[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55821-55828]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26839]
[[Page 55821]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 990226056-9213-02; I.D. 122498C]
RIN 0648-AL31
Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Amendment 9 to the Northeast
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement the approved portions
of Amendment 9 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan
(FMP). This rule adds Atlantic halibut to the species managed under the
FMP, implements a 1-fish per vessel halibut possession limit with a
minimum size of 36 inches (66 cm); postpones implementation of the
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) requirement; modifies the framework
process to allow for aquaculture projects and changes to the
overfishing definitions (OFDs); and prohibits brush-sweep trawl gear
when fishing for multispecies. The chief purpose of Amendment 9 is to
address requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), as amended by the Sustainable
Fisheries Act (SFA).
DATES: This rule is effective November 15, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 9, its Regulatory Impact Review, and the
Final Environmental Assessment are available from Paul J. Howard,
Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, Suntaug
Office Park, 5 Broadway (U.S. Route 1), Saugus, MA 01906-1097.
Copies of the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) are
available from Patricia Kurkul, Regional Administrator, NMFS, Northeast
Regional Office, 1 Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.
Comments regarding burden-hour estimates for the collection-of-
information requirements contained in this final rule should be sent to
the Regional Administrator and the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503
(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regina L. Spallone, Fishery Policy
Analyst, 978-281-9221.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Amendment 9 was prepared by the New England Fishery Management
Council (Council) mainly to address requirements of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, as amended by the SFA on October 11, 1996, eliminate
overfishing, and rebuild many of the groundfish stocks. Amendment 11 to
the FMP identifies and describes essential fish habitat (EFH) of
groundfish stocks as required by the SFA. NMFS approved Amendment 11 on
behalf of the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) on March 3, 1999.
Background concerning the development of Amendment 9 was provided in
the preamble of the notice of proposed rulemaking (64 FR 13952, March
23, 1999) and in the supplement to the proposed rule (64 FR 19111,
April 19, 1999), and is not repeated here. This final rule implements
approved measures contained in Amendment 9 to the FMP intended to
eliminate overfishing and rebuild many of the groundfish stocks.
Specifically, the measures establish new overfishing definitions (OFDs)
for various groundfish species and stocks, add Atlantic halibut to the
FMP's management unit to begin rebuilding this severely overfished
stock, and prohibit brush sweep gear until the Council better
understands its fishing efficiency given the overall short-term goal to
reduce fishing effort. Implementation of the VMS requirement is
postponed so the Council can address outstanding policy, equity, and
operations issues.
On behalf of the Secretary, NMFS disapproved on April 7, 1999, two
measures proposed in Amendment 9 after evaluation of the amendment, as
authorized in section 304(a)(3) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The
disapproved measures include an increase in the size limit for winter
flounder for both the commercial and recreational fisheries to 13
inches (33.0 cm) from its current 12 inches (30.5 cm), and the OFD for
the Gulf of Maine (GOM) winter flounder stock. Amendment 9 did not
provide an OFD for GOM winter flounder. Since none was provided, the
OFD does not meet the requirements of the SFA or the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. NMFS has notified the Council that it should revise the OFD at the
next available opportunity using the most recent assessment conducted
at the 28th Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW-28).
Amendment 9 Measures
This final rule revises the regulations implementing the Northeast
Multispecies FMP to add Atlantic halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus) to
the management unit of the FMP and to implement management measures for
that species. This rule implements a 1-fish halibut possession limit
with a minimum size of 36 inches (66 cm); postpones implementation of
the VMS requirement beyond May 1, 1999; modifies the framework process
to allow for aquaculture projects and changes to the OFDs; and
prohibits brush-sweep trawl gear when fishing for multispecies.
Comments and Responses
Eighteen written comments on Amendment 9 were received during the
comment period established by the notice of availability of the
amendment, which ended March 8, 1999. These comments were considered by
NMFS in its decision to partially approve Amendment 9 on April 7, 1999.
In addition, NMFS received two comments during the comment period
specified for the proposed rule, which ended on May 3, 1999. Comments
pertaining to both the amendment and the rule that were received during
the respective comment periods are addressed here.
Comment 1: Several comments were received that did not support the
increases in minimum fish size for winter flounder. Some of these
comments stated that the size increases: (1) merely postpone mortality,
rather than reduce it, (2) would have a disproportionate impact on
participants west of 72o30', (3) are not consistent with
mesh in place west of 72o30', (4) would increase discards,
and (5) favor fishermen in Northern states at the expense of southerly
fishermen. These commenters generally supported a 12-inch (30.5 cm)
size limit west of 72o30', trip limits, limits on the length
of trawl sweeps, and 6-inch (15.2 cm) codend in the Southern New
England management area. At least one comment on this measure noted
that the final report of SAW-28 indicated that this stock is not
overfished, and that with no further management measures, the stock
could rebuild in 2 to 5 years.
