[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 127 (Wednesday, July 2, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35774-35779]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17229]



[[Page 35774]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 970523122-7122-01; I.D. 041897B]
RIN 0648-AH52


Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 
Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 9

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed rule to implement Amendment 9 to the 
Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 
(FMP). Amendment 9 would require, with limited exceptions, the use of 
certified bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) in shrimp trawls in the 
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Gulf of Mexico shoreward of the 
100-fathom (fm) (183-m) depth contour west of 85 deg.30' W. long.; set 
the bycatch reduction criterion for the certification of BRDs; and 
establish an FMP framework procedure for modifying the bycatch 
reduction criterion, for establishing and modifying the BRD testing 
protocol and its specifications, and for certifying and decertifying 
BRDs. The intended effects are to reduce the unwanted bycatch mortality 
of juvenile red snapper and, to the extent practicable, not adversely 
affect the shrimp fishery in the Gulf of Mexico.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 18, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed rule must be sent to the Southeast 
Regional Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg, 
FL 33702. Requests for copies of Amendment 9, which includes a 
regulatory impact review (RIR), an initial regulatory flexibility 
analysis (IRFA), a fishery impact statement, and a final supplemental 
environmental impact statement (final SEIS) should be sent to the Gulf 
of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 3018 U.S. Highway 301 North, 
Suite 1000, Tampa, FL 33619-2266; Phone: 813-228-2815; Fax: 813-225-
7015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael E. Justen, 813-570-5305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico 
Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented through 
regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

Background

    The shrimp fishery is the most valuable commercial fishery in the 
Gulf of Mexico. In 1995, roughly 5,000 large vessels and some 20,000 
small boats harvested 219.8 million lb (99,700 mt) with an exvessel 
value of $437.4 million. Shrimp species managed under the FMP are brown 
shrimp, pink shrimp, rock shrimp, royal red shrimp, seabob shrimp, and 
white shrimp. All except royal red shrimp are harvested in water depths 
less than 100 fm (183 m). Royal red shrimp are not found in depths less 
than 100 fm.
    Shrimp trawls have a significant bycatch of non-target finfish and 
invertebrates, most of which are discarded dead. Scientific survey 
results indicate that the ratio of the weight of finfish bycatch to 
that of shrimp caught is about 4.2 to 1.
    Bycatch may result in the reduction of species diversity within a 
marine ecosystem, adversely impact other fauna, and significantly 
reduce the yield in other fisheries that are directed at adults of the 
discarded species. Important fish species in the shrimp fishery bycatch 
include juveniles of red snapper, king and Spanish mackerel, and 
sharks. If left to mature and grow, these juvenile fish possibly could 
be harvested later and produce a significantly higher yield in weight 
as well as enhancing the reproductive capacity of their stocks.
    Recent concerns over the shrimp fishery bycatch in the Gulf of 
Mexico have focused on the high mortality of juvenile (age 0 and age 1) 
red snapper, a valuable reef fish species for commercial and 
recreational fisheries. In 1991, NMFS began participation in a 
cooperative research program on the magnitude, composition, and impacts 
of the shrimp fishery bycatch in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic 
and on technological approaches for reducing this bycatch. The shrimp 
and finfish industries, states, universities, and NMFS have been major 
partners in this cooperative research effort. To date, this research 
program has involved expenditures of more than $10 million.
    Based on research results, the Council developed Amendment 9 to 
reduce the unwanted bycatch of juvenile red snapper while, to the 
extent practicable, minimizing adverse effects on the shrimp fishery. 
The red snapper stock of the Gulf of Mexico is overfished. Even if the 
directed fisheries for adult red snapper were eliminated, the bycatch 
of juvenile red snapper in shrimp trawls would still need to be reduced 
significantly for the adult spawning stock to recover. Under the 
Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of 
Mexico, the red snapper stock is subject to a long-term rebuilding 
program with the objective of reaching a 20 percent spawning potential 
ratio (SPR) by the year 2019, at which point the stock would no longer 
be considered overfished.

