[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 222 (Monday, November 17, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67829-67834]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27225]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 0808041043-81412-01]
RIN 0648-AX16


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel, 
Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Specifications and Management Measures

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

ACTION: Proposed rule, request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes 2009 specifications and management measures for 
Atlantic mackerel, squid, and butterfish (MSB). This action proposes to 
maintain quotas for Atlantic mackerel (mackerel), Illex squid (Illex), 
and butterfish at the same levels as 2008, while increasing the quota 
for Loligo squid (Loligo). Additionally, this action proposes to 
increase the incidental possession limit for mackerel and requests 
public comment concerning the possibility of an inseason adjustment to 
increase the mackerel quota, if landings approach proposed harvest 
limits. These proposed specifications and management measures promote 
the utilization and conservation of the MSB resource.

DATES: Public comments must be received no later than 5 p.m., eastern 
standard time, on December 17, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting documents used by the Mid-Atlantic 
Fishery Management Council (Council), including the Environmental 
Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are available from: Daniel Furlong, 
Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115, 
Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, DE 19904-6790. The EA/
RIR/IRFA is accessible via the Internet at http://www.nero.nmfs.gov.
    You may submit comments, identified by 0648-AX16, by any one of the 
following methods:
     Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking portal http://www.regulations.gov;
     Fax: (978) 281-9135, Attn: Carrie Nordeen;
     Mail to NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn 
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope 
``Comments on 2009 MSB Specifications.''
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without 
change. All Personal Identifying Information (e.g., name, address) 
voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do 
not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or 
protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments 
to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, 
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF formats only.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Nordeen, Fishery Policy 
Analyst, 978-281-9272, fax 978-281-9135.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Regulations implementing the Fishery Management Plan for the 
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries (FMP) appear at 50 
CFR part 648, subpart B. Regulations governing foreign fishing appear 
at 50 CFR part 600, subpart F. These regulations at Sec.  648.21 and 
600.516(c), require that NMFS, based on the maximum optimum yield (Max 
OY) of each fishery as established by the regulations, annually publish 
a proposed rule specifying the amounts of the initial optimum yield 
(IOY), allowable biological catch (ABC), domestic annual harvest (DAH), 
and domestic annual processing (DAP), as well as, where applicable, the 
amounts for total allowable level of foreign fishing (TALFF) and joint 
venture processing (JVP) for the affected species managed under the 
FMP. In addition, these regulations allow specifications to be 
specified for up to 3 years, subject to annual review. The regulations 
found in Sec.  648.21 also specify that IOY for squid is equal to the 
combination of research quota (RQ) and DAH, with no TALFF specified for 
squid. For butterfish, the regulations specify that a butterfish 
bycatch TALFF will be specified only if TALFF is specified for 
mackerel.
    At its June 10-12, 2008, meeting in Atlantic City, NJ, the Mid-
Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) recommended 2009 MSB 
specifications. The recommended specifications for mackerel, Illex, and 
butterfish are the same as those implemented in 2008. For Loligo, the 
Council recommended increasing the Max OY, ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP based 
on updated biological reference points implemented in Amendment 9 to 
the FMP and based on the most recent stock assessment. The Council also 
recommended increasing the incidental possession limit for mackerel 
during summer months to reduce the potential for the regulatory 
discarding of mackerel by the Atlantic herring fleet. With the 
exception of the incidental possession limit for mackerel, all other 
management measures (e.g., fishery closure thresholds, possession 
limits, gear requirements) are the same as those implemented in 2008.

Research Quota

    Framework Adjustment 1 to the FMP established the Mid-Atlantic 
Research Set-Aside (RSA) Program, which allows research projects to be 
funded through the sale of fish that has been set-aside from the total 
annual quota. The RQ may vary between 0 and 3 percent of the overall 
quota for each species. The Council has recommended that 3 percent of 
the 2009 Loligo, Illex, butterfish, and mackerel quotas be set aside to 
fund projects selected under the 2009 Mid-Atlantic RSA Program.
    NMFS solicited research proposals under the 2009 Mid-Atlantic RSA 
Program through the Federal Register (73 FR 7528, February 8, 2008). 
The deadline for submission was March 24, 2008. On July 5, 2008, NMFS 
convened a Review Panel to review the comments submitted by technical 
reviewers. At this time, the project selection and award process for 
the 2009 Mid-Atlantic RSA Program has not concluded. Based on 
discussions between NMFS staff, technical review comments, and Review 
Panel comments, projects requesting Loligo RQ will be forwarded to the 
NOAA Grants Office for award. If any portion of the RQ is not awarded, 
NMFS will return any un-awarded RQ to the commercial fishery either 
through the final 2009 MSB specification rulemaking process or through 
the publication of a separate notice in the