Response: On April 7, 1999, NMFS disapproved the size increases for
winter flounder. The Council used preliminary information (the draft
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission assessment of winter
flounder) to support the size increase. The final SAW-28 report was not
complete or available at the time the
[[Page 55822]]
Council initially considered the increases. Draft documents for SAW-28
indicated the Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic stock is overfished and
would benefit from mortality reduction. However, the final
interpretation of the results with respect to the revised national
standard 1 guidelines (63 FR 24212, May 1, 1998) indicated that the
stock is not overfished, and that the mortality reduction is not
necessary. Instead, the stock could rebuild to maximum sustainable
yield (MSY) in 2 to 5 years under the management measures currently in
place. Since a reduction is not necessary under the final assessment
results, the costs imposed by the restrictive size limits are not
justified. Therefore, this provision was disapproved.
Comment 2: One commenter supports a 13-inch (33-cm) fish size as an
incentive not to use illegal net liners.
Response: While NMFS supports measures that would decrease illegal
activity, NMFS found no compelling scientific or social benefit to
increasing the fish size solely to achieve that goal. Further, revision
to the interpretation of the SAW-28 results indicating that the stock
is not overfished has changed the scientific basis used to support the
proposed minimum fish size increases. As discussed in the response to
Comment 1, NMFS has disapproved the measure.
Comment 3: One commenter supports a prohibition on brush-sweep
(streetsweeper'') trawl gear.
Response: NMFS agrees and approved this provision on April 7, 1999.
Comment 4: One commenter supported implementation of the VMS as
soon as possible as an aid to enforcement, whereas another expressed
concern and disappointment that NMFS was considering disapproval of the
recommended VMS postponement, and urged approval of the delay.
Response: The mandatory use of VMS by individual days-at-sea (DAS)
vessels was originally implemented under Amendment 5 to the FMP. At the
time, the Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS (Regional
Administrator) authorized the alternative call-in system as a method of
notification for these vessels until the VMS was determined operable.
The VMS requirement was due to become effective May 1, 1999. For the
reasons stated in the proposed rule, NMFS considered disapproving
measures in Amendment 9 which would postpone implementation of the VMS
requirement until the Council addresses outstanding policy, equity and
operations issues. NMFS specifically invited comments from the public
on the issue during its review. Upon completion of its review, NMFS
concluded that the existing call-in system is adequate for the needs of
the fishery and that the framework mechanism would be the appropriate
place to re-initiate the program, should the Council resolve the
outstanding issues listed above. NMFS approved the indefinite
postponement of the VMS requirement for individual DAS vessels.
Comment 5: Several commenters expressed concern that Amendment 9
does not address bycatch. One supported a comprehensive bycatch review
to address bycatch of unmanaged species, such as barndoor skate.
Response: NMFS and the Council are both active participants in the
Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program which is a long-term
effort to improve the collection and utility of fisheries data -
including bycatch. Currently, NMFS employs both the mandatory Vessel
Trip Reports (VTRs) and information gathered in the Northeast Fisheries
Observer Program. Both of these systems review discards of both managed
and unmanaged species, as they are comprehensive. Assessment scientists
have recently expanded their analysis of discards in stock assessments
for some species.
NMFS recognizes that bycatch, as defined under the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, can include both managed and unmanaged species. Measures contained
in the FMP, such as DAS, fish sizes, closed areas, and mesh
requirements, are designed to minimize bycatch and bycatch mortality.
Specific measures adopted under Amendment 9, such as the 1-fish halibut
possession limit, recognize that the multi-species nature of the
fishery prevents complete cessation of bycatch. The Council believes
that additional management measures regarding bycatch, beyond those
adopted in Amendment 9, are impracticable and unnecessary at this time.
Regarding barndoor skate, this species is the focus of recent media
attention but was not of special concern when the Council developed
Amendment 9. As a result, the species was not added to the FMP's
management unit under Amendment 9. However, the Council recently
requested that NMFS designate it as the lead Council for skate
management. NMFS will decide on the Council's request after inviting
public comment on it.
Comment 6: One commenter stated that the Council did not accurately
note the changes SFA made to the definition of optimum'' as it relates
to optimum yield (OY). The commenter points out that the Magnuson-
Stevens Act defines ``optimum'' as the yield as reduced by relevant
social, economic and ecological factors, and also requires that OY take
into account protection of marine ecosystems. Thus, the commenter
argues, Amendment 9 is deficient in that it ignores fishing gears'
effect on marine ecosystems and relies solely on mortality and the use
of landings as a proxy for mortality, which are not the same. The
commenter does not support management by mortality reduction.
Response: The impacts of fishing gears' differential impacts on
marine ecosystems, to the degree that they are known, were fully
considered in Amendment 11 to the FMP. That discussion and its findings
were found to be acceptable under the requirements of the SFA, and as a
result, Amendment 11 was approved on March 3, 1999 (64 FR 199503, April
21, 1999). The OY specified in Amendment 9 was found to be in
accordance with the SFA, and was approved on April 7, 1999. The
Magnuson-Stevens Act allows for a multi-faceted approach to achievement
of OY, including mortality reduction, which by definition includes the
reduction of bycatch and bycatch mortality (bycatch is defined as fish
that are harvested but not sold or kept for personal use), stock
rebuilding, and habitat protection. The Council and NMFS have never
defined mortality as synonymous with landings, as this comment letter
states.
