Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Shrimp Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico; Revisions to Bycatch Reduction Devices and Testing Protocols, 8219-8228 [E8-2679]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Guidelines amount, but less than 200%
of the applicable Federal Poverty
Guidelines amount (and who may be
found to be financially eligible under
duly adopted exceptions to the annual
income ceiling in accordance with
sections 1611.3, 1611.4 and 1611.5).
Victor M. Fortuno,
Vice President for Legal Affairs, General
Counsel & Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–2427 Filed 2–12–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7050–01–P
Comments regarding the approved
collection-of-information requirements
contained in this final rule should be
submitted in writing to Jason Rueter at
the Southeast Regional Office address
(above) and to David Rostker, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), by email at DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov,
or by fax to 202–395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Branstetter, telephone: 727–824–
5305, fax: 727–824–5308, e-mail:
Steve.Branstetter@noaa.gov.
The
fisheries for shrimp in the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) of the Gulf of
Mexico (Gulf) and the South Atlantic
are managed under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) and regulations
at 50 CFR part 622. The regulations
implement the Gulf FMP prepared by
the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council (GMFMC) and the South
Atlantic FMP prepared by the South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council
(SAFMC).
On October 12, 2007, NMFS
published the proposed rule to revise
the bycatch reduction device testing
protocols for the Gulf and South
Atlantic regions, revise the BRD
certification criterion for the western
Gulf, and certify additional BRDs (72 FR
58031). Public comment on the
proposed rule was requested through
November 13, 2007. The rationale for
the measures contained in this final rule
is provided in the preamble to the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 0612243163–7151–01]
RIN 0648–AU59
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; Shrimp
Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico;
Revisions to Bycatch Reduction
Devices and Testing Protocols
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
framework procedures for adjusting
management measures specified in
regulations implementing the Fishery
Management Plan for the Shrimp
Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf
FMP) and the Fishery Management Plan
for the Shrimp Fishery of the South
Atlantic Region (South Atlantic FMP),
NMFS issues this final rule to
consolidate and make modifications to
the Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manuals (Manual) for the Gulf of
Mexico and the South Atlantic regions.
This final rule also revises the bycatch
reduction device (BRD) certification
criterion for the western Gulf of Mexico
and certifies additional BRDs. The
intended effect of this final rule is to
improve bycatch reduction in the
shrimp fisheries and better meet the
requirements of national standard 9.
DATES: This final rule is effective March
14, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
and the consolidated and revised
Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual are available from the Southeast
Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701;
phone: 727–824–5305; fax: 727–824–
5308.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
Comments and Responses
The following is a summary of the
comments NMFS received on the
proposed rule and NMFS’ respective
responses. Three comment letters were
received during the comment period. In
addition, a non-governmental
organization submitted comments
signed by 1,266 individuals in support
of the proposed action.
Comment 1: NMFS should implement
the proposed changes as part of a
comprehensive plan to address the
significant amount of bycatch associated
with this fishery and help end
overfishing and rebuild the red snapper
stock.
Response: This rulemaking is part of
a comprehensive plan addressing
bycatch in the shrimp fishery and
overfishing of the red snapper resource.
This rulemaking to provide additional
BRDs to the fishery will support
additional actions taken by the GMFMC
and NMFS. In 2006, the GMFMC
recommended, and NMFS
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8219
implemented, an individual fishing
quota (IFQ) for the commercial Gulf red
snapper fishery; in general, IFQs tend to
help reduce fishing mortality. To better
control overall effort in the shrimp
fishery, the GMFMC recommended, and
NMFS implemented, a moratorium on
the issuance of Federal shrimp vessel
permits. Approximately 2,000 vessels
qualified for a moratorium permit; this
is a substantial reduction from the
number of vessels participating in the
fishery in the past. In addition, the
GMFMC recommended, and NMFS is
currently considering several actions to
end overfishing of red snapper by 2010
and rebuild the stock by 2032. The
recommended actions include a
substantial reduction in the total
allowable catch for the directed
commercial and recreational red
snapper fishery, harvesting restrictions
to restrain the recreational fishery to its
quota, and possible time-area closures
for the shrimp fishery to reduce bycatch
mortality on juvenile red snapper.
Comment 2: The proposed changes to
increase flexibility in the field testing
procedures for experimental BRDs
should substantially improve the
practicability of the testing criteria and
procedures that currently exist. Many of
the changes will better allow research to
be adapted to the real-world practical
realities of shrimp trawling and, as a
consequence, will encourage more
fishermen to participate in testing new
BRD designs and configurations.
Response: The procedures prescribed
for testing BRDs in the field were
rigorous in an attempt to reduce the
statistical uncertainty of the results.
However, these rigorous field sampling
procedures and the inflexible statistical
procedures hindered the successful
certification of several BRD designs that
showed promise at reducing substantial
amounts of bycatch. This discourages
innovative developments to improve
BRDs.
Comment 3: Replacing the current
tow time restrictions with a more
realistic requirement for such
adjustments to be reasonable will allow
fishermen to adapt to local fishing
conditions and successfully complete a
test on an experimental BRD. However,
the proposed rule indicated any tow
time changes made during a field test
would need to be approved by the
Regional Administrator (RA) at the
conclusion of the test, and the changes
may be disapproved. There should be a
more deliberate process for the
applicant and NMFS to resolve what the
acceptable limits will be on tow time
adjustments. This should be done on a
case-by-case basis before the testing
begins and as part of the initial design
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
8220
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
of the operations plan. This will avoid
the situation of after-the-fact rejections
of the tests by the RA and the resulting
wasted time and resources.
Response: It is the responsibility of
the applicant to make logical and
reasonable proposals for tow times in
the research plan submitted to the RA
requesting a Letter of Authorization to
conduct a test on an experimental BRD.
The research plan should also include a
‘‘contingency’’ plan if any of the
primary procedures have to be changed
during a test. Changes to the tow time
made during a test should follow a
similar logical and reasonable rationale.
Even under the best pre-planned event,
there may be a need to make such a
change during a test. For example, the
total catch taken during a tow may be
greater than what was anticipated in the
applicant’s proposal. Under such
conditions, shorter tow times would
produce manageable quantities of catch
for sampling. Under the new
procedures, when the final test results
are submitted to NMFS for review, the
applicant would simply need to
document the need for such a change,
and provide a good rationale for such
change. The rationale for the change
would be reviewed by the RA, in
consultation with Southeast Fisheries
Science Center staff, on a case-by-case
basis.
Comment 4: The current requirement
to rotate gear between the port and
starboard sides every four to six tows
(Gulf) or daily (South Atlantic) to
eliminate net or side bias is highly
impracticable and has presented a
serious obstacle to participation in the
testing program. The proposed change
would allow the applicant to propose an
acceptable rotational schedule that still
ensures equal numbers of tows will be
conducted with the BRD candidate on
both sides. In the case of a quad-rig (4–
net) vessel, NMFS should additionally
allow the applicant to use the candidate
BRD in one of the two nets on each side
of the vessel, simultaneously, as an
alternative means to eliminate bias that
might result from testing on just one
side of the vessel. This will help
eliminate the numerous practical
difficulties associated with rotating gear.
Response: BRD testing is conducted
by comparing the differences in the
catch and bycatch of two nets towed
simultaneously by a single vessel, where
one net contains an experimental BRD,
the other net has no BRD. Assuming the
two nets have equal or similar fishing
efficiencies, the differences in catch and
bycatch between the two nets can be
attributed to the inclusion of the
experimental BRD in one net. In reality,
no two nets will have identical fishing
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
efficiencies, nor will each net encounter
exactly the same number of each species
during a tow. Therefore, the paired tests
will always have some, albeit minor,
bias between nets. The requirement to
rotate the experimental BRD from one
net to another on a regular basis is
intended to negate this bias.
Additionally, there may be some
differences in the catch between
outboard and inboard nets in a quad-rig
system, especially for the inboard net
located behind the try net. Comparisons
of the catch of an inboard net to the
catch of an outboard net adds another
variable for consideration. For this
reason, to make the paired comparison
as balanced as possible, the procedure
has always designated the two outboard
nets be used as experimental and
control nets. Nevertheless, NMFS does
not automatically exclude the proposed
concept to place an experimental BRD
in a net on both sides of the vessel, and
compare the catch of those nets against
the catch of the other two nets that do
not contain a BRD. The revisions to the
testing procedures are intended to
provide the applicant with the
flexibility to make a reasonable proposal
for a scientifically and statistically valid
experiment.
Classification
The Administrator, Southeast Region,
NMFS, determined that this rule is
necessary for the conservation and
management of the shrimp fisheries in
the Gulf and the South Atlantic regions
and is consistent with the MagnusonStevens Act and other applicable laws.
This final rule has been determined to
be significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
A FRFA was prepared. The FRFA
incorporates the IRFA, a summary of the
significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the IRFA, and
NMFS responses to those comments,
and a summary of the analyses
completed to support the action. A copy
of this analysis is available from NMFS
(see ADDRESSES).
This final rule will modify the
procedures for field testing BRD
candidates for use in the Gulf and South
Atlantic EEZ commercial shrimp
fisheries, will modify the bycatch
reduction criterion for certifying BRDs
for use in the penaeid shrimp fishery in
the Gulf EEZ west of Cape San Blas,
Florida (western Gulf), and certify new
BRDs for the fisheries.
The purpose of this final rule is to
implement more practical field testing
procedures for BRD certification
candidates and to establish a realistic
bycatch reduction threshold for the Gulf
EEZ commercial shrimp fishery.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
No significant issues were raised by
public comments in response to the
IRFA. Therefore, no changes were made
in the final rule as a result of such
comments.
The primary entities that are expected
to apply for the BRD certification
process are state government, academic,
and not-for-profit entities. Independent
commercial shrimping operations in
either the Gulf or South Atlantic may
also be included among applicants. In
addition to being potential testing
applicants, Gulf shrimp vessels are
expected to be indirectly impacted by
the modification to the bycatch
reduction criterion. NMFS estimates up
to 24 applicants will apply for the BRD
certification process during the first year
and a smaller number in following
years. While the identity of entities that
might pursue future BRD testing cannot
be determined with any certainty, based
on past applicants, BRD testing is
expected to be undertaken by NMFS,
the Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department, the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, Texas A&M
University, the University of Georgia,
the Gulf and South Atlantic Fisheries
Foundation, Inc., other institutions, and
owners of shrimp vessels.
There are approximately 700 vessels
permitted to operate in the South
Atlantic EEZ commercial shrimp
fishery. The most current assessment of
the South Atlantic commercial shrimp
fishery covers the period 2000–2002 and
encompasses vessels that operated in
both state and EEZ waters. While this
assessment covered a larger universe of
vessels, an average of approximately
1,900 vessels per year, and different
economic conditions, it represents the
best profile available at this time. Over
this period, average gross revenue per
vessel ranged from approximately
$71,000 to approximately $81,000. The
highest gross revenue per vessel from all
commercial harvesting activities did not
exceed $1.0 million.
For the Gulf EEZ, as of March 26,
2007, a moratorium permit is required
to fish for shrimp. Based on the number
of permits issued and number of
applications being processed as of
November 8, 2007, approximately 2,000
vessels are expected to be issued
moratorium permits.
An evaluation of revenue distribution
within the Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp
fleet by vessel size indicates substantial
differences in yearly average revenues
between large (at least 60 ft (18.3 m) in
length) and small vessels. For the large
vessel group, average annual revenues
per vessel in 2004 was approximately
$140,000, while the comparable value
for small vessels was approximately
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
$27,000. Across all vessels, the average
annual gross revenue per vessel was
approximately $110,000. Maximum
yearly gross revenue reported by a
qualifying vessel was approximately
$1,046,000.
On average, small vessels are also
smaller in regards to most of their
physical attributes (e.g., they use
smaller crews, fewer and smaller nets,
have less engine horsepower and fuel
capacity). Small vessels are also older
on average. Large vessels tend to be
steel-hulled, whereas fiberglass hulls are
most prominent among small vessels,
though steel and wood hulls are also
common. Nearly two-thirds of large
vessels have freezing capabilities while
few small vessels have such equipment.
Small vessels still rely on ice for
refrigeration and storage, though more
than one-third of large vessels also rely
on ice. Some vessels are so small that
they rely on live wells for storage.
An important difference between
large and small Gulf EEZ commercial
shrimp vessels is with respect to their
dependency on the food shrimp fishery.
The percentage of revenues arising from
food shrimp landings is approximately
81 percent for large vessels, but only
approximately 58 percent for small
vessels. Thus, on average, large vessels
are more dependent than their smaller
counterparts on the food shrimp fishery.
However, dependency on food shrimp is
more variable within the small vessel
sector than the large vessel sector. Many
small vessels are quite dependent on
food shrimp landings, while others
illustrate little if any dependency.
Finally, according to recent
projections, on average, both small and
large Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp
vessels are experiencing significant
economic losses, ranging from a -27
percent rate of return (net revenues or
total fixed and variable costs) in the
small vessel sector to a -36 percent rate
of return in the large vessel sector (-33
percent on average for the fishery as a
whole).
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) defines a small organization as
any not-for-profit enterprise that is
independently owned and operated and
not dominant in its field of operation.
This definition includes private
educational institutions. The SBA also
defines a small governmental
jurisdiction as the government of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages,
school districts, or special districts with
a population less than 50,000. Finally,
the SBA defines a small business in the
commercial fishing activity as an entity
that is independently owned and
operated, is not dominant in its field of
operation (including its affiliates), and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
has average annual total receipts not in
excess of $4.0 million annually (NAICS
codes 114111 and 114112, finfish and
shellfish fishing).
