a fishing vessel that participates in non-commercial bottomfish fishing without a Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permit or State CML. The proposed rule neglected, however, to create the related requirement, so the final rule creates the requirement. The final rule adds the definition of State of Hawaii Commercial Marine License, which was omitted in the proposed rule, and revises the definition of Main Hawaiian Islands Non-Commercial Bottomfish Fishing Permit to clarify that the permit is required to own or fish from a vessel that is used in any non-commercial vessel-based fishing, landing, or transshipment of any BMUS in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea. The final rule clarifies that both the vessel owner and vessel operator share responsibility for submitting required logbook information for each day of the fishing trip. The final rule also clarifies the procedures used by the Regional Administrator
(RA)in notifying the public of the projected closure date for the fishery. The RA will file an official notice of the closure with the Office of the federal Register at least 14 days in advance of the projected closure date. The final rule also clarifies that, in addition to the prohibition on fishing for Deep 7 bottomfish after the TAC is reached, Deep 7 bottomfish species may not be sold or offered for sale after the TAC is reached unless otherwise legally harvested. The final rule also reorders the numbering of new §§ 665.73 (bag limits) and 665.74 (closed season). Because the closed season will be effective only in 2008 and repealed afterward, renumbering the sections now will preclude the need to renumber them later. Classification The NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries
(AA)determined that Amendment 14 is necessary for the conservation and management of the affected fisheries, and that the amendment is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. A final environmental impact statement dated December 19, 2007, was prepared for this final rule. The FSEIS was filed with the Environmental Protection Agency on January 4, 2008. A notice of availability was published on January 11, 2008 (73 FR 2027). In approving Amendment 14 on March 18, 2008, NMFS issued a Record of Decision
(ROD)identifying the selected alternative. A copy of the ROD is available from William L. Robinson (see ADDRESSES ). This final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. Consistent with section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NMFS prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis
(FRFA)for Amendment 14, as follows: This FRFA incorporates the IRFA prepared for Amendment 14. The preamble to the proposed rule included a detailed summary of the analyses contained in the IRFA, and that discussion is not repeated in its entirety here. A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule is provided in the preambles to the proposed rule and to this final rule, and is not repeated here. There were two comments on the IRFA, and NMFS responds as follows: *Comment 1:* The statement that “There are no reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements for commercial vessels in the proposed rule” seems out of place, given that all vessels must report their catch toward the TAC. *Response:* The keyword in that phrase is “commercial”. This rule does not create new requirements for commercial vessels or operators. Under current State of Hawaii regulations, all commercial fishermen are required to have a State CML and report their catch to the State, and are subject to vessel-marking requirements. In monitoring and calculating the TAC, the commercial information collected by the State will be incorporated with the non-commercial data collected under the requirements in this rule. *Comment 2:* The statement that vessels in the bottomfish fishery “are not independently-owned and operated” is inaccurate, as many individuals own boats and fish from their own boats. *Response:* The proposed rule contained a typographic error. The full sentence should have read “All vessels are considered to be small entities under the Small Business Administration definition of a small entity, i.e., they are engaged in the business of fish harvesting, are independently-owned and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have annual gross receipts not in excess of $4 million.” Steps Taken to Minimize Impacts The Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements to prevent overfishing preclude allowing a TAC to be set above a level of overfishing in order to minimize impacts to small entities. Economic losses to the commercial sector could be mitigated somewhat by increases to available harvest from improvements to the bottomfish stock and economic benefits derived from other fisheries or other uses of fishing vessels (opportunity costs), to the extent they exist. Given that there could be sizable adverse economic impacts to the commercial fishery resulting from one TAC for commercial and non-commercial sectors, NMFS will complete a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to determine the economic impacts to commercial vessels when non-commercial landings are estimated and the 2008-09 TAC is specified. Additionally, by the time the TAC is specified, NMFS should have information on the State of Hawaii's intentions regarding possible changes to the State bag limit requirements. Since the universe of affected entities does not include non-commercial fishermen, economic impacts to this group are not considered under this FRFA. However, those impacts were analyzed by the Council as part of the Regulatory Impact Review to assess regional and national economic impacts. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule Applies Approximately 380 vessels were engaged in the harvest of bottomfish based on 2000-03 data. The aggregate gross receipts for these vessels in the bottomfish fishery were $1.47 million with average gross receipts per vessel of $3,870 annually. All vessels are considered to be small entities under the Small Business Administration definition of a small entity, i.e., they are engaged in the business of fish harvesting, are independently-owned or operated, are not dominant in its field of operation, and have annual gross receipts not in excess of $4 million. Therefore, there are no disproportionate economic impacts between large and small entities. Furthermore, there are no disproportionate economic impacts among vessels based on geographic location, gear, or vessel size resulting from publication of this final rule. Small Entity Compliance Guide Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule, and shall designate such publications as “small entity compliance guides.” The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. As part of this rulemaking process, a small entity compliance guide was prepared. The guide will be sent to all vessels that have historic landings in this fishery. In addition, copies of this final rule and guide are available from the Regional Administrator (see ADDRESSES ) and are also available at the following web site: *fpir.nmfs.noaa.gov* . This final rule contains collection-of-information requirements subject to the PRA. These requirements have not yet been approved, but OMB approval is expected in the near future. NMFS will publish a notice when these requirements are cleared by OMB and are, therefore, effective. The public reporting burden for these requirements is estimated to be 30 minutes for a new permit application, and 20 minutes for completing a fishing logbook each day. NMFS estimates that 800-5,000 non-commercial fishermen will request permits. Thus, the collection of information burden estimate for permit applications is 400-2,500 hours per year. Estimating that between 800-1,800 vessels would make 10-50 trips per year, 8,000-90,000 logbooks could be generated each year. Thus, the total collection of information burden estimate for fishing data reporting would be between 2,664 to 29,970 hours per year. Send comments regarding these burden estimates or any other aspect of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to William L. Robinson, NMFS PIR (see ADDRESSES ), or by e-mail to *David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov* or fax to 202-395-7285. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to 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. A consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act was conducted for Amendment 14. In a biological opinion dated March 18, 2008, the Regional Administrator determined that fishing activities conducted under Amendment 14 and its implementing regulations are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species. There is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the 30-day delay in effective date to implement these measures in a timely manner. The Council and NMFS completed FMP Amendment 14 and the FSEIS in December 2007, and the proposed rule was published in February 2008. Public comments on the proposed rule were accepted until March 7, and by the time this final rule was prepared, monitoring of Hawaii bottomfish landings since the beginning of the 2007-08 fishing year (i.e., October 2007) indicates that the proposed TAC of 178,000 lb will be reached on or prior to April 17, according to NMFS scientists. This is a result of higher than anticipated landings of Hawaii bottomfish during the months of February and March 2008. This necessitates closure of the fishery before the scheduled May 1 beginning of the 2008 closed season. If the fishery is not closed soon, the recommended 2007-08 TAC would likely be further exceeded, and overfishing of Hawaii bottomfish would continue, and an even lower quota would be required to reduce fishing mortality for fishing year 2008-09 to adequately end the overfishing, resulting in greater negative impacts on the fishery. Therefore, the rule must be effective upon the date of filing with the Office of the **Federal Register** . List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 665 Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries, Fishing, Guam, Hawaii, Hawaiian natives, Northern Mariana Islands, Pacific Remote Island Areas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: March 31, 2008. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator For Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 665 is amended as follows: PART 665—FISHERIES IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC l. The authority citation for part 665 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* 2. In subpart A, add a new § 665.4 to read as follows: § 665.4 Licensing and registration. Any person who is required to do so by applicable state law or regulation must comply with licensing and registration requirements in the exact manner required by applicable state law or regulation. 