Comment 7: Two commenters do not support management by fishing
mortality (F) reduction and instead support opening closed areas to
jigging.
Response: Reduction of F to rebuild overfished stocks is an
appropriate mechanism that has proven successful in the Northeast
Multispecies FMP and other FMPs. Additionally, the commenters'
suggestion of opening closed areas to jigging was not taken to public
hearings for Amendment 9. Therefore, under Section 304 of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, NMFS could not implement such a measure in the final rule
implementing the approved measures of Amendment 9. NMFS encourages the
commenters to forward their suggestions to the Council for
consideration under future FMP amendments.
Comment 8: Several comment letters were received on the EFH
provisions. One commenter stated that EFH was not considered, and
called Amendment 9 ``shallow avoidance.'' Another stated that Amendment
9 fails to comply with EFH provisions and interpreted statements in the
Council's EFH omnibus Amendment (including Amendment 11 to the FMP) to
indicate that Amendment 9 would contain provisions to satisfy the EFH
[[Page 55823]]
requirement of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Response: Amendment 11 to the FMP conducted a methodical evaluation
of impact from fishing gears on EFH. That amendment indicated that some
of the management measures contained in Amendment 9 that are designed
to curb F will also serve to limit impacts on EFH. Those measures,
therefore, warrant consideration in determining the Council's
compliance with the requirements to minimize the effects of fishing on
EFH, to the extent practicable. Amendment 11 includes the EFH
information required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act and was approved by
NMFS on March 3, 1999.
Comment 9: Several commenters did not specifically comment on any
one measure or provision of Amendment 9, but expressed support for the
small boat fleet of Cape Cod, and do not want regulations that would
cause it undue harm.
Response: This comment did not specifically address any one
provision of Amendment 9. Regardless, NMFS reviewed Amendment 9 for
consistency with the national standards and other applicable law. The
approved measures of Amendment 9 were found to be consistent with
national standard 8, which specifies the measures shall, consistent
with the conservation requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act
(including the prevention of overfishing and rebuilding of overfished
stocks), take into account the importance of fishery resources to
fishing communities in order to provide for the sustained participation
of such communities, and to the extent practicable, minimize adverse
impacts on such communities. Management measures enacted by this rule
will have few impacts on communities, the exceptions being the halibut
restrictions and the brush-sweep trawl gear prohibition.
The Council drafted an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) to examine impacts of the bush-sweep trawl gear prohibition, and
1-fish halibut possession limit. NMFS supplemented that analysis and
considered the impact of Amendment 9 on small entities prior to making
the decision to implement these measures. The IRFA includes a
discussion of the various alternatives considered and rejected. This
analysis is summarized in the Classification section and is
incorporated within the FRFA for this final rule.
Comment 10: Several commenters found the OFDs confusing and
difficult to understand. As a result, the commenters were unsure of the
consequences of the OFDs. Further, one of the commenters questioned the
stock definitions, and urged that the stock definitions be rejected and
improved.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that the OFDs are very technical and,
thus, can be confusing, particularly to the lay person. Consequently,
NMFS has made every effort, where practicable, to encourage or employ
the use of easily understood language. The purpose of these definitions
is to aid managers in identifying the status of the stock relative to
the goals of the FMPs, and to adopt measures to rebuild stocks (as
appropriate) so that the stocks may produce the MSY on a continuing
basis.
Stock definitions were approved with the original FMP adopting
management measures for these species. The definitions were not
revisited in Amendment 9 and, consequently, cannot be rejected at this
time. The authority granted to NMFS is the approval, partial approval,
or disapproval of the measures contained within Amendment 9.
Comment 11: One commenter supported the OFDs and is pleased that
both a stock biomass component and an F component are included.
Response: Comment noted. NMFS approved the OFDs, except for GOM
winter flounder, which was not included in the amendment. The OFDs are
not described in this rule, which makes changes to the text of
regulations implementing the FMP. While OFDs appear in the FMP, they do
not appear in the regulations.
Comment 12: One commenter supported halibut conservation, and
recommended a prohibition on halibut possession, rather than a 1-fish
possession limit of 36 inches (91.4 cm).
Response: NMFS recognizes that this fishery is seriously depleted
in comparison to historical levels. The measures approved in Amendment
9 will allow for the occasional incidental catch of halibut, but not a
directed fishery for that species. However, a complete prohibition on
halibut possession would not provide any substantive conservation
benefits, since mortality would still occur due to incidental catch.
Changes from the Proposed Rule
To clarify the DAS notification requirements for vessels issued a
limited access multispecies, occasional scallop, or combination permit,
the regulations in Secs. 648.4(c)(2)(iii), 648.10(b), and 648.14(c)(2)
have been revised.
