[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 240 (Wednesday, December 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 90241-90246]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29984]



[[Page 90241]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 635

[Docket No. 160129062-6999-02]
RIN 0648-BF49


Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Commercial Retention Limit for 
Blacknose Sharks and Non-Blacknose Small Coastal Sharks in the Atlantic 
Region

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes a commercial retention limit of 
eight blacknose sharks for all Atlantic shark limited access permit 
holders in the Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude. NMFS 
manages four small coastal shark (SCS) species in the Atlantic: 
Blacknose, Atlantic sharpnose, finetooth, and bonnethead. All of these 
species except blacknose sharks are managed in a management group 
called the ``non-blacknose SCS.'' This action is being taken to reduce 
discards of non-blacknose small coastal sharks (SCS) while increasing 
the utilization of available Atlantic non-blacknose SCS quota and aid 
in rebuilding and ending overfishing of Atlantic blacknose sharks. The 
final action affects fishermen who fish in the Atlantic region and who 
hold commercial shark limited access permits. In addition, this final 
rule implements two small, unrelated administrative changes to existing 
regulatory text to remove cross-references to an unrelated section and 
a section that does not exist. These two changes are administrative in 
nature, and are not expected to result in any impacts to the 
environment or current fishing operations.

DATES: Effective on January 13, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the supporting documents--the Final Environmental 
Assessment (EA) for this final action, the 2006 Consolidated Highly 
Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and its 
amendments, and the annual HMS Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation 
(SAFE) Reports--are available from the HMS Management Division Web site 
at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ or by contacting the HMS 
Management Division by phone at 301-427-8503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gu[yacute] DuBeck, Larry Redd, Cliff 
Hutt, or Karyl Brewster-Geisz by telephone at 301-427-8503.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Atlantic sharks are directly managed under 
the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), and the authority to issue 
regulations has been delegated from the Secretary of Commerce to the 
Assistant Administrator (AA) for Fisheries, NOAA. NMFS published in the 
Federal Register (71 FR 59058) final regulations, effective November 1, 
2006 implementing the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species (HMS) 
Fishery Management Plan (FMP), which details management measures for 
Atlantic HMS fisheries. The implementing regulations for the 2006 
Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments are at 50 CFR part 635. This 
final rule establishes a commercial retention limit of eight blacknose 
sharks per trip in the Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude.

Background

    NMFS published a proposed rule on August 3, 2016 (81 FR 51165), 
outlining the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EA, identifying the 
preferred alternative, and soliciting public comments on the measures, 
which would impact the blacknose shark and non-blacknose SCS fisheries 
in the Atlantic region. Specifically, the proposed rule proposed 
establishing a commercial retention limit of eight blacknose sharks in 
the Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude but also considered 
alternatives that would establish a commercial retention limit of non-
blacknose SCS for shark directed access permit holders in the Atlantic 
region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude once the blacknose shark quota 
is reached, as well as two other alternatives regarding potential 
commercial retention limits for blacknose sharks. The full description 
of the management and conservation measures considered is included in 
both the Final EA and the proposed rule and is not repeated here. The 
comment period for the Draft EA and proposed rule ended on September 
20, 2016. The comments received, and responses to those comments, are 
summarized below under the heading labeled Response to Comments.
    This final rule establishes a commercial retention limit of eight 
blacknose sharks for all Atlantic shark limited access permit holders 
in the Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude. This rulemaking 
only focuses on the Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude 
since NMFS prohibited the retention and landings of blacknose sharks in 
the Gulf of Mexico and north of 34[deg]00' N. latitude in 2015. This 
final action should reduce discards of non-blacknose SCS while 
increasing the utilization of available Atlantic non-blacknose SCS 
quota and aid in rebuilding and ending overfishing of Atlantic 
blacknose sharks.
    Finally, this rule makes administrative changes to existing 
regulatory text. Specifically, in two locations in Sec.  635.24(a), the 
regulations make reference to paragraphs (a)(4)(iv) through (vi); those 
cross-references are unnecessary because the Commercial Caribbean Small 
Boat permit under (a)(4)(iv) is a separate permit from the shark 
limited access permits and there is no (a)(4)(v) and (a)(4)(vi) 
regulations. This final rule implements changes to the regulations in 
50 CFR part 635 to correct those regulatory cross-references.

