11791
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
48
/
Wednesday,
March
12,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
136
[
FRL
 
7462
 
9]

Technical
Support
Document
for
the
Assessment
of
Detection
and
Quantitation
Concepts
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Notice
of
document
availability
and
public
comment
period.

SUMMARY:
Today's
action
announces
the
availability
of
a
recent
assessment
of
detection
and
quantitation
procedures
used
by
EPA
to
determine
the
sensitivity
of
analytical
(
test)
methods
under
EPA's
Clean
Water
Act
(
CWA).
EPA's
method
detection
limit
(
MDL)
and
minimum
level
of
quantitation
(
ML)
are
used
to
define
test
sensitivity
under
the
CWA.
The
MDL
is
used
to
determine
the
lowest
concentration
at
which
a
substance
is
detected
or
is
``
present''
in
a
sample.
The
ML
appears
in
many
EPA
methods
and
has
been
used
to
describe
the
lowest
concentration
of
a
substance
that
gives
a
recognizable
signal,
or
as
a
quantitation
limit.
The
Assessment
Document
includes
an
evaluation
of
the
MDL
and
ML
procedures
and
alternative
approaches
for
defining
test
sensitivity.
This
Assessment
Document
has
been
peer­
reviewed
and
is
now
available
for
public
review
and
comment.
DATES:
Comments
must
be
postmarked,
delivered
by
hand,
or
electronically
mailed
on
or
before
July
10,
2003.
Comments
provided
electronically
will
be
considered
timely
if
they
are
submitted
electronically
by
11:
59
p.
m.
Eastern
Time
on
July
10,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
Comments
may
be
submitted
by
mail
to
Water
Docket,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
4101T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue
NW.,
Washington
DC
20460,
or
electronically
through
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
OW
 
2003
 
0003.
See
Unit
C
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
section
for
additional
ways
to
submit
comments
and
more
detailed
instructions.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
William
Telliard;
Engineering
and
Analysis
Division
(
4303T);
Office
of
Science
and
Technology;
Office
of
Water;
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency;
Ariel
Rios
Building;
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460,
or
call
(
202)
566
 
1061
or
email
at
telliard.
william@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
I.
General
Information
A.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
of
This
Document
and
Other
Related
Information?
1.
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
Docket
ID
No.
OW
 
2003
 
0003.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Water
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC.
The
EPA
Docket
Center
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Public
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566
 
1744,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
Water
Docket
is
(
202)
566
 
2426.
2.
Electronic
Access.
You
may
access
this
Federal
Register
document
electronically
through
the
EPA
Internet
under
the
``
Federal
Register''
listings
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
fedrgstr/.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EPA
Dockets.
You
may
use
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
to
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number.
Certain
types
of
information
will
not
be
placed
in
the
EPA
Dockets.
Information
claimed
as
CBI
and
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute,
which
is
not
included
in
the
official
public
docket,
will
not
be
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
EPA's
policy
is
that
copyrighted
material
will
not
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
but
will
be
available
only
in
printed,
paper
form
in
the
official
public
docket.
Although
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
in
I.
A.
1.
For
public
commenters,
it
is
important
to
note
that
EPA's
policy
is
that
public
comments,
whether
submitted
electronically
or
in
paper,
will
be
made
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
as
EPA
receives
them
and
without
change,
unless
the
comment
contains
copyrighted
material,
CBI,
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
When
EPA
identifies
a
comment
containing
copyrighted
material,
EPA
will
provide
a
reference
to
that
material
in
the
version
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
The
entire
printed
comment,
including
the
copyrighted
material,
will
be
available
in
the
public
docket.
Public
comments
submitted
on
computer
disks
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
docket
will
be
transferred
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Public
comments
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
Docket
will
be
scanned
and
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Where
practical,
physical
objects
will
be
photographed,
and
the
photograph
will
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
along
with
a
brief
description
written
by
the
docket
staff.