While the identity of entities that
might pursue BRD testing cannot be
determined with any certainty, based on
past applicants, BRD testing is expected
to be undertaken by NMFS, the Texas
Parks and Wildlife Department, the
Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, Texas A&M University, the
University of Georgia, the Gulf and
South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation,
Inc., other institutions, and owners of
shrimp vessels. The state agencies are
extensions of the respective state
governments and, as such, clearly
exceed the SBA population thresholds
for small government entities. Similarly,
both Texas A&M University and the
University of Georgia are, as public
universities, extensions of the respective
state government educational systems,
with staff being state employees, and,
therefore, are similarly classified as
large entities. Any private college or
university, or non-profit organization
that might apply for the BRD testing
process is determined for the purpose of
this analysis to be a small entity because
private educational institutions and
small non-profit organizations are
generally understood to be smaller in
terms of student population, staff, and
operational budgets than public
institutions. Based on the maximum
annual revenue information for Gulf and
South Atlantic commercial shrimping
operations, vessels that may participate
in the certification program are
determined to be small business entities
for the purpose of this analysis. It is
unknown what portion of the estimated
maximum 24 entities expected to apply
for the certification program the first
year, and fewer entities in subsequent
years, would be small or large entities.
All entities that receive the Gulf EEZ
commercial shrimp fishery moratorium
permit may be indirectly affected by the
Gulf bycatch reduction criterion. Based
on the maximum revenue information
for Gulf EEZ commercial shrimping
operations, all such vessels are
determined, for the purpose of this
analysis, to be small business entities.
The measures in this final rule do not
affect the reporting or record-keeping
requirements for shrimp vessels. This
final rule only modifies the performance
standards used in BRD certification and
does not require new record or report
preparation.
The outcome of ‘‘significant economic
impact’’ can be ascertained by
examining two issues:
disproportionality and profitability.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8221
The disproportionality question is: do
the final regulations place a substantial
number of small entities at a significant
competitive disadvantage to large
entities? Revision to the Manual is not
expected to result in any direct or
indirect adverse economic impacts on
any affected entities since the reporting
burden per applicant will not increase
and the revisions, in and of themselves,
will not cause any BRDs to be certified,
provisionally certified, or decertified in
future actions. Therefore, the issue of
disproportionate impacts does not apply
to this component of the final rule.
Similarly, the change to the Gulf EEZ
commercial shrimp fishery bycatch
reduction criterion will not result in any
direct adverse economic impacts on
participants in the Gulf EEZ commercial
shrimp fishery. However, the change in
the bycatch reduction criterion is
expected to generate indirect impacts on
vessels in this fishery as a result of
future certification, provisional
certification, or decertification actions.
All of these vessels have been
determined to be small business
entities. Thus, the issue of
disproportionality does not apply to this
component of the final rule.
The certifications and provisional
certifications will affect all vessels in
the Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp
fishery, as well as some vessels in the
South Atlantic EEZ commercial shrimp
fishery. Because all of these entities are
determined to be small entities, the
issue of disproportionality does not
apply to this component of the final
rule.
The profitability question is: do the
regulations significantly reduce profit
for a substantial number of small
entities?
The revision of the Manual will not
directly affect fishery participation or
harvest because it merely establishes
procedures under which research and
gear development may proceed. The
bycatch reduction criterion for the Gulf
EEZ commercial shrimp fishery will
also not result in any direct adverse
economic impacts on fishery
participants because it is an
administrative action.
In addition to the Modified JonesDavis BRD, the bycatch reduction
criterion will allow for the extended
funnel BRD to be provisionally certified
for use in the Gulf EEZ shrimp fishery,
and the composite panel BRD to be
provisionally certified for use in the
Gulf and South Atlantic EEZ shrimp
fisheries. However, these three BRDs are
not presently certified for use by the
fleet in the western Gulf, are more costly
to purchase, and produce greater shrimp
loss, on average, than the predominantly
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
8222
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
used fisheye-type BRDs. As such, no
shrimp vessel owners are expected to
switch from their current BRDs to these
BRDs and no direct impacts are
expected to result from the certification
or provisional certification of these
BRDs.
The bycatch reduction criterion will,
however, result in decertification of
some currently used BRDs through
subsequent regulatory action.
Decertification of currently used BRDs
will require the use of alternative
certified or provisionally certified BRDs,
with associated re-gearing costs. Among
the BRDs currently in use, the
maximum first-year re-gearing cost that
could be incurred as a result of future
decertification would be that associated
with the Jones-Davis BRD, which is the
most expensive remaining certified
BRD, with an estimated cost of $425 per
BRD, and would range from $2,550 per
vessel for six BRDs to $4,250 per vessel
for 10 BRDs, or between 2.3 percent and
3.8 percent of an average vessel’s annual
revenues. Lowest BRD replacement
costs would be associated with a
Modified Jones-Davis BRD, with an
estimated cost of $300 per BRD, or
$1,800 to $3,000 per vessel. Not all
vessels would be required to acquire
new BRDs, however, since not all
current BRDs would be decertified, and
the cheapest and currently most
commonly used BRD, a fisheye-type
BRD, could continue to be used in a
different configuration. Although
potential resultant shrimp loss would
have to be figured into the decision,
some fishermen may elect to retain but
move the fisheye BRD as opposed to
purchasing a different BRD, thus
incurring no replacement costs for the
gear itself.
Since different BRDs produce
different rates of shrimp retention, the
decision of which BRD to use impacts
gross revenues as well as operational
and gear costs. Depending upon the
BRD type currently used and the BRD
type that might be selected as a
replacement, reductions in average
annual gross revenues of up to 3 percent
have been projected for small vessels
and 2 percent for many large vessels.
Actual performance would vary,
however, as individual vessels adopt the
BRD that best meets their skill and
fishing behavior in order to minimize
costs and maximize revenues. All
associated costs will directly accrue,
however, only to a subsequent rule and
not to the current action.
This final rule will certify the
Modified Jones-Davis BRD for the Gulf
and South Atlantic EEZ shrimp
fisheries, provisionally certify the
extended funnel BRD to be used in the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
Gulf EEZ shrimp fishery, and
provisionally certify the composite
panel BRD to be used in the Gulf and
South Atlantic EEZ shrimp fisheries. No
direct adverse economic impacts will
accrue to fishermen in either the Gulf or
South Atlantic EEZ shrimp fisheries as
a result of these changes because no
vessels will be required to use these
BRDs. The certification or provisional
certification of these BRDs will increase
the options available to vessels. Use of
these BRDs will be at the discretion of
individual fishermen and adoption of
the gear would only be expected to
occur where it was expected to result in
improved economic outcomes.
Two alternatives, the final rule and
the status quo, were considered for the
action to modify the Manual. The status
quo would continue overly restrictive
and inflexible testing procedures and
would not achieve NMFS’ objectives.
Three alternatives, including the
status quo, were considered for the
change in the BRD bycatch reduction
criterion. Two alternatives contained
multiple options, resulting in eight
effective alternatives. As previously
discussed, changing the criterion is an
administrative action and would not
simultaneously decertify BRDs currently
in use or require immediate
replacement. Decertification, with
attendant costs, however, will occur
through subsequent action.
The first alternative to the final
bycatch reduction criterion, the status
quo, is a specific juvenile red snapper
fishing mortality reduction. Maintaining
the status quo will result in the
decertification of all currently certified
BRDs except the Jones-Davis BRD for
use in the Gulf. Current data indicate
these BRDs do not meet the status quo
bycatch reduction criterion.
Decertification of these BRDs under the
status quo would induce greater
industry-wide replacement costs than
the bycatch reduction criterion of this
final rule because the final rule will
allow more BRD options than the single
Jones-Davis BRD.
The second alternative to the final
bycatch reduction criterion would
continue to base the bycatch reduction
target on juvenile red snapper, similar to
the status quo, but would consider three
different minimum thresholds in catchper-unit-effort (CPUE). The two lower
minimum thresholds, 12 percent and 20
percent reductions in juvenile red
snapper CPUE, would be expected to
allow continued use of the fisheye BRD,
resulting in no direct or indirect adverse
economic impacts. Neither threshold,
however, would meet the objective of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act requirement
that bycatch be reduced to the extent
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
practicable. The final rule alternative
has been identified to improve overall
finfish bycatch reduction including
juvenile red snapper at rates higher than
specified by these alternatives. The
highest red snapper bycatch reduction
minimum threshold, a 30 percent
reduction in juvenile red snapper CPUE,
would be expected to result in the same
effects as the status quo, because it has
not been demonstrated this goal is
achievable, resulting in greater indirect
adverse economic impacts than the
bycatch reduction criterion of this final
rule.
The third alternative to the final
bycatch reduction criterion would base
the bycatch reduction criterion on all
finfish species and considered four
minimum thresholds, ranging from 10 to
40 percent. The final rule will establish
a 30–percent finfish bycatch reduction
minimum threshold. The two lower
finfish bycatch reduction minimum
thresholds, 10 percent and 20 percent,
would be expected to allow continued
use of fisheye BRDs, resulting in no
direct or indirect adverse economic
impacts. However, neither threshold
would meet the Magnuson-Stevens Act
requirement of achieving bycatch
reduction to the extent practicable
because several available BRDs are
already achieving a 30–percent
reduction in finfish bycatch. The
highest finfish bycatch reduction
minimum threshold, 40 percent, would
not be expected to result in any direct
adverse economic impacts but would be
expected to result in indirect increased
gear costs equal to those of the status
quo, resulting in greater indirect adverse
economic impacts than the bycatch
reduction criterion of this final rule.
This alternative would also set an
excessive standard that few BRD designs
could achieve.
Copies of the FRFA are available from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
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 an 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.’’ As part of this
rulemaking process, NMFS prepared a
fishery bulletin, which also serves as a
small entity compliance guide. The
fishery bulletin will be sent to all vessel
permit holders in the Gulf and South
Atlantic shrimp fisheries.
This final rule contains approved
collection-of-information requirements-namely, the BRD certification process,
consisting of applications for pre-
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
certification or certification of a new
BRD, pre-certification adjusting, the
testing itself, the submission of the test
results, application for observer
position, and references for observers,
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). These collection-of-information
requirements have been approved by
OMB under Control Number 0648–0345.
The public reporting burden for this
collection of information which
includes the application, precertification phase, testing, and
submission of results, is estimated to
average 222 hours per test. The public
reporting burden for applying for an
observer position will average 1 hour
per response, and the burden for
obtaining references will average 1 hour
per response. The collection consists of
an Application Form, Vessel
Information Form, Gear Specification
Form, TED/BRD Specification Form,
Station Sheet Form, Species
Characterization Form, Length
Frequency Form, and Condition and
Fate Form. The average response time
for each of these forms is 20 minutes,
except for the Species Characterization
Form which has a 2.8-hour response
time and the Application Form which
has a 2.3-hour response time. In
addition, 4 hours will be needed to
prepare the final report. These burden
estimates include the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding these burden
estimates or any other aspect of the
collection-of-information requirement,
including suggestions for reducing the
burden, to NMFS and to OMB (see
ADDRESSES).
Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, no person is required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with, a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA unless that
collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Virgin Islands.
Dated: February 7, 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 622 is amended
as follows:
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE
CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH
ATLANTIC
1. The authority citation for part 622
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In § 622.41, paragraph (h) is
removed and reserved and paragraph (g)
is revised to read as follows:
I
§ 622.41
Species specific limitations.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) BRD requirement for Gulf and
South Atlantic shrimp. On a shrimp
trawler in the Gulf EEZ or South
Atlantic EEZ, each net that is rigged for
fishing must have a BRD installed that
is listed in paragraph (g)(2) of this
section and is certified or provisionally
certified for the area in which the
shrimp trawler is located, unless
exempted as specified in paragraphs
(g)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section. A
trawl net is rigged for fishing if it is in
the water, or if it is shackled, tied, or
otherwise connected to a sled, door, or
other device that spreads the net, or to
a tow rope, cable, pole, or extension,
either on board or attached to a shrimp
trawler.
(1) Exemptions from BRD
requirement—(i) Royal red shrimp
exemption. A shrimp trawler is exempt
from the requirement to have a certified
or provisionally certified BRD installed
in each net provided that at least 90
percent (by weight) of all shrimp on
board or offloaded from such trawler are
royal red shrimp.
(ii) Try net exemption. A shrimp
trawler is exempt from the requirement
to have a certified or provisionally
certified BRD installed in a single try
net with a headrope length of 16 ft (4.9
m) or less provided the single try net is
either placed immediately in front of
another net or is not connected to
another net.
(iii) Roller trawl exemption. A shrimp
trawler is exempt from the requirement
to have a certified or provisionally
certified BRD installed in up to two
rigid-frame roller trawls that are 16 ft
(4.9 m) or less in length used or
possessed on board. A rigid-frame roller
trawl is a trawl that has a mouth formed
by a rigid frame and a grid of rigid
vertical bars; has rollers on the lower
horizontal part of the frame to allow the
trawl to roll over the bottom and any
obstruction while being towed; and has
no doors, boards, or similar devices
attached to keep the mouth of the trawl
open.
(iv) BRD certification testing
exemption. A shrimp trawler that is
authorized by the RA to participate in
the pre-certification testing phase or to
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8223
test a BRD in the EEZ for possible
certification, has such written
authorization on board, and is
conducting such test in accordance with
the ‘‘Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual’’ is granted a limited exemption
from the BRD requirement specified in
this paragraph (g). The exemption from
the BRD requirement is limited to those
trawls that are being used in the
certification trials. All other trawls
rigged for fishing must be equipped
with certified or provisionally certified
BRDs.
(2) Procedures for certification and
decertification of BRDs. The process for
the certification of BRDs consists of two
phases--an optional pre-certification
phase and a required certification phase.
The RA may also provisionally certify a
BRD.
(i) Pre-certification. The precertification phase allows a person to
test and evaluate a new BRD design for
up to 60 days without being subject to
the observer requirements and rigorous
testing requirements specified for
certification testing in the ‘‘Bycatch
Reduction Device Testing Manual.’’
(A) A person who wants to conduct
pre-certification phase testing must
submit an application to the RA, as
specified in the ‘‘Bycatch Reduction
Device Testing Manual.’’ The ‘‘Bycatch
Reduction Device Testing Manual’’,
which is available from the RA, upon
request, contains the application forms.
(B) After reviewing the application,
the RA will determine whether to issue
a letter of authorization (LOA) to
conduct pre-certification trials upon the
vessel specified in the application. If the
RA authorizes pre-certification, the RA’s
LOA must be on board the vessel during
any trip involving the BRD testing.