In Sec. 648.10, paragraph (b) has been revised to incorporate the
applicable requirements contained in the final rule implementing the
Monkfish FMP (64 FR 54732, October 7, 1999).
Section headings for Secs. 648.80, 648.83, 648.86, 648.88, and
Sec. 648.90 have been revised to reflect revisions contained in the
final rule implementing the Monkfish FMP (64 FR 54732, October 7,
1999).
NMFS disapproved the fish size increases for winter flounder. As a
result, the regulations proposed in Secs. 648.83(a)(1) and
648.89(b)(1), as they relate to winter flounder only, have been removed
from this final rule. The size limits for halibut that are specified in
those same paragraphs, remain and are unchanged from the proposed rule.
NOAA codifies its OMB control numbers for information collection at
15 CFR part 902. Part 902 collects and displays the control numbers
assigned to information collection requirements of NOAA by OMB pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This final rule codifies OMB
control number 0648-0307 for Sec. 648.10.
Under NOAA Administrative Order 205-11, dated December 17, 1990,
the Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere has delegated to the
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, the authority to sign
material for publication in the Federal Register.
Classification
The Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS, determined that
Amendment 9 is necessary for the conservation and management of the
Northeast Multispecies fishery and that it is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable law, except for the
disapproved provisions.
This final rule has been determined to be significant for the
purposes of E.O. 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
NMFS prepared an FRFA as part of the regulatory impact review,
which describes the impact this rule would have on small entities. The
FRFA is comprised of the IRFA and its supplement prepared by the
Council, dated December 14, 1998, and supplement prepared by NMFS,
dated January 27, 1999, public comments and responses that are included
in this document, the analysis of impacts and alternatives in Amendment
9, and the summary that is included here.
The Council, in its IRFA, had determined that this action would not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
However, NMFS concluded that a determination of non-significance could
not be made because of the inability to identify the number of vessels
that may
[[Page 55824]]
be impacted by measures in the proposed rule, namely the brush-sweep
trawl gear prohibition, the 1-fish halibut possession limit, and the
winter flounder fish size increase. In its supplement to the IRFA, NMFS
revisited each of these measures and concluded that the degree of
economic impacts on small entities varied depending on whether the
number of vessels impacted includes all permitted vessels, all active
vessels, or just those vessels directly impacted by a measure. A copy
of the FRFA is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The following section discusses (1) the need for, and objectives,
of the rule; (2) public comments on the IRFA; (3) the number of small
entities to which the rule will apply; (4) reporting and recordkeeping
requirements; (5) reasons for selecting the alternatives adopted in the
final rule and rejecting the alternatives; and (6) the measures that
minimize the economic impact of this action.
The need for, and objectives of, the rule are mainly to address
requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, as amended by the SFA on
October 11, 1996, eliminate overfishing, and rebuild many of the
groundfish stocks. Several comments were received that opposed
regulations that caused undue harm to the Cape Cod small boat fleet.
Those comments, and the agency's response, are summarized in the
preamble. No changes were made to the rule as a result.
This rule prohibits the possession of brush-sweep trawl gear while
in the possession of Northeast multispecies and fishing for, landing,
or possessing Northeast multispecies harvested with brush-sweep trawl
gear, unless the vessel has not been issued a multispecies permit and
fishes for Northeast multispecies exclusively in state waters. This
measure was selected in order to allow time to study the effect of this
gear on habitat and to protect the integrity of the DAS system. The
Council rejected the ``no-action'' alternative (no prohibition) because
continued use of brush-sweep trawl gear may significantly increase
trawl efficiency and thereby reduce the benefits of the FMP's effort
reduction program. The potential number of vessels that would be
impacted by the brush-sweep trawl gear prohibition is approximately 900
vessels, based on the number of permit holders, according to the NMFS
Regional Office database, that fish for multispecies with otter trawl
gear, and assuming all 900 vessels are currently using brush-sweep
gear.
This action implements a 1-fish per vessel halibut possession limit
with a minimum fish size of 36 inches (91.4 cm). These measures were
selected to promote the rebuilding of this overfished resource.
Alternatives to these measures that were considered but rejected were
status quo (no action); a 1-fish possession limit with a maximum fish
size of 48 inches (137.1 cm); a 1-fish possession limit combined with a
maximum fish size of 48 inches (137.1 cm) and a minimum fish size of 36
inches (91.4 cm); and a total prohibition on halibut possession. The
Council rejected the status quo alternative because of the need to
reduce directed fishing mortality on this overfished resource. The
Council rejected the maximum size provisions based on concerns that the
associated discard mortality would negate the intended conservation
benefits. The Council rejected a total prohibition as that measure
would not provide any substantive conservation benefits, since
mortality would still occur due to incidental catch.
The number of vessels affected by the proposed 1-fish halibut
possession limit may amount to 1,050 vessels based on the number of
permitted vessels in the multispecies fishery. This number includes
active limited access multispecies permit holders (1,000) combined with
a subset of one-half the estimated 100 active participants in the
directed halibut fishery that do not possess a Federal fisheries
permit. Active vessels (those that reported landings of halibut in
recent years) are estimated to be only those vessels that caught at
least one halibut (134 - 139 vessels) in 1996 or 1997.
