Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; 2011 Sector Operations Plans and Contracts, and Allocation of Northeast Multispecies Annual Catch Entitlements, 23076-23108 [2011-9711]
Download as PDF
23076
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
kg)). For example, if the GOM cod trip
limit specified at § 648.86(b)(1) doubled,
then the cod trip limit for the Handgear
B category fishing in the GOM
Regulated Mesh Area would also double
to 150 lb (68 kg).
(2) * * *
(iv) Declaration. To fish for GB cod
south of the GOM Regulated Mesh Area,
as defined at § 648.80(a)(1), a vessel
owner or operator must obtain, and
retain on board, a letter of authorization
from the Regional Administrator
declaring an intent to fish south of the
GOM Regulated Mesh Area, and may
not fish in any other area for a minimum
of 7 consecutive days from the effective
date of the letter of authorization. Such
a vessel may transit the GOM Regulated
Mesh Area, provided that their gear is
stowed in accordance with the
provisions at § 648.23(b).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. In § 648.89, revise paragraph (e)(1)
to read as follows:
§ 648.89 Recreational and charter/party
vessel restrictions.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) GOM Closed Areas. Unless
otherwise specified in this paragraph
(e)(1), a vessel fishing under charter/
party regulations may not fish in the
GOM closed areas specified at
§ 648.81(d)(1) through (f)(1) during the
time periods specified in those
paragraphs, unless the vessel has on
board a valid letter of authorization
issued by the Regional Administrator
pursuant to § 648.81(f)(2)(iii) and
paragraph (e)(3) of this section. The
conditions and restrictions of the letter
of authorization must be complied with
for a minimum of 3 months if the vessel
fishes or intends to fish in the seasonal
GOM closure areas; or for the rest of the
fishing year, beginning with the start of
the participation period of the letter of
authorization, if the vessel fishes or
intends to fish in the year-round GOM
closure areas. A vessel fishing under
charter/party regulations may not fish in
the GOM Cod Spawning Protection Area
specified at § 648.81(o)(1) during the
time period specified in that paragraph,
unless the vessel complies with the
requirements specified at
§ 648.81(o)(2)(iii).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. In § 648.90, revise paragraph
(a)(4)(iii)(E)(2) to read as follows:
§ 648.90 NE multispecies assessment,
framework procedures and specifications,
and flexible area action system.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(iii) * * *
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
(E) * * *
(2) Commercial allocation. The ABC/
ACL for regulated species or ocean pout
stocks available to the commercial NE
multispecies fishery, after consideration
of the recreational allocation pursuant
to paragraph (a)(4)(iii)(E)(1) of this
section, shall be divided between
sectors operating under an approved
sector operations plan, as described at
§ 648.87(c), and vessels operating under
the provisions of the common pool, as
defined in this part, based upon the
cumulative PSCs of vessels/permits
participating in sectors calculated
pursuant to § 648.87(b)(1)(i)(E). Unless
otherwise specified in paragraph (a)(5)
of this section, regulated species or
ocean pout catch by common pool and
sector vessels shall be deducted from
the sub-ACL/ACE allocated pursuant to
this paragraph (a)(4)(iii)(E)(2) for the
purposes of determining whether
adjustments to common pool measures
are necessary, pursuant to the common
pool AMs specified in § 648.82(n), or
whether sector ACE overages must be
deducted, pursuant to § 648.87(b)(1)(iii).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–9705 Filed 4–19–11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 110201085–1212–02]
RIN 0648–XY55
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions;
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Northeast Multispecies
Fishery; 2011 Sector Operations Plans
and Contracts, and Allocation of
Northeast Multispecies Annual Catch
Entitlements
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
This interim final rule
partially approves and implements 19
sector operations plans and contracts for
fishing year (FY) 2011. NMFS received
sector operations plans and contracts
from the following 22 sectors: The
Georges Bank (GB) Cod Fixed Gear
Sector; the Maine Permit Bank Sector;
the Massachusetts Permit Bank Sector;
the New Hampshire Permit Bank Sector;
the Northeast Coastal Communities
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors II
through XIII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; the Rhode Island
Permit Bank Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State
Sector. This interim final rule partially
approves the operations plans and
contracts, and allocates an annual catch
entitlement (ACE) of certain NE
multispecies stocks to the following 19
sectors: The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
the Maine Permit Bank Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors II through
XIII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State
Sector. The Massachusetts Permit Bank
Sector, the New Hampshire Permit Bank
Sector, and the Rhode Island Permit
Bank Sector, were unable to fulfill the
roster requirements, and, therefore, were
not approved to operate in FY 2011.
Certain exemptions proposed in the
operations plans have not been
approved, as explained in detail below.
Additionally, NMFS is modifying, for
the purposes of this rule, the definition
for ‘‘unmarketable’’ fish (see Exemption
11) and will accept further comment on
this definition. NMFS is also accepting
further comment on final sector
membership. NMFS will publish a
subsequent final rule, if necessary,
making any further changes to this
definition or in light of additional
comments on changes to membership of
sectors since the publication of this rule.
DATES: Effective May 1, 2011, through
April 30, 2012. Written comments must
be received on or before May 10, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on the new definition of ‘‘unmarketable’’
fish and changes to sector membership,
identified by 0648–XY55, by any one of
the following methods:
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Fax: (978) 281–9135, Attn: Allison
Murphy.
• Mail: Paper, disk, or CD–ROM
comments should be sent to Patricia A.
Kurkul, Regional Administrator,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 55
Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA
01930.
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 publicly accessible. Do not
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
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, Microsoft Excel,
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats
only.
Copies of each sector’s final
operations plan, contract, the
environmental assessment (EA), and the
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA) are available from the NMFS
Northeast Regional Office: Patricia A.
Kurkul, Regional Administrator,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 55
Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA
01930. These documents are also
accessible via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Allison Murphy, Sector Policy Analyst,
phone (978) 281–9122, fax (978) 281–
9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A
proposed rule soliciting public
comment on 19 sector operations plans
and contracts was published in the
Federal Register on February 28, 2011
(76 FR 10852), with public comments
accepted through March 15, 2011. After
review of the public comments, NMFS
has partially approved 19 sector
operations plans and contracts after
determining the operations plans to be
consistent with the goals of the NE
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan
(FMP), as described in Amendment 16
to the NE Multispecies FMP and other
applicable laws, and in compliance with
the proposed measures that govern the
development and operation of a sector
as specified in Section 4.2.3 of
Amendment 16. Certain exemptions
proposed in the operations plans have
not been approved, as explained in
detail below.
Background
The final rule for Amendment 13 to
the FMP (69 FR 22906, April 27, 2004)
implemented the GB Cod Hook Sector
in 2004, and the Framework Adjustment
42 final rule (71 FR 62156, October 23,
2006) implemented the GB Cod Fixed
Gear Sector in 2006. The final rule
implementing Amendment 16 (75 FR
18262; April 9, 2010) revised and
expanded the rules for sectors and
authorized an additional 17 new sectors,
including the Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector, Northeast Fishery
Sectors I through XIII, the Port Clyde
Community Groundfish Sector, the
Sustainable Harvest Sector, and the TriState Sector, in accordance with the
revised Amendment 16 rules.
Framework Adjustment 45 (FW 45),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
which is being implemented
concurrently with this action, further
revises the rules for these existing
sectors and authorizes five new sectors
(for a total of 24 sectors). The 5 sectors
newly authorized by FW 45 are the
Maine Permit Bank Sector, the
Massachusetts Permit Bank Sector, the
New Hampshire Permit Bank Sector, the
Rhode Island Permit Bank Sector, and
Sustainable Harvest Sector 3.
In accordance with Amendment 16,
the proposed rule for this action
discussed authorization of 22 sector
operations plans and contracts for FY
2011. As discussed in the proposed rule,
NMFS received sector operations plans
and contracts from the following 22
sectors: The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
the Maine Permit Bank Sector; the
Massachusetts Permit Bank Sector; the
New Hampshire Permit Bank Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors II through
XIII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; the Rhode Island
Permit Bank Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State
Sector. This rule partially approves the
operations plans and contracts, and
allocates an ACE of certain NE
multispecies stocks to the following 19
sectors: The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
the Maine Permit Bank Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors II through
XIII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State
Sector. The Massachusetts Permit Bank
Sector, the New Hampshire Permit Bank
Sector, and the Rhode Island Permit
Bank Sector, were unable to fulfill the
roster requirements, and, therefore, their
operations were not approved for FY
2011. Since FW 45 revises some rules
for all existing sectors and authorizes an
additional five sectors, NMFS suggests
that interested readers review the final
rule for FW 45 to fully understand the
measures being implemented in this
final rule.
Amendment 16 defined a sector as
‘‘[a] group of persons (three or more
persons, none of whom have an
ownership interest in the other two
persons in the sector) holding NE
multispecies limited access vessel
permits who have voluntarily entered
into a contract and agree to certain
fishing restrictions for a specified period
of time, and which has been granted a
TAC(s) [sic] in order to achieve
objectives consistent with applicable
FMP goals and objectives.’’ A sector’s
total allowable catch (TAC) is referred to
as an ACE. Regional Administrator
approval is required for these sectors to
be authorized to fish and to be allocated
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23077
an ACE for stocks of regulated NE
multispecies during each FY. Each
individual sector’s ACE for a particular
stock represents a share of that stock’s
annual catch limit (ACL) available to
commercial NE multispecies vessels,
based upon the potential sector
contribution (PSC) of permits
participating in that sector for that FY.
Therefore, sectors will be allocated all
regulated multispecies stocks for which
members have landings history, with
the exception of Atlantic halibut,
windowpane flounder, Atlantic
wolffish, and Southern New England/
Mid-Atlantic (SNE/MA) winter
flounder. Sectors will also not be
allocated ocean pout. Sectors are selfselecting, meaning each sector
maintains the ability to choose its
members. Sectors may pool harvesting
resources and consolidate operations to
fewer vessels, if they desire.
Concurrent with the implementation
of FW 45, NMFS and the states of
Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
and Rhode Island have entered into
separate Memoranda of Agreement
(MOA) for the administration of statemanaged permit banks in accordance
with grants awarded to these states.
Terms and conditions for permit banks
include: The permit banks may only
transfer out ACE, it may not transfer in
ACE; the permit banks may only transfer
ACE to sectors for use by vessels that are
45 ft (13.72 m) in length or smaller,
based out of ports with a population of
30,000 residents or less.
For state permits banks to transfer
ACE to approved sectors under the
current regulations, each state permit
bank developed and submitted an
operations plan. Although the states of
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and
Rhode Island met deadline requirements
when submitting their operations plans
and contracts, they were unable to fulfill
roster requirements in time for their
sectors to be considered in this
rulemaking process for FY 2011. The
Maine Permit Bank Sector, the only
permit bank sector that met all of the
requirements, consists of two privately
held permits, as well as an additional
five permits that are owned by the State
of Maine. The permits owned by the
State of Maine must abide by the terms
of the MOA.
Sector ACEs
As of February 1, 2011, 836 of the
1,475 eligible NE multispecies permits,
which accounts for 98.8 percent of the
historical commercial NE multispecies
landings during the Amendment 16
qualifying period, have indicated their
intent to participate in a sector for FY
2011 (see Table 1). Following input
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23078
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
during the public comment period for
FW 45, and based on industry request,
NMFS has allowed for a limited
opportunity for additional changes to
sector rosters for FY 2011 to
accommodate permit holders who took
ownership of their limited access NE
multispecies permit(s) after the
December 1, 2010, roster deadline.
