National Standard 10 Guidelines, 22342-22344 [2011-9718]
Download as PDF
22342
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 77 / Thursday, April 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mechanism would help to ensure that
Tribal priorities are met in providing
USF support for the extension of mobile
voice service. To the extent other
options may be preferable, commenters
are requested to discuss alternatives in
detail and explain how these options
would work in the context of the
proposed competitive bidding
mechanism. Commenters are also
invited to provide information about
what factors are most important in
targeting limited support for mobile
wireless service within Tribal lands.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
2. Possible Requirement for Engagement
With Tribal Governments Prior to
Auction
6. Several commenters suggest that
parties participating in a Mobility Fund
auction seeking support to serve Tribal
lands be required to demonstrate that
Tribal governments have been formally
and effectively engaged in the planning
process and that the service to be
provided will advance the goals
established by the Tribal government.
The Commission seeks comment on
those proposals. What issues should
receive priority in a flow of information
and exchange of ideas with Tribal
governments? What subjects of
discussion will increase the potential
for sustainability and adoption of the
contemplated service? Among other
things, the Commission believes the
topics of engagement with Tribal
governments could include: (1) Needs
assessment, deployment planning and
inclusion of Tribal anchor institutions
and communities; (2) feasibility and
sustainability planning; (3) marketing
supported services in a culturally
sensitive manner; (4) rights-of-way
processes, land use permitting, facilities
siting and cultural preservation review
processes; and, (5) compliance with
Tribal business and licensing
requirements. At what point in time
should any such engagement
requirement apply (e.g., at the shortform or long-form application stage)?
Commenters are invited to address the
appropriate scope and timing of a
potential consultation requirement.
3. Possible Preference for TriballyOwned and -Controlled Providers
7. At least one comment to the
Mobility Fund NPRM suggested a
preference for Tribally-owned and
-controlled providers. Specifically, the
Commission seeks comment on a
proposal that would provide a form of
bidding credit to qualified Triballyowned and -controlled providers. If a
provider qualified for this bidding
credit, its per-unit bid amount would be
reduced by a designated percentage for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:05 Apr 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
purposes of comparing it to other bids
made—although if the bid were to win,
support would be calculated at the full,
undiscounted bid amount. That is, the
‘‘reduced’’ bid would fall lower in the
ranking of bids from lowest to highest,
making it more likely that a Triballyowned and -controlled entity would be
among the winning bidders eligible to
receive funding, but the bidding credit
would not reduce the amount of funding
that the entity would receive if it were
to be awarded support. The Commission
seeks comment on this approach. The
Commission also invites comment on
whether a Tribal preference is
appropriate in the context of awarding
universal service funds. To the extent
the Commission wishes to adopt such a
bidding credit for Tribally-owned and
-controlled providers, what percentage
would be appropriate? Are there other
methods the Commission should
consider to provide a preference to
Tribally-owned and -controlled
providers? The Commission notes that
the establishment of an absolute Tribal
priority, as proposed in the mobile
spectrum context and adopted in the
context of the Tribal Priority for radio
broadcast licensing, may not be
appropriate here. This is because in the
reverse auction mechanism proposed for
the Mobility Fund, an award would not
be made for each area, but instead
support would be granted only for those
areas where the per-unit bids are lowest.
8. The Commission also seeks
comment on whether it should employ
both a priority unit mechanism and a
bidding preference for Tribal entities at
the same time. And, if not, which of
these mechanisms may work more
effectively in a Mobility Fund auction to
target support consistent with Tribal
needs?
