[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 242 (Wednesday, December 17, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70219-70223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-31140]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 222 and 223

[Docket No.031202301-3301-01; I.D. 111403C]
RIN 0648-AR53


Taking of Threatened or Endangered Species Incidental to 
Commercial Fishing Operations

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

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to prohibit shallow longline sets of the type 
normally targeting swordfish on the high seas in the Pacific Ocean east 
of 150[deg] W. long. by vessels that are not already prohibited from 
making such sets under the current regulations for the Fishery 
Management Plan for the Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region 
(WesPac FMP). This action is intended to protect endangered and 
threatened sea turtles from the adverse impacts of shallow longline 
fishing by U.S. longline fishing vessels in the Pacific Ocean and 
operating out of the west coast instead of Hawaii. This rule would 
supplement the regulations proposed to implement the Fishery Management 
Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (FMP) 
that would prohibit shallow longline sets on the high seas in the 
Pacific Ocean west of 150[deg] W. long. by vessels that would be 
managed under that FMP. The FMP is currently under review by NMFS and 
will be approved, disapproved or partially approved in early February 
2004. Together, these two regulations are expected to conserve 
leatherback and loggerhead sea turtles as required under the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA).

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received or transmitted by 
facsimile by 5 p.m., Pacific Standard Time, on January 16, 2004. 
Comments transmitted via e-mail or the Internet will not be accepted.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Rodney R. McInnis, Acting 
Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 
4200, Long Beach, CA 90802, or by fax (562) 980-4027.
    Copies of the FMP, which includes an environmental impact statement 
(EIS) accompanied by a regulatory impact review (RIR) and an initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) are available on the internet at 
http://www.pcouncil.org/hms/hmsfmp.html or may be obtained from Daniel 
Waldeck, Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, 
Suite 200, Portland, Oregon, 97220-1384, [email protected], (503) 
820-2280. This proposed action corresponds to the High Seas Pelagic 
Longline Alternative 3 in the Council EIS, RIR, and IRFA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Price, NMFS, Southwest Region, 
Protected Resources Division, (562) 980-4029.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All species of sea turtles that are known to 
interact with U.S. longline vessels in the Pacific Ocean are listed as 
either endangered or threatened under the ESA. The leatherback 
(Dermochelys coriacea) sea turtle is listed as endangered. The 
loggerhead (Caretta caretta), olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea), and 
green (Chelonia mydas) sea turtles are listed as threatened, except for 
populations of olive ridleys on the Pacific coast of Mexico and green 
turtles in Florida and on the Pacific coast of Mexico, which are listed 
as endangered. Under the ESA and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 
223.205), taking endangered and threatened sea turtles, even 
incidentally, is prohibited, with exceptions identified in 50 CFR 
223.206. The incidental taking of an endangered species of wildlife 
within the United States, U.S. territorial sea, or high seas is 
prohibited by section 9(a)(1)(B) and (C) of the ESA. The incidental 
take of endangered species may be authorized only by an incidental take 
statement issued under

[[Page 70220]]

section 7 of the ESA or an incidental take permit issued under section 
10 of the ESA. The incidental take of threatened species may be 
authorized only by an incidental take statement in a biological opinion 
issued pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, an incidental take permit 
issued pursuant to section 10 of the ESA, or regulations under section 
4(d) of the ESA. Pursuant to section 11(f) of the ESA, the Secretary of 
Commerce is authorized to promulgate regulations to enforce the 
requirements of the ESA.

West Coast-Based Pelagic Longline Fishery

    Since the early 1990s, a number of longline vessels targeting 
swordfish and, possibly, tuna, although no sets have been documented, 
have unloaded their catch and re-provisioned in California ports. 
Participation has declined from a peak of 43 vessels participating in 
the fishery in 2001 and 38 vessels in 2000, to approximately 28 vessels 
in 2002 and an estimated 20-25 vessels in 2003. Almost all of these 
vessels had some history of fishing in the Hawaii-based longline 
fishery. Participants in the West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery 
often fish more than 1,000 nautical miles (1,900 km) offshore and are 
generally prohibited by state regulations from fishing within 200 
nautical miles (370 km) of the West Coast. Longline vessels registered 
in West Coast states are allowed to land longline caught fish into West 
Coast ports provided that fishing takes place outside the 200-mile 
Exclusive Economic Zone. All documented longline fishing by West Coast 
vessels in recent years has been out of California ports.
    NMFS began placing observers aboard West Coast-based pelagic 
longline fishing vessels on a voluntary basis in October 2001 and began 
a mandatory observer program in August 2002 under the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act. From October 2001 through May 2003, 280 sets were 
observed on 13 trips, documenting a total of 27 sea turtle 
interactions, consisting of two leatherback sea turtles, 24 loggerhead 
sea turtles, and one olive ridley sea turtle. All of the observed sea 
turtles were released alive.