Reopening the rosters provides
additional flexibility to new permit
holders without disrupting the
organization of sectors; however, each
sector may decide whether or not a
member may leave the sector and
whether or not to accept new members.
This window to reopen FY 2011 sector
rosters began on March 23, 2011, and
will end on April 30, 2011. An
announcement of this limited
opportunity to reopen sector rosters was
sent out to all sector managers on March
16, 2011, and to all NE multispecies
permit holders on March 23, 2011. All
permits enrolled in a sector, and the
vessels associated with those permits,
have until April 30, 2011, to withdraw
from a sector and fish in the common
pool for FY 2011, if they so choose.
NMFS will publish final sector ACEs,
based upon final rosters for FY 2011 and
common pool sub-ACL totals, as soon as
possible after the start of FY 2011 on
May 1, 2011. This final rule responds to
public comments on the proposed rule
and implements the approved
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
regulatory exemptions that were
requested by the individual sectors.
Table 2 details the maximum
cumulative PSC (a percentage) each
sector will receive based on their rosters
as of February 1, 2011. Tables 3a and 3b
detail the maximum ACEs (in thousands
of pounds and metric tons, respectively)
each sector will be allocated based on
their February 1, 2011, sector rosters for
FY 2011. While the common pool does
not receive a specific allocation of ACE,
it has been included in each of these
tables for comparison.
Note that individual sector members
are not assigned a PSC for Eastern GB
cod or Eastern GB haddock; rather each
sector is allocated a portion of the GB
cod and GB haddock ACE to harvest
exclusively in the Eastern U.S./Canada
Area. The amount of cod and haddock
that a sector may harvest in the Eastern
U.S./Canada Area is calculated by
multiplying the cumulative PSC of the
GB cod and GB haddock allocated to a
sector by the Eastern U.S./Canada Area
by the GB cod and GB haddock TACs,
respectively.
Each sector is required to ensure that
its ACE is not exceeded during the FY.
Sectors are required to monitor their
landings, track their available ACE, and
submit weekly catch reports to NMFS.
In addition, the sector manager is
required to provide NMFS with
aggregate sector reports on a daily basis
when a threshold (specified in the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
operations plan) is reached. Once a
sector’s ACE for a particular stock is
caught, a sector is required to cease all
fishing operations in that stock area
until it acquires additional ACE for that
stock. Each sector must also submit an
annual report to NMFS and the New
England Fishery Management Council
(Council) within 60 days of the end of
the FY detailing all of the sector’s catch
(landings and discards of all stocks by
the sector), enforcement actions, and
pertinent information necessary to
evaluate the biological, economic, and
social impacts from the sector, as
directed by NMFS.
In accordance with Amendment 16, at
the start of FY 2011, NMFS will
withhold 20 percent of each sector’s FY
2011 ACE for each stock for a period of
up to 61 days, to allow time to process
any FY 2010 ACE transfers submitted
after May 1, 2011, and to determine
whether the FY 2011 ACE allocated to
any sector needs to be reduced, or any
overage penalties need to be applied to
accommodate an FY 2010 ACE overage
by that sector. At the request of the
Council, NMFS is relaxing the May 14
deadline to submit ACE transfers for FY
2010. NMFS will allow sectors to
transfer FY 2010 ACE for 14 days after
the date that NMFS provides final FY
2010 catch data to sectors. NMFS will
notify the Council and sectors of this
date in writing.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23079
ER25AP11.000
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
ER25AP11.001
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
23080
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23081
ER25AP11.002
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
ER25AP11.003
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
23082
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Sector Operations Plans and Contracts
All sectors must submit an operations
plan and sector contract to NMFS by a
specified deadline to be authorized to
fish and receive an allocation of
groundfish for the following FY. Of the
24 (19 current and 5 newly authorized
under FW 45) sectors, a total of 19
sectors met the operations plan deadline
and the roster deadline for FY 2011,
including the Maine Permit Bank
Sector. Two of the 24 sectors, the GB
Cod Hook Sector and Northeast Fishery
Sector I, again elected not to submit
operations plans for FY 2011, and three
sectors, the Massachusetts Permit Bank
Sector, the New Hampshire Permit Bank
Sector, and the Rhode Island Permit
Bank Sector, were unable to fulfill the
roster requirements, and, therefore, were
not approved for operations in FY 2011.
Two of the FY 2011 sectors, Northeast
Fishery Sector IV and Sustainable
Harvest Sector 3, will operate as private
lease-only sectors. The Sustainable
Harvest Sector 3 has not explicitly
prohibited fishing activity, and may
transfer permits onto active vessels.
Each sector operations plan contains the
rules under which each approved sector
would fish. The sector contract provides
the legal contract that binds members to
a sector and its operations plan. Most
sectors submitted one document to
NMFS that encompasses both the
operations plan and contract.
While each sector conducts fishing
activities according to its approved
operations plan, Amendment 16
contains numerous provisions that
apply to all sector operations plans and
sector members. All permit holders with
a limited access NE multispecies permit
that was valid as of May 1, 2008, are
eligible to participate in a sector,
including holders of permits currently
held in confirmation of permit history
(CPH). While membership in each sector
is voluntary, each member (and his/her
permits enrolled in the sector) must
remain with the sector for the entire FY,
and cannot fish in the NE multispecies
days-at-sea (DAS) program outside of
the sector (i.e., in the common pool)
during the FY. Participating vessels are
required to comply with all Federal
fishing regulations, unless specifically
exempted by a letter of authorization
(LOA) issued by the Regional
Administrator, as part of the approved
sector’s operations plan, as described
further below.
Sector operations plans may be
amended in-season if a change is
necessary and agreed to by NMFS,
provided the change is consistent with
the sector administration provisions.
These changes would be included in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
updated LOAs issued to sector members
and through amendments to the
approved operations plan.
Sector vessels are required to retain
all legal-sized allocated groundfish,
unless an exemption is granted allowing
sector vessels to discard legal-sized
unmarketable fish at sea (see Exemption
10 below). Catch (including discards) of
all allocated groundfish stocks by a
sector’s vessels counts against the
sector’s ACE, unless the catch is an
element of a separate ACL subcomponent, such as groundfish bycatch
caught when fishing in an exempted
fishery, or yellowtail flounder caught
when fishing in the Atlantic sea scallop
fishery. Sector vessels fishing for
monkfish, skate, lobster (with non-trap
gear), and spiny dogfish when on a
sector trip (e.g., not fishing under
provisions of a NE multispecies
exempted fishery) shall have their
groundfish catch (including discards) on
those trips debited against the sector’s
ACE. Discard ratios applied to sectors
will be determined by NMFS, based on
observed trips.
All vessels that fish in an approved
sector, with the exception noted below,
must receive a LOA for FY 2011 to fish
under regulations that apply to the
sector in which they are enrolled and to
be exempted from the regulations that
otherwise would be applicable if the
vessels were not fishing as a sector
vessel. Permits and vessels enrolled in
Northeast Fishery Sector IV, which is a
lease-only sector, will not receive an
LOA to fish, as no vessels in that sector
are authorized to actively fish.
Amendment 16 required sectors to
develop independent third-party
dockside monitoring programs (DSM)
for monitoring landings and utilization
of ACE, and to verify landings at the
time they are weighed by the dealer to
certify that the landing weights are
accurate as reported by the dealer. FW
45, which is being implemented
concurrently with this action, changes
the required coverage level for DSM to
the level NMFS is able to fund, up to
100-percent coverage through FY 2012,
prioritizing coverage for trips that have
not received at-sea or electronic
monitoring. In addition, FW 45 removes
DSM requirements (a reporting
requirement) from the list of prohibited
exemptions for sectors.
Each sector operations plan and
contract provides procedures to enforce
the sector operations plan, explains
sector monitoring and reporting
requirements, presents a schedule of
penalties, and provides authority to
sector managers to issue stop fishing
orders to sector members that violate
provisions of the contract. Sector
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23083
members may be held jointly and
severally liable for ACE overages,
discarding of legal-sized fish, and/or
misreporting of catch (landings or
discards). Each sector operations plan
and contract submitted for FY 2011
withholds an initial reserve from the
sector’s sub-allocation to each
individual member to prevent the sector
from exceeding its ACE. Each sector
operations plan and contract also details
the method for initial ACE allocation to
sector members; for FY 2011, each
sector will allow each member to
harvest an amount of fish equal to the
amount that member’s permit(s)
contributed to the sector’s ACE.
In order to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in an
efficient manner, a single EA was
prepared analyzing all 19 operations
plans. The sector EA is tiered from the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
prepared for Amendment 16. The
summary findings of the EA conclude
that each sector will likely produce
similar effects that result in nonsignificant impacts. An analysis of
aggregate sector impacts was also
conducted and Finding of No
Significant Impact for the sector EA
were issued by the Regional
Administrator on April 13, 2011.
Amendment 16 created several
universal exemptions that are applicable
to all sectors, including exemptions
from: Trip limits on allocated stocks; the
GB Seasonal Closure Area; NE
multispecies DAS restrictions; the
requirement to use a 6.5-inch (16.51-cm)
mesh codend when fishing with
selective gear on GB; and portions of the
GOM Rolling Closure Areas.
Amendment 16 prohibits sectors from
requesting exemptions from year-round
closed areas, permitting restrictions,
gear restrictions designed to minimize
habitat impacts, and reporting
requirements (not including DAS
reporting requirements). FW 45 removes
DSM from the reporting requirements
from which sectors may not be
exempted. Sectors may request
additional exemptions from NE
multispecies regulations through their
sector operations plan. Additional
background information on requested
exemptions for FY 2011 can be found in
the proposed rule for this action.
Approved FY 2011 Sector Exemption
Requests
In addition to the universal
exemptions in Amendment 16, sectors
requested 31 additional exemptions
from the NE multispecies regulations in
their FY 2011 sector operations plans.
After thorough review and
consideration of public comments on
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23084
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
the exemption requests, NMFS
authorizes 17 exemptions from the
following regulations for the individual
sectors that requested them, the first 9
of which were previously approved in
FY 2010: (1) 120-day block out of the
fishery required for Day gillnet vessels;
(2) prohibition on a vessel hauling
another vessel’s gillnet gear; (3)
limitation on the number of gillnets that
may be hauled on GB when fishing
under a groundfish/monkfish DAS; (4)
limitation on the number of gillnets
imposed on Day gillnet vessels; (5) 20day spawning block out of the fishery
required for all vessels; (6) limits on the
number of hooks that may be fished; (7)
DAS Leasing Program length and
horsepower restrictions; (8) prohibition
on the possession or use of squid or
mackerel in the Closed Area I (CA I)
Hook Gear Haddock Special Access
Program (SAP); (9) sink gillnet mesh
size restrictions in the GOM from
January through April; (10) extension of
sink gillnet mesh size restrictions in the
GOM through the month of May; (11)
prohibition on discarding; (12) daily
catch reporting by Sector Managers for
vessels participating in the CA I Hook
Gear Haddock SAP; (13) trawl gear
restrictions in the U.S./Canada
Management Area; (14) the requirement
to power a VMS while at the dock; (15)
DSM requirements for vessels fishing
west of 72°30′ W. long.; (16) DSM
requirements for Handgear A-permitted
Sector Vessels; and (17) DSM
Requirements for monkfish trips in the
monkfish Southern Fishery
Management Area (SFMA). Details of
these exemptions are discussed below.
