[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 184 (Monday, September 23, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59471-59477]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-24155]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 229

[Docket No. 020819200-2200-01; I.D. 021202A]
RIN 0648-AP93


Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing 
Operations; Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan Regulations

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The NMFS is amending the regulations that implement the 
Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP), specifically with 
regard to the straight set of gillnets in the southeast U.S. restricted 
area in waters off the coasts of Georgia and Florida. This final rule 
prohibits straight sets of gillnets at night from November 15 through 
March 31, annually, to reduce the risk of entanglement of large whales, 
including the western North Atlantic right whale (right whale).

DATES: This final rule is effective October 23, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Environmental Assessment (EA), the Regulatory 
Impact Review (RIR), and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) analysis 
are available from Protected Resources Division, NMFS /Southeast 
Region, 9721 Executive Center Drive North, St. Petersburg, FL 33702-
2432. ALWTRP Compliance guide, Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Team 
(ALWTRT) meeting summaries, and a progress report on implementation of 
the ALWTRP may be obtained by writing to Diane Borggaard, NMFS /
Northeast Region, 1 Blackburn Dr., Gloucester, MA 01930 or to Katie 
Moore, NMFS/Southeast Region, 9721 Executive Center Dr., St. 
Petersburg, FL 33702-2432. Copies of the EA, the RIR, and the RFA 
analysis can also be obtained from the ALWTRP Web site listed under the 
Electronic Access portion of this document. A copy of the most recent 
Stock Assessment Report (SAR) can be obtained by writing to Richard 
Merrick, 166 Water St., Woods Hole, MA 02543 or can be downloaded from 
the NMFS Protected Resources Web site listed under the Electronic 
Access portion of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Moore, NMFS, Southeast Region, 
727-570-5312; Diane Borggaard, NMFS, Northeast Region, 978-281-9145; or 
Patricia Lawson, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, 301-713-2322. 
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may 
call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 
a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday, excluding Federal 
holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    Several of the background documents for this final rule and the 
take reduction planning process can be downloaded from the ALWTRP Web 
site: http://www.nero.nmfs.gov/whaletrp/. Copies of the most recent 
SARs may be downloaded from the Internet at http://www.nefsc.nmfs.gov/psb/assesspdfs.htm. Information on disentanglement events is available 
on the Web page of NMFS' whale disentanglement contractor, the Center 
for Coastal Studies, http://www.coastalstudies.org/.

Background

    This final rule implements approved modifications contained in the 
ALWTRP recommended by the ALWTRT to satisfy the requirements of the 
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act 
(MMPA). Details concerning the justification for and development of 
this rule were provided in the preamble to the proposed rule (66 FR 
14690, March 27, 2002) and are not repeated here.
    The proposed rule provided a 60-day public comment period to 
provide feedback to NMFS via postmarked mail or via facsimile. NMFS 
also issued a press release announcing the availability of the proposed 
rule and

[[Page 59472]]

summarizing its purpose and requirements. Information in the press 
release was sent to more than 500 people in the southeast U.S. 
including permitted fishers, state representatives, fishery management 
council members, and industry representatives. The NMFS also posted the 
proposed rule on the ALWTRP Web site (listed under the Electronic 
Access portion of this document).