B.
How
and
to
Whom
Do
I
Submit
Comments?
You
may
submit
comments
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
identify
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
comment.
Please
ensure
that
your
comments
are
submitted
within
the
specified
comment
period.
Comments
received
after
the
close
of
the
comment
period
will
be
marked
``
late.''
EPA
is
not
required
to
consider
these
late
comments.
However,
late
comments
may
be
considered
if
time
permits.
1.
Electronically.
If
you
submit
an
electronic
comment
as
prescribed
below,
EPA
recommends
that
you
include
your
name,
mailing
address,
and
an
e­
mail
address
or
other
contact
information
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
Also
include
this
contact
information
on
the
outside
of
any
disk
or
CD
ROM
you
submit,
and
in
any
cover
letter
accompanying
the
disk
or
CD
ROM.
This
ensures
that
you
can
be
identified
as
the
submitter
of
the
comment
and
allows
EPA
to
contact
you
in
case
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
or
needs
further
information
on
the
substance
of
your
comment.
EPA's
policy
is
that
EPA
will
not
edit
your
comment,
and
any
identifying
or
contact
information
provided
in
the
body
of
a
comment
will
be
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
and
cannot
contact
you
for
clarification,
EPA
may
not
be
able
to
consider
your
comment.

VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
15:
38
Mar
11,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00041
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
12MRP1.
SGM
12MRP1
11792
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
48
/
Wednesday,
March
12,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
i.
EPA
Dockets.
Your
use
of
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
to
submit
comments
to
EPA
electronically
is
EPA's
preferred
method
for
receiving
comments.
Go
directly
to
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket,
and
follow
the
online
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
and
then
key
in
Docket
ID
No.
OW
 
2003
 
0003.
The
system
is
an
``
anonymous
access''
system,
which
means
EPA
will
not
know
your
identity,
e­
mail
address,
or
other
contact
information
unless
you
provide
it
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
ii.
E­
mail.
Comments
may
be
sent
by
electronic
mail
(
e­
mail)
to
OW
 
docket@
epa.
gov
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
OW
 
2003
 
0003.
In
contrast
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
is
not
an
``
anonymous
access''
system.
If
you
send
an
e­
mail
comment
directly
to
the
Docket
without
going
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
automatically
captures
your
e­
mail
address.
E­
mail
addresses
that
are
automatically
captured
by
EPA's
e­
mail
system
are
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
iii.
Disk
or
CD
ROM.
You
may
submit
comments
on
a
disk
or
CD
ROM
that
you
mail
to
the
mailing
address
identified
in
I.
B.
2.
These
electronic
submissions
will
be
accepted
in
WordPerfect
or
ASCII
file
format.
Avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
any
form
of
encryption.
2.
By
Mail.
Send
an
original
and
three
copies
of
your
comments
to:
Water
Docket,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Mailcode:
4101T,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC,
20460,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
OW
 
2003
 
0003.
3.
By
Hand
Delivery
or
Courier.
Deliver
your
comments
to
EPA
Docket
Center
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
OW
 
2003
 
0003.
Such
deliveries
are
only
accepted
during
the
Docket's
normal
hours
of
operation
as
identified
in
I.
A.
1.

C.
How
Should
I
Submit
CBI
to
the
Agency?
Do
not
submit
information
that
you
consider
to
be
CBI
electronically
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
or
by
e­
mail.
You
may
claim
information
that
you
submit
to
EPA
as
CBI
by
marking
any
part
or
all
of
that
information
as
CBI
(
if
you
submit
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
as
CBI
and
then
identify
electronically
within
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
the
specific
information
that
is
CBI).
Information
so
marked
will
not
be
disclosed
except
in
accordance
with
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2.
In
addition
to
one
complete
version
of
the
comment
that
includes
any
information
claimed
as
CBI,
a
copy
of
the
comment
that
does
not
contain
the
information
claimed
as
CBI
must
be
submitted
for
inclusion
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
you
submit
the
copy
that
does
not
contain
CBI
on
disk
or
CD
ROM,
mark
the
outside
of
the
disk
or
CD
ROM
clearly
that
it
does
not
contain
CBI.
Information
not
marked
as
CBI
will
be
included
in
the
public
docket
and
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
without
prior
notice.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
CBI
or
the
procedures
for
claiming
CBI,
please
consult
the
person
identified
in
the
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.