This interim final rule approves FY
2011 exemption requests only for
sectors that requested those exemptions
through their sector operations plans
and contracts. The accompanying EA
has analyzed all exemption requests as
if all sectors had requested the
exemptions. Therefore, sectors not
granted an approved exemption may
request any of the approved exemptions
at any time during the FY, except the
discarding exemption, and could add
these exemptions to their operations
plans and contracts through
amendments. NMFS will accept
additional public comment on this
approach.
1. 120-Day Block Out of the Fishery
Requirement for Day Gillnet Vessels
The 120-day block out of the fishery
requirement for Day gillnet vessels was
implemented in 1997 under Framework
20 (62 FR 15381; April 1, 1997) to help
ensure that management measures for
Day gillnet vessels were comparable to
effort controls placed on other fishing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
gear types, given that gillnets continue
to fish as long as they are in the water.
Regulations at 50 CFR 648.82(j)(1)(ii)
require that each NE multispecies
gillnet vessel declared into the Day
gillnet category declare and take 120
days out of the non-exempt gillnet
fishery each FY. Each period of time
taken must be a minimum of 7
consecutive days, and at least 21 of the
120 days must be taken between June 1
and September 30. An exemption from
this requirement was previously
approved for FY 2010 based upon the
rationale that this measure was designed
to control fishing effort and, therefore, is
no longer necessary for sectors because
sectors are restricted to an ACE for each
groundfish stock, which limits overall
fishing mortality. This exemption is
again approved in FY 2011 based on the
same rationale. Approval of this
exemption increases the operational
flexibility of sector vessels and is
expected to increase profit margins of
sector fishermen. For additional
information pertaining to this
exemption and other exemptions
previously approved in FY 2010, please
refer to the proposed and final sector
rules for FY 2010 sectors (74 FR 68015,
December 22, 2009; and 75 FR 18113,
April 9, 2010, respectively). The
exemption from the Day gillnet 120-day
block requirement has been approved
for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, V–VIII,
and X–XIII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State
Sector.
2. Prohibition on a Vessel Hauling
Another Vessel’s Gillnet Gear
Regulations at §§ 648.14(k)(6)(ii)(A)
and 648.84(a) specify the manner in
which gillnet gear must be tagged,
requiring that information pertinent to
the vessel owner or vessel be
permanently affixed to the gear. No
provisions exist in the regulations
allowing for multiple vessels to haul the
same gear. An exemption from this
regulation, which was previously
approved in FY 2010 because it was
determined that the regulations
pertaining to hauling and setting
responsibilities are no longer necessary
when sectors are confined to an ACE for
each stock, would allow a sector to
share fixed gear among vessels, thereby
reducing costs. This exemption is again
approved in FY 2011 based on the same
rationale. Consistent with the
exemption as originally approved, the
sectors requesting this exemption have
agreed that all vessels utilizing
community fixed gear will be jointly
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
liable for any violations associated with
that gear. Additionally, each member
intending to haul the same gear will be
required to tag the gear with the
appropriate gillnet tags, consistent with
§ 648.84(a). The exemption from the
prohibition against hauling another
vessel’s gear has been approved for the
GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors III, VI–VIII, and X–XII;
the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1
and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
3. Limitation on the Number of Gillnets
That May Be Hauled on GB When
Fishing Under a Groundfish/Monkfish
DAS
Regulations at § 648.80(a)(4)(iv)
prohibit Day gillnet vessels fishing on a
groundfish DAS from possessing,
deploying, fishing, or hauling more than
50 nets on GB were implemented as a
groundfish mortality control under
Amendment 13. An exemption from the
limit on the number of gillnets that may
be hauled on GB when fishing under a
groundfish/monkfish DAS was
previously granted in FY 2010 because
it would allow nets deployed under
existing net limits under the Monkfish
FMP to be hauled more efficiently by
vessels dually permitted under both
FMPs. This exemption is again
approved in FY 2011 based on the same
rationale. The exemption from the
limitation on the number of gillnets that
may be hauled on GB when fishing
under a groundfish/monkfish DAS has
been approved for the GB Cod Fixed
Gear Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors
III, V–VIII, and X–XIII; Sustainable
Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the TriState Sector.
4. Limitation on the Number of Gillnets
for Day Gillnet Vessels
Current gear restrictions in the
groundfish regulated mesh areas (RMA)
restrict Day gillnet vessels from fishing
more than: 100 gillnets (of which no
more than 50 can be roundfish gillnets)
in the GOM RMA (§ 648.80(a)(3)(iv)); 50
gillnets in the GB RMA
(§ 648.80(a)(4)(iv)); and 75 gillnets in the
SNE and MA RMAs (§§ 648.80(b)(2)(v)
and 648.80(c)(2)(iv), respectively). This
exemption was previously approved in
FY 2010, and allows sector Day gillnet
vessels to fish up to a maximum of 150
nets (any combination of flatfish or
roundfish nets) in any RMA, and
provides greater operational flexibility
to sector vessels in deploying gillnet
gear. This exemption was previously
approved for FY 2010 because it is
designed to control fishing effort and is
no longer necessary, since each sector is
restricted by an ACE for each stock,
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
vessels. This exemption is again
approved in FY 2011 based on the same
rationale. The exemption from the
limitation on the number of hooks that
may be fished has been approved for the
GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors III, VI–VIII, and X–XII;
the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1
and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
5. 20-Day Spawning Block
Regulations at §§ 648.82(b)(6) and
648.82(g) require vessels to refrain from
fishing in NE multispecies DAS program
for a 20-day period each calendar year
between March 1 and May 31, when
spawning is most prevalent in the GOM.
This 20-day period must be declared in
advance. This regulation was developed
to reduce fishing effort on spawning
groundfish stocks and an exemption
was approved for FY 2010 sectors based
upon the rationale that the sector’s ACE
will restrict fishing mortality, making
this measure no longer necessary as an
effort control. This exemption is again
approved in FY 2011 based on the same
rationale. An exemption from this
requirement provides vessel owners
greater flexibility to plan operations
according to fishing and market
conditions. The exemption from the 20day block requirement has been
approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear
Sector; the Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector; Northeast Fishery
Sectors II–III and V–XIII; the Port Clyde
Community Groundfish Sector;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and
the Tri-State Sector.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
which caps overall fishing mortality.
This exemption is again approved in FY
2011 based on the same rationale. The
exemption from the limit on the number
of gillnets for Day gillnet vessels has
been approved for the GB Cod Fixed
Gear Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors
III, V–VIII, and X–XIII; the Port Clyde
Community Groundfish Sector;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and
the Tri-State Sector.
7. Length and Horsepower Restrictions
on DAS Leasing
While sector vessels are exempt from
the requirement to use NE multispecies
DAS to harvest groundfish, sector
vessels have been allocated, and still
need to use, NE multispecies DAS for
specific circumstances. For example, the
Monkfish FMP includes a requirement
that limited access monkfish Category C
and D vessels harvesting more than the
incidental monkfish possession limit
must fish under both a monkfish and a
groundfish DAS. Therefore, sector
vessels may still use, and lease, NE
multispecies DAS.
An exemption from the DAS Leasing
Program length and horsepower
baseline restrictions on DAS leases
among vessels within individual
sectors, as well as between vessels in
different sectors, was approved in FY
2010. Restricting sectors to their ACEs
eliminates the need to use vessel
characteristics to control groundfish
fishing effort. Further, exemption from
this restriction allows sector vessels
greater flexibility in the utilization of
ACE and DAS. Providing greater
flexibility in the distribution of DAS
could result in increased effort on nonallocated target stocks, such as monkfish
and skates. However, sectors predicted
little consolidation and little redirection
of effort to non-allocated species in their
FY 2010 operations plans. In addition,
any potential redirection in effort would
be restricted by the sector’s ACE for
each stock, as well as by effort controls
in other fisheries (e.g., monkfish trip
limits and DAS). This exemption is
again approved in FY 2011 based on the
same rationale. The exemption from the
length and horsepower restrictions on
DAS leasing has been approved for the
GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Maine
Permit Bank Sector; all 12 Northeast
Fishery Sectors; the Port Clyde
Community Groundfish Sector;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and
the Tri-State Sector.
6. Limitation on the Number of Hooks
That May Be Fished
Current regulations for the GOM
RMA, GB RMA, SNE RMA, and MA
RMA at §§ 648.80(a)(3)(iv)(B)(2),
648.80(a)(4)(iv)(B)(2),
648.80(b)(2)(iv)(B)(1), and
648.80(c)(2)(v)(B)(1), respectively,
prohibit vessels from fishing or
possessing more than 2,000 rigged
hooks in the GOM RMA, more than
3,600 rigged hooks in the GB RMA,
more than 2,000 rigged hooks in the
SNE RMA, or more than 4,500 rigged
hooks in the MA RMA. This measure,
which was initially implemented in
2002 through an interim action (67 FR
50292; August 1, 2002) and made
permanent through Amendment 13, was
designed to control fishing effort. An
exemption from the limitation on the
number of hooks that a vessel may fish
was approved for FY 2010 because it
would allow sector vessels to more
efficiently harvest ACE and is no longer
a necessary control on effort by sector
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
8. Prohibition on the Possession or Use
of Squid or Mackerel in the CA I Hook
Gear Haddock SAP
The restriction on the possession or
use of squid or mackerel as bait in the
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23085
CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP was
originally approved by the Council in
Framework 41, and analyzed in the FEIS
for Framework 41, but inadvertently not
included in the regulations
implementing Framework 41. To correct
this oversight, this provision was
implemented in the Amendment 16
final rule. This restriction was intended
to control the catch rates of cod, as
squid and mackerel have been
demonstrated to result in higher catch
rates of cod. NMFS received comments
on Amendment 16 that the bait
restrictions should not apply to sector
vessels. In the final rule implementing
Amendment 16, NMFS stated that
‘‘* * * because the Council did not
provide for a specific exemption from
such bait restriction in Amendment 16,
NMFS cannot provide a sector an
exemption from the bait requirements
for this SAP in the final rule.’’ However,
because the bait restriction in
Framework 41 was included under
Section 4.2.2.2 ‘‘Requirements for
Vessels not in the Hook Sector,’’ NMFS
has determined that Framework 41
specified that this bait restriction
applied only to vessels fishing outside
of a sector (i.e., the common pool).
Based on this, NMFS intends to revise
the current regulations for this
requirement in an upcoming correction
rule and, until the correction is
effective, exempt any interested sector
from this provision for FY 2011. Until
the correction rule becomes effective,
this exemption from this bait restriction
has been approved for the GB Cod Fixed
Gear Sector.