Management Measures in Amendment 9

    The critical management measure would require installation of NMFS-
certified BRDs in shrimp trawls towed in the Gulf of Mexico EEZ 
shoreward of the 100-fm (183-m) depth contour west of 85 deg.30' W. 
long., the approximate longitude of Cape San Blas, FL. To be certified, 
these BRDs must reduce the bycatch mortality of juvenile red snapper by 
a minimum of 44 percent from the average level of mortality on these 
age groups during the years 1984-89. Specifically, on board a shrimp 
trawler, each trawl net that is rigged for fishing, and each try net 
that is rigged for fishing and has a headrope length greater than 16.0 
ft (4.9 m), would be required to have a certified BRD installed. BRD 
designs that have passed the operational testing phase of the NMFS 
cooperative bycatch research program (i.e., the fisheye BRD and the 
Andrews turtle excluder device (TED)) would be certified for use in the 
EEZ where BRDs are required.
    The fisheye BRD is a cone-shaped rigid frame constructed from 
aluminum or steel that is inserted into the top center of the codend to 
form an escape opening facing the mouth of the trawl.
    The Andrews TED is an approved soft TED made of webbing that is 
designed to exclude marine turtles from shrimp trawls. This TED also 
meets the bycatch reduction criterion for juvenile red snapper and is 
considered as a potentially certifiable BRD upon implementation of 
Amendment 9, if not prohibited from use as a TED by other applicable 
Federal law or regulation. On December 19, 1996, NMFS issued a final 
rule (61 FR 66933) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that 
decertified the Andrews TED effective March 1, 1997, in the specified 
conservation area (i.e., 0-10 nautical miles offshore west of the 
Mississippi River) and, effective December 19, 1997, throughout the 
Gulf. New tests indicated that this TED does not meet the requirements 
for excluding turtles. That final rule would remove the

[[Page 35775]]

Andrews TED from the list of NMFS-approved TEDs unless improvements or 
modifications are made to the design, so that it will exclude turtles 
effectively. Thus, the Andrews TED would be a certified BRD upon 
implementation of Amendment 9 only during a time when, and in a 
geographical area where, it is an approved TED, as specified in the 
applicable ESA regulations (i.e., at 50 CFR 227.72(e)(4)(iii)).
    Amendment 9 would exclude from the requirement for use of BRDs: (1) 
Vessels trawling for royal red shrimp beyond the 100-fm (183-m) depth 
contour or trawling for butterfish or groundfish; (2) a single try net 
with a headrope of 16 ft (4.9 m) or less on each vessel; and (3) 
vessels trawling for shrimp with no more than two rigid-frame roller 
trawls limited to 16 ft (4.9 m) or less, such as those used in the Big 
Bend area of Florida. The rationale for excluding vessels fishing for 
royal red shrimp is that red snapper rarely occur in areas where royal 
red shrimp are caught. Vessels trawling for butterfish would be 
excluded because, based on observer information, such vessels have a 
minimal bycatch of red snapper and only two or three vessels are in the 
fishery. Vessels trawling for groundfish would be excluded because 
these vessels have a minimal bycatch of red snapper compared to shrimp 
trawlers. In the butterfish and groundfish fisheries, the mesh sizes 
and deployments of trawls make it highly unlikely that a vessel would 
have on-board or landed catch of shrimp in excess of 1 percent, by 
weight. Therefore, the codified text of this proposed rule contains no 
explicit exemption from the requirement for the use of a BRD by a 
vessel trawling for butterfish or groundfish--such vessel, by 
definition, would not be a ``shrimp trawler'' required to have a BRD in 
each net. Vessels trawling for shrimp with rigid-frame roller trawls 
would be excluded because such vessels operate in shallow waters where 
red snapper are not found in significant numbers.

