[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 29, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16766-16780]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-7697]



[[Page 16765]]

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

Part V





Department of Commerce





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



National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



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



15 CFR Part 902 and 50 CFR Part 648



Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies 
Fishery; Amendment 12 and Framework Adjustment 32 to the Northeast 
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan; and Final Rules

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 29, 2000 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 16766]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Part 902

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 990811218-0072-02; I.D. 050399A]
RIN 0648-AL27


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast 
Multispecies Fishery; Amendment 12 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 measures contained in 
Amendment 12 to the Northeast Multispecies Fisheries Management Plan 
(FMP) to address the management of silver hake (whiting), red hake, 
offshore hake, and ocean pout and to implement the framework measure 
approved in Amendment 11 to the FMP regarding essential fish habitat. 
Amendment 12 and these regulations establish differential whiting 
possession limits based on the mesh size with which a vessel chooses to 
fish. The intended effect of this action is to reduce fishing mortality 
rates on whiting and red hake to eliminate overfishing and rebuild the 
biomass in accordance with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

DATES: This rule is effective April 28, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Amendment 12 document, its Regulatory Impact 
Review (RIR), Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) and the 
July 1, 1999, supplement to the IRFA prepared by NMFS, the Final 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS), and other 
supporting documents for the FMP amendment, as well as all documents 
pertaining to Amendment 11, are available from Paul J. Howard, 
Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water 
Street, The Tannery-Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
    Comments regarding burden-hour estimates for collection-of-
information requirements or other aspects of the collection-of-
information requirements contained in this final rule should be sent to 
NMFS and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503 (Attention: NOAA Desk 
Officer).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Christopher, Fishery Policy 
Analyst, 978-281-9288.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule implements Amendment 12 to 
the Northeast Multispecies FMP, which was partially approved by NMFS on 
behalf of the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) on September 1, 1999. 
NMFS disapproved the limited access permit program and the associated 
open access permit category. All of the remaining measures contained in 
Amendment 12, as originally submitted, were approved. A proposed rule 
to implement these measures was published at 64 FR 49427, September 13, 
1999. Comments were accepted through October 28, 1999.
    The limited access permit program proposed in Amendment 12 was 
disapproved because NMFS determined that it was inconsistent with 
national standard 4 and section 304(e) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The 
qualification criteria would have allowed vessels that participated in 
either the Gulf of Maine whiting raised footrope or separator trawl 
experimental fisheries to qualify for a limited access permit under 
criteria different from those established for other vessels. Vessels 
that participated in the experiments would have qualified with 1,000 lb 
(453.6 kg) of landings over 3 years, rather than 50,000 lb (22,680 kg) 
of landings over 18 years. Vessels would have been subject to the same 
restrictions regardless of how the vessel qualified for the permit. 
This portion of the proposed limited access program is inconsistent 
with national standard 4 because different sectors of the industry 
could have qualified for the same level of fishing with different 
landings requirements. Further, vessels may have been excluded from 
participation in experimental fisheries because NMFS imposed 
participation restrictions, and these restrictive controls may have 
discouraged vessels from participating.
    The limited access program also proposed that, at the beginning of 
year 6 of Amendment 12, unless otherwise extended, vessels would be 
eligible for limited access small-mesh multispecies permits without 
having to meet the landings criteria, provided the vessels possessed a 
limited access multispecies permit that was valid on the date the final 
rule for Amendment 12 is published and that continues to be valid in 
year 6. The sunset provision could have given vessel owners who would 
not qualify for the limited access permit unrealistic expectations that 
they may be able to participate in the whiting (small-mesh 
multispecies) fisheries as a limited access vessel when it is unlikely 
to happen. Further, there was no analysis of the potential effects of 
such effort on the rebuilding schedule. Amendment 12 is intended to end 
overfishing in Year 4 and to rebuild the stocks of whiting and red hake 
within 10 years. Because it is uncertain that the fishery could sustain 
additional vessel participation just 1 year beyond the target date to 
end overfishing, rebuilding goals may be compromised. This measure was, 
therefore, found to be inconsistent with section 304(e) of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act that specifies that overfished fisheries be 
rebuilt within a period not to exceed 10 years.
    This rule does not implement the open access permit category for 
small-mesh multispecies because this category serves no purpose without 
the limited access permit program.
    Details concerning the justification for, and development of, 
Amendment 12 and the implementing regulations were provided in the 
notice of availability (NOA) of Amendment 12 at 64 FR 29257, June 1, 
1999, corrected at 64 FR 34758, June 29, 1999, and in the preamble to 
the proposed rule and are not repeated here.

Approved Measures

    Although possession limits and other measures contained in the 
Amendment 12 are specific to whiting and offshore hake, the measures to 
protect whiting will also provide similar protection for red hake 
because it is primarily caught as incidental catch along with whiting 
or in directed whiting fisheries.
    The existing ``Open Access Nonregulated Multispecies Permit'' 
category is renamed the ``Open Access Multispecies Permit'' to avoid 
confusion that would result from the elimination of the definition of 
``Nonregulated Multispecies.'' The term ``nonregulated'' is no longer 
appropriate because Amendment 12 regulates whiting, red hake, and 
offshore hake. Vessels currently issued ``Open Access Nonregulated 
Multispecies Permits'' do not have to acquire a new ``Open Access 
Multispecies Permit'' this fishing year, but will have to obtain one 
for future years.
    This rule amends the regulations so that the Cultivator Shoal 
Whiting Exemption Area fishing season begins on June 15 and ends on 
September 30 of each year. Vessels fishing in this exemption area with 
the appropriate letter of authorization from the Regional Administrator 
on board are restricted to

[[Page 16767]]

a minimum mesh size of 3 inches (7.62 cm), subject to applicable codend 
restrictions. Such vessels are also subject to a possession limit of 
30,000 lb (13,608 kg) of whiting and offshore hake. Vessels with a 
valid letter of authorization to fish in the Cultivator Shoal Whiting 
Exemption Area are allowed to fish in areas other than this exemption 
area, but they are subject to the more restrictive mesh and possession 
measures regardless of where they fish.
    Vessels issued any category of Federal limited access multispecies 
permit or an ``Open Access Multispecies Permit'' are subject to a 
whiting and offshore hake possession limit of 3,500 lb (1,588 kg) while 
using a codend mesh size (defined at Sec. 648.86(d)(1)(iv)) of less 
than 2.5 inches (6.35 cm) or while using any mesh size and not issued a 
letter of authorization as described at 648.86(d)(2). Vessels issued 
any category of Federal limited access multispecies permit or the 
``Open Access Multispecies Permit'' are subject to the following 
whiting and offshore hake possession limits: 7,500 lb (3,402 kg), while 
using a codend mesh size of 2.5 inches (6.35 cm) or larger, provided 
the vessel has a letter of authorization from the Administrator, 
Northeast Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) on board; and 30,000 lb 
(13,608 kg), while using a codend mesh size of 3 inches (7.62 cm) or 
larger, provided the vessel has a letter of authorization from the 
Regional Administrator on board. Letters of authorization for these 
mesh size categories are valid for a minimum of 30 days. However, 
vessels can withdraw from either minimum mesh size category after a 
minimum of 7 days, but they are subject to a possession limit of 3,500 
lb (1,588 kg) regardless of the mesh size in use and may not re-enter 
the original authorization category for the remainder of the original 
30 days.
    To retain silver hake (whiting) and offshore hake while 
participating in the northern shrimp fishery, a vessel must have a 
Federal multispecies permit. Vessels issued a Federal multispecies 
permit and fishing in the Small-Mesh Northern Shrimp Fishery Exemption 
Area with an appropriate letter of authorization from the Regional 
Administrator on board are subject to a possession limit of silver hake 
and offshore hake, combined, equal to the weight of shrimp on board, 
but may not exceed 3,500 lb (1,588 kg).
    This rule includes instructions for vessel owners to follow in 
order for them to receive the required letters of authorization to 
participate in one of the minimum mesh size and corresponding 
possession limit categories. To request a letter of authorization, 
vessel owners must call the Northeast Region Permit Office during 
normal business hours and provide the vessel name, owner name, permit 
number, the desired mesh size/possession limit category, and the period 
of time that the vessel is enrolled. Because letters of authorization 
are effective on the date of receipt, vessel owners should allow 
appropriate processing and mail time. To withdraw from a category, 
vessel owners must call the Northeast Region Permit Office. Withdrawals 
are effective upon date of request.
    Vessels issued Federal multispecies permits may transfer up to 500 
lb (226.8 kg) of small-mesh multispecies to another vessel at sea, 
provided the transferring vessel has a letter of authorization to 
transfer fish at sea on board the vessel. A total of 500 lb (226.8 kg) 
will automatically be deducted from the possession limit of the vessel 
the fish is transferred from, regardless of the actual amount 
transferred. Vessels receiving the small-mesh multispecies at sea do 
not have to have a multispecies permit but must have a receipt for the 
transferred fish.
    For vessels less than or equal to 60 ft (18.29 m) in length 
overall, the minimum codend mesh size applies to the first 50 meshes 
(100 bars in the case of square mesh) from the terminus of the net. For 
vessels greater than 60 ft (18.29 m) in length overall, the minimum 
codend mesh size applies to the first 100 meshes (200 bars in the case 
of square mesh) from the terminus of the net. These restrictions do not 
apply to vessels using less than 2.5-inch (6.35-cm) mesh and subject to 
other Northeast Region codend specifications specified in 50 CFR part 
648. Vessels using mesh less than 2.5 inches (6.35 cm) may continue to 
use net strengtheners as allowed in this 50 CFR part 648.
    Unless a framework or amendment to address fishing mortality for 
whiting and red hake is implemented by May 1, 2002, the following 
default measures are applicable:
    A regulated mesh area throughout the range of the species, with a 
3-inch (7.62-cm) minimum mesh requirement for all fishing activities. 
Vessels participating in any fishery are required to use the minimum 
codend mesh or larger unless fishing in a fishery that has been 
determined exempt from the minimum mesh size.
    A possession limit of whiting and offshore hake up to 10,000 lb 
(4,536 kg) for vessels possessing a Federal multispecies permit.
    An allowance for vessels to fish with mesh less than 3 inches (7.62 
cm), if fishing is determined to be exempted from the minimum mesh size 
by demonstrating a bycatch of small-mesh multispecies that is less than 
10 percent of total catch.
    A possession limit of 100 lb (45.36 kg) of whiting and offshore 
hake for vessels participating in an exempted fishery.
    This rule allows the following measures to be implemented through 
the framework procedure in Sec. 648.90: A total allowable landings 
limit of whiting (and appropriate seasonal adjustments) for vessels 
fishing in the northern area requiring that the fishery be closed when 
the limit is reached; modifications or adjustments to whiting grate/
mesh configuration requirements; adjustments to whiting stock 
boundaries for management purposes; modifications to criteria defining 
fisheries as exempt from the minimum mesh requirements for small-mesh 
multispecies; adjustments to the season, declaration process, or 
participation requirements for the Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery; 
and measures to designate essential fish habitat. In addition, the 
following management measures can be implemented through a framework 
adjustment to the FMP, provided that they are accompanied by a full set 
of public hearings: Whiting Days at Sea (DAS) effort reduction program 
and a whiting total allowable catch (TAC), either by region or for the 
entire fishery.
    This rule establishes the Whiting Monitoring Committee (WMC) to 
monitor the progress of the rebuilding of small-mesh multispecies 
stocks on an annual basis. The role, structure, and process for the WMC 
are identical to those of the Multispecies Monitoring Committee (MMC), 
with the exception that the WMC must include at least three industry 
representatives: One from New England, one from Southern New England, 
and one from the Mid-Atlantic regions. This final rule changes the 
proposed regulations to specify that the first meeting of the WMC will 
take place in 2001. Implementation of this final rule will occur only 
six months prior to the first scheduled meeting of the Whiting 
Monitoring Committee. Therefore, the Whiting Monitoring Committee would 
have an incomplete year under the management measures to review if they 
were to meet in 2000. Changing the first meeting date to 2001 will 
provide a full year of the initial management measures for the Whiting 
Monitoring Committee to consider.