9. Sink Gillnet Mesh Size Restrictions in
the GOM From January Through April
The regulations require a minimum
mesh size of 6.5 inches (16.51 cm) for
gillnets in the GOM RMA
(§ 648.80(a)(3)(iv)). Minimum mesh size
requirements have been used to reduce
overall mortality on groundfish stocks,
as well as to reduce discarding of, and
improve survival of, sub-legal
groundfish. An exemption from this
requirements allows sector vessels to
use 6-inch (15.24-cm) mesh stand-up
gillnets in the GOM RMA from January
1, 2012, to April 30, 2012, when fishing
for haddock. The designation of this
season is consistent with the pilot
program originally proposed in
Amendment 16 and is the time period
when haddock are most available in the
GOM. Sector vessels utilizing this
exemption would be prohibited from
using tie-down gillnets on trips in the
GOM, however, sector vessels may
transit the GOM RMA with tie-down
gillnets, provided they are properly
stowed and not available for immediate
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23086
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
use in accordance with one of the
methods specified at § 648.23(b). Day
gillnet vessels granted the sector
exemption from Day gillnet net limits,
as explained under Exemption 4, are not
subject to the general net limit in the
GOM RMA, and thus are able to fish up
to 150 nets in the GOM RMA. To
maximize the flexibility for vessels
fishing under both exemptions, NMFS is
allowing Day gillnet vessels granted
both the Sink Gillnet Mesh Size
Restrictions in the GOM exemption and
the general net limit exemption to fish
up to 150 stand-up sink gillnets in the
GOM RMA during this period (up to 150
nets total in all RMAs). Day gillnets
vessels participating in a sector that
have not also been approved for the
general net limit exemption are
restricted to the limit of 50 stand-up
sink gillnets during this period. To
improve enforceability and increase
flexibility, vessels using this exemption
must declare their intent on a trip-bytrip basis through a VMS form. There is
no limit on the number of nets that
participating Trip gillnet vessels are
able to fish with, possess, haul, or
deploy, during this period, because Trip
gillnet vessels are required to remove all
gillnet gear from the water before
returning to port at the end of a fishing
trip.
For additional information pertaining
to this exemption, please refer to the
proposed and final supplemental rules
for FY 2010 sector operations plans and
contracts (75 FR 53939, September 2,
2010 and 75 FR 80720, December 23,
2010, respectively). The exemption from
sink gillnet mesh size restrictions in the
GOM from January through April has
being approved for the GB Cod Fixed
Gear Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors
III, VI–VIII, and X–XII; the Port Clyde
Community Groundfish Sector;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and
the Tri-State Sector.
10. Extension of the Sink Gillnet Mesh
Size Restrictions in the GOM Through
May
For a full description of the Sink
Gillnet Mesh Size Restrictions in the
GOM, please see Exemption 9 of this
section. As stated above under
Exemption 9, the implementation of the
sink gillnet mesh size restriction in the
GOM during the January through April
season is consistent with the pilot
program originally proposed in
Amendment 16 and is the time period
when haddock are most available in the
GOM. Since fishing effort by sector
vessels is restricted by ACE for allocated
stocks, overall mortality is capped.
Extending this exemption through May
will provide sector vessels the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
opportunity to potentially catch more
GOM haddock, a fully rebuilt stock, and
will also provide sector participants the
opportunity to more fully harvest their
allocation of GOM haddock, thereby
increasing efficiency and revenues for
vessel participating in this program. All
provisions specified under Exemption 8
also apply to this exemption. The
extension of the exemption of the sink
gillnet mesh size restriction in the GOM
through May has been being approved
for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, and
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, VI–VIII,
and X.
11. Prohibition on Discarding
Current regulations prohibit sector
vessels from discarding legal-sized fish
of any of the 14 stocks allocated to
sectors while at sea
(§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(A)): GB cod, GOM cod,
GB haddock, GOM haddock, GB
yellowtail flounder, SNE/MA yellowtail
flounder, CC/GOM yellowtail flounder,
plaice, witch flounder, GB winter
flounder, GOM winter flounder, redfish,
white hake, and pollock. Amendment
16 contained this provision to ensure
that the sector’s ACE is accurately
monitored. Sectors requested a partial
exemption from this prohibition
because of concerns that retaining and
landing large amounts of unmarketable
fish, including fish carcasses, creates
operational difficulties and potentially
unsafe working conditions for sector
vessels at sea. NMFS has approved a
partial exemption from the requirement
to retain all legal-sized fish for FY 2011
sectors, which will allow sector vessels
to discard these fish. However, all legalsized unmarketable allocated fish will
be accounted for in the overall sectorspecific discard rates in the same way
discards of undersized fish are currently
accounted for, through observer and atsea monitor coverage. The final
supplemental rule to implement
amendments to 17 FY 2010 sector
operations plans and contracts initially
defined unmarketable fish as ‘‘any legalsized fish the vessel owner/captain
elects not to retain because of condition
or marketability problems.’’ The intent
of this exemption is to permit the
discarding of fish that cannot be sold
because of physical damage, not because
of market price or availability; the
regulations implementing Amendment
16 were developed to reduce the
potential for any high-grading of catch.
Therefore, NMFS is revising its
definition of ‘‘unmarketable’’ fish. For
the purpose of this regulatory
exemption, ‘‘unmarketable’’ fish is redefined as ‘‘any legal-sized fish the
vessel owner/captain elects not to retain
because of poor quality as a result of
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
damage prior to, or from, harvest.’’
NMFS is requesting additional
comments on this revised definition of
‘‘unmarketable’’ fish and, depending on
comments provided by the public, may
further revise the definition in a future
action. NMFS will publish a subsequent
final rule, if necessary, with any
changes to this definition. The
definition of unmarketable fish will be
included in the sector’s LOA.
All vessels in a sector opting for this
exemption will be required to discard
legal-sized unmarketable fish at sea on
all trips (i.e., not just on select trips).
Legal-sized unmarketable fish, as
defined by the vessel operator, will be
prohibited from being landed to prevent
the potential to skew observed discards.
NMFS intends to modify the sectorspecific discard rates for each sector
utilizing this exemption because this
exemption represents a change to the
treatment of unmarketable fish (from
landings to discards). Once the
discarding exemption takes effect and
the discard rates have been modified,
unmarketable fish discarded by the
sector’s vessels on observed trips will be
deducted from the sector’s ACE and
incorporated into the sector’s discard
rates to account for discarding under
this exemption on unobserved trips.
This exemption will enhance
operational flexibility, foster safer
working conditions for sector vessels,
and relieve the burden on sector vessels
and their dealers from having to dispose
of the unmarketable fish upon landing.
The determination of what fish should
be discarded under this exemption is at
the discretion of the vessel operator, but
must be based on physical damage to
the fish. There is an incentive for vessel
operators to retain and market as much
of their catch of allocated stocks as
possible to maximize the value of the
sector’s ACE, because discarded fish
will still count against the sector’s ACE
and be incorporated into the sector’s
discard rates, without any financial
benefit. Thus, it is unlikely that this
exemption will lead to additional
mortality, but will provide flexibility to
sector vessels. This exemption is
expected to result in negligible impacts
to allocated species, non-allocated
species, and bycatch, because discarded
unmarketable fish are already dead.
Impacts to protected resources and the
physical environment are also expected
to be negligible because overall effort by
sectors is limited by an ACE.
Implementation of this exemption for all
sectors may increase safety at sea, and
may increase the expected profit
margins of fishermen by eliminating any
costs associated with disposal of
unmarketable fish, thereby resulting in
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
a positive impact on sector participants.
The discarding exemption, in
combination with the required reporting
of legal-sized unmarketable fish
discarded, will improve the monitoring
of this portion of sector catch,
particularly on unobserved sector trips.
NMFS cannot add this exemption to a
sector’s operations plan in season,
because adjusting sector-specific discard
rates mid-season would disrupt the
cumulative year-long dataset used to
monitor the sector’s ACE. The discard
exemption has been approved for the
GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; and
Northeast Fishery Sectors XI–XIII.
12. Daily Catch Reporting by Sector
Managers for Vessels Participating in
the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP
The regulations at § 648.85(b)(7)(v)(C)
require that sector vessels that declare
into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP
submit daily catch reports to the sector
manager, and that the sector manager
report catch information to NMFS on a
daily basis. This reporting requirement
was originally implemented through
Framework 40A, to facilitate real-time
monitoring of quotas by NMFS.
Amendment 16 granted authority to the
Regional Administrator to determine if
weekly sector reports were sufficient for
the monitoring of most SAPs. Through
the final rule implementing Amendment
16, the Regional Administrator
alleviated reporting requirements for
sector vessels participating in other
Special Management Programs (SMPs),
but reporting requirements were
retained for the CA I Hook Gear
Haddock SAP, because NMFS must
continue to monitor an overall haddock
TAC that applies to sector and common
pool vessels fishing in this SAP. This
rule exempts sector managers from the
daily reporting requirement for the CA
I Hook Gear Haddock SAP.
NMFS evaluated the possibility of
using the sector manager’s weekly
report, rather than daily reports, to
monitor the TAC. Sector weekly reports
are received in a timely enough manner
to adequately monitor other SAPs.
However, the weekly reports, in their
current form, would not provide
sufficient information, and would
require NMFS and all sectors to update
their reporting systems to accommodate
any change to the weekly report to
gather sufficient information. Requiring
all sectors to modify their individual
systems would produce unnecessary
burden on sectors whose vessels do not
participate in this SMP. However,
participating vessels could submit a
daily VMS catch report directly to
NMFS containing all required
information, analogous to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
requirements for common pool vessels
to satisfy this reporting requirement.
Therefore, as proposed, an exemption
from the daily catch reporting
requirements for sector managers for
member vessels participating in the CA
I Hook Gear Haddock SAP with the
requirement that sector vessels submit
daily VMS catch reports directly to
NMFS has been approved for the GB
Cod Fixed Gear Sector and the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector.
13. Trawl Gear Requirements in the
U.S./Canada Management Area
Current regulations require that a NE
multispecies vessel fishing with trawl
gear in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area
must fish with a Ruhle trawl, a haddock
separator trawl, or a flounder trawl net.
The final rule implementing
Amendment 13 clarified that the
restriction to use a haddock separator
trawl or a flounder trawl net was
designed to ‘‘ensure that the U.S./
Canada TACs are not exceeded. Because
both the flounder net and haddock
separator trawl are designed to affect
cod selectivity, and because the cod
TAC is specific to the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area only, application of this
gear requirement to the Western U.S./
Canada Area is not necessary to achieve
the stated goal.’’ The requirement to
utilize a Ruhle trawl in the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area was implemented through
several inseason actions, and made
permanent in Amendment 16. This gear
configuration was originally authorized
for its demonstrated ability to allow the
targeting of haddock, an underharvested stock, while reducing bycatch
of cod and yellowtail flounder stocks,
which were identified as overfished.
The addition of the Ruhle Trawl to gear
previously approved (haddock separator
trawl and flounder trawl net) provided
added flexibility to trawl vessels.
An exemption from these specific gear
requirements will enhance operational
flexibility for sector vessels while not
impacting overall fishing mortality
given that sectors are constrained by the
allocated ACE for each stock. An
exemption from the gear requirements
in the U.S./Canada Management Area
has been approved for Northeast Fishery
Sectors II and V, the Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3, and the Tri-State
Sector. Any trawl gear not currently
approved for the U.S./Canada
Management Area, but utilized under
this exemption, will be included in the
standard otter trawl discard rate strata.
For sectors approved to utilize this
exemption, NMFS will apply the final
sector-specific FY 2010 standard otter
trawl rate derived for stocks in the
Western GB stock area as the initial
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23087
discard rate for FY 2011, prior to
transitioning into an inseason discard
rate based upon observed trips in those
strata.
14. Requirement To Power a VMS While
at the Dock
The regulations at § 648.10(b)(4)
require that a vessel issued certain
categories of NE multispecies permits,
or participating in a sector, must have
an operational VMS unit onboard.
