Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery, 66797-66799 [05-21953]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Federalism
List of Subjects in 46 CFR 388
We have analyzed this rule in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13132 (Federalism) and have
determined that it does not have
sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a federalism
summary impact statement. These
regulations have no substantial effects
on the States, the current Federal-State
relationship, or the current distribution
of power and responsibilities among
local officials. Therefore, consultation
with State and local officials is not
necessary.
Administrative practice and
procedure, Maritime carriers, Passenger
vessels, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
I Accordingly, the Maritime
Administration amends 46 CFR chapter
II, subchapter J, by amending part 388
as follows.
Executive Order 13175
MARAD does not believe that this
rulemaking will significantly or
uniquely affect the communities of
Indian tribal governments when
analyzed under the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13175 (Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments).
Therefore, the funding and consultation
requirements of this Executive Order do
not apply.
Environmental Impact Statement
We have analyzed this rule for
purposes of compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and have
concluded that under the categorical
exclusions in section 4.05 of Maritime
Administrative Order (MAO) 600–1,
‘‘Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts,’’ 50 FR 11606
(March 22, 1985), neither the
preparation of an Environmental
Assessment, an Environmental Impact
Statement, nor a Finding of No
Significant Impact for this rulemaking is
required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule does not impose an
unfunded mandate under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does
not result in costs of $100 million or
more, in the aggregate, to any of the
following: State, local, or Native
American tribal governments, or the
private sector. This rule is the least
burdensome alternative that achieves
this objective of U.S. policy.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains information
collection requirements covered by the
Office of Management and Budget
approval number 2133–0529. The
changes have no impact on the reporting
burden.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 Nov 02, 2005
Jkt 208001
PART 388—ADMINISTRATIVE
WAIVERS OF THE COASTWISE TRADE
LAWS
1. The authority citation for part 388
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 46 App. U.S.C. 1114(b); Pub. L.
105–383, 112 Stat. 3445 (46 U.S.C. 12106
note); 49 CFR 1.66.
2. Amend § 388.3 by revising
paragraph (a)(1) and the introductory
text of paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
I
§ 388.3
Application and fee.
(a) * * *
(1) The application form contained on
MARAD’s Web site at https://
www.marad.dot.gov may be submitted
electronically with credit card or
Automated Clearinghouse (ACH)
payment of the $500 application fee.
(2) Alternatively, applicants may send
written applications to Small Vessel
Waiver Applications, Office of Ports and
Domestic Shipping, MAR–830, Room
7201, 400 7th St., SW., Washington, DC
20590. Written applications need not be
in any particular format, but must be
signed, be accompanied by a check for
$500 made out to the order of ‘‘Maritime
Administration’’, and contain the
following information:
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: October 31, 2005.
By order of the Maritime Administrator.
Joel C. Richard,
Secretary, Maritime Administration.
[FR Doc. 05–21924 Filed 11–2–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–81–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 051028281–5281–01; I.D.
101705C]
RIN 0648–AT99
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
66797
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This final rule amends
current regulatory text regarding
boundaries for the essential fish habitat
(EFH) closures that were established by
Framework 16 to the Atlantic Sea
Scallop (Scallop) Fishery Management
Plan (FMP) and Framework 39 to the
Northeast Multispecies (NE
Multispecies) FMP (Joint Frameworks
16/39) in order to reflect recent court
orders in Oceana v. Evans, vacating
such text and reinstating boundaries for
EFH closures established by
Amendment 10 to the Scallop FMP
(Amendment 10). This final rule also
revises the Scallop Access Area
boundaries to be consistent with the
redefined EFH closed areas.
DATES: Effective November 3, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 13 to
the NE Multispecies FMP, Amendment
10, Joint Frameworks 16/39, their
Regulatory Impact Reviews (RIR),
including the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analyses (IRFA), and the
Environmental Assessment and
Environmental Impact Statements are
available on request from Paul J.
