[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 65 (Thursday, April 4, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16079-16081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-8076]



[[Page 16079]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 020329075-2075-01; I.D. 031902E]
RIN 0648-AP11


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Monkfish Fishery; 
Framework Adjustment 1

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes management measures contained in Framework 
Adjustment 1 to the Monkfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP). These 
measures would delay for 1 year the default management measure 
contained in the FMP for the fishing year May, 2002- April, 2003 (Year 
4), and establish management area total allowable catch (TAC) targets 
for Year 4 at the level of monkfish landings in Year 2. The framework 
would also adjust the monkfish trip limits in the Southern Fishery 
Management Area (SFMA) to achieve the proposed TAC while considering 
the effect of a Federal court order vacating differential gear-based 
trip limits for trawl and gillnet vessels. This proposed rule would 
also correct and clarify the regulatory language related to the 
monkfish area declaration procedures to make the procedures consistent 
with the intent of the FMP.

DATES: Public comments must be received on or before April 19, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed rule should be sent to Patricia A. 
Kurkul, Regional Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS, One Blackburn 
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2298. Mark the outside of the envelope 
``Comments on Monkfish Framework 1.'' Comments may also be submitted 
via facsimile (fax) to 978-281-9135. Comments will not be accepted if 
submitted via e-mail or the Internet.
    Copies of Framework Adjustment 1 to the Monkfish FMP, including the 
Environmental Assessment (EA), Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) are available upon 
request from Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery 
Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. The 
EA/RIR/IRFA are also accessible via the Internet at http://www.nero.nmfs.gov.
    Written comments regarding the approved collection-of-information 
requirements should be sent to the Regional Administrator and to the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget, Washington, DC 20503 (Attn: NOAA Desk Officer).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison Ferreira, Fishery Management 
Specialist, (978) 281-9103, fax (978) 281-9135, e-mail 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The monkfish fishery is jointly managed by 
the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) and the Mid-Atlantic 
Fishery Management Council (MAFMC)(Councils), with the NEFMC having the 
administrative lead. The intent of the management program established 
by the monkfish FMP is to eliminate overfishing by May 2002 and rebuild 
the stock by 2009. In order to ensure the elimination of overfishing by 
May 2002, current regulations specify that restrictive measures become 
effective for Year 4 of the management program (May 1, 2002 - April 30, 
2003) unless a 3-year review of the stock status indicates that these 
restrictive measures are not necessary. The Year 4 default measures 
would eliminate the directed monkfish fishery by allocating zero 
monkfish days-at-sea (DAS) and by allowing only incidental landings of 
monkfish. Instead of the default measures, this proposed rule, if 
adopted, would implement the following measures: (1) A 1-year delay of 
the default management measures contained in the FMP for the fishing 
year May, 2002 to April, 2003 (Year 4); (2) a revision of management 
area target TACs for Year 4 to be equivalent to the level of landings 
in Year 2; and (3) an adjustment of trawl and non-trawl trip limits in 
the SFMA to achieve the TACs, while considering the impacts of a 
Federal court order vacating differential gear-based trip limits for 
trawl and gillnet vessels.
    The Monkfish Monitoring Committee (MFMC) of the NEFMC, the NEFMC, 
and the MAFMC evaluated biological reference points and the 
effectiveness of management measures to stop overfishing and to allow 
for rebuilding by 2009. This review relied on information from the 31st 
Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW 31, June 2001) and on landings and stock 
survey information. The MFMC noted that SAW 31 determined that the 
fishing mortality rate (F) reference points on which the default TACs 
are based are no longer reliable. Therefore, the MFMC could not develop 
recommendations for alternative management measures. The MFMC noted 
that updated resource survey indices indicated that stock abundance 
could have increas ed in the Northern Fishery Management Area (NFMA) 
and stabilized in the SFMA.
    The Councils considered this information and the results of the 
updated stock assessment released in January 2002 (SAW 34). SAW 34 
investigated several methods for assessing stock status and provided 
suggestions for improved biological reference points based on yield per 
recruit analyses. Based on the results of the current and previous 
assessments, an F threshold (Fthreshold) of 
Fmax=0.2 was recommended by the Stock Assessment Review 
Committee (SARC) for defining overfishing.
    The assessment produced a range of fishing mortality estimates for 
calendar year 2000, which varied depending on the method used for 
calculating F and on the assumptions used regarding tow distance and 
relative net efficiency in the industry-based trawl survey. The F 
estimates produced were between 0.10 and 0.38, with 61 percent of the F 
estimates from the cooperative survey less than or equal to the 
recommended Fmax=0.20. These F estimates included only 6 
months of management restrictions, implemented for Year 2 of the FMP 
(effective May 1, 2000). The management restrictions consisted of the 
establishment of monkfish DAS, trip limits, and a minimum fish size. 
During 1998 and 1999, approximately one-third of the annual landings 
came from January - April. Thus, roughly, one-third of annual effort 
was likely expended in 2000 before trip limits were implemented on May 
1. This suggests that, even without further restrictions, F estimates 
for calendar year 2001 will be lower than the F for calendar year 2000, 
since management restrictions were in force for all of 2001.
    Given the proximity of F estimates for calendar year 2000 to 
F=0.20, preliminary data from the NMFS' fall trawl survey for 2001 
further support the conclusion that the proposed measures will end 
overfishing. These data, which are still preliminary, show positive 
results for the stock in both management areas. After considering the 
information presented above, NMFS has determined that the proposed 
measures are consistent with the FMP objectives of ending overfishing 
in 2002 and of rebuilding the monkfish stock by 2009.
    The Councils have also started to develop Amendment 2 to the FMP to 
incorporate the results of SAW 34 in