The postponement of the VMS requirement (measure) mitigates impacts
of this rule on small entities because they do not have to invest in
VMS equipment at this time. The measure was selected, and the ``no
action'' alternative (no postponement of VMS) was rejected, because of
unresolved uncertainties regarding the equity among permit categories,
system efficiency, and costs. Between 91 and 110 vessels that fished as
Individual DAS vessels in 1998 would be required to have an operational
VMS unit under the ``no-action'' alternative if those vessels remained
in that permit category in 1999.
This rule also modifies the framework process to allow the Council
to make recommendations on adjustments or additions to selected
management measures and OFDs. Modification of the framework process
will not have any immediate impact on small entities. Specific
framework actions will be evaluated, including their economic impacts,
when they are developed and proposed by the Council. The Council
rejected the ``no-action'' alternative (no modification) as that would
prevent the Council's use of the procedure to recommend timely
adjustments or additions to management measures and OFDs.
NMFS disapproved the proposed fish size increases for winter
flounder as inconsistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other
applicable law.
This rule contains information collection requirements subject to
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The rule restates requirements
concerning the installation of a vessel tracking system, documentation
of installation of a vessel tracking system, declarations of a vessel
being in or out of a fishery, and call-in systems.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required
to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of
the PRA unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
The requirement for installation of vessel tracking systems has
been approved under OMB control number 0648-0307, with an estimated
response time of 60 minutes. The other requirements have been approved
under OMB control number 0648-0202, with an estimated response time of
2 minutes for each requirement.
The contents of this rule also affect two other information
collection requirements. The requirement that a vessel must have a NE
multispecies permit in order to land or possess one halibut will
subject additional persons to the existing permit requirement approved
under OMB number 0648-0202. Those persons who are newly subject to the
permit requirement will also automatically be subject to the
requirement that permit holders submit VTRs, a requirement which has
been approved under OMB number 0648-0212. This request for the expanded
coverage of these requirements has been approved by OMB. The estimated
response time for these requirements is 35 minutes for the permit and 5
minutes per day for the logbook entries beyond those made in vessel
logbooks as part of normal fishing operations and includes the time
needed for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information. Send comments regarding these burden
estimates or any other aspect of the data requirements, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and to the
Office of
[[Page 55825]]
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC 20503 (ATTN: NOAA Desk Officer).
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 902
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 7, 1999.
Andrew A. Rosenberg,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR part 902, chapter
IX, and 50 CFR part 648, chapter VI, are amended as follows:
15 CFR Chapter IX
PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT; OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
2. In Sec. 902.1, the table in paragraph (b) is amended by revising
under 50 CFR the following entry in numerical order:
Sec. 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current OMB control number
CFR part or section where the information (all numbers begin with 0648-
collection requirement is located )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
50 CFR
* * * * *
648.10 -0202 and -0307
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Chapter VI
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 648.2, the definition for ``Brush-sweep trawl gear'' is
added, and the definitions for ``Nonregulated multispecies'' and
``Northeast (NE) multispecies or multispecies'' are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 648.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Brush-sweep trawl gear means trawl gear consisting of alternating
roller discs and bristle brushes that are strung along cables, chains,
or footropes, and aligned together to form the sweep of the trawl net,
designed to allow the trawl sweep to maintain contact with the ocean
floor, or any modification to trawl gear that is substantially similar
in design or effect.
* * * * *
Nonregulated multispecies means the subset of Northeast
multispecies that includes silver hake, red hake, ocean pout, and
Atlantic halibut.
Northeast (NE) multispecies or multispecies means the following
species:
American plaice--Hippoglossoides platessoides.
Atlantic cod--Gadus morhua.
Atlantic halibut--Hippoglossus hippoglossus.
Haddock--Melanogrammus aeglefinus.
Ocean pout--Macrozoarces americanus.
Pollock--Pollachius virens.
Redfish--Sebastes fasciatus.
Red hake--Urophycis chuss.
Silver hake (whiting)--Merluccius bilinearis.
White hake--Urophycis tenuis.
Windowpane flounder--Scophthalmus aquosus.
Winter flounder--Pleuronectes americanus.
Witch flounder--Glyptocephalus cynoglossus.
Yellowtail flounder--Pleuronectes ferrugineus.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 648.4, paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 648.4 Vessel and individual commercial permits.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(A) An application for a limited access multispecies permit must
also contain the following information: For vessels fishing for NE
multispecies with gillnet gear, with the exception of vessels fishing
under the Small Vessel permit category, an annual declaration as either
a Day or Trip gillnet vessel designation as described in
Sec. 648.82(k). A vessel owner electing a Day gillnet designation must
indicate the number of gillnet tags that he/she is requesting and must
include a check for the cost of the tags. A permit holder letter will
be sent to the owner of each eligible gillnet vessel informing him/her
of the costs associated with this tagging requirement and directions
for obtaining tags. Once a vessel owner has elected this designation,
he/she may not change the designation or fish under the other gillnet
category for the remainder of the fishing year. Incomplete
applications, as described in paragraph (e) of this section, will be
considered incomplete for the purpose of obtaining authorization to
fish in the NE multispecies gillnet fishery and will be processed
without a gillnet authorization.