(ii) Certification. A person who
proposes a BRD for certification for use
in the Gulf EEZ or South Atlantic EEZ
must submit an application to test such
BRD, conduct the testing, and submit
the results of the test in accordance with
the ‘‘Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual.’’ The RA will issue a LOA to
conduct certification trials upon the
vessel specified in the application if the
RA finds that: The operation plan
submitted with the application meets
the requirements of the ‘‘Bycatch
Reduction Device Testing Manual≥; the
observer identified in the application is
qualified; and the results of any precertification trials conducted have been
reviewed and deemed to indicate a
reasonable scientific basis for
conducting certification testing. If
authorization to conduct certification
trials is denied, the RA will provide a
letter of explanation to the applicant,
together with relevant recommendations
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
8224
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
to address the deficiencies resulting in
the denial. To be certified for use in the
fishery, the BRD candidate must
successfully demonstrate a 30 percent
reduction in total weight of finfish
bycatch. In addition, the BRD candidate
must satisfy the following conditions:
There is at least a 50–percent
probability the true reduction rate of the
BRD candidate meets the bycatch
reduction criterion and there is no more
than a 10–percent probability the true
reduction rate of the BRD candidate is
more than 5 percentage points less than
the bycatch reduction criterion. If a BRD
meets both conditions, consistent with
the ‘‘Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual’’, NMFS, through appropriate
rulemaking procedures, will add the
BRD to the list of certified BRDs in
paragraph (g)(3) of this section; and
provide the specifications for the newly
certified BRD, including any special
conditions deemed appropriate based
on the certification testing results.
(iii) Provisional certification. Based on
data provided consistent with the
‘‘Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual’’, the RA may provisionally
certify a BRD if there is at least a 50–
percent probability the true reduction
rate of the BRD is no more than 5
percentage points less than the bycatch
reduction criterion, i.e. 25 percent
reduction in total weight of finfish
bycatch. Through appropriate
rulemaking procedures, NMFS will add
the BRD to the list of provisionally
certified BRDs in paragraph (g)(3) of this
section; and provide the specifications
for the BRD, including any special
conditions deemed appropriate based
on the certification testing results. A
provisional certification is effective for
2 years from the date of publication of
the notification in the Federal Register
announcing the provisional
certification.
(iv) Decertification. The RA will
decertify a BRD if NMFS determines the
BRD does not meet the requirements for
certification or provisional certification.
Before determining whether to decertify
a BRD, the RA will notify the
appropriate Fishery Management
Council in writing, and the public will
be provided an opportunity to comment
on the advisability of any proposed
decertification. The RA will consider
any comments from the Council and
public, and if the RA elects to decertify
the BRD, the RA will proceed with
decertification via appropriate
rulemaking.
(3) Certified and provisionally
certified BRDs —(i) Certified BRDS. The
following BRDs are certified for use in
the Gulf EEZ and South Atlantic EEZ
unless indicated otherwise.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
Specifications of these certified BRDs
are contained in Appendix D to this
part.
(A) Fisheye.
(B) Gulf fisheye.
(C) Jones-Davis.
(D) Modified Jones-Davis.
(E) Expanded mesh.
(F) Extended funnel -South Atlantic
EEZ only.
(ii) Provisionally certified BRDs. The
following BRDs are provisionally
certified for use in the areas and for the
time periods indicated. Specifications of
these provisionally certified BRDs are
contained in Appendix D to this part.
(A) Extended funnel- Gulf EEZ only;
through February 16, 2010.
(B) Composite panel -Gulf EEZ and
South Atlantic EEZ; through February
16, 2010.
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. In Appendix D to part 622, sections
F and G are added to read as follows:
Appendix D to Part 622—
Specifications for Certified BRDs
*
*
*
*
*
F. Modified Jones-Davis.
1. Description. The Modified JonesDavis BRD is a variation to the
alternative funnel construction method
of the Jones-Davis BRD except the
funnel is assembled by using depthstretched and heat-set polyethylene
webbing instead of the flaps formed
from the extension webbing. In
addition, no hoops are used to hold the
BRD open.
2. Minimum Construction and
Installation Requirements. The
Modified Jones-Davis BRD must contain
all of the following.
(a) Webbing extension. The webbing
extension must be constructed from a
single rectangular piece of 1 5/8–inch
(4.1–cm) stretch mesh number 30 nylon
with dimensions of 39 1⁄2 meshes by 150
meshes. A tube is formed from the
extension webbing by sewing the 39 1⁄2–
mesh-sides together.
(b) Funnel. The funnel must be
constructed from two sections of 1 5/8–
inch (4.1–cm) heat-set and depthstretched polypropylene or
polyethylene webbing. The two side
sections must be rectangular in shape,
25 meshes on the leading edge by 21
meshes deep. The 25–mesh leading edge
of each polyethylene webbing section
must be sewn evenly two meshes in
from the front of the extension webbing
starting 25 meshes from the top center
on each side. The 21–mesh edge must
be sewn to the extension webbing on a
9–bar and 1–mesh angle in the top and
bottom, forming a V-shape funnel.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(c) Cutting the escape opening. The
leading edge of the escape openings
must be located within 18 inches (45.7
cm) of the posterior edge of the turtle
excluder device (TED) grid. The area of
the escape opening must total at least
635 in2 (4,097 cm2). Two escape
openings, 6 meshes wide by 12 meshes
deep, must be cut 4 meshes apart in the
extension webbing, starting at the top
center extension seam, 7 meshes back
from the leading edge, and 30 meshes to
the left and to the right (total of four
openings). The four escape openings
must be double selvaged for strength.
(d) Cone fish deflector. The cone fish
deflector is constructed of 2 pieces of 1
5/8–inch (4.1–cm) polypropylene or
polyethylene webbing, 40 meshes wide
by 20 meshes in length and cut on the
bar on each side forming a triangle.
Starting at the apex of the two triangles,
the two pieces must be sewn together to
form a cone of webbing. The apex of the
cone fish deflector must be positioned
within 12 inches (30.5 cm) of the
posterior edge of the funnel.
(e) 11–inch (27.9–cm) cable hoop for
cone deflector. A single hoop must be
constructed of 5/16–inch (0.79–cm) or
3/8–inch (0.95–cm) cable 34 1⁄2 inches
(87.6 cm) in length. The ends must be
joined by a 3–inch (7.6–cm) piece of 3/
8–inch (0.95–cm) aluminum pipe
pressed together with a 1/4–inch (0.64–
cm) die. The hoop must be inserted in
the webbing cone, attached 10 meshes
from the apex and laced all the way
around with heavy twine.
(f) Installation of the cone in the
extension. The apex of the cone must be
installed in the extension within 12
inches (30.5 cm) behind the back edge
of the funnel and attached in four
places. The midpoint of a piece of
number 60 twine (or at least 4–mesh
wide strip of number 21 or heavier
webbing) 3 ft (1.22 m) in length must be
attached to the apex of the cone. This
piece of twine or webbing must be
attached within 5 meshes of the aft edge
of the funnel at the center of each of its
sides. Two 12–inch (30.5–cm) pieces of
number 60 (or heavier) twine must be
attached to the top and bottom of the
11–inch (27.9–cm) cone hoop. The
opposite ends of these two pieces of
twine must be attached to the top and
bottom center of the extension webbing
to keep the cone from inverting into the
funnel.
G. Composite Panel.
1. Description. The Composite Panel
BRD is a variation to the alternative
funnel construction method of the
Jones-Davis BRD except the funnel is
assembled by using depth-stretched and
heat-set polyethylene webbing with
square mesh panels on the inside
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
instead of the flaps formed from the
extension webbing. In addition, no
hoops are used to hold the BRD open.
2. Minimum Construction and
Installation Requirements. The
Composite Panel BRD must contain all
of the following:
(a) Webbing extension. The webbing
extension must be constructed from a
single rectangular piece of 1 1⁄2–inch to
1 5/8–inch (3.8–cm to 4.1–cm) stretch
mesh number 30 nylon with dimensions
of 24 1⁄2 meshes by 150 to 160 meshes.
A tube is formed from the extension
webbing piece by sewing the 24 1⁄2–
mesh sides together. The leading edge of
the webbing extension must be attached
no more than 4 meshes from the
posterior edge of the TED grid.
(b) Funnel. The V-shaped funnel
consists of two webbing panels attached
to the extension along the leading edge
of the panels. The top and bottom edges
of the panels are sewn diagonally across
the extension toward the center to form
the funnel. The panels are 2–ply in
design, each with an inner layer of 1 1⁄2–
inch to 1 5/8–inch (3.8–cm to 4.1–cm)
heat-set and depth-stretched
polyethylene webbing and an outer
layer constructed of 2–inch (5.1–cm)
square mesh webbing (1–inch bar). The
inner webbing layer must be rectangular
in shape, 36 meshes on the leading edge
by 20 meshes deep. The 36–mesh
leading edges of the polyethylene
webbing should be sewn evenly to 24
meshes of the extension webbing 1 1⁄2
meshes from and parallel to the leading
edge of the extension starting 12 meshes
up from the bottom center on each side.
Alternately sew 2 meshes of the
polyethylene webbing to 1 mesh of the
extension webbing then 1 mesh of the
polyethylene webbing to 1 mesh of the
extension webbing toward the top. The
bottom 20–mesh edges of the
polyethylene layers are sewn evenly to
the extension webbing on a 2 bar 1 mesh
angle toward the bottom back center
forming a v-shape in the bottom of the
extension webbing. The top 20–mesh
edges of the polyethylene layers are
sewn evenly along the bars of the
extension webbing toward the top back
center. The square mesh layers must be
rectangular in shape and constructed of
2–inch (5.1–cm) webbing that is 18 bars
or squares on the leading edge. The
depth of the square mesh layer must be
no more than 2 inches (5.1 cm) less than
the 20 mesh side of the inner
polyethylene layer when stretched
taught. The 18 bar leading edge of each
square mesh layer must be sewn evenly
1 bar to 2 meshes of the 36–mesh
leading edge of the polyethylene section
and the sides are sewn evenly (in
length) to the 20–mesh edges of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
polyethylene webbing. This will form a
v-shape funnel using the top of the
extension webbing as the top of the
funnel and the bottom of the extension
webbing as the bottom of the funnel.
(c) Cutting the escape opening. There
are two escape openings on each side of
the funnel. The leading edge of the
escape openings must be located on the
same row of meshes in the extension
webbing as the leading edge of the
composite panels. The lower openings
are formed by starting at the first
attachment point of the composite
panels and cutting 9 meshes in the
extension webbing on an even row of
meshes toward the top of the extension.
Next, turn 90 degrees and cut 15 points
on an even row toward the back of the
extension webbing. At this point turn
and cut 18 bars toward the bottom front
of the extension webbing. Finish the
escape opening by cutting 6 points
toward the original starting point. The
top escape openings start 5 meshes
above and mirror the lower openings.
Starting at the leading edge of the
composite panel and 5 meshes above
the lower escape opening, cut 9 meshes
in the extension on an even row of
meshes toward the top of the extension.
Next, turn 90 degrees, and cut 6 points
on an even row toward the back of the
extension webbing. Then cut 18 bars
toward the bottom back of the
extension. To complete the escape
opening, cut 15 points forward toward
the original starting point. The area of
each escape opening must total at least
212 in2 (1,368 cm2). The four escape
openings must be double selvaged for
strength.
NOTE: The ‘‘Bycatch Reduction Device
Testing Manual’’ is published, excluding the
Manual’s appendices, as an appendix to this
document. See the contact under ADDRESSES
to obtain a complete Manual.
The following appendix will not
appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Appendix—Bycatch Reduction Device
Testing Manual
Definitions
Bycatch reduction criterion is the standard
by which a BRD candidate will be evaluated.
To be certified for use by the shrimp fishery
in the Exclusive Economic Zone off the
southeastern United States (North Carolina
through Texas), the BRD candidate must
demonstrate a successful reduction of total
finfish bycatch by at least 30 percent by
weight.
Bycatch reduction device (BRD) is any gear
or trawl modification designed to allow
finfish to escape from a shrimp trawl.
BRD candidate is a BRD to be tested for
certification for use in the commercial
shrimp fishery of southeastern United States.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8225
Certified BRD is a BRD that has been tested
according to the procedure outlined herein
and has been determined by the RA as having
met the bycatch reduction criterion.
Control trawl means a trawl that is not
equipped with a BRD during the evaluation.
Evaluation and oversight personnel means
scientists, observers, and other technical
personnel who, by reason of their occupation
or scientific expertise or training, are
approved by the RA as qualified to evaluate
and review the application and testing
process.
Experimental trawl means the trawl that is
equipped with the BRD candidate during an
evaluation.
Net or side bias means when the net(s)
being fished on one side of the vessel
demonstrate a different catch rate (fishing
efficiency) than the net(s) being fished on the
other side of the vessel during paired-net
tests.
Observer means a person on the list
maintained by the RA of individuals
qualified (see Appendix H) to supervise and
monitor a BRD certification test.
Paired-net test means a tow during
certification trials where a control net and an
experimental net are fished simultaneously,
and the catches and catch rates between the
nets are compared.
Provisional Certification Criterion means a
secondary benchmark which would allow a
BRD candidate to be used for a time-limited
period in the southeastern shrimp fishery. To
meet the criterion, the BRD candidate must
demonstrate a successful reduction of total
finfish bycatch by at least 25 percent by
weight.
Provisionally certified BRD means a BRD
that has been tested according to the
procedure outlined herein and has been
determined by the RA as having met the
provisional certification criterion. A BRD
meeting the provisional certification criterion
would be certified by the RA for a period of
2 years.
Regional Administrator (RA) means the
Southeast Regional Administrator, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
Required measurements refers to the
quantification of gear characteristics such as
the dimensions and configuration of the
trawl, the BRD candidate, the doors, or the
location of the BRD in relation to other parts
of the trawl gear that are used to assess the
performance of the BRD candidate.
Sample size means the number of
successful tows (a minimum of 30 tows per
test are required).
Shrimp trawler means any vessel that is
equipped with one or more trawl nets whose
on-board or landed catch of shrimp is more
than 1 percent, by weight, of all fish
comprising its on-board or landed catch.
Successful tow means that the control and
experimental trawl were fished in accordance
with the requirements set forth herein and
the terms and conditions of the letter of
authorization, and there is no indication
problematic events, such as those listed in
Appendix D–5, occurred during the tow to
impact or influence the fishing efficiency
(catch) of one or both nets.