4. Timing of a Tribal Mobility Fund
Auction
9. In the Mobility Fund NPRM, the
Commission noted that addressing
Mobility Fund support for Tribal lands
on a separate track could be beneficial
in providing adequate time to consult
with Tribal governments and seek their
input. While commenters generally
supported creation of a separate Tribal
Mobility Fund, they cautioned that
addressing Tribal issues on a ‘‘separate
track’’ should not put them on a ‘‘slow
track.’’ The Commission agrees that
Tribal issues are a priority and should
be resolved expeditiously in order to
speed the provision of services on Tribal
lands. The Commission observes,
however, that there are pending
proposals regarding utilization of
spectrum over Tribal lands that could
benefit from the support that may be
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
available through a Tribal Mobility
Fund auction. In particular, the
Improving Communications Services for
Native Nations by Promoting Greater
Utilization of Spectrum Over Tribal
Lands, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
76 FR 18476, April 4, 2011, proposes a
variety of options for Tribal entities to
access spectrum over Tribal lands. The
Commission seeks comment on the
extent to which these open issues
should influence the timing of a
possible Tribal Mobility Fund auction.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), the Mobility Fund
NPRM included an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 603, exploring the potential
impact on small entities of the
Commission’s proposal. The
Commission invites parties to file
comments on the IRFA in light of this
additional notice.
Procedural Matters
Ex Parte Presentations. This matter
shall be treated as a ‘‘permit-butdisclose’’ proceeding in accordance with
the ex parte rules. Persons making oral
ex parte presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentations must contain summaries
of the substance of the presentations
and not merely a listing of the subjects
discussed. More than a one- or twosentence description of the views and
arguments presented generally is
required. Other requirements pertaining
to oral and written presentations are set
forth in section 1.1206(b) of the
Commission’s rules.
Federal Communications Commission.
Margaret W. Wiener,
Chief, Auctions and Spectrum Access
Division.
[FR Doc. 2011–9860 Filed 4–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 110218147–1199–01]
RIN 0648–BA74
National Standard 10 Guidelines
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 77 / Thursday, April 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for comments;
notice of a public meeting.
ACTION:
NMFS issues this advance
notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR)
to provide background information and
request public comment on potential
adjustments to the National Standard 10
Guidelines.
DATES: Written comments regarding the
issues in this ANPR must be received by
5 p.m., local time, on July 20, 2011. A
public meeting to obtain additional
comments on the items discussed in this
ANPR will be held at the NOAA Science
Center in Silver Spring, MD, on May 19,
2011 from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. NMFS may
hold additional meetings during the
comment period and will announce
those meetings in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: A public meeting will be
held on May 19, 2011 from 1 p.m. to 3
p.m. at the NOAA Science Center, 1301
East-West Highway; Silver Spring, MD
20910.
You may submit comments, identified
by ‘‘0648–BA74’’, by any one of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Fax: 301–713–1193, Attn: Debra
Lambert.
• Mail: Debra Lambert; National
Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA; 1315
East-West Highway, Room 13403; Silver
Spring, MD 20910.
Instructions: All comments received
are part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.regulations.gov without change.
All Personal Identifying Information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publically accessible. Do not
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter
N/A in the required fields, if you wish
to remain anonymous). You may submit
attachments to electronic comments in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or
Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Debra Lambert, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 301–713–2341.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
Background
Section 301(a) of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSA) contains 10
national standards (NS) with which all
Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) and
their amendments and implementing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:05 Apr 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
regulations must be consistent. Section
301(b) of the MSA requires that ‘‘the
Secretary establish advisory guidelines
(which shall not have the force and
effect of law), based on the national
standards to assist in the development
of fishery management plans.’’
Conforming to the NS guidelines (50
CFR part 600, subpart D) when
preparing an FMP, FMP amendment,
and regulations is essential to properly
addressing the intentions of Congress
when it established and revised the
MSA.
The Sustainable Fisheries Act, signed
into law in 1996, added National
Standard 10 (NS10) to the MSA (15
U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). National Standard
10 states: ‘‘Conservation and
management measures shall, to the
extent practicable, promote the safety of
human life at sea.’’ NMFS published
final guidelines for NS10 in 1998 (63 FR
24212; May 1, 1998). More recently, the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2006, added
section 303(a)(9)(C) to the MSA, which
states that fishery impact statements
shall address the impact of conservation
and management measures and include
possible mitigation measures for ‘‘the
safety of human life at sea, including
whether and to what extent such
measures may affect the safety of
participants to the fishery.’’