D.
What
Should
I
Consider
as
I
Prepare
My
Comments
for
EPA?

You
may
find
the
following
suggestions
helpful
for
preparing
your
comments:
1.
Explain
your
views
as
clearly
as
possible.
2.
Describe
any
assumptions
that
you
used.
3.
Provide
any
technical
information
and/
or
data
you
used
that
support
your
views.
4.
If
you
estimate
potential
burden
or
costs,
explain
how
you
arrived
at
your
estimate.
5.
Provide
specific
examples
to
illustrate
your
concerns.
6.
Offer
alternatives.
7.
Make
sure
to
submit
your
comments
by
the
comment
period
deadline.
8.
Ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA
by
identifying
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
response.
It
would
also
be
helpful
if
you
provided
the
name,
date,
and
Federal
Register
citation
related
to
your
comments.

II.
Summary
of
EPA's
Assessment
EPA
completed
an
assessment
for
determining
the
sensitivity
of
analytical
test
methods
(
i.
e.,
procedures
for
determining
detection
and
quantitation)
and
their
application
to
Clean
Water
Act
(
CWA)
programs.
The
assessment
examines
the
method
detection
limit
(
MDL)
and
minimum
level
of
quantitation
(
ML)
procedures
currently
used
by
the
Agency
for
determining
test
sensitivity
for
CWA
applications.
It
also
considers
alternative
concepts
and
procedures.
EPA
conducted
the
assessment
to
partially
fulfill
certain
provisions
of
a
settlement
agreement
with
the
Alliance
of
Automobile
Manufacturers,
et
al.,
which
is
discussed
further
below.
On
June
8,
1999,
EPA
published
a
final
rule
adding
EPA
Method
1631,
Revision
B:
Mercury
in
Water
by
Oxidation,
Purge
and
Trap,
and
Cold
Vapor
Atomic
Fluorescence
Spectrometry
(
Method
1631)
to
the
``
Guidelines
Establishing
Test
Procedures
for
the
Analysis
of
Pollutants''
under
section
304(
h)
of
the
Clean
Water
Act.
Following
promulgation,
the
Alliance
of
Automobile
Manufacturers,
the
Chemical
Manufacturers
Association,
and
the
Utility
Water
Act
Group
(``
Petitioners'')
and
the
American
Forest
and
Paper
Association
(``
Intervenor'')
filed
a
lawsuit
challenging
the
method.
The
challenge
addressed
specific
aspects
of
EPA
Method
1631
as
well
as
the
general
procedures
used
to
establish
the
method
detection
limit
(
MDL)
and
minimum
level
of
quantitation
(
ML)
specified
in
the
method.
On
October
19,
2000,
EPA
entered
into
a
settlement
agreement
with
the
Petitioners
and
Intervenor
(
Alliance
of
Automobile
Manufacturers,
et
al.
v.
EPA,
No.
99
 
1420
(
D.
C.
Cir.);
the
``
settlement
agreement'').
Clause
6
of
the
settlement
agreement
provides
for
EPA
to
assess
existing
Agency
and
alternative
procedures
for
determining
detection
and
quantitation
limits
under
the
Clean
Water
Act
and
to
sign
a
notice
for
publication
in
the
Federal
Register
on
or
before
February
28,
2003,
inviting
comment
on
the
assessment.
The
settlement
agreement
further
provides
for
EPA
to
submit
its
assessment
to
formal
peer
review
by
experts
in
the
fields
of
analytical
chemistry
and
in
the
statistical
aspects
of
analytical
data
interpretation.
EPA
drafted
an
Assessment
Document
describing
the
issues
associated
with
the
assessment
process,
the
detection
and
quantitation
concepts
and
procedures
evaluated,
the
criteria
used
for
the
evaluation,
the
evaluation
results,
and
the
conclusions
of
the
assessment.
EPA
then
conducted
a
peer
review
of
the
draft
Assessment
Document
in
August
2002.
As
stipulated
in
the
settlement
agreement,
EPA
provided
the
draft
Assessment
Document
to
the
Petitioners
and
Intervenor
for
concurrent
review
and
comment
in
August
2002.
Following
peer
review,
EPA
revised
the
Assessment
Document
to
incorporate
peer
review
comments.
The
revised
assessment
is
contained
in
a
document
titled,
``
Technical
Support
Document
for
the
Assessment
of
Detection
and
Quantitation
Concepts''
(
EPA
821
 
