[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 177 (Tuesday, September 13, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56327-56329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23387]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 101102552-1319-02]
RIN 0648-BA35


Fisheries Off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Species 
Fisheries; Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues a final rule under authority of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) to implement 
Amendment 2 to the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast 
Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP). NMFS approved 
Amendment 2 on June 12, 2011. The final rule implements regulatory 
components specified under Amendment 2 by changing the suite of 
management unit species and modifying the process for revising 
numerical estimates of maximum sustainable yield and optimal yield, and 
specify status determination criteria so that overfishing and 
overfished determinations can be made for all management unit species. 
The final rule is necessary to ensure that the HMS FMP is consistent 
with the objectives of National Standard 1 in the MSA. National 
Standard 1 mandates that ``Conservation and management measures shall 
prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum 
yield from each fishery for the U.S. fishing industry.''

DATES: This final rule is effective October 13, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Heberer, Sustainable Fisheries 
Division, NMFS, 760-431-9440, ext. 303.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    This final rule is also accessible at (http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/). 
An electronic copy of the current HMS FMP and accompanying appendices, 
including Amendments 1 and 2, are available on the Pacific Fishery 
Management Council's Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org/hms/hmsfmp.html.
    The HMS FMP was developed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council 
(Council) in response to the need to coordinate state, Federal, and 
international management of HMS stocks. The management unit in the FMP 
consists of several highly migratory species (tunas, billfish, and 
sharks) that occur within the West Coast (California, Oregon, and 
Washington) Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and to a limited extent on 
adjacent high seas waters. The National Marine Fisheries Service 
(NMFS), on behalf of the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, partially approved 
the HMS FMP on February 4, 2004. NMFS implements the Council's 
recommended management measures through the Federal regulatory process.
    In June 2010, the Council took final action to recommend adoption 
of Amendment 2 to the HMS FMP, which addresses statutory requirements 
of the MSA National Standard Guidelines in regard to the establishment 
of annual catch limits (ACLs) and accountability measures (AMs). The 
Council transmitted Amendment 2 to NMFS on March 14, 2011. NMFS 
approved Amendment 2 on June 12, 2011. This final rule implements 
Amendment 2. In Amendment 2, the Council recommended and NMFS concurred 
that all 11 MUS will fall under the international exemption for setting 
ACLs and AMs as described at 50 CFR

[[Page 56328]]

660.310(h)(2)(ii) in the revised MSA National Standard 1 (NS1) 
Guidelines.
    The final rule: (1) Reduces the number of HMS FMP Management Unit 
Species (MUS) listed in 50 CFR part 660 from 13 to 11; and (2) modifies 
the process for revising and seeking NMFS approval for numerical 
estimates of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) and optimal yield (OY) and 
specifies status determination criteria (SDC) so that overfishing and 
overfished determinations can be made for all MUS stocks.
    In regard to classification of stocks in the FMP, Amendment 2 and 
this final rule reclassifies bigeye thresher shark (Alopias 
superciliosus) and pelagic thresher shark (A. pelagicus) as EC species, 
thereby reducing the current suite of MUS from 13 to 11. Bigeye and 
pelagic thresher sharks were originally included in the HMS FMP as MUS 
due to concern over their low resiliency to exploitation; their 
reclassification as EC species is based in part on the minor levels of 
west coast commercial and recreational catch that have been reported 
for these species since the FMP was implemented. However, given the 
presence of these species off the West Coast, particularly during El 
Nino warming periods, these species will continue to be monitored under 
the HMS FMP as an EC species. One of the essential purposes behind 
identifying EC species is to monitor these species over time, 
periodically evaluate their status, and assess whether any management 
is needed under the HMS FMP, in which case an EC species could be 
reclassified as MUS, which means they would be treated as ``in the 
fishery.'' Amendment 2 establishes eight EC species in the HMS FMP: the 
two thresher shark species (bigeye and pelagic), pelagic sting ray 
(Dasyetis violacea), wahoo (Acathocybium solandri), common mola (Mola 
mola), escolar (Lepidocybium flavobrunneum), lancetfishes 
(Alepisauridae), and louvar (Luvarus imperialis).
    In regard to the process for revising numerical estimates of 
management reference points, the methods for determining MSY (or 
proxies), OY, and SDC are currently described in the HMS FMP. Existing 
numerical estimates of these quantities (shown in FMP Table 4-3) are 
retained. However, upon receipt of any new information based on the 
best available science, the Council may adjust the numerical estimates 
of MSY, OY, and SDC periodically under the Council's management measure 
process. The process would involve the Council's HMSMT identifying the 
numerical estimates within the draft HMS Stock Assessment and Fishery 
Evaluation (SAFE) document that is submitted in June with the Council's 
SSC HMS subcommittee and then making a recommendation on their 
suitability. The Council would then decide whether to adopt updated 
numerical estimates of MSY and OY, which would be submitted as 
recommendations for NMFS to review as part of the management measure 
review process. This provides the Secretary with an opportunity to 
review revised MSY and OY estimates. In this process, the Council takes 
final action in November and NMFS subsequently engages in rulemaking to 
implement the specifications of any management measures proposed by the 
Council. The revised estimates of MSY, OY, and SDC would also be 
published in the annual HMS SAFE document. However, if a regional 
fisheries management organization formally adopts reference points for 
the purpose of regional management for any of the HMS FMP managed 
species, these would generally take precedence. The Council would 
engage in a review process similar to that described above before 
adopting them as appropriate for domestic management purposes under the 
HMS FMP.
    A single public comment was received on the proposed rule to 
implement Amendment 2 pointing out an error in the use of the common 
name for bluefin tuna. NMFS made this change in the final rule.