Need for Revision
Commercial fishing is one of the most
dangerous occupations because fishing
operations are often conducted under
poor weather conditions, high winds,
cold temperatures, and on moving
platforms that can be slippery or icy;
some gear types can be dangerous to
operate; a number of structural or
mechanical problems can arise on
vessels; and the work can be physically
straining and lead to fatigue.
Recreational fishing, including the forhire charter and party-boat segments,
can also be a dangerous activity with
participants facing many of the same
risks as commercial participants.
The National Standard 10 Guidelines
are the primary source of guidance for
the consideration of safety issues in
fishery management regulations. The
current Guidelines are relatively short
and have four main sections with the
following elements: (1) A general
statement that fishing is a dangerous
occupation and recommendation that
Regional Fishery Management Councils
(Councils) reduce safety risks when
developing management measures; an
explanation of the qualifying phrase ‘‘to
the extent practicable’’ in NS10; and an
explanation that the phrase ‘‘safety of
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22343
human life at sea’’ refers to both the
safety of a fishing vessel and the safety
of persons aboard the vessel; (2) a list of
safety issues to consider when
evaluating management measures; (3) a
recommendation that during the
preparation of any FMP, FMP
amendment, or regulation that might
affect safety of human life at sea, the
Council should consult with the U.S.
Coast Guard and fishing industry as to
the nature and extent of any adverse
impact; and (4) a list of mitigation
measures that could be considered
when management measures are
developed.
Recent events suggest a need to revise
the guidelines for NS10. The current
Guidelines are thirteen years old and
fisheries management and fishing vessel
safety science in general has evolved
during that time. NOAA has new fishery
management requirements and policies
in place, and the implementation of
these measures will lead to changes in
the way fisheries are managed. Major
changes in fisheries management that
change the way fishing operations are
conducted, including catch share
programs, could impact the safety of
fishermen at sea, and those impacts
should be assessed during the
management process.
As mentioned above, section
303(a)(9)(C) to the MSA states that
fishery impact statements shall include
possible mitigation measures for ‘‘the
safety of human life at sea, including
whether and to what extent such
measures may affect the safety of
participants to the fishery.’’ This is a
relatively new requirement (added by
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2006) and NMFS
could provide guidance on addressing
this requirement in the revised National
Standard 10 Guidelines.
There are also external factors that
point to the need to focus on safety at
sea. The Coast Guard Authorization Act
(CGAA) of 2010 was signed by President
Obama on October 15, 2010. Section 604
of the CGAA builds on requirements set
forth in the Commercial Fishing
Industry Vessel Safety Act of 1988,
including the following: It authorizes
the U.S. Coast Guard to examine at
dockside, at least once every 2 years,
fishing vessels that operate beyond
3 miles to ensure that they meet safety
standards; it authorizes and requires a
training program for the operators of
fishing vessels that operate beyond
3 miles; and it establishes design and
construction standards for all new
vessels. Furthermore, the CGAA
requires that Alternative Compliance
and Safety Agreement programs be
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
22344
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 77 / Thursday, April 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
developed for certain groups of existing
fishing vessels. These new requirements
highlight an emphasis on improving
fishing vessel safety. NMFS will ensure
that revisions to the NS10 Guidelines
will complement the new mandates of
the CGAA.
The current NS10 Guidelines do not
contain any guidance on analytical
methods to evaluate safety. Recent work
by the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health and the
U.S. Coast Guard has shown that the
fishery management process can more
explicitly address safety at sea by
analyzing fatalities and calculating
fatality rates for the fishery and
understanding the overall trend in
fatality rates. This information can be
used in risk assessments to identify
major hazards within a fishery. NMFS
could include guidance on the
analytical approaches for addressing
safety considerations in the revised
NS10 Guidelines.
