[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