[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 215 (Monday, November 8, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60731-60732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-29215]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 600

[I.D. 120996A]


Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Essential Fish Habitat

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

ACTION: Interim final rule; reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS announces the reopening of a public comment period to 
assist in the development of a final rule for Essential Fish Habitat 
(EFH). The interim final rule established guidelines to assist the 
Regional Fishery Management Councils (Councils) and the Secretary of 
Commerce (Secretary) in the description and identification of EFH in 
fishery management plans, including the identification of threats and 
conservation measures. The interim regulations also detailed the 
procedures that the Secretary, other Federal agencies, state agencies, 
and the Councils should use to coordinate, consult, or provide 
recommendations on Federal and state actions that may adversely affect 
EFH. NMFS now requests additional comments on four specific issues.

DATES: Comments must be received at the appropriate address or fax 
number (See ADDRESSES) no later that 5:00 p.m., eastern standard time, 
on December 23, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to EFH Coordinator, Office of 
Habitat Conservation, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 
20910-3282. Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 301-713-
1043. Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or 
Internet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Kurland, NMFS, 301-713-2325, fax 
301-713-1043, e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    This rulemaking is required by section 305(b) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act, 
16 U.S.C. 1855(b)). The interim final rule was promulgated on December 
19, 1997 (62 FR 66531). Details concerning the justification for and 
development of the interim final rule were provided in the proposed 
rule (62 FR 19723, April 23, 1997).
    The interim final rule contains two subparts. Subpart J of 50 CFR 
part 600 provides guidelines to the Councils for including information 
in fishery management plans on the description and identification of 
EFH, the identification of threats to EFH from fishing and non-fishing 
activities, and the identification of recommended measures to conserve 
and enhance EFH, as required by sections 303(a)(7) and 305(b)(1)(A) of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1853(a)(7), 1855(b)(1)(A)). Subpart 
K of 50 CFR part 600 details the procedures for implementing the 
coordination, consultation, and recommendation requirements of section 
305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(b)).
    In issuing the interim final rule, NMFS decided to postpone 
development of a final rule for two reasons. First, NMFS decided to 
provide an additional comment period to allow another opportunity for 
affected parties to provide input prior to the development of a final 
rule. Second, NMFS determined that it would be advantageous to 
implement the EFH provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act for a period 
of time via interim final regulations, which would afford an 
opportunity to gain experience adding EFH information to fishery 
management plans and carrying out consultations and coordination with 
Federal and state agencies whose actions may adversely affect EFH.
    Since the promulgation of the interim final rule, EFH provisions 
for 39 fishery management plans have been developed by the Councils and 
approved or partially approved by the Secretary. Additionally, NMFS and 
Federal agencies have begun consulting on actions that may adversely 
affect EFH. Approximately 2000 EFH consultations have been completed to 
date.

[[Page 60732]]

    The comment period on the interim final regulations closed on March 
19, 1998 (63 FR 8607, February 20, 1998). NMFS carefully reviewed and 
is considering the written comments received on the interim final rule. 
NMFS now intends to proceed with development of a final rule.

Electronic Access

    The interim final rule is accessible via the Internet at http://
www.nmfs.gov/habitat/.

Request for Comments

    In light of the comments received on the interim final rule and 
NMFS' experience implementing the EFH provisions of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act under the interim final rule for approximately 20 months, 
NMFS has identified four issues that warrant additional public input 
prior to the development of a final rule. Commenters on the interim 
final rule need not resubmit their previous comments. When developing 
the final rule, NMFS will consider all comments received on the interim 
final rule as well as comments received in response to this document.
    NMFS requests comments on the following issues:
    (1) Given the statutory definition of EFH in section 3(10) of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1802(10)), what suggestions do you have 
for improving the regulatory guidance regarding the description and 
identification of EFH, including the breadth of EFH designations, in 
Secs. 600.815(a)(1) and (2) of the interim final rule?
    (2) Section 600.815(a)(3) of the interim final rule addresses 
fishing activities that may adversely affect EFH. What additional 
guidance, if any, should the final rule contain on how Councils should 
document their efforts to minimize the effects of fishing on EFH, to 
the extent practicable, as required by section 303(a)(7) of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1853(a)(7))?
    (3) Has the use of existing environmental review procedures as 
described in Sec. 600.920(e) of the interim rule been an effective way 
to handle EFH consultations? What additional guidance, if any, should 
the final rule provide on how to use existing environmental reviews to 
satisfy EFH consultation requirements?
    (d) Federal action agencies are required by Sec. 600.920(g) of the 
interim rule to prepare an EFH Assessment as part of the consultation 
process. How, if at all, should the EFH Assessment requirement be 
revised in the final rule?

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

    Dated: November 2, 1999.
Penelope D. Dalton,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 99-29215 Filed 11-5-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F