For the above reasons, NMFS believes
it is appropriate and timely to revise
NS10 Guidelines and is accepting
public comments on potential revisions
to the Guidelines. Through the revision
of the NS10 Guidelines, NMFS intends
to enhance consideration of safety
issues in fisheries management.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Public Comments
To help determine the scope of issues
to be addressed and to identify
significant issues related to this action,
NMFS is soliciting written comments on
this ANPR and will hold a public
meeting at the NOAA Science Center in
Silver Spring, MD, on May 19, 2011
from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. NMFS may hold
additional public meetings during the
comment period and will announce
those meetings in the Federal Register.
The public is encouraged to submit
comments related to the specific ideas
mentioned in this ANPR. NMFS is also
seeking additional ideas and solutions
to improve safety at sea and the NS10
Guidelines. All written comments
received by the due date will be
considered in drafting proposed
revisions to the NS10 Guidelines.
Issues Under Consideration
In considering potential revisions to
the NS10 Guidelines, NMFS has
identified the following list of issues
related to safety of human life at sea.
NMFS seeks public comment on the
scope of this ANPR generally and the
potential for guidance on the following
fisheries safety issues.
1. Assembling Fatality, Injury, and
Vessel Loss Information: Establishing
guidance on how to assemble and
analyze data on fatalities and injuries
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:05 Apr 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
for each Federal fishery using
information from NMFS’s National
Observer Program, U.S. Coast Guard
investigations, U.S. Coast Guard’s
Marine Information and Safety and Law
Enforcement database system, and
National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health data.
2. Developing Fatality, Injury, and
Vessel Loss Rates: Establishing guidance
on how to estimate workforce for each
Federal fishery in order to calculate
fatality and injury rates. By combining
fatality and non-fatal injury information
with workforce estimates, injury,
fatality, and vessel loss rates can be
calculated to identify trends over time.
3. Evaluating Risks: Establishing
general guidance on how to conduct
fishery specific risk assessments, which
can help identify major safety hazards
within a fishery. The frequency for
conducting such assessments will also
be explored.
4. Safety Considerations and
Mitigation Measures: Risk assessments
may identify that fishery conservation
and management measures are needed
and appropriate to improve safety at sea.
The current NS10 Guidelines contain
three safety considerations (operating
environment, gear and vessel loading
requirements, and limited season and
area fisheries) and eight mitigation
measures to consider when developing
management measures (see 50 CFR
600.355 paragraphs (c) and (d)). NMFS
seeks comments on these sections and,
if appropriate, additional safety
considerations and mitigation measures
that could be added to the Guidelines.
For example, NMFS could consider how
fishery management measures can better
complement and reinforce U.S. Coast
Guard safety regulations. In addition,
where regulations currently restrict
vessel upgrades or replacement,
mitigation measures could include
allowing for vessel replacement in a
fleet so that older vessels can be
replaced with newer and safer vessels.
Other potential mitigation measures
could include eliminating or reducing
penalties for cutting fishing trips short
due to weather or other conditions and
extending fishing seasons to allow for
quotas to be reached.
5. Recreational Fisheries: NMFS
welcomes information about safety
issues in both the private recreational
and the recreational for-hire
components of recreational fisheries and
suggestions on how to address them.
6. Establishing a Safety Committee:
The current NS10 Guidelines (50 CFR
600.355 paragraph (d)) recommend that
Councils consult with the U.S. Coast
Guard and the fishing industry during
the development of management
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
measures that might affect the safety of
human life at sea. NMFS welcomes
comments on this guidance and if
improvements to the consultation
process are necessary. For example,
NMFS could recommend that Councils
and the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary), as appropriate, establish a
Safety Committee or Safety Advisory
Panel that regularly reports on ongoing
activities to reduce injuries, fatalities,
and vessel losses within their
jurisdiction. U.S. Coast Guard
personnel, NMFS National Observer
Program personnel, and state
enforcement officers would be
encouraged to participate on such
committees and/or panels.