High Seas Fishing Compliance Act

    On March 22, 1996, NMFS issued an interim final rule (61 FR 11751) 
to implement the High Seas Fishing Compliance Act of 1995 (HSFCA). The 
purpose of the HSFCA is to license U.S. vessels fishing on the high 
seas and to implement the Agreement to Promote Compliance with 
International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels 
on the High Seas. The West Coast-based pelagic longline vessels are 
permitted under the HSFCA. In May 2001, the Center for Biological 
Diversity and Turtle Island Restoration Network filed a complaint with 
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California 
alleging that NMFS unlawfully failed to conduct an ESA section 7 
consultation on the West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery when 
issuing the HSFCA permits for this fishery. On November 27, 2001, the 
court denied the plaintiffs' motion and ruled in favor of NMFS. In 
response, the plaintiffs appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit 
Court of Appeals in December 2001. On August 21, 2003, the Ninth 
Circuit Court ruled that NMFS is required to engage in consultation 
under section 7 of the ESA regarding the effects on sea turtles and 
other listed species when issuing fishing permits under the HSFCA to 
West Coast-based pelagic longline fishing vessels. Consequently, the 
effects of issuing of HSFCA permits that authorize fishing by West 
Coast-based pelagic longline vessels will be considered during the 
section 7 consultation that is now being conducted. Furthermore, this 
proposed rule, if adopted, would be the vehicle by which NMFS imposes 
conditions and restrictions on the HSFCA permits (16 U.S.C. 5503(d)) 
held by West Coast-based pelagic longline vessels to ensure the fishery 
complies with the ESA.

Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly 
Migratory Species

    On October 31, 2003, the Pacific Fishery Management Council 
(Council) submitted the FMP to NMFS for review. After a public comment 
process, NMFS will approve, disapprove, or partially approve the FMP, 
and then implement those portions that were approved (if any). The FMP 
includes management measures for the West Coast-based pelagic longline 
fishery that would prohibit shallow longline sets of the type normally 
used to target swordfish on the high seas in the Pacific Ocean west of 
150[deg] W. long. by vessels managed under the new FMP. The FMP would 
not prohibit West Coast-based pelagic longline vessels from targeting 
swordfish in waters east of 150[deg] W. long. It should be noted that 
Hawaii-based longline vessels are currently prohibited from targeting 
swordfish in this area, pursuant to regulations under the WesPac FMP. 
Those regulations will be vacated on April 1, 2004, by Court Order. 
NMFS will propose regulations with any necessary restrictions or 
prohibitions for vessels operating under the WesPac FMP. The 
regulations that will be proposed under the WesPac FMP will be subject 
to NEPA review and ESA Section 7 consultation.
    In addition, to conserve sea turtles, the FMP would require West 
Coast-based pelagic longline vessels to have on board and to use dip 
nets, line cutters, and wire or bolt cutters capable of cutting through 
the vessel's hooks to release sea turtles with the least harm possible 
to the sea turtles. NMFS issued a proposed rule to implement the FMP on 
December 10, 2003 (68 FR 68834).