Framework Measures in Amendment 9

    The purpose of the framework measures is to provide a flexible 
management system to minimize regulatory delays while maintaining 
substantial Council and public input into management decisions. With 
these procedures in place, management can rapidly adapt to changes in 
the abundance of red snapper, new scientific information, and changes 
in fishing practices, such as seasonal variations in fishing patterns, 
areas, and effort. In addition, BRD certification/decertification via 
the framework procedure may be expedited to react to changes in the 
certification criterion and to the testing of new or modified BRDs.
    If Amendment 9 is approved, the following procedures would be 
followed under the framework measures that are contained in Amendment 9 
but are not part of the proposed rule.

Modification of the Bycatch Reduction Criterion

    The Council would evaluate the need for changes to the bycatch 
reduction criterion for red snapper and recommend needed changes to the 
Regional Administrator, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS (Regional 
Administrator). Such changes would be accomplished through regulatory 
amendments (which would modify the final rule implementing Amendment 9 
through notice-and-comment rulemaking). If the Council determines that 
bycatch reduction criteria are needed for other finfish species, those 
criteria would be established by FMP amendments.
    The Council would establish a Special BRD Advisory Panel (SBAP) 
made up of scientists, engineers, fishermen, environmentalists, and 
others with knowledge of BRDs and their ability to reduce bycatch of 
juvenile red snapper. The SBAP would advise the Council on the need 
for, and recommendations regarding, modifications to the bycatch 
reduction criterion for red snapper. Prior to recommending such 
changes, the Council would also consult its shrimp and reef fish 
committees, as appropriate.
    In addressing changes to bycatch reduction criterion for juvenile 
red snapper, the Council would consider the status of red snapper 
stocks as reflected in stock assessments, the impacts of shrimp trawl 
bycatch, and the impacts of the directed fishery for red snapper on the 
stock. The Council would also consider factors related to the shrimp 
fishery such as changes in fishing effort, the effects of state and 
Federal management efforts on bycatch, changes in TED gear or rules 
that may affect bycatch, closed areas, closed seasons and/or seasonal 
usage of BRDs, and limitations on the types and sizes of trawl gear. 
The Council would consider environmental and ecological effects, social 
and economic factors in the commercial and recreational fisheries for 
both red snapper and shrimp, and other relevant data. Modifications to 
the bycatch reduction criterion would be based on the best available 
scientific information and must be achievable through available, or 
soon to be available, technology. Public comments would be received 
prior to changes, and public testimony would be obtained at the meeting 
at which the Council considers changing the criteria.
    The bycatch reduction criterion would be specified in terms of a 
percentage reduction in bycatch mortality of juvenile red snapper (age 
0 and age 1) from the average level of mortality on those age groups 
during the years 1984-89. The criterion may be further qualified 
according to seasons and geographic areas.
    If changes are needed to the bycatch reduction criterion for 
juvenile red snapper, the Council would send a regulatory amendment to 
the Regional Administrator that details its recommendations along with 
any relevant reports and public comments. The Regional Administrator 
would review the Council's recommendations, all scientific reports, and 
comments of the SBAP and other Council committees. If it is determined 
that the recommendations are consistent with the objectives of the FMP, 
the provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, 
the Regional Administrator would draft proposed regulations 
implementing the changes to the bycatch reduction criterion for 
publication in the Federal Register. A comment period of not less than 
15 days would be provided on the proposed rule.
    If the Regional Administrator rejects the recommended changes of 
the Council, the Regional Administrator would notify the Council and 
provide written reasons for rejection along with recommendations for 
revisions. In the event of rejection, the existing criterion for 
bycatch reduction of red snapper would remain in effect until changes 
are approved and implemented.