7. Stock Assessment and Fishery
Evaluation Reports: Establishing
guidance for the type of safety
information to include in Stock
Assessment and Fishery Evaluation
(SAFE) reports. The National Standard 2
Guidelines state that safety information
should be summarized in SAFE reports.
SAFE reports provide Councils and the
Secretary with important scientific
information needed for management
purposes and different types of safety
information could be added to these
reports to better inform the Councils
and the Secretary.
8. Fishery Impact Statements:
Establishing guidance for addressing
safety issues in fishery impact
statements, as required by the MSA.
Fishery impact statements are supposed
to address the impact of conservation
and management measures and include
possible mitigation measures for ‘‘the
safety of human life at sea, including
whether and to what extent such
measures may affect the safety of
participants to the fishery’’ (MSA
section 303(a)(9)(C)).
Special Accommodations
The public meeting to be held at the
NOAA Science Center on May 19, 2011
from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. will be accessible
to people with physical disabilities.
Request for sign language interpretation
or other auxiliary aids should be
directed to Debra Lambert (301–713–
2341), by May 5, 2011.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: April 15, 2011.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–9718 Filed 4–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 77 (Thursday, April 21, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22342-22344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9718]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 110218147-1199-01]
RIN 0648-BA74
National Standard 10 Guidelines
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce
[[Page 22343]]
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; request for comments;
notice of a public meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR)
to provide background information and request public comment on
potential adjustments to the National Standard 10 Guidelines.
DATES: Written comments regarding the issues in this ANPR must be
received by 5 p.m., local time, on July 20, 2011. A public meeting to
obtain additional comments on the items discussed in this ANPR will be
held at the NOAA Science Center in Silver Spring, MD, on May 19, 2011
from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. NMFS may hold additional meetings during the
comment period and will announce those meetings in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: A public meeting will be held on May 19, 2011 from 1 p.m. to
3 p.m. at the NOAA Science Center, 1301 East-West Highway; Silver
Spring, MD 20910.
You may submit comments, identified by ``0648-BA74'', by any one of
the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Fax: 301-713-1193, Attn: Debra Lambert.
Mail: Debra Lambert; National Marine Fisheries Service,
NOAA; 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13403; Silver Spring, MD 20910.
Instructions: All comments received are part of the public record
and will generally be posted to https://www.regulations.gov without
change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publically
accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or
otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept
anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to
remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Debra Lambert, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 301-713-2341.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 301(a) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSA) contains 10 national standards (NS) with which all
Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) and their amendments and implementing
regulations must be consistent. Section 301(b) of the MSA requires that
``the Secretary establish advisory guidelines (which shall not have the
force and effect of law), based on the national standards to assist in
the development of fishery management plans.'' Conforming to the NS
guidelines (50 CFR part 600, subpart D) when preparing an FMP, FMP
amendment, and regulations is essential to properly addressing the
intentions of Congress when it established and revised the MSA.
The Sustainable Fisheries Act, signed into law in 1996, added
National Standard 10 (NS10) to the MSA (15 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
National Standard 10 states: ``Conservation and management measures
shall, to the extent practicable, promote the safety of human life at
sea.'' NMFS published final guidelines for NS10 in 1998 (63 FR 24212;
May 1, 1998). More recently, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006, added section 303(a)(9)(C)
to the MSA, which states that fishery impact statements shall address
the impact of conservation and management measures and include possible
mitigation measures for ``the safety of human life at sea, including
whether and to what extent such measures may affect the safety of
participants to the fishery.''
Need for Revision
Commercial fishing is one of the most dangerous occupations because
fishing operations are often conducted under poor weather conditions,
high winds, cold temperatures, and on moving platforms that can be
slippery or icy; some gear types can be dangerous to operate; a number
of structural or mechanical problems can arise on vessels; and the work
can be physically straining and lead to fatigue. Recreational fishing,
including the for-hire charter and party-boat segments, can also be a
dangerous activity with participants facing many of the same risks as
commercial participants.