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 648.10, paragraphs (b) and (d) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 648.10 DAS notification requirements.
* * * * *
(b) VMS Notification. (1) A scallop vessel issued a full-time or
part-time limited access scallop permit, or issued an occasional
limited access permit when fishing under the Georges' Bank Sea Scallop
Exemption Program specified under Sec. 648.58, or a scallop vessel
fishing under the small dredge program specified in Sec. 648.51(e), or
a vessel issued a limited access multispecies, monkfish, occasional
scallop, or combination permit whose owner elects to provide the
notifications required by this paragraph (b) using the VMS specified in
paragraph (b) of this section, unless otherwise authorized or required
by the Regional Administrator under paragraph (d) of this section, must
have installed on board an operational VMS unit that meets the minimum
performance criteria specified in Sec. 648.9(b) or as modified in
Sec. 648.9(a). The owner of such a vessel must provide documentation to
the Regional Administrator at the time of application for a limited
access permit that the vessel has an operational VMS unit installed on
board that meets those criteria. If a vessel has already been issued a
limited access permit without the owner providing such documentation,
the Regional Administrator shall allow at least 30 days for the vessel
to install an operational VMS unit that meets the criteria and for the
owner to provide documentation of such installation to the Regional
Administrator. A vessel that is required to, or whose owner has elected
to, use a VMS unit is subject to the following requirements and
presumptions:
(i) A vessel that have crossed the VMS Demarcation Line specified
under paragraph (a) of this section is deemed to be fishing under the
DAS program, unless the vessel's owner or authorized representative
declares the vessel out of the scallop or NE multispecies, or monkfish
fishery, as applicable, for a specific time period by notifying the
Regional Administrator through the VMS prior to the vessel leaving
port.
[[Page 55826]]
(ii) A part-time scallop vessel may not fish in the DAS allocation
program unless it declares into the scallop fishery for a specific time
period by notifying the Regional Administrator through the VMS.
(iii) Notification that the vessel is not under the DAS program
must be received prior to the vessel leaving port. A vessel may not
change its status after the vessel leaves port or before it returns to
port on any fishing trip.
(iv) DAS for a vessel that is under the VMS notification
requirements of this paragraph (b) begin with the first hourly location
signal received showing that the vessel crossed the VMS Demarcation
Line leaving port. DAS end with the first hourly location signal
received showing that the vessel crossed the VMS Demarcation Line upon
its return to port.
(v) If the VMS is not available or not functional, and if
authorized by the Regional Administrator, a vessel owner must provide
the notifications required by paragraphs (b)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) of
this section by using the call-in notification system described under
paragraph (c) of this section, instead of using the VMS specified in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(2)(i) A vessel issued a limited access multispecies, monkfish,
occasional scallop, or combination permit must use the call-in
notification system specified in paragraph (c) of this section, unless
the owner of such vessel has elected under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of
this section to provide the notifications required by paragraph (b) of
this section.
(ii) Upon recommendation by the Council, the Regional Administrator
may require, by notification through a letter to affected permit
holders, notification in the Federal Register, or other appropriate
means, that a multispecies vessel issued an Individual DAS or
Combination Vessel permit install on board an operational VMS unit that
meets the minimum performance criteria specified in Sec. 648.9(b) or as
modified in Sec. 648.9(a). An owner of such a vessel must provide
documentation to the Regional Administrator that the vessel has
installed on board an operational VMS unit that meets those criteria.
If a vessel has already been issued a permit without the owner
providing such documentation, the Regional Administrator shall allow at
least 30 days for the vessel to install an operational VMS unit that
meets the criteria and for the owner to provide documentation of such
installation to the Regional Administrator. A vessel that is required
to use a VMS shall be subject to the requirements and presumptions
described under paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (b)(1)(v) of this section.
(iii) A vessel issued a limited access multispecies, monkfish,
occasional scallop, or combination permit may be authorized by the
Regional Administrator to provide the notifications required by
paragraph (b) of this section using the VMS specified in paragraph (b)
of this section. The owner of such vessel becomes authorized by
providing documentation to the Regional Administrator at the time of
application for an individual or combination vessel limited access
multispecies permit that the vessel has installed on board an
operational VMS unit that meets the minimum performance criteria
specified in Sec. 648.9(b) or as modified in Sec. 648.9(a). Vessels
that are authorized to use the VMS in lieu of the call-in requirement
for DAS notification shall be subject to the requirements and
presumptions described under paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (b)(1)(v) of
this section. Those who elect to use the VMS do not need to call in DAS
as specified in paragraph (c) of this section. Vessels that do call in
are exempt from the prohibition specified in Sec. 648.14(c)(2).