Establishment and Modification of BRD Certification/Decertification 
Criteria and the BRD Testing Protocol

    The criterion for the certification of a BRD would be that the BRD 
can consistently meet or exceed the established bycatch reduction 
criterion through the testing protocol established by the Regional 
Administrator. This BRD certification criterion may be modified through 
implementation of a regulatory amendment concurrent and consistent with 
changes to the bycatch reduction criterion.
    The Council has not established criteria for shrimp loss from BRDs; 
however, shrimp loss data should accompany any application for 
certification of a BRD to allow evaluation of shrimp loss while 
satisfying bycatch reduction requirements. In addition, the applicant 
should provide information on cost and

[[Page 35776]]

operational considerations (e.g., ease of handling and any special 
operating tactics such as hauling back while towing away from high seas 
to minimize shrimp loss).
    The BRD testing protocol would include the testing parameters and 
statistical guidelines to be followed in evaluating the effectiveness 
of BRD designs in meeting the established bycatch reduction criterion. 
The basic testing procedure would include an accurate and detailed 
written description and diagram of the gear used, including the types 
and rigging of trawls, BRDs, and TEDs. Also, the BRD must be rotated 
between outside and inside nets from side to side to reduce net bias. 
Modification of gear during testing constitutes the beginning of a new 
test.
    All testing would be done under the supervision of qualified 
scientists or other technical personnel approved by the Regional 
Administrator to ensure that the protocol is followed and to help 
prevent the need for additional evaluation. Testing would be 
accomplished by comparison of a net with an experimental BRD and 
approved TED to a net with only the same type of TED. Testing will 
involve at least the minimum number of tows specified by the protocol. 
Testing would be done in areas where juvenile red snapper are present.
    The Regional Administrator would develop the testing protocol for 
certifying new BRDs. This testing protocol would include specifications 
and guidelines regarding various testing parameters. Prior to 
implementation of the testing protocol, the Regional Administrator 
would provide copies of the protocol to the Council and provide a 
reasonable period for the Council's review and comment. In reviewing 
the testing protocol, the Council may consult appropriate committees 
and advisory panels for recommendations. The Council would advise the 
RA in writing of any recommendations regarding the testing protocol, 
including its guidelines and parameters, and provide any relevant 
reports and comments. The RA would review the Council's recommendations 
along with other comments and reports. The BRD testing protocol would 
be published in the Federal Register.
    The following are testing parameters and guidelines that would be 
included in the testing protocol. There may be other parameters that 
would be required to be examined in evaluating BRD performance. The RA 
would determine if the researcher has complied with these testing 
parameters as specified in the protocol including: Valuation and 
oversight personnel, sample size, experimental design, season and area 
of testing, time of day, required measurements, length of tows, 
descriptions of devices in nets, shrimp loss, and any other relevant 
parameters.
    For each new BRD proposed for certification, the applicant would be 
required to submit an application to the Regional Administrator along 
with a complete report on the BRD testing. This report would be 
required to contain a comprehensive description of the tests, including 
a summary of all data collected together with copies or listings of all 
data collected during the certification trials, and analyses of the 
data that demonstrate compliance with the testing protocol and the 
ability of the BRD to meet or exceed the bycatch reduction criterion. 
An applicant would be required to provide photographs, drawings, and 
similar material describing the BRDs. In addition, any unique or 
special circumstances of the tests should be described.
    The Regional Administrator would determine if a BRD meets or 
exceeds the bycatch reduction criterion and whether the required 
reports and supporting materials are complete. The Regional 
Administrator would also determine whether the testing protocol was 
followed. If the applicant complies with the testing protocol and the 
BRD meets or exceeds the current bycatch reduction criterion, the 
Regional Administrator would certify the BRD (with any appropriate 
conditions as indicated by test results) and announce the certification 
in the Federal Register, amending the list of certified BRDs.
    The Regional Administrator would advise the applicant, in writing, 
if a BRD is not certified. This notification would explain why the BRD 
was not certified and what the applicant may do to modify the BRD or 
the testing procedures to improve the chances of having the BRD 
certified in the future. If certification were denied because of 
insufficient information, the applicant would have 60 days from receipt 
of such notification to provide the additional information; afterwards, 
the applicant would have to re-apply. If the Regional Administrator 
subsequently certifies the BRD, the Regional Administrator would 
announce the certification in the Federal Register, amending the list 
of certified BRDs.
    The Regional Administrator would decertify a BRD whenever it is 
determined that the BRD does not satisfy the bycatch reduction 
criterion. Before any proposed action would be taken to decertify a 
BRD, the Council and public would be advised and provided an 
opportunity to comment on the advisability of the proposed 
decertification. The Regional Administrator would consider any comments 
from the Council, and if the Regional Administrator elects to decertify 
the BRD, it would be accomplished through publication of proposed and 
final rules in the Federal Register with a comment period of not less 
than 15 days.
    The Regional Administrator would, if necessary, modify the BRD 
testing protocol to more appropriately evaluate BRDs to determine if 
they meet the bycatch reduction criterion as established or modified by 
the Council. If the Regional Administrator determines that changes to 
the testing protocol are needed, the Regional Administrator would 
follow the same basic process as for initial implementation (i.e., 
consultation with the Council and regulatory amendment).