Howard, Executive Director, New
England Fishery Management Council,
50 Water Street, Newburyport, MA
01950. These documents are also
available online at https://
www.nefmc.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peter W. Christopher, Fishery Policy
Analyst, (978) 281–9288; fax (978) 281–
9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 1,
2004, NMFS implemented approved
measures in Amendment 13 to the NE
Multispecies FMP (Amendment 13),
which was developed and
recommended by the New England
Fishery Management Council (NEFMC)
(69 FR 22906, April 27, 2004). Among
the implemented measures was a
description of boundaries of certain
areas of the ocean closed to all mobile
fishing gear for the protection of NE
multispecies EFH (§ 648.81(h)).
Subsequent to the implementation of
Amendment 13, on July 23, 2004, NMFS
implemented approved measures in
Amendment 10, which was also
developed and recommended by the
NEFMC (69 FR 35194, June 23, 2004).
Amendment 10 also included a
description of boundaries of certain
areas of the ocean closed to scallop
fishing for the protection of NE
multispecies, and EFH for other species,
from the effects of scallop fishing gear
(§ 648.61). The Amendment 10 EFH
E:\FR\FM\03NOR1.SGM
03NOR1
66798
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
closures were defined by somewhat
different boundaries than the EFH
closures implemented by Amendment
13. Because the EFH closures under
Amendment 10 were designed primarily
to protect multispecies EFH, the
NEMFC, through Joint Frameworks 16/
39, recommended that the Amendment
10 EFH closed area boundaries be
identical to the Amendment 13 EFH
closed area boundaries. On November 2,
2004, NMFS implemented the
recommended Joint Frameworks 16/39
EFH closed area boundaries, thereby
replacing the boundaries contained in
regulations implementing Amendment
10 (69 FR 63460, November 2, 2004).
Oceana, Inc., challenged Amendment
10 and Joint Frameworks 16/39 in
Oceana v. Evans, et al., (Civil Action
No. 04–810, D.D.C., August 2, 2005, and
October 6, 2005), on several grounds,
including the validity of changing the
Amendment 10 EFH closed area
boundaries through a framework
procedure, namely Joint Frameworks
16/39. On August 2, 2005, the court
ruled that Amendment 10 EFH closed
area boundaries could not be changed
through a framework procedure. Based
on this finding, the Court ordered the
vacatur of Joint Frameworks 16/39
regulations, which changed the EFH
closed area boundaries and stated that
the ‘‘practical result of the Court’s
holding is that, for the time being, both
the habitat closures in Amendment 10
and the habitat closure in Amendment
13 will remain in place.’’ (Oceana v.
Evans, (Order #73, August 2, 2005) p.
87). NMFS subsequently asked the
Court for clarification on whether this
statement meant that Amendment 10
EFH closures are automatically
reinstated by the Court’s order. On
October 6, 2005, the Court issued
another order in response to the request
for clarification stating ‘‘ the Court′s
August 2, 2005 Order [#73] is clarified
to the extent that it reinstates the habitat
area closures established by
Amendment 10 so it is not necessary for
defendants to repromulgate those
closures . . . . ‘‘ (Oceana v. Evans, (Order
#83, October 6, 2005) p. 1).
This final rule is necessary to ensure
that the Federal Register and Code of
Federal Regulations accurately reflects
the Court’s order reinstating
Amendment 10 EFH closures and to
make the Scallop Access Area
boundaries specified in § 648.59
consistent with the redefined EFH
closed areas. This rule provides
sufficient notice to the scallop industry
and the public of the effect of the
Court’s order. As a result, it is more
likely the scallop industry will come
into immediate compliance with the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 Nov 02, 2005
Jkt 208001
Amendment 10 EFH closures and
NMFS’s ability to enforce violations of
this rule effectively will be enhanced.
Classification
The Regional Administrator
previously determined that Amendment
10 is necessary for the conservation and
management of the Atlantic sea scallop
fishery and is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act and
other applicable law. This action does
not change that determination.
Because prior notice and opportunity
for public comment are not required for
this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other
law, the analytical requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq., are inapplicable.
The requirement for notice and
comment rulemaking is waived for good
cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
because it would be unnecessary and
impracticable. Notice and comment
rulemaking for this rule is unnecessary
and impracticable because the agency
must act immediately in order to bring
regulations into compliance with the
court order in Oceana v. Evans. The
agency, therefore, has no discretion as to
the substance or timing of this rule.