Changes Proposed for the ALWTRP for Gillnet Gear

    This final rule prohibits the straight set of gillnets at night 
from November 15 through March 31, annually, in the southeast U.S. 
restricted area, (unless the exemption under 50 CFR 229.32(f)(3)(iii), 
which relates to shark gillnets, applies). This final rule regulates 
the MMPA's List of Fisheries (LOF) definition for the Southeast 
Atlantic gillnet fishery which includes any type of gillnet gear for 
any species (except shark gillnetting effort using 5-inch (12.7-cm) or 
greater stretched mesh south of the North Carolina/Georgia border) in 
waters south of a line extending due east of the fishery management 
council demarcation line between the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of 
Mexico (50 CFR 600.105). The southeast U.S. restricted area consists of 
those waters from 27[deg]51' N. lat. (near Sebastian Inlet, FL) to 
32[deg]00' N. lat. (near Savannah, GA) extending from the shore outward 
to 80[deg] W long. Night means any time between one-half hour before 
sunset and one-half hour after sunrise, as per the ALWTRP (50 CFR 
229.2). The gillnet gear is fished as strikenets or straight sets. 
Fishing with strikenet gear means a gillnet that is designed so that, 
when it is deployed, it encircles or encloses an area of water either 
with the net or by utilizing the shoreline to complete encirclement or 
to fish with such a net and method. A straight set is the deployment of 
a gillnet in a straight line, as opposed to the deployment of a gillnet 
in a circular manner, for example, around a school of fish. Both 
deployment types are currently fished in the proposed management area, 
the southeast U.S. restricted area, which includes a nursery area for 
right whale mothers and calves.
    Right whales generally occur in the southeast U.S. restricted area 
from around November 15 through March 31, annually. Within the time 
period and geographical area in which the right whale is known to have 
become entangled, a prohibition would afford additional protection to 
the concentrations of right whales. NMFS believes straight set gillnets 
deployed during daytime are of very minimal threat to whales. Such gear 
is retrieved within about one-half hour of every set; thus, the fisher 
would be on-site in the possible event of an entanglement, and could 
subsequently contact the disentanglement network for action. Straight 
sets at night pose a higher level of risk of entanglement to whales 
than strike sets or straight sets during the day, because fishers are 
not as actively involved with straight set gear (in comparison to the 
strike set method used in southeast Atlantic waters), and whales are 
much more difficult to spot at night due to darkness. Through this 
final rule, NMFS aims to reduce the potential for the entanglement of 
right whales in straight set gillnet gear. Due to the gear 
restrictions, the final rule will also reduce the likelihood of effort 
influx into the fishery in the future, thereby further reducing the 
potential likelihood of entanglements.
    Figure 1 shows the boundaries for the southeast U.S. restricted 
area. Currently the Southeast U.S. shark gillnet fishery is regulated 
using these boundaries (50 CFR 229.32 (f)(1)).
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S

[[Page 59473]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23SE02.090

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

[[Page 59474]]

Comments and Responses

    NMFS received eight sets of written comments on the proposed rule 
by the May 28, 2002, deadline. The comments were considered in 
developing this final rule to amend the regulations that implement the 
ALWTRP and are responded to here.

