Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery; Amendment 11, 62087-62089 [05-21561]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 208 / Friday, October 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call Mr. William D. Evans, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards at (202) 366–2272. His FAX number is (202) 366–7002. For legal issues, you may call Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Office of the Chief Counsel at (202) 366–2992. Her FAX number is (202) 366–3820. You may send mail to both of these officials at National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 31, 2005 (70 FR 51707), NHTSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards Nos. 120 Tire selection and rims for motor vehicles other than passenger cars, and 110, Tire selection and rims. We proposed to require manufacturers of motor homes and travel trailers over 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) GVWR to provide information to consumers in a label that is intended to inform the consumer about the vehicle’s cargo carrying capacity (CCC). This information would be helpful both at the time the consumer is making a purchase decision and also as the consumer uses his or her vehicle. We also proposed to require that the size of tires on the same motor homes and travel trailers be the same as the size of the tires listed on the tire information label required by FMVSS No. 120. We proposed to limit our CCC label to motor homes and travel trailers with a GVWR greater than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) as these are the vehicles that have large open interior areas that consumers fill with cargo. We noted that Recreational vehicles (RV) with GVWRs equal to or less than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) will be required to have less detailed CCC information as a result of an amendment to FMVSS No. 110, which took effect on September 1, 2005. It should be noted that on September 1, 2005, FMVSS No. 120 was changed to apply to vehicles with a GVWR greater than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) and FMVSS No. 110 was changed to apply to vehicles with a GVWR equal to or less than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). It is our belief that the proposed rule complements the efforts of the recreational vehicle industry to provide consumers with information in order to help reduce overloading in motor homes and travel trailers. In addition, we stated our belief that the proposed rule would provide regulatory relief for dealers from a VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:35 Oct 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 labeling requirement in FMVSS No. 110. The standard’s requirement may currently require dealers that add even small amounts of weight to re-label the vehicles. Under the proposed amendment, dealers that add weight in excess of 0.5 percent of the vehicles’ gross vehicle weight ratings would be required to disclose this extra weight on labels affixed to the vehicles. Dealers could add lesser amounts of weight without needing to change or add labels. The NPRM announced a comment due date of October 31, 2005. In a joint letter dated October 14, 2005, the National Truck and Equipment Dealers Association, the National Automobile Dealers Association, the National Association of Trailer Manufacturers, the National Marine Manufacturers Association, the Recreational Vehicle Dealers Association, the Tire Industries Association, the Service Station Dealers of America and Allied Trades, the Specialty Equipment Market Association, the National Trailer Dealers Association, the Automotive Service Association, and the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association asked for an extension of time to comment on the NPRM. The stated rationale was that additional time was necessary ‘‘to allow for appropriate, well-reasoned comments addressing an array of practical technical issues associated with the cargo carrying capacity proposal.’’ After considering the rationale explaining the need for extra time to consider the NPRM as well as that these groups are primarily small businesses and the parties most directly affected by the proposal, NHTSA has decided that it is in the public interest to grant the submitters’ request. Therefore, NHTSA grants until November 30, 2005, submission of public comments on the NPRM of August 31, 2005. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. Issued on: October 24, 2005. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. 05–21500 Filed 10–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 62087 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 660 [I.D. 102105A] RIN 0648–AT11 Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery; Amendment 11 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of availability of an amendment to a fishery management plan; request for comments. AGENCY: SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Amendment 11 to the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Secretarial review. Amendment 11 would change the framework for the annual apportionment of the Pacific sardine harvest guideline along the U.S. Pacific coast. The purpose of Amendment 11 is to achieve optimal utilization of the Pacific sardine resource and equitable allocation of the harvest opportunity for Pacific sardine. DATES: Comments on Amendment 11 must be received on or before December 27, 2005. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the NOA identified by I.D. 102105A by any of the following methods: • E-mail: 0648–AT11.SWR@noaa.gov. Include I.D. 102105 in the subject line of the message. • Federal e-Rulemaking portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Rodney R. McInnis, Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802. • Fax: (562)980–4047 Copies of Amendment 11, which includes an Environmental Assessment/ Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis/ Regulatory Impact Review, are available from Donald O. McIssac, Executive Director, Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon 97220– 1384. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua B. Lindsay, Sustainable Fisheries Division, NMFS, at 562–980–4034 or Mike Burner, Pacific Fishery Management Council, at 503–820–2280. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM 28OCP1 62088 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 208 / Friday, October 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each Regional Fishery Management Council to submit any amendment to an FMP to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an amendment to an FMP, immediately publish notification in the Federal Register that the amendment is available for public review and comment. NMFS will consider the public comments received during the comment period described above in determining whether to approve, disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 11. Amendment 11 establishes an allocation framework that would help to achieve optimal utilization and equitable allocation between the different sectors of the Pacific sardine fishery. The Council tasked the CPS Advisory Subpanel (Subpanel) to develop an initial range of allocation alternatives for a longer-term allocation framework. The Subpanel adopted a range of alternatives for the allocation of Pacific sardine at their meetings in August and September 2004. At the November 2004 meeting the Council reviewed the range of alternatives, and with some modification and additions forwarded nine alternatives to the CPS Management Team (Team) for preliminary analysis. When adopting a range of alternatives for long-term allocation in April 2005, the Council expressed an interest in having the flexibility to revisit the proposed action in the near-term as the Pacific sardine resource and the fisheries and markets that rely on it are dynamic and difficult to predict. At the April 2005 Council meeting the Council adopted seven of the nine alternatives and sent those to the Team for further analysis. Below is a summary of the seven forwarded alternatives given to the Team for analysis including both a no action alternative and a status quo alternative. If the Council chose to take no action, the allocation framework would revert to original FMP (64 FR 69888, December 15, 1999) formula that was in place before the regulatory amendment (69 FR 8572, February 25, 2003) was implemented in 2003. Under status quo the Council would have chosen to take action to extend the interim allocation. The order of alternatives does not indicate rank or priority. All alternatives (except No Action) used Point Arena, California (39° N. lat.) as the dividing line between the allocation subareas. In order to present the alternatives in a clear and comparable fashion the descriptions for VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:35 Oct 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 the fishing season, the initial allocation, and reallocations made at different points during the fishing season are summarized in bullet form. No Action: FMP Allocation Framework The allocation subareas are divided at Point Piedras Blancas, California (35° 40′ N. lat.). Season: January 1 – December 31 Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north, which includes Monterey) and 66 percent to the Subarea B (Southern California). Reallocation: On October 1, remaining unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is pooled and reallocated 50 percent to Subarea A (north) and 50 percent to Subarea B (south). Status Quo: Interim Allocation Framework Season: January 1 – December 31 Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to Subarea B (south). Reallocation: On September 1, 20 percent of the remaining unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is reallocated to the Subarea A (north) and 80 percent to Subarea B (south). Second reallocation: On December 1, the remaining unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is reallocated coastwide. Alternative 1: Coastwide Allocation In Two Periods Season: January 1 – December 31 Initial allocation: On January 1, 50 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated coastwide. Reallocation: On July 1, the remaining harvest guideline (50 percent plus any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is allocated coastwide. Alternative 2: Rejected by the Council Alternative 3: Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods Season: January 1 – December 31 Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated coastwide. Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is allocated coastwide. Second reallocation: On October 1, 20 percent of the harvest guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the first reallocation) is reallocated coastwide. Alternative 4: Allocation Formula Depends on the Size of the Harvest Guideline PO 00000 Season: January 1 – December 31 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 (a) The coastwide harvest guideline is greater than 100,000 mt: Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 percent of the coastwide harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 60 percent to the Subarea B (south). Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is pooled and allocated coastwide. (b) The coastwide harvest guideline is less than 100,000 mt: Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the coastwide harvest guideline is allocated to Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to the Subarea B (south). Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining unharvested portion of the coastwide harvest guideline is pooled and 20 percent is allocated to Subarea A (north) and 80 percent to the Subarea B (south). Second reallocation: On November 1, any remaining unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is again pooled and reallocated coastwide. Alternative 5: Rejected by the Council Alternative 6: Transfer of Unused Allocations Between Subareas Season: January 1 – December 31 Initial allocation (for 2006 only): On January 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 60 percent to the Subarea B (south). Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining harvest guideline is pooled and allocated coastwide. Transfer Rules For Computing Subsequent-Year Allocations After the initial year (2006) these rules dictate the allocations to each subarea in each subsequent year: Rule 1: The transfer of a portion of the harvest guideline from one subarea to the other, for the purpose of recomputing allocation percentages for the next year, occurs if the portion of a subarea’s allocation remaining uncaught at the end of the year is greater than the transfer limits described in Rule 2. Rule 2: If the harvest guideline is greater than 100,000 mt, the transfer amount will be equal to 10 percent of the coastwide harvest guideline for that year. When the coastwide harvest guideline is 100,000 mt or less, the transfer amount will be 5,000 mt. Rule 3: The transfer amount is applied to the current-year allocation for each subarea. The resulting numerical values are then converted to percentages of the current-year coastwide harvest guideline and used to determine the initial allocation for the following year. E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM 28OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 208 / Friday, October 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules Rule 4: No subarea may initially be allocated more than 75 percent of the coastwide harvest guideline. Rule 5: The September 1 coastwide reallocation always applies. Alternative 7: Equal Reallocation Season: January 1 December 31 Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to the Subarea B (south). Reallocation: On September 1, remaining harvest guideline is pooled and 50 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 50 percent to the Subarea B (south). Second Reallocation: On November 1, any remaining unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is again pooled and reallocated coastwide.At the June 2005 Council meeting in Foster City, CA, the Council adopted a preferred VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:35 Oct 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 option for the allocation of Pacific sardine that creates a seasonal, coastwide allocation scheme. This preferred alternative is a modified version of Alternative 3, which provides the following allocation formula for the non-tribal share of the harvest guideline: Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods Season: January 1 – December 31 Initial allocation: On January 1, 35 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated coastwide. Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is allocated coastwide. Second reallocation: On September 15, 25 percent of the harvest guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the first reallocation) is reallocated coastwide. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 62089 The Council also recommended a review of the allocation formula in 2008. Public comments on Amendment 11 must be received by December 27, 2005, to be considered by NMFS in the decision whether to approve, disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 11. A proposed rule to implement Amendment 11 has been submitted for Secretarial review and approval. NMFS expects to publish and request public comment on the proposed regulation to implement Amendment 11 in the near future. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Dated: October 24, 2005. Ann M. Lange, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 05–21561 Filed 10–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–S E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM 28OCP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 208 (Friday, October 28, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62087-62089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21561]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[I.D. 102105A]
RIN 0648-AT11


Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; 
Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery; Amendment 11

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

ACTION: Notice of availability of an amendment to a fishery management 
plan; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the Pacific Fishery Management Council 
(Council) has submitted Amendment 11 to the Coastal Pelagic Species 
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Secretarial review. Amendment 11 
would change the framework for the annual apportionment of the Pacific 
sardine harvest guideline along the U.S. Pacific coast. The purpose of 
Amendment 11 is to achieve optimal utilization of the Pacific sardine 
resource and equitable allocation of the harvest opportunity for 
Pacific sardine.

DATES: Comments on Amendment 11 must be received on or before December 
27, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the NOA identified by I.D. 
102105A by any of the following methods:
     E-mail: 0648-AT11.SWR@noaa.gov. Include I.D. 102105 in the 
subject line of the message.
     Federal e-Rulemaking portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Rodney R. McInnis, Regional Administrator, Southwest 
Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 
90802.
     Fax: (562)980-4047
    Copies of Amendment 11, which includes an Environmental Assessment/
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis/Regulatory Impact Review, are 
available from Donald O. McIssac, Executive Director, Pacific Fishery 
Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, 
Oregon 97220-1384.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua B. Lindsay, Sustainable 
Fisheries Division, NMFS, at 562-980-4034 or Mike Burner, Pacific 
Fishery Management Council, at 503-820-2280.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

[[Page 62088]]

Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each 
Regional Fishery Management Council to submit any amendment to an FMP 
to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval. The 
Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an 
amendment to an FMP, immediately publish notification in the Federal 
Register that the amendment is available for public review and comment. 
NMFS will consider the public comments received during the comment 
period described above in determining whether to approve, disapprove, 
or partially approve Amendment 11.
    Amendment 11 establishes an allocation framework that would help to 
achieve optimal utilization and equitable allocation between the 
different sectors of the Pacific sardine fishery. The Council tasked 
the CPS Advisory Subpanel (Subpanel) to develop an initial range of 
allocation alternatives for a longer-term allocation framework. The 
Subpanel adopted a range of alternatives for the allocation of Pacific 
sardine at their meetings in August and September 2004. At the November 
2004 meeting the Council reviewed the range of alternatives, and with 
some modification and additions forwarded nine alternatives to the CPS 
Management Team (Team) for preliminary analysis. When adopting a range 
of alternatives for long-term allocation in April 2005, the Council 
expressed an interest in having the flexibility to revisit the proposed 
action in the near-term as the Pacific sardine resource and the 
fisheries and markets that rely on it are dynamic and difficult to 
predict.
    At the April 2005 Council meeting the Council adopted seven of the 
nine alternatives and sent those to the Team for further analysis. 
Below is a summary of the seven forwarded alternatives given to the 
Team for analysis including both a no action alternative and a status 
quo alternative. If the Council chose to take no action, the allocation 
framework would revert to original FMP (64 FR 69888, December 15, 1999) 
formula that was in place before the regulatory amendment (69 FR 8572, 
February 25, 2003) was implemented in 2003. Under status quo the 
Council would have chosen to take action to extend the interim 
allocation. The order of alternatives does not indicate rank or 
priority. All alternatives (except No Action) used Point Arena, 
California (39[deg] N. lat.) as the dividing line between the 
allocation subareas. In order to present the alternatives in a clear 
and comparable fashion the descriptions for the fishing season, the 
initial allocation, and reallocations made at different points during 
the fishing season are summarized in bullet form.

No Action: FMP Allocation Framework

    The allocation subareas are divided at Point Piedras Blancas, 
California (35[deg] 40' N. lat.).
    Season: January 1 - December 31
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest 
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north, which includes 
Monterey) and 66 percent to the Subarea B (Southern California).
    Reallocation: On October 1, remaining unharvested portion of the 
harvest guideline is pooled and reallocated 50 percent to Subarea A 
(north) and 50 percent to Subarea B (south).

Status Quo: Interim Allocation Framework

    Season: January 1 - December 31
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest 
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to 
Subarea B (south).
    Reallocation: On September 1, 20 percent of the remaining 
unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is reallocated to the 
Subarea A (north) and 80 percent to Subarea B (south).
    Second reallocation: On December 1, the remaining unharvested 
portion of the harvest guideline is reallocated coastwide.

Alternative 1: Coastwide Allocation In Two Periods

    Season: January 1 - December 31
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 50 percent of the harvest 
guideline is allocated coastwide.
    Reallocation: On July 1, the remaining harvest guideline (50 
percent plus any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is 
allocated coastwide.