3. In § 665.12, revise the definitions of “Commercial fishing”, “Fishing year”, and “Trap”, and add the definitions for “Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species Fishing Year 2007-08”, “Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species Fishing Year 2008-09 and After”, “Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permit”, “Non-commercial fishing”, and “State of Hawaii Commercial Marine License” in alphabetical order to read as follows: § 665.12 Definitions. *Commercial fishing* means fishing in which the fish harvested, either in whole or in part, are intended to enter commerce or enter commerce through sale, barter, or trade. All lobster fishing in Crustaceans Permit Area 1 is considered commercial fishing. *Fishing year* means the year beginning at 0001 local time on January 1 and ending at 2400 local time on December 31, with the exception of fishing for Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species. *Hawaii restricted bottomfish species fishing year 2007-08* means the year beginning at 0001 HST on October 1, 2007, and ending at 2400 HST on April 30, 2008. *Hawaii restricted bottomfish species fishing year 2008-09 and After* means the year beginning at 0001 HST on September 1 and ending at 2400 HST on August 31 of the next calendar year. *Main Hawaiian Islands Non-Commercial Bottomfish Permit* means the permit required by § 665.61(a)(4) to own or fish from a vessel that is used in any non-commercial vessel-based fishing, landing, or transshipment of any bottomfish management unit species in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea. *Non-commercial fishing* means fishing that does not meet the definition of commercial fishing. *State of Hawaii Commercial Marine License* means the license required by the State of Hawaii for anyone to take marine life for commercial purposes (also known as the commercial fishing license). *Trap* means a box-like device used for catching and holding lobsters or fish. 4. In § 665.13, revise paragraphs (f)(2) and
(g)to read as follows: § 665.13 Permits and fees.
(f)* * *
(2)PIRO will charge a non-refundable processing fee for each application (including transfers and renewals) for the following permits. The amount of the fee is calculated in accordance with the procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook, for determining the administrative costs of each special product or service incurred in processing the permit. The fee may not exceed such costs and is specified with each application form. The appropriate fee must accompany each application. Failure to pay the fee will preclude the issuance, transfer or renewal of any of these permits:
(i)Hawaii longline limited access permit;
(ii)Mau Zone limited access permit;
(iii)Coral reef ecosystem special permit;
(iv)American Samoa longline limited access permit; and
(v)Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permit.
(g)*Expiration.* Permits issued under subparts C, D, E, F, and G of this part are valid for the period specified on the permit unless revoked, suspended, transferred, or modified. 5. In § 665.14, revise paragraphs
(a)to read as follows: § 665.14 Reporting and recordkeeping.
(a)*Fishing record forms.*
(1)*Applicability.* The operator of any fishing vessel subject to the requirements of §§ 665.21, 665.41, 665.61(a)(2), 665.61(a)(3), 665.61(a)(4), 665.81, or 665.602 must maintain on board the vessel an accurate and complete record of catch, effort, and other data on paper report forms provided by the Regional Administrator, or electronically as specified and approved by the Regional Administrator. All information specified by the Regional Administrator must be recorded on paper or electronically within 24 hours after the completion of each fishing day. The logbook information, reported on paper or electronically, for each day of the fishing trip must be signed and dated or otherwise authenticated by the vessel operator in the manner determined by the Regional Administrator, and be submitted or transmitted via an approved method as specified by the Regional Administrator, and as required by this paragraph (a).
(2)*Timeliness of submission.*
(i)If fishing was authorized under a permit pursuant to §§ 665.21, 665.41, 665.61(a)(1), 665.61(a)(3), or 665.81 the vessel operator must submit the original logbook form for each day of the fishing trip to the Regional Administrator within 72 hours of the end of each fishing trip, except as allowed in paragraph
(iii)of this section.
(ii)If fishing was authorized under a permit pursuant to § 665.61(a)(4) the vessel operator or vessel owner must submit the original logbook form for each day of the fishing trip to the Regional Administrator within 72 hours of the end of each fishing trip.
(iii)If fishing was authorized under a PRIA bottomfish permit pursuant to § 665.61(a)(2), PRIA pelagic troll and handline permit pursuant to § 665.21(f), crustaceans fishing permit for the PRIA (Permit Area 4) pursuant to § 665.41, or a precious corals fishing permit for Permit Area X-P-PI pursuant to § 665.81, the original logbook form for each day of fishing within the PRIA EEZ waters must be submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30 days of the end of each fishing trip.