Estimated Sea Turtle Take Levels

    There are two sets of data from which rates of sea turtle 
interactions in the West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery could be 
derived: (1) Data from observers on Hawaii-based longline vessels 
operating in the same areas as the West Coast-based pelagic longline 
vessels; and (2) data from observers on West Coast-based pelagic 
longline vessels. Vessels in the West Coast-based pelagic longline 
fishery fish in the same manner, and frequently in the same area, as 
vessels that had been targeting swordfish in the Hawaii-based longline 
fishery. Because of the strong similarities between these two fisheries 
and the limited amount of observer data available for the West Coast-
based pelagic longline fleet alone, NMFS concluded that using the 
combined observer data from the Hawaii-based and West Coast-based 
longline fleets for fishing east of 150[deg] W. long. is more likely to 
be representative of the sea turtle interaction rates that can be 
expected to occur throughout the West Coast-based pelagic longline 
fishery.
    Using the combined observer data, NMFS developed estimates of sea 
turtle take levels that would result from the West Coast-based pelagic 
longline fishery under different fishery scenarios. Assuming that the 
West Coast-based pelagic longline fleet deploys 1.55 million hooks east 
of 150[deg] W. longitude (the estimated fleet effort in 2002 according 
to the FMP), NMFS estimates the fishery under the FMP would result in 
the annual take of 174 loggerhead and 52 leatherback sea turtles. For 
loggerhead sea turtles, NMFS estimates that 3 may be entangled and no 
hooking or injury will occur, 74 may be hooked externally or entangled 
with line left on the animal, 97 may be hooked in the mouth or ingested 
the hook, and 0 may be released dead. For leatherback sea turtles, NMFS 
estimates that 0 may be entangled and no hooking or injury will occur, 
46 may be hooked externally or entangled with line left on the animal, 
6 may be hooked in the mouth or

[[Page 70221]]

ingested the hook, and 0 may be released dead. Applying the 27 and 42 
percent post-release mortality rates developed by NMFS for sea turtles 
that have been hooked externally or entangled with line left on the 
animal and for sea turtles that have been hooked in the mouth or 
ingested the hook, preliminary estimates indicate that the West Coast-
based pelagic longline fishery under the management measures proposed 
by the Council would result in the annual mortality of 61 loggerhead 
sea turtles and 15 leatherback sea turtles.

