Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Essential Fish Habitat

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