One-Year Delayed Effectiveness Period

    In a letter dated March 26, 1997, based on the Council's motions 
passed at its meeting of March 10-13, 1997, the Council Chairman 
requested NMFS to:

    1) Implement Amendment 9 to the Shrimp Fishery Management Plan 
with an effective date of one year from its approval date 
(approximately August 1, 1998).
    2) Develop and implement a transition plan including, but not 
limited to the following elements:
     A. Outreach to encourage the industry to experiment with 
existing and new BRDs to develop as many acceptable models as 
possible, and any BRD other than a hard TED will be acceptable 
during the transition period;
     B. Technology transfer to provide training and assistance to 
the industry in the use of BRDs; and
     C. Educational assistance to provide the industry with 
knowledge to obtain the maximum benefit of newly developed devices.
    3) Freeze the existing total allowable catch (TAC) for red 
snapper until the effective implementation date of Amendment 9.

    In a letter dated April 8, 1997, to the Council, the Regional 
Administrator advised that NMFS could not grant its request for delayed 
implementation of Amendment 9 because the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires 
NMFS to implement approved fishery management plans and amendments 
without delay, and that a 1-year delay in implementation would be 
inconsistent with the administrative record supporting Amendment 9. In 
a letter dated April 10, 1997, to the Regional Administrator, the 
Council Chairman indicated: ``In regard to your letter of April 8 
regarding Shrimp Amendment 9, I do not think it was ever the Council's 
intent that the secretarial

[[Page 35777]]

review process for approval and implementation be halted or slowed.'' 
He further indicated: ``My reading of the Council intent was as soon as 
the rules were approved that the requirement for bycatch reduction 
devices (BRDs) be modified to allow the use of noncertified BRDs as 
well as certified BRDs for a one-year period. This would allow testing 
by the industry of other BRD designs, hopefully resulting in designs 
that could be certified during that period. Also during that period we 
had hoped that National Marine Fisheries Service and National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration personnel (including Sea Grant) would 
provide assistance to the industry in evaluating and `tuning' that 
gear.''
    NMFS has initiated Secretarial review of Amendment 9 and has 
announced the availability of Amendment 9 for public review and 
comment. NMFS is proceeding with publication of this proposed rule for 
public comment. As indicated above, Amendment 9 measures approved by 
NMFS must be implemented without delay. If approved, the measure 
requiring all affected shrimp fishermen to use NMFS-certified BRDs 
would become effective in accordance with the Administrative Procedure 
Act. Amendment 9 does not provide for the use of non-certified BRDs. If 
the Council wants to allow the use of non-certified BRDs for whatever 
period, it would have to amend the FMP and submit such amendment to 
NMFS for review, approval, and implementation.

Availability of and Comments on Amendment 9

    Additional background and rationale for the measures discussed 
above are contained in Amendment 9, the availability of which was 
announced in the Federal Register on April 29, 1997 (62 FR 23211). 
Written comments on Amendment 9 must be received by June 30, 1997. 
Comments that are received by NMFS by June 30, 1997, whether 
specifically directed to Amendment 9 or the proposed rule, will be 
considered by NMFS in its decision to approve, disapprove, or partially 
approve Amendment 9. Comments received after that date will not be 
considered by NMFS in this decision. All comments received on Amendment 
9 or on this proposed rule during their respective comment periods will 
be addressed in the final rule.