Impacts to Loggerhead and Leatherback Sea Turtle Populations

    The estimated takes and mortalities of loggerhead and leatherback 
sea turtles by the West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery under the 
proposed FMP exceed those authorized under the ESA in other Pacific 
fisheries. As an example, the agency's incidental take statement in the 
2002 biological opinion on the western Pacific pelagic fisheries 
authorized takes in the Hawaii-based longline fishery of only 8 
leatherback and 14 loggerhead turtles per year. In contrast, as 
calculated above, at the estimated fishing level of 2002, longline 
fishing for swordfish east of 150 W long. would be expected to result 
in the take of 52 leatherback turtles and 174 loggerhead turtles.
    As required under the ESA, NMFS is now conducting a formal 
consultation under section 7 of the ESA on the Council's FMP in order 
to determine if fishing activities proposed under the FMP are likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of endangered or threatened species 
under NMFS' jurisdiction. Based on the severe decline and lack of 
recovery in loggerhead and leatherback sea turtles populations, and the 
extensive analyses conducted by the agency on existing threats to these 
populations, NMFS is concerned that the take levels expected to occur 
in the West coast-based pelagic longline fishery under the Council's 
FMP might be likely to jeopardize the continued existence of these 
species. If the section 7 consultation on the Council's FMP concludes 
that the action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of 
endangered or threatened sea turtle species, then NMFS will be unable 
to authorize the expected amount of incidental take by the West Coast-
based pelagic longline fishery under the Council's FMP.
    Until NMFS completes a full analysis of the impacts of the 
Council's FMP on endangered or threatened sea turtles, NMFS cannot 
determine what measures will be included in the final regulations of 
this fishery in order to conserve loggerhead and leatherback sea 
turtles. The consultation could conclude that the Council's FMP is not 
likely to jeopardize sea turtle populations. On the other hand, the 
consultation could conclude that the Council's FMP is likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of sea turtle populations and 
include a reasonable and prudent alternative (RPA) that would mitigate 
sea turtle takes to avoid the likelihood of jeopardy. Mitigation 
measures may depend on the severity of the impact to sea turtle 
populations and could include effort reduction or a complete 
prohibition of swordfish fishing. The FMP contains framework procedures 
by which adjustments in conservation and management measures may be 
made through regulatory amendments if available information and 
conditions warrant it, and the RPA could provide a basis for such 
action. However, promulgation of regulations to implement the RPA could 
take several months to complete and leave fishers in a very difficult 
situation in the interim because they would lack an exemption from the 
take prohibition specified in section 9 of the ESA.
    Given that NMFS anticipates an annual mortality of 61 loggerhead 
sea turtles and 15 leatherback sea turtles as a result of the West 
Coast-based pelagic fishery, NMFS is proposing to implement 
restrictions in the West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery in waters 
east of 150[deg] W. long. to conserve leatherback and loggerhead sea 
turtles as required under the ESA. Under this rule, West Coast-based 
pelagic longline vessels would be prohibited from making shallow 
longline sets on the high seas in the Pacific Ocean east of 150[deg] W. 
long. The prohibition of shallow longline sets west of 150[deg] W. 
long. proposed under the FMP would also apply, if the FMP is approved 
and implemented by NMFS. The regulatory text of this proposed rule 
might be revised, as necessary, to comport with the RPA , if any, of 
the section 7 consultation on the FMP. As a result, NMFS is requesting 
comments on this rulemaking and any alternative management regime to 
conserve sea turtles.
    There are several other factors that may ultimately affect the 
management of the West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery. As noted, 
the FMP contains framework procedures by which adjustments in 
conservation and management measures may be made through regulatory 
amendments if warranted by available information and conditions. 
Further, the FMP recognizes a potential for exempted fishing permits 
that allow testing of alternative gear and/or techniques that might 
demonstrate that longline fishing can be conducted in a manner that 
will not adversely affect protected species or that will result in 
lower levels of bycatch. NMFS is conducting research in the Atlantic 
Ocean into gear and techniques that might allow longline fishing for 
swordfish or other species with less risk to sea turtles. Preliminary 
results from this research indicate that the use of 18/0 circle hooks 
with no offset and squid bait may reduce loggerhead and leatherback sea 
turtle capture rates by more than 80 and 50 percent, respectively. The 
use of 18/0 circle hooks with a 10 percent offset and mackerel type 
bait may reduce loggerhead and leatherback sea turtle capture rates by 
more than 90 and 65 percent, respectively. Additional treatments are 
being tested using 20/0 circle hooks and mackerel which also show 
promise with possible significant reductions in sea turtle catch rates. 
Large circle hooks have also been shown to reduce the rate of swallowed 
hooks which may decrease post-hooking mortality resulting from internal 
injuries. The best treatments for reducing the capture of loggerhead 
and leatherback sea turtles cannot be identified until the researchers 
analyze the data and their significance. However, based on these 
promising results, NMFS is considering allowing the use of circle hooks 
and mackerel type bait to target swordfish and is soliciting public 
comment on this alternative.
    A similar experiment is planned for the central Pacific Ocean, 
pending completion of an Environmental Impact Statement. The results of 
these experiments will be provided to the Council. NMFS anticipates 
that the Council will review information as it is generated to consider 
possible changes in longline fishing regulations and may propose 
changes. NMFS will consider any such proposals, which could result in 
lessening the burden to fishermen while maintaining adequate protection 
of sea turtles under these regulations. NMFS will fully support the 
Council in examination and selection of appropriate protective 
measures. However, the need for protection of sea turtles in the near 
term warrants the use of Secretarial authority under the ESA (as well 
as under the HSFCA, 16 U.S.C. 5503(d)) to promulgate regulations in 
this fishery to ensure the fishery complies with the ESA.

[[Page 70222]]

Classification

    NMFS has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the 
ESA and other applicable laws.
    The impacts of this proposed action and alternatives are evaluated 
in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act as the High 
Seas Pelagic Longline Alternative 3 in the EIS prepared by the Council 
(see ADDRESSES).
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    This proposed rule does not contain collection-of-information 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
    The Council prepared a combined RIR/IRFA that describes the 
economic impacts of the Council's FMP, which includes an analysis of 
this proposed action as High Seas Pelagic Longline Alternative 3. The 
RIR/IRFA is available from the Council (see ADDRESSES). A summary of 
the RIR/IRFA follows:
    The SUMMARY and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION sections of this proposed 
rule provide a description of the action, why it is being considered, 
and the legal basis for this action. That information is not repeated 
here.
    A fish-harvesting business is considered a ``small'' business by 
the Small Business Administration (SBA) if it has annual receipts not 
in excess of $3.5 million. For related fish-processing businesses, a 
small business is one that employs 500 or fewer persons. For marinas 
and charter/party boats, a small business is one with annual receipts 
not in excess of $5.0 million.
    This regulation imposes controls on the fleet of approximately 22-
25 longline vessels that fish principally out of California ports for 
swordfish and associated species. A total of 28 vessels participated in 
the West-coast-based pelagic longline fishery during 2002, down from a 
peak of 43 vessels in 2001 and from 38 vessels in 2000. All of these 
vessels would be considered small businesses under the SBA standards. 
Therefore, there would be no financial impacts resulting from 
disproportionality between small and large vessels under the proposed 
action. For most of the longline vessels involved, swordfish caught by 
longline gear makes up more than half the total revenue from fish 
sales. Table 1 presents total ex-vessel revenue and dependence on 
swordfish landings for the 38 West coast-based vessels with high seas 
pelagic longline swordfish landings in 2001, broken down by the number 
of vessels with varying percent dependence on swordfish. NMFS believes 
these data are representative of 2002 as well.