[[Page 67830]]

Federal Register notifying the public of a quota adjustment.
    Vessels harvesting RQ in support of approved research projects 
would be issued exempted fishing permits (EFP) authorizing them to 
exceed Federal possession limits and to fish during Federal quota 
closures. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that interested parties be provided an 
opportunity to comment on all proposed EFPs. These exemptions are 
necessary to allow project investigators to recover research expenses, 
as well as adequately compensate fishing industry participants 
harvesting RQ. Vessels harvesting RQ would operate within all other 
regulations that govern the commercial fishery, unless otherwise 
exempted through a separate EFP.

2009 Proposed Specifications and Management Measures

   Table 1. Proposed Specifications, in Metric Tons (mt), for Atlantic
         Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish for 2009 Fishing Year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Specifications           Loligo    Illex    Mackerel  Butterfish
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max OY                            32,000   24,000        N/A     12,175
ABC                               19,000   24,000    156,000      1,500
IOY                            13,300\1\   24,000  115,000\2        500
                                                           \
DAH                               13,300   24,000  115,000\3        500
                                                           \
DAP                               13,300   24,000    100,000        500
JVP                                    0        0          0          0
TALFF                                  0        0          0          0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes 5,700 mt (3 percent of the IOY) for RQ.
\2\ IOY may be increased during the year, but the total ABC will not
  exceed 156,000 mt.
\3\ Includes a 15,000 mt catch of Atlantic mackerel by the recreational
  fishery.

Atlantic Mackerel

    The status of the Atlantic mackerel stock was most recently 
assessed at the 42nd Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC) in late 
2005. SARC 42 concluded that the mackerel stock is not overfished and 
overfishing is not occurring. According to the FMP, mackerel ABC must 
be calculated using the formula ABC = T -- C, where C is the estimated 
catch of mackerel in Canadian waters for the upcoming fishing year and 
T is the yield associated with a fishing mortality rate that is equal 
to the target fishing mortality rate (F). Based on projections from 
SARC 42, the yield associated with the target F of 0.12 in 2008 is 
211,000 mt. SARC 42 did not project yields for 2009, but the yield 
projections from 2008 will be used as a proxy until new projections are 
calculated in the next mackerel stock assessment, currently scheduled 
for 2009. Canadian catch of mackerel has been increasing in recent 
years; therefore, the estimate of Canadian catch for 2009 has been 
increased from the 2007 estimate of 52,000 mt to 55,000 mt. Thus, 
211,000 mt minus 55,000 mt results in a proposed 2009 mackerel ABC of 
156,000 mt.
    This action proposes a mackerel IOY of 115,000 mt. The Council 
believes that this level of harvest would provide the greatest overall 
benefit to the Nation with respect to food production and recreational 
opportunities, and would allow for an increase in domestic landings. In 
recent years, domestic mackerel landings have been increasing due to 
major investments in the domestic mackerel processing sector. Mackerel 
landings in 2003 totaled 35,071 mt, while landings for 2006 totaled 
58,279 mt. The Council concluded, based on industry testimony, that 
U.S. vessels will continue to increase their landings and that 
shoreside processing capacity has increased to the point that it can 
process all of the DAH. Industry has indicated that the relatively low 
landings in 2007 (26,429 mt) as compared to 2006 were because mackerel 
were farther offshore than in recent years and thus less available to 
the fishery. If mackerel are available to the fishery in 2009, industry 
expects to land the entire IOY. The proposed 115,000-mt IOY is 
consistent with mackerel regulations at Sec.  648.21(b)(2)(ii), which 
state that IOY is a modification of ABC, based on social and economic 
factors, and must be less than or equal to ABC.
    The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides that the specification of TALFF, 
if any, shall be that portion of the optimum yield (OY) of a fishery 
that will not be harvested by vessels of the United States. TALFF would 
allow foreign vessels to harvest U.S. fish and sell their product on 
the world market, in direct competition with the U.S. industry efforts 
to expand exports. The Council expressed its concern, supported by 
industry testimony, that an allocation of TALFF would threaten the 
expansion of the domestic industry. The Council noted that this would 
prevent the U.S. industry from taking advantage of declines in the 
European production of Atlantic mackerel that have resulted in an 
increase in world demand for U.S. fish. The only economic benefit 
associated with a TALFF is the foreign fishing fees it generates. On 
the other hand, there are economic benefits associated with the 
development of the domestic mackerel fishery. Increased mackerel 
production generates jobs both for plant workers and other support 
industries. More jobs generate additional sources of income for 
residents of coastal communities and generally enhance the social 
fabric of these communities.
    For these reasons, and consistent with the Council's 
recommendation, NMFS proposes to specify IOY at a level that can be 
fully harvested by the domestic fleet, thereby precluding the 
specification of a TALFF, in order to assist the expansion of the U.S. 
mackerel industry. This would yield positive social and economic 
benefits to both U.S. harvesters and processors. Given the trends in 
landings, and the industry's testimony that it has experienced 
significant growth, NMFS concurs that it is reasonable to assume that, 
in 2009, the commercial fishery has the ability to harvest 100,000 mt 
of mackerel. Thus DAH would be 115,000 mt, which is the commercial 
harvest plus the 15,000 mt allocated for the recreational fishery. 
Because IOY = DAH, this specification is consistent with the Council's 
recommendation that the level of IOY should not provide for a TALFF.
    NMFS proposes to maintain JVP at zero (the most recent allocation 
was 5,000 mt of JVP in 2004), consistent with the Council's 
recommendation. In previous years, the Council recommended a JVP 
greater than zero because it believed U.S. processors lacked the 
ability to process the total