Classification

    At this time, NMFS has not made a final determination that the 
provisions of Amendment 9 are consistent with the national standards, 
other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable 
laws. In making that final determination, NMFS will take into account 
the data, views, and comments received during the comment period.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of E.O. 12866.
    The Council prepared a final SEIS for Amendment 9 that was filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for public review and 
comment; a notice of its availability was published by the EPA in the 
Federal Register (June 6, 1997, 62 FR 31098). The public comment period 
will end July 7, 1997. The final SEIS assesses the impacts on the human 
environment of both the Gulf shrimp fishery and the Council's proposed 
and alternative management measures for reducing shrimp fishery 
bycatch.
    According to the final SEIS, the bycatch reduction measures of 
Amendment 9 (i.e., the installation of certified BRDs in shrimp 
trawls): (1) Would reduce the bycatch mortality of juvenile red snapper 
by 44 percent, an amount necessary for rebuilding the red snapper stock 
to a healthy level by 2019; (2) would reduce red snapper bycatch in 
geographic areas where red snapper are concentrated; (3) would reduce 
the bycatch of other finfish in the area where BRDs are required (i.e., 
in the Gulf EEZ within the 100-fathom (183-m) contour west of Cape San 
Blas, FL); no finfish bycatch reduction is expected for most of 
Florida's west coast; (4) may result in a loss of shrimp harvested; the 
amount of this loss will depend on the type of BRD used and the 
operation of the trawl and vessel; (5) would still result in some 
reduced level of incidental take of finfish in shrimp trawls because 
BRDs are not 100 percent effective; and (6) would not affect shrimp 
fishery incidental catch in state controlled waters unless the states 
adopt similar BRD regulations or unless some level of voluntary use of 
BRDs would occur in these areas.
    The best available stock assessment model indicates that the red 
snapper stock will rebound with a substantial reduction in the bycatch 
mortality of the juveniles, but the ecological consequences of reducing 
the bycatch mortality of other fishes and invertebrates, particularly 
those that have little commercial value due to size or marketability, 
are not fully understood. Based on the results of ecological modeling, 
the mandated use of BRDs could have a negative effect on the biomass of 
shrimp stocks (i.e., between a 5.9 and 8.2 percent reduction in shrimp 
biomass resulting primarily from increased populations of bottom fish 
predators); three of four models considered showed shrimp biomass 
reductions resulting from increased finfish predation--one model 
indicated the potential for a small increase in shrimp biomass. Shrimp 
fishermen will be adversely affected to the extent that their catch is 
reduced through the loss of shrimp from BRDs as well as any resultant 
loss of catch from potential reductions in the total shrimp biomass.
    Conversely, both recreational and commercial red snapper fishermen 
should benefit from the predicted recovery of the red snapper stock. 
Fishermen who target other highly sought-after species that are also 
taken in the shrimp fishery bycatch (e.g., king and Spanish mackerel) 
also should benefit to the extent that populations of these species 
increase. The effects of the shrimp fishery on the red snapper stock 
have heretofore been adverse because of the bycatch mortality of 
juveniles; the effects of this fishery on other finfish populations 
have probably been adverse but the exact biological impacts are unknown 
or not well understood.
    The overall effects of the proposed BRD measures will be positive 
for the red snapper stock and probably positive for the other finfish 
stocks affected by shrimp fishery bycatch (the probable effects on 
these other species is not well understood). Although the overall 
effects of the bycatch reduction measures may be positive for finfish, 
they may have negative effects in terms of a reduced biomass of shrimp 
because of increased finfish predation and reduced nutrient recycling. 
Whether this will result in a corresponding reduction in shrimp harvest 
is unknown at this time. Firm conclusions about impacts of BRDs on 
shrimp catches are difficult given an approximate 12 percent 
variability in annual Gulf shrimp landings over the last five years. 
Because of these uncertainties, it is difficult to predict the effects 
of BRDs on shrimp fishery participants or fishing communities resulting 
from changes in the biomass of shrimp stocks or the level of shrimp 
landings.
     The Council prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 
(IRFA) based on the RIR that describes the impacts this proposed rule, 
if adopted, would have on small entities. Based on the IRFA, NMFS has 
concluded that Amendment 9, if approved and implemented through final 
regulations, would have significant economic impacts on a substantial 
number of small entities. A summary of the IRFA's assessment of the 
significant impacts on small entities follows.
    Amendment 9 will affect most of the roughly 5,000 shrimp vessels 
that