Tow time means the total time (hours and
minutes) an individual trawl was fished (i.e.,
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
8226
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
the time interval beginning when the winch
is locked after deploying the net overboard,
and ending when retrieval of the net is
initiated).
Trawl means a net and associated gear and
rigging used to catch shrimp. The terms trawl
and net are used interchangeably throughout
this Manual.
Try net means a separate net pulled for
brief periods by a shrimp trawler to test for
shrimp concentrations or determine fishing
conditions (e.g., presence of absence of
bottom debris, jellyfish, bycatch, and
seagrasses).
Tuning a net means adjusting the trawl and
its components to minimize or eliminate any
net or side bias that exists between the two
nets that will be used as the control and
experimental trawls during the certification
test.
I. Introduction
This Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual (Manual) establishes a standardized
process for evaluating the ability of bycatch
reduction device (BRD) candidates to meet
the established bycatch reduction criterion,
and be certified for use in the EEZ by the
southeastern shrimp fishery. BRDs are
required for use in shrimp trawls fished
shoreward of the 100–fathom (183–meter)
depth contour in the Gulf of Mexico, and
within the EEZ of the South Atlantic region.
Various BRD requirements also exist in
state waters in the South Atlantic and off
Florida and Texas in the Gulf of Mexico.
Persons wishing to conduct BRD candidate
evaluations exclusively in state waters do not
need to apply to NMFS for authorization to
conduct these tests, but should contact the
appropriate state officials for authorizations.
However, for data collected in such
evaluations to be considered by NMFS for
certification, the operations plan and data
collection procedures must meet the criteria
established in this Manual.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
II. BRD Candidate Evaluations
A. Application
Persons interested in evaluating the
efficiency of a BRD candidate must apply for,
receive, and have on board the vessel during
the evaluation, a Letter of Authorization
(LOA) from the Regional Administrator (RA).
To receive an LOA, the applicant must
submit the following documentation to the
RA: (1) a completed application form
(Appendix A); (2) a brief statement of the
purpose and goal of the activity for which the
LOA is requested; (3) an operations plan (see
Section C below) describing the scope,
duration, dates, and location of the test, and
methods that will be used to conduct the test;
(4) an 8.5- inch x 11–inch (21.6–cm x 27.9–
cm) diagram drawn to scale of the BRD
design; (5) an 8.5–inch x 11–inch (21.6–cm
x 27.9–cm) diagram drawn to scale of the
BRD in the shrimp trawl; (6) a description of
how the BRD is supposed to work; (7) a copy
of the testing vessel’s U.S. Coast Guard
documentation or its state registration; and
(8) a copy of the testing vessel’s Federal
commercial shrimp vessel permit.
An applicant requesting an LOA to test an
unapproved turtle excluder device (TED) as
a BRD (including modifications to a TED that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
would enhance finfish exclusion) must first
apply for and obtain from the RA an
experimental TED authorization pursuant to
50 CFR 223.207(e)(2). Applicants should
contact the Protected Resources Division of
NMFS’ Southeast Regional Office for further
information. The LOA applicant must
include a copy of that authorization with the
application.
Incomplete applications will be returned to
the applicant along with a letter from the RA
indicating what actions the applicant may
take to make the application complete.
There is no cost to the applicant for the
RA’s administrative expenses such as
reviewing applications, issuing LOAs,
evaluating test results, or certifying BRDs.
However, all other costs associated with the
actual testing activities are the responsibility
of the applicant, or any associated sponsor.
If an application for an LOA is denied, the
RA will provide a letter of explanation to the
applicant, together with relevant
recommendations to address the deficiencies
that resulted in the denial.
B. Allowable Activities
Issuance of an LOA to test a BRD candidate
in the South Atlantic or Gulf of Mexico
allows the applicant to remove or disable the
existing certified BRD in one outboard net (to
create a control net), and to place the BRD
candidate in another outboard net in lieu of
a certified BRD (to create an experimental
net). All other trawls under tow during the
test must have a certified BRD, unless these
nets are specifically exempted in the LOA.
All trawls under tow during the test must
have an approved TED unless operating
under an authorization issued pursuant to 50
CFR 223.207(e)(2), whereby the test is being
conducted on an experimental TED. The
LOA, and experimental TED authorization if
applicable, must be on board the vessel while
the test is being conducted. The term of the
LOA will be 60 days; should circumstances
require a longer test period, the applicant
may apply to the RA for a 60-day extension.
C. Operations Plan
An operations plan should be submitted
with the application describing a method to
compare the catches of shrimp and fish in a
control net (net without a BRD candidate
installed) to the catches of the same species
in an experimental net (a net configured
identically to the control net but also
equipped with the BRD candidate).
The applicant may choose to conduct a
pre-certification test of a prototype BRD
candidate. A pre-certification test would be
conducted when the intent is to assess the
preliminary effectiveness of a prototype BRD
candidate under field conditions, and to
make modifications to the prototype BRD
candidate during the field test. For precertification testing, the operations plan must
include only a description of the scope,
duration, dates, and location of the test, along
with a description of methods that will be
used to conduct the test. No observer is
required for a pre-certification test, but the
applicant may choose to use an observer to
maintain a written record of the test. The
applicant will maintain a written record for
both the control and experimental net during
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
each tow. Mandatory data collection is
limited to the weight of the shrimp catch and
the weight of the total finfish catch in each
test net during each tow. These data must be
submitted to NMFS at the conclusion of the
test. Although not required, the applicant
may wish to incorporate some or all the
certification test requirements listed below.
For a BRD candidate to be considered for
certification, the operations plan must be
more detailed and address the following
topics:
(1) The primary assumption in assessing
the bycatch reduction efficiency of the BRD
candidate during paired net tests is that the
inclusion of the BRD candidate in the
experimental net is the only factor causing a
difference in catch from the control net.
Therefore, the nets to be used in the tests
must be calibrated (tuned) to minimize, to
the extent practicable, any net or side bias in
catch efficiency prior to beginning a test
series, and tuned again after any gear
modification or change. Additional
information on tuning shrimp trawls to
minimize bias is available from the
Harvesting Technology Branch, Mississippi
Laboratories, Pascagoula Facility, 3209
Frederic Street, Pascagoula, MS 39568 1207;
phone (601) 762 4591.
(2) A standard tow time for a proposed
evaluation should be defined. Tow times
must be representative of the tow times used
by commercial shrimp trawlers. The
applicant should indicate what alternatives
will be considered should the proposed tow
time need adjustment once the test begins.
(3) A minimum sample size of 30
successful tows using a specific BRD
candidate design is required for the statistical
analysis described in Section F. No
alterations of the BRD candidate design are
allowed during a specific test series. If the
BRD candidate design is altered, a new test
series must be started. If a gear change (i.e.,
changing nets, doors, or rigging) is required,
the nets should be tuned again before
proceeding with further tests to complete the
30–tow series. Minor repairs to the gear (e.g.,
sewing holes in the webbing; replacing a
broken tickler chain with a new one of the
same configuration) are not considered a gear
change.
(4) For tests conducted on twin-rig vessels,
biases that might result from the use of a try
net should be reduced to the extent
practicable. Total fishing times for a try net
must be a consistent percentage of the total
tow time during each tow made in the test.
(5) To incorporate any net or side bias that
remains after the tuning tows (e.g., the effect
of a try net), or to accommodate for bias that
develops between the control and
experimental nets during the test, the
operations plan should outline a timetable
ensuring that an equal number of successful
tows are made with the BRD candidate
employed in both the port and starboard nets.
(6) Mandatory data to be collected during
a test includes: (1) detailed gear
specifications as set forth in Appendices B
and C, and (2) pertinent information
concerning the location, duration and catch
from individual tows as set forth in
Appendices D and F.
(7) Following each paired tow, the catches
from the control and experimental nets must
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
be examined separately. This requires that
the catch from each net be kept separate from
each other, as well as from the catch taken
in other nets fished during that tow.
Mandatory data collections include recording
the weight of the total catch of each test net
(control and experimental nets), the catch of
shrimp (i.e., brown, white, pink, rock, or
other shrimp by species) in each test net, and
the catch of total finfish in aggregate in each
test net.
(8) When recording the detailed
information on the species found in the
catch, if the catch in a net does not fill one
standard 1–bushel [ca. 10 gallon] (30 liters)
polyethylene shrimp basket (ca. 70 lb) (31.8
kg), but the tow is otherwise considered
successful, data must be collected on the
entire catch of the net, and recorded as a
‘‘select’’ sample (see Appendices D and F),
indicating that the values represent the total
catch of the particular net. If the catch in a
net exceeds 70 lb (31.8 kg), a well-mixed
sample consisting of one standard 1–bushel
[ca. 10 gallon] (30 liters) polyethylene shrimp
basket must be taken from the total catch of
the net. The total weight of the sample must
be recorded, as well as the weights (and
numbers as applicable) of the various species
or species groups found within that sample.
These sample values can then be
extrapolated to estimate the quantity of those
species or species groups found in the total
catch of the particular net.
(9) Although not a criterion for
certification, applicants testing BRD
candidates are encouraged to collect
additional information that may be pertinent
to addressing bycatch issues in their
respective regions. For example, in the
western Gulf of Mexico applicants are
especially encouraged to collect information
on red snapper. If the applicant chooses to
collect these data, the total (‘‘select’’) catch of
the target species from each test net (not just
from the sample) should be recorded along
with lengths for as many individuals per net
per tow as set forth in Appendices E and F.
Additional information in regard to the catch
can be recorded on forms such as Appendix
G.
The operations plan should address what
the applicant will do should it become
necessary to deviate from the primary
procedures outlined in the operations plan.
The plan should describe in detail what will
be done to continue the test in a reasonable
manner that is consistent with the primary
procedures. For example, it may become
necessary to alter the pre-selected tow time
to adapt to local fishing conditions to
successfully complete the test. Prior to
issuing a LOA, the RA may consult with
evaluation personnel to review the
acceptability of these proposed alterations.
D. Observer Requirements
It is the responsibility of the applicant to
ensure that a qualified observer (see
Appendix H) is on board the vessel during
the certification tests. A list of qualified
observers is available from the RA. Observers
may include employees or individuals acting
on behalf of NMFS, state fishery management
agencies, universities, or private industry
who meet the minimum requirements
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
outlined in Appendix H. Any change in
information or testing circumstances, such as
replacement of the observer, must be
reported to the RA within 30 days. Under 50
CFR 600.746, when any fishing vessel is
required to carry an observer as part of a
mandatory observer program under the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.), the
owner or operator of the vessel must comply
with guidelines, regulations, and conditions
to ensure their vessel is adequate and safe to
carry an observer, and to allow normal
observer functions to collect information as
described in this Manual. A vessel owner is
deemed to meet this requirement if the vessel
displays one of the following: (i) a current
Commercial Fishing Vessel Safety
Examination decal, issued within the last 2
years, that certifies compliance with
regulations found in 33 CFR chapter I, and
46 CFR chapter I; (ii) a certificate of
compliance issued pursuant to 46 CFR
28.710; or (iii) a valid certificate of inspection
pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 3311. The observer has
the right to check for major safety items, and
if those items are absent or unserviceable, the
observer may choose not to sail with the
vessel until those deficiencies are corrected.
E. Reports
A report on the BRD candidate test results
must be submitted by the applicant or
associated sponsor before the RA will
consider the BRD for certification. The report
must contain a comprehensive description of
the tests, copies of all completed data forms
used during the tests, and photographs,
drawings, and similar material describing the
BRD. The captain, vessel owner, or the
applicant must sign and submit the cover
form (Appendix I). The report must include
a description and explanation of any
unanticipated deviations from the operations
plan which occurred during the test. These
deviations must be described in sufficient
detail to indicate the tests were continued in
a reasonable manner consistent with the
approved operations plan procedures.
Applicants must provide information on the
cost of materials, labor, and installation of
the BRD candidate. In addition, any unique
or special circumstances of the tests, such as
special operational characteristics or fishing
techniques which enhance the BRD’s
performance, should be described and
documented as appropriate.
F. Certification
The RA will determine whether the
required reports and supporting materials are
sufficient to evaluate the BRD candidate’s
efficiency. The determination of sufficiency
would be based on whether the applicant
adhered to the prescribed testing procedure
or provided adequate justification for any
deviations from the procedure during the
test. If the RA determines that the data are
sufficient for evaluation, the BRD candidate
will be evaluated to determine if it meets the
bycatch reduction criterion. In making a
decision, the RA may consult with evaluation
and oversight personnel. Based on the data
submitted for review, the RA will determine
the effectiveness of the BRD candidate, using
appropriate statistical procedures such as
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8227
Bayesian analyses, to determine if the BRD
candidate meets the following conditions:
(1) There is at least a 50–percent
probability that the true reduction rate of the
BRD candidate meets the bycatch reduction
criterion (i.e., the BRD candidate
demonstrates a best point estimate [sample
mean] that meets the certification criterion);
and
(2) There is no more than a 10–percent
probability that the true reduction rate of the
BRD candidate is more than 5 percentage
points less than the bycatch reduction
criterion.
To be certified for use in the fishery, the
BRD candidate will have to satisfy both
conditions. The first condition ensures that
the observed reduction rate of the BRD
candidate has an acceptable level of certainty
that it meets the bycatch reduction criterion.
The second condition ensures the BRD
candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree
of certainty that the observed reduction rate
represents the true reduction rate of the BRD
candidate. This determination ensures the
operational use of the BRD candidate in the
shrimp fishery will, on average, provide a
level of bycatch reduction that meets the
established bycatch reduction criterion.
Interested parties may obtain details
regarding the hypothesis testing procedure to
be used by contacting the Harvesting
Technology Branch, Mississippi Laboratories,
Pascagoula Facility, 3209 Frederic Street,
Pascagoula, MS 39568 1207; phone (228) 762
4591. Following a favorable determination of
the certification analysis, the RA will certify
the BRD (with any appropriate conditions as
indicated by test results) and add the BRD to
the list of certified BRDs in the Federal
Register through appropriate rulemaking
procedures.