General Comments

    Comment 1: Seven commenters generally supported the proposed rule 
to reduce entanglement risk to right whales. Two of the seven 
commenters generally believed that the proposed prohibition would 
protect whales and reduce the potential for whale entanglements. One 
commenter urged NMFS to expedite the publication of the final rule.
    Response: By this final rule, NMFS is amending the regulations that 
implement the ALWTRP to provide further protection for large whales, 
with an emphasis on right whales due to their critical status. Based on 
NMFS' current understanding of the right whale population and local 
fisheries, NMFS believes the prohibition defined by this final rule 
should reduce entanglement risk to right whales.
    Comment 2: Two commenters generally believed that the regulations 
were not restrictive enough. Two commenters believed NMFS needs to do 
more, such as implementing a year-round ban on gillnets in all waters, 
similar to what some states have implemented in the southeast United 
States. One commenter supported a ban on all nets that kill both target 
and non-target species. One commenter suggested that further action may 
be necessary, such as a proactive, precautionary approach in order to 
offer real bycatch risk reduction.
    Response: Taking into account the economics of the affected 
fisheries, technological feasibility, and stock status, NMFS believes 
the final regulations adequately reduce the potential for right whale 
entanglement due to gillnets in the southeast United States. At this 
time, NMFS does not support a year-round ban on gillnets in all waters 
including Federal waters to protect marine animals. Should new 
scientific information indicate the necessity for additional management 
measures, NMFS will reconvene also take the ALWTRT's recommendations 
into consideration and conduct the necessary environmental and economic 
analyses to determine the potential benefits and costs associated with 
any proposed measures.
    Comment 3: One commenter urged NMFS to continue working with 
coastal states on marine mammal conservation.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the necessity and utility of cooperating 
with coastal states on marine mammal conservation, and NMFS plans to 
continue its current partnerships. Some of the current efforts which 
NMFS plans to continue include interagency cooperation on marine mammal 
stranding issues, instituting ESA section 6 agreements with states, 
entering into Memorandums of Agreement with states on conservation 
issues, facilitating regional policy discussions, and participating in 
the Southeast U.S. Implementation Team to implement the right whale 
recovery plan.
    Comment 4: One commenter emphasized the need to continue research 
on Atlantic whale survival and management efforts to return the 
populations to viable levels.
    Response: NMFS is actively conducting and supporting research on 
Atlantic whales and Atlantic fisheries' gear modifications. NMFS has 
gear laboratories and research teams that specifically focus on gear 
development and testing, has marine mammalogists and statisticians 
conducting the science necessary to better understand Atlantic whales 
and the risks associated with them, and has fishery management 
specialists whose time is completely dedicated to implementing 
management actions to protect and conserve Atlantic whales and provides 
financial support to numerous entities involved in whale research and 
gear research activities. NMFS makes its management decisions on the 
best available information, and it spends a great deal of money and 
resources to expand its knowledge base. NMFS will continue to expand 
these programs as funding allows.
    Comment 5: One commenter requested that NMFS expand the management 
area southward another 60 miles to east of Jupiter Inlet or to Latitude 
27[deg]0.0' to protect right whales and other marine species such as 
leatherback turtles and sharks.
    Response: Given the results of a recent data analysis, NMFS 
believes this final rule should include only those waters designated by 
the existing southeast U.S. restricted area in order to protect right 
whales from potential entanglement due to straight sets of gillnets. 
NMFS believes the most important winter/calving areas known are within 
the latitudinal boundaries identified in the existing ALWTRP rule (50 
CFR 229.32), although northern right whales are occasionally sighted 
outside this area. NMFS, with the assistance of the Florida Fish and 
Wildlife Conservation Commission's Florida Marine Research Institute 
(FMRI), conducted an analysis of aerial survey data to determine the 
frequency of right whale sightings, as a measure of the likelihood of 
right whale presence in the expanded management area recommended by the 
commenter. The analysis reviewed the aerial survey tracks flown by FMRI 
over the waters bounded by 27[deg]51.0'N. to 27[deg]0.0'N., from 
Florida's Eastern coastline to 80[deg] W. The analysis consisted of 127 
days between February 14, 1992, and March 31, 2001, though several days 
had limited search effort in the area. During the 127 days, there were 
six right whale sighting events, totaling 11 individuals. NMFS does not 
believe that the number of animals sighted over the 10-year period 
warrants the requested area expansion to waters south of 27[deg]51.0'N. 
Public feedback on right whale sightings is important to the agency, 
and the agency will take public sightings into consideration along with 
aerial survey data as it periodically reviews critical habitat and the 
southeast U.S. restricted area boundaries.
    NMFS has the authority to regulate U.S. waters for ESA listed 
species such as leatherback turtles; however, NMFS does not believe at 
this point in time that an expansion of the gillnet restriction area, 
as defined by this final rule, is warranted for leatherback turtles or 
sharks. Furthermore, this would be an inappropriate rationale for 
action on a rule implementing take reduction provisions under the MMPA.
    Comment 6: Based on economic effects, one commenter objected to the 
definition of ``night'' used in the proposed rule. ``Night'' is defined 
as any time between one-half hour before sunset and one-half hour after 
sunrise, as per the ALWTRP (50 CFR 229.2). Instead of the proposed 
rule's definition, the commenter requested that NMFS define ``night'' 
as any time between one-half hour after sunset and one-half hour before 
sunrise. The commenter stated that fishers rely on the low light 
conditions to catch a substantial amount of fish. The commenter 
believed that the fishery's temporal feature has not had an adequate 
economic analysis.
    Response: The commenter suggests a change in the definition of 
night which would result in two extra hours of permitted fishing each 
day (as compared to the proposed rule) in which straight sets of 
gillnets in the Southeast Atlantic gillnet fishery would be legal. NMFS 
believes the change in the definition of night for this measure is not 
warranted on an economic impact basis.
    Available data do not demonstrate that the fishing behavior or 
methodology restricted by this final rule (straight set gillnets at 
night) is utilized