Response to Comments

    During the proposed rule stage, NMFS received 15 written and oral 
comments. NMFS also received feedback from: The HMS Advisory Panel on 
September 8, 2016; constituents who attended the conference call/
webinar held on August 16, 2016; and constituents who attended the 
public hearing on August 24, 2016, in Cocoa Beach, FL. Additionally, 
NMFS consulted with the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council on 
September 15, 2016. A summary of the comments received on the proposed 
rule during the public comment period is provided below with NMFS' 
responses. All written comments submitted during the comment period can 
be found at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for NOAA-NMFS-2016-
0095.
    Comment 1: NMFS received a number of comments regarding the 
preferred retention limit of eight blacknose sharks per trip within the 
Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude. The South Atlantic 
Fishery Management Council, a number of HMS Advisory Panel members, and 
other commenters supported the preferred retention limit of eight 
blacknose sharks per trip within the Atlantic region south of 
34[deg]00' N. latitude. Some commenters were concerned that the 
preferred retention limit was not low enough and would still result in 
the early closure of the non-blacknose SCS fishery. Some commenters 
suggested that the preferred retention limit of eight blacknose sharks 
per trip should apply only to directed shark limited access permit 
holders and that incidental shark limited access permit holders should 
not be allowed to land blacknose sharks or should have a lower 
retention limit. Lastly, other

[[Page 90242]]

