[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10593-10595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04368]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XE298


Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; General 
Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Application for Exempted Fishing 
Permit

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

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator, NMFS West Coast Region, has 
determined that an application for an exempted fishing permit (EFP) 
warrants further consideration and requests public comment on the 
application. The application requests a 2-year exemption from 
prohibitions under the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast 
Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP) to test the effects 
and efficacy of using modified drift gillnet (DGN) gear to fish for 
swordfish and other highly migratory species (HMS) off the U.S. West 
Coast in the Pacific Leatherback Conservation Area (PLCA) when 
environmental conditions are favorable during the PLCA closure period.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing by March 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by 
NOAA-NMFS-2015-0063, by any of the following methods:
     Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0063, click the 
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or 
attach your comments. EFP applications will be available under Relevant 
Documents through the same link.
     Mail: Attn: Chris Fanning, NMFS West Coast Region, 501 W. 
Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802. Include the identifier 
``NOAA-NMFS-2015-0063'' in the comments.
    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other 
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, 
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the 
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on 
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying 
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business 
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily 
by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous 
comments (enter

[[Page 10594]]

``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Fanning, NMFS, West Coast 
Region, 562-980-4198.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 2, 2014, the Pacific Fishery 
Management Council (Council) solicited EFP proposals \1\ to test 
alternative gears to large-mesh drift gillnet and/or new approaches or 
methods for targeting swordfish and other HMS off the U.S. West Coast. 
In response, the Alliance of Communities for Sustainable Fisheries 
(ACSF) submitted an application that, in summary, proposes to fish in 
the PLCA using two DGN vessels, with 60 sets per vessel and 100% 
monitoring, from August 15 to November 15. The PLCA, located off the 
coast of California and Oregon, is an area closed to DGN fishing 
annually from August 15 to November 15 under the HMS FMP (50 CFR 
660.713(c)), and is bounded by straight lines connecting the following 
coordinates in the order listed: Point Sur at 36[deg]18.5' N. lat., to 
34[deg]27' N. lat. 123[deg]35' W. long., to 34[deg]27' N. lat. 129[deg] 
W. long., to 45[deg] N. lat. 129[deg] W. long., and then to the point 
where 45[deg] N. lat. intersects the Oregon coast. This application 
contemplates that the two commercial fishing vessels would be exempt 
from the PLCA closure period, and applicants would have access to this 
area when favorable oceanographic conditions (e.g., sea surface 
temperature, prey abundance) are present. The EFP would test whether 
these triggers could result in increased swordfish catch and decreased 
bycatch. Vessels fishing under an EFP would be subject to all other 
regulations implementing the HMS FMP, including measures to protect sea 
turtles and marine mammals. The applicants requested issuance of an EFP 
for two fishing seasons or two calendar years. The Council discussed 
the merits of the application at its March 2015 meeting and concluded 
that obtaining additional information was warranted.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/HMS_EFP_Notice_Letter_July2014.pdf.
    \2\ http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/0315decisions.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the June 2015 Council meeting, ACSF submitted a revised 
application addressing the Council's concerns. Based on the revised 
application, the Council recommended \3\ that NMFS consider issuing an 
EFP to ACSF as long as the EFP were restricted in accordance with the 
Council's supplementary conservation recommendations. These 
recommendations were to ensure adequate scientific design while testing 
the hypothesis that dynamic ocean management practices could be used to 
effectively reduce the risk of protected species bycatch when targeting 
swordfish. The Council recommendation is consistent with the policy it 
articulated in June 2014 to evaluate future access to the PLCA in light 
of full accountability and acceptable bycatch cap levels.\4\ After 
reviewing the revised EFP application, on July 8, 2015, the Council 
transmitted to NMFS its written recommendation to issue an EFP based on 
the ACSF application. At its November 2015 meeting, the Council 
reaffirmed their support of a DGN EFP within the PLCA that uses 
favorable oceanographic conditions to trigger fishing times and 
locations. Similar uses of dynamic ocean management have proven 
effective in domestic fisheries. For example, fishermen are using sea 
surface temperatures and sea turtle thermal habitat preferences to 
minimize loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) interactions in the 
Hawaii longline fishery. On the U.S. East Coast, fishermen have reduced 
yellowtail flounder bycatch in the Atlantic sea scallop fishery by 
reporting bycatch levels in small spatial grids via vessel monitoring 
systems with coincident avoidance of unfavorable grids by the fleet. 
Since adopting this program, the fishery has remained open for its 
entire duration because bycatch levels have not been reached (Lewison 
et al., 2015). There are other examples of successful fishery-trigger 
mechanisms in salmon gillnet fisheries in the Strait of Juan de Fuca 
and the Columbia River, where bycatch observations in test fisheries 
and species-specific dam counts, respectively, are successfully used to 
obtain high target species catch and low incidence of bycatch in full-
fleet fisheries (Pacific Fishery Management Council, personal 
communication).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/0615decisions.pdf.
    \4\ http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/0614decisions.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Academic researchers, in collaboration with NMFS scientists, have 
been developing EcoCast, a tool to predict favorable habitat for 
swordfish and bycatch species to assist fishers in targeting catch and 
in bycatch avoidance. This tool may be used to support the EFP 
objective of testing the use of environmental triggers to direct 
fishing to times and areas of increased swordfish catch and decreased 
bycatch.
    The Council has indicated that if the innovations tested in this 
EFP are able to demonstrate higher target catch and lower bycatch than 
the current DGN fleet, the Council would consider subsequent EFPs that 
increase the number of vessels fishing within the PLCA. The Council may 
also recommend granting DGN vessels access to all, or portions of, the 
PLCA when oceanographic conditions suggest that swordfish catch rates 
would be higher and protected species bycatch would be lower.