(iv)If fishing was authorized under a permit pursuant to § 665.602, the original logbook information for each day of fishing must be submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30 days of the end of each fishing trip. 6. In § 665.16, revise paragraph
(a)and add new paragraph
(e)to read as follows: § 665.16 Vessel identification.
(a)Each fishing vessel subject to this subpart, except those identified in paragraph
(e)of this section, must display its official number on the port and starboard sides of the deckhouse or hull, and on an appropriate weather deck, so as to be visible from enforcement vessels and aircraft.
(e)The following fishing vessels are exempt from the vessel identification requirements in this section:
(1)A vessel registered for use under a Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permit that is in compliance with State of Hawaii bottomfish vessel registration and marking requirements.
(2)[Reserved] 7. In § 665.61, revise paragraph
(a)to read as follows: § 665.61 Permits.
(a)*Applicability.*
(1)*Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI).* The owner of any vessel used to fish for, land, or transship bottomfish management unit species shoreward of the outer boundary of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands subarea must have a permit issued under this section, and the permit must be registered for use with that vessel. The PIRO will not register a single vessel for use with a Ho omalu Zone permit and a Mau Zone permit at the same time. Mau Zone permits issued before June 14, 1999, become invalid June 14, 1999, except that a permit issued to a person who submitted a timely application under paragraph (b)(3) of this section is valid until the permit holder either receives a Mau Zone limited entry permit or until final agency action is taken on the permit holder's application. The Ho omalu Zone and the Mau Zone limited entry systems described in this section are subject to abolition, modification, or additional effort limitation programs.
(2)*Pacific Remote Island Areas (PRIA).* The owner of any vessel used to fish for, land, or transship bottomfish management unit species shoreward of the outer boundary of the Pacific Remote Island Areas subarea must have a permit issued under this section, and the permit must be registered for use with that vessel.
(3)*Guam large vessel.* The owner of any large vessel used to fish for, land, or transship bottomfish management unit species shoreward of the outer boundary of the Guam subarea must have a permit issued under this section, and the permit must be registered for use with that vessel.
(4)*Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial.* The owner of a vessel that is used for and any person who participates in non-commercial, vessel-based fishing, landing, or transshipment of bottomfish management unit species in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea is required to obtain a Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permit or a State of Hawaii Commercial Marine License. If one or more persons on a vessel-based bottomfish fishing trip holds a Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial permit, then the entire trip is considered non-commercial, and not commercial. However, if any commercial fishing occurs during or as a result of a vessel-based fishing trip, then the fishing trip is considered commercial, and not non-commercial. Charter boat customers are not subject to the requirements of the section. 8. In § 665.62, add new paragraphs
(j)through (n), as follows: § 665.62 Prohibitions.
(j)Falsify or fail to make or file reports of all fishing activities shoreward of outer boundary of the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea, in violation of §§ 665.3 or 665.14(a).
(k)Own a vessel or fish from a vessel that is used to fish non-commercially for any bottomfish management unit species in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea without either a Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permit or a State of Hawaii Commercial Marine License, in violation of §§ 665.4 or 665.61(a)(4).
(l)Fish for or possess any Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species as specified in § 665.71, in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea after a closure of the fishery, in violation of §§ 665.72 or 665.74.
(m)Sell or offer for sale any Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species, as specified in § 665.71, after a closure of the fishery, in violation of §§ 665.72 or 665.74.
(n)Harvest, possess, or land more than a total of five fish (all species combined) identified as Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species in § 665.71 from a vessel in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea, while holding a Main Hawaiian Islands non-commercial bottomfish permit, or while participating as a charter boat customer, in violation of § 665.73. 9. In subpart E, add a new § 665.71 to read as follows: § 665.71 Hawaii restricted bottomfish species. Hawaii restricted bottomfish species means the following species: Common Name Common Name Scientific Name Silver jaw jobfish Lehi *Aphareus rutilans* Squirrelfish snapper Ehu *Etelis carbunculus* Longtail snapper Onaga *Etelis coruscans* Pink snapper Opakapaka *Pristipomoides filamentosus* Snapper Kalekale *Pristipomoides sieboldii* Snapper Gindai *Pristipomoides zonatus* Sea bass Hapu'upu'u *Epinephelus quernus* 10. In subpart E, add a new § 665.72 to read as follows: § 665.72 Total Allowable Catch
(TAC)limit.