[[Page 67831]]

amount of mackerel that U.S. harvesters could land. However, for the 
past 5 years, the Council has recommended zero JVP because the surplus 
between DAH and DAP has been declining as U.S. shoreside processing 
capacity for mackerel has expanded. The Council received testimony from 
processors and harvesters that the shoreside processing sector of this 
industry has continued to expand since 2002-2003. Subsequent industry 
testimony estimated current processing capacity at 2,500 mt per day. 
The Council also heard from the industry that the availability (i.e., 
size, distribution, and abundance) of mackerel to the fishery, rather 
than processing capacity, has curtailed catch in recent years. Based on 
this information, the Council concluded that processing capacity is no 
longer a limiting factor relative to domestic production of mackerel. 
Furthermore, the Council concluded that the U.S. mackerel processing 
sector has the potential to process the DAH, so JVP would be specified 
at zero.

Mackerel Incidental Possession Limit

    Regulations at Sec.  648.25(a) specify that, during closures of the 
directed mackerel fishery, the incidental possession limit for mackerel 
is 20,000 lb (9.08 mt). At the Council's June 2008 meeting, the 
industry requested increasing the incidental mackerel possession limit 
to minimize the potential for regulatory discard of mackerel by the 
Atlantic herring fleet. Mackerel and Atlantic herring are known to co-
occur in the Gulf of Maine during summer months. To minimize the 
potential for the regulatory discarding of mackerel by the Atlantic 
herring fleet during a closure of the directed mackerel fishery, the 
industry requested that the mackerel incidental possession limit be 
increased during summer months. Industry identified a 50,000-lb (22.7-
mt) incidental mackerel possession limit, to be effective after June 1, 
as an appropriate limit to minimize the potential for regulatory 
discarding by the Atlantic herring fleet in the Gulf of Maine, without 
creating directed fishing for mackerel during a closure of the mackerel 
fishery. When considering this incidental possession limit increase, 
the Council discussed that, relative to the quota, few mackerel are 
landed after June 1, because they move offshore and are largely 
unavailable to U.S. pelagic fishing fleets. The Council also recognized 
that this measure was not anticipated to result in a quota overage 
because it was unlikely that the buffer between the threshold at which 
the directed mackerel fishery closes (103,500 mt) and the IOY (115,000 
mt) would be landed between June 1 and December 31.
    After considering these factors, NMFS proposes that the mackerel 
incidental possession limit be increased from a 20,000-lb (9.08-mt) 
incidental possession limit to a 20,000-lb (9.08-mt) limit if the 
directed mackerel fishery closes prior to June 1, and a 50,000-lb 
(22.7-mt) limit if the directed mackerel fishery closes on or after 
June 1. This proposed incidental possession limit is consistent with 
the Council's recommendation.