[[Page 59475]]

to a great extent in the restricted area. Data on average trip times, 
landings, soak times, and vessel characteristics indicate that the 
fishery is primarily prosecuted as a day fishery generating less than 
$167 per year of gross revenues. Taking into account the number of 
vessels participating in the straight set gillnet fishery (from 41 to 
62), vessels average less than $4 income annually, indicating that the 
fishery is likely of lowly economic profitability to the fleet as a 
whole. Virtually all recorded gillnet harvests from this area and 
season are attributed to runaround gillnets and not straight set 
gillnets. Whether spread over multiple participants or attributed to a 
single vessel, NMFS believes restricting the use of this gear during 
the times defined as ``night'' will not significantly reduce profits 
for fishery participants. Therefore, any direct economic impacts on the 
fishery will be minimal since the fishery does not substantially 
operate in the manner being restricted.
    NMFS believes the current definition of ``night'' used in this 
final rule takes into consideration stakeholders' economic concerns and 
does not result in substantial economic impact sufficient to warrant 
changing the definition of night as requested.
    Comment 7: One commenter requested that NMFS reconvene the ALWTRT 
and the southeast sub-group to review and re-evaluate bycatch 
mitigation strategies.
    Response: NMFS values the ALWTRT's input to reduce the incidental 
take of large whales in commercial fisheries and believes the regional 
sub-group process is an effective means of addressing regionally 
specific management needs. During the early months of 2002, NMFS 
implemented several management actions including Dynamic Area 
Management, Seasonal Area Management, and gear modifications. NMFS 
intends to reconvene the ALWTRT to discuss the effectiveness of these 
measures and to determine if further measures are warranted based on 
the best available information. Though NMFS has not finalized meeting 
dates at this time, in order to ensure public participation in 
commercial fishery management, NMFS will inform both the ALWTRT and the 
general public of the logistics of future meetings of the ALWTRT.
    Two comments were received after the close of the public comment 
period. Since the comments reflected unique thoughts not previously 
identified during the public comment period, NMFS has chosen to respond 
to them.
    Comment 8: One commenter suggested that NMFS consider a visibility 
threshold such as ``no sets anytime when visibility is less than 400 
yds'' (366 m). NMFS stated in the proposed rule that ``straight sets at 
night pose a higher level of risk to entanglement to whales . . . 
because whales are much more difficult to spot at night due to 
darkness.'' The commenter was concerned that whales can be difficult to 
spot in the dense fog which often occurs in the right whale calving 
area during the winter.
    Response: Taking into account technological feasibility and stock 
status, NMFS believes the final regulations adequately reduce the 
potential for right whale entanglement due to gillnets in the southeast 
United States. At this time, NMFS does not support further restrictions 
on the non-shark gillnet fishery which would only allow operation at 
times where visibility is equal to or greater than 400 yds (366 m). 
Should additional scientific information indicate the necessity for 
additional management measures such as a visibility threshold on 
gillnets similar to the shark gillnetters, NMFS will reconvene the 
ALWTRT to discuss this potential management measure and others. NMFS 
will take the ALWTRT's recommendations into consideration and conduct 
the necessary environmental and economic analyses to fully disclose the 
potential benefits and costs associated with all proposed measures.
    Comment 9: One commenter suggested that NMFS better define the 
subject gillnet gear's characteristics in order to differentiate the 
gear from that used in the shark gillnet fishery. The commenter said 
that the subject gear in the proposed rule differs from gillnet gear 
used to target sharks, because the subject gear is relatively low in 
tensile strength, has small sized mesh, and the deployed gear is small 
in scope. One suggestion for defining the subject gillnet gear's 
characteristics was to include a maximum ceiling on net length, mesh 
size, and/or tensile strength in this final rule.
    Response: The proposed rule uses the MMPA's LOF definition for the 
Southeast Atlantic Gillnet Fishery, and NMFS believes further gear 
descriptions by tensile strength, mesh size, or target species are not 
necessary to clarify the proposed rule and its affected fishers.
    Under the MMPA's LOF, there are two types of gillnet gear 
categorized in the southeast United States: Southeast Atlantic Gillnet 
and Southeastern U.S. Atlantic Shark Gillnet. NMFS currently has 
restrictions on the Southeastern U.S. Atlantic Shark Gillnet Fishery 
which has been defined in 50 CFR 229.32 as any gillnets which fish in 
waters south of the South Carolina/Georgia border with webbing of 5 
inches (12.7 cm) or greater stretched mesh.
    Under the ESA, additional whale conservation measures were required 
for gillnet gear which did not have adequate management restrictions in 
place to reduce the likelihood of whale entanglement. Therefore, 
through the proposed rule, NMFS proposed whale conservation measures 
for the Southeast Atlantic Gillnet Fishery which includes any type of 
gillnet gear for any species (except shark gillnetting effort using 5-
inch (12.7 cm) or greater stretched mesh south of the South Carolina/
Georgia border) in waters south of a line extending due east from the 
North Carolina/South Carolina border and south and east of the fishery 
management council demarcation line between the Atlantic Ocean and the 
Gulf of Mexico (50 CFR 600.105). Through the proposed rule and the pre-
existing requirements for shark gillnetters, NMFS regulated the full 
suite of gillnet users in the Atlantic south of the South Carolina/
Georgia border. Further descriptions in the subject rule to 
differentiate the two fisheries beyond their current LOF definitions 
may inadvertently exclude a part of the gillnet fishery population 
which this regulation is attempting to address. Therefore, NMFS does 
not believe that further gear descriptions are necessary. NMFS will 
take this recommendation into advisement during future LOF actions to 
ensure that fishery descriptions are clear.