Comments and Responses

    Comment 1: Two commenters stated that the limited access permit 
program proposed in Amendment 12 represents the best compromise that 
could be reached to address the difficult and

[[Page 16768]]

complex problem of limiting access to small-mesh multispecies 
fisheries.
    Response 1: The limited access permit program has some merits; 
however, the exemption from the landing criteria for vessels that 
participated in an experimental fishery is inequitable. Further, no 
analysis of the potential effects of the sunset provision on the 
rebuilding schedule exists. Amendment 12 proposes to end overfishing in 
Year 4 and to rebuild the stocks of whiting and red hake within 10 
years. Because it is uncertain that the fishery could sustain 
additional vessel participation just 1 year beyond the target date to 
end overfishing, rebuilding goals may be compromised.
    Comment 2: Several comments were received in support of the limited 
access permit program. Commenters felt that, since equity is a concern 
with any limited access program, implementing Amendment 12 without 
limited access should be of greater concern, that a limited access 
permit program would protect historical participants' interests in the 
fishery and ensure that as many people as possible who have 
participated in the whiting fishery would qualify, and that the limited 
access permit program should be implemented immediately, while the 
Council continues to work toward resolving concerns.
    Response 2: The limited access permit program was disapproved on 
the basis of its inconsistency with national standard 4 and sec. 304(c) 
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Council should proceed with developing 
a new limited access program that is equitable and supports the 
rebuilding goals of Amendment 12.
    Comment 3: The Council commented that the exception from the 50,000 
lb (22,680 kg) landing requirement for vessels that participated in an 
experimental fishery is not intended to exclude vessels that did not 
participate in experimental fisheries, but rather to include vessels 
that have demonstrated a clear intent to fish for small-mesh 
multispecies and may not have had the opportunity to land 50,000 lb 
(22,680 kg). The Council commented that every known vessel denied 
access to the experiment would at least qualify for the limited access 
possession limit permit. The Council commented that it is likely that 
unknown vessels having been denied participation would also qualify for 
at least the possession limit permit.
    Response 3: The Council's intent to allow any vessel into the 
fishery that showed a clear intent to participate in whiting fisheries 
is misrepresented by the exemption from landing requirements for a 
small number of vessels that had participated in experimental fishing. 
Instead, this exception creates an inequitable provision by eliminating 
any vessel whose owner may have had an intent to participate but may 
have been discouraged from participating or may have been denied 
participation in the fishery or experimental fishing. The Council's 
argument that most vessels that were denied access to the experiment 
would still qualify for the possession limit permit does not justify 
the exemption from the landing requirement but, rather, appears to 
support not having an exemption at all.
    Comment 4: The Council and two individuals commented that the 
inclusion of the sunset provision is appropriate because it is not an 
automatic condition and is conditional on the determination that 
whiting stocks can withstand additional pressure.
    Response 4: Like the default management measures, the sunset 
provision would have been implemented unless the Council took action to 
prevent its implementation. Although it may have been the intent of the 
Council to review the status of the stocks before the sunset provision 
was implemented, the measure as proposed implied that vessels would be 
allowed entry. It would be appropriate to consider allowing additional 
vessels into the fishery only when it is determined that the stocks can 
withstand the additional effort.
    Comment 5: The Council, the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council 
(Mid-Atlantic Council), and one individual commented that open access 
and increasing regulations in other fisheries are reasons to expect a 
potential increase of effort in whiting fisheries, despite market 
conditions.
    Response 5: NMFS agrees that increased participation over the long-
term in an open access fishery is possible. However, market conditions 
and Amendment 12's increased restrictions on the whiting fisheries 
would likely discourage a large number of new vessels from entering the 
fishery. The measures approved by NMFS are designed to eliminate 
overfishing and allow the stocks to rebuild. If stocks begin to recover 
and market conditions improve and/or stabilize over time, vessels may 
find whiting fisheries more attractive. NMFS encourages the Council to 
develop a limited access system as soon as possible.
    Comment 6: The Council commented that it is unfair to impose the 
default measure at the beginning of Year 4 if the tools to achieve the 
Year 1-3 reductions, including limited access permits, are not 
implemented in a timely manner. Some commenters feel that the Year 4 
default measures should also be delayed.
    Response 6: The default measure is necessary to reach rebuilding 
objectives within the time required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act as 
amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA) and Amendment 12. The 
default measure, as demonstrated in the analyses in Amendment 12, is 
needed to meet rebuilding goals under either limited access or open 
access. The Council will have the opportunity under the annual review 
process to change management measures if needed.
    Comment 7: The Mid-Atlantic Council commented that the conclusion 
that the elimination of the limited access permit program will not have 
an adverse effect on overfishing contradicts the reason for the 
disapproval of the sunset provision because both appear to allow 
additional vessels into the fishery and would have the same net effect 
on rebuilding goals. The Mid-Atlantic Council and one individual 
further commented that both the sunset provision and an open access 
fishery would compromise optimum yield (OY) and rebuilding goals.
    Response 7: The assumptions are not the same when considering the 
sunset provision and an open access fishery. NMFS reasonably assumed 
that, in the short-term, participants in an open access fishery will 
not significantly increase due to current market conditions, status of 
the fishery, and restrictions of the management measures. The sunset 
provision, however, allows vessels into the fishery in the future 
without consideration of their effects on the rebuilding goals and 
without any compensating measures.
    Comment 8: One commenter suggested that the supplemental analysis 
prepared to evaluate the management measures in an open access fishery 
is a ``case of magic numbers.''
    Response 8: NMFS disagrees. However, NMFS recognizes that it is 
difficult to precisely predict the behavior of fisheries in an open 
access fishery. Nevertheless, NMFS' analysis is supported by current 
market conditions in the fishery and by new restrictions implemented by 
Amendment 12 that may dissuade vessel owners from entering the fishery. 
NMFS is aware that the level of uncertainty could be greatly reduced if 
effort is controlled over the long term with a limited access permit 
program. Accordingly, NMFS has encouraged the Council to develop a 
limited access permit program that is fair and equitable.

[[Page 16769]]

    Comment 9: The Mid-Atlantic Council and another commenter supported 
using landings data dating back to 1980 to qualify for a limited access 
permit. The commenters feel that, because of declines in availability 
of fish in the Mid-Atlantic/Southern New England areas around 1988, a 
qualifying period beginning in 1987 would eliminate many vessels from 
qualification in the southern areas.
    Response 9: This comment is moot because NMFS disapproved the 
limited access component of Amendment 12.
    Comment 10: The Mid-Atlantic Council commented that the limited 
access qualifying criteria should be applied equally across all 
fisheries and the sunset provision should be disapproved. The Mid-
Atlantic Council also commented that Amendment 12 should include an 
exemption for vessels that participated in the small-mesh shrimp 
fishery with separator grates that would not have qualified for limited 
access small-mesh multispecies permits.
    Response 10: NMFS disapproved the limited access permit program in 
part because the qualifying criteria were not fair and equitable.
    Comment 11: The Council commented that the proposed enrollment 
program for the mesh size/possession limit categories does not provide 
the industry the flexibility that was intended and that it would 
discourage vessels from fishing for whiting and other small-mesh 
species with the most appropriate gear. The Council suggested that NMFS 
make a technical change in the final rule to implement a call-in 
enrollment, which would be incorporated into the current call-in system 
for groundfish to provide industry the necessary flexibility.
    Response 11: The rule accurately reflects the enrollment program 
developed by the Council in Amendment 12. While the Council may now 
feel that a call-in program is preferable, a technical amendment to the 
regulations is not the proper vehicle to make a change in the type of 
enrollment program. After its submission of Amendment 12 to NMFS, the 
Council developed Framework 32, which eliminates Amendment 12's 
enrollment program. The final rule for Framework 32 will be published 
concurrently with this rule and will override relevant portions of the 
Amendment 12 rule.
    Comment 12: The Council recommended that NMFS implement an 
allowance for a net strengthener of mesh size that is twice that of the 
inside mesh (e.g., 5-inch (12.7 cm) for 2.5-inch (6.35-cm) inside mesh) 
as a technical change to the 2.5-inch (6.35-cm) minimum mesh size/
possession limit category measure. The Council feels that vessels may 
not catch enough squid with 2.5-inch (6.35-cm) mesh to make a 
profitable trip and will use 1.875-inch (4.76-cm) mesh and discard 
whiting over 3,500 lbs (1,588 kg), creating an excessive amount of 
discarding that could compromise the objectives of Amendment 12 to 
reduce whiting mortality and discards. The Mid-Atlantic Council 
supported the use of net strengtheners for all mesh sizes provided they 
do not alter the intended selective properties of the minimum mesh 
specified in Amendment 12.
    Response 12: A technical amendment to this rule is not an 
appropriate means of eliminating Amendment 12's limited prohibition on 
the use of net strengtheners. The Whiting Plan Development Team (PDT) 
expressed concern during the development of Amendment 12 that net 
strengtheners may have a detrimental impact on the selectivity of the 
net, increasing catch and discards. However, time constraints prevented 
a full analysis of the use of various net strengtheners prior to 
Amendment 12's submission for Secretarial review. As a result, it was 
determined that, given the uncertain impacts, allowing the use of net 
strengtheners may compromise the objectives of Amendment 12. The 
Council has since analyzed impacts of net strengtheners and submitted a 
framework adjustment action to implement a net strengthener allowance 
for vessels using 2.5-inch (6.35-cm) mesh, that will be implemented 
simultaneously with this amendment. Assuming that all vessels may 
choose to use a net strengthener whenever the best strategy is to use 
2.5-inch (6.35-cm) mesh, the conservation benefits of Amendment 12 are 
expected to be reduced by only 3.6 percent in the northern area and 1.9 
percent in the southern area. Under the alternative assumption that the 
net strengthener would be employed only on observed trips where squid 
revenues exceeded small mesh multispecies revenues, the conservation 
benefits are estimated to remain unchanged compared to the status quo 
in the northern area and are estimated to be reduced by 0.9 percent in 
the southern area.
    Comment 13: One commenter suggested that the implementation of the 
proposed minimum mesh size/possession limit measures would result in 
increased discards. The commenter notes that the Council was 
considering a call-in enrollment procedure and the use of a net 
strengthener. Therefore, the commenter recommends that NMFS should wait 
to implement all Amendment 12 regulations until the Council acts on 
these issues.
    Response 13: As noted in the response to comment 12, NMFS is 
publishing the Framework 32 final rule, which provides for the use of 
net strengtheners and new mesh possession limit measures, 
simultaneously with this final rule.
    Comment 14: The Mid-Atlantic Council commented that Amendment 12 
should require the use of square mesh, which has been demonstrated to 
greatly improve the escapement of small fish in a number of fisheries 
around the world similar to U.S. whiting fisheries.
    Response 14: The Council and NMFS are not aware of any data to 
support the commenter's claims about the benefits of square mesh for 
small-mesh multispecies. The Mid-Atlantic Council may want to consider 
recommending this gear restriction to the Council for future 
consideration. The WMC would have an opportunity to review the effects 
of the current measures and recommend new measures as part of its first 
annual review.
    Comment 15: Several commenters felt that, because the default 
measures do not currently specify a geographical extent, Amendment 12 
would affect southern fisheries, such as southern shrimp trawl fishery. 
The commenters suggested that a southern limit at 39 deg. or 39 deg.30' 
N. lat. be established to protect fisheries that have little 
interaction with whiting, red hake, and offshore hake. Further, the 
commenters expressed concern that the 3-inch (7.62-cm) minimum mesh 
size will shut down Loligo, Illex, herring, and Atlantic mackerel 
fisheries.
    Response 15: In the years prior to the Year 4 default measure, the 
Councils and NMFS can work together to identify appropriate fisheries 
for exemption from the 3-inch (7.62-cm) minimum mesh size and to 
consider a southern limit to the measure, which was discussed by the 
Council in the development of Amendment 12.
    Comment 16: One commenter opposes the Year 4 default measures. The 
commenter feels that the disapproval of the limited access permit 
program and the gaps in scientific information on the stocks should be 
addressed before implementing the Year 4 default measures.
    Response 16: Sufficient scientific information exists on stock 
abundance of whiting and hakes to form the basis for concluding that 
the stocks are overfished and that the Year 4 default measures are 
necessary to ensure that rebuilding occurs in sufficient time to comply 
with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, while easing the economic burden in

