Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Gulf of Alaska; Proposed Revision to the Final 2006 and 2007 Harvest Specifications for Groundfish, 39046-39048 [E6-10855]
Download as PDF
39046
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
requirements of Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000), do not apply
to this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721
Environmental protection, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
Dated: July 5, 2006.
Charles M. Auer,
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics.
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045, entitled Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because the impact of
this SNUR will be less than $100
million. Executive Order 13045 only
requires analysis of impacts on children
for rules that will have an impact of
$100 million or more.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001), because this action is not
expected to affect energy supply,
distribution, or use.
I. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
This action does not involve any
technical standards; therefore, section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does not
apply to this action.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
This action does not entail special
considerations of environmental justice
related issues as delineated by
Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994).
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
K. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice
Reform
In issuing this proposed rule, EPA has
taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct, as
required by section 3 of Executive Order
12988, entitled Civil Justice Reform (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Jul 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR
part 721 be amended as follows:
PART 721—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 721
would continue to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and
2625(c).
2. By adding new § 721.10068 to
subpart E to read as follows:
§ 721.10068
Elemental mercury.
(a) Definitions. The definitions in
§ 721.3 apply to this section. In
addition, the following definition
applies: Motor vehicle has the meaning
found at 40 CFR 85.1703.
(b) Chemical substances and
significant new uses subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance elemental
mercury (CAS. No. 7439–97–6) is
subject to reporting under this section
for the significant new uses described in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Manufacture or processing of
elemental mercury for use in
convenience light switches in new
motor vehicles.
(ii) Manufacture or processing of
elemental mercury for use in
convenience light switches as new
aftermarket replacement parts for motor
vehicles.
(iii) Manufacture or processing of
elemental mercury for use in switches
in anti-lock brake systems (ABS) in new
motor vehicles.
(iv) Manufacture or processing of
elemental mercury for use in switches
in ABS as new aftermarket replacement
parts for motor vehicles that were
manufactured after January 1, 2003.
(v) Manufacture or processing of
elemental mercury for use in switches
in active ride control systems in new
motor vehicles.
(vi) Manufacture or processing of
elemental mercury for use in switches
in active ride control systems as new
aftermarket replacement parts for motor
vehicles that were manufactured after
January 1, 2003.
(c) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified
by this paragraph.
(1) Revocation of article exemption.
The provisions of § 721.45(f) do not
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
apply to this section. A person who
imports or processes the substance as
part of an article for the significant new
use must submit a significant new use
notice.
(2) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. E6–10858 Filed 7–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 060606148–6148–01; I.D.
112805A]
RIN 0648–AU52
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Gulf of Alaska;
Proposed Revision to the Final 2006
and 2007 Harvest Specifications for
Groundfish
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to revise the
final 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications for the ‘‘other species’’
complex in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) by
reducing the total allowable catch (TAC)
for the complex to 4,500 metric tons
(mt) annually. The intended effect of
this action is to conserve and manage
the groundfish resources in the GOA in
accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
DATES: Comments must be received by
August 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue
Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Walsh, Records Officer. Comments
may be submitted by:
• Mail to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802;
• Hand Delivery to the Federal
Building, 709 West 9th Street, Room
420A, Juneau, AK;
• E-mail to
2006AKGOA.tacspecs@noaa.gov and
include in the subject line of the e-mail
comments the document identifier:
‘‘2006 GOA Amend Harvest
Specifications’’ (E-mail comments, with
or without attachments, are limited to 5
megabytes);
• Fax to 907–586–7557; or
E:\FR\FM\11JYP1.SGM
11JYP1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
• Webform at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions at that site for submitting
comments.
Copies of the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) prepared for
this action and the final Environmental
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(EA/RIR/FRFA) prepared for
Amendment 69 are available from
NMFS at the mailing address above or
from the Alaska Region website
www.fakr.noaa.gov. A copy of the EA/
IRFA prepared for the 2006 and 2007
harvest specifications for the Bering Sea
and Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska
groundfish fisheries also is available
from the same address and website.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom
Pearson, Sustainable Fisheries Division,
Alaska Region, 907–481–1780 or e-mail
at tom.pearson@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone off Alaska
under the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the GOA (FMP). The
North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council) prepared the FMP
under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.
Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and
implementing the FMP appear at 50
CFR parts 600, 679, and 680.
On February 13, 2006, the Secretary of
Commerce approved Amendment 69 to
the FMP. A final rule implementing the
amendment was published in the
Federal Register on March 13, 2006 (71
FR 12626). Amendment 69 and its
implementing rule modify the TAC
calculation for the ‘‘other species’’
complex from a fixed 5 percent of the
sum of target species annual TACs to an
amount less than or equal to this
percentage. The intent of this
adjustment is to prevent overfishing of
species within the ‘‘other species’’
complex. The actual TAC amount for
the ‘‘other species’’ complex will
continue to be established during the
annual harvest specification process set
forth in regulations at § 679.20. Under
this process, the Council recommends a
TAC amount consistent with the
provisions set forth under Amendment
69 that then is forwarded to the
Secretary of Commerce for review and
approval.
The final 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications for groundfish in the GOA
were published in the Federal Register
on March 3, 2006 (71 FR 10870). Under
these specifications, the 2006 and 2007
TACs for the ‘‘other species’’ complex
are 13,856 mt and 12,229 mt,
respectively. These amounts are equal to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Jul 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
5 percent of the sum of the target
species TACs. In December 2005, the
Council recommended that the ‘‘other
species’’ TAC be reduced to 4,500 mt
pending the approval of Amendment 69.
This proposed rule would implement
the Council’s recommendation for the
‘‘other species’’ TAC and revise the
2006 and 2007 harvest specifications
accordingly.
The FMP and its implementing
regulations require NMFS, after
consultation with the Council, to
specify the TAC for each target species
and for the ‘‘other species’’ category, the
sum of which must be within the
optimum yield range of 116,000 mt to
800,000 mt. Section 679.20(c)(1) further
requires NMFS to publish and solicit
public comment on the proposed
harvest specifications. As mentioned
above, this proposed action would
lower the TAC for the ‘‘other species’’
complex in the 2006 and 2007 fishing
years to 4,500 mt. If approved, this
adjustment would reduce the
cumulative 2006 TAC amount to
291,948 mt, a difference of 9,356 mt.
Similarly, the cumulative 2007 TAC
amount would be reduced to 273,911
mt, a difference of 7,729 mt. Under
§ 679.20(c)(3), NMFS will publish the
final revised 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications for the ‘‘other species’’
complex after considering comments
received within the comment period
(see DATES).
The Council’s recommendation in
December 2005 was based on the GOA
Plan Team’s 4,000 mt estimate of the
annual incidental catch of ‘‘other
species’’ in the targeted groundfish and
Pacific halibut fisheries, the Council’s
Advisory Panel’s recommendation, and
public testimony. A 4,500 mt TAC for
the ‘‘other species’’ complex would
allow for incidental catch needs and a
small directed fishery for ‘‘other
species’’ of approximately 500 mt in
each year.
As a result of lowering the TAC for
‘‘other species,’’ NMFS also proposes to
proportionally lower the 2006 and 2007
‘‘other species’’ harvest sideboard
limitations for non-exempt American
Fisheries Act (AFA) catcher vessels and
non AFA crab vessels. For 2006 and
2007, the ‘‘other species’’ harvest
sideboard limitation for non-exempt
AFA catcher vessels would be reduced
to 40 mt from 125 mt in 2006 and 110
mt in 2007. For 2006 and 2007 the
‘‘other species’’ harvest sideboard
limitation for non AFA crab vessels
would be reduced to 79 mt from 244 mt
in 2006 and 215 mt in 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39047
Classification
An IRFA was prepared to evaluate the
impacts of the 2006 and 2007 proposed
harvest specifications on directly
regulated small entities following
Secretarial approval of Amendment 69
to the GOA FMP. This IRFA is intended
to meet the statutory requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the
IRFA is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). The reason for the action, a
statement of the objective of the action,
and the legal basis are discussed in the
IRFA and in the preamble of the
proposed rule and are not repeated here.