Accordingly, notice and comment
rulemaking would serve no purpose and
would inappropriately delay amending
regulations necessary to reflect the court
order. Because the agency must act
immediately to bring regulations into
compliance with the court order, it has
no discretion to delay the rule′s
effectiveness. Therefore, there is good
cause to waive the requirement to delay
effectiveness of the rule pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Recordkeeping and
reporting requirements.
Dated: October 28, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
50 CFR, part 648 is amended as follows:
I
PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE
NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
§ 648.59
Sea Scallop Access Areas.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) The Closed Area I Access Area is
defined the straight lines connecting the
points in the order stated in the
following table (copies of a chart
depicting this area are available from
the Regional Administrator upon
request):
Point
Latitude
CAIA1
CAIA2
CAIA3
CAIA1
41°26′
41°09′
41°4.54′
41°26′
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68°30′
68°30′
69°0.9′
68°30′
W.
W.
W.
W.
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(3) The Nantucket Lightship Sea
Scallop Access Area is defined by
straight lines connecting the points in
the order stated in the following table
(copies of a chart depicting this area are
available from the Regional
Administrator upon request):
Point
Latitude
NLSA1
NLSA2
NLSA3
NLSA4
NLSA1
*
40°50′
40°30′
40°30′
40°50′
40°50′
*
*
*
Longitude
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
69°00′
69.00′
69°14.5′
69°29.5′
69°00′
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
*
3. Section 648.61 is revised to read as
follows:
I
§ 648.61
EFH closed areas.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of this part, the following areas
identified in paragraphs (a) through (e)
of this section are closed to scallop
fishing to protect EFH from adverse
effects of scallop fishing (copies of
charts depicting these areas are
available from the Regional
Administrator upon request):
(a) Closed Area I EFH Closure. No
vessel may fish for scallops in, or
possess or land scallops from, the area
known as the Closed Area I EFH
Closure. No vessel may possess scallops
in the Closed Area I EFH Closure, unless
such vessel is only transiting the area as
provided in paragraph (e) of this
section. The Closed Area I EFH Closure
consists of two sections, defined by
straight lines connecting the points in
the order stated in the following table:
2. In § 648.59, paragraphs (b)(3), and
(d)(3) are revised to read as follows:
Frm 00052
N.
N.
N.
N.
*
I
PO 00000
Longitude
E:\FR\FM\03NOR1.SGM
03NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
SECTION 1
Point
CAIE1
CAIE2
CAIE3
CAIE4
CAIE5
CAIE6
CAIE7
CAIE8
CAIE5
N.
N.
N.
N.
Latitude
41°04.5′
41°09′
40°45′
40°45′
41°04.5′
42°22′ N.
41°30′ N.
69°23′
68°35′
69°4.2′
69°23′
CAIIE3
CAIIE1
41°30′ N.
42°22′ N.
W.
W.
W.
W.
Longitude
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
69°1.2′
68°30′
68°30′
68°45′
69°1.2′
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
(b) Closed Area II EFH Closure. No
vessel may fish for scallops in, or
possess or land scallops from, the area
known as the Closed Area II EFH
Closure. No vessel may possess scallops
in the Closed Area II EFH Closure,
unless such vessel is only transiting the
area as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section. The Closed Area II EFH Closure
is defined by straight lines connecting
the points in the order stated in the
following table:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Longitude
CAIIE1
CAIIE2
SECTION 2
Point
Latitude
Longitude
Latitude
41°30′
41°30′
41°08′
41°30′
Point
17:03 Nov 02, 2005
Jkt 208001
1
67°20′ W.1
66°34.8′
W.1
67°20′ W.