Inseason Adjustment of the Mackerel IOY

    Regulations at Sec.  648.21(e) provide that specifications may be 
adjusted inseason during the fishing year by the NMFS Northeast 
Regional Administrator (Regional Administrator), in consultation with 
the Council, by publishing a notice in the Federal Register and 
providing a 30-day public comment period. At the June 2008 Council 
meeting, in response to recent growth in the domestic harvesting and 
processing sectors of the mackerel fishery, both the mackerel industry 
and the Council voiced interest in increasing the 2009 mackerel IOY if 
landings approach 115,000 mt during the most active part of the fishing 
year (January-April). However, the mackerel fishing season is short, 
and it would be difficult to implement a separate inseason action 
during the fishing season. To facilitate a timely inseason adjustment 
to the mackerel IOY, if necessary, this action proposes and seeks 
comment on such an inseason adjustment. In 2009, as in 2008, NMFS's 
Northeast Fishery Statistic Office will summarize mackerel landings 
from dealer reports on a weekly basis and post this information on the 
Northeast Regional Office website (http://www.nero.noaa.gov/). NMFS 
staff will closely monitor these landings and industry trends to 
determine if an inseason adjustment is necessary. If, using landings 
projections and all other available information, the Regional 
Administrator determines that 70 percent of the Atlantic mackerel IOY 
will be landed during the 2009 fishing year, the Regional Administrator 
will make available additional quota for a total IOY of 156,000 mt of 
Atlantic mackerel for harvest during 2009. Additionally, if an inseason 
adjustment of the IOY is warranted, the Regional Administrator will 
notify the Council and the inseason adjustment will be published in the 
Federal Register.

Atlantic Squids

Loligo
    Amendment 9 to the FMP (Amendment 9) (73 FR 37382, July 1, 2008) 
revised the proxies for Loligo target and threshold fishing mortality 
rates, FTarget and FThreshold, respectively, to 
reflect the analytical advice provided by the most recent Loligo stock 
assessment review committee (SARC 34). While Amendment 9 revised the 
formulas and values for these reference points, the function of the 
reference points remains unchanged. FTarget is the basis for 
determining OY and FThreshold determines whether overfishing 
is occurring.
    Because Loligo is a sub-annual species (i.e., has a lifespan of 
less than 1 year), the stock is solely dependent on sufficient 
recruitment year to year to prevent stock collapse. The revised proxies 
for FTarget and FThreshold implemented in Amendment 9 are fixed values 
based on average fishing mortality rates achieved during a time period 
when the stock biomass was fairly resilient (1987--2000). The revised 
proxies are calculated as follows: FTarget is the 75th 
percentile of fishing mortality rates during 1987--2000 and 
FThreshold is the average fishing mortality rates during the 
same period. The revised proxy for FTarget (0.32) is used as 
the basis for establishing Loligo OY. The use of a proxy is necessary 
because it is currently not possible to accurately predict Loligo stock 
biomass because recruitment, which occurs throughout the year, is 
highly variable inter-annually and influenced by changing environmental 
conditions.
    Based on the revised biological reference points for Loligo, the 
Council recommended an increase to the 2009 Loligo Max OY, ABC, IOY, 
DAH, and DAP. In 2008, the Loligo Max OY was 26,000 mt and the ABC, 
IOY, DAH, and DAP was 17,000 mt. For 2009, the proposed Loligo Max OY 
is 32,000 mt and the proposed ABC, IOY, DAH, DAP is 19,000 mt. Using 
the revised Loligo biological reference points, the Monitoring 
Committee initially calculated the proposed 2009 Loligo ABC, IOY, DAH, 
and DAP to be 23,000 mt. The Monitoring Committee subsequently reduced 
the proposed 2009 Loligo ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP to 19,000 mt, to be 
consistent with SARC 34 management recommendation that harvest not 
exceed 20,000 mt, and due to uncertainty associated with the Loligo 
stock assessment model.
    NMFS concurs with the Council's recommendation, therefore, this 
action proposes a 2009 Loligo Max OY of 32,000 mt and an ABC, IOY DAH, 
and

[[Page 67832]]