* * * * *
(d) Temporary authorization for use of the call-in system. The
Regional Administrator may authorize or require, on a temporary basis,
the use of the call-in system of notification specified in paragraph
(c) of this section, instead of use of the VMS. If use of the call-in
system is authorized or required, the Regional Administrator shall
notify affected permit holders through a letter, notification in the
Federal Register, or other appropriate means. A multispecies vessel
issued an Individual DAS or Combination Vessel (regarding the
multispecies fishery) permit are authorized to use the call-in system
of notification specified in paragraph (c) of this section, unless
otherwise notified as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
5. In Sec. 648.14, paragraphs (a)(117), (a)(118) and (c)(31) are
added, and paragraphs (b), (c)(1), (c)(2) introductory text, (d)(1),
(e) and (g)(2) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.14 Prohibitions.
(a) * * *
(117) Fish for, land, or possess NE multispecies harvested with
brush-sweep trawl gear unless the vessel has not been issued a
multispecies permit and fishes for NE multispecies exclusively in state
waters.
(118) Possess brush-sweep trawl gear while in possession of NE
multispecies, unless the vessel has not been issued a multispecies
permit and fishes for NE multispecies exclusively in state waters.
(b) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in
Sec. 600.725 of this chapter and in paragraph (a) of this section, it
is unlawful for any person owning or operating a vessel holding a
multispecies permit, issued an operator's permit, or issued a letter
under Sec. 648.4(a)(1)(i)(H)(3), to land, or possess on board a vessel,
more than the possession or landing limits specified in
Sec. 648.86(a),(b) and (c), or to violate any of the other provisions
of Sec. 648.86, unless otherwise specified in Sec. 648.17.
(c) * * *
(1) Fish for, possess at any time during a trip, or land per trip
more than the possession limit of NE multispecies specified in
Sec. 648.86(d) after using up the vessel's annual DAS allocation or
when not participating in the DAS program pursuant to Sec. 648.82,
unless otherwise exempted under Sec. 648.82(b)(3) or Sec. 648.89.
(2) For purposes of DAS notification, if required or electing to
have a VMS unit under Sec. 648.10:
* * * * *
(31) Possess or land per trip more than the possession or landing
limit specified under Sec. 648.86(c) if the vessel has been issued a
multispecies permit.
(d) * * *
(1) Possess, at any time during a trip, or land per trip, more than
the possession limit of NE multispecies specified in Sec. 648.88(a),
unless the vessel is a charter or party vessel fishing under the
charter/party restrictions specified in Sec. 648.89.
* * * * *
(e) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in
Sec. 600.725 of this chapter and in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
section, it is unlawful for any person owning or operating a vessel
issued a scallop multispecies possession limit permit to possess or
land more than the possession limit of NE multispecies specified in
Sec. 648.88(c), or to possess or land regulated species when not
fishing under a scallop DAS, unless otherwise specified in Sec. 648.17.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(2) Possess cod, haddock, and Atlantic halibut in excess of the
possession limits specified in Sec. 648.89(c).
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 648.80, paragraph (g)(4) is added to read as follows:
[[Page 55827]]
Sec. 648.80 Multispecies regulated mesh areas and restrictions on gear
and methods of fishing.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(4) Brush-sweep trawl prohibition. No vessel may fish for, possess,
or land NE multispecies while fishing with, or while in possession of,
brush-sweep trawl gear.
* * * * *
7. In Sec. 648.83, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.83 Multispecies minimum fish sizes.
(a) * * * (1) Minimum fish sizes for recreational vessels and
charter/party vessels that are not fishing under a NE multispecies DAS
are specified in Sec. 648.89. Except as provided in Sec. 648.17, all
other vessels are subject to the following minimum fish sizes,
determined by total length (T.L.):
Minimum Fish Sizes (T.L.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Size (Inches)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cod 19 (48.3 cm)
Haddock 19 (48.3 cm)
Pollock 19 (48.3 cm)
Witch flounder (gray sole) 14 (35.6 cm)
Yellowtail flounder 13 (33.0 cm)
American plaice (dab) 14 (35.6 cm)
Atlantic halibut 36 (91.4 cm)
Winter flounder (blackback) 12 (30.5 cm)
Redfish 9 (22.9 cm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
8. In Sec. 648.86, paragraph (c) is revised and paragraph (e) is
added to read as follows:
Sec. 648.86 Multispecies possession restrictions.
* * * * *
(c) Atlantic halibut. A vessel issued a NE multispecies permit
under Sec. 648.4(a)(1) may land or possess on board no more than one
Atlantic halibut per trip, provided the vessel complies with other
applicable provisions of this part.
* * * * *
(e) Other possession restrictions. Vessels are subject to any other
applicable possession limit restrictions of this part.
9. In Sec. 648.88, paragraphs (a)(1), (b), (c), and (d) are revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 648.88 Multispecies open access permit restrictions.