67°20′ W.1
The U.S/Canada Maritime Boundary
(c) Nantucket Lightship Closed Area
EFH Closure. No vessel may fish for
scallops in, or possess or land scallops
from, the area known as the Nantucket
Lightship Closed Area EFH Closure. No
vessel may possess scallops in the
Nantucket Lightship Closed Area EFH
Closure, unless such vessel is only
transiting the area as provided in
paragraph (e) of this section. The
Nantucket Lightship Closed Area EFH
Closure is defined by straight lines
connecting the points in the order stated
in the following table:
Point
NLSE1
NLSE2
NLSE3
NLSE4
NLSE5
NLSE6
NLSE1
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Latitude
40°50′
40°50′
40°30′
40°30′
40°20′
40°20′
40°50′
Fmt 4700
Longitude
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
Sfmt 4700
70°20′
69°29.5′
69°14.5′
69°00′
69°00′
70°20′
70°20′
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
66799
(d) Western Gulf of Maine EFH
Closure. No vessel may fish for scallops
in, or possess or land scallops from, the
area known as the Western Gulf of
Maine EFH Closure. No vessel may
possess scallops in the Western Gulf of
Maine EFH Closure, unless such vessel
is only transiting the area as provided in
paragraph (e) of this section. The
Western Gulf of Maine EFH Closure is
defined by straight lines connecting the
points in the order stated in the
following table:
Point
WGOM1
WGOM2
WGOM3
WGOM4
WGOM1
Latitude
43°15′
43°15′
42°15′
42°15′
43°15′
Longitude
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
70°15′
69°55′
69°55′
70°15′
70°15′
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
(e) Transiting. A vessel may transit
the area(s) specified in paragraphs (a),
(c), and (d) of this section, provided that
its gear is stowed in accordance with the
provisions of § 648.23(b). A vessel may
transit the area specified in paragraph
(b) of this section, in accordance with
§ 648.81(b)(2)(iv).
[FR Doc. 05–21953 Filed 10–31–05; 2:09 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\03NOR1.SGM
03NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 212 (Thursday, November 3, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66797-66799]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21953]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 051028281-5281-01; I.D. 101705C]
RIN 0648-AT99
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop
Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends current regulatory text regarding
boundaries for the essential fish habitat (EFH) closures that were
established by Framework 16 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop (Scallop)
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and Framework 39 to the Northeast
Multispecies (NE Multispecies) FMP (Joint Frameworks 16/39) in order to
reflect recent court orders in Oceana v. Evans, vacating such text and
reinstating boundaries for EFH closures established by Amendment 10 to
the Scallop FMP (Amendment 10). This final rule also revises the
Scallop Access Area boundaries to be consistent with the redefined EFH
closed areas.
DATES: Effective November 3, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 13 to the NE Multispecies FMP, Amendment
10, Joint Frameworks 16/39, their Regulatory Impact Reviews (RIR),
including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analyses (IRFA), and the
Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Statements are
available on request from Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New
England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Newburyport, MA
01950. These documents are also available online at https://
www.nefmc.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter W. Christopher, Fishery Policy
Analyst, (978) 281-9288; fax (978) 281-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 1, 2004, NMFS implemented approved
measures in Amendment 13 to the NE Multispecies FMP (Amendment 13),
which was developed and recommended by the New England Fishery
Management Council (NEFMC) (69 FR 22906, April 27, 2004). Among the
implemented measures was a description of boundaries of certain areas
of the ocean closed to all mobile fishing gear for the protection of NE
multispecies EFH (Sec. 648.81(h)). Subsequent to the implementation of
Amendment 13, on July 23, 2004, NMFS implemented approved measures in
Amendment 10, which was also developed and recommended by the NEFMC (69
FR 35194, June 23, 2004). Amendment 10 also included a description of
boundaries of certain areas of the ocean closed to scallop fishing for
the protection of NE multispecies, and EFH for other species, from the
effects of scallop fishing gear (Sec. 648.61). The Amendment 10 EFH
[[Page 66798]]
closures were defined by somewhat different boundaries than the EFH
closures implemented by Amendment 13. Because the EFH closures under
Amendment 10 were designed primarily to protect multispecies EFH, the
NEMFC, through Joint Frameworks 16/39, recommended that the Amendment
10 EFH closed area boundaries be identical to the Amendment 13 EFH
closed area boundaries. On November 2, 2004, NMFS implemented the
recommended Joint Frameworks 16/39 EFH closed area boundaries, thereby
replacing the boundaries contained in regulations implementing
Amendment 10 (69 FR 63460, November 2, 2004).