R
 
03
 
005,
February,
2003),
or
``
Assessment
Document.''
The
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
15:
38
Mar
11,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00042
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
12MRP1.
SGM
12MRP1
11793
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
48
/
Wednesday,
March
12,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
Assessment
Document,
the
peer
review
comments,
and
comments
from
the
Petitioners
and
Intervenor
are
available
in
the
docket
for
this
notice.
The
purpose
of
this
notice
is
specifically
to
request
comment
on
the
Assessment
Document.
Elsewhere
in
today's
Federal
Register,
the
Agency
is
proposing
revisions
to
the
MDL
definition
and
procedure
codified
at
40
CFR
part
136,
Appendix
B,
and
is
also
proposing
to
add
a
definition
of
the
ML
at
40
CFR
136.2.
The
proposed
revisions
are
based
on
the
findings
from
the
assessment
and
are
fully
discussed
in
the
proposed
rule.
To
comment
on
these
proposed
revisions,
readers
are
referred
to
the
Proposed
Rules
section
of
today's
Federal
Register
for
the
Guidelines
Establishing
Test
Procedures
for
the
Analysis
of
Pollutants;
Procedures
for
Detection
and
Quantitation.
The
settlement
agreement
stipulates
that
EPA's
assessment
of
concepts
and
procedures
for
detection
and
quantitation
be
submitted
for
public
review
and
comment
for
a
period
of
no
less
than
120
days.
The
settlement
agreement
also
requires
EPA
to
sign
a
final
notice
taking
action
on
the
assessment
on
or
before
September
30,
2004.
By
this
notice,
EPA
invites
the
public
to
comment
on
the
Assessment
Document.
The
public
comment
period
is
open
for
120
days
and
will
close
on
July
10,
2003.
After
EPA
considers
public
comments,
it
will
publish
a
notice
taking
final
action
on
the
assessment
by
September
30,
2004.

Dated:
February
28,
2003.
Christine
Todd
Whitman,
Administrator.
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
5711
Filed
3
 
11
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
DEPARTMENT
OF
COMMERCE
National
Oceanic
and
Atmospheric
Administration
50
CFR
Part
600
[
I.
D.
022403D]

Magnuson­
Stevens
Act
Provisions;
General
Provisions
for
Domestic
Fisheries;
Application
for
Exempted
Fishing
Permits
(
EFPs)

AGENCY:
Department
of
Commerce,
National
Oceanic
and
Atmospheric
Administration
(
NOAA),
National
Marine
Fisheries
Service
(
NMFS)
ACTION:
Notification
of
a
proposal
for
EFPs
to
conduct
experimental
fishing;
request
for
comments.
SUMMARY:
The
Administrator,
Northeast
Region,
NMFS
(
Regional
Administrator)
has
made
a
preliminary
determination
that
the
subject
EFP
application
contains
all
the
required
information
and
warrants
further
consideration.
The
Regional
Administrator
has
also
made
a
preliminary
determination
that
the
activities
authorized
under
the
EFPs
would
be
consistent
with
the
goals
and
objectives
of
the
Northeast
(
NE)
Multispecies
Fishery
Management
Plan
(
FMP).
However,
further
review
and
consultation
may
be
necessary
before
a
final
determination
is
made
to
issue
EFPs.
Therefore,
NMFS
announces
that
the
Regional
Administrator
proposes
to
issue
EFPs
that
would
allow
four
vessels
to
conduct
fishing
operations
that
are
otherwise
restricted
by
the
regulations
governing
the
fisheries
of
the
Northeastern
United
States.
The
EFPs
would
exempt
these
vessels
from
minimum
mesh
size
requirements
of
the
Gulf
of
Maine
(
GOM)
and
Georges
Bank
(
GB)
Regulated
Mesh
Areas
(
RMAs)
and
from
the
seasonal
GOM
Rolling
Closure
Areas
II
and
III.
The
proposed
experiment
would
test
a
separator
panel
designed
to
separate
haddock
from
cod
in
the
GOM
and
GB
RMAs.
All
experimental
work
would
be
monitored
by
Manomet
Center
for
Conservation
Sciences
(
Manomet)
personnel.
Regulations
under
the
Magnuson­
Stevens
Fishery
Conservation
and
Management
Act
require
publication
of
this
notification
to
provide
interested
parties
the
opportunity
to
comment
on
applications
for
proposed
EFPs.
DATES:
Comments
must
be
received
at
the
appropriate
address
or
fax
number
(
see
ADDRESSES)
on
or
before
March
27,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
Written
comments
should
be
sent
to
Patricia
A.
Kurkul,
Regional
Administrator,
NMFS,
NE
Regional
Office,
1
Blackburn
Drive,
Gloucester,
MA
01930.
Mark
the
outside
of
the
envelope
``
Comments
on
Manomet
Separator
Trawl
EFP
Proposal.''
Comments
may
also
be
sent
via
fax
to
(
978)
281
 