[[Page 16080]]

developing revisions to the management program, including the 
rebuilding plan and the overfishing definition. The Councils intend to 
implement Amendment 2 by May 1, 2003 (Year 5).

Management Measures

    Optimum yield (OY) for Year 4 would be specified at 19,595 metric 
tons (mt), with TACs for the NFMA and SFMA set at 11,674 mt and 7,921 
mt, respectively. The analysis in Framework 1 determined that these 
TACs are consistent with the fishing mortality threshold for ending 
overfishing of F=0.2, recommended by SAW 34.
    Framework 1 would also adjust the monkfish trip limits in the SFMA 
as needed to achieve the TACs while considering the effect of a Federal 
court order issued on Feburary 15, 2002, in the case of Hall et al. v. 
Evans et al.(C.A. No. 99-5491 (D.R.I.), pursuant to an initial court 
decision issued on August 14, 2001, vacating differential gear-based 
trip limits for trawl and gillnet vessels. This framework would 
allocate, as in Years 2 and 3, 40 monkfish DAS to limited access permit 
holders for Year 4, with no monkfish trip limit while fishing on a 
monkfish or multispecies DAS in the NFMA, and a trip limit of 550 lb 
(249 kg) (tail weight, per DAS) for permit categories A and C, or 450 
lb (204 kg) (tail weight, per DAS) for permit categories B and D while 
fishing on a monkfish DAS in the SFMA. The incidental catch limits, 
which vary by permit category and fishing area, would continue at 
current levels for 1 additional year.

Technical Correction

    This proposed rule would also make a technical correction to the 
regulatory language at Sec. 648.94(f) citing area declaration 
procedures. This would make the regulatory language consistent with the 
FMP, which stated that under certain circumstances vessels with 
multispecies, scallop, and monkfish DAS permits would be required to 
declare into the NFMA to fish. The collection-of-information 
requirements for the FMP approved under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
(PRA) also contained references to the multispecies, scallop and 
monkfish DAS permit vessels. When the regulations implementing the FMP 
were published, NMFS inadvertently only referenced vessels with 
monkfish DAS permits, rather than also including vessels with 
multispecies and scallop permits. Therefore, this action proposes to 
correct the current regulatory language at Sec. 648.94(f) to include 
all vessels fishing for monkfish under a multispecies, scallop, or 
monkfish DAS in the NFMA.