(a)TAC limits will be set annually for the fishing year by NMFS, as recommended by the Council, based on the best available scientific, commercial, and other information, and taking into account the associated risk of overfishing.
(b)The Regional Administrator shall publish a notice indicating the annual Total Allowable Catch limit in the **Federal Register** by August 31 of each year, and shall use other means to notify permit holders of the TAC limit for the year.
(c)When the TAC limit specified in this section is projected to be reached based on analyses of available information, the Regional Administrator shall publish a notice to that effect in the **Federal Register** and shall use other means to notify permit holders. The notice will include an advisement that the fishery will be closed beginning at a specified date, which is not earlier than 14 days after the date of filing the closure notice for public inspection at the Office of the **Federal Register** , until the end of the fishing year in which the TAC is reached.
(d)On and after the date specified in § 665.72(c), no person may fish for or possess any Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species as specified in § 665.71 in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea, except as otherwise allowed by law.
(e)On and after the date specified in § 665.72(c), no person may sell or offer for sale Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species as specified in § 665.71, except as otherwise authorized by law.
(f)Fishing for, and the resultant possession or sale of, Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species by vessels legally registered to Mau Zone, Ho omalu Zone, or PRIA bottomfish fishing permits and conducted in compliance with all other laws and regulations, is exempted from this section.
(g)The Hawaii restricted bottomfish species TAC limit for the 2007-08 fishing year is 178,000 lb (80,740 kg). 11. Under subpart E, add a new § 665.73 to read as follows: § 665.73 Non-commercial bag limits. No more than a total of five fish (all species combined) identified as Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species as specified in § 665.71, may be harvested, possessed, or landed by any individual participating in a non-commercial vessel-based fishing trip in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea. Charter boat customers are also subject to the bag limit. 12. In subpart E, add a new § 665.74 to read as follows: § 665.74 Closed season.
(a)All fishing for, or possession of, any Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species as specified in § 665.71, is prohibited in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea during May 1, 2008, through August 31, 2008, inclusive. All such species possessed in the Main Hawaiian Islands Management Subarea are presumed to have been taken and retained from that Subarea, unless otherwise demonstrated by the person in possession of those species.
(b)Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species, as specified in § 665.71, may not be sold or offered for sale during May 1, 2008, through August 31, 2008, inclusive, except as otherwise authorized by law.
(c)Fishing for, and the resultant possession or sale of, Hawaii Restricted Bottomfish Species by vessels legally registered to Mau Zone, Ho'omalu Zone, or PRIA bottomfish fishing permits and conducted in compliance with all other laws and regulations, is exempted from paragraphs
(a)and (b). [FR Doc. 08-1093 Filed 4-1-08; 11:30 am]
Connectionstraces to 25
Traces to 25 documents
CFR
21 references not yet in our index
  • 7 CFR 1
  • 7 USC 6501-6522
  • Pub. L. 104-121
  • 21 USC 104
  • 7 CFR 2.35
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 14 CFR 91
  • 14 CFR 71
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 5 USC 801-808
  • 21 CFR 510
  • 21 CFR 558
  • 21 CFR 520
  • 21 CFR 526
  • 26 CFR 301
  • T.D. 8697
  • 47 CFR 101
  • 50 CFR 648
  • 50 CFR 600
  • 50 CFR 665
  • 15 CFR 904
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Final rule
U.S.C.§ 553
U.S.C.§ 804
U.S.C.§ 601
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 301
U.S.C.§ 61
U.S.C.§ 1828
U.S.C.§ 620d
U.S.C.§ 1740
Cite7 CFR 1
Cite7 USC 6501-6522
Pub. L.Pub. L. 104-121
Cites 46 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.