Classification

    The Administrator of the Southwest Region, NMFS, determined that 
the HMS FMP Amendment 2 is necessary for the conservation and 
management of the U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory 
Species and that it is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act and other applicable laws.
    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce 
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration during the proposed rule stage that this action would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The factual basis for the certification was published in the 
proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments were received 
regarding this certification. As a result, a regulatory flexibility 
analysis was not required and none was prepared.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660

    Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 7, 2011.
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 660 is amended 
as follows:

PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES

0
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.


0
2. In Sec.  660.702, revise the definition of ``Highly Migratory 
Species (HMS)'' to read as follows:


Sec.  660.702  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Highly Migratory Species (HMS) means species managed by the FMP, 
specifically:

Billfish/Swordfish:
    striped marlin (Tetrapturus audax)
    swordfish (Xiphias gladius)
Sharks:
    common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus)
    shortfin mako or bonito shark (Isurus oxyrinchus)
    blue shark (Prionace glauca)
Tunas:
    north Pacific albacore (Thunnus alalunga)
    yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares)
    bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus)
    skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis)
    Pacific bluefin tuna (Thunnus orientalis)
Other:
    dorado or dolphinfish (Coryphaena hippurus)
* * * * *

0
3. In Sec.  660.709, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.709  Annual specifications.

    (a) Procedure. (1) In June of each year, the HMSMT will deliver a 
preliminary SAFE report to the Council for all HMS with any necessary 
recommendations for harvest guidelines, quotas or other management 
measures to protect HMS, including updated MSY and OY estimates based 
on the best available science. The Council's HMS Science and 
Statistical Committee will review the estimates and make a 
recommendation on their suitability for management. The Council will 
review these recommendations and decide whether to adopt updated 
numerical

[[Page 56329]]

estimates of MSY and OY, which are then submitted as recommendations 
for NMFS to review as part of the management measures review process.
    (2) In September of each year, the HMSMT will deliver a final SAFE 
report to the Council. The Council will adopt any necessary harvest 
guidelines, quotas or other management measures including updated MSY 
and OY estimates if any for public review.
    (3) In November each year, the Council will take final action on 
any necessary harvest guidelines, quotas, or other management measures 
including updated MSY and OY estimates if any and make its 
recommendations to NMFS.
    (4) Based on recommendations of the Council, the Regional 
Administrator will approve or disapprove any harvest guideline, quota, 
or other management measure including updated MSY and OY estimates 
after reviewing such recommendations to determine compliance with the 
FMP, the Magnuson Act, and other applicable law. The Regional 
Administrator will implement through rulemaking any approved harvest 
guideline, quota, or other management measure adopted under this 
section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-23387 Filed 9-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P