Classification

    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    The Council and NMFS prepared an IRFA that describes the economic 
impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A 
description of the action, the reason for being considered, and the 
legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of the 
preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. This action does 
not contain any additional collection-of-information, reporting or 
recordkeeping requirements. It will not duplicate, overlap, or conflict 
with any other Federal rules. A summary of the analysis follows:
    The IRFA analysis examined the economic impacts of three sets of 
management alternatives for Year 4 of the FMP: Preferred and non-
preferred alternatives for OY and management area TACs, and a ``no 
action'' alternative. The preferred alternative consists of the 
measures outlined in this proposed rule. These measures consist of a 
delay in the Year 4 default management measures for 1 year and of the 
establishment of an OY of 19,595 mt for Year 4, with management area 
TACs of 11,674 mt and 7,921 mt for the NFMA and SFMA, respectively. 
This OY is equivalent to the level of landings generated during Year 2 
of the rebuilding program.
    The non-preferred alternative would establish an OY of 11,697 mt 
for Year 4, with management area TACs of 5,673 mt and 6,024 mt for the 
NFMA and the SFMA, respectively. This OY is equivalent to the OY 
specified for Years 2 and 3 of the rebuilding plan for monkfish. In 
addition, the preferred and non-preferred alternatives would adjust the 
directed monkfish trip limits in the SFMA to achieve corresponding TAC 
for that area. The ``no action'' alternative considers the impacts 
associated with default management measures.
    The category of entities likely to be affected by this action are 
the limited access monkfish permit holders, which are virtually all 
small entities, primarily trawl and gillnet vessels fishing in the 
SFMA. Thus, analysis of the impacts of this proposed rule necessarily 
includes impacts on all small entities affected. The preferred 
alternative affects only a subset of those entities, primarily trawl 
and gillnet vessels fishing in the SFMA. As of March 13, 2002, there 
were 704 vessels holding active limited access monkfish permits and an 
additional 34 vessels holding limited access monkfish permits in a 
Confirmation of Permit History. Approximately 160 of these vessels 
declared their intention to fish in the NFMA for at least 30 days 
during the 2001 fishing year (May 1, 2001, to April 30, 2002), thereby 
fishing under the less restrictive management measures of the NFMA.
    The preferred alternative would result in loss of income from 
fishing year 2000 levels for several vessel types. However, these 
losses are lower than the losses that would result from implementation 
of either the non-preferred or no action alternative. Under the 
preferred alternative, approximately 10 percent of vessels less than 50 
ft (15.24 m) in length would experience a 3.4-percent or greater 
reduction in income as a result of the proposed measures. However, 10 
percent of these vessels would experience a 12.4-percent or greater 
reduction in income under the non-preferred alternative and a 54.6-
percent or greater loss in income under the ``no action'' alternative. 
The income of vessels in other size categories would either not be 
affected by implementation of the preferred alternative, or would be 
reduced by less than 1 percent. Conversely, 10 percent of vessels 
greater than or equal to 50 ft (15.24 m) in length would experience 
some income loss under the non-preferred and ``no action'' 
alternatives. For example, vessels between 50 and 70 feet (21.34 m) in 
length would experience an income loss of 1.5 percent or greater under 
the non-preferred alternative, and a 10.2-percent or greater loss in 
income under the ``no action'' alternative.
    Vessels that fish for monkfish but that are not eligible for 
limited access permits to fish for Northeast multispecies or sea 
scallops (category A and B permits) would be the vessels most severely 
impacted by the no action alternative. Under this alternative, 10 
percent of these vessels would lose 100 percent of their net income 
from fishing. However, 10 percent of vessels in these categories would 
likely not be affected at all because their landings during the 2000 
fishing year were at or below the incidental catch levels allowed under 
the ``no action'' alternative. Impacts to these vessels would be 
substantially less under either the preferred or non-preferred 
alternatives. Under the preferred alternative, 10 percent of these 
vessels would experience no income loss, but 50 percent would 
experience an income loss of 3.1 percent or greater. Under the non-
preferred alternative, 10 percent of these vessels would experience no 
income loss, but 50 percent would experience an income loss of 9.9 
percent or greater.

[[Page 16081]]