DAP of 19,000 mt. The FMP does not authorize the specification of JVP 
and TALFF for the Loligo fishery because of the domestic industry's 
capacity to harvest and process the OY for this fishery; therefore, 
there would be no Loligo JVP or TALFF in 2009.
    As described previously, the Council recommended that the Loligo RQ 
for 2009 be up to 3 percent (5,700 mt) of the ABC. Scientific research 
project proposals requesting Loligo RQ were recommended for approval 
and will be forwarded to the NOAA Grants Office for award. The proposed 
Loligo IOY, DAH, and DAP were adjusted to reflect the RQ and equal 
13,300 mt. Any of the Loligo RQ that is not awarded to a scientific 
research project will be made available to the commercial fishery after 
the publication of a notice in the Federal Register.

Distribution of the Loligo DAH

    As was done in 2007 and 2008, NMFS is proposing that the 2009 
Loligo DAH be allocated into trimesters, consistent with the Council's 
recommendation. The proposed 2009 trimester allocations would be as 
follows:

     Table 2. Proposed Trimester Allocation of Loligo Quota in 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Metric
                       Trimester                        Percent  Tons\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I (Jan-Apr)                                                43      8,116
II (May-Aug)                                               17      3,208
III (Sep-Dec)                                              40      7,550
Total                                                     100     13,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Trimester allocations after 5,700 mt RQ deduction.

Illex Squid
    The Illex stock was most recently assessed at SARC 42 in late 2005. 
While it was not possible to evaluate current stock status because 
there are no reliable current estimates of stock biomass or fishing 
mortality rate, qualitative analyses determined that overfishing had 
not likely been occurring.
    NMFS proposes to maintain the Illex specifications in 2009 at the 
same levels as they were for the 2008 fishing year, consistent with the 
Council's recommendation. This action proposes that the specification 
of Max OY, IOY, ABC, and DAH would be 24,000 mt. This level of DAH 
corresponds to a target fishing mortality rate of 75 percent 
FMSY. The FMP does not authorize the specification of JVP 
and TALFF for the Illex fishery because of the domestic fishing 
industry's capacity to harvest and to process the OY from this fishery.

Butterfish

    The status of the butterfish stock was most recently assessed at 
SARC 38 in late 2004. The assessment concluded that, while overfishing 
of the stock is not occurring, the stock is overfished because 
estimates of stock biomass are below the minimum biomass threshold (\1/
2\ BMSY). SARC 38 estimated the butterfish stock at 8,700 
mt, \1/2\ BMSY at 11,400 mt, and BMSY at 22,798 
mt. Based on this information, the Council was notified by NMFS on 
February 11, 2005, that the butterfish stock was designated as 
overfished, pursuant to the requirements of section 304(e) of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Council is developing a rebuilding plan for 
the butterfish stock in Amendment 10 to the FMP. Therefore, as in 2008, 
the Council recommended that the quota be restricted to recent landings 
levels to prevent an expansion of the fishery and to protect the 
rebuilding stocks. Without a current market for butterfish, a directed 
butterfish fishery has not existed for several years, with landings 
since 2003 ranging from 437 mt to 554 mt.
    The MSB FMP specifies that maximum sustainable yield equals Max OY. 
SARC 38 re-estimated butterfish maximum sustainable yield as 12,175 mt, 
and the butterfish overfishing threshold at F of 0.38. Assuming that 
butterfish discards equal twice the level of landings, the amount of 
butterfish discards associated with approximately 500 mt of landings is 
approximately 1,000 mt.
    Therefore, in 2009, as implemented in 2008, the proposed 
specifications would set the Max OY at 12,175 mt; the ABC at 1,500 mt; 
and the IOY, DAH, and DAP at 500 mt. Harvest at these proposed levels 
should prevent overfishing on the butterfish stock in 2009. 
Additionally, consistent with MSB regulations, the Council recommended, 
and NMFS is proposing, zero TALFF for butterfish in 2009 because zero 
TALFF is proposed for mackerel.

Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the 
NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is 
consistent with the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish FMP, other 
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, 
subject to further consideration after pubic comment.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866 (E.O. 12866).
    The Council prepared an IRFA, as required by section 603 of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic 
impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A 
summary of the analysis follows. A copy of this analysis is available 
from the Council or NMFS (see ADDRESSES) or via the Internet at http://www.nero.noaa.gov.