Classification

    This final rule does not include a collection-of-information 
requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce 
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration that this final rule, if adopted, would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The basis for this certification follows:
    The MMPA provides the statutory basis for the rule. The final rule 
would prohibit the use of straight set gillnets in the southeast U.S. 
restricted area at night from November 15 through March 31, annually, 
unless the fishing activity was exempted under 50 CFR 
229.32(f)(3)(iii), which pertains to fishing for sharks with strikenet 
gear. Strikenet gear is exempt if no nets are set at night or when 
visibility is less than 400 yards (460m), each set is made under the 
observation of a spotter plane, if a right, humpback, fin or minke 
whale

[[Page 59476]]

moves within 3 nautical miles o the set gear, the gear is removed 
immediately from the water.
    The objective of this final rule is to eliminate serious injuries 
or mortalities of right whales attributable to entanglements with 
fishing gear and takes into account the time and area during which 
right whale calves are born.
    Available data do not demonstrate that the fishing behavior or 
methodology restricted by this final rule (straight set gillnets at 
night) is utilized to a great extent in the restricted area. Data on 
average trip times, landings, soak times, and vessel characteristics 
indicate that the fishery is primarily prosecuted as a day fishery 
generating less than $167 per year of gross revenues. Taking into 
account the number of vessels participating in the straight set gillnet 
fishery, vessels average less than $4 income annually, indicating that 
the fishery is likely of lowly economic profitability to the fleet as a 
whole. Virtually all recorded gillnet harvests from this area and 
season are attributed to runaround gillnets and not straight set 
gillnets. Whether spread over multiple participants or attributed to a 
single vessel, the economic impacts associated with this rule will not 
significantly reduce profits for a substantial number of small 
entities. Therefore, any direct economic impacts on the fishery will be 
minimal since the fishery does not substantially operate in the manner 
being restricted.
    Generally, a fish-harvesting business is considered a small 
business if it is independently owned and operated, not dominant in its 
field of operation, and has annual receipts not in excess of $3.5 
million. One hundred and two unique entities (vessels or persons) have 
reported landings in this fishery over the 1997-2000 fishing seasons. 
Total dockside value of commercial harvests by these entities from all 
fishing activities and all gears averaged from $16,000 to $24,000 per 
year over this period. The maximum gross revenues were less than 
$300,000. All of these entities are considered small business entities. 
Thus, business operations in this fishery consist solely of small 
business entities.
    The determination of significant economic impact can be ascertained 
by examining two criteria: Disproportionality and profitability. The 
disproportionality question is: Do the regulations place a substantial 
number of small entities at a significant competitive disadvantage to 
large entities? All business entities participating in the area of the 
South Atlantic Gillnet Fishery are considered small business entities. 
Thus, the issue of disproportionality does not arise in the present 
case.
    The profitability question is: Do the regulations significantly 
reduce profit for a substantial number of small entities? The 
predominant harvest methodology in this fishery is runaround (i.e., 
strike) gillnets and day trips and not the methodology restricted by 
this document. Less than $500, or $167 per year, of reported landings 
from all participants over the 1997-2000 fishing seasons (1997-98, 
1998-99, 1999-2000) is potentially attributable to straight set 
gillnets. On this basis, the Assistant General Counsel for Legislation 
and Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this 
final rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. NMFS received only one public 
comment relating to the economic impacts of this final rule. NMFS 