    Under any of the three alternatives, vessels that hold limited 
access permits for either multispecies or scallops in addition to 
monkfish (category C and D) would be the least affected of all vessels 
holding limited access monkfish permits. Under the preferred 
alternative, category C vessels have a higher possession limit than 
category D vessels. Ten percent of category C vessels would experience 
a 0.8-percent or greater reduction in income, and 10 percent of 
category D vessels would experience a 2.9-percent or greater reduction 
in income. Under the non-preferred alternative, category C vessels also 
have a higher trip limit than category D vessels. Category C vessels 
would experience a 3.7-percent or greater loss in income, while 
category D vessels would experience a 5.9-percent or greater loss in 
income. Finally, the ``no action'' alternative would result in 10 
percent of category C vessels having a 25.8-percent loss in income, 
while category D vessels would experience a 43.3-percent loss in 
income.
    Geographically, vessels homeported in New Jersey and Delaware 
(combined) would be the vessels most affected under all three 
alternatives. Under the ``no action'' alternative, 10 percent of these 
vessels would experience a 72-percent or greater loss in income, while 
10 percent of these vessels would experience a 12.5-percent or greater 
loss in income under the non-preferred alternative. Under the preferred 
alternative, 10 percent of the vessels homeported in New Jersey and 
Delaware would experience only a 2.1-percent or greater loss in income.
    A copy of this analysis is available from the Council (see 
ADDRESSES).
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty 
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), unless that 
collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control 
number.
    This action makes a technical correction to the regulatory language 
referencing area declaration procedures. This collection-of-information 
requirement that is subject to the PRA has been approved by OMB under 
control number 0648-0202. Public reporting burden for this collection 
of information is estimated to average 3 minutes per response, 
including 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 this 
burden estimate, or any other aspect of this data collection, including 
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and to OMB 
at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget, Washington DC 20503 (Attention: NOAA Desk 
Officer).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

    Fisheries, Fishing, reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    March 29, 2002.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

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. 648.92, paragraph (b)(1) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 648.92  Effort-control program for monkfish limited access 
vessels.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Limited access monkfish permit holders. For fishing year 2002, 
all limited access monkfish permit holders shall be allocated 40 
monkfish DAS. Multispecies and scallop limited access permit holders 
who also qualify for a limited access monkfish permit shall be 
allocated up to 40 monkfish DAS, depending on whether they have 
sufficient multispecies and/or scallop DAS to use concurrently with 
their monkfish DAS, as required by paragraph (b)(2) of this section. 
For fishing years 2003 and thereafter, no monkfish DAS will be 
allocated to any limited access monkfish permit holder.
* * * * *

    3. In Sec. 648.94, revise paragraph (b)(1); remove and reserve 
paragraph (b)(2); and revise the introductory paragraph headings of 
(b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6); the first sentence of paragraph 
(b)(7), the introductory paragraph headings of (c)(2)(i) and (ii), and 
the first sentence of paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec. 648.94  Monkfish possession and landing restrictions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Vessels fishing under the monkfish DAS program in the SFMA. (i) 
Category A and C vessels. Category A and C vessels fishing under the 
monkfish DAS program in the SFMA may land up to 550 lb (249 kg) tail-
weight or 1,826 lb (828 kg) whole weight of monkfish per DAS (or any 
prorated combination of tail-weight and whole weight based on the 
conversion factor).
    (ii) Category B and D vessels. Category B and D vessels fishing 
under the monkfish DAS program in the SFMA may land up to 450 lb (204 
kg) tail-weight or 1,494 lb (678 kg) whole weight of monkfish per DAS 
(or any prorated combination of tail-weight and whole weight based on 
the conversion factor).
    (iii) Administration of landing limits. A vessel owner or operator 
may not exceed the monkfish trip limits as specified in paragraphs 
(b)(1)(ii) and (iii) of this section per monkfish DAS fished, or any 
part of a monkfish DAS fished.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (3) Category C and D vessels fishing during a multispecies DAS 
prior to May 1, 2003-- * * *
* * * * *
    (4) Category C and D vessels fishing during a multispecies DAS from 
May 1, 2003, and thereafter-- * * *
* * * * *
    (5) Category C and D vessels fishing under the scallop DAS program 
prior to May 1, 2003. * * *
* * * * *
    (6) Category C and D vessels fishing under the scallop DAS program 
from May 1, 2003, and thereafter.* * *
* * * * *
    (7) Category C and D scallop vessels declared into the monkfish DAS 
program without a dredge on board. Category C and D vessels that have 
declared into the monkfish DAS program and that do not fish with or 
have on board a dredge are subject to the same possession limits as 
specified at paragraph (b)(1) of this section. * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Prior to May 1, 2003.* * *
    (ii) From May 1, 2003, and thereafter.* * *
* * * * *
    (f) Area declaration. In order for a vessel fishing under a 
multispecies, scallop, or monkfish DAS to fish for monkfish under the 
less restrictive management measures of the NFMA, such vessel must 
declare into, and fish for monkfish exclusively in, the NFMA for a 
period of not less than 30 days. * * *
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-8076 Filed 4-3-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S