In addition, based on the data provided,
the RA may provisionally certify a BRD
candidate through appropriate rulemaking
procedures based on the following condition:
There is at least a 50–percent probability
that the true reduction rate of the BRD
candidate is no more than 5 percentage
points less than the bycatch reduction
criterion (i.e., the BRD candidate
demonstrates a best point estimate [sample
mean] within 5 percentage points of the
bycatch reduction criterion).
A provisional certification will be effective
for 2 years from the date of publication in the
Federal Register of a determination of
provisional certification. This time period
will allow additional wide scale industry
evaluation of the BRD candidate, during
which additional effort would be made to
improve the efficiency of the BRD to meet the
certification criterion.
III. BRDs Not Certified and Resubmission
Procedures
The RA will advise the applicant, in
writing, if a BRD is not certified. This
notification will explain why the BRD was
not certified and what the applicant may do
to either modify the BRD or the testing
procedures to improve the chances of having
the BRD certified in the future. If certification
was denied because of insufficient
information, the RA will explain what
information is lacking. The applicant must
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
8228
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
provide the additional information within 60
days from receipt of such notification. If the
additional information is not provided
within 60 days, the application will be
deemed abandoned. If the RA subsequently
certifies the BRD, the RA will announce the
certification in the Federal Register.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
IV. Decertification of BRDs
The RA will decertify a BRD whenever
NMFS determines a BRD no longer satisfies
the bycatch reduction criterion. Before
determining whether to decertify a BRD, the
RA will notify the appropriate Fishery
Management Council in writing, and the
public will be provided an opportunity to
comment on the advisability of any proposed
decertification. The RA will consider any
comments from the Council and public, and
if the RA elects to proceed with
decertification of the BRD, the RA will
publish proposed and final rules in the
Federal Register with a comment period of
no less than 15 days on the proposed rule.
A provisionally certified BRD is valid for
use in the fishery for 2 years from the date
of publication of a notice in the Federal
Register. If no new data are submitted to
indicate the efficiency of the BRD has been
improved, the RA will remove the BRD from
the list of provisionally certified BRDs.
V. Interactions with Sea Turtles
The following section is provided for
informational purposes. Sea turtles are listed
under the Endangered Species Act as either
endangered or threatened. The following
procedures apply to incidental take of sea
turtles under 50 CFR 223.206(d)(1):
‘‘Any sea turtles taken incidentally during
the course of fishing or scientific research
activities must be handled with due care to
prevent injury to live specimens, observed
for activity, and returned to the water
according to the following procedures:
(A) Sea turtles that are actively moving or
determined to be dead (as described in
paragraph (B)(4) below) must be released
over the stern of the boat. In addition, they
must be released only when fishing or
scientific collection gear is not in use, when
the engine gears are in neutral position, and
in areas where they are unlikely to be
recaptured or injured by vessels.
(B) Resuscitation must be attempted on sea
turtles that are comatose or inactive by:
(1) Placing the turtle on its bottom shell
(plastron) so that the turtle is right side up
and elevating its hindquarters at least 6
inches (15.2 cm) for a period of 4 to 24 hours.
The amount of elevation depends on the size
of the turtle; greater elevations are needed for
larger turtles. Periodically, rock the turtle
gently left to right and right to left by holding
the outer edge of the shell (carapace) and
lifting one side about 3 inches (7.6 cm) then
alternate to the other side. Gently touch the
eye and pinch the tail (reflex test)
periodically to see if there is a response.
(2) Sea turtles being resuscitated must be
shaded and kept damp or moist but under no
circumstance be placed into a container
holding water. A water-soaked towel placed
over the head, carapace, and flippers is the
most effective method in keeping a turtle
moist.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Feb 12, 2008
Jkt 214001
(3) Sea turtles that revive and become
active must be released over the stern of the
boat only when fishing or scientific
collection gear is not in use, when the engine
gears are in neutral position, and in areas
where they are unlikely to be recaptured or
injured by vessels. Sea turtles that fail to
respond to the reflex test or fail to move
within 4 hours (up to 24, if possible) must
be returned to the water in the same manner
as that for actively moving turtles.
(4) A turtle is determined to be dead if the
muscles are stiff (rigor mortis) and/or the
flesh has begun to rot; otherwise, the turtle
is determined to be comatose or inactive and
resuscitation attempts are necessary.
Any sea turtle so taken must not be
consumed, sold, landed, offloaded,
transshipped, or kept below deck.’’
[FR Doc. E8–2679 Filed 2–12–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 070213033–7033–01]
RIN 0648–XF55
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by
Catcher Processors Using Hook-andLine Gear in the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed
fishing for Pacific cod by catcher
processors using hook-and-line gear in
the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
management area (BSAI). This action is
necessary to prevent exceeding the A
season allowance of the 2008 Pacific
cod total allowable catch (TAC)
allocated to catcher processors using
hook-and-line gear in the BSAI.
DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local
time (A.l.t.), February 8, 2008, through
1200 hrs, A.l.t., June 10, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Hogan, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
BSAI according to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (FMP) prepared by
the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council under authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act.
Regulations governing fishing by U.S.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
vessels in accordance with the FMP
appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600
and 50 CFR part 679.
The A season allowance of the 2008
Pacific cod TAC allocated to catcher
processors using hook-and-line gear in
the BSAI is 27,979 metric tons (mt) as
established by the 2007 and 2008 final
harvest specifications for groundfish in
the BSAI (72 FR 9451, March 2, 2007)
and revision (72 FR 71802, December
19, 2007). See § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A)(4),
§ 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(A)(2),
§ 679.20(c)(3)(iii), and § 679.20(c)(5).
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii),
the Regional Administrator finds that
the A season allowance of the 2008
Pacific cod directed fishing allowance
allocated to catcher processors using
hook-and-line gear in the BSAI has been
reached. Consequently, NMFS is
prohibiting directed fishing for Pacific
cod by catcher processors using hookand-line gear in the BSAI.
After the effective date of this closure
the maximum retainable amounts at
§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time
during a trip.
Classification
This action responds to the best
available information recently obtained
from the fishery. The Assistant
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA
(AA), finds good cause to waive the
requirement to provide prior notice and
opportunity for public comment
pursuant to the authority set forth at 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. This requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest as it would prevent NMFS from
responding to the most recent fisheries
data in a timely fashion and would
delay the closure of Pacific cod by
catcher processors using hook-and-line
gear in the BSAI. NMFS was unable to
publish a notice providing time for
public comment because the most
recent, relevant data only became
available as of February 6, 2008.
The AA also finds good cause to
waive the 30–day delay in the effective
date of this action under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). This finding is based upon
the reasons provided above for waiver of
prior notice and opportunity for public
comment.
This action is required by section
679.20 and is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 13, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8219-8228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2679]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 0612243163-7151-01]
RIN 0648-AU59
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic;
Shrimp Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico; Revisions to Bycatch Reduction
Devices and Testing Protocols
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the framework procedures for adjusting
management measures specified in regulations implementing the Fishery
Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf FMP)
and the Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the South
Atlantic Region (South Atlantic FMP), NMFS issues this final rule to
consolidate and make modifications to the Bycatch Reduction Device
Testing Manuals (Manual) for the Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic
regions. This final rule also revises the bycatch reduction device
(BRD) certification criterion for the western Gulf of Mexico and
certifies additional BRDs. The intended effect of this final rule is to
improve bycatch reduction in the shrimp fisheries and better meet the
requirements of national standard 9.
DATES: This final rule is effective March 14, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
and the consolidated and revised Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual are available from the Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701; phone: 727-824-5305; fax: 727-
824-5308.
Comments regarding the approved collection-of-information
requirements contained in this final rule should be submitted in
writing to Jason Rueter at the Southeast Regional Office address
(above) and to David Rostker, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), by
e-mail at David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or by fax to 202-395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Branstetter, telephone: 727-824-
5305, fax: 727-824-5308, e-mail: Steve.Branstetter@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The fisheries for shrimp in the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) and the South Atlantic
are managed under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and regulations
at 50 CFR part 622. The regulations implement the Gulf FMP prepared by
the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC) and the South
Atlantic FMP prepared by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council
(SAFMC).
On October 12, 2007, NMFS published the proposed rule to revise the
bycatch reduction device testing protocols for the Gulf and South
Atlantic regions, revise the BRD certification criterion for the
western Gulf, and certify additional BRDs (72 FR 58031). Public comment
on the proposed rule was requested through November 13, 2007. The
rationale for the measures contained in this final rule is provided in
the preamble to the proposed rule and is not repeated here.
Comments and Responses
The following is a summary of the comments NMFS received on the
proposed rule and NMFS' respective responses. Three comment letters
were received during the comment period. In addition, a non-
governmental organization submitted comments signed by 1,266
individuals in support of the proposed action.
Comment 1: NMFS should implement the proposed changes as part of a
comprehensive plan to address the significant amount of bycatch
associated with this fishery and help end overfishing and rebuild the
red snapper stock.
Response: This rulemaking is part of a comprehensive plan
addressing bycatch in the shrimp fishery and overfishing of the red
snapper resource. This rulemaking to provide additional BRDs to the
fishery will support additional actions taken by the GMFMC and NMFS. In
2006, the GMFMC recommended, and NMFS implemented, an individual
fishing quota (IFQ) for the commercial Gulf red snapper fishery; in
general, IFQs tend to help reduce fishing mortality. To better control
overall effort in the shrimp fishery, the GMFMC recommended, and NMFS
implemented, a moratorium on the issuance of Federal shrimp vessel
permits. Approximately 2,000 vessels qualified for a moratorium permit;
this is a substantial reduction from the number of vessels
participating in the fishery in the past. In addition, the GMFMC
recommended, and NMFS is currently considering several actions to end
overfishing of red snapper by 2010 and rebuild the stock by 2032. The
recommended actions include a substantial reduction in the total
allowable catch for the directed commercial and recreational red
snapper fishery, harvesting restrictions to restrain the recreational
fishery to its quota, and possible time-area closures for the shrimp
fishery to reduce bycatch mortality on juvenile red snapper.
Comment 2: The proposed changes to increase flexibility in the
field testing procedures for experimental BRDs should substantially
improve the practicability of the testing criteria and procedures that
currently exist. Many of the changes will better allow research to be
adapted to the real-world practical realities of shrimp trawling and,
as a consequence, will encourage more fishermen to participate in
testing new BRD designs and configurations.
Response: The procedures prescribed for testing BRDs in the field
were rigorous in an attempt to reduce the statistical uncertainty of
the results. However, these rigorous field sampling procedures and the
inflexible statistical procedures hindered the successful certification
of several BRD designs that showed promise at reducing substantial
amounts of bycatch. This discourages innovative developments to improve
BRDs.
Comment 3: Replacing the current tow time restrictions with a more
realistic requirement for such adjustments to be reasonable will allow
fishermen to adapt to local fishing conditions and successfully
complete a test on an experimental BRD. However, the proposed rule
indicated any tow time changes made during a field test would need to
be approved by the Regional Administrator (RA) at the conclusion of the
test, and the changes may be disapproved. There should be a more
deliberate process for the applicant and NMFS to resolve what the
acceptable limits will be on tow time adjustments. This should be done
on a case-by-case basis before the testing begins and as part of the
initial design
[[Page 8220]]
of the operations plan. This will avoid the situation of after-the-fact
rejections of the tests by the RA and the resulting wasted time and
resources.
Response: It is the responsibility of the applicant to make logical
and reasonable proposals for tow times in the research plan submitted
to the RA requesting a Letter of Authorization to conduct a test on an
experimental BRD. The research plan should also include a
``contingency'' plan if any of the primary procedures have to be
changed during a test. Changes to the tow time made during a test
should follow a similar logical and reasonable rationale. Even under
the best pre-planned event, there may be a need to make such a change
during a test. For example, the total catch taken during a tow may be
greater than what was anticipated in the applicant's proposal. Under
such conditions, shorter tow times would produce manageable quantities
of catch for sampling. Under the new procedures, when the final test
results are submitted to NMFS for review, the applicant would simply
need to document the need for such a change, and provide a good
rationale for such change. The rationale for the change would be
reviewed by the RA, in consultation with Southeast Fisheries Science
Center staff, on a case-by-case basis.
Comment 4: The current requirement to rotate gear between the port
and starboard sides every four to six tows (Gulf) or daily (South
Atlantic) to eliminate net or side bias is highly impracticable and has
presented a serious obstacle to participation in the testing program.
The proposed change would allow the applicant to propose an acceptable
rotational schedule that still ensures equal numbers of tows will be
conducted with the BRD candidate on both sides. In the case of a quad-
rig (4-net) vessel, NMFS should additionally allow the applicant to use
the candidate BRD in one of the two nets on each side of the vessel,
simultaneously, as an alternative means to eliminate bias that might
result from testing on just one side of the vessel. This will help
eliminate the numerous practical difficulties associated with rotating
gear.
Response: BRD testing is conducted by comparing the differences in
the catch and bycatch of two nets towed simultaneously by a single
vessel, where one net contains an experimental BRD, the other net has
no BRD. Assuming the two nets have equal or similar fishing
efficiencies, the differences in catch and bycatch between the two nets
can be attributed to the inclusion of the experimental BRD in one net.
In reality, no two nets will have identical fishing efficiencies, nor
will each net encounter exactly the same number of each species during
a tow. Therefore, the paired tests will always have some, albeit minor,
bias between nets. The requirement to rotate the experimental BRD from
one net to another on a regular basis is intended to negate this bias.
Additionally, there may be some differences in the catch between
outboard and inboard nets in a quad-rig system, especially for the
inboard net located behind the try net. Comparisons of the catch of an
inboard net to the catch of an outboard net adds another variable for
consideration. For this reason, to make the paired comparison as
balanced as possible, the procedure has always designated the two
outboard nets be used as experimental and control nets. Nevertheless,
NMFS does not automatically exclude the proposed concept to place an
experimental BRD in a net on both sides of the vessel, and compare the
catch of those nets against the catch of the other two nets that do not
contain a BRD. The revisions to the testing procedures are intended to
provide the applicant with the flexibility to make a reasonable
proposal for a scientifically and statistically valid experiment.
Classification
The Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, determined that this
rule is necessary for the conservation and management of the shrimp
fisheries in the Gulf and the South Atlantic regions and is consistent
with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
This final rule has been determined to be significant for purposes
of Executive Order 12866.