Proposed Restrictions for an EFP in the PLCA

    The Council suggested conditions that NMFS impose on an EFP, if 
issued, to ACSF. Conservation and gear modification recommendations, as 
well as general EFP recommendations, include:
    (1) An observed serious injury or mortality of a single leatherback 
sea turtle would terminate the EFP.
    (2) No more than two large mesh drift gillnet vessels could fish 
under the EFP.
    (3) The EFP fishing vessels must consult with scientists from NMFS' 
Southwest Fisheries Science Center about current ocean climate 
conditions that are thought to be favorable for identification of 
optimal time/area locations to conduct test fishery operations. In this 
consultation, the scientists would use oceanographic data to predict 
general times and areas where target catch rates are expected to be 
high relative to bycatch rates, especially bycatch rates of protected 
species. The scientists would identify times and areas anticipated to 
have favorable environmental conditions, deliver this information via 
web interface or via mobile application, and the fishermen would 
determine the exact time and location of EFP fishing activity based on 
ocean conditions and their experience optimizing the ratio of target to 
non-target species. These data will be used to test and improve the 
oceanographic models to ensure they are accurately predicting times and 
areas with a high target catch to bycatch ratio.
    (4) The EFP vessels must collect detailed data on catch and 
bycatch, gear deployment, and ocean conditions, including: Catch-per-
unit-effort, sea surface temperature, water clarity, profiles of 
temperature with depth, species and abundance of marine mammals and 
turtles in the area, and other information available from sonar, echo-
sounder, or other onboard electronic technology devices.
    (5) 100% on-board observer coverage would be required while fishing 
under the EFP.
    (6) The following gear modifications must be instituted relative to 
the rest of the DGN fishery:

--Installation of 50 percent more acoustic pingers,

[[Page 10595]]

--breakaways on the net allowing large mammals to break through the 
gear (Note: A `breakaway' is a weakly sewn together area of the net 
that would allow a large animal to break the net and avoid 
entanglement),
--shortening soak times to only 6 hours, and
--shortening the net length to 900 fathoms.

    (7) Impose an annual incidental catch limit for striped marlin.
    (8) Prohibit fishing in leatherback sea turtle critical habitat 
(designated under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA)).
    (9) Prohibit fishing in waters north of the Washington/Oregon 
border, and in the first year prohibit fishing in waters north of the 
Oregon/California border.
    (10) Fishing under the EFP would cease for the remainder of the 
year if the number of observed takes in the fishery for animals listed 
as threatened or endangered under the ESA is the lower of either double 
the amount of incidental take estimated in an ESA biological opinion 
prepared for the EFP, or 10 animals.

Additional EFP Considerations

    The elements of the EFP application and the Council recommendations 
will be considered by NMFS; however, if NMFS issues an EFP, it may 
impose different and/or additional mitigation measures as it deems 
necessary and in accordance with other applicable laws, such as the 
ESA. In considering this matter, NMFS is seeking public comment on the 
EFP application, the Council's recommended conditions, and any other 
suggested mitigation measures to improve conservation elements while 
maintaining feasible fishery operations. In particular, NMFS is 
interested in additional methods and technologies that could be applied 
to the fishing operations in order to further reduce the likelihood of 
interactions with federally endangered leatherback sea turtles. NMFS is 
mindful of the population status of Pacific leatherback sea turtles and 
that test fishing in the PLCA with DGN gear would have interaction 
risks with the endangered Pacific leatherback sea turtle. Designing an 
EFP that minimizes such risks is critical, and therefore NMFS is also 
interested in comments on how this proposed EFP complements the draft 
Pacific Coast Swordfish Fishery Management and Monitoring Plan and the 
future of the U.S. West Coast swordfish fishery.
    In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6, if NMFS pursues 
issuance of an EFP, then NMFS will complete the appropriate National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses. Additionally, issuance of an 
EFP would be developed for consistency with all applicable laws, 
including Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), to 
ensure it would not be likely to jeopardize the continued existence and 
recovery of any endangered or threatened species or result in the 
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Given strong 
public interest in the DGN fishery and its impacts on protected 
species, if NMFS decides to pursue issuing an EFP to ACSF, then it will 
publish a `Notice of Availability' to give the public the opportunity 
to comment on the draft NEPA analysis (i.e., either environmental 
assessment or environmental impact statement) that would be prepared 
for the proposed action.

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

    Dated: February 24, 2016.
Jennifer M. Wallace,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-04368 Filed 2-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P