[[Page 35778]]

operate in the Gulf, because the vast majority of such vessels operate 
in the EEZ for at least part of the year. It will also affect a 
substantial, but unknown, number of shrimp boats that are smaller than 
the typical offshore shrimp vessel (smaller craft that do not require 
U.S. Coast Guard documentation) but operate in the EEZ during periods 
of favorable weather when harvestable shrimp populations are found in 
the near-shore portion of the EEZ. All of the vessels and boats that 
would be affected by Amendment 9 are considered small business entities 
for the purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, because their 
individual annual gross revenues are less than $3 million. The small 
entities that would be affected by Amendment 9 generate annual gross 
revenues ranging from almost nil to about $200,000, while incurring 
annual operating costs ranging from $8,000 to $98,000.
    The shrimp loss from using BRDs would cause at least a 5-percent 
reduction in gross revenues for a large, but unknown, number of shrimp 
vessels. The owners of affected shrimp fishing vessels and boats will 
have to purchase and use certified BRDs, each costing between $50 and 
$200; vessels and boats may fish with between one and five nets. In 
addition, affected small entities would incur annual increases in 
operating costs ranging from 0.2 to 10 percent; these costs generally 
would be less than 5 percent. The IRFA indicates that, depending on the 
type of certified BRD shrimpers choose, between 10 and 513 full-time 
shrimp vessels (i.e., between 0.3 and 16.6 percent of the fleet size of 
these vessels) would leave the shrimp fishery because of the effects of 
the BRD requirements.
    The subject proposed rule to implement Amendment 9 would not 
establish any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements. However, the 
BRD testing protocol required by Amendment 9 will be published under a 
separate and subsequent proposed rule and will include two new 
collection-of-information requirements subject to the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (see discussion below regarding Paperwork Reduction Act). 
The impacts of these information collections on small entities will be 
discussed in the subsequent rulemaking.
    Regarding other Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict 
with the proposed rule, if Amendment 9 is approved and implemented, the 
Andrews TED would be a NMFS-certified BRD only for that period of time 
and for that geographic area for which it will still be a NMFS-
certified TED (see discussion above regarding the Andrews TED in 
relation to Amendment 9 and the ESA). After that period of time or 
outside of that area, the Andrews TED would not be a NMFS-certified 
BRD.
    Several alternatives to the proposed measures of Amendment 9 were 
considered by the Council. The status quo, which would have no negative 
economic effects on the shrimp trawling industry, was rejected because 
the critical bycatch reduction objective cannot be met without some 
action to reduce the shrimp fishery bycatch of red snapper. The 
alternative of closing the shrimp season for a portion of the year was 
rejected because this would not likely result in a large enough 
reduction of red snapper bycatch and because the negative impacts on 
the shrimp industry would be significant. The alternative of meeting 
the bycatch reduction objective through permanently closing some shrimp 
trawling areas where juvenile red snapper are concentrated was rejected 
because the projected economic losses to the shrimp industry were 
greater than the preferred alternative. The proposed rule does provide 
for certain exemptions from the BRD requirements (e.g., exemptions for 
gear and fishing operations in certain depth and geographic zones where 
juvenile red snapper are not abundant) to reduce negative economic 
impacts on shrimp fishermen while still meeting the bycatch reduction 
objectives. A copy of the IRFA is available from the Council (see 
ADDRESSES).
    This rule would not establish any new reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements. As discussed above, the BRD testing protocol is expected 
to include two new collection-of-information requirements subject to 
the Paperwork Reduction Act. These two requirements are the 
notification of NMFS prior to conducting BRD certification tests and 
the submission of test results with the application for certification. 
The estimated burden hours (i.e., response times for these 
requirements) for these requirements have not been determined. When 
determined, these new collection-of-information requirements will be 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for approval. These 
requirements and their response times/burden hours will be part of 
another proposed rule containing the BRD testing protocol to be 
published by NMFS subsequently in the Federal Register with an 
opportunity for public comment.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622