The 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications establish harvest limits
for the groundfish species and species
groups in the GOA. Entities directly
impacted are those fishing for
groundfish in the exclusive economic
zone, or in parallel fisheries in State of
Alaska waters (in which harvests are
counted against the Federal TAC). An
estimated 782 small catcher vessels and
18 small catcher processors may be
directly regulated by these harvest
specifications in the GOA. The catcher
vessel estimate in particular is subject to
various uncertainties. It may provide an
underestimate because it does not count
vessels that fish only within State of
Alaska waters. This may be offset by
upward biases introduced by the use of
preliminary price estimates (which do
not fully account for post-season price
adjustments) and by a failure to account
for affiliations, other than AFA
cooperative affiliations, among entities.
For these reasons the catcher vessel
estimate must be considered an
approximation.
This regulation does not impose new
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
on the regulated small entities. This
analysis did not reveal any Federal rules
that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with
the proposed action.
This IRFA analysis prepared for this
proposed action examined the status
quo, or no action alternative in relation
to the proposed action to reduce the
TAC for the ‘‘other species’’ complex to
4,500 mt. A TAC of 4,500 mt exceeds
the estimated annual incidental catch
needs in the groundfish and Pacific
halibut fisheries while allowing for a
limited (approximately 500 mt
annually) directed fishery for the ‘‘other
species’’ complex and the development
of markets for these species.
The EA/RIR/FRFA prepared for
Amendment 69 examined a range of
TAC setting alternatives. Alternative 1
would have been the status quo, or no
action alternative, and the TAC for the
‘‘other species’’ complex would
continue to be set at 5 percent of the
E:\FR\FM\11JYP1.SGM
11JYP1
39048
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
sum of other targeted species TACs.
This alternative was not selected for
conservation reasons. If the TAC were
set at this level (and fully harvested) it
would most likely not be sustainable,
further, if a single species in the
complex were targeted to the exclusion
of other species in the complex that
targeted species would likely experience
overfishing. Alternative 3 would have
set the TAC at a level anticipated to
meet anticipated incidental catch needs
in other directed fisheries. This
alternative was not selected because,
while it would have allowed retention
of up to 20 percent of marketable ‘‘other
species,’’ it would have precluded the
possibility the possibility of future
development of directed fisheries
targeting ‘‘other species.’’ Alternative 2,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Jul 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
the alternative selected by the Council
and implemented by final rule gave the
Council the greatest amount of
flexibility to recommend a TAC up to 5
percent of the sum of the target species
TACs. Presumably the Council would
recommend a TAC sufficient to meet
incidental catch needs in other directed
fisheries while allowing for the
development of sustainable fisheries
targeting ‘‘other species.’’ The FRFA
prepared for Amendment 69 determined
that any of the alternatives considered
would not adversely impact small
entities.
The IRFA prepared for this proposed
rule specifically examined the impacts
of setting the TAC for the ‘‘other
species’’ complex at 4,500 mt, as
recommended by the Council, versus 5
percent of the sum of targeted species
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
TACs which was in effect at the time the
final harvest specifications for
groundfish in the GOA for the fishing
years 2006 and 2007 were implemented.
The IRFA concluded that the proposed
action does not appear to create adverse
impacts on directly regulated small
entities.
This action is authorized under
§ 679.20 and is exempt from review
under Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1540(f);
1801 et seq.; 1851 note; and 3631 et seq.