[[Page 16770]]

Years 1-3. Meanwhile, prior to the actual implementation of the default 
measure in Year 4, there will be opportunities to review the scientific 
data and adjust management measures based on that review, if 
appropriate. Other management alternatives could be developed that 
would replace the default measures.
    Comment 17: Two commenters felt that the economic impact analysis 
is inadequate with respect to the effects on non-whiting fisheries, 
such as squid, mackerel, and herring fisheries. An industry 
representative further stated that, because of the inadequacy, 
Amendment 12 does not comply with national standard 8.
    Response 17: NMFS disagrees with the commenters' suggestion that 
regulations implementing Amendment 12 violate national standard 8 of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act. National standard 8 states that 
``conservation and management measures shall, consistent with the 
conservation requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (including the 
preventing of overfishing and rebuilding of overfished stocks), take 
into account the importance of fishery resources to fishing communities 
in order to: (1) Provide for the sustained participation of such 
communities; and (2) to the extent practicable, minimize adverse 
economic impacts on such communities.'' Economic impacts of the 
preferred management measures and alternatives on communities are 
described in Amendment 12 in section E.5.2, E.7.0, the RIR, and the 
IRFA. Section E.7.2.3, ``Analysis of Fishery Impacts,'' describes the 
impacts of production losses associated with fisheries for large-mesh 
species, offshore hake, whiting, red hake, Loligo and Illex squid, 
shrimp, and small-mesh species (which include mackerel and herring) and 
identifies such losses in tables on pages 243 and 245 of Amendment 12. 
Community involvement in small-mesh multispecies fisheries and 
community impacts are discussed throughout Amendment 12 and its FSEIS.
    Amendment 12 and this rule provide for the sustained participation 
of communities in small-mesh multispecies fisheries and minimizes 
economic impacts on them to the extent practicable in several ways, 
including the following. First, to reach the goal of ending 
overfishing, the rebuilding plan phases in reductions of the fishing 
mortality rate over the first 3 years, rather than requiring attainment 
of that goal immediately. Thus, they provide for the continued harvest 
of small-mesh species, albeit at reduced levels. Second, Amendment 12 
sets up a rebuilding plan that meets the conservation requirements of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, yet provides for rebuilding over an extended 
period of time--the full 10 years allowed by the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 
Third, while the impacts of the Year 4 default measure are likely to be 
more severe than those of the Year 1-3 measures, the impacts of the 
Year 4 measure are short-lived relative to the negative impacts 
associated with maintaining the status quo and allowing fishing 
mortality to remain too high on stocks of whiting and red hake. By 
delaying the default measure to Year 4, Amendment 12 and this rule 
provide fishermen with the opportunity and incentive to modify their 
strategies for small mesh fishing in Years 1-3, which could make 
implementation of the Year 4 default measure unnecessary. Finally, 
Amendment 12 and this rule accommodated non-whiting fisheries by 
allowing possession of silver hake and offshore hake in amounts 
depending on mesh size. For these reasons, NMFS finds that Amendment 12 
and this rule comply with national standard 8.
    Comment 18: One commenter felt that Amendment 12 is inconsistent 
with national standards 4, 5, and 8 because it discriminates between 
sectors of the industry, does not foster efficiency in utilization of 
the fishery, and does not consider the importance of fishery resources 
to communities. Specifically, the commenter expressed a concern that 
large vessels would be unfairly disadvantaged by the possession limit 
in the Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery because trips to the area 
involve long travel time and 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) of whiting could not 
cover costs of operating the vessel. The commenter finds this 
inequitable because smaller vessels, which generally fish closer to 
shore, would be able to reach their fishing grounds in less time and, 
thus, have lower operating costs to cover.
    With respect to national standard 5, the commenter stated that the 
proposed possession limits are contrary to the Council's intent in 
Amendment 12, which the commenter stated is to increase economic 
efficiency and allow a wide range of trip sizes. To address inequities 
associated with uniform possession limits, the commenter states that 
Amendment 12 should have used a ``sliding scale'' for possession limits 
where vessels would be allowed a possession limit based on the size of 
their vessel.
    With respect to national standard 8, the commenter states that the 
FSEIS does not adequately address the significant economic and social 
consequences of the preferred alternative on fishermen and communities 
as compared to other options.
    Response 18: NMFS disagrees that Amendment 12 is inconsistent with 
national standards 4, 5, and 8. A possession limit of 30,000 lb (13,608 
kg) for the Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery was chosen because it 
provided for the required 63-percent reduction in exploitation by 
eliminating extremely large whiting trips in the area, some of which 
have historically exceeded 100,000 lbs (45,360 kg). The 30,000 lb 
(13,608 kg) possession limit would still result in profitable trips. 
Based on 1995 through 1997 landings data from the Cultivator Shoal 
whiting fishery, trips averaged about 10,000 lbs (4,536 kg). Further, 
with a 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) possession limit, market conditions during 
the fishery's season should be more stable, allowing more vessels to 
take advantage of the market and profit from trips that may otherwise 
have been negatively impacted by large trips flooding the market.
    Vessel size and sliding scales were considered as possible criteria 
for possession limits, but were rejected because they were overly 
complex and would not have provided any significant benefits compared 
to the administration and enforcement difficulties associated with 
them, as described in section E.5.2, ``Alternatives to the Proposed 
Action''. Large vessels are not restricted to fishing in the Cultivator 
Shoal whiting fishery area. In fact, no vessels are restricted to 
certain areas where they can fish. Vessels of all sizes have the 
flexibility to modify their trips to reduce costs, if necessary.
    Finally, NMFS finds Amendment 12 complies with national standard 8, 
as described in Comment Response 17.
    Comment 19: One commenter felt that NMFS should articulate a 
program within the context of Amendment 12 to ensure the necessary 
information will be available to conduct a benchmark assessment.
    Response 19: One of the goals of Amendment 12 is to increase 
scientific information on whiting, red hake, and offshore hake stocks. 
During the first 3 years that Amendment 12 is in effect, NMFS is 
hopeful that new stock assessments can be conducted on each species and 
the results will be used to modify management measures on an annual 
basis, if appropriate.
    Comment 20: Three commenters noted that a composite net, utilizing 
large-mesh panels in the front of the net, is effective in reducing 
bycatch of whiting and other species in mixed trawl fisheries. They 
feel, however, that uniform small-mesh nets have a high bycatch. The 
commenters feel that

[[Page 16771]]