commenters suggested that NMFS should adjust the blacknose shark 
retention limit on an inseason basis, similar to what is done in the 
large coastal shark fishery.
    Response: In this final action, NMFS is establishing a commercial 
retention limit of eight blacknose sharks per trip because the 
retention limit would have moderate beneficial ecological impacts on 
blacknose sharks, neutral ecological impacts on non-blacknose SCS, and 
minor beneficial socioeconomic impacts for SCS fishermen because they 
would be able to continue utilizing the non-blacknose SCS quota. Based 
on the analyses conducted, NMFS believes this retention limit would 
allow between 40 and 96 lb dw blacknose sharks to be landed per trip, 
depending on the average weight of blacknose sharks used. Using these 
weights landed per trip, the full blacknose shark quota could be landed 
in approximately 395 to 948 trips. This result is more than double and 
could be as high as 10 times the number of trips that harvested the 
blacknose quota from the 2011 to 2015 average. As such, the final 
retention limit of eight blacknose sharks per trip should allow for the 
blacknose and non-blacknose SCS quotas to remain open throughout the 
year and not cause the fisheries to close early. Because the retention 
limit should allow for the fisheries to remain open and because 
incidental shark permit holders by definition do not target sharks, 
NMFS does not believe it is necessary to consider separate blacknose 
retention limits by permit type. Regarding the comment about inseason 
adjustments to the retention limit, NMFS did not consider establishing 
an adjustable retention limit for blacknose sharks because this species 
should only be landed at incidental levels in order to allow for 
rebuilding and the final action to establish an eight blacknose shark 
retention limit should prevent early closure of the SCS fishery. NMFS 
may revisit inseason adjustments to the blacknose shark retention limit 
in the future as warranted.
    Comment 2: NMFS received a comment suggesting that the average 
dressed weight for blacknose sharks should be increased from the 5 lb 
dw used in the latest stock assessment to 10 to 20 lb dw because larger 
blacknose sharks are more typically landed in the fishery.
    Response: In all the calculations in the proposed rule, NMFS used 
an average dressed weight of 5 lb for blacknose sharks. This average 
weight is the average weight that was derived for the 2011 stock 
assessment using a length-weight conversion function. However, based on 
these public comments, NMFS reviewed data from observed bottom longline 
and gillnet trips that landed blacknose sharks in the years 2013 
through 2015 and found that these data indicate that fishermen are 
landing blacknose sharks with an average weight of 12 lb dw. As a 
result, NMFS provided information on both weights in the final EA and 
final rule. Based on data analysis, using either average weight would 
support using an eight blacknose shark retention limit and accomplish 
the goals of the rulemaking.
    Comment 3: NMFS received a comment requesting the removal of the 
quota linkage between the blacknose shark and the South Atlantic non-
blacknose SCS quotas so that fishermen would not have to discard non-
blacknose SCS after the blacknose quota is filled.
    Response: The objectives of this action are to continue rebuilding 
the Atlantic blacknose shark stock; to aid in ending overfishing of the 
Atlantic blacknose shark stock; to aid in achieving optimum yield in 
the blacknose and non-blacknose-SCS fisheries; and to reduce dead 
discards of small coastal sharks. The quota linkage was established to 
prevent further overfishing and aid in rebuilding blacknose sharks. 
Without the quota linkage, fishermen would lose an important incentive 
for avoiding blacknose sharks, thus jeopardizing the rebuilding plan 
for blacknose sharks and potentially increasing overfishing of 
blacknose sharks.
    Comment 4: NMFS received a comment suggesting that the SCS season 
open in September instead of January.
    Response: The final action does not reanalyze the overall start 
date for SCS, which was analyzed in the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and 
its amendments. NMFS could consider this in a future rulemaking.
    Comment 5: NMFS received a comment requesting that the 80-percent 
threshold closure policy for shark fisheries be changed.
    Response: NMFS' goal is to allow shark fishermen to harvest the 
full quota without exceeding it in order to maximize economic benefits 
to stakeholders while achieving conservation goals, including 
preventing overfishing. The 80-percent threshold closure policy refers 
to NMFS calculating that the overall, regional, and/or sub-regional 
landings for any species and/or management group has reached or is 
projected to reach 80 percent of the available overall, regional, and/
or sub-regional quota and NMFS closing the species and/or management 
groups for the rest of the season. Based on current experiences with 
monitoring quotas for all shark species and management groups, NMFS 
believes that the 80-percent threshold allows for all or almost the 
entire quota to be harvested without exceeding the quota. As such, NMFS 
expects that, in general, the quotas would be harvested between the 
time that the 80-percent threshold is reached and the time that the 
season actually closes. In addition, NMFS must also account for late 
reporting by shark dealers even with the improved electronic dealer 
system and provide a buffer to include landings received after the 
reporting deadline in an attempt to avoid overharvests. NMFS will 
continue to evaluate the 80-percent threshold and may consider changes 
in a future rulemaking.
    Comment 6: NMFS received a comment suggesting that an Atlantic 
blacknose update stock assessment be performed in 2019 along with the 
Atlantic blacktip benchmark assessment.
    Response: Most of the domestic shark stock assessments follow the 
Southeast Data, Assessment Review (SEDAR) process. This process is also 
used by the South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean Fishery 
Management Councils and is designed to provide transparency throughout 
the stock assessment. With regard to the timing of upcoming shark stock 
assessments, NMFS aims to conduct a number of shark stock assessments 
every year and to regularly reassess these stocks. The number of 
species that can be assessed each year depends on whether assessments 
are establishing baselines or are only updates to previous assessments. 
Assessments also depend on ensuring there are data available for a 
particular species. In addition to the shark assessments being 
conducted by the International Commission for the Conservation of 
Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), NMFS intends to conduct, through the SEDAR 
process, a sandbar shark benchmark assessment in 2017, a Gulf of Mexico 
blacktip shark update assessment in 2018, and an Atlantic blacktip 
benchmark assessment in 2019. NMFS will continue to monitor options for 
future stock assessments, including an assessment for Atlantic 
blacknose sharks.

Classification

    The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that the final rule 
is necessary for the conservation and management of the Atlantic shark 
fisheries and that it is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and 
other applicable laws.