considered this comment before it approved this final rule, and NMFS 
characterized and responded to it in the ``Comments and Responses'' 
section of the preamble to this final rule, as comment/response number 
6. No changes to this final rule were made as a result of the comment 
received. NMFS believes the economic analysis adequately characterized 
the impact of the proposed rule on affected fisheries and the RFA 
analysis and copies of the RIR are available (see ADDRESSES).
    This final rule has been determined not to be significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    NMFS requested consultation under section 7 of the ESA regarding 
the proposed action. As described in the proposed rule, the proposed 
action was developed to address a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative 
(RPA) identified in four Biological Opinions (BOs) on the multispecies, 
spiny dogfish, monkfish, and lobster fisheries on June 14, 2001. The 
objective of the RPA is to eliminate mortality and serious injuries of 
right whales, eliminate serious and prolonged right whale 
entanglements, and significantly reduce the total number of right whale 
entanglements. On February 7, 2002, NMFS concluded that since the 
proposed action would implement an RPA under existing BOs, the action 
did not warrant further analysis under the ESA at that time. NMFS 
stated that the issuance of the proposed action does not change the 
basis for the finding of the June 14, 2001, BOs; instead, the rule 
directly addresses the gear restriction RPA from those findings.
    NMFS requested an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) review of the 
proposed action and received a determination that the proposed gillnet 
restrictions would not adversely affect EFH of species managed by the 
NMFS or the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council.
    NMFS has determined that the final action is consistent to the 
maximum extent practicable with the coastal zone management programs of 
those affected Atlantic coastal states that have approved coastal zone 
management programs: Georgia and Florida. The proposed rule, RIR, RFA 
analysis, and EA were submitted to the responsible state agencies for 
their review under section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act. 
Florida concurred that the proposed action is consistent to the maximum 
extent practicable with their applicable CZMA regulations.
    The Georgia Coastal Management Program (GCMP) objected to NMFS' 
determination that the amendment to the ALWTRP is consistent to the 
maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the GCMP, 
pursuant to 15 CFR part 930, subpart C. NMFS is required by law to rely 
on the best scientific information available to develop fishery 
management actions. NMFS believes a complete gillnet prohibition, as 
suggested by Georgia, would be in direct conflict with several of NMFS' 
statutory obligations because there is not sufficient documented 
evidence at this time to justify the gillnet prohibition. Therefore, 
current statutory obligations restrict NMFS' ability to be fully 
consistent with the GCMP, and the proposed action remains the legally 
appropriate decision at this time.
    NMFS shares Georgia's concern regarding bycatch and bycatch 
mortality rates in gillnet fisheries and continues to dedicate 
resources to evaluate the degree to which gillnet fisheries affect 
protected species. NMFS encourages Georgia and all coastal states to 
submit data collected through state activities, and NMFS will continue 
to work with Georgia to address the issues with gillnet fisheries in 
Federal waters off the coasts of Georgia and Florida.
    NMFS prepared a draft EA for the proposed action, as described in 
the proposed rule. NMFS did not receive any comments on the EA during 
the public comment period. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 
NOAA has determined, based on an EA prepared under the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), that implementation of these 
regulations would not have a significant impact on the human 
environment. As a result of this determination, an environmental impact

[[Page 59477]]

statement is not required. A copy of the final EA prepared for this 
rule is available upon request (see ADDRESSES).