Dated: July 6, 2006.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E6–10855 Filed 7–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\11JYP1.SGM
11JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39046-39048]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10855]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 060606148-6148-01; I.D. 112805A]
RIN 0648-AU52
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Gulf of
Alaska; Proposed Revision to the Final 2006 and 2007 Harvest
Specifications for Groundfish
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to revise the final 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications for the ``other species'' complex in the Gulf of Alaska
(GOA) by reducing the total allowable catch (TAC) for the complex to
4,500 metric tons (mt) annually. The intended effect of this action is
to conserve and manage the groundfish resources in the GOA in
accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
DATES: Comments must be received by August 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS,
Attn: Ellen Walsh, Records Officer. Comments may be submitted by:
Mail to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802;
Hand Delivery to the Federal Building, 709 West 9th
Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK;
E-mail to 2006AKGOA.tacspecs@noaa.gov and include in the
subject line of the e-mail comments the document identifier: ``2006 GOA
Amend Harvest Specifications'' (E-mail comments, with or without
attachments, are limited to 5 megabytes);
Fax to 907-586-7557; or
[[Page 39047]]
Webform at the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at that site for
submitting comments.
Copies of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
prepared for this action and the final Environmental Assessment/
Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/
FRFA) prepared for Amendment 69 are available from NMFS at the mailing
address above or from the Alaska Region website www.fakr.noaa.gov. A
copy of the EA/IRFA prepared for the 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications for the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and Gulf of
Alaska groundfish fisheries also is available from the same address and
website.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Pearson, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region, 907-481-1780 or e-mail at
tom.pearson@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone off Alaska under the Fishery Management Plan
for Groundfish of the GOA (FMP). The North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council) prepared the FMP under the authority of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq. Regulations governing U.S.
fisheries and implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600, 679, and
680.
On February 13, 2006, the Secretary of Commerce approved Amendment
69 to the FMP. A final rule implementing the amendment was published in
the Federal Register on March 13, 2006 (71 FR 12626). Amendment 69 and
its implementing rule modify the TAC calculation for the ``other
species'' complex from a fixed 5 percent of the sum of target species
annual TACs to an amount less than or equal to this percentage. The
intent of this adjustment is to prevent overfishing of species within
the ``other species'' complex. The actual TAC amount for the ``other
species'' complex will continue to be established during the annual
harvest specification process set forth in regulations at Sec. 679.20.
Under this process, the Council recommends a TAC amount consistent with
the provisions set forth under Amendment 69 that then is forwarded to
the Secretary of Commerce for review and approval.
The final 2006 and 2007 harvest specifications for groundfish in
the GOA were published in the Federal Register on March 3, 2006 (71 FR
10870). Under these specifications, the 2006 and 2007 TACs for the
``other species'' complex are 13,856 mt and 12,229 mt, respectively.
These amounts are equal to 5 percent of the sum of the target species
TACs. In December 2005, the Council recommended that the ``other
species'' TAC be reduced to 4,500 mt pending the approval of Amendment
69. This proposed rule would implement the Council's recommendation for
the ``other species'' TAC and revise the 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications accordingly.
The FMP and its implementing regulations require NMFS, after
consultation with the Council, to specify the TAC for each target
species and for the ``other species'' category, the sum of which must
be within the optimum yield range of 116,000 mt to 800,000 mt. Section
679.20(c)(1) further requires NMFS to publish and solicit public
comment on the proposed harvest specifications. As mentioned above,
this proposed action would lower the TAC for the ``other species''
complex in the 2006 and 2007 fishing years to 4,500 mt. If approved,
this adjustment would reduce the cumulative 2006 TAC amount to 291,948
mt, a difference of 9,356 mt. Similarly, the cumulative 2007 TAC amount
would be reduced to 273,911 mt, a difference of 7,729 mt. Under Sec.
679.20(c)(3), NMFS will publish the final revised 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications for the ``other species'' complex after considering
comments received within the comment period (see DATES).
The Council's recommendation in December 2005 was based on the GOA
Plan Team's 4,000 mt estimate of the annual incidental catch of ``other
species'' in the targeted groundfish and Pacific halibut fisheries, the
Council's Advisory Panel's recommendation, and public testimony. A
4,500 mt TAC for the ``other species'' complex would allow for
incidental catch needs and a small directed fishery for ``other
species'' of approximately 500 mt in each year.