[[Page 90243]]

    This final action has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    A Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) was prepared for 
this rule pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 
604 (c)(1)-(4)). The FRFA incorporates the Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a summary of the significant issues raised 
by the public comments in response to the IRFA, NMFS responses to those 
comments, and a summary of the analyses completed to support the 
action. The full FRFA and analysis of economic and ecological impacts 
are available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the FRFA follows.
    Under Section 604(a)(1) of the RFA, the management goals and 
objectives of the preferred alternative are to provide for the 
sustainable management of SCS species under authority of the Secretary 
consistent with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other 
statutes which may apply to such management, including the Endangered 
Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, and Atlantic Tunas 
Convention Act. The Magnuson-Stevens Act mandates that the Secretary 
provide for the conservation and management of HMS through development 
of an FMP for species identified for management and to implement the 
FMP with necessary regulations. In addition, the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
directs the Secretary, in managing HMS, to prevent overfishing of 
species while providing for their optimum yield on a continuing basis 
and to rebuild fish stocks that are considered overfished. The 
management objective of the preferred alternative is to implement 
management measures for the Atlantic SCS fishery that will further the 
objective of preventing overfishing while achieving (on a continuing 
basis) optimum yield, and aid in rebuilding overfished shark stocks.
    Section 604(a)(2) of the RFA requires a summary of the significant 
issues raised by the public comments in response to the IRFA, a summary 
of the Agency's assessment of such issues, and a statement of any 
changes made in the rule as a result of such comments. NMFS received 
several comments on the proposed rule and Draft EA during the public 
comment period. Summarized public comments and NMFS' responses to them 
are included in Appendix A of this document. Section 604(a)(3) of the 
RFA requires the Agency to respond to any comments filed by the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) in 
response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change 
made in the rule as a result of such comments. NMFS did not receive any 
comments from the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA nor the public 
in response to this document.
    Section 604(a)(3) of the RFA requires agencies to provide an 
estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule would apply. 
The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size criteria 
for all major industry sectors in the United States, including fish 
harvesters. Provision is made under SBA's regulations for an agency to 
develop its own industry-specific size standards after consultation 
with Advocacy and an opportunity for public comment (see 13 CFR 
121.903(c)). Under this provision, NMFS may establish size standards 
that differ from those established by the SBA Office of Size Standards, 
but only for use by NMFS and only for the purpose of conducting an 
analysis of economic effects in fulfillment of the agency's obligations 
under the RFA. To utilize this provision, NMFS must publish such size 
standards in the Federal Register (FR), which NMFS did on December 29, 
2015 (80 FR 81194, December 29, 2015). In this final rule, effective on 
July 1, 2016, NMFS established a small business size standard of $11 
million in annual gross receipts for all businesses in the commercial 
fishing industry (NAICS 11411) for RFA compliance purposes (80 FR 
81194, December 29, 2015). NMFS considers all HMS permit holders to be 
small entities because they have average annual receipts of less than 
$11 million for commercial fishing.
    This final rule would apply to the 499 commercial shark permit 
holders in the Atlantic shark fishery, based on an analysis of permit 
holders as of November 2015. Of these permit holders, 224 have directed 
shark permits and 275 hold incidental shark permits. Not all permit 
holders are active in the fishery in any given year. Active directed 
permit holders are defined as those with valid permits that landed one 
shark based on 2015 HMS electronic dealer reports. Of the 499 permit 
holders, only 27 permit holders landed SCS in the Atlantic region and 
of those only 13 landed blacknose sharks. NMFS has determined that the 
final rule would not likely affect any small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    Section 604(a)(4) of the RFA requires Agencies to describe any new 
reporting, record-keeping and other compliance requirements. The action 
does not contain any new collection of information, reporting, or 
record-keeping requirements. The alternatives considered would adjust 
the commercial retention limits for the SCS fisheries, which would mean 
new compliance requirements for the shark fishery participants in the 
Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude, but which are similar 
to other compliance requirements the fishermen already follow.
    Section 604(a)(5) of the RFA requires a description of the steps 
the Agency has taken to minimize any significant economic impact on 
small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable 
statutes. Additionally, the RFA lists four general categories of 
``significant'' alternatives that would assist an agency in the 
development of significant alternatives. These categories of 
alternatives are: (1) Establishment of differing compliance or 
reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the 
resources available to small entities; (2) Clarification, 
consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting 
requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) Use of 
performance rather than design standards; and (4) Exemptions from 
coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
    In order to meet the objectives of this final rule, consistent with 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the Endangered Species Act, NMFS cannot 
establish differing compliance requirements for small entities or 
exempt small entities from compliance requirements. Thus, there are no 
alternatives discussed that fall under the first and fourth categories 
described above. NMFS does not know of any performance or design 
standards that would satisfy the aforementioned objectives of this 
rulemaking while, concurrently, complying with the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act. As described below, NMFS analyzed several different alternatives 
in this final rulemaking and provides rationales for identifying the 
preferred alternatives to achieve the desired objectives.
    The alternatives considered and analyzed are described below. The 
FRFA assumes that each vessel will have similar catch and gross 
revenues to show the relative impact of the final action on vessels.
    Alternative 1, the No Action alternative, would not implement any 
new retention limits for blacknose sharks or non-blacknose SCS in the 
Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude beyond those already in 
effect for current Atlantic shark limited access permit holders. NMFS 
would continue to allow fishermen with a direct limited access permit 
to land unlimited sharks per trip and allow fishermen with an 
incidental permit to land 16 combined SCS and pelagic sharks per vessel 
per trip. In 2010, Amendment 3 to the 2006