Federalism Impact Statement

    This final rule contains policies with federalism implications that 
were sufficient to warrant preparation of a federalism summary impact 
statement under Executive Order 13132. Accordingly, the Assistant 
Secretary for Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs provided notice 
of the proposed action to the appropriate officials of the affected 
state and local governments through a letter mailed to those officials 
in April 2002. Specifically, the letter was sent to the state of 
Florida and Georgia. The letter described NMFS' position supporting the 
need to issue the regulation, specifically the need to reduce the risk 
of entanglement of large whales, including right whales. The state and 
local officials did not raise any concerns in direct response to the 
April 2002 letter.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 229

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Fisheries, and Marine mammals.

    Dated: September 17, 2002.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory programs, national marine 
Fisheries Services.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the National Marine 
Fisheries Service amends 50 CFR part 229 as follows:

PART 229--AUTHORIZATION FOR COMMERCIAL FISHERIES UNDER THE MARINE 
MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT OF 1972

    1. The authority citation for part 229 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1371 et seq.
    1. In Sec.  229.3, paragraph (k) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  229.3  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (k) It is prohibited to fish with gillnet gear in the areas and for 
the times specified in Sec.  229.32(f)(1) through (f)(4), unless the 
gear or the person with gillnet gear complies with the gear marking 
requirements specified in Sec.  229.32(f)(2), the requirements for 
observer coverage as specified in Sec.  229.32(f)(3), and the closures, 
requirements, and other restrictions as specified in Sec.  
229.32(f)(4).
* * * * *

    4. In Sec.  229.32, the heading of paragraph (f) and paragraph 
(f)(3) are revised; and paragraph (f)(4) is added to read as follows:


Sec.  229.32  Atlantic large whale take reduction plan regulations.

* * * * *
    (f) Restrictions applicable to the southeast U.S. restricted area 
and the southeast U.S. observer area. * * *
* * * * *
    (3) Observer requirement. No person may fish with shark gillnet 
gear in the southeast U.S. observer area from November 15 through March 
31 of the following year unless the operator of the vessel calls the SE 
Regional Office in St. Petersburg, FL not less than 48 hours prior to 
departing on any fishing trip in order to arrange for observer 
coverage. If the Regional Office requests that an observer be taken on 
board a vessel during a fishing trip at any time from November 15 
through March 31 of the following year, no person may fish with shark 
gillnet gear aboard that vessel in the southeast U.S. observer area 
unless an observer is on board that vessel during the trip.
    (4) Restricted period, closure and restrictions, and exemption. (i) 
Restricted period. The restricted period for the southeast U.S. 
restricted area is from November 15 through March 31 of the following 
year, unless the Assistant Administrator revises this restricted period 
in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section.
    (ii) Closure for shark gillnet gear. Except as provided under 
paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section, no person may fish with shark 
gillnet gear in the southeast U.S. restricted area during the 
restricted period.
    (iii) Restrictions for straight sets. Except as provided for shark 
gillnet gear under paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section, no person may 
fish with a straight set of gillnet gear at night in the southeast U.S. 
restricted area during the restricted period. A straight set is defined 
as a set in which the gillnet is placed in a line in the water column, 
as opposed to a circular set in which the gillnet is placed to encircle 
an area in the water column.
    (iv) Special provision for strikenets. Fishing for sharks with 
strikenet gear is exempt from the restrictions under paragraphs 
(f)(4)(ii) and (f)(4)(iii) of this section if:
    (A) No nets are set at night or when visibility is less than 500 
yards (460m).
    (B) Each set is made under the observation of a spotter plane.
    (C) No net is set within 3 nautical miles of a right, humpback, fin 
or minke whale.
    (D) If a right, humpback, fin or minke whale moves within 3 
nautical miles of the set gear, the gear is removed immediately from 
the water.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-24155 Filed 9-20-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S