NMFS should consider allowing the gear or authorizing experiments with 
the ``composite'' tail bag.
    Response 20: NMFS will consider any request for an experimental 
fishery to evaluate the effectiveness of a composite net in the 
reduction of bycatch.
    Comment 21: One commenter expressed concern regarding the inclusion 
of two measures on the list of measures that could be implemented by 
framework action: (1) The description and identification of essential 
fish habitat (EFH), and (2) the description and identification of 
habitat areas of particular concern (HAPC). The commenter is concerned 
that the framework process would allow changes to these measures to be 
published as a final rule, without publication first as a proposed 
rule. The commenter states that nonfishing interests lack 
representation at Council meetings and, therefore, will not have the 
opportunity to comment upon actions regarding EFH. The commenter also 
asserts that the framework adjustment process for these two measures 
will create inconsistencies in the measures among different NMFS 
Regions and the New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management 
Councils (Councils), thereby complicating the EFH consultation process. 
The commenter requests that the inclusion of these measures be delayed 
until NMFS EFH interim final regulations and guidelines are revised.
    Response 21: The framework adjustment process requires the 
Councils, when making allowed adjustments to the FMP, to develop and 
analyze them over the span of at least two Council meetings. The 
Councils must provide the public with advance notice of the meetings, 
the proposals, and the analysis. Publication of the meeting agenda in 
the Federal Register is required. The public is provided an opportunity 
to comment on the proposals in writing, and/or in person at the second 
Council meeting. Upon review of the analysis and written and verbal 
public comments, the Council may recommend to the Regional 
Administrator that the measures be published as a final rule, provided 
certain conditions are met. NMFS may publish the measures either as a 
final rule or as a proposed rule if either NMFS or the Council 
determines that additional public comment is needed.
    The list of frameworkable measures included in the Amendment 12 and 
the final rule to implement it is inclusive to provide the Council 
maximum flexibility in responding quickly to fishery information as it 
becomes available and in adjusting the regulations accordingly. As 
such, modifications to EFH and HAPC can be implemented in a expedited 
manner if circumstances warrant, based upon Council and NMFS approval. 
The framework adjustment process requires adherence to all applicable 
law, and a framework adjustment requires full analysis to evaluate the 
impact of the measures. The degree of the required analysis will differ 
for each framework adjustment, depending upon the scope of the action 
and the degree to which the impacts have been previously analyzed. This 
process is considered to be adequate in providing the public 
opportunity to comment or be involved with any measures to address EFH 
concerns.
    Comment 22: One commenter stated that the 15-percent reduction in 
catch associated with a 0.5-inch (1.27 cm) increase in mesh size from 
2.5-inch (6.35 cm) mesh to 3-in (7.62 cm) mesh is not accurate and 
reported that industry feels that the reduction is 50 percent. The 
commenter feels that this would result in measures being more effective 
in achieving Amendment 12 objectives than anticipated.
    Response 22: The Amendment 12 document takes this into account in 
the comparison of sensitivity trials. However, the Whiting PDT 
established the 15-percent reduction in catch based on scientific 
studies conducted by state agencies. There is no current evidence to 
show that the reduction in catch resulting from a \1/2\-inch (1.27-cm) 
increase in mesh size is higher than that recommended by the Whiting 
PDT. If measures are more effective than anticipated, NMFS notes that 
framework action or an amendment addressing the new information may 
preclude the need to implement default measures in Year 4.
    Comment 23: One commenter noted that, because whiting stocks cross 
US/Canadian boundaries, Canada should also be actively involved in the 
management of whiting.
    Response 23: Annual reviews of the status of the stocks and the 
effectiveness of the management measures will take into account the 
possibility of stocks existing and migrating into Canadian waters, 
allowing NMFS and the Council to develop appropriate management, 
including coordination with Canada, if necessary.
    Comment 24: One commenter feels that Amendment 12 is inconsistent 
with national standards 1 and 2 because possession limits would not 
allow achievement of OY and the management measures are not based on 
the best scientific information. The commenter states that the northern 
stock of whiting is approaching an overfished condition, and there is 
no determination that it is overfished. Further, the commenter states 
that, because long trips with 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) possession limits 
would not be economical, vessels would divert effort into the southern 
area, possibly compromising the rebuilding goals for whiting and red 
hake in that area.
    Response 24: NMFS disagrees and finds Amendment 12 to be consistent 
with national standards 1 and 2. National standard 1 requires that 
conservation and management measures prevent overfishing while 
achieving, on a continuing basis, the OY from each fishery for the 
United States fishing industry. Also, sec. 304(e)(3)(B) of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the Council to develop a FMP amendment to 
prevent overfishing in a fishery identified as approaching an 
overfished condition. Amendment 12 concludes that the stock of whiting 
in the northern area is approaching an overfished condition and sets a 
fishing mortality rate of 0.36 (or a 63-percent reduction in the 
exploitation rate) to prevent overfishing. The possession limits and 
the selectivity of the minimum mesh sizes in both the northern area and 
the Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery exemption area are intended to 
achieve that fishing mortality target.
    Amendment 12 also complies with national standard 1 because it 
sufficiently specifies OY. Amendment 12 specifies OY for whiting, red 
hake, and offshore hake as the amount of fish that results from fishing 
under the set of rules designed to achieve the plan objectives. It is 
the amount of fish caught by the fishery when fishing at target fishing 
mortality rates at current biomass levels, or when fishing in a manner 
intended to maintain or achieve biomass levels capable of producing 
maximum sustainable yield on a continuing basis. Given the definition 
of OY is tied to the fishing mortality rate, and the possession limits 
are designed to achieve the fishing mortality rates, the possession 
limits allow for the harvest of OY.
    The majority of trips that landed 30,000 lbs or greater of whiting 
historically occurred in either the Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery or 
in Southern New England waters. Therefore, it is unlikely that the 
30,000 lb possession limit would cause additional effort in the 
southern area that is not already considered in Amendment 12. Regarding 
the issue of trip profitability under a 30,000-lb limit, see the 
response to comment 18.
    Section E.6.2 of Amendment 12 describes the data the Council used 
to

[[Page 16772]]

evaluate the potential impacts of the management measures on small-mesh 
multispecies fisheries. In summary, the Council considered information 
and analyses provided by scientific and technical groups including the 
Overfishing Definition Review Panel and the Whiting PDT. It also 
considered information provided by the Whiting Industry Advisory Panel 
and other industry representatives when systematically collected data 
were unavailable. While recent information is lacking, Amendment 12 can 
use only what is available. NMFS found, through review of Amendment 12, 
that this information was the best available scientific information.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    Changes made are related to technical and administrative needs and 
concerns and are made to clarify the intent of the regulations. In 
addition, the final rule for Amendment 9 to the FMP was published on 
October 15, 1999. Changes are made to make the final rule for Amendment 
12 to the FMP consistent with the regulations as modified by the final 
rule for Amendment 9 to the FMP. The most notable changes from the 
proposed rule to the final rule implementing Amendment 12 are listed 
below in the order appearing in the regulations:
    In Sec. 648.2, in the definition for Northeast (NE) multispecies or 
multispecies, Atlantic halibut has been added by Amendment 9 to the 
FMP. The scientific name for yellowtail flounder in the definition is 
corrected to Pleuronectes ferruginea. In the proposed rule it was 
inadvertently specified as Limanda ferruginea, which was the old 
classification.
    In Sec. 648.6, paragraph (a) is revised to delete references to 
effective dates that have been passed.
    In Sec. 648.14, paragraph (a)(42) is revised to better reflect the 
intent of the referenced paragraphs. Paragraphs (b) and (c)(7) are 
revised to reflect revised references.
    In Sec. 648.80, paragraphs (a)(3)(i)(A), (a)(3)(i)(B), 
(a)(4)(i)(B), (a)(8)(i)(A), (a)(8)(i)(B), and (a)(9)(i)(D) are revised 
to reference additional American lobster possession limits imposed by 
Sec. 697.17 of this chapter.
    In Sec. 648.80, paragraphs (a)(8)(i)(B), (a)(9)(i)(D)(2), and 
(b)(3)(i)(B) are revised, and paragraph (c)(2)(iii) is added to reflect 
the minimum mesh size implemented by the Year 4 default measures.
    In Sec. 648.80(g) the net strengthener provisions are clarified.
    In Sec. 648.80, paragraph (g)(4) is redesignated (g)(5) because a 
restriction on street sweeper gear is now designated as paragraph 
(g)(4).
    In Sec. 648.86 the paragraphs that were to be added as paragraphs 
(c) and (d) are added as paragraphs (d) and (e) because the possession 
limit for halibut is now designated as paragraph (c).
    In Sec. 648.86, the paragraphs that were to be redesignated as 
paragraphs (e) and (f) are redesignated as paragraphs (f) and (g).
    In Sec. 648.86, paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (d)(1)(iii) are 
revised for clarity and to specify that net stowage applies to the 
entire trip, and paragraph (d)(1)(iv) is added to clarify that minimum 
mesh size applies to the last 50 meshes (100 bars if square mesh is 
used) for vessels 60 ft (18.28 m) and under and to the last 100 meshes 
(200 bars if square mesh is used) for vessels greater than 60 ft (18.28 
m), as specified in Amendment 12.
    In Sec. 648.90, paragraph (a) is revised to specify that the first 
annual meeting of the Whiting Monitoring Committee will occur in 2001.
    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 0648-0391 for Secs. 648.13 and 648.86.
    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 the FMP, 
except for the disapproved measure, is necessary for the conservation 
and management of the northeast multispecies fisheries and that it is 
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
    The Council prepared and NMFS has adopted a FSEIS for Amendment 12; 
a NOA was published at 64 FR 39990, July 23, 1999. Although short-term 
negative impacts will result from lowered allowed catches of small-mesh 
multispecies, the proposed management action will have long-term 
positive impacts on affected physical, biological, and human 
environments.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of E.O. 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.) (RFA), the Council prepared an IRFA, and NMFS prepared a 
supplement, dated July 1, 1999, that describes the economic impacts of 
the proposed rule, if adopted, on small entities and discusses various 
alternatives considered by the Council. The final regulatory 
flexibility analysis (FRFA) consists of the IRFA, the supplement to the 
IRFA, public comments received on the amendment and proposed rule 
related to economic impacts on small entities and responses in this 
final rule, and the summary that follows.
    In its September 1997 Report to Congress, NMFS determined that some 
stocks of whiting and red hake are overfished or approaching an 
overfished condition. NMFS is publishing this rule to comply with the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act, which requires that an amendment be developed and 
implemented to prevent overfishing of stocks declared to be approaching 
an overfished condition and to end overfishing and to rebuild 
overfished stocks. This rule intends to prevent overfishing by 
implementing whiting and offshore hake possession limits; minimum mesh 
sizes; and a Year 4 default measure to ensure that overfishing is 
eliminated. To ensure effective recordkeeping and compliance with the 
measures exist, this rule establishes two new collection-of-information 
requirements and includes one existing collection-of-information 
requirement in the FMP that was not previously approved by OMB. The two 
new requirements require a vessel owner or operator to call the 
Regional Administrator to request a letter of authorization to fish 
under one of the mesh size/possession limit categories and require a 
vessel owner or operator to provide/obtain a receipt for fish bought 
through a transfer of fish at sea. The requirement not previously 
approved by OMB is a requirement to call in to receive a letter of 
authorization to transfer fish other than regulated multispecies at 
sea. Measures analyzed in the IRFA include the full set of management 
measures with particular attention to mesh size and possession limits 
and the Year 4 default measure and various other alternatives 
considered by the Council. The entities affected by these regulations 
are all small entities; therefore, analysis of impacts of the 
regulations and of the alternatives considered in Amendment 12 
constitutes an analysis of the impact of the regulations on small 
entities as required under the RFA. The small entities considered in 
this analysis are

[[Page 16773]]