Additionally, the regulations at
§ 648.10(c)(1)(i) require that the VMS
units onboard a NE multispecies vessel
transmit accurate positional information
(i.e., polling) at least every hour, 24 hr
per day, throughout the year.
Amendment 5 first included the
requirement for vessels to use VMS (59
FR 9872; March 1, 1994). While the
requirement to use VMS was delayed
until a later action (FW 42 ultimately
implemented a VMS requirement for NE
multispecies DAS vessels), NMFS
supported polling due to its ability to
insure adequacy of monitoring
requirements and address enforcement
concerns, and because it could be
beneficial in the event of an at-sea
emergency.
Under certain circumstances, the
regulations at § 648.10(c)(2) allow
NMFS to issue a LOA allowing vessels
to sign out of the VMS program for a
minimum of 30 consecutive days. An
exemption from the requirement to
power a VMS at the dock request is
administrative in nature, and is
expected to have negligible impacts to
allocated species, non-allocated species,
protected resources, and the physical
environment. Additionally, this
exemption provides operational
flexibility for sector vessels and may
help to lower the costs associated with
the operation of a VMS unit. Because
sector managers are ultimately
responsible for ensuring that their sector
members adhere correctly to the
operations plans requirements, the
enforcement concerns related to
powering down at the dock are
mitigated. For these reasons, an
exemption from the requirement to
power a VMS while at the dock has
been approved for the GB Cod Fixed
Gear Sector; the Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector; Northeast Fishery
Sectors IV, VI, and X; the Port Clyde
Community Groundfish Sector, and the
Tri-State Sector. Vessels will be granted
this exemption provided the vessel is at
the dock and not underway. The
Regional Administrator reserves the
right to revoke this exemption, should it
be determined that the exemption is
being misused or abused. Vessels
granted this exemption and electing to
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23088
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
power down must submit the
appropriate VMS declaration, as
specified on the sector’s LOA. Since
sectors may only request exemptions
from NE multispecies regulations, this
exemption only applies to NE
multispecies requirements; vessels must
continue to comply with the
requirements of other FMPs for which
the vessel is permitted. For instance, a
vessel in a sector granted this exemption
that has a surfclam/ocean quahog permit
would still need to have an active VMS
24 hr a day, 7 days a week.
15. DSM Requirements for Vessels
Fishing West of 72°30′ W. long.
Upon receiving requests for an
exemption from the DSM requirement
(§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1)) for vessels
fishing in SNE and MA waters during
FY 2010, the Regional Administrator, in
a September 1, 2010, letter to the
Council, requested that the Council
consider establishing a geographic
boundary outside of which DSM would
not be required. At its November 18,
2010, meeting, the Council considered
this request and voted to remove DSM
from the list of prohibited exemptions.
Several Northeast Fishery Sectors and
the Sustainable Harvest Sector proposed
exemptions from areas in the SNE and
MA RMAs; the Northeast Fishery
Sectors requested an exemption from
DSM requirements when fishing in
certain statistical areas (615, 616, 621,
622, 623, 625, 626, 627, 631, 632, 633,
635, 637, and 638) and the Sustainable
Harvest Sector requested an exemption
from DSM requirements for vessels
fishing west of 72°30′ W. long. All noted
that historical data indicate that little
groundfish incidental catch has been
observed in these areas, and monitoring
of such trips is burdensome and not a
beneficial use of financial resources.
Using VMS declarations and Vessel Trip
Report (VTR) data, NMFS has verified
that little groundfish has been landed
from these areas. For example, VTR data
from FY 2009 indicates that of 1,220
groundfish trips fishing west of 72°30′
W. long., 74 trips (approximately 6
percent) landed a total of 11,345 lb
(5,146.01 kg) of groundfish. Similarly,
VTR data available from FY 2010 (May
1, 2010 through February 3, 2011)
indicates that 8 out of 390 trips (2
percent) fishing west of this line landed
approximately 1,500 lb (680.39 kg) of
groundfish.
NMFS believes that one exemption
area based on a longitudinal line will
better facilitate enforcement and,
therefore, has approved the request for
a southern boundary drawn along the
72°30′ W. long. line, where vessels that
fish exclusively west of this line on a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
fishing trip would be exempted from
DSM requirements for that trip. Vessels
fishing under this exemption must stow
all gear capable of catching groundfish
consistent with the regulations at
§ 648.23(b) while steaming to or from
areas west of 72°30′ W. long. Sectors
electing to utilize this exemption must
coordinate with their contracted DSM
providers to establish a method to
exclude these trips from DSM.
Trip start and trip end hails are used
by NMFS to coordinate the deployment
of enforcement resources in monitoring
offloads. Therefore, NMFS will continue
to require vessels utilizing this
exemption to comply with all hail
requirements. An exemption from DSM
requirements for vessels fishing west of
72°30′ W. long. has been approved for
the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, Northeast
Fishery Sectors III, V–VI, X–XII,
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3, and
the Tri-State Sector; as well as Northeast
Fishery Sectors VII,VIII, and XIII, which
requested an exemption from DSM
requirements when fishing in certain
statistical areas.
16. DSM Requirements for Handgear APermitted Sector Vessels
The FY 2011 proposed rule included
two requests for exemption from DSM
requirements (§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1)) for
vessels using hook gear (Exemption 22:
DSM Requirements for Jig Vessels and
Exemption 26: DSM, Roving
Monitoring, and Hail Requirements for
Hook-only or Handgear Vessels), noting
that vessels utilizing this gear type are
among the smallest operators, have
historically landed small amounts of
groundfish, and are able to target certain
species with little incidental catch of
other allocated groundfish species. The
sectors pointed out that the cost of
monitoring these trips is
disproportionately high, due to the
comparatively small amount of catch
that this gear type yields, and that the
proceeds from these trips may be less
than the cost of deploying monitors.
FW 45 removes DSM requirements in
FY 2011 for Handgear A- and Bpermitted vessels, as well as for Small
Vessel-permitted vessels (Category HA,
HB and C, respectively) in the common
pool, because the small quantities of
groundfish landed by these permit
categories would make monitoring such
trips uneconomical. Consistent with
flexibility provided for Handgearpermitted vessels in FW 45, NMFS has
partially approved the two exemption
requests highlighted above, allowing
limited access Handgear A-permitted
sector vessels to be exempt from DSM
requirements. As explained in the
proposed rule, hail requirements
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(including trip start and trip end hails)
remain reporting requirements, and
sectors may not be exempted from such
provisions. Additionally, hails are used
by NMFS to coordinate the deployment
of enforcement resources in monitoring
offloads. An exemption from DSM
requirements for Handgear A-permitted
sector vessels has been approved for the
GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, the Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector, and
Northeast Fishery Sectors VI and X.
17. DSM Requirements for Monkfish
Trips in the Monkfish SFMA
Amendment 13 specified that sectors
are responsible for monitoring sector
catch, and Amendment 16 expanded
this requirement. Unless a vessel is
fishing in a NE multispecies exempted
fishery specified in § 648.80, directed
monkfish, skate and dogfish trips are
considered a sector trip. Several sectors
requested exemptions from DSM while
on directed fishing trips for monkfish,
skate, and/or dogfish, contending that:
Data collected from observed FY 2010
trips demonstrate that little groundfish
incidental catch occurs in these
fisheries, making the cost of DSM per
pound of groundfish too low to support
it; and that the implementation of DSM
in FY 2010 has not met the objectives
stated in Amendment 16 in an
economically efficient manner.
NMFS cited several operational
concerns about exempting these trips
from DSM in the proposed rule for this
action. Vessels fishing on a directed
monkfish, dogfish, or skate trip, outside
of an exempted fishery, must declare a
NE multispecies DAS or sector trip
through VMS or IVR prior to starting
their trip because the gear utilized on
such trips has the ability to catch
groundfish, and because groundfish
retention is permitted. It is currently
impossible to distinguish most directed
fishing trips for monkfish, skate and/or
dogfish from directed fishing trips for
groundfish because neither the skate nor
the spiny dogfish FMPs currently
require VMS. It is not possible for a
groundfish action to implement VMS
requirements for fisheries managed
under other FMPs.
Trawl vessels fishing on a NE
multispecies DAS or on a sector trip in
the Southern New England RMA must
use a minimum 6-inch (15.2-cm)
diamond mesh or 6.5-inch (16.5-cm)
square mesh through the body and 6.5inch (16.5-cm) square or diamond mesh
applied to the codend of a trawl net
(648.80(b)(2)(i)). Day and Trip gillnet
vessels must fish with a minimum mesh
size of 6.5 inches (16.5 cm) throughout
the entire net (§ 648.80(b)(2)(iv)).
Monkfish management measures at
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
§ 648.91(c)(1)(i) require vessels fishing
under the monkfish DAS program with
trawl gear in the SFMA to utilize a
minimum 10-inch (25.4-cm) square or
12-inch (30.5-cm) diamond mesh
throughout the codend and for at least
45 continuous meshes forward of the
terminus of the net. The monkfish
regulations also require vessels fishing
under the monkfish DAS program with
gillnet gear to fish with a minimum
diamond mesh size of 10 inches (25.4
cm) or larger (§ 648.91(c)(1)(iii)). Vessels
that are issued both monkfish limited
access and NE multispecies limited
access permits must comply with the
more restrictive set of management
measures. Therefore, a vessel that is
fishing under concurrent monkfish DAS
and NE multispecies DAS on a sector
trip must abide by the more restrictive
monkfish gear requirements.
Since publication of the proposed rule
for this action, NMFS was able to
identify a subset of groundfish trips
under concurrent monkfish/NE
multispecies DAS. Data from VTRs from
April 2010 through March 2011 for this
subset of trips show sector trips
declared into the SFMA monkfish
fishery using 10-inch (25.4-cm) or larger
mesh, as required in the Monkfish FMP,
landed only a small amount (1,248 lb,
or 566.1 kg) of groundfish on 18 trips
out of the 847 trips declared in the
monkfish SFMA through March, 31,
2011. Based on this information, NMFS
has approved an exemption from
dockside monitoring for sector trips
declared into the SFMA when fishing
on a concurrent monkfish/NE
multispecies DAS trip provided that the
vessel fishes the entirety of its trip in
the SFMA. Sector vessels utilizing this
exemption must have non-conforming
gear stowed as specified in § 648.23(b),
and comply with dockside monitoring
hail requirements specified at
§ 648.87(b)(5)(i)(A). Sector vessels
utilizing this exemption must determine
with their dockside monitoring provider
how to notify their provider that a given
sector trip is utilizing this exemption.
Therefore, NMFS has partially approved
an exemption from DSM requirements
for directed monkfish trips for gillnet
and trawl vessels on concurrent NE
multispecies and monkfish DAS trips
when declared into the monkfish SFMA
and fishing with 10-inch (25.4-cm) or
greater mesh size nets for the Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors III, V–X, and XIII; and
the Tri-State Sector.
Special Management Program (SMP)
Reporting Requirements
Amendment 16 provided the Regional
Administrator with the authority to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
remove SMP-specific reporting
requirements for sectors if it is
determined that the reporting
requirements are unnecessary.