    Fisheries, Fishing, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Virgin Islands.

    Dated: June 25, 1997.
David L. Evans,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 622--FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC

    1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as 
follows:

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

    2. In Sec. 622.2, a definition for ``Shrimp trawler'' is added in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec. 622.2  Definitions and acronyms.

* * * * *
    Shrimp trawler means any vessel that is equipped with one or more 
trawl nets whose on-board or landed catch of shrimp is more than 1 
percent, by weight, of all fish comprising its on-board or landed 
catch.
* * * * *
    3. In Sec. 622.41, paragraph (h) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 622.41  Species specific limitations.

* * * * *
    (h) Shrimp in the Gulf--(1) BRD requirement. (i) Except as exempted 
in paragraphs (h)(1)(ii) through (iv) of this section, on a shrimp 
trawler in the Gulf EEZ shoreward of the 100-fathom (183-m) depth 
contour west of 85 deg.30' W. long., each net that is rigged for 
fishing must have a certified BRD installed. A trawl net is rigged for 
fishing if it is in the water, or if it is shackled, tied, or otherwise 
connected to a sled, door, or other device that spreads the net, or to 
a tow rope, cable, pole, or extension, either on board or attached to a 
shrimp trawler.
    (ii) A shrimp trawler is exempt from the requirement to have a 
certified BRD installed in each net provided that at least 90 percent 
(by weight) of all shrimp on board or offloaded from such trawler is 
royal red shrimp.
    (iii) A single try net with a headrope length of 16 ft (4.9 m) or 
less used by a shrimp trawler is exempt from the requirement to have a 
BRD installed provided it is either pulled immediately in front of 
another net or is not connected to another net.
    (iv) Up to two rigid-frame roller trawls that are 16 ft (4.9 m) or 
less in length used or possessed on board a shrimp trawler are exempt 
from the requirement

[[Page 35779]]

to have a certified BRD installed. A rigid-frame roller trawl is a 
trawl that has a mouth formed by a rigid frame and a grid of rigid 
vertical bars; has rollers on the lower horizontal part of the frame to 
allow the trawl to roll over the bottom and any obstruction while being 
towed; and has no doors, boards, or similar devices attached to keep 
the mouth of the trawl open.
    (2) Certified BRDs. The following BRDs are certified for use by 
shrimp trawlers in the Gulf EEZ. Specifications of these certified BRDs 
are contained in Appendix D of this part.
    (i) Fisheye.
    (ii) Andrews TED. The Andrews TED is certified as a BRD only during 
a time when and in a geographical area where it is an approved TED, as 
specified at 50 CFR 227.72(e)(4)(iii).
    4. In Sec. 622.48, paragraph (i) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 622.48  Adjustment of management measures.

* * * * *
    (i) Gulf shrimp. Bycatch reduction criteria, BRD testing protocol, 
certified BRDs, and BRD specifications.
    5. In Appendix D, paragraph D is added to read as follows:

Appendix D to Part 622--Specifications for Certified BRDs

* * * * *
    D. Andrews TED. Specifications for the Andrews TED are at 50 CFR 
227.72(e)(4)(iii)(C).
[FR Doc. 97-17229 Filed 7-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F