Oceana, Inc., challenged Amendment 10 and Joint Frameworks 16/39 in
Oceana v. Evans, et al., (Civil Action No. 04-810, D.D.C., August 2,
2005, and October 6, 2005), on several grounds, including the validity
of changing the Amendment 10 EFH closed area boundaries through a
framework procedure, namely Joint Frameworks 16/39. On August 2, 2005,
the court ruled that Amendment 10 EFH closed area boundaries could not
be changed through a framework procedure. Based on this finding, the
Court ordered the vacatur of Joint Frameworks 16/39 regulations, which
changed the EFH closed area boundaries and stated that the ``practical
result of the Court's holding is that, for the time being, both the
habitat closures in Amendment 10 and the habitat closure in Amendment
13 will remain in place.'' (Oceana v. Evans, (Order 73, August
2, 2005) p. 87). NMFS subsequently asked the Court for clarification on
whether this statement meant that Amendment 10 EFH closures are
automatically reinstated by the Court's order. On October 6, 2005, the
Court issued another order in response to the request for clarification
stating `` the Court's August 2, 2005 Order [73] is clarified
to the extent that it reinstates the habitat area closures established
by Amendment 10 so it is not necessary for defendants to repromulgate
those closures . . . . `` (Oceana v. Evans, (Order 83, October
6, 2005) p. 1).
This final rule is necessary to ensure that the Federal Register
and Code of Federal Regulations accurately reflects the Court's order
reinstating Amendment 10 EFH closures and to make the Scallop Access
Area boundaries specified in Sec. 648.59 consistent with the redefined
EFH closed areas. This rule provides sufficient notice to the scallop
industry and the public of the effect of the Court's order. As a
result, it is more likely the scallop industry will come into immediate
compliance with the Amendment 10 EFH closures and NMFS's ability to
enforce violations of this rule effectively will be enhanced.
Classification
The Regional Administrator previously determined that Amendment 10
is necessary for the conservation and management of the Atlantic sea
scallop fishery and is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act and other applicable law. This action
does not change that determination.
Because prior notice and opportunity for public comment are not
required for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other law, the
analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq., are inapplicable.
The requirement for notice and comment rulemaking is waived for
good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) because it would be
unnecessary and impracticable. Notice and comment rulemaking for this
rule is unnecessary and impracticable because the agency must act
immediately in order to bring regulations into compliance with the
court order in Oceana v. Evans. The agency, therefore, has no
discretion as to the substance or timing of this rule. Accordingly,
notice and comment rulemaking would serve no purpose and would
inappropriately delay amending regulations necessary to reflect the
court order. Because the agency must act immediately to bring
regulations into compliance with the court order, it has no discretion
to delay the rule's effectiveness. Therefore, there is good cause to
waive the requirement to delay effectiveness of the rule pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Dated: October 28, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 50 CFR, part 648 is amended as
follows:
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
0
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 648.59, paragraphs (b)(3), and (d)(3) are revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 648.59 Sea Scallop Access Areas.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) The Closed Area I Access Area is defined the straight lines
connecting the points in the order stated in the following table
(copies of a chart depicting this area are available from the Regional
Administrator upon request):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAIA1 41[deg]26' 68[deg]30'
N. W.
CAIA2 41[deg]09' 68[deg]30'
N. W.
CAIA3 41[deg]4.54 69[deg]0.9'
' N. W.
CAIA1 41[deg]26' 68[deg]30'
N. W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) The Nantucket Lightship Sea Scallop Access Area is defined by
straight lines connecting the points in the order stated in the
following table (copies of a chart depicting this area are available
from the Regional Administrator upon request):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NLSA1 40[deg]50' 69[deg]00'
N. W.
NLSA2 40[deg]30' 69.00' W.
N.