1,156 vessels that reported landing one or more combined pounds of 
whiting, red hake, and offshore hake during the calendar years 1995 to 
1997.
    Other measures approved in Amendment 12, including minimum mesh and 
possession limit enrollment programs (not including the direct 
reductions of catch and landings caused by minimum mesh sizes and 
possession limits), codend specifications, the net strengthener 
provision, and the transfer at sea provision have no quantifiable 
economic impact but are intended, in part, to help mitigate all impacts 
of these measures on participants in the fishery. These measures are 
expected to have minimal economic impact on participating vessels 
because they will not result in the loss of catch or landings.
    All of the alternatives considered by the Council have varying 
degrees of impact upon different sectors of the fishery, all of whom 
are small entities. These alternatives, their impacts on the 
participants in the fishery, and reasons they were not adopted are 
discussed in more detail at section E.5.0 of the FSEIS and are hereby 
incorporated into the FRFA. A summary of alternatives considered but 
rejected follows:
    1. The Council considered a ``no action'' alternative that would 
result in no changes to the current measures under the Northeast 
Multispecies FMP. The no action alternative was rejected because it 
would not fulfill the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act as 
amended by the SFA with respect to overfished stocks and stocks 
approaching an overfished condition. Further, evaluations of 
biological, social, and economic impacts suggest that the approved 
management measures would result in greater, long-term benefits to the 
industry.
    2. The Council considered various management measures specific to 
northern, southern, and the Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery areas, 
using the boundary between the Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank and the 
Southern New England Regulated Mesh Areas to differentiate between the 
northern and southern areas. Management measures that were considered 
included minimum mesh sizes, eastern and western zone delineation in 
the southern area, and possession limits based on mesh size, areas 
fished, seasons, and vessel size. While the Council maintained the 
Cultivator Shoal Whiting Fishery Exemption Area, it rejected further 
area delineation because it felt uniform management measures for all 
areas, except the Cultivator Shoal Whiting exemption area, would be the 
least complex, the easiest to enforce and administer and would still 
provide for the necessary reductions in fishing mortality and 
exploitation.
    3. Seasonal restrictions, including a reduction of the current 
season, were considered by the Council for management measures for the 
Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery. The Council had considered reducing 
the fishery season by 2 months by eliminating June and October. In 
addition, various possession limits and participation restrictions were 
considered. While Amendment 12 implements a 1-month reduction of the 
season that eliminates the month of October, the elimination of June 
from the season was rejected. Public comment during the public hearing 
stage suggested that landings from the fishery in June are of high 
value because of the lack of other available fish or whiting fisheries. 
The possession limits and other restrictions, other than the measures 
in this rule, were rejected for consideration in Amendment 12 because 
they were too complex or not feasible. Also, the Council felt that, 
while a possession limits less than 30,000 lbs in the Cultivator Shoal 
whiting fishery would ensure that fishing mortality goals relative to 
the Cultivator Shoal area would be reached quickly, it would be more 
likely that vessels would not be able to profit from trips to the 
Cultivator Shoal area with such low possession limits.
    4. The Council considered three options for possible transfers of 
small-mesh multispecies at sea. One measure would prohibit transfers; a 
second would allow unlimited transfers; and a third would allow vessels 
to transfer limited amounts of small-mesh multispecies. The Council 
rejected the prohibition of transfers because it would not allow the 
needed flexibility in the industry. The unlimited transfer at sea 
option was also rejected because it would compromise the effectiveness 
of the possession limits it was developing.
    5. The Council considered implementing minimum fish sizes for 
whiting, but rejected the idea due to the likelihood that measuring 
whiting would be impractical and difficult to enforce given the high-
volume nature of the fishery. In addition, whiting is a highly 
perishable product. Implementing such a requirement would increase the 
time required to process the fish, thereby lessening the quality and 
value of retained fish.
    6. The Council considered spawning season closures to protect 
spawning stocks of whiting and red hake, but rejected the measure 
because spawning data for whiting are incomplete. The data that are 
available suggest that existing large-mesh measures in the Northeast 
Multispecies FMP provide protection for known spawning fish.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    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 Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information 
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    This rule contains three new collection-of-information requirements 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that have been approved by OMB. 
This rule also repeats an existing requirement that has been approved 
by OMB under control number 0648-0202. The OMB control numbers and 
public reporting burden are listed as follows:
    Call-in to NMFS Region for Enrollments for Authorization Letter to 
Transfer at Sea, OMB No. 0648-0391 (2 minutes/response);
    Written Receipt for At-Sea Transfers of Small-mesh Multispecies, 
OMB No. 0648-0391 (1 minute/response);
    Call-in to NMFS Region for Enrollments for Mesh Size/ Possession 
Limit Authorization Letter, OMB No. 0648-0391 (2 minutes/response).
    Call in to NMFS Region for Enrollment for the Cultivator Shoal 
Whiting Fishery Authorization Letter, OMB No. 0648-0202 (2 minutes/
response).
    The response times shown include the time 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 and to OMB (see 
ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 902

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

50 CFR Part 648

    Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 22, 2000.
Gary C. Matlock,
Acting 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:

[[Page 16774]]

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) under 50 CFR is 
amended by adding an entry for 648.13 in numerical order and revising 
the entry for 648.86 to read as follows:


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 number is located                       )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                  *        *        *        *        *
50 CFR:
 
                  *        *        *        *        *
648.13                                      -0391
 
                  *        *        *        *        *
648.86                                      -0202, -0391
 
                  *        *        *        *        *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 ``Nonregulated multispecies'' 
is removed, the definitions for ``Dealer'' and ``Northeast (NE) 
multispecies or multispecies'' are revised, and the definitions for 
``Small-mesh multispecies'' and ``Whiting Monitoring Committee (WMC)'' 
are added to read as follows:


Sec. 648.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Dealer means any person who receives, for a commercial purpose 
(other than solely for transport on land), from the owner or operator 
of a vessel issued a valid permit under this part, any species of fish, 
the harvest of which is managed by this part, unless otherwise exempted 
in this part.
* * * * *
    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.
    Offshore Hake- Merluccius albidus.
    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 ferruginea.
* * * * *
    Small-mesh multispecies means the subset of Northeast multispecies 
that includes silver hake, offshore hake, and red hake.
* * * * *
    Whiting Monitoring Committee (WMC) means a team appointed by the 
NEFMC to review, analyze, and recommend adjustments to the management 
measures addressing small-mesh multispecies. The team consists of staff 
from the NEFMC and MAFMC, NMFS Northeast Regional Office, the NEFSC, 
the USCG, at least one industry representative from each geographical 
area (northern New England, southern New England, and the Mid-
Atlantic), and no more than two representatives, appointed by the 
Commission, from affected states.
    3. In Sec. 648.4, paragraph (a)(1)(ii) is revised to read as 
follows:


Sec. 648.4  Vessel and individual commercial permits.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Open access permits. A vessel of the United States that has 
not been issued a limited access multispecies permit is eligible for 
and may be issued an ``open access multispecies'', ``handgear'', or 
``charter/party'' permit and may fish for, possess on board, and land 
multispecies finfish subject to the restrictions in Sec. 648.88. A 
vessel that has been issued a valid limited access scallop permit, but 
that has not been issued a limited access multispecies permit, is 
eligible for and may be issued an open access scallop multispecies 
possession limit permit and may fish for, possess on board, and land 
multispecies finfish subject to the restrictions in Sec. 648.88. The 
owner of a vessel issued an open access permit may request a different 
open access permit category by submitting an application to the 
Regional Administrator at any time.
* * * * *
    4. In Sec. 648.6, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 648.6  Dealer/processor permits.

    (a) General. All NE multispecies, sea scallop, summer flounder, 
surf clam, ocean quahog, mackerel, squid, butterfish, scup, black sea 
bass, or spiny dogfish dealers and surf clam and ocean quahog 
processors must have been issued under this section, and have in their 
possession, a valid permit for these species. As of April 28, 2000, 
persons aboard vessels receiving small-mesh multispecies at sea for use 
exclusively as bait are deemed not to be dealers for purposes of 
receiving such small-mesh multispecies and are not required to possess 
a valid dealer's permit under this section, provided the vessel 
complies with the provisions specified under Sec. 648.13.
* * * * *
    5. In Sec. 648.13, paragraph (b) is revised, and paragraph (e) is 
added to read as follows:


Sec. 648.13  Transfers at sea.

* * * * *
    (b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, 
vessels issued a multispecies permit under Sec. 648.4(a)(1) or a 
scallop permit under Sec. 648.4(a)(2) are prohibited from transferring 
or attempting to transfer any fish from one vessel to another vessel, 
except that vessels issued a Federal multispecies permit under 
Sec. 648.4(a)(1) and specifically authorized in writing by the Regional 
Administrator to do so, may transfer species other than regulated 
species from one vessel to another vessel.
    (2) Vessels issued a Federal multispecies permit under 
Sec. 648.4(a)(1) may transfer only up to 500 lb (226.8 kg) of combined 
small-mesh multispecies per trip for use as bait from one vessel to 
another, provided:
    (i) The transferring vessel possesses a Federal multispecies permit 
as specified under Sec. 648.4(a)(1);
    (ii) The transferring vessel has a letter of authorization issued 
by the Regional Administrator on board; and
    (iii) The receiving vessel possesses a written receipt for any 
small-mesh multispecies purchased at sea.
* * * * *
    (e) Vessels issued a letter of authorization from the Regional 
Administrator to transfer small-mesh multispecies at sea for use as 
bait will

[[Page 16775]]

automatically have 500 lb (226.8 kg) deducted from the vessel's 
combined silver hake and offshore hake possession limit, as specified 
under Sec. 648.86(c), for every trip during the participation period 
specified on the letter of authorization, regardless of whether a 
transfer of small-mesh multispecies at sea occurred or whether the 
actual amount that was transferred was less than 500 lb (226.8 kg). 
This deduction shall be noted on the transferring vessel's letter of 
authorization from the Regional Administrator.
    6. In Sec. 648.14, paragraphs (a)(42), (a)(43), (b), (c) 
introductory text, (c)(7) and (t) are revised, and paragraphs 
(x)(4)(iii) and (z) are added to read as follows:


Sec. 648.14  Prohibitions.