The National Standard 10 Guidelines are the primary source of
guidance for the consideration of safety issues in fishery management
regulations. The current Guidelines are relatively short and have four
main sections with the following elements: (1) A general statement that
fishing is a dangerous occupation and recommendation that Regional
Fishery Management Councils (Councils) reduce safety risks when
developing management measures; an explanation of the qualifying phrase
``to the extent practicable'' in NS10; and an explanation that the
phrase ``safety of human life at sea'' refers to both the safety of a
fishing vessel and the safety of persons aboard the vessel; (2) a list
of safety issues to consider when evaluating management measures; (3) a
recommendation that during the preparation of any FMP, FMP amendment,
or regulation that might affect safety of human life at sea, the
Council should consult with the U.S. Coast Guard and fishing industry
as to the nature and extent of any adverse impact; and (4) a list of
mitigation measures that could be considered when management measures
are developed.
Recent events suggest a need to revise the guidelines for NS10. The
current Guidelines are thirteen years old and fisheries management and
fishing vessel safety science in general has evolved during that time.
NOAA has new fishery management requirements and policies in place, and
the implementation of these measures will lead to changes in the way
fisheries are managed. Major changes in fisheries management that
change the way fishing operations are conducted, including catch share
programs, could impact the safety of fishermen at sea, and those
impacts should be assessed during the management process.
As mentioned above, section 303(a)(9)(C) to the MSA states that
fishery impact statements shall include possible mitigation measures
for ``the safety of human life at sea, including whether and to what
extent such measures may affect the safety of participants to the
fishery.'' This is a relatively new requirement (added by the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of
2006) and NMFS could provide guidance on addressing this requirement in
the revised National Standard 10 Guidelines.
There are also external factors that point to the need to focus on
safety at sea. The Coast Guard Authorization Act (CGAA) of 2010 was
signed by President Obama on October 15, 2010. Section 604 of the CGAA
builds on requirements set forth in the Commercial Fishing Industry
Vessel Safety Act of 1988, including the following: It authorizes the
U.S. Coast Guard to examine at dockside, at least once every 2 years,
fishing vessels that operate beyond 3 miles to ensure that they meet
safety standards; it authorizes and requires a training program for the
operators of fishing vessels that operate beyond 3 miles; and it
establishes design and construction standards for all new vessels.
Furthermore, the CGAA requires that Alternative Compliance and Safety
Agreement programs be
[[Page 22344]]
developed for certain groups of existing fishing vessels. These new
requirements highlight an emphasis on improving fishing vessel safety.
NMFS will ensure that revisions to the NS10 Guidelines will complement
the new mandates of the CGAA.
The current NS10 Guidelines do not contain any guidance on
analytical methods to evaluate safety. Recent work by the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the U.S. Coast Guard
has shown that the fishery management process can more explicitly
address safety at sea by analyzing fatalities and calculating fatality
rates for the fishery and understanding the overall trend in fatality
rates. This information can be used in risk assessments to identify
major hazards within a fishery. NMFS could include guidance on the
analytical approaches for addressing safety considerations in the
revised NS10 Guidelines.
For the above reasons, NMFS believes it is appropriate and timely
to revise NS10 Guidelines and is accepting public comments on potential
revisions to the Guidelines. Through the revision of the NS10
Guidelines, NMFS intends to enhance consideration of safety issues in
fisheries management.
Public Comments
To help determine the scope of issues to be addressed and to
identify significant issues related to this action, NMFS is soliciting
written comments on this ANPR and will hold a public meeting at the
NOAA Science Center in Silver Spring, MD, on May 19, 2011 from 1 p.m.
to 3 p.m. NMFS may hold additional public meetings during the comment
period and will announce those meetings in the Federal Register. The
public is encouraged to submit comments related to the specific ideas
mentioned in this ANPR. NMFS is also seeking additional ideas and
solutions to improve safety at sea and the NS10 Guidelines. All written
comments received by the due date will be considered in drafting
proposed revisions to the NS10 Guidelines.