     Table 1: Total ex-vessel revenue and dependence on swordfish for 38 West-coast-based vessels with high seas pelagic longline landings in 2001.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                       Average Percent
                                                             Dependence on High Seas Longline Caught     Average Total Ex-vessel     Longline Swordfish
                     Number of Vessels                      Swordfish (category of swordfish revenue/       Revenue ($/vessel)       (swordfish revenue/
                                                                          total revenue)                                               total revenue)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             4                                                                  < 50%                     $228,951                32.57%
                             3                                                               50 - 70%                     $170,067                60.99%
                             3                                                    70 - 80%                     $222,089                76.66%
                             4                                                    80 - 90%                     $258,335                86.77%
                            13                                                    90 - 95%                     $182,211                93.26%
                            11                                                         95%                     $219,885                97.57%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The impacts of alternatives to this proposed action were evaluated 
in the Council's RIR/IRFA. The Council considered three alternatives 
for managing the high seas pelagic longline fishery. Under Alternative 
1 (Status Quo), the FMP would not impose regulations on this fishery. 
The Council assumes that in the short-run, the fishery would continue 
to operate as it currently does, earning average annual profits of $6.7 
million. However, in the long-run, the Council expected that 
regulations would be established under other authorities , such that 
over time the fishery would disappear, and long-run profits would 
become zero as the fishery was phased out.
    Alternative 2 (Council Proposed Action) would maintain the fishery, 
allowing fishermen to continue targeting swordfish east of 150[deg] W. 
long., but impose some additional costs on longliners targeting 
swordfish on the high seas. Short-run average annual profits would 
remain at $6.7 million, minus the cost of adopting turtle and sea bird 
mitigation measures, accommodating observers, and using monitoring 
equipment. NMFS is developing guidelines for the design and performance 
standards of equipment required for the handling of incidentally caught 
sea turtles. The required tools can be purchased, for an estimated 
maximum cost of $2,000 per vessel, but vessel owners may also be able 
use the guidelines to fabricate the equipment with lower cost 
materials. Vessel owners do not pay an observer's salary, but do bear 
costs associated with providing room and board for the observer. 
Additionally, carrying an observer may increase the cost of insurance 
that the vessel carries. Vessel monitoring equipment costs 
approximately $2,000 to purchase and $500 to install, and would require 
annual maintenance estimated to cost approximately 20 percent of the 
purchase price per year. However, despite the equipment costs, the 
fishery would be able to land swordfish, and so over 25 years, the 
present value of long-run profits relative to the status quo would 
range between $78 and $105 million, using 7 percent and 4 percent 
discount rates, respectively.
    Alternative 3, which is the same as this proposed action, would 
prohibit fishermen from targeting swordfish east of 150[deg] W. long. 
Swordfish are the target species of this fishery. This would 
effectively eliminate all but incidental swordfish landings and the 
short- and long-run profits currently associated with landing swordfish 
($6.7 million, and $78 million to $105 million, respectively), at least 
until alternative fishing opportunities are identified. This loss 
assumes that all vessels in this fishery cease fishing, although 
longline fishing targeting tuna out of West Coast ports or Hawaii may 
be an alternative. However, current participants in the fishery 
indicate that without being able to target swordfish, the high seas 
longline fishery originating from West Coast ports would cease to 
exist.
    Although no fishery interactions with the endangered short-tailed 
albatrosses (Phoebastria albatrus) have been recorded to date, on 
September 22, 2003, NMFS initiated section 7 consultation under the ESA 
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for this species. On September 
24, 2003, formal