    (a) * * *
    (42) Fish within the areas described in Sec. 648.80(a)(4) with nets 
of mesh smaller than the minimum size specified in Sec. 648.80(a)(2), 
unless the vessel possesses on board a valid authorizing letter issued 
to the vessel under Sec. 648.80(a)(4)(i) and the vessel complies with 
the requirements specified in Sec. 648.80(a)(4).
    (43) Violate any of the provisions of Sec. 648.80, including 
paragraphs (a)(3), the small-mesh northern shrimp fishery exemption 
area; (a)(4), the Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery exemption area; 
(a)(8), Small-mesh Area 1/Small-mesh Area 2; (a)(9), the Nantucket 
Shoals dogfish fishery exemption area; (a)(11), the Nantucket Shoals 
mussel and sea urchin dredge exemption area; (a)(12), the GOM/GB 
monkfish gillnet exemption area; (a)(13), the GOM/GB dogfish gillnet 
exemption area; (b)(3), exemptions (small mesh); (b)(5), the SNE 
monkfish and skate trawl exemption area; (b)(6), the SNE monkfish and 
skate gillnet exemption area; (b)(7), the SNE dogfish gillnet exemption 
area; (b)(8), the SNE mussel and sea urchin dredge exemption area; or 
(b)(9), the SNE little tunny gillnet exemption area. A violation of any 
provision of the paragraphs in Sec. 648.80 is a separate violation.
* * * * *
    (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 owner or operator of a vessel holding a valid 
multispecies permit, or any person issued an operator's permit or 
issued a letter under Sec. 648.4(a)(1)(i)(M)(3), to land or possess on 
board a vessel more than the possession or landing limits specified in 
Sec. 648.86(a),(b),(c), (d) and (e) or to violate any of the other 
provisions of Sec. 648.86, unless otherwise specified in Sec. 648.17.
    (c) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in 
Sec. 600.725 of this chapter and in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this 
section, it is unlawful for any owner or operator of a vessel issued a 
valid limited access multispecies permit or a letter under 
Sec. 648.4(a)(1)(i)(M)(3), unless otherwise specified in Sec. 648.17, 
to do any of the following:
* * * * *
    (7) Possess or land per trip more than the possession or landing 
limits specified under Sec. 648.86(a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) and under 
Sec. 648.82(b)(3), if the vessel has been issued a limited access 
multispecies permit.
* * * * *
    (t) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in 
Sec. 600.725 of this chapter and in paragraphs (a) through (h) of this 
section, it is unlawful for any owner or operator of a vessel issued a 
valid open access multispecies permit to possess or land any regulated 
species as defined in Sec. 648.2, or to violate any applicable 
provisions of Sec. 648.88, unless otherwise specified in Sec. 648.17.
* * * * *
    (x) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) All small-mesh multispecies retained or possessed on a vessel 
issued any permit under Sec. 648.4 are deemed to have been harvested 
from the EEZ.
* * * * *
    (z) Small-mesh multispecies. (1) In addition to the general 
prohibitions specified in Sec. 600.725 of this chapter and in paragraph 
(a) of this section, and subject to paragraph (a)(32) of this section, 
it is unlawful for any person owning or operating a vessel issued a 
valid Federal multispecies permit to land, offload, or otherwise 
transfer, or attempt to land, offload, or otherwise transfer, small-
mesh multispecies from one vessel to another in excess of the limits 
specified in Sec. 648.13.
    (2) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in 
Sec. 600.725 of this chapter and in paragraph (a) of this section, 
beginning May 1, 2002, it is unlawful for an owner or operator of a 
vessel issued a valid Federal multispecies permit to do any of the 
following:
    (i) Fish with, use or have available for immediate use within the 
areas described in Secs. 648.80(a), (b), and (c), nets of mesh size 
smaller than 3-in (7.62-cm), unless otherwise exempted pursuant to 
Sec. 648.80(a)(7).
    (ii) If issued a Federal multispecies permit, land or possess on 
board a vessel, more than 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) of combined whiting and 
offshore hake.
    7. In Sec. 648.80, paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (a)(4)(i)(A) through 
(a)(4)(i)(D), (a)(7), (a)(8)(i), (a)(9)(i)(D), (b)(3)(i), (c)(4), 
(g)(1), and (g)(2)(i) are revised and (a)(4)(i)(E) through 
(a)(4)(i)(G), (c)(2)(iii), and (g)(5) are added to read as follows:


Sec. 648.80  Regulated mesh areas and restrictions on gear and methods 
of fishing.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Restrictions on fishing for, possessing, or landing fish other 
than shrimp. (A) Through April 30, 2002, an owner or operator of a 
vessel fishing in the northern shrimp fishery described in this section 
under this exemption may not fish for, possess on board, or land any 
species of fish other than shrimp, except for the following, with the 
restrictions noted, as allowable incidental species: Longhorn sculpin; 
combined silver hake and offshore hake--up to an amount equal to the 
total weight of shrimp possessed on board or landed, not to exceed 
3,500 lb (1,588 kg); and American lobster--up to 10 percent, by weight, 
of all other species on board or 200 lobsters, whichever is less, 
unless otherwise restricted by landing limits specified in Sec. 697.17 
of this chapter. Silver hake and offshore hake on board a vessel 
subject to this possession limit must be separated from other species 
of fish and stored so as to be readily available for inspection.
    (B) Beginning May 1, 2002, an owner or operator of a vessel fishing 
for northern shrimp may not fish for, possess on board, or land any 
species of fish other than shrimp, except for the following, with the 
restrictions noted, as allowable incidental species: Longhorn sculpin; 
combined silver hake and offshore hake--up to 100 lb (45.36 kg); and 
American lobster--up to 10 percent, by weight, of all other species on 
board or 200 lobsters, whichever is less, unless otherwise restricted 
by landing limits specified in Sec. 697.17 of this chapter.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) A vessel fishing in the Cultivator Shoal Whiting Fishery 
Exemption Area under this exemption must have a valid letter of 
authorization issued by the Regional Administrator on board.
    (B) Through April 30, 2002, an owner or operator of a vessel 
fishing in this area may not fish for, possess on board, or land any 
species of fish other than whiting and offshore hake combined--up to a 
maximum of 30,000 lb (13,608 kg), except for the following, with the

[[Page 16776]]

restrictions noted, as allowable incidental species: Herring; longhorn 
sculpin; squid; butterfish; Atlantic mackerel; dogfish, and red hake--
up to 10 percent each, by weight, of all other species on board; 
monkfish and monkfish parts--up to 10 percent, by weight, of all other 
species on board or up to 50 lb (23 kg) tail-weight/166 lb (75 kg) 
whole-weight of monkfish per trip, as specified in Sec. 648.94(c)(4), 
whichever is less; and American lobster--up to 10 percent, by weight, 
of all other species on board or 200 lobsters, whichever is less, 
unless otherwise restricted by landing limits specified in Sec. 697.17 
of this chapter.
    (C) Beginning May 1, 2002, an owner or operator of a vessel fishing 
in this area is subject to the mesh size restrictions specified in 
paragraph (a)(4)(i)(D) of this section and may not fish for, possess on 
board, or land any species of fish other than whiting and offshore hake 
combined--up to a maximum of 10,000 lb (4,536 kg), except for the 
allowable incidental species listed in paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) of this 
section.
    (D) Counting from the terminus of the net, all nets must have a 
minimum mesh size of 3 in (7.62 cm) square or diamond mesh applied to 
the first 100 meshes (200 bars in the case of square mesh) for vessels 
greater than 60 ft (18.28 m) in length and the first 50 meshes (100 
bars in the case of square mesh) for vessels less than or equal to 60 
ft (18.28 m) in length.
    (E) Fishing is confined to a season of June 15 through September 
30, unless otherwise specified by notification in the Federal Register.
    (F) When transiting through the GOM/GB Regulated Mesh Area 
specified under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, any nets with a mesh 
size smaller than the minimum mesh specified in paragraph (a)(2) of 
this section must be stowed in accordance with one of the methods 
specified in Sec. 648.23(b), unless the vessel is fishing for small-
mesh multispecies under another exempted fishery specified in paragraph 
(a) of this section during the course of the trip.
    (G) A vessel fishing in the Cultivator Shoal Whiting Fishery 
Exemption Area may fish for small-mesh multispecies in exempted 
fisheries outside of the Cultivator Shoal Whiting Fishery Exemption 
Area, provided that the vessel complies with the requirements specified 
in paragraph (a)(4)(i) of this section for the entire trip.
* * * * *
    (7) Addition or deletion of exemptions--(i)(A) Regulated 
multispecies. An exemption may be added in an existing fishery for 
which there are sufficient data or information to ascertain the amount 
of regulated species bycatch, if the Regional Administrator, after 
consultation with the NEFMC, determines that the percentage of 
regulated species caught as bycatch is, or can be reduced to, less than 
5 percent, by weight, of total catch and that such exemption will not 
jeopardize fishing mortality objectives. In determining whether 
exempting a fishery may jeopardize meeting fishing mortality 
objectives, the Regional Administrator may take into consideration 
various factors including, but not limited to, juvenile mortality. A 
fishery can be defined, restricted, or allowed by area, gear, season, 
or other means determined to be appropriate to reduce bycatch of 
regulated species. An existing exemption may be deleted or modified if 
the Regional Administrator determines that the catch of regulated 
species is equal to or greater than 5 percent, by weight, of total 
catch, or that continuing the exemption may jeopardize meeting fishing 
mortality objectives. Notification of additions, deletions or 
modifications are made through issuance of a rule in the Federal 
Register.
    (B) Small-mesh multispecies. Beginning May 1, 2002, an exemption 
may be added in an existing fishery for which there are sufficient data 
or information to ascertain the amount of small-mesh multispecies 
bycatch, if the Regional Administrator, after consultation with the 
NEFMC, determines that the percentage of small-mesh multispecies caught 
as bycatch is, or can be reduced to, less than 10 percent, by weight, 
of total catch and that such exemption will not jeopardize fishing 
mortality objectives. In determining whether exempting a fishery may 
jeopardize meeting fishing mortality objectives, the Regional 
Administrator may take into consideration various factors including, 
but not limited to, juvenile mortality. A fishery can be defined, 
restricted, or allowed by area, gear, season, or other means determined 
to be appropriate to reduce bycatch of small-mesh multispecies. An 
existing exemption may be deleted or modified if the Regional 
Administrator determines that the catch of regulated species is equal 
to or greater than 10 percent, by weight, of total catch, or that 
continuing the exemption may jeopardize meeting fishing mortality 
objectives. Notification of additions, deletions, or modifications are 
made through issuance of a rule in the Federal Register.
    (ii) The NEFMC may recommend to the Regional Administrator, through 
the framework procedure specified in Sec. 648.90(b), additions or 
deletions to exemptions for fisheries, either existing or proposed, for 
which there may be insufficient data or information for the Regional 
Administrator to determine, without public comment, percentage catch of 
regulated species or small-mesh multispecies.
    (8) * * *
    (i)(A) Unless otherwise prohibited in Sec. 648.81, through April 
30, 2002, a vessel subject to the minimum mesh size restrictions 
specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section may fish with or possess 
nets with a mesh size smaller than the minimum size, provided the 
vessel complies with the requirements of paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) or 
(a)(8)(ii) of this section, and, 648.86(d), from July 15 through 
November 15 when fishing in Small-mesh Area 1 and from January 1 
through June 30 when fishing in Small-mesh Area 2. An owner or operator 
of any vessel may not fish for, possess on board, or land any species 
of fish other than: Silver hake and offshore hake--up to the amounts 
specified in Sec. 648.86(d); butterfish; dogfish; herring; Atlantic 
mackerel; ocean pout; scup; squid; and red hake; except for the 
following allowable incidental species (bycatch as the term is used 
elsewhere in this part) with the restrictions noted: Longhorn sculpin; 
monkfish and monkfish parts--up to 10 percent, by weight, of all other 
species on board or up to 50 lb (23 kg) tail-weight/166 lb (75 kg) 
whole-weight of monkfish per trip, as specified in Sec. 648.94(c)(4), 
whichever is less; and American lobster--up to 10 percent, by weight, 
of all other species on board or 200 lobsters, whichever is less, 
unless otherwise restricted by landing limits specified in Sec. 697.17 
of this chapter.
    (B) Unless otherwise prohibited in Sec. 648.81, beginning May 1, 
2002, in addition to the requirements specified in paragraph 
(a)(8)(i)(A) of this section, nets may not have a mesh size of less 
than 3 in (7.62 cm) square or diamond mesh counting the first 100 
meshes (200 bars in the case of square mesh) from the terminus of the 
net for vessels greater than 60 ft (18.28 m) in length and the first 50 
meshes (100 bars in the case of square mesh) from the terminus of the 
net for vessels less than or equal to 60 ft (18.28 m) in length. An 
owner or operator of any vessel may not fish for, possess on board, or 
land any species of fish other than: Silver hake and offshore hake--up 
to 10,000 lb (4,536 kg); butterfish; dogfish; herring; Atlantic 
mackerel; ocean pout; scup; squid; and red hake; except for the 
following allowable incidental species (bycatch as the term is used 
elsewhere in this part) with the restrictions noted:

[[Page 16777]]

Longhorn sculpin; monkfish and monkfish parts--up to 10 percent, by 
weight, of all other species on board or up to 50 lb (23 kg) tail-
weight/166 lb (75 kg) whole-weight of monkfish per trip, as specified 
in Sec. 648.94(c)(4), whichever is less; and American lobster--up to 10 
percent, by weight, of all other species on board or 200 lobsters, 
whichever is less, unless otherwise restricted by landing limits 
specified in Sec. 697.17 of this chapter.
    (C) Small-mesh areas 1 and 2 are defined by straight lines 
connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart 
depicting these areas are available from the Regional Administrator 
upon request (see Table 1 to Sec. 600.502 of this chapter)):

                            Small-mesh Area 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Point                        N. lat.      W. long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SM1...........................................   43 deg.03'   70 deg.27'
SM2...........................................   42 deg.57'   70 deg.22'
SM3...........................................   42 deg.47'   70 deg.32'
SM4...........................................   42 deg.45'   70 deg.29'
SM5...........................................   42 deg.43'   70 deg.32'
SM6...........................................   42 deg.44'   70 deg.39'
SM7...........................................   42 deg.49'   70 deg.43'
SM8...........................................   42 deg.50'   70 deg.41'
SM9...........................................   42 deg.53'   70 deg.43'
SM10..........................................   42 deg.55'   70 deg.40'
SM11..........................................   42 deg.59'   70 deg.32'
SM1...........................................   43 deg.03'   70 deg.27'
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                            Small-mesh Area 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Point                        N. lat.      W. long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SM13..........................................  43 deg.05.6  69 deg.55.0
                                                          '            '
SM14..........................................  43 deg.10.1  69 deg.43.3
                                                          '            '
SM15..........................................  42 deg.49.5  69 deg.40.0
                                                          '            '
SM16..........................................  42 deg.41.5  69 deg.40.0
                                                          '            '
SM17..........................................  42 deg.36.6  69 deg.55.0
                                                          '            '
SM13..........................................  43 deg.05.6  69 deg.55.0
                                                          '            '
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (9) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (D)(1) Through April 30, 2002, the following species may be 
retained, with the restrictions noted, as allowable incidental species 
in the Nantucket Shoals Dogfish Fishery Exemption Area: Longhorn 
sculpin; silver hake--up to 200 lb (90.72 kg); monkfish and monkfish 
parts--up to 10 percent, by weight, of all other species on board or up 
to 50 lb (23 kg) tail-weight/166 lb (75 kg) whole-weight of monkfish 
per trip, as specified in Sec. 648.94(c)(4), whichever is less; 
American lobster--up to 10 percent, by weight, of all other species on 
board or 200 lobsters, whichever is less, unless otherwise restricted 
by landing limits specified in Sec. 697.17 of this chapter; and skate 
or skate parts--up to 10 percent, by weight, of all other species on 
board.
    (2) Beginning May 1, 2002, all nets must comply with a minimum mesh 
size of 3 in (7.62 cm) square or diamond mesh counting the first 100 
meshes (200 bars in the case of square mesh) from the terminus of the 
net for vessels greater than 60 ft (18.28 m) in length and the first 50 
meshes (100 bars in the case of square mesh) from the terminus of the 
net for vessels less than or equal to 60 ft (18.28 m) in length. 
Vessels may retain the allowable incidental species listed in paragraph 
(a)(9)(i)(D)(1) of this section.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Species exemptions. (A) Through April 30, 2002, owners and 
operators of vessels subject to the minimum mesh size restrictions 
specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section may fish for, harvest, 
possess, or land butterfish, dogfish (trawl only), herring, Atlantic 
mackerel, ocean pout, scup, shrimp, squid, summer flounder, silver hake 
and offshore hake, and weakfish with nets of a mesh size smaller than 
the minimum size specified in the SNE Regulated Mesh Area, provided 
such vessels comply with requirements specified in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) 
of this section and with the mesh size and possession limit 
restrictions specified under Sec. 648.86(d).
    (B) Beginning May 1, 2002, owners and operators of vessels subject 
to the minimum mesh size restrictions specified in paragraph (b)(2) of 
this section may not use nets with mesh size less than 3 in (7.62 cm), 
unless exempted pursuant to paragraph (b)(4) of this section, and may 
fish for, harvest, possess, or land butterfish, dogfish (trawl only), 
herring, Atlantic mackerel, ocean pout, scup, shrimp, squid, summer 
flounder, silver hake and offshore hake--up to 10,000 lb (4,536 kg), 
and weakfish with nets of a mesh size smaller than the minimum size 
specified in the SNE Regulated Mesh Area, provided such vessels comply 
with requirements specified in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section and 
with the possession limit restrictions specified under Sec. 648.86. 
Nets may not have a mesh size of less than 3 in (7.62 cm) square or 
diamond mesh counting the first 100 meshes (200 bars in the case of 
square mesh) from the terminus of the net for vessels greater than 60 
ft (18.28 m) in length and the first 50 meshes (100 bars in the case of 
square mesh) from the terminus of the net for vessels less than or 
equal to 60 ft (18.28 m) in length.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Small mesh beginning May 1, 2002. Beginning May 1, 2002, nets 
may not have a mesh size of less than 3 in (7.62 cm) square or diamond 
mesh counting the first 100 meshes (200 bars in the case of square 
mesh) from the terminus of the net for vessels greater than 60 ft 
(18.28 m) in length and the first 50 meshes (100 bars in the case of 
square mesh) from the terminus of the net for vessels less than or 
equal to 60 ft (18.28 m) in length.
* * * * *
    (4) Addition or deletion of exemptions. Same as paragraph (a)(7) of 
this section.
* * * * *
    (g) Restrictions on gear and methods of fishing--(1) Net 
obstruction or constriction. Except as provided in paragraph (g)(5) of 
this section, a fishing vessel subject to minimum mesh size 
restrictions shall not use any device or material, including, but not 
limited to, nets, net strengtheners, ropes, lines, or chafing gear, on 
the top of a trawl net except that one splitting strap and one bull 
rope (if present), consisting of line and rope no more than 3 in (7.62 
cm) in diameter, may be used if such splitting strap and/or bull rope 
does not constrict in any manner the top of the trawl net. ``The top of 
the trawl net'' means the 50 percent of the net that (in a hypothetical 
situation) is not in contact with the ocean bottom during a tow if the 
net were laid flat on the ocean floor. For the purpose of this 
paragraph, head ropes are not considered part of the top of the trawl 
net.
    (2) Net obstruction or constriction. (i) Except as provided in 
paragraph (g)(5) of this section, a fishing vessel may not use any mesh 
configuration, mesh construction, or other means on or in the top of 
the net subject to minimum mesh size restrictions, as defined in 
paragraph (g)(1) of this section, if it obstructs the meshes of the net 
in any manner.
* * * * *
    (5) Net strengthener restrictions when fishing for small-mesh 
multispecies. A vessel lawfully fishing for small-mesh multispecies in 
the GOM/GB, SNE, or MA Regulated Mesh Areas as defined in paragraphs 
(a), (b), and (c) of this section with nets of mesh size smaller than 
2.5-in (6.35-cm) may use a net strengthener provided that the net 
strengthener complies with Sec. 648.23(d).
* * * * *
    8. In Sec. 648.86, paragraphs (d) and (e) are redesignated as 
paragraphs (f) and (g) respectively and new paragraphs (d) and (e) are 
added to read as follows:

[[Page 16778]]

Sec. 648.86  Multispecies possession restrictions.