Consistent with the provisions adopted
under Amendment 16, NMFS retained
the authority to reinstate such reporting
requirements if it is later determined
that the weekly sector catch reports are
insufficient to adequately monitor catch
by sector vessels in SMPs. For FY 2010,
the Regional Administrator determined
that daily SMP-specific VMS catch
reports for vessels participating in
sectors were unnecessary, because
sectors were allocated ACE for most NE
multispecies regulated species, and
ocean pout, and, therefore, would not be
subject to any SMP-specific TACs or
other restrictions on catch; would be
responsible for ensuring that sector
allocations are not exceeded; and would
provide sufficient information to
monitor all sector catch through the
submission of weekly sector catch
reports. For these same reasons, the
Regional Administrator has determined,
unless otherwise noted above, that SMPspecific reporting requirements are not
necessary to monitor sector catch for FY
2011. This exemption from the SMP
reporting requirements for sector vessels
will not apply to vessels participating in
the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, as
this SAP includes an overall haddock
TAC that is applicable to both sector
and common pool vessels fishing in this
SAP. Therefore, the existing
requirement for sector managers to
provide daily catch reports by
participating sector vessels is
maintained for the CA I Hook Gear
Haddock SAP only.
Disapproved Exemption Requests
After completing an initial review of
the 19 sector operations plans and
contracts submitted as of September 1,
2010, NMFS discussed all sector
exemption requests in the proposed rule
for this action, and highlighted
exemption requests of concern when
soliciting public comment. Public
comment that was received pertaining
to these exemptions did not provide
new data or sufficient additional
rationale to mitigate concerns raised by
NMFS in the proposed rule. Due to the
fact that no new information was
received by the public that would
provide sufficient rationale to grant
such exemption requests, exemption
requests from the following regulations
have not been approved by NMFS for
FY 2011: Access to GOM Rolling
Closure Areas in May and June;
prohibition on pair trawling; minimum
hook size requirements for demersal
longline gear; minimum trawl mesh size
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23089
requirement; Ruhle and haddock
separator trawl requirements to utilize
the 98.4-inch x 15.7-inch (250-cm x 40cm) Eliminator Trawl in areas where
these gear types have previously been
approved; all DSM and roving
monitoring requirements; DSM
requirements for hook vessels when the
sector has caught less than 10,000 lb
(4,535.9 kg) of groundfish per year; DSM
requirements when fishing in several
mid-Atlantic NMFS Statistical Areas;
DSM, roving monitoring, and hail
requirements for vessels using demersal
longline, jig and handgear while
targeting spiny dogfish in Massachusetts
state waters in NMFS Statistical Area
521; DSM requirements when at-sea
monitoring has previously observed the
trip; the requirement to delay offloading
due to the late arrival of the assigned
monitor; the prohibition of offloading
non-allocated stocks prior to the arrival
of the monitor; and the requirement to
provide a sector roster to NMFS by the
specified deadline. These requests and
NMFS’s decisions on them are
discussed below.
18. Access to GOM Rolling Closure
Areas in May and June
Exemptions from GOM Rolling
Closure Areas, specifically blocks 138
and 139 during May and/or access to
blocks 139, 145, and 146 during June,
for FY 2011 are disapproved for the
same reasons that these exemptions
were ultimately disapproved in the final
rule implementing the FY 2010 sector
operations plans. This request is
disapproved because the requesting
sectors failed to consider that, despite
ACE limits, direct targeting of spawning
aggregations can adversely impact the
reproductive potential of a stock, as
opposed to post-spawning mortality. In
addition, this request has been
disapproved because that the existing
GOM Rolling Closure Areas provide
some protection to harbor porpoise and
other marine mammals.
The sectors requesting this exemption
for FY 2011 asserted that the GOM
Rolling Closure Areas were originally
intended as mortality closures and are
therefore now unnecessary because
fishing mortality for sectors is capped
by the ACE allocated for each
groundfish stock. They also argued that
vessels fishing in the requested closed
areas would provide information, which
could serve as a pilot study for future
use of these areas and times by all
sectors.
One sector noted that Table 177 in the
EIS for Amendment 16 indicates that
May is not a particularly important time
for groundfish spawning, with the
exception of plaice and haddock. While
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23090
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
previous actions addressed the
protection of spawning cod, NMFS
believes that the protection of spawning
stocks of all species is relevant, and
necessary to the rebuilding and
maintaining of rebuilt stocks.
FW 45 includes a closure of the
Whaleback region of the GOM in June
to protect spawning cod. In addition, a
scientific paper (Stock Identification of
Atlantic Cod in U.S. Waters Using
Microsatellite and Single Nucleotide
Polymorphism DNA Analyses by Wirgin
et al., 2007) indicates that there is some
cod spawning in the GOM in June,
which supports this decision.
One sector proposed a strategy to
minimize the impacts to spawning fish,
whereby the harvesting of any species in
these areas and times would be
restricted by capping the percentage of
the sector’s available ACE that could be
harvested from these areas, and would
institute a closure of these areas if,
based on NMFS Northeast Fisheries
Observer Program (NEFOP) data, a
significant amount of spawning fish
were harvested. Additionally, that
sector proposed to implement a program
to notify the sector manager and other
vessels if spawning aggregations and/or
marine mammals were detected in these
areas. NEFOP does not currently collect
data on spawning activities; therefore,
this is not a viable option to limit the
impacts on spawning aggregations of
fish.
Ancillary benefits from the GOM
Rolling Closure Areas afford protection
to harbor porpoise and other marine
mammals. Further, increased harbor
porpoise interactions could trigger
Coastal GOM Consequence Closure
Areas, as specified in the Harbor
Porpoise Take Reduction Plan, resulting
in the closure of the GOM to all gillnet
gear, including gear deployed by both
sector and common pool vessels. Given
these concerns, it is not prudent to
allow further exemptions from the GOM
Rolling Closure Areas at this time.
19. Prohibition on Pair Trawling
The prohibition to prohibit pair
trawling in the NE multispecies fishery
was originally implemented through an
emergency rule in 1993 (58 FR 32062;
June 8, 1993), and made permanent in
Amendment 5 (59 FR 9872; March 1,
1994). This prohibition was originally
implemented to protect cod and
haddock because of the high efficiency
of this gear and the need to drastically
reduce fishing effort on these stocks.
Several Northeast Fishery Sectors
requested an exemption from the pair
trawling restriction for FY 2011 to allow
pairs of vessels to utilize either the
Ruhle Trawl or the Eliminator Trawl,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
asserting that sectors are managed under
an ACE and should be exempt from
effort controls. These sectors asserted
that the exemption would enable
participating vessels to harvest the
sector’s ACE more efficiently and
economically.
NMFS raised concerns in the
proposed rule for this action that the
impacts and effects of these gear
configurations have not been studied.
NMFS believes that pair trawling using
the Ruhle Trawl or Eliminator Trawl
could diminish the established
selectivity of these gears through
increased herding of fish, and could
result in increased catch of prohibited
stocks, for which sectors have no ACE
and little incentive to reduce catch. In
addition, NMFS has observed an
increase in interactions between bottom
trawl fisheries on GB and Atlantic
white-sided dolphins, a protected
species, and is concerned that granting
this exemption could increase these
interactions. For these reasons and
concerns, NMFS has disapproved the
exemption from the prohibition on pair
trawling.
20. Minimum Hook Size Requirements
for Demersal Longline Gear
The minimum longline gear size of
12/0 was first implemented through
Amendment 13 to reduce the catch of
small fish and improve their
survivability, as well as to reduce
overall effort in the hook fishery. The
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector
requested an exemption from this
regulation in FY 2011 to target flatfish,
stating this exemption would allow its
members to more effectively harvest the
sector’s ACE and increase profit margins
for sector fishermen.
Due to concern that this exemption
would increase catch of sublegal fish
and result in recruitment overfishing,
and that potential changes to size
selectivity of the fishery would be
inconsistent with those used to
determine current Allowable Biological
Catch levels, NMFS has disapproved the
exemption from the minimum hook size
requirements for demersal longline gear.
21. Minimum Mesh Size Requirements
on Targeted Redfish Trips
The current minimum mesh size
requirements at § 648.80 were
implemented to provide protection to
spawning fish and increase the size of
targeted fish. Several Northeast Fishery
Sectors requested an exemption from
the current minimum mesh size codend
for targeted redfish trips in FY 2011;
replacing this requirement with a 5-inch
(12.7-cm) minimum mesh size codend
when fishing on directed redfish trips,
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
stating that this reduced codend mesh
size could increase operational
flexibility and profit margins of sector
fishermen.
As stated in the proposed rule for this
action, NMFS is currently funding a
study through the Northeast Cooperative
Research Partners Program to investigate
strategies and methods to sustainably
harvest the redfish resource in the GOM,
which will include determining the
success of various mesh sizes within the
fishery. Recognizing that there is an
established mechanism through the
Council for the review and
incorporation of scientific research,
NMFS believes that the exemption
request from minimum mesh size
requirements on targeted redfish trips is
premature, and has, therefore, not
approved this request.
22. Ruhle and Haddock Separator
Requirements To Utilize the 98.4-inch x
15.7-inch (250-cm x 40-cm) Eliminator
Trawl
NMFS has previously authorized the
use of the Ruhle Trawl (f.k.a.,
Eliminator Trawl and Haddock Rope
Trawl) as one of the gears required to be
used in the B DAS Program
(§ 648.85(b)(6)(iv)(J)), Eastern U.S./
Canada Haddock SAP (§ 648.85(b)(8)(v),
and the Eastern U.S./Canada Area
(§ 648.85(a)(1)(iii)). NMFS approval of
this gear was based upon a
recommendation from the Council,
following review of a study that
demonstrated that this experimental net
was successful at targeting haddock and
significantly reducing the catch of other
groundfish species. Several of the
Northeast Fishery Sectors requested an
FY 2011 exemption to utilize a smaller
version of the approved Ruhle trawl,
i.e., the 98.4-inch x 15.7-inch (250-cm x
40-cm) Eliminator Trawl, in areas and
programs where the Ruhle trawl has
been approved as an acceptable gear,
asserting that this gear will provide
sector members with greater flexibility,
as many vessels are too small to utilize
the currently approved version of the
net. The sectors cited the final results of
‘‘Exploring Bycatch Reduction in the
Haddock Fishery through the use of the
Eliminator Trawl with Fishing Vessels
in the 250 to 550 HP Range,’’ by Laura
Scrobe, David Beutel, and Jonathan
Knight, 2006, which indicated that this
smaller net may reduce the catch of
major stocks of concern, while allowing
vessels to selectively target haddock.
The results of the smaller-scale trawl
study were reviewed at the March 16,
2011, Research Steering Committee
(RSC) meeting. At that meeting, the RSC
determined that the statistical analysis
presented was not appropriate to
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
measure the performance of the gear
against the control and requested
additional statistical analysis of the
results before continuing their review of
the study.
There is an established mechanism for
the incorporation of additional gear
types for special management programs
through review by the RSC and approval
by the Council, and approval of this
exemption request would be
inconsistent with this process. Based on
this, the exemption request from Ruhle
and Haddock Separator requirements to
utilize the 98.4-inch x 15.7-inch (250cm x 40-cm) Eliminator Trawl has been
disapproved. Currently, there is no
prohibition against vessels using this
smaller-scale trawl net outside of SAPs
and the Eastern U.S./Canada Area.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
23. All DSM and Roving Monitoring
Requirements
The DSM program was implemented
under Amendment 16 to ensure that
catch is accurately monitored to bolster
compliance monitoring. For FY 2011,
several sectors requested an exemption
from all DSM requirements at
§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1), arguing that there
is little value to the program, and that
it is not meeting its objectives as an
enforcement tool.