NLSA3 40[deg]30' 69[deg]14.5
N. ' W.
NLSA4 40[deg]50' 69[deg]29.5
N. ' W.
NLSA1 40[deg]50' 69[deg]00'
N. W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
3. Section 648.61 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.61 EFH closed areas.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, the following
areas identified in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section are
closed to scallop fishing to protect EFH from adverse effects of
scallop fishing (copies of charts depicting these areas are available
from the Regional Administrator upon request):
(a) Closed Area I EFH Closure. No vessel may fish for scallops in,
or possess or land scallops from, the area known as the Closed Area I
EFH Closure. No vessel may possess scallops in the Closed Area I EFH
Closure, unless such vessel is only transiting the area as provided in
paragraph (e) of this section. The Closed Area I EFH Closure consists
of two sections, defined by straight lines connecting the points in the
order stated in the following table:
[[Page 66799]]
Section 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAIE1 41[deg]30' 69[deg]23'
N. W.
CAIE2 41[deg]30' 68[deg]35'
N. W.
CAIE3 41[deg]08' 69[deg]4.2'
N. W.
CAIE4 41[deg]30' 69[deg]23'
N. W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAIE5 41[deg]04.5 69[deg]1.2'
' N. W.
CAIE6 41[deg]09' 68[deg]30'
N. W.
CAIE7 40[deg]45' 68[deg]30'
N. W.
CAIE8 40[deg]45' 68[deg]45'
N. W.
CAIE5 41[deg]04.5 69[deg]1.2'
' N. W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Closed Area II EFH Closure. No vessel may fish for scallops in,
or possess or land scallops from, the area known as the Closed Area II
EFH Closure. No vessel may possess scallops in the Closed Area II EFH
Closure, unless such vessel is only transiting the area as provided in
paragraph (e) of this section. The Closed Area II EFH Closure is
defined by straight lines connecting the points in the order stated in
the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAIIE1 42[deg]22' 67[deg]20'
N. W.\1\
CAIIE2 41[deg]30' 66[deg]34.8
N. ' W.\1\
CAIIE3 41[deg]30' 67[deg]20'
N. W.
CAIIE1 42[deg]22' 67[deg]20'
N. W.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The U.S/Canada Maritime Boundary
(c) Nantucket Lightship Closed Area EFH Closure. No vessel may fish
for scallops in, or possess or land scallops from, the area known as
the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area EFH Closure. No vessel may possess
scallops in the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area EFH Closure, unless
such vessel is only transiting the area as provided in paragraph (e) of
this section. The Nantucket Lightship Closed Area EFH Closure is
defined by straight lines connecting the points in the order stated in
the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NLSE1 40[deg]50' 70[deg]20'
N. W.
NLSE2 40[deg]50' 69[deg]29.5
N. ' W.
NLSE3 40[deg]30' 69[deg]14.5
N. ' W.
NLSE4 40[deg]30' 69[deg]00'
N. W.
NLSE5 40[deg]20' 69[deg]00'
N. W.
NLSE6 40[deg]20' 70[deg]20'
N. W.
NLSE1 40[deg]50' 70[deg]20'
N. W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Western Gulf of Maine EFH Closure. No vessel may fish for
scallops in, or possess or land scallops from, the area known as the
Western Gulf of Maine EFH Closure. No vessel may possess scallops in
the Western Gulf of Maine EFH Closure, unless such vessel is only
transiting the area as provided in paragraph (e) of this section. The
Western Gulf of Maine EFH Closure is defined by straight lines
connecting the points in the order stated in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WGOM1 43[deg]15' 70[deg]15'
N. W.
WGOM2 43[deg]15' 69[deg]55'
N. W.
WGOM3 42[deg]15' 69[deg]55'
N. W.
WGOM4 42[deg]15' 70[deg]15'
N. W.
WGOM1 43[deg]15' 70[deg]15'
N. W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) Transiting. A vessel may transit the area(s) specified in
paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) of this section, provided that its gear is
stowed in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 648.23(b). A vessel
may transit the area specified in paragraph (b) of this section, in
accordance with Sec. 648.81(b)(2)(iv).
[FR Doc. 05-21953 Filed 10-31-05; 2:09 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