[[Page 70223]]

consultation with NMFS Protected Resources under the Endangered Species 
Act was initiated on the fisheries managed under the FMP, including the 
fisheries now permitted under the HSFCA.
    Based on the conclusions of the consultation, NMFS will determine 
if fishing activities under the FMP are likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of endangered or threatened species under NMFS' 
jurisdiction. The results of this consultation will determine whether 
NMFS needs to implement the regulations outlined in this proposed rule 
in order to meet the requirements of the ESA. Based on analyses 
conducted during previous biological opinions, NMFS is concerned that 
the amount of take estimated to occur if fishing were managed under the 
Council's FMP might be likely to jeopardize the continued existence of 
leatherback and loggerhead sea turtles. Therefore, NMFS is proposing to 
implement a prohibition on shallow sets by West Coast-based pelagic 
longline vessels that has proven effective at reducing sea turtle 
encounters in the Hawaii-based pelagic longline fishery and the 
Atlantic pelagic longline fishery.
    In keeping with the intent of Executive Order 13132 to provide 
continuing and meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual state and 
Federal interest, NMFS is conferring with the States of California, 
Oregon, and Washington regarding this proposed rule. NMFS intends to 
continue engaging in informal and formal contacts with these States 
during the implementation of this proposed rule and review of the FMP.

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 222
    Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened 
species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and record keeping requirements, 
Transportation.
50 CFR Part 223
    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Marine 
mammals, Transportation.

    Dated: December 11, 2003.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 222 and 223 
are proposed to be amended to read as follows:

PART 222--GENERAL ENDANGERED AND THREATENED MARINE SPECIES

    1. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 742a et seq.; 31 
U.S.C. 9701; Sec.  222.403 also issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
    2. In Sec.  222.102, the following definitions are added 
alphabetically, to read as follows:


Sec.  222.102  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Basket-style longline gear means a type of longline gear that is 
divided into units called baskets, each consisting of a segment of main 
line to which 10 or more branch lines with hooks are spliced. The 
mainline and all branch lines are made of multiple braided strands of 
cotton or of nylon or other synthetic fibers impregnated with tar or 
other heavy coatings that cause the lines to sink rapidly in seawater.
* * * * *
    Pelagic longline gear means longline gear consisting of a main line 
that is suspended horizontally in the water column and not stationary 
or anchored, and from which dropper lines with hooks (gangions) are 
attached.
* * * * *

PART 223--THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES

    3. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543; subpart B, Sec.  223.12 also 
issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for Sec.  
223.206(d)(9)
    4. In Sec.  223.206, a new paragraph (d)(9) is added to read as 
follows:


Sec.  223.206  Exceptions to prohibitions relating to sea turtles.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (9) Restrictions applicable to Pacific pelagic longline vessels. In 
addition to the general prohibitions specified in Sec.  600.725 of 
Chapter VI, it is unlawful for any person who is not operating under a 
western Pacific longline permit under Sec.  660.21 to do any of the 
following:
    (i) Direct fishing effort toward the harvest of swordfish (Xiphias 
gladius) using longline gear deployed on the high seas of the Pacific 
Ocean north of the equator (0[deg] lat.).
    (ii) Possess a light stick on board a longline vessel when fishing 
on the high seas of the Pacific Ocean north of the equator.
    (iii) Possess a light stick on board a longline vessel on the high 
seas of the Pacific Ocean north of the equator. A light stick as used 
in this paragraph is any type of light emitting device, including any 
flourescent glow bead, chemical, or electrically powered light that is 
affixed underwater to the longline gear.
    (iv) Possess more than 10 swordfish on board a longline vessel from 
a fishing trip where any part of the trip included fishing in the 
Pacific Ocean north of the equator (0[deg] lat.).
    (v) An operator of a longline vessel subject to this section may 
land or possess no more than 10 swordfish from a fishing trip where any 
part of the trip included fishing east of 150[deg] W. long. and north 
of the equator (0[deg] N. lat.).
    (vi) Fail to employ basket-style longline gear such that the 
mainline is deployed slack when fishing on the high seas of the Pacific 
Ocean north of the equator.
    (vii) When a conventional monofilament longline is deployed by a 
vessel subject to this section, no fewer than 15 branch lines may be 
set between any two floats. Vessel operators using basket-style 
longline gear must set a minimum of 10 branch lines between any 2 
floats when fishing in waters north of the equator.
    (viii) Longline gear deployed by a vessel subject to this section 
must be deployed such that the deepest point of the main longline 
between any two floats, i.e., the deepest point in each sag of the main 
line, is at a depth greater than 100 m (328.1 ft or 54.6 fm) below the 
sea surface.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-31140 Filed 12-16-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S