Alternative 2: Rejected by the Council

Alternative 3: Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods

    Season: January 1 - December 31
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 percent of the harvest 
guideline is allocated coastwide.
    Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline (plus 
any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is allocated 
coastwide.
    Second reallocation: On October 1, 20 percent of the harvest 
guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the first reallocation) is 
reallocated coastwide.

Alternative 4: Allocation Formula Depends on the Size of the Harvest 
Guideline

    Season: January 1 - December 31
    (a) The coastwide harvest guideline is greater than 100,000 mt:
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 percent of the coastwide 
harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 60 percent 
to the Subarea B (south).
    Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining unharvested portion of 
the harvest guideline is pooled and allocated coastwide.
    (b) The coastwide harvest guideline is less than 100,000 mt:
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the coastwide 
harvest guideline is allocated to Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to 
the Subarea B (south).
    Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining unharvested portion of 
the coastwide harvest guideline is pooled and 20 percent is allocated 
to Subarea A (north) and 80 percent to the Subarea B (south).
    Second reallocation: On November 1, any remaining unharvested 
portion of the harvest guideline is again pooled and reallocated 
coastwide.

Alternative 5: Rejected by the Council

Alternative 6: Transfer of Unused Allocations Between Subareas

    Season: January 1 - December 31
    Initial allocation (for 2006 only): On January 1, 40 percent of the 
harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 60 percent 
to the Subarea B (south).
    Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining harvest guideline is 
pooled and allocated coastwide.

Transfer Rules For Computing Subsequent-Year Allocations

    After the initial year (2006) these rules dictate the allocations 
to each subarea in each subsequent year:
    Rule 1: The transfer of a portion of the harvest guideline from one 
subarea to the other, for the purpose of recomputing allocation 
percentages for the next year, occurs if the portion of a subarea's 
allocation remaining uncaught at the end of the year is greater than 
the transfer limits described in Rule 2.
    Rule 2: If the harvest guideline is greater than 100,000 mt, the 
transfer amount will be equal to 10 percent of the coastwide harvest 
guideline for that year. When the coastwide harvest guideline is 
100,000 mt or less, the transfer amount will be 5,000 mt.
    Rule 3: The transfer amount is applied to the current-year 
allocation for each subarea. The resulting numerical values are then 
converted to percentages of the current-year coastwide harvest 
guideline and used to determine the initial allocation for the 
following year.

[[Page 62089]]

    Rule 4: No subarea may initially be allocated more than 75 percent 
of the coastwide harvest guideline.
    Rule 5: The September 1 coastwide reallocation always applies.

Alternative 7: Equal Reallocation

    Season: January 1 December 31
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest 
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to the 
Subarea B (south).
    Reallocation: On September 1, remaining harvest guideline is pooled 
and 50 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A 
(north) and 50 percent to the Subarea B (south).
    Second Reallocation: On November 1, any remaining unharvested 
portion of the harvest guideline is again pooled and reallocated 
coastwide.At the June 2005 Council meeting in Foster City, CA, the 
Council adopted a preferred option for the allocation of Pacific 
sardine that creates a seasonal, coastwide allocation scheme. This 
preferred alternative is a modified version of Alternative 3, which 
provides the following allocation formula for the non-tribal share of 
the harvest guideline: Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods
    Season: January 1 - December 31
    Initial allocation: On January 1, 35 percent of the harvest 
guideline is allocated coastwide.
    Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline (plus 
any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is allocated 
coastwide.
    Second reallocation: On September 15, 25 percent of the harvest 
guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the first reallocation) is 
reallocated coastwide.
    The Council also recommended a review of the allocation formula in 
2008.
    Public comments on Amendment 11 must be received by December 27, 
2005, to be considered by NMFS in the decision whether to approve, 
disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 11. A proposed rule to 
implement Amendment 11 has been submitted for Secretarial review and 
approval. NMFS expects to publish and request public comment on the 
proposed regulation to implement Amendment 11 in the near future.

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

    Dated: October 24, 2005.
Ann M. Lange,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-21561 Filed 10-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S