A FRFA was prepared. The FRFA incorporates the IRFA, a summary of
the significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the
IRFA, and NMFS responses to those comments, and a summary of the
analyses completed to support the action. A copy of this analysis is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
This final rule will modify the procedures for field testing BRD
candidates for use in the Gulf and South Atlantic EEZ commercial shrimp
fisheries, will modify the bycatch reduction criterion for certifying
BRDs for use in the penaeid shrimp fishery in the Gulf EEZ west of Cape
San Blas, Florida (western Gulf), and certify new BRDs for the
fisheries.
The purpose of this final rule is to implement more practical field
testing procedures for BRD certification candidates and to establish a
realistic bycatch reduction threshold for the Gulf EEZ commercial
shrimp fishery.
No significant issues were raised by public comments in response to
the IRFA. Therefore, no changes were made in the final rule as a result
of such comments.
The primary entities that are expected to apply for the BRD
certification process are state government, academic, and not-for-
profit entities. Independent commercial shrimping operations in either
the Gulf or South Atlantic may also be included among applicants. In
addition to being potential testing applicants, Gulf shrimp vessels are
expected to be indirectly impacted by the modification to the bycatch
reduction criterion. NMFS estimates up to 24 applicants will apply for
the BRD certification process during the first year and a smaller
number in following years. While the identity of entities that might
pursue future BRD testing cannot be determined with any certainty,
based on past applicants, BRD testing is expected to be undertaken by
NMFS, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, the Florida Department
of Environmental Protection, Texas A&M University, the University of
Georgia, the Gulf and South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation, Inc., other
institutions, and owners of shrimp vessels.
There are approximately 700 vessels permitted to operate in the
South Atlantic EEZ commercial shrimp fishery. The most current
assessment of the South Atlantic commercial shrimp fishery covers the
period 2000-2002 and encompasses vessels that operated in both state
and EEZ waters. While this assessment covered a larger universe of
vessels, an average of approximately 1,900 vessels per year, and
different economic conditions, it represents the best profile available
at this time. Over this period, average gross revenue per vessel ranged
from approximately $71,000 to approximately $81,000. The highest gross
revenue per vessel from all commercial harvesting activities did not
exceed $1.0 million.
For the Gulf EEZ, as of March 26, 2007, a moratorium permit is
required to fish for shrimp. Based on the number of permits issued and
number of applications being processed as of November 8, 2007,
approximately 2,000 vessels are expected to be issued moratorium
permits.
An evaluation of revenue distribution within the Gulf EEZ
commercial shrimp fleet by vessel size indicates substantial
differences in yearly average revenues between large (at least 60 ft
(18.3 m) in length) and small vessels. For the large vessel group,
average annual revenues per vessel in 2004 was approximately $140,000,
while the comparable value for small vessels was approximately
[[Page 8221]]
$27,000. Across all vessels, the average annual gross revenue per
vessel was approximately $110,000. Maximum yearly gross revenue
reported by a qualifying vessel was approximately $1,046,000.
On average, small vessels are also smaller in regards to most of
their physical attributes (e.g., they use smaller crews, fewer and
smaller nets, have less engine horsepower and fuel capacity). Small
vessels are also older on average. Large vessels tend to be steel-
hulled, whereas fiberglass hulls are most prominent among small
vessels, though steel and wood hulls are also common. Nearly two-thirds
of large vessels have freezing capabilities while few small vessels
have such equipment. Small vessels still rely on ice for refrigeration
and storage, though more than one-third of large vessels also rely on
ice. Some vessels are so small that they rely on live wells for
storage.
An important difference between large and small Gulf EEZ commercial
shrimp vessels is with respect to their dependency on the food shrimp
fishery. The percentage of revenues arising from food shrimp landings
is approximately 81 percent for large vessels, but only approximately
58 percent for small vessels. Thus, on average, large vessels are more
dependent than their smaller counterparts on the food shrimp fishery.
However, dependency on food shrimp is more variable within the small
vessel sector than the large vessel sector. Many small vessels are
quite dependent on food shrimp landings, while others illustrate little
if any dependency.
Finally, according to recent projections, on average, both small
and large Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp vessels are experiencing
significant economic losses, ranging from a -27 percent rate of return
(net revenues or total fixed and variable costs) in the small vessel
sector to a -36 percent rate of return in the large vessel sector (-33
percent on average for the fishery as a whole).
The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a small
organization as any not-for-profit enterprise that is independently
owned and operated and not dominant in its field of operation. This
definition includes private educational institutions. The SBA also
defines a small governmental jurisdiction as the government of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts with a population less than 50,000. Finally, the SBA defines
a small business in the commercial fishing activity as an entity that
is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of
operation (including its affiliates), and has average annual total
receipts not in excess of $4.0 million annually (NAICS codes 114111 and
114112, finfish and shellfish fishing).
While the identity of entities that might pursue BRD testing cannot
be determined with any certainty, based on past applicants, BRD testing
is expected to be undertaken by NMFS, the Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Texas
A&M University, the University of Georgia, the Gulf and South Atlantic
Fisheries Foundation, Inc., other institutions, and owners of shrimp
vessels. The state agencies are extensions of the respective state
governments and, as such, clearly exceed the SBA population thresholds
for small government entities. Similarly, both Texas A&M University and
the University of Georgia are, as public universities, extensions of
the respective state government educational systems, with staff being
state employees, and, therefore, are similarly classified as large
entities. Any private college or university, or non-profit organization
that might apply for the BRD testing process is determined for the
purpose of this analysis to be a small entity because private
educational institutions and small non-profit organizations are
generally understood to be smaller in terms of student population,
staff, and operational budgets than public institutions. Based on the
maximum annual revenue information for Gulf and South Atlantic
commercial shrimping operations, vessels that may participate in the
certification program are determined to be small business entities for
the purpose of this analysis. It is unknown what portion of the
estimated maximum 24 entities expected to apply for the certification
program the first year, and fewer entities in subsequent years, would
be small or large entities.
All entities that receive the Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp fishery
moratorium permit may be indirectly affected by the Gulf bycatch
reduction criterion. Based on the maximum revenue information for Gulf
EEZ commercial shrimping operations, all such vessels are determined,
for the purpose of this analysis, to be small business entities.
The measures in this final rule do not affect the reporting or
record-keeping requirements for shrimp vessels. This final rule only
modifies the performance standards used in BRD certification and does
not require new record or report preparation.
The outcome of ``significant economic impact'' can be ascertained
by examining two issues: disproportionality and profitability.
The disproportionality question is: do the final regulations place
a substantial number of small entities at a significant competitive
disadvantage to large entities? Revision to the Manual is not expected
to result in any direct or indirect adverse economic impacts on any
affected entities since the reporting burden per applicant will not
increase and the revisions, in and of themselves, will not cause any
BRDs to be certified, provisionally certified, or decertified in future
actions. Therefore, the issue of disproportionate impacts does not
apply to this component of the final rule.
Similarly, the change to the Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp fishery
bycatch reduction criterion will not result in any direct adverse
economic impacts on participants in the Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp
fishery. However, the change in the bycatch reduction criterion is
expected to generate indirect impacts on vessels in this fishery as a
result of future certification, provisional certification, or
decertification actions. All of these vessels have been determined to
be small business entities. Thus, the issue of disproportionality does
not apply to this component of the final rule.
The certifications and provisional certifications will affect all
vessels in the Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp fishery, as well as some
vessels in the South Atlantic EEZ commercial shrimp fishery. Because
all of these entities are determined to be small entities, the issue of
disproportionality does not apply to this component of the final rule.
The profitability question is: do the regulations significantly
reduce profit for a substantial number of small entities?
The revision of the Manual will not directly affect fishery
participation or harvest because it merely establishes procedures under
which research and gear development may proceed. The bycatch reduction
criterion for the Gulf EEZ commercial shrimp fishery will also not
result in any direct adverse economic impacts on fishery participants
because it is an administrative action.
In addition to the Modified Jones-Davis BRD, the bycatch reduction
criterion will allow for the extended funnel BRD to be provisionally
certified for use in the Gulf EEZ shrimp fishery, and the composite
panel BRD to be provisionally certified for use in the Gulf and South
Atlantic EEZ shrimp fisheries. However, these three BRDs are not
presently certified for use by the fleet in the western Gulf, are more
costly to purchase, and produce greater shrimp loss, on average, than
the predominantly
[[Page 8222]]
used fisheye-type BRDs. As such, no shrimp vessel owners are expected
to switch from their current BRDs to these BRDs and no direct impacts
are expected to result from the certification or provisional
certification of these BRDs.
The bycatch reduction criterion will, however, result in
decertification of some currently used BRDs through subsequent
regulatory action. Decertification of currently used BRDs will require
the use of alternative certified or provisionally certified BRDs, with
associated re-gearing costs. Among the BRDs currently in use, the
maximum first-year re-gearing cost that could be incurred as a result
of future decertification would be that associated with the Jones-Davis
BRD, which is the most expensive remaining certified BRD, with an
estimated cost of $425 per BRD, and would range from $2,550 per vessel
for six BRDs to $4,250 per vessel for 10 BRDs, or between 2.3 percent
and 3.8 percent of an average vessel's annual revenues. Lowest BRD
replacement costs would be associated with a Modified Jones-Davis BRD,
with an estimated cost of $300 per BRD, or $1,800 to $3,000 per vessel.
Not all vessels would be required to acquire new BRDs, however, since
not all current BRDs would be decertified, and the cheapest and
currently most commonly used BRD, a fisheye-type BRD, could continue to
be used in a different configuration. Although potential resultant
shrimp loss would have to be figured into the decision, some fishermen
may elect to retain but move the fisheye BRD as opposed to purchasing a
different BRD, thus incurring no replacement costs for the gear itself.
Since different BRDs produce different rates of shrimp retention,
the decision of which BRD to use impacts gross revenues as well as
operational and gear costs. Depending upon the BRD type currently used
and the BRD type that might be selected as a replacement, reductions in
average annual gross revenues of up to 3 percent have been projected
for small vessels and 2 percent for many large vessels. Actual
performance would vary, however, as individual vessels adopt the BRD
that best meets their skill and fishing behavior in order to minimize
costs and maximize revenues. All associated costs will directly accrue,
however, only to a subsequent rule and not to the current action.
This final rule will certify the Modified Jones-Davis BRD for the
Gulf and South Atlantic EEZ shrimp fisheries, provisionally certify the
extended funnel BRD to be used in the Gulf EEZ shrimp fishery, and
provisionally certify the composite panel BRD to be used in the Gulf
and South Atlantic EEZ shrimp fisheries. No direct adverse economic
impacts will accrue to fishermen in either the Gulf or South Atlantic
EEZ shrimp fisheries as a result of these changes because no vessels
will be required to use these BRDs. The certification or provisional
certification of these BRDs will increase the options available to
vessels. Use of these BRDs will be at the discretion of individual
fishermen and adoption of the gear would only be expected to occur
where it was expected to result in improved economic outcomes.
Two alternatives, the final rule and the status quo, were
considered for the action to modify the Manual. The status quo would
continue overly restrictive and inflexible testing procedures and would
not achieve NMFS' objectives.
Three alternatives, including the status quo, were considered for
the change in the BRD bycatch reduction criterion. Two alternatives
contained multiple options, resulting in eight effective alternatives.
As previously discussed, changing the criterion is an administrative
action and would not simultaneously decertify BRDs currently in use or
require immediate replacement. Decertification, with attendant costs,
however, will occur through subsequent action.
The first alternative to the final bycatch reduction criterion, the
status quo, is a specific juvenile red snapper fishing mortality
reduction. Maintaining the status quo will result in the
decertification of all currently certified BRDs except the Jones-Davis
BRD for use in the Gulf. Current data indicate these BRDs do not meet
the status quo bycatch reduction criterion. Decertification of these
BRDs under the status quo would induce greater industry-wide
replacement costs than the bycatch reduction criterion of this final
rule because the final rule will allow more BRD options than the single
Jones-Davis BRD.
The second alternative to the final bycatch reduction criterion
would continue to base the bycatch reduction target on juvenile red
snapper, similar to the status quo, but would consider three different
minimum thresholds in catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE). The two lower
minimum thresholds, 12 percent and 20 percent reductions in juvenile
red snapper CPUE, would be expected to allow continued use of the
fisheye BRD, resulting in no direct or indirect adverse economic
impacts. Neither threshold, however, would meet the objective of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act requirement that bycatch be reduced to the extent
practicable. The final rule alternative has been identified to improve
overall finfish bycatch reduction including juvenile red snapper at
rates higher than specified by these alternatives. The highest red
snapper bycatch reduction minimum threshold, a 30 percent reduction in
juvenile red snapper CPUE, would be expected to result in the same
effects as the status quo, because it has not been demonstrated this
goal is achievable, resulting in greater indirect adverse economic
impacts than the bycatch reduction criterion of this final rule.
The third alternative to the final bycatch reduction criterion
would base the bycatch reduction criterion on all finfish species and
considered four minimum thresholds, ranging from 10 to 40 percent. The
final rule will establish a 30-percent finfish bycatch reduction
minimum threshold. The two lower finfish bycatch reduction minimum
thresholds, 10 percent and 20 percent, would be expected to allow
continued use of fisheye BRDs, resulting in no direct or indirect
adverse economic impacts. However, neither threshold would meet the
Magnuson-Stevens Act requirement of achieving bycatch reduction to the
extent practicable because several available BRDs are already achieving
a 30-percent reduction in finfish bycatch. The highest finfish bycatch
reduction minimum threshold, 40 percent, would not be expected to
result in any direct adverse economic impacts but would be expected to
result in indirect increased gear costs equal to those of the status
quo, resulting in greater indirect adverse economic impacts than the
bycatch reduction criterion of this final rule. This alternative would
also set an excessive standard that few BRD designs could achieve.
Copies of the FRFA are available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
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 an 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.'' As part of this rulemaking process, NMFS prepared
a fishery bulletin, which also serves as a small entity compliance
guide. The fishery bulletin will be sent to all vessel permit holders
in the Gulf and South Atlantic shrimp fisheries.