[[Page 90244]]

Consolidated HMS FMP established, among other things, a quota for 
blacknose sharks separate from the SCS quota. The 2011 blacknose shark 
stock assessment determined that separate stocks of blacknose sharks 
existed in the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic. Amendment 5a to the 
2006 Consolidated HMS FMP established, among other things, regional 
quotas for non-blacknose SCS and blacknose sharks in the Gulf of Mexico 
and the Atlantic in 2013. These blacknose shark and non-blacknose SCS 
quotas are linked by region and the regional SCS fishery closes when 
the blacknose quota is reached. This linkage has resulted in the early 
closure of the entire SCS fishery due to high abundance of blacknose 
shark landings. Closure of the fishery as a result of Atlantic 
blacknose rapid harvest leaves the non-blacknose shark SCS quota 
underutilized. Between 2014 and 2015, the Atlantic non-blacknose SCS 
quota was underutilized by an average of 314,625 lb dw, or 54 percent 
of the quota. This represents an average annual ex-vessel loss of 
$298,583 for the fishery, assuming an average value for 2014-2015 of 
$0.74/lb dw for meat and $4.18/lb dw for fins. Based on the 27 vessels 
that landed SCS in the Atlantic, the individual vessel impact would be 
an approximate loss of $11,059 per year.
    Alternative 2a would remove the quota linkage to blacknose sharks 
for shark directed limited access permit holders in the Atlantic region 
south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude once the blacknose shark quota is 
reached and would implement a commercial retention limit of 50 non-
blacknose SCS per trip at that point. Additionally, this alternative 
would adjust the blacknose shark quota to 15.0 mt dw (33,069 lb dw) 
assuming a 5 lb dw carcass, or 11.8 mt dw (26,089 lb dw) assuming a 12 
lb dw carcass. Reduction of the blacknose shark quota would result in 
an average ex-vessel revenue loss of $5,275 for the fishery assuming a 
5 lb dw carcass, or $12,660 assuming a 12 lb dw carcass. Conversely, 
increased landings of non-blacknose SCS would result in an overall 
estimated average ex-vessel revenue gain of $34,470 for the fishery. 
NMFS estimates that this bycatch retention limit would result in a net 
gain of $21,810 to $29,195 in average ex-vessel revenue for the fishery 
per year depending on the average carcass weight of blacknose sharks, 
or $808 to $1,081 per vessel for the 27 vessels that targeted non-
blacknose SCS in 2015.
    Alternative 2b would remove the quota linkage to blacknose sharks 
for shark directed limited access permit holders in the Atlantic region 
south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude once the blacknose shark quota is 
reached and would implement a commercial retention limit of 150 non-
blacknose SCS per trip at that point. Additionally, this alternative 
would adjust the blacknose shark quota to 10.5 mt dw (23,148 lb dw) 
assuming a 5 lb dw carcass, or 1.1 mt dw (2,521 lb dw) assuming a 12 lb 
dw carcass. Reduction of the blacknose shark quota would result in an 
average ex-vessel revenue loss of $15,783 for the fishery assuming a 5 
lb dw carcass, or $37,878 assuming a 12 lb dw carcass. Conversely, 
increased landings of non-blacknose SCS would result in an overall 
estimated average ex-vessel revenue gain of $65,139 for the fishery. 
NMFS estimates that this bycatch retention limit would result in a net 
gain of $27,261 to $49,357 in average ex-vessel revenue for the fishery 
per year depending on the average carcass weight of blacknose sharks, 
or approximately $1,010 to $1,828 per vessel for the 27 vessels that 
targeted non-blacknose SCS in 2015.
    Alternative 2c would remove the quota linkage to blacknose sharks 
for shark directed limited access permit holders in the Atlantic region 
south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude once the blacknose shark quota is 