* * * * *
    (d) Small-mesh multispecies through April 30, 2002. (1) Vessels 
issued a valid Federal multispecies permit specified under 
Sec. 648.4(a)(1) are subject to the following possession limits for 
small-mesh multispecies:
    (i) Vessels using mesh size smaller than 2.5 in (6.35 cm) and 
vessels without a letter of authorization. Owners or operators of 
vessels fishing for, in possession of, or landing small-mesh 
multispecies with, or having on board except as provided herein, nets 
of mesh size smaller than 2.5 in (6.35 cm) (as applied to the part of 
the net specified at (d)(1)(iv) of this section), and, vessels that 
have not been issued a letter of authorization pursuant to paragraph 
(d)(1)(ii) or (d)(1)(iii) of this section may possess on board and land 
up to only 3,500 lb (1,588 kg) of combined silver hake and offshore 
hake. This possession limit on small-mesh multispecies does not apply 
if all nets with mesh size smaller than 2.5 in (6.35 cm) have not been 
used to catch fish for the entire fishing trip and the nets have been 
properly stowed pursuant to Sec. 648.81(e), and the vessel is fishing 
with a mesh size and a letter of authorization as specified in 
paragraphs (d)(1)(ii), (d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2) of this section. Silver 
hake and offshore hake on board a vessel subject to this possession 
limit must be separated from other species of fish and stored so as to 
be readily available for inspection. The vessel is subject to 
applicable restrictions on gear, area, and time of fishing specified in 
Sec. 648.80 and any other applicable provision of this part.
    (ii) Vessels authorized to use nets of mesh size 2.5 in (6.35 cm) 
or greater. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(3) of this section, 
owners and operators of vessels issued a valid letter of authorization 
pursuant to paragraph (d)(2) of this section authorizing the use of 
nets of mesh size 2.5 in (6.35 cm) or greater, may fish for, possess, 
and land small-mesh multispecies up to only 7,500 lb (3,402 kg) 
combined silver hake and offshore hake when fishing with nets of a 
minimum mesh size of 2.5 in (6.35 cm) (as applied to the part of the 
net specified in (d)(1)(iv) of this section), provided that any nets of 
mesh size smaller than 2.5 in (6.35 cm) have not been used to catch 
such fish and are properly stowed pursuant to Sec. 648.81(e) for the 
entire trip. Silver hake and offshore hake on board a vessel subject to 
this possession limit must be separated from other species of fish and 
stored so as to be readily available for inspection. The vessel is 
subject to applicable restrictions on gear, area, and time of fishing 
specified in Sec. 648.80 and any other applicable provision of this 
part.
    (iii) Vessels authorized to use nets of mesh size 3 in (7.62 cm) or 
greater. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(3) of this section, owners 
and operators of vessels issued a valid letter of authorization 
pursuant to paragraph (d)(2) of this section authorizing the use of 
nets of mesh size 3 in (7.62 cm) or greater, may fish for, possess, and 
land small-mesh multispecies up to only 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) combined 
silver hake and offshore hake when fishing with nets of a minimum mesh 
size of 3 in (7.62 cm) (as applied to the part of the net specified in 
(d)(1)(iv) of this section), provided that any nets of mesh size 
smaller than 3 in (7.62 cm) have not been used to catch such fish and 
are properly stowed pursuant to Sec. 648.81(e) for the entire trip. 
Silver hake and offshore hake on board a vessel subject to this 
possession limit must be separated from other species of fish and 
stored so as to be readily available for inspection. The vessel is 
subject to applicable restrictions on gear, area, and time of fishing 
specified in Sec. 648.80 and any other applicable provision of this 
part.
    (iv) Application of mesh size. Counting from the terminus of the 
net, the mesh size restrictions specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(i),(ii) 
and (iii) of this section are only applicable to the first 100 meshes 
(200 bars in the case of square mesh) for vessels greater than 60 ft 
(18.28 m) in length, and to the first 50 meshes (100 bars in the case 
of square mesh) for vessels 60 ft (18.28 m) or less in length.
    (2) Letter of authorization. To fish for, possess on board, or land 
silver hake and offshore hake in excess of 3,500 lb (1,588 kg), as 
specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(ii) or (d)(1)(iii) of this section, a 
vessel must be issued and carry on board a valid letter of 
authorization to fish in the applicable minimum mesh size/possession 
limit category. To request a letter of authorization, vessel owners 
must write to or call during normal business hours the Northeast Region 
Permit Office and provide the vessel name, owner name, permit number, 
the desired mesh size/possession limit category and the period of time 
that the vessel is enrolled. Since letters of authorization are 
effective on the date of receipt, vessel owners should allow 
appropriate processing and mail time. To withdraw from a category, 
vessel owners must write to or call the Northeast Region Permit Office. 
Withdrawals are effective upon date of request. Withdrawals may occur 
after a minimum of 7 days of enrollment in which case vessel owners may 
not re-enroll the vessel in any mesh size/possession limit category 
until 30 days after the beginning of the original enrollment period. 
Until the vessel owner re-enrolls, the vessel is subject to a silver 
hake and offshore hake possession limit of 3,500 lb (1,588 kg) 
regardless of the mesh size in use. For example, if a vessel owner 
enrolls in the 3-in (7.62 cm) mesh/30,000 lb (13,608 kg) possession 
limit category which is effective October 1 and chooses November 30 as 
the end date but withdraws on October 7, the vessel may not be re-
enrolled in the 2.5-in (6.35 cm)/ 7,500 lb (3,402 kg) or 3-in (7.62 cm) 
mesh/30,000 lb (13,608 kg) possession limit category until October 31.
    (3) Possession limit for vessels participating in the Northern 
shrimp fishery. Owners and operators of vessels participating in the 
Small-Mesh Northern Shrimp Fishery Exemption Area, as described in 
Sec. 648.80(a)(3) with a vessel issued a valid Federal multispecies 
permit specified under Sec. 648.4(a)(1) may possess and land silver 
hake and offshore hake, combined, up to an amount equal to the weight 
of shrimp on board, not to exceed 3,500 lb (1,588 kg). Silver hake and 
offshore hake on board a vessel subject to this possession limit must 
be separated from other species of fish and stored so as to be readily 
available for inspection.
    (4) Possession restriction for vessels electing to transfer small-
mesh multispecies at sea. Owners and operators of vessels issued a 
valid Federal multispecies permit and issued a letter of authorization 
to transfer small-mesh multispecies at sea according to the provisions 
specified in Sec. 648.13(b) are subject to a combined silver hake and 
offshore hake possession limit which is 500 lb (226.8 kg) less than the 
possession limit the vessel otherwise receives. This deduction shall be 
noted on the transferring vessel's letter of authorization from the 
Regional Administrator.
    (e) Small-mesh multispecies beginning on May 1, 2002--(1) Federal 
multispecies permit holders. An owner or operator of a vessel issued a 
valid Federal multispecies permit specified under Sec. 648.4 (a)(1) may 
possess on board or land up to 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) of combined silver 
hake and offshore hake. Silver hake and offshore hake on board a vessel 
subject to this possession limit must be separated from other species 
of fish and stored so as to be readily available for inspection. The 
vessel is subject to restrictions on gear,

[[Page 16779]]

area, and time of fishing specified in Sec. 648.80 and any other 
applicable provision of this part.
    (2) Possession limit for vessels participating in the Northern 
shrimp fishery. Owners or operators of vessels fishing in the Small-
mesh Northern Shrimp Fishery Exemption Area under the exemption 
described in Sec. 648.80(a)(3), with a vessel issued a valid Federal 
multispecies permit specified under Sec. 648.4(a)(1), may possess on 
board or land silver hake and offshore hake, combined, up to 100 lb 
(45.36 kg). Silver hake and offshore hake on board a vessel subject to 
this possession limit must be separated from other species of fish and 
stored so as to be readily available for inspection.
    (3) Possession restriction for vessels electing to transfer small-
mesh multispecies at sea. Vessels issued a valid Federal multispecies 
permit and issued a letter of authorization to transfer small-mesh 
multispecies at sea according to the provisions specified in 
Sec. 648.13(b) are subject to a combined silver hake and offshore hake 
possession limit that is 500 lb (226.9 kg) less than the possession 
limit the vessel otherwise receives. This deduction shall be noted on 
the transferring vessel's letter of authorization from the Regional 
Administrator.
* * * * *
    9. In Sec. 648.90, paragraphs (a) introductory text, (a)(1) through 
(a)(4), and (b)(1) are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 648.90  Multispecies framework specifications.

    (a) Annual review. The Multispecies Monitoring Committee (MSMC) 
shall meet on or before November 15 of each year to develop target TACs 
for the upcoming fishing year and to develop options for NEFMC 
consideration on any changes, adjustments, or additions to DAS 
allocations, closed areas, or on other measures necessary to achieve 
the NE Multispecies FMP goals and objectives. For the year 2000 and 
thereafter, the MSMC, and for the year 2001 and thereafter, the Whiting 
Monitoring Committee (WMC) shall meet separately on or before November 
15 of each year to develop options for NEFMC consideration on any 
changes, adjustments, or additions to DAS allocations, if applicable, 
closed areas or other measures necessary to achieve the NE Multispecies 
FMP goals and objectives.
    (1) The MSMC and WMC, as applicable, shall separately review 
available data pertaining to: Catch and landings, discards, DAS, and 
other measures of fishing effort, survey results, stock status, current 
estimates of fishing mortality, and any other relevant information.
    (2) Based on this review, the MSMC shall recommend target TACs and 
develop options necessary to achieve the FMP goals and objectives, 
which may include a preferred option. The WMC shall recommend 
management options necessary to achieve FMP goals and objectives 
pertaining to small-mesh multispecies, which may include a preferred 
option. The MSMC and WMC must demonstrate through analyses and 
documentation that the options they develop are expected to meet the NE 
Multispecies FMP goals and objectives. The MSMC and WMC may review the 
performance of different user groups or fleet sectors in developing 
options. The range of options developed by the MSMC or WMC may include 
any of the management measures in the NE Multispecies FMP, including, 
but not limited to: Annual target TACs, which must be based on the 
projected fishing mortality levels required to meet the goals and 
objectives outlined in the NE Multispecies FMP for the 10 regulated 
species or small-mesh multispecies; DAS changes; possession limits; 
gear restrictions; closed areas; permitting restrictions; minimum fish 
sizes; recreational fishing measures; description and identification of 
essential fish habitat (EFH); fishing gear management measures to 
protect EFH; designation of habitat areas of particular concern within 
EFH; and any other management measures currently included in the NE 
Multispecies FMP. In addition, for the 2002 fishing year, the WMC must 
consider, and recommend as appropriate, management options other than 
the default measures for small-mesh multispecies management (mesh and 
possession limit restrictions for small-mesh multispecies beginning May 
1, 2002).
    (3) The NEFMC shall review the recommended target TACs recommended 
by the MSMC and all of the options developed by the MSMC and WMC, and 
other relevant information, consider public comment, and develop a 
recommendation to meet the NE Multispecies FMP objective pertaining to 
regulated species or small-mesh multispecies that is consistent with 
other applicable law. If the NEFMC does not submit a recommendation 
that meets the NE Multispecies FMP objectives and is consistent with 
other applicable law, the Regional Administrator may adopt any option 
developed by the MSMC or WMC, unless rejected by the NEFMC, as 
specified in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, provided the option 
meets the NE Multispecies FMP objectives and is consistent with other 
applicable law.
    (4) Based on this review, the NEFMC shall submit a recommendation 
to the Regional Administrator of any changes, adjustments or additions 
to DAS allocations (if applicable), closed areas or other measures 
necessary to achieve the NE Multispecies FMP's goals and objectives. 
The NEFMC shall include in its recommendation supporting documents, as 
appropriate, concerning the environmental and economic impacts of the 
proposed action and the other options considered by the NEFMC.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Adjustment process. (i) After a management action has been 
initiated, 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 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 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, description and identification of 
essential fish habitat (EFH), fishing gear management measures to 
protect EFH, designation of habitat areas of particular concern within 
EFH, and any other management measures currently included in the FMP. 
In addition, the Council's recommendation on adjustments or additions 
to management measures pertaining to small-mesh multispecies, other 
than to address gear conflicts, must come from one or more of the 
following categories: Quotas and appropriate seasonal adjustments for 
vessels fishing in experimental or exempted fisheries that use small 
mesh in combination with a separator trawl/grate (if applicable), 
modifications to separator grate (if applicable) and mesh 
configurations for fishing for small-mesh multispecies, adjustments to 
whiting stock boundaries for management purposes, adjustments for

[[Page 16780]]

fisheries exempted from minimum mesh requirements to fish for small-
mesh multispecies (if applicable), season adjustments, declarations, 
and participation requirements for the Cultivator Shoal Whiting Fishery 
Exemption Area
    (ii) Adjustment process for Whiting TACs and DAS. The Council may 
develop recommendations for a Whiting DAS effort reduction program or a 
Whiting TAC through the framework process outlined in paragraph (c)(1) 
of this section only if these options are accompanied by a full set of 
public hearings that span the area affected by the proposed measures in 
order to provide adequate opportunity for public comment.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-7697 Filed 3-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F