Statement of Objective and Need

    This action proposes 2009 specifications and management measures 
for mackerel, squid, and butterfish, and proposes to modify an 
incidental possession limit for mackerel. A complete description of the 
reasons why this action is being considered, and the objectives of and 
legal basis for this action, are contained in the preamble to this 
proposed rule and are not repeated here.

Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule 
Will Apply

    Based on permit data for 2007, the numbers of potential fishing 
vessels in the 2009 fisheries are as follows: 383 for Loligo/
butterfish, 78 for Illex, 2,462 for mackerel, and 2,108 vessels with 
incidental catch permits for squid/butterfish. There are no large 
entities participating in this fishery, as defined in section 601 of 
the RFA. Therefore, there are no disproportionate economic impacts on 
small entities. Many vessels participate in more than one of these 
fisheries; therefore, permit numbers are not additive.

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements

    This action does not contain any new collection-of-information, 
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. It does not 
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.

Minimizing Significant Economic Impacts on Small Entities

Proposed Actions
    The mackerel IOY proposed in this action (115,000 mt, with 15,000 
mt allocated to recreational catch) represents status quo, as compared 
to 2008, and is no constraint to vessels relative to the landings in 
recent years. Mackerel landings for 2001-2003 averaged 24,294 mt. 
Landings in 2004 were 55,528 mt, landings in 2005 were 43,246 mt, 
landings in 2006 were 58,279 mt, and landings in 2007 were 24,446 mt. 
This action also proposes an inseason adjustment, if landings approach 
the IOY early in the fishing

[[Page 67833]]

year, to increase the IOY up to the ABC (156,000 mt). Therefore, no 
reductions in revenues for the mackerel fishery are expected as a 
result of this proposed action; in fact, an increase in revenues as a 
result of the proposed action is possible. Based on 2007 data, the 
mackerel fishery could increase its landings by 90,554 mt in 2009, if 
it takes the entire IOY. In 2007, the last year for which complete 
financial data are available, the average value for mackerel was $258 
per mt. Using this value, the mackerel fishery could see an increase in 
revenues of $23,362,932 as a result of the proposed 2009 IOY (115,000 
mt), and an additional increase in revenues of $10,578,000 as a result 
of the proposed adjustment to increase the IOY up to the ABC (156,000 
mt).
    The Loligo IOY (19,000 mt) proposed in this action represents a 
potential for increased landings when compared to the 2008 IOY (17,000 
mt). Loligo landings for 2001-2003 averaged 14,092 mt. Landings in 2004 
were 15,447, landings in 2005 were 16,984 mt, landings in 2006 were 
15,880 mt, and landings in 2007 were 12,342 mt. In 2007, the last year 
for which complete financial data are available, the average value for 
Loligo was $1,883 per mt. No reductions in revenues for the Loligo 
fishery are expected as a result of this proposed action; in fact, an 
increase in revenues as a result of the proposed action is possible. 
Based on 2007 data, the Loligo fishery could increase its landings by 
6,658 mt in 2009, if it takes the entire IOY. Using the average value 
for Loligo from 2007 ($1,883 mt), the Loligo fishery could see an 
increase in revenues of $12,537,014 as a result of the proposed 2009 
IOY (19,000 mt),
    The Illex IOY (24,000 mt) proposed in this action represents status 
quo as compared to 2008. Illex landings for 2001-2003 averaged 4,350 
mt. Landings in 2004 were 26,098 mt, landings in 2005 were 12,032 mt, 
landings in 2006 were 13,944 mt, and landings in 2007 were 9,022 mt. In 
2007, the last year for which complete financial data are available, 
the average value for Illex was $428 per mt. Implementation of this 
proposed action would not result in a reduction in revenue or a 
constraint on the fishery in 2009. Based on 2007 data, the Illex 
fishery could increase its landings by 14,978 mt in 2009, if it takes 
the entire IOY. Using the average value for Illex from 2007 ($428 mt), 
the Illex fishery could see an increase in revenues of $6,410,584 as a 
result of the proposed 2009 IOY (24,000 mt).
    The butterfish IOY proposed in this action (500 mt) represents 
status quo, as compared to 2008, and represents only a minimal 
constraint to vessels relative to the landings in recent years. Due to 
market conditions, there has been not been a directed butterfish 
fishery in recent years; therefore, recent landings have been low. 
Landings in 2004 were 537 mt, landings in 2005 were 437 mt, landings in 
2006 were 554 mt, and landings in 2007 were 673 mt. Given the lack of a 
directed butterfish fishery and low butterfish landings, the proposed 
action is not expected to reduce revenues in this fishery more than 
minimally. Based on 2007 data, the value of butterfish was $1,602 per 
mt.