This final rule contains approved collection-of-information
requirements--namely, the BRD certification process, consisting of
applications for pre-
[[Page 8223]]
certification or certification of a new BRD, pre-certification
adjusting, the testing itself, the submission of the test results,
application for observer position, and references for observers,
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). These collection-of-
information requirements have been approved by OMB under Control Number
0648-0345. The public reporting burden for this collection of
information which includes the application, pre-certification phase,
testing, and submission of results, is estimated to average 222 hours
per test. The public reporting burden for applying for an observer
position will average 1 hour per response, and the burden for obtaining
references will average 1 hour per response. The collection consists of
an Application Form, Vessel Information Form, Gear Specification Form,
TED/BRD Specification Form, Station Sheet Form, Species
Characterization Form, Length Frequency Form, and Condition and Fate
Form. The average response time for each of these forms is 20 minutes,
except for the Species Characterization Form which has a 2.8-hour
response time and the Application Form which has a 2.3-hour response
time. In addition, 4 hours will be needed to prepare the final report.
These burden estimates include the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding these burden estimates or any other aspect of
the collection-of-information requirement, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, to NMFS and to OMB (see ADDRESSES).
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required
to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure
to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements
of the PRA unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Virgin Islands.
Dated: February 7, 2008.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator For Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended as
follows:
PART 622--FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC
0
1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 622.41, paragraph (h) is removed and reserved and paragraph
(g) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.41 Species specific limitations.
* * * * *
(g) BRD requirement for Gulf and South Atlantic shrimp. On a shrimp
trawler in the Gulf EEZ or South Atlantic EEZ, each net that is rigged
for fishing must have a BRD installed that is listed in paragraph
(g)(2) of this section and is certified or provisionally certified for
the area in which the shrimp trawler is located, unless exempted as
specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section. A trawl
net is rigged for fishing if it is in the water, or if it is shackled,
tied, or otherwise connected to a sled, door, or other device that
spreads the net, or to a tow rope, cable, pole, or extension, either on
board or attached to a shrimp trawler.
(1) Exemptions from BRD requirement--(i) Royal red shrimp
exemption. A shrimp trawler is exempt from the requirement to have a
certified or provisionally certified BRD installed in each net provided
that at least 90 percent (by weight) of all shrimp on board or
offloaded from such trawler are royal red shrimp.
(ii) Try net exemption. A shrimp trawler is exempt from the
requirement to have a certified or provisionally certified BRD
installed in a single try net with a headrope length of 16 ft (4.9 m)
or less provided the single try net is either placed immediately in
front of another net or is not connected to another net.
(iii) Roller trawl exemption. A shrimp trawler is exempt from the
requirement to have a certified or provisionally certified BRD
installed in up to two rigid-frame roller trawls that are 16 ft (4.9 m)
or less in length used or possessed on board. A rigid-frame roller
trawl is a trawl that has a mouth formed by a rigid frame and a grid of
rigid vertical bars; has rollers on the lower horizontal part of the
frame to allow the trawl to roll over the bottom and any obstruction
while being towed; and has no doors, boards, or similar devices
attached to keep the mouth of the trawl open.
(iv) BRD certification testing exemption. A shrimp trawler that is
authorized by the RA to participate in the pre-certification testing
phase or to test a BRD in the EEZ for possible certification, has such
written authorization on board, and is conducting such test in
accordance with the ``Bycatch Reduction Device Testing Manual'' is
granted a limited exemption from the BRD requirement specified in this
paragraph (g). The exemption from the BRD requirement is limited to
those trawls that are being used in the certification trials. All other
trawls rigged for fishing must be equipped with certified or
provisionally certified BRDs.
(2) Procedures for certification and decertification of BRDs. The
process for the certification of BRDs consists of two phases--an
optional pre-certification phase and a required certification phase.
The RA may also provisionally certify a BRD.
(i) Pre-certification. The pre-certification phase allows a person
to test and evaluate a new BRD design for up to 60 days without being
subject to the observer requirements and rigorous testing requirements
specified for certification testing in the ``Bycatch Reduction Device
Testing Manual.''
(A) A person who wants to conduct pre-certification phase testing
must submit an application to the RA, as specified in the ``Bycatch
Reduction Device Testing Manual.'' The ``Bycatch Reduction Device
Testing Manual'', which is available from the RA, upon request,
contains the application forms.
(B) After reviewing the application, the RA will determine whether
to issue a letter of authorization (LOA) to conduct pre-certification
trials upon the vessel specified in the application. If the RA
authorizes pre-certification, the RA's LOA must be on board the vessel
during any trip involving the BRD testing.
(ii) Certification. A person who proposes a BRD for certification
for use in the Gulf EEZ or South Atlantic EEZ must submit an
application to test such BRD, conduct the testing, and submit the
results of the test in accordance with the ``Bycatch Reduction Device
Testing Manual.'' The RA will issue a LOA to conduct certification
trials upon the vessel specified in the application if the RA finds
that: The operation plan submitted with the application meets the
requirements of the ``Bycatch Reduction Device Testing
Manual; the observer identified in the application is
qualified; and the results of any pre-certification trials conducted
have been reviewed and deemed to indicate a reasonable scientific basis
for conducting certification testing. If authorization to conduct
certification trials is denied, the RA will provide a letter of
explanation to the applicant, together with relevant recommendations
[[Page 8224]]
to address the deficiencies resulting in the denial. To be certified
for use in the fishery, the BRD candidate must successfully demonstrate
a 30 percent reduction in total weight of finfish bycatch. In addition,
the BRD candidate must satisfy the following conditions: There is at
least a 50-percent probability the true reduction rate of the BRD
candidate meets the bycatch reduction criterion and there is no more
than a 10-percent probability the true reduction rate of the BRD
candidate is more than 5 percentage points less than the bycatch
reduction criterion. If a BRD meets both conditions, consistent with
the ``Bycatch Reduction Device Testing Manual'', NMFS, through
appropriate rulemaking procedures, will add the BRD to the list of
certified BRDs in paragraph (g)(3) of this section; and provide the
specifications for the newly certified BRD, including any special
conditions deemed appropriate based on the certification testing
results.
(iii) Provisional certification. Based on data provided consistent
with the ``Bycatch Reduction Device Testing Manual'', the RA may
provisionally certify a BRD if there is at least a 50-percent
probability the true reduction rate of the BRD is no more than 5
percentage points less than the bycatch reduction criterion, i.e. 25
percent reduction in total weight of finfish bycatch. Through
appropriate rulemaking procedures, NMFS will add the BRD to the list of
provisionally certified BRDs in paragraph (g)(3) of this section; and
provide the specifications for the BRD, including any special
conditions deemed appropriate based on the certification testing
results. A provisional certification is effective for 2 years from the
date of publication of the notification in the Federal Register
announcing the provisional certification.
(iv) Decertification. The RA will decertify a BRD if NMFS
determines the BRD does not meet the requirements for certification or
provisional certification. Before determining whether to decertify a
BRD, the RA will notify the appropriate Fishery Management Council in
writing, and the public will be provided an opportunity to comment on
the advisability of any proposed decertification. The RA will consider
any comments from the Council and public, and if the RA elects to
decertify the BRD, the RA will proceed with decertification via
appropriate rulemaking.
(3) Certified and provisionally certified BRDs --(i) Certified
BRDS. The following BRDs are certified for use in the Gulf EEZ and
South Atlantic EEZ unless indicated otherwise. Specifications of these
certified BRDs are contained in Appendix D to this part.
(A) Fisheye.
(B) Gulf fisheye.
(C) Jones-Davis.
(D) Modified Jones-Davis.
(E) Expanded mesh.
(F) Extended funnel -South Atlantic EEZ only.
(ii) Provisionally certified BRDs. The following BRDs are
provisionally certified for use in the areas and for the time periods
indicated. Specifications of these provisionally certified BRDs are
contained in Appendix D to this part.
(A) Extended funnel- Gulf EEZ only; through February 16, 2010.
(B) Composite panel -Gulf EEZ and South Atlantic EEZ; through
February 16, 2010.
* * * * *
0
3. In Appendix D to part 622, sections F and G are added to read as
follows:
Appendix D to Part 622--Specifications for Certified BRDs
* * * * *
F. Modified Jones-Davis.
1. Description. The Modified Jones-Davis BRD is a variation to the
alternative funnel construction method of the Jones-Davis BRD except
the funnel is assembled by using depth-stretched and heat-set
polyethylene webbing instead of the flaps formed from the extension
webbing. In addition, no hoops are used to hold the BRD open.
2. Minimum Construction and Installation Requirements. The Modified
Jones-Davis BRD must contain all of the following.
(a) Webbing extension. The webbing extension must be constructed
from a single rectangular piece of 1 5/8-inch (4.1-cm) stretch mesh
number 30 nylon with dimensions of 39 \1/2\ meshes by 150 meshes. A
tube is formed from the extension webbing by sewing the 39 \1/2\-mesh-
sides together.
(b) Funnel. The funnel must be constructed from two sections of 1
5/8-inch (4.1-cm) heat-set and depth-stretched polypropylene or
polyethylene webbing. The two side sections must be rectangular in
shape, 25 meshes on the leading edge by 21 meshes deep. The 25-mesh
leading edge of each polyethylene webbing section must be sewn evenly
two meshes in from the front of the extension webbing starting 25
meshes from the top center on each side. The 21-mesh edge must be sewn
to the extension webbing on a 9-bar and 1-mesh angle in the top and
bottom, forming a V-shape funnel.
(c) Cutting the escape opening. The leading edge of the escape
openings must be located within 18 inches (45.7 cm) of the posterior
edge of the turtle excluder device (TED) grid. The area of the escape
opening must total at least 635 in2 (4,097 cm2). Two escape openings, 6
meshes wide by 12 meshes deep, must be cut 4 meshes apart in the
extension webbing, starting at the top center extension seam, 7 meshes
back from the leading edge, and 30 meshes to the left and to the right
(total of four openings). The four escape openings must be double
selvaged for strength.
(d) Cone fish deflector. The cone fish deflector is constructed of
2 pieces of 1 5/8-inch (4.1-cm) polypropylene or polyethylene webbing,
40 meshes wide by 20 meshes in length and cut on the bar on each side
forming a triangle. Starting at the apex of the two triangles, the two
pieces must be sewn together to form a cone of webbing. The apex of the
cone fish deflector must be positioned within 12 inches (30.5 cm) of
the posterior edge of the funnel.
(e) 11-inch (27.9-cm) cable hoop for cone deflector. A single hoop
must be constructed of 5/16-inch (0.79-cm) or 3/8-inch (0.95-cm) cable
34 \1/2\ inches (87.6 cm) in length. The ends must be joined by a 3-
inch (7.6-cm) piece of 3/8-inch (0.95-cm) aluminum pipe pressed
together with a 1/4-inch (0.64-cm) die. The hoop must be inserted in
the webbing cone, attached 10 meshes from the apex and laced all the
way around with heavy twine.
(f) Installation of the cone in the extension. The apex of the cone
must be installed in the extension within 12 inches (30.5 cm) behind
the back edge of the funnel and attached in four places. The midpoint
of a piece of number 60 twine (or at least 4-mesh wide strip of number
21 or heavier webbing) 3 ft (1.22 m) in length must be attached to the
apex of the cone. This piece of twine or webbing must be attached
within 5 meshes of the aft edge of the funnel at the center of each of
its sides. Two 12-inch (30.5-cm) pieces of number 60 (or heavier) twine
must be attached to the top and bottom of the 11-inch (27.9-cm) cone
hoop. The opposite ends of these two pieces of twine must be attached
to the top and bottom center of the extension webbing to keep the cone
from inverting into the funnel.
G. Composite Panel.
1. Description. The Composite Panel BRD is a variation to the
alternative funnel construction method of the Jones-Davis BRD except
the funnel is assembled by using depth-stretched and heat-set
polyethylene webbing with square mesh panels on the inside
[[Page 8225]]
instead of the flaps formed from the extension webbing. In addition, no
hoops are used to hold the BRD open.
2. Minimum Construction and Installation Requirements. The
Composite Panel BRD must contain all of the following:
(a) Webbing extension. The webbing extension must be constructed
from a single rectangular piece of 1 \1/2\-inch to 1 5/8-inch (3.8-cm
to 4.1-cm) stretch mesh number 30 nylon with dimensions of 24 \1/2\
meshes by 150 to 160 meshes. A tube is formed from the extension
webbing piece by sewing the 24 \1/2\-mesh sides together. The leading
edge of the webbing extension must be attached no more than 4 meshes
from the posterior edge of the TED grid.
(b) Funnel. The V-shaped funnel consists of two webbing panels
attached to the extension along the leading edge of the panels. The top
and bottom edges of the panels are sewn diagonally across the extension
toward the center to form the funnel. The panels are 2-ply in design,
each with an inner layer of 1 \1/2\-inch to 1 5/8-inch (3.8-cm to 4.1-
cm) heat-set and depth-stretched polyethylene webbing and an outer
layer constructed of 2-inch (5.1-cm) square mesh webbing (1-inch bar).
The inner webbing layer must be rectangular in shape, 36 meshes on the
leading edge by 20 meshes deep. The 36-mesh leading edges of the
polyethylene webbing should be sewn evenly to 24 meshes of the
extension webbing 1 \1/2\ meshes from and parallel to the leading edge
of the extension starting 12 meshes up from the bottom center on each
side. Alternately sew 2 meshes of the polyethylene webbing to 1 mesh of
the extension webbing then 1 mesh of the polyethylene webbing to 1 mesh
of the extension webbing toward the top. The bottom 20-mesh edges of
the polyethylene layers are sewn evenly to the extension webbing on a 2
bar 1 mesh angle toward the bottom back center forming a v-shape in the
bottom of the extension webbing. The top 20-mesh edges of the
polyethylene layers are sewn evenly along the bars of the extension
webbing toward the top back center. The square mesh layers must be
rectangular in shape and constructed of 2-inch (5.1-cm) webbing that is
18 bars or squares on the leading edge. The depth of the square mesh
layer must be no more than 2 inches (5.1 cm) less than the 20 mesh side
of the inner polyethylene layer when stretched taught. The 18 bar
leading edge of each square mesh layer must be sewn evenly 1 bar to 2
meshes of the 36-mesh leading edge of the polyethylene section and the
sides are sewn evenly (in length) to the 20-mesh edges of the
polyethylene webbing. This will form a v-shape funnel using the top of
the extension webbing as the top of the funnel and the bottom of the
extension webbing as the bottom of the funnel.