9135.
Comments
will
not
be
accepted
if
submitted
via
e­
mail
or
the
Internet.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Heather
Sagar,
Fisheries
Management
Specialist,
978
 
281
 
9104.
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
An
initial
application
from
Manomet
was
received
on
December
6,
2002,
and
the
application
was
completed
on
January
31,
2003.
The
proposed
study
would
test
a
modified
trawl
net
with
a
separator
panel,
designed
to
separate
haddock
from
cod.
The
modified
net
would
be
built
with
a
4
 
inch
mesh
horizontal
separator
panel
dividing
the
trawl
codend
into
an
upper
and
lower
codend.
Both
codends
would
be
constructed
with
legal
minimum
mesh
size
and
the
net
would
be
fully
compliant
with
current
regulations
except
for
the
insertion
of
a
small
mesh
separator
panel.
The
study
would
involve
four
phases.
The
first
phase
would
consist
of
development
and
construction
of
a
separator
trawl
net.
Phase
two
would
involve
a
series
of
sea
trials
conducted
with
an
underwater
video
camera
to
ensure
that
the
trawl
and
separator
panel
are
fishing
properly.
Trials
would
take
place
in
shallow
water
to
ensure
high
quality
video
imaging.
This
process
would
take
up
to
2
days.
Phase
three
would
be
the
experimental
sea
trials.
Four
commercial
vessels
would
fish
5
days
each,
making
approximately
five
tows
per
day
for
a
total
of
100
tows
for
this
portion
of
the
study.
Tow
length
would
be
approximately
30
minutes
and
experimental
tows
would
mimic
normal
fishing
practices.
This
would
result
in
a
total
of
22
sea
days
for
the
entire
study
(
including
2
days
for
preliminary
sea
trials).
Participating
vessels
would
be
required
to
notify
NMFS
prior
to
commencing
an
experimental
fishing
trip.
The
final
phase
of
the
experiment
would
be
data
analysis
and
reporting,
including
a
video
analysis.
The
proposed
study
area
would
take
place
off
the
coast
of
Cape
Cod,
MA,
inside
the
area
defined
by
the
following
coordinates:
42
°
15'
N.
lat.,
70
°
15'
W.
long.;
42
°
15'
N.
lat.,
69
°
30'
W.
long.;
42
°
00'
N.
lat.,
69
°
30'
W.
long.;
42
°
00'
N.
lat.,
68
°
30'
W.
long.;
41
°
30'
N.
lat.,
68
°
30'
W.
long.;
41
°
30'
N.
lat.
70
°
00'
W.
long.
following
the
Cape
Cod
shoreline
north
to
42
°
00'
N.
lat.,
70
°
00'
W.
long.;
42
°
00'
N.
lat.,
70
°
15'
W.
long.;
and
42
°
15'
N.
lat.,
70
°
15'
W.
long.
Areas
subjected
to
permanent
closures
would
be
avoided.
The
EFPs
would
allow
for
exemptions
from
the
GOM
and
GB
RMA
minimum
mesh
size
requirements
specified
at
50
CFR
648.80(
a)(
1)
and
(
a)(
2),
and
seasonal
GOM
Rolling
Closure
Areas
II
and
III
specified
at
50
CFR
648.81(
g).
Under
this
experiment,
target
species
would
be
cod,
haddock,
yellowtail
flounder,
American
plaice,
witch
flounder,
pollock,
and
windowpane
flounder.
Incidental
species
would
include
skate,
smooth
dogfish,
spiny
dogfish,
sculpins,
sea
raven
and
sea
robin.
All
biological
and
environmental
information
would
be
recorded
by
trained
observers
(
supplied
by
Manomet)
on
relevant
NMFS
observer
logbooks.
Each
participating
vessel
would
have
an
observer
on
board.
All
catch
would
be
sorted
and
weighed
on
board
the
vessel.
In
addition,
all
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
15:
38
Mar
11,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00043
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
12MRP1.
SGM
12MRP1