reached and would implement a commercial retention limit of 250 non-
blacknose SCS per trip at that point. This alternative would also 
adjust the blacknose shark quota to 6.1 mt dw (13,448 lb dw) assuming a 
5 lb dw carcass, or 0.0 mt dw (0.0 lb dw) assuming a 12 lb dw carcass. 
Reduction of the blacknose shark quota would result in an average ex-
vessel revenue loss of $26,295 for the fishery assuming a 5 lb dw 
carcass, or $40,575 assuming a 12 lb dw carcass. Conversely, increased 
landings of non-blacknose SCS would result in an estimated average ex-
vessel revenue gain of $80,339 for the fishery. NMFS estimates that 
this bycatch retention limit would result in a net gain of $39,764 to 
$54,044 in average ex-vessel revenue for the fishery per year depending 
on the average carcass weight of blacknose sharks, or approximately 
$1,473 to $2,002 per vessel for the 27 vessels that targeted non-
blacknose SCS in 2015.
    Alternative 3a would establish a commercial retention limit of 50 
blacknose sharks per trip for shark directed limited access permit 
holders in the Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude and 
maintain the quota linkage between blacknose sharks and non-blacknose 
SCS. This alternative would have minor beneficial to neutral economic 
impacts as a retention limit of this size would allow an average of 250 
to 600 lb dw blacknose sharks per trip and would take an estimated 63 
to 152 trips for fishermen to land the full blacknose shark quota. This 
alternative will prevent targeted take of blacknose sharks as the per 
trip value of 50 blacknose sharks would range between $270 ($218 for 
meat and $52 for fins) assuming an average weight of 5 lb dw per 
blacknose shark, and $642 ($522 for meat and $120 for fins) assuming an 
average weight of 12 lb dw for the estimated 13 vessels that land 
blacknose sharks in the Atlantic. Based on 2015 eDealer reports, 106 
trips landed blacknose sharks, and between 14 and 33 percent landed 
blacknose sharks in excess of a commercial retention limit of 50 
blacknose sharks depending on the average trip weight used in the 
calculations (250-600 lb dw). This alternative would likely increase 
the number of trips needed to fill the blacknose shark quota when 
compared to the average from 2010 through 2015 under Alternative 1. A 
retention limit of 50 blacknose sharks could potentially cause the SCS 
fisheries to close as early as June or July if every trip landing 
blacknose sharks landed the full retention limit but, since few 
fishermen land that many blacknose sharks per trip now, NMFS believes a 
change in behavior as a result of this alternative is unlikely.
    Alternative 3b would establish a commercial retention limit of 16 
blacknose sharks per trip for all Atlantic shark limited access permit 
holders in the Atlantic region south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude and 
maintain the quota linkage between blacknose sharks and non-blacknose 
SCS. This alternative would have minor beneficial economic impacts as a 
retention limit of this size would allow an average of 80 to 192 lb dw 
blacknose sharks per trip and would take an estimated 198 to 474 trips 
for fishermen to land the full blacknose shark quota. Based on 2015 
eDealer reports, 38 to 55 percent of the overall number of trips landed 
blacknose sharks in excess of a commercial retention limit of 16 
blacknose sharks depending on the average trip weight used in the 
calculations (80-192 lb dw). This alternative would dramatically 
increase the number of trips needed to fill the blacknose shark quota 
when compared to the yearly averages under Alternative 1. Currently, 
the linkage between the blacknose shark quota and the non-blacknose SCS 
quota causes the closure of both fisheries once the lower blacknose 
shark quota is attained. NMFS expects that, under this alternative, the 
blacknose shark quota would not be filled and the SCS fisheries in the 
South Atlantic region