Alternatives to the Proposed Rule

    The Council analysis evaluated three alternatives for mackerel, and 
all of them would have set the ABC at 156,000 mt, IOY at 115,000 mt, 
and maintained the status quo trigger for closing the directed fishery. 
This ABC and IOY do not represent a constraint on vessels in this 
fishery, so no negative impacts on revenues in this fishery are 
expected as a result of these alternatives. These alternatives only 
differed from the proposed action with respect to incidental possession 
limits. The proposed action specifies the incidental mackerel 
possession limit at 20,000 lb (9.08 mt) if the directed mackerel 
fishery closes prior to June 1, and at 50,000 lb (22.7 mt) if the 
directed mackerel fishery closes on or after June 1. The alternatives 
to the proposed action specify incidental mackerel possession limits at 
20,000 lb (9.08 mt)(status quo) and at 50,000 lb (22.7 mt)(least 
restrictive). These alternatives were not adopted by the Council 
because the status quo incidental possession limit may have resulted in 
the regulatory discarding of mackerel by the Atlantic herring fishery 
in the Gulf of Maine and, if mackerel are available to the fishery in 
2009, the least restrictive incidental possession limit may have 
encouraged targeting on mackerel during a fishery closure early in the 
year (January-April). Differences in incidental possession limits may 
affect behavior and effort during closures of the directed fishery; 
however, all alternatives are expected to result in the same total 
landings for 2009.
    For Loligo, alternatives to the proposed action would have set the 
Max OY at 26,000 mt and ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP at 17,000 mt (status 
quo) or Max OY at 32,000 mt and ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP at 23,000 mt 
(least restrictive). These alternatives were not adopted by the Council 
because they were either not consistent with the revised reference 
points from SARC 34 (status quo) or not consistent with the management 
recommendations from SARC 34 and did not consider the uncertainty 
associated with the Loligo stock assessment model (least restrictive).
    For Illex, one alternative considered would have set Max OY, ABC, 
IOY, DAH, and DAP at 30,000 mt. This alternative would allow harvest 
far in excess of recent landings in this fishery. Therefore, there 
would be no constraints and, thus, no revenue reductions, associated 
with this alternative. However, the Council considered this alternative 
unacceptable because an ABC specification of 30,000 mt may not prevent 
overfishing in years of moderate to low abundance of Illex. Another 
alternative considered would have set MAX OY at 24,000 mt and ABC, IOY, 
DAH, and DAP at 19,000 mt. The Council considered this alternative 
unacceptable because it was unnecessarily restrictive.
    For butterfish, one alternative considered would have set the ABC 
at 4,525 mt, and IOY, DAH, and DAP at 1,861 mt; while another would 
have set ABC at 12,175 mt, and IOY, DAH, and DAP 9,131 mt. These 
amounts exceed the landings of this species in recent years. Therefore, 
neither alternative represents a constraint on vessels in this fishery 
or would reduce revenues in the fishery. However, neither of these 
alternatives were adopted by the Council because they would likely 
result in overfishing and the additional depletion of the spawning 
stock biomass of an overfished species.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

    Fisheries, Fishing, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

    Dated: November 12, 2008.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
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.  648.25, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  648.25  Possession restrictions.

    (a) Atlantic mackerel. During a closure of the directed Atlantic 
mackerel fishery that occurs prior to June 1, vessels may not fish for, 
possess, or land more than 20,000 lb (9.08 mt) of Atlantic mackerel per 
trip at any time,

[[Page 67834]]

and may only land Atlantic mackerel once on any calendar day, which is 
defined as the 24-hr period beginning at 0001 hours and ending at 2400 
hours. During a closure of the directed fishery for butterfish that 
occurs on or after June 1, vessels may not fish for, possess, or land 
more than 50,000 lb (22.7 mt) of Atlantic mackerel per trip at any 
time, and may only land Atlantic mackerel once on any calendar day.
[FR Doc. E8-27225 Filed 11-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S