As a result of lowering the TAC for ``other species,'' NMFS also
proposes to proportionally lower the 2006 and 2007 ``other species''
harvest sideboard limitations for non-exempt American Fisheries Act
(AFA) catcher vessels and non AFA crab vessels. For 2006 and 2007, the
``other species'' harvest sideboard limitation for non-exempt AFA
catcher vessels would be reduced to 40 mt from 125 mt in 2006 and 110
mt in 2007. For 2006 and 2007 the ``other species'' harvest sideboard
limitation for non AFA crab vessels would be reduced to 79 mt from 244
mt in 2006 and 215 mt in 2007.
Classification
An IRFA was prepared to evaluate the impacts of the 2006 and 2007
proposed harvest specifications on directly regulated small entities
following Secretarial approval of Amendment 69 to the GOA FMP. This
IRFA is intended to meet the statutory requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A copy of the IRFA is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). The reason for the action, a statement of the objective of
the action, and the legal basis are discussed in the IRFA and in the
preamble of the proposed rule and are not repeated here.
The 2006 and 2007 harvest specifications establish harvest limits
for the groundfish species and species groups in the GOA. Entities
directly impacted are those fishing for groundfish in the exclusive
economic zone, or in parallel fisheries in State of Alaska waters (in
which harvests are counted against the Federal TAC). An estimated 782
small catcher vessels and 18 small catcher processors may be directly
regulated by these harvest specifications in the GOA. The catcher
vessel estimate in particular is subject to various uncertainties. It
may provide an underestimate because it does not count vessels that
fish only within State of Alaska waters. This may be offset by upward
biases introduced by the use of preliminary price estimates (which do
not fully account for post-season price adjustments) and by a failure
to account for affiliations, other than AFA cooperative affiliations,
among entities. For these reasons the catcher vessel estimate must be
considered an approximation.
This regulation does not impose new recordkeeping or reporting
requirements on the regulated small entities. This analysis did not
reveal any Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed action.
This IRFA analysis prepared for this proposed action examined the
status quo, or no action alternative in relation to the proposed action
to reduce the TAC for the ``other species'' complex to 4,500 mt. A TAC
of 4,500 mt exceeds the estimated annual incidental catch needs in the
groundfish and Pacific halibut fisheries while allowing for a limited
(approximately 500 mt annually) directed fishery for the ``other
species'' complex and the development of markets for these species.
The EA/RIR/FRFA prepared for Amendment 69 examined a range of TAC
setting alternatives. Alternative 1 would have been the status quo, or
no action alternative, and the TAC for the ``other species'' complex
would continue to be set at 5 percent of the
[[Page 39048]]
sum of other targeted species TACs. This alternative was not selected
for conservation reasons. If the TAC were set at this level (and fully
harvested) it would most likely not be sustainable, further, if a
single species in the complex were targeted to the exclusion of other
species in the complex that targeted species would likely experience
overfishing. Alternative 3 would have set the TAC at a level
anticipated to meet anticipated incidental catch needs in other
directed fisheries. This alternative was not selected because, while it
would have allowed retention of up to 20 percent of marketable ``other
species,'' it would have precluded the possibility the possibility of
future development of directed fisheries targeting ``other species.''
Alternative 2, the alternative selected by the Council and implemented
by final rule gave the Council the greatest amount of flexibility to
recommend a TAC up to 5 percent of the sum of the target species TACs.
Presumably the Council would recommend a TAC sufficient to meet
incidental catch needs in other directed fisheries while allowing for
the development of sustainable fisheries targeting ``other species.''
The FRFA prepared for Amendment 69 determined that any of the
alternatives considered would not adversely impact small entities.
The IRFA prepared for this proposed rule specifically examined the
impacts of setting the TAC for the ``other species'' complex at 4,500
mt, as recommended by the Council, versus 5 percent of the sum of
targeted species TACs which was in effect at the time the final harvest
specifications for groundfish in the GOA for the fishing years 2006 and
2007 were implemented. The IRFA concluded that the proposed action does
not appear to create adverse impacts on directly regulated small
entities.
This action is authorized under Sec. 679.20 and is exempt from
review under Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1540(f); 1801 et seq.; 1851
note; and 3631 et seq.
Dated: July 6, 2006.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-10855 Filed 7-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S