At its November 18, 2010, meeting,
the Council voted to alter several of the
DSM provisions originally implemented
by Amendment 16, including setting a
goal of 100-percent DSM and
prioritizing DSM for trips that did not
receive an at-sea monitor, and removing
DSM from the list of reporting
requirements, thereby removing this
requirement from the list of prohibited
sector exemptions. These provisions
were included in FW 45, and approved
by NMFS. The Council’s modifications
to DSM, as highlighted in their
comment on the proposed rule for this
action (Comment 28), do not support
exemptions from DSM for all trips.
Therefore, NMFS has disapproved the
request for an exemption from all DSM
and roving monitoring requirements.
NMFS acknowledges that the DSM
program could be strengthened and is
modifying DSM requirements through
FW 45 for the start of FY 2011 to
include provisions such as inspection of
fish holds, to help ensure better
compliance monitoring, the primary
objective of the program.
24. DSM Requirements for Hook Vessels
When the Sector Has Caught Less Than
10,000 lb (4,535.9 kg) of Groundfish per
Year
VTR data collected through February
2011, document that hook vessels, i.e.,
handgear and longline vessels, have
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
landed approximately 2.3 percent of the
total groundfish catch thus far for FY
2010 (May 1, 2010–March 21, 2010); of
this amount, longline gear landed 2.13
percent of the total groundfish catch.
Although handgear vessels represent a
small portion of this amount, FW 45, as
approved by NMFS, exempts handgear
permitted vessels from DSM. Unless
otherwise exempted by the Council, the
current regulations at § 648.87(b)(1)(v)
require catch of all stocks on sector trips
to be monitored, to help ensure the
accuracy of the total catch being
documented by dealers, which is used
to calculate sector discards. The sector
requested that this exemption start once
a certain threshold of fish is caught.
Implementation of a DSM program
mid-year would not meet the
requirements that trip selection be
random and representative. Further, the
threshold of 10,000 lb (4,535.9 kg) is
arbitrary, and could be construed as
unfair to vessels fishing other gear types
with minimal pounds caught for the
year. Therefore, NMFS has disapproved
the request for an exemption from DSM
requirements for hook vessels when the
sector has caught less than 10,000 lb
(4,535.9 kg) of groundfish per year.
25. DSM Requirements When Fishing in
Certain Mid-Atlantic (MA) Areas
Several Northeast Fishery Sectors
requested an exemption from DSM
requirements at (§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1))
in May and June on non-groundfish
directed trips that occur in the following
NMFS statistical areas: 615, 616, 621,
622, 623, 625, 626, 627, 631, 632, 633,
635, 637, and 638
(§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1)). The sectors
pointed out that historical data indicate
that little groundfish incidental catch
has been observed in these areas, and
monitoring of such trips is therefore not
a beneficial use of financial resources.
NMFS’s VTR data indicate that 1,222
trips were taken within these areas
during FY 2009, and 374 trips were
taken, thus far, in these areas in FY 2010
(May 1, 2010–February 3, 2011). These
data showed that none of the trips from
FY 2009 or 2010 landed any groundfish.
Many of the sectors’ reasons for
submitting this exemption request are
addressed through the approval of
Exemption 15, a similar exemption
request from DSM requirements for
vessels fishing west of 72°30′ W. long.,
which represents roughly the same area
as described in this exemption. Because
Exemption 15 was comparable, and
would more easily facilitate
enforcement efforts by setting a
longitudinal line rather than a statistical
area boundary, NMFS approved
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23091
Exemption 15. Exemption 25 has been
disapproved for FY 2011.
26. DSM, Roving Monitoring, and Hail
Requirements for Vessels Using
Demersal Longline Gear, Jig Gear, and
Handgear While Targeting Spiny
Dogfish in Massachusetts State Waters
Unless a vessel is fishing in an
exempted fishery, directed spiny
dogfish trips are considered sector trips.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector
requested an exemption from DSM,
roving monitoring, and hail
requirements for vessels using demersal
longline gear, jig gear, and handlines
while targeting spiny dogfish in
Massachusetts state waters (NMFS
Statistical Area 521)
(§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1)), stating that its
FY 2010 sector data indicate little
groundfish incidental catch in this area
and that deploying monitors on such
trips would provide little value to a
program designed to monitor landings
of regulated groundfish.
Vessels fishing on a directed dogfish
trip, outside of an exempted fishery,
must declare a sector trip through the
NE multispecies VMS or IVR
declarations prior to starting their trip
because the gear utilized on such trips
have the ability to catch groundfish, and
because groundfish retention is
permitted. It is currently impossible to
distinguish such a trip from a directed
groundfish trip because the declaration
is a requirement of the NE Multispecies
FMP and because the Spiny Dogfish
FMP does not currently require VMS.
Granting this exemption would
therefore pose operational issues that
would be difficult to resolve.
Regulations require catch of all stocks
on sector trips be monitored, to help
ensure the accuracy of the total catch
being documented by dealers, which is
used to calculate sector discard ratios.
Additionally, as previously stated,
sectors are prohibited from being
exempted from hail requirements,
which are considered to be reporting
requirement. For these reasons, NMFS
has disapproved an exemption from
DSM, roving monitoring, and hail
requirements for vessels using demersal
longline Gear, jig gear, and handgear
while targeting spiny dogfish in
Massachusetts state waters.
27. DSM Requirements When a Trip Has
Been Monitored by Either an At-Sea
Monitor or Fishery Observer
The Northeast Coastal Communities
Sector requested an exemption from
DSM requirements
(§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1)) when a trip has
been monitored by either an at-sea
monitor or fishery observer, stating that
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23092
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
requiring both at-sea monitoring and
DSM is redundant, as the goal of both
programs is catch verification.
At its November 18, 2010, meeting,
the Council asked NMFS to prioritize
DSM for trips that did not receive an atsea monitor (if 100-percent DSM was
not possible), and included this
provision in FW 45. The final rule
implementing FW 45, which is being
implemented concurrently with this
action, implements prioritization of
dockside/roving monitor coverage for
trips that do not have an observer, at-sea
monitor, or approved electronic
monitoring equipment. Because NMFS
is addressing this exemption through
alternate rulemaking, it is not being
approved through this rule.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
28. The Requirement To Delay
Offloading Due to the Late Arrival of an
Assigned Dockside Monitor
The regulations at § 648.87(b)(5)(i)(C)
specify that a vessel may not offload any
fish from a trip that was selected to be
observed by a dockside/roving monitor
until the dockside/roving monitor
assigned to that trip is present. The
regulations implementing Amendment
16 require each sector to develop,
implement, and fund a DSM program,
including the selection and hiring of
approved monitoring provider(s). The
GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector requested a
partial exemption from the above
regulation, allowing vessels to begin
offloading catch if a dockside or roving
monitor is late, arguing that it is the
responsibility of the monitor to ensure
timely arrival at monitoring events.
In the proposed rule for this action,
NMFS highlighted several operational
concerns with this exemption request.
Because each sector contracts directly
with a monitoring provider(s), the sector
has the ability and responsibility to
resolve the late arrival of an assigned
monitor directly with its contracted
provider(s). For these reasons, this
exemption has been disapproved for FY
2011.
29. Prohibition of Offloading NonAllocated Species Prior to the Arrival of
the Monitor
When selected to be observed by a
dockside/roving monitor, a vessel may
not offload any fish from a trip until the
dockside/roving monitor assigned to
that trip is present (§ 648.87)(b)(5)(i)(C)).
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3
requested an exemption from the
prohibition of offloading non-allocated
species prior to the arrival of the
monitor. The sectors contend that, on
occasion, dealers request vessels to
offload non-allocated stocks, such as
lobster, prior to the offload of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
groundfish and that this exemption
would give additional flexibility to
sector members and dealers for the
processing of catch.
The Amendment 16 DSM standards
require catch of all stocks to be
monitored, to help ensure the accuracy
of the total catch being documented by
dealers. Additionally, NMFS remains
concerned that granting an exemption
for components of a vessel’s catch could
create a loophole in the existing
regulations. Therefore, for compliance
purposes, NMFS has disapproved this
exemption request, and retains the
Amendment 16 requirement to observe
the offload of the entire catch from
sector trips.
30. Requirement To Provide a Sector
Roster to NMFS by the Specified
Deadline
The regulations implementing
Amendment 16 require that sector
operations plan submissions must be
submitted to NMFS by September 1 of
each year (unless the operations plan is
for multiple years), to ensure that the
operations plans and associated
analyses are reviewed in time to
implement such operations by the start
of the next FY (§ 648.87(b)(2)). Several
administrative roster deadline
extensions were provided by NMFS for
FY 2011. Setting the deadline for
submitting sector rosters is an
administrative matter. Therefore, this
exemption request was highlighted in
the proposed rule, but not proposed
because NMFS was able to
administratively accommodate these
submission deadline extensions.
Therefore, this exemption has not been
approved for FY 2011.
Requested Exemptions Not Considered
in This Action Because They Are
Prohibited or Were Previously Rejected
Exemptions requested by several
sectors, ranging from at-sea monitoring
provisions, discard rate calculation
methods, Eastern U.S./Canada Area
requirements, VTR requirements, and
NMFS’s Office of Law Enforcement
(OLE) confidentiality requirements, are
either specifically prohibited, or fall
outside the NE multispecies regulations.
For a more detailed discussion, see the
proposed rule for this action.
Comments
Nine letters, each containing several
comments, were submitted from several
entities: An attorney on behalf of an
undisclosed number of individuals,
three sectors, one sector support
organization, one industry organization,
one non-governmental organization, the
New England Fishery Management
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Council (Council), and the
Massachusetts Division of Marine
Fisheries (DMF). Only comments that
were applicable to the proposed
measures, including the analyses used
to support these measures, are
responded to below.
General Sector Issues
Comment 1: Three comments were
received supporting NMFS’s proposal to
relax the 14-day deadline for the
submission of ACE transfer requests
after the end of the FY.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that
the current regulatory text requiring
ACE transfers to be completed within 14
days of the end of the FY is insufficient;
therefore, an extension will be granted
for FY 2010, allowing sector managers
additional time to submit ACE transfers.
Comment 2: Two comments were
received pertaining to the costs
associated with the implementation of
sector management. The Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector asserted
that monitoring costs are excessive,
especially for small vessels and vessels
operating out of remote ports. An
individual noted that the cost of sectors
is high in comparison to the gross value
of landings.
Response: For FY 2010, NMFS
provided funding to sectors for hiring a
manager, the writing of an operations
plan, reimbursement of DSM costs, and
for the costs of a contractor to prepare
the sector EAs. NMFS anticipates that
funding will be available to provide
similar reimbursement in FY 2011.
Additionally, NMFS is granting
exemptions from DSM requirements to
certain gear and permitted vessels, as
well as for vessels fishing exclusively
west of 72°30′ W. long. NMFS
acknowledges that there are additional
costs for sector vessels under this comanagement system. The costs
associated with sector management and
the responsibility of sector managers
monitoring their own allocation are
exchanged for the ability to fish with
exemptions from certain NE
multispecies regulations. As outlined
above, joining a sector is voluntary.