(c) Cutting the escape opening. There are two escape openings on
each side of the funnel. The leading edge of the escape openings must
be located on the same row of meshes in the extension webbing as the
leading edge of the composite panels. The lower openings are formed by
starting at the first attachment point of the composite panels and
cutting 9 meshes in the extension webbing on an even row of meshes
toward the top of the extension. Next, turn 90 degrees and cut 15
points on an even row toward the back of the extension webbing. At this
point turn and cut 18 bars toward the bottom front of the extension
webbing. Finish the escape opening by cutting 6 points toward the
original starting point. The top escape openings start 5 meshes above
and mirror the lower openings. Starting at the leading edge of the
composite panel and 5 meshes above the lower escape opening, cut 9
meshes in the extension on an even row of meshes toward the top of the
extension. Next, turn 90 degrees, and cut 6 points on an even row
toward the back of the extension webbing. Then cut 18 bars toward the
bottom back of the extension. To complete the escape opening, cut 15
points forward toward the original starting point. The area of each
escape opening must total at least 212 in\2\ (1,368 cm\2\). The four
escape openings must be double selvaged for strength.
Note: The ``Bycatch Reduction Device Testing Manual'' is
published, excluding the Manual's appendices, as an appendix to this
document. See the contact under ADDRESSES to obtain a complete
Manual.
The following appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Appendix--Bycatch Reduction Device Testing Manual
Definitions
Bycatch reduction criterion is the standard by which a BRD
candidate will be evaluated. To be certified for use by the shrimp
fishery in the Exclusive Economic Zone off the southeastern United
States (North Carolina through Texas), the BRD candidate must
demonstrate a successful reduction of total finfish bycatch by at
least 30 percent by weight.
Bycatch reduction device (BRD) is any gear or trawl modification
designed to allow finfish to escape from a shrimp trawl.
BRD candidate is a BRD to be tested for certification for use in
the commercial shrimp fishery of southeastern United States.
Certified BRD is a BRD that has been tested according to the
procedure outlined herein and has been determined by the RA as
having met the bycatch reduction criterion.
Control trawl means a trawl that is not equipped with a BRD
during the evaluation.
Evaluation and oversight personnel means scientists, observers,
and other technical personnel who, by reason of their occupation or
scientific expertise or training, are approved by the RA as
qualified to evaluate and review the application and testing
process.
Experimental trawl means the trawl that is equipped with the BRD
candidate during an evaluation.
Net or side bias means when the net(s) being fished on one side
of the vessel demonstrate a different catch rate (fishing
efficiency) than the net(s) being fished on the other side of the
vessel during paired-net tests.
Observer means a person on the list maintained by the RA of
individuals qualified (see Appendix H) to supervise and monitor a
BRD certification test.
Paired-net test means a tow during certification trials where a
control net and an experimental net are fished simultaneously, and
the catches and catch rates between the nets are compared.
Provisional Certification Criterion means a secondary benchmark
which would allow a BRD candidate to be used for a time-limited
period in the southeastern shrimp fishery. To meet the criterion,
the BRD candidate must demonstrate a successful reduction of total
finfish bycatch by at least 25 percent by weight.
Provisionally certified BRD means a BRD that has been tested
according to the procedure outlined herein and has been determined
by the RA as having met the provisional certification criterion. A
BRD meeting the provisional certification criterion would be
certified by the RA for a period of 2 years.
Regional Administrator (RA) means the Southeast Regional
Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Required measurements refers to the quantification of gear
characteristics such as the dimensions and configuration of the
trawl, the BRD candidate, the doors, or the location of the BRD in
relation to other parts of the trawl gear that are used to assess
the performance of the BRD candidate.
Sample size means the number of successful tows (a minimum of 30
tows per test are required).
Shrimp trawler means any vessel that is equipped with one or
more trawl nets whose on-board or landed catch of shrimp is more
than 1 percent, by weight, of all fish comprising its on-board or
landed catch.
Successful tow means that the control and experimental trawl
were fished in accordance with the requirements set forth herein and
the terms and conditions of the letter of authorization, and there
is no indication problematic events, such as those listed in
Appendix D-5, occurred during the tow to impact or influence the
fishing efficiency (catch) of one or both nets.
Tow time means the total time (hours and minutes) an individual
trawl was fished (i.e.,
[[Page 8226]]
the time interval beginning when the winch is locked after deploying
the net overboard, and ending when retrieval of the net is
initiated).
Trawl means a net and associated gear and rigging used to catch
shrimp. The terms trawl and net are used interchangeably throughout
this Manual.
Try net means a separate net pulled for brief periods by a
shrimp trawler to test for shrimp concentrations or determine
fishing conditions (e.g., presence of absence of bottom debris,
jellyfish, bycatch, and seagrasses).
Tuning a net means adjusting the trawl and its components to
minimize or eliminate any net or side bias that exists between the
two nets that will be used as the control and experimental trawls
during the certification test.
I. Introduction
This Bycatch Reduction Device Testing Manual (Manual)
establishes a standardized process for evaluating the ability of
bycatch reduction device (BRD) candidates to meet the established
bycatch reduction criterion, and be certified for use in the EEZ by
the southeastern shrimp fishery. BRDs are required for use in shrimp
trawls fished shoreward of the 100-fathom (183-meter) depth contour
in the Gulf of Mexico, and within the EEZ of the South Atlantic
region.
Various BRD requirements also exist in state waters in the South
Atlantic and off Florida and Texas in the Gulf of Mexico. Persons
wishing to conduct BRD candidate evaluations exclusively in state
waters do not need to apply to NMFS for authorization to conduct
these tests, but should contact the appropriate state officials for
authorizations. However, for data collected in such evaluations to
be considered by NMFS for certification, the operations plan and
data collection procedures must meet the criteria established in
this Manual.
II. BRD Candidate Evaluations
A. Application
Persons interested in evaluating the efficiency of a BRD
candidate must apply for, receive, and have on board the vessel
during the evaluation, a Letter of Authorization (LOA) from the
Regional Administrator (RA). To receive an LOA, the applicant must
submit the following documentation to the RA: (1) a completed
application form (Appendix A); (2) a brief statement of the purpose
and goal of the activity for which the LOA is requested; (3) an
operations plan (see Section C below) describing the scope,
duration, dates, and location of the test, and methods that will be
used to conduct the test; (4) an 8.5- inch x 11-inch (21.6-cm x
27.9-cm) diagram drawn to scale of the BRD design; (5) an 8.5-inch x
11-inch (21.6-cm x 27.9-cm) diagram drawn to scale of the BRD in the
shrimp trawl; (6) a description of how the BRD is supposed to work;
(7) a copy of the testing vessel's U.S. Coast Guard documentation or
its state registration; and (8) a copy of the testing vessel's
Federal commercial shrimp vessel permit.
An applicant requesting an LOA to test an unapproved turtle
excluder device (TED) as a BRD (including modifications to a TED
that would enhance finfish exclusion) must first apply for and
obtain from the RA an experimental TED authorization pursuant to 50
CFR 223.207(e)(2). Applicants should contact the Protected Resources
Division of NMFS' Southeast Regional Office for further information.
The LOA applicant must include a copy of that authorization with the
application.
Incomplete applications will be returned to the applicant along
with a letter from the RA indicating what actions the applicant may
take to make the application complete.
There is no cost to the applicant for the RA's administrative
expenses such as reviewing applications, issuing LOAs, evaluating
test results, or certifying BRDs. However, all other costs
associated with the actual testing activities are the responsibility
of the applicant, or any associated sponsor. If an application for
an LOA is denied, the RA will provide a letter of explanation to the
applicant, together with relevant recommendations to address the
deficiencies that resulted in the denial.
B. Allowable Activities
Issuance of an LOA to test a BRD candidate in the South Atlantic
or Gulf of Mexico allows the applicant to remove or disable the
existing certified BRD in one outboard net (to create a control
net), and to place the BRD candidate in another outboard net in lieu
of a certified BRD (to create an experimental net). All other trawls
under tow during the test must have a certified BRD, unless these
nets are specifically exempted in the LOA. All trawls under tow
during the test must have an approved TED unless operating under an
authorization issued pursuant to 50 CFR 223.207(e)(2), whereby the
test is being conducted on an experimental TED. The LOA, and
experimental TED authorization if applicable, must be on board the
vessel while the test is being conducted. The term of the LOA will
be 60 days; should circumstances require a longer test period, the
applicant may apply to the RA for a 60-day extension.
C. Operations Plan
An operations plan should be submitted with the application
describing a method to compare the catches of shrimp and fish in a
control net (net without a BRD candidate installed) to the catches
of the same species in an experimental net (a net configured
identically to the control net but also equipped with the BRD
candidate).
The applicant may choose to conduct a pre-certification test of
a prototype BRD candidate. A pre-certification test would be
conducted when the intent is to assess the preliminary effectiveness
of a prototype BRD candidate under field conditions, and to make
modifications to the prototype BRD candidate during the field test.
For pre-certification testing, the operations plan must include only
a description of the scope, duration, dates, and location of the
test, along with a description of methods that will be used to
conduct the test. No observer is required for a pre-certification
test, but the applicant may choose to use an observer to maintain a
written record of the test. The applicant will maintain a written
record for both the control and experimental net during each tow.
Mandatory data collection is limited to the weight of the shrimp
catch and the weight of the total finfish catch in each test net
during each tow. These data must be submitted to NMFS at the
conclusion of the test. Although not required, the applicant may
wish to incorporate some or all the certification test requirements
listed below.
For a BRD candidate to be considered for certification, the
operations plan must be more detailed and address the following
topics:
(1) The primary assumption in assessing the bycatch reduction
efficiency of the BRD candidate during paired net tests is that the
inclusion of the BRD candidate in the experimental net is the only
factor causing a difference in catch from the control net.
Therefore, the nets to be used in the tests must be calibrated
(tuned) to minimize, to the extent practicable, any net or side bias
in catch efficiency prior to beginning a test series, and tuned
again after any gear modification or change. Additional information
on tuning shrimp trawls to minimize bias is available from the
Harvesting Technology Branch, Mississippi Laboratories, Pascagoula
Facility, 3209 Frederic Street, Pascagoula, MS 39568 1207; phone
(601) 762 4591.
(2) A standard tow time for a proposed evaluation should be
defined. Tow times must be representative of the tow times used by
commercial shrimp trawlers. The applicant should indicate what
alternatives will be considered should the proposed tow time need
adjustment once the test begins.
(3) A minimum sample size of 30 successful tows using a specific
BRD candidate design is required for the statistical analysis
described in Section F. No alterations of the BRD candidate design
are allowed during a specific test series. If the BRD candidate
design is altered, a new test series must be started. If a gear
change (i.e., changing nets, doors, or rigging) is required, the
nets should be tuned again before proceeding with further tests to
complete the 30-tow series. Minor repairs to the gear (e.g., sewing
holes in the webbing; replacing a broken tickler chain with a new
one of the same configuration) are not considered a gear change.
(4) For tests conducted on twin-rig vessels, biases that might
result from the use of a try net should be reduced to the extent
practicable. Total fishing times for a try net must be a consistent
percentage of the total tow time during each tow made in the test.
(5) To incorporate any net or side bias that remains after the
tuning tows (e.g., the effect of a try net), or to accommodate for
bias that develops between the control and experimental nets during
the test, the operations plan should outline a timetable ensuring
that an equal number of successful tows are made with the BRD
candidate employed in both the port and starboard nets.
(6) Mandatory data to be collected during a test includes: (1)
detailed gear specifications as set forth in Appendices B and C, and
(2) pertinent information concerning the location, duration and
catch from individual tows as set forth in Appendices D and F.
(7) Following each paired tow, the catches from the control and
experimental nets must
[[Page 8227]]
be examined separately. This requires that the catch from each net
be kept separate from each other, as well as from the catch taken in
other nets fished during that tow. Mandatory data collections
include recording the weight of the total catch of each test net
(control and experimental nets), the catch of shrimp (i.e., brown,
white, pink, rock, or other shrimp by species) in each test net, and
the catch of total finfish in aggregate in each test net.
(8) When recording the detailed information on the species found
in the catch, if the catch in a net does not fill one standard 1-
bushel [ca. 10 gallon] (30 liters) polyethylene shrimp basket (ca.
70 lb) (31.8 kg), but the tow is otherwise considered successful,
data must be collected on the entire catch of the net, and recorded
as a ``select'' sample (see Appendices D and F), indicating that the
values represent the total catch of the particular net. If the catch
in a net exceeds 70 lb (31.8 kg), a well-mixed sample consisting of
one standard 1-bushel [ca. 10 gallon] (30 liters) polyethylene
shrimp basket must be taken from the total catch of the net. The
total weight of the sample must be recorded, as well as the weights
(and numbers as applicable) of the various species or species groups
found within that sample. These sample values can then be
extrapolated to estimate the quantity of those species or species
groups found in the total catch of the particular net.
(9) Although not a criterion for certification, applicants
testing BRD candidates are encouraged to collect additional
information that may be pertinent to addressing bycatch issues in
their respective regions. For example, in the western Gulf of Mexico
applicants are especially encouraged to collect information on red
snapper. If the applicant chooses to collect these data, the total
(``select'') catch of the target species from each test net (not
just from the sample) should be recorded along with lengths for as
many individuals per net per tow as set forth in Appendices E and F.
Additional information in regard to the catch can be recorded on
forms such as Appendix G.
The operations plan should address what the applicant will do
should it become necessary to deviate from the primary procedures
outlined in the operations plan. The plan should describe in detail
what will be done to continue the test in a reasonable manner that
is consistent with the primary procedures. For example, it may
become necessary to alter the pre-selected tow time to adapt to
local fishing conditions to successfully complete the test. Prior to
issuing a LOA, the RA may consult with evaluation personnel to
review the acceptability of these proposed alterations.
D. Observer Requirements
It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that a
qualified observer (see Appendix H) is on boar