Issues Under Consideration
In considering potential revisions to the NS10 Guidelines, NMFS has
identified the following list of issues related to safety of human life
at sea. NMFS seeks public comment on the scope of this ANPR generally
and the potential for guidance on the following fisheries safety
issues.
1. Assembling Fatality, Injury, and Vessel Loss Information:
Establishing guidance on how to assemble and analyze data on fatalities
and injuries for each Federal fishery using information from NMFS's
National Observer Program, U.S. Coast Guard investigations, U.S. Coast
Guard's Marine Information and Safety and Law Enforcement database
system, and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health data.
2. Developing Fatality, Injury, and Vessel Loss Rates: Establishing
guidance on how to estimate workforce for each Federal fishery in order
to calculate fatality and injury rates. By combining fatality and non-
fatal injury information with workforce estimates, injury, fatality,
and vessel loss rates can be calculated to identify trends over time.
3. Evaluating Risks: Establishing general guidance on how to
conduct fishery specific risk assessments, which can help identify
major safety hazards within a fishery. The frequency for conducting
such assessments will also be explored.
4. Safety Considerations and Mitigation Measures: Risk assessments
may identify that fishery conservation and management measures are
needed and appropriate to improve safety at sea. The current NS10
Guidelines contain three safety considerations (operating environment,
gear and vessel loading requirements, and limited season and area
fisheries) and eight mitigation measures to consider when developing
management measures (see 50 CFR 600.355 paragraphs (c) and (d)). NMFS
seeks comments on these sections and, if appropriate, additional safety
considerations and mitigation measures that could be added to the
Guidelines. For example, NMFS could consider how fishery management
measures can better complement and reinforce U.S. Coast Guard safety
regulations. In addition, where regulations currently restrict vessel
upgrades or replacement, mitigation measures could include allowing for
vessel replacement in a fleet so that older vessels can be replaced
with newer and safer vessels. Other potential mitigation measures could
include eliminating or reducing penalties for cutting fishing trips
short due to weather or other conditions and extending fishing seasons
to allow for quotas to be reached.
5. Recreational Fisheries: NMFS welcomes information about safety
issues in both the private recreational and the recreational for-hire
components of recreational fisheries and suggestions on how to address
them.
6. Establishing a Safety Committee: The current NS10 Guidelines (50
CFR 600.355 paragraph (d)) recommend that Councils consult with the
U.S. Coast Guard and the fishing industry during the development of
management measures that might affect the safety of human life at sea.
NMFS welcomes comments on this guidance and if improvements to the
consultation process are necessary. For example, NMFS could recommend
that Councils and the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), as
appropriate, establish a Safety Committee or Safety Advisory Panel that
regularly reports on ongoing activities to reduce injuries, fatalities,
and vessel losses within their jurisdiction. U.S. Coast Guard
personnel, NMFS National Observer Program personnel, and state
enforcement officers would be encouraged to participate on such
committees and/or panels.
7. Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Reports: Establishing
guidance for the type of safety information to include in Stock
Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) reports. The National Standard
2 Guidelines state that safety information should be summarized in SAFE
reports. SAFE reports provide Councils and the Secretary with important
scientific information needed for management purposes and different
types of safety information could be added to these reports to better
inform the Councils and the Secretary.
8. Fishery Impact Statements: Establishing guidance for addressing
safety issues in fishery impact statements, as required by the MSA.
Fishery impact statements are supposed to address the impact of
conservation and management measures and include possible mitigation
measures for ``the safety of human life at sea, including whether and
to what extent such measures may affect the safety of participants to
the fishery'' (MSA section 303(a)(9)(C)).
Special Accommodations
The public meeting to be held at the NOAA Science Center on May 19,
2011 from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. will be accessible to people with physical
disabilities. Request for sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to Debra Lambert (301-713-2341), by
May 5, 2011.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: April 15, 2011.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-9718 Filed 4-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P