[[Page 90245]]

would not close early. Thus, this alternative would have minor 
beneficial economic impacts to the Atlantic SCS fisheries as it would 
allow for the potential full-utilization of the non-blacknose SCS 
quota, and potentially increase total ex-vessel revenue by as much as 
$298,583 a year. However, given the low monthly trip rates occurring to 
harvest SCS in the Atlantic, the non-blacknose SCS quota is likely to 
remain underutilized. Using calculations based on observed trip and 
landings rates of non-blacknose SCS in 2015, a more likely result of 
this alternative would be additional landings of 104,962 lb dw of non-
blacknose SCS valued at $98,664, or approximately $3,654 per vessel for 
the 27 vessels that participated in the fishery in 2015. Any financial 
losses due to underutilization of the blacknose shark quota would be 
minimal in comparison.
    Alternative 3c, the preferred alternative, would establish a 
commercial retention limit of eight blacknose sharks per trip for all 
Atlantic shark limited access permit holders in the Atlantic region 
south of 34[deg]00' N. latitude and maintain the quota linkage between 
blacknose sharks and non-blacknose SCS. Because this retention limit 
would be less than the current retention limit for shark incidental 
limited access permit holders, the retention limit for shark incidental 
limited access permit holders would need to change slightly. The 
adjusted retention limit for incidental permit holders would still 
allow fishermen to land a total of 16 pelagic or small coastal sharks 
per trip but, of those sharks, no more than eight could be blacknose 
sharks. This alternative would have moderate beneficial economic 
impacts as a retention limit of this size would allow an average of 40 
to 96 lb dw blacknose sharks per trip and would take an estimated 395 
to 948 trips to land the full blacknose shark quota. Based on 2015 
eDealer reports, 55 to 70 percent of the overall number of trips landed 
blacknose sharks in excess of the commercial retention limit of eight 
blacknose sharks depending on the average trip weight used in the 
calculations (40-96 lb dw). This alternative would dramatically 
increase the number of trips needed to fill the blacknose shark quota 
when compared to the yearly averages under Alternative 1. Currently, 
the linkage between the blacknose shark quota and the non-blacknose SCS 
quota causes the closure of both fisheries once the lower blacknose 
shark quota is attained. NMFS expects that, under this alternative, the 
blacknose shark quota would not be filled and the SCS fisheries in the 
South Atlantic region would not close early. Thus, this would have 
moderate beneficial economic impacts as the fishermen would still be 
allowed to land blacknose sharks and the fishery would remain open for 
a longer period of time, significantly increasing non-blacknose SCS 
revenues by as much as $298,583 a year on average if the non-blacknose 
SCS quota is fully utilized. However, given current monthly trip rates 
in the Atlantic the non-blacknose SCS quota is likely to remain 
underutilized. Using calculations based on observed trip and landings 
rates of non-blacknose SCS in 2015, a more likely result of this 
alternative would be additional landings of 104,962 lb dw of non-
blacknose SCS valued at $98,664, or approximately $3,654 per vessel for 
the 27 vessels that participated in the fishery in 2015. Any financial 
losses due to underutilization of the blacknose shark quota would be 
minimal in comparison.
    Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for 
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish 
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule, 
and shall designate such publications as ``small entity compliance 
guides.'' The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is 
required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. As part of 
this rulemaking process, a listserv notice to permit holders that also 
serves as small entity compliance guide (the guide) was prepared. 
Copies of this final rule are available from the HMS Management 
Division (see ADDRESSES), and the guide, i.e., the listserv notice, 
will be sent to all fishermen who hold commercial shark limited access 
permits. The guide and this final rule will be available upon request.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635

    Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations, Imports, 
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Treaties.

    Dated: December 7, 2016.
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 635 is amended 
as follows:

PART 635--ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 635 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

0
2. In Sec.  635.24, revise paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4)(ii), and 
(a)(4)(iii) to read as follows:


Sec.  635.24  Commercial retention limits for sharks, swordfish, and 
BAYS tunas.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) The commercial retention limit for LCS other than sandbar 
sharks for a person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued 
a directed LAP for sharks and does not have a valid shark research 
permit, or a person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued 
a directed LAP for sharks and that has been issued a shark research 
permit but does not have a NMFS-approved observer on board, may range 
between zero and 55 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip 
if the respective LCS management group(s) is open per Sec. Sec.  635.27 
and 635.28. Such persons may not retain, possess, or land sandbar 
sharks. At the start of each fishing year, the default commercial 
retention limit is 45 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip 
unless NMFS determines otherwise and files with the Office of the 
Federal Register for publication notification of an inseason 
adjustment. During the fishing year, NMFS may adjust the retention 
limit per the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria listed in 
paragraph (a)(8) of this section.
    (3) A person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued an 
incidental LAP for sharks and does not have a valid shark research 
permit, or a person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued 
an incidental LAP for sharks and that has been issued a valid shark 
research permit but does not have a NMFS-approved observer on board, 
may retain, possess, or land no more than 3 LCS other than sandbar 
sharks per vessel per trip if the respective LCS management group(s) is 
open per Sec. Sec.  635.27 and 635.28. Such persons may not retain, 
possess, or land sandbar sharks.
    (4) * * *
    (ii) A person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued a 
shark LAP and is operating south of 34[deg]00' N. lat. in the Atlantic 
region, as defined at Sec.  635.27(b)(1), may retain, possess, land, or 
sell blacknose and non-blacknose SCS if the respective blacknose and 
non-blacknose SCS management groups are open per Sec. Sec.  635.27 and 
635.28. Such

[[Page 90246]]

persons may retain, possess, land, or sell no more than 8 blacknose 
sharks per vessel per trip. A person who owns or operates a vessel that 
has been issued a shark LAP and is operating north of 34[deg]00' N. 
lat. in the Atlantic region, as defined at Sec.  635.27(b)(1), or a 
person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued a shark LAP 
and is operating in the Gulf of Mexico region, as defined at Sec.  
635.27(b)(1), may not retain, possess, land, or sell any blacknose 
sharks, but may retain, possess, land, or sell non-blacknose SCS if the 
respective non-blacknose SCS management group is open per Sec. Sec.  
635.27 and 635.28.
    (iii) Consistent with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section, a 
person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued an incidental 
shark LAP may retain, possess, land, or sell no more than 16 SCS and 
pelagic sharks, combined, per vessel per trip, if the respective 
fishery is open per Sec. Sec.  635.27 and 635.28. Of those 16 SCS and 
pelagic sharks per vessel per trip, no more than 8 shall be blacknose 
sharks.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2016-29984 Filed 12-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P