(a) * * *
(1) The vessel may possess and land up to 300 lb (136.1 kg) of cod,
haddock, and yellowtail flounder, combined, one Atlantic halibut, and
unlimited amounts of the other NE multispecies, per trip, provided that
it does not use or possess on board gear other than rod and reel or
handlines while in possession of, fishing for, or landing NE
multispecies, and provided it has at least one standard tote on board.
* * * * *
(b) Charter/party permit. A vessel that has been issued a valid
open access multispecies charter/party permit is subject to the
additional restrictions on gear, recreational minimum fish sizes,
possession limits, and prohibitions on sale specified in Sec. 648.89,
and any other applicable provisions of this part.
(c) Scallop multispecies possession limit permit. A vessel that has
been issued a valid open access scallop multispecies possession limit
permit may possess and land up to 300 lb (136.1 kg) of regulated
species when fishing under a scallop DAS allocated under Sec. 648.53,
provided the vessel does not fish for, possess, or land haddock from
January 1 through June 30 as specified under Sec. 648.86(a)(2)(i), and
provided the vessel has at least one standard tote on board.
(d) Non-regulated multispecies permit. A vessel issued a valid open
access nonregulated multispecies permit may possess and land one
Atlantic halibut and unlimited amounts of the other nonregulated
multispecies. The vessel is subject to restrictions on gear, area, and
time of fishing specified in Sec. 648.80 and any other applicable
provisions of this part.
10. In Sec. 648.89, paragraphs (b)(1) and (c) are revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 648.89 Recreational and charter/party restrictions.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Minimum fish sizes. Persons aboard charter or party vessels
permitted under this part and not fishing under the DAS program, and
recreational fishing vessels in the EEZ, may not retain fish smaller
than the minimum fish sizes, measured in total length (T.L.) as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Size (Inches)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cod 21 (53.3 cm)
Haddock 21 (53.3 cm)
Pollock 19 (48.3 cm)
Witch flounder (gray sole) 14 (35.6 cm)
Yellowtail flounder 13 (33.0 cm)
Atlantic halibut 36 (91.4 cm)
American plaice (dab) 14 (35.6 cm)
Winter flounder (blackback) 12 (30.5 cm)
Redfish 9 (22.9 cm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(c) Possession restrictions--(1) Cod and haddock. Each person on a
recreational vessel may possess no more than 10 cod and/or haddock,
combined, in, or harvested from, the EEZ.
(i) For purposes of counting fish, fillets will be converted to
whole fish at the place of landing by dividing fillet number by two. If
fish are filleted into a single (butterfly) fillet, such fillet shall
be deemed to be from one whole fish.
(ii) Cod and haddock harvested by recreational vessels with more
than one person aboard may be pooled in one or more containers.
Compliance with the possession limit will be determined by dividing the
number of fish on board by the number of persons on board. If there is
a violation of the possession limit on board a vessel carrying more
than one person, the violation shall be deemed to have been committed
by the owner and operator.
(iii) Cod and haddock must be stored so as to be readily available
for inspection.
(2) Atlantic halibut. Charter and party vessels permitted under
this part, and recreational fishing vessels fishing in the EEZ, may not
possess, on board, more than one Atlantic halibut.
* * * * *
11. In Sec. 648.90, paragraphs (b) introductory text and (b)(1) are
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.90 Multispecies framework specifications.
* * * * *
(b) Within season management action. The Council may, at any time,
initiate action to add or adjust management measures if it finds that
action is necessary to meet or be consistent with the goals and
objectives of the Northeast Multispecies FMP, to address gear
conflicts, or to facilitate the development of aquaculture projects in
the EEZ. This procedure may also be used to modify FMP overfishing
definitions and fishing mortality targets which form the basis for
selecting specific management measures.
(1) Adjustment process. The Council shall develop and analyze
appropriate management actions over the span of at least two Council
meetings. The Council shall provide the public with advance notice of
the availability of both the proposals and the analyses and an
opportunity to comment on them prior to, and at, the second Council
meeting. The Council's recommendation on adjustments or additions to
management measures, other than to address gear conflicts, must come
from one or more of the following categories: DAS changes, effort
monitoring, data
[[Page 55828]]
reporting, possession limits, gear restrictions, closed areas,
permitting restrictions, crew limits, minimum fish sizes, onboard
observers, minimum hook size and hook style, the use of crucifiers in
the hook-gear fishery, fleet sector shares, recreational fishing
measures, area closures and other appropriate measures to mitigate
marine mammal entanglements and interactions, and any other management
measures currently included in the FMP. The Council's recommendation on
adjustments or additions to management measures for the purposes of
facilitating aquaculture projects must come from one or more of the
following categories: Minimum fish sizes, gear restrictions, minimum
mesh sizes, possession limits, tagging requirements, monitoring
requirements, reporting requirements, permit restrictions, area
closures, establishment of special management areas or zones, and any
other management measures currently included in the FMP.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-26839 Filed 10-14-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F