Given that 57% of permits have joined
a sector in FY 2011, it appears that
sectors remain a better choice for many
NE multispecies limited access permit
holders over the alternative of fishing in
the common pool fishery. As we move
forward, NMFS will continue to work
with the sectors to evaluate and reduce
costs associated with sector
management, where it can.
Comment 3: The Northeast Sector
Service Network, Inc. (NESSN),
representing Northeast Fishery Sectors
II through XIII noted, and the Northeast
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Seafood Coalition (NSC) concurred, that
sectors, in general, are constrained by
their allocated ACE, as adjusted by
transfers, and assert previous effort
control management measures should
no longer be applicable.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that
many effort control measures are not
applicable when vessels are constrained
by ACE. The regulations implementing
Amendment 16 relieved sectors of some
of these effort control measures through
universal exemptions, e.g., DAS
requirements. In addition, sectors have
the opportunity to request exemptions
from additional specific NE
multispecies management measures
through their operations plan, subject to
NMFS’s approval. For FY 2010, and
again for FY 2011 through this rule,
sectors are exempt from the following
requirements: 120-day block out of the
fishery required for Day gillnet vessels;
20-day spawning block out of the
fishery required for all vessels;
limitation on the number of gillnets
imposed on Day gillnet vessels;
prohibition on a vessel hauling another
vessel’s gillnet gear; limitation on the
number of gillnets that may be hauled
on GB when fishing under a groundfish/
monkfish DAS; limits on the number of
hooks that may be fished; DAS Leasing
Program length and horsepower
restrictions; GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh
Exemption; and bait restrictions in the
CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP.
However, some effort control measures
remain necessary, because an overall
mortality limit, such as an ACE, does
not by itself prevent some other negative
impacts, such as disruption of spawning
aggregations or overharvest of juveniles.
Accordingly, NMFS has disapproved
several exemption requests, including:
Access to GOM Rolling Closure Areas,
minimum hook size requirements, and
trawl size and trawl mesh size
requirements.
Comment 4: An attorney, commenting
on behalf of an unspecified number of
individuals, raised concern that the
operations plans do not contain specific
strategies for the management of interrelated groundfish stocks.
Response: Current regulations require
sector operations plans to include
specific management rules that the
sector participants agree to abide by in
order to avoid exceeding the allocated
ACE for each stock, including a plan of
operations or cessation of operations in
an area once the ACE(s) of one or more
stocks in that area are harvested. Each
sector operations plan includes a set of
harvest rules and specifies actions to be
taken as thresholds of ACE are achieved.
Each sector is allocated ACE for NE
multispecies stocks and determines how
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
the sector members will sub-allocate the
ACE among themselves. Details of this
distribution are prescribed in the
operations plan. It is the responsibility
of each sector to successfully manage
these inter-related stocks. Sector
management provides industry the
opportunity to determine how best to
harvest allocated fish, and provides
flexibility for industry to balance
allocations of inter-related stocks.
Further, current regulations specify that
vessels in a sector may only fish in
particular stock areas if the sector has
been allocated or acquires sufficient
ACE for all stocks caught in that stock
area. NMFS believes these provisions of
the regulations adequately address the
management of inter-related stocks in
the NE multispecies fishery.
Comment 5: DMF commented that the
process established to annually review
and approve sector operations plans and
the associated exemption requests lacks
Council input and involvement. DMF
questioned at what point approval of
exemptions would be incorporated into
the FMP, especially considering the
costs to both NMFS and individual
sectors to request and analyze each
exemption annually.
Response: Regulations implementing
Amendment 16 require sectors to
submit to NMFS a list of existing
regulations that the sector is requesting
exemption from, as part of the
operations plan. In order for a sector to
be implemented, approved to fish, and
allocated ACEs, it must first submit a
preliminary operations plan to the
Council 1 year prior to the year in
which it wants to fish and request
implementation in a FW or FMP
amendment. Thus, the Council
determines whether and when to
implement additional sectors. If the
Council decides to authorize a new
sector, it begins the development of an
appropriate action to do so. In
anticipation of approval of such action
by the Council and NMFS, the sector
submits its operations plan and contract
to NMFS by the required deadlines.
NMFS then reviews the final operations
plan and solicits comment through a
proposed rule. The Council can, and
has, commented on sector operations
plans and proposed exemptions at that
time. Therefore, the Council has input
and involvement both at the initial stage
of considering a new sector and
annually when operations plans are
proposed. Amendment 16 is silent on
how NMFS-approved exemptions could
be incorporated into the suite of
Council-issued universal exemptions
granted to sector vessels. It is up to the
Council to evaluate the feasibility and
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23093
desirability of incorporating approved
exemptions into the FMP.
Allocation Issues
Comment 6: The Council commented
on the proposed rule language that
stated: ‘‘As required by Amendment 16,
each sector contract submitted for FY
2011 states that the sector will withhold
an initial reserve from the sector’s suballocation to each individual member to
prevent the sector from exceeding its
ACE.’’ The Council wanted to clarify
that Amendment 16 does not require the
withholding of ACE from individual
sector members, but rather that a
portion of the sector’s overall ACE must
be withheld.
Response: NMFS agrees that the
regulations implementing Amendment
16 require NMFS to withhold a
percentage of each sectors ACE at the
start of a FY to account for any ACE
overages. However, each sector, through
its operations plan, has allocated an
amount of fish to each vessel equal to
what the vessel contributed to the
sector’s ACE. Because the sector has the
flexibility to fish its quota however it
wishes to, their method of allocation is
strictly voluntary.
Comment 7: An attorney estimated
that one sector will be allocated
approximately 32 percent of the
combined NE multispecies ACLs in FY
2011, and raised the concern that one
party is controlling an excessive share of
the NE multispecies fishery.
Response: Several comments were
received as part of the Amendment 16
rulemaking process regarding capping
the amount of ACE that can be allocated
to an individual sector, stated that the
absence of an allocation cap could
compromise small vessel operations due
to consolidation. NMFS recognizes that
the fact that one sector may have a
significant percentage of the total ACE
for one fishing season may raise
potential concerns for incidental
allocative or market effects, and that
such possibilities should be closely
monitored. However, analysis by the
PDT during the development of
Amendment 16 suggested it is unlikely
that any one sector could accumulate a
large enough share of a stock to exercise
market power over the rest of the
fishery. Because sector ACEs are
temporary in nature and depend upon
the collective PSCs of participating
vessels, no one sector would be
allocated a permanent share of any
resource. This further limits the ability
of a sector to influence market
conditions for a particular stock over the
long term. Amendment 16 allowed
sectors to transfer ACE for use during
FY in which it is allocated. This will
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23094
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
minimize the influence of the initial
sector allocation, including any cap on
initial allocations, on market control, as
a sector could acquire an unlimited
amount of ACE from another sector
through ACE transfers. Based on those
comments, NMFS in a January 21, 2010,
letter to the Council, recommended that
the Council consider addressing
potential problems of the incidental
allocative effects of the sector program
as well as individual permit holders
acquiring excessive control of fishing
privileges through an allocation cap. In
response to these concerns, the Council
has begun development of Amendment
18, and NMFS has published an
Advanced Notice of Public Rulemaking
(76 FR 19305, April 7, 2011) that puts
into place a control date that the
Council may use in setting future
allocation measures. Given that
concerns about consolidation are part of
the overall sector program adopted and
addressed in Amendment 16, such
concerns are beyond the scope of this
rule.
Sector Operations Plans and Contracts
Comment 8: The Council noted that
the Maine Permit Bank Sector, and its
prospective permits, was provided a
February 1, 2011, deadline to submit a
finalized sector roster. The Council
agreed that it was reasonable for NMFS
to extend the roster submission deadline
to December 1, 2010, but suggested that
the final roster submission date of
February 1, 2011, provided to permit
holders wanting to sell permits to the
Maine Permit Bank Sector could
complicate the analyses and was not
consistent across all sectors.
Response: NMFS accepted a
preliminary list of permits from the
Maine Permit Bank Sector on December
1, 2010, which included permits that
the State of Maine anticipated
purchasing, with the stipulation that
these permits were the only permits that
could be included in the final roster.
Because of the unique nature of the
Maine Permit Bank Sector, NMFS
allowed these permit holders additional
time, through February 1, 2011, to
finalize agreements with the State of
Maine. This was handled
administratively to provide additional
flexibility to individual permit holders
who were considering selling their
permits to the State of Maine. Without
this flexibility, permit holders selling to
the State of Maine would have been
required to drop out of the sector that
they previously signed into by the
December 1, 2010, deadline. Had the
sale not occurred, the permit holder
would have had to drop out of the
Maine Permit Bank for FY 2011. Since
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
approximately 99 percent of the
historical landings are associated with
those vessels that had elected to sign up
to participate in sectors in FY 2011, the
impacts associated with the harvest of
the ACE allocated to the Maine Permit
Bank Sector is sufficiently analyzed in
the final EA.
Comment 9: DMF commented that the
ability of the public to comment on the
proposed action was hindered by
incomplete access to data, including the
redaction of roster information and
inconsistencies between the information
presented in the rule, the EA, and the
operations plans.
Response: NMFS acknowledges minor
inconsistencies between the data
presented in these documents. During
FY 2011, sector rosters were reopened
following the initial September 10,
2010, deadline, allowing additional
permit holders to enroll in sectors up to
December 1, 2010. Permit holders
negotiating permit sales with the Maine
Permit Bank Sector were allowed
through February 1, 2011, to either sell
permits to the Maine Permit Bank
Sector, or to enroll permits in that
sector. Due to evolving roster deadlines,
and the time required to draft these
documents, slightly different
information was used. NMFS has
elected not to publish rosters or rosterspecific information contained
elsewhere in the operations plans
because final sector membership is
subject to change, as permit holders
have until April 30, 2011, to withdraw
from a sector. NMFS published the
rosters associated with the final
approved operations plans in this final
rule. Any further changes to rosters
made through April 30, 2011, will be
acknowledged through amendments to
the operations plan. NMFS will accept
comment on final sector membership.
Amendments are posted to: https://
www.nero.noaa.gov/sfd/
sfdmultisector.html.
Proposed Exemptions
Comment 10: DMF stated that the list
of proposed exemptions is extensive
and difficult to properly evaluate.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the
extensiveness of the proposed
exemptions and the difficulty in
evaluating them. This is an unavoidable
problem, however, given the nature of
the sector management program and the
number of sectors involved. NMFS also
attempts to summarize, as concisely as
possible, all exemption requests and
justifications in the proposed rule for
this action, excluding exemptions that
were specifically prohibited. Further, all
proposed exemptions were analyzed in
the EA, and the final determination on
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the approval of the exemption requests
and supporting reasons are summarized
in this final rule.
Several FY 2010 Exemptions Requested
Again in FY 2011
Comment 11: Four individuals
commented on the exemption from the
120-day block requirement for gillnet
vessels, the exemption from the
prohibition on a vessel hauling another
vessel’s gillnet gear, the exemption from
the limitation on the number of gillnets
that may be hauled on GB when fishing
under a groundfish/monkfish DAS, the
exemption from the limitation on the
number of hooks that may be fished,
and the limitation on the number of
gillnets imposed on Day gillnet vessels.
NESSN and the NSC supported the
reauthorization of these exemption
requests. The Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector raised concern that
the scarcity of available space to set this
extra gear could potentially lead to
safety hazards on the water as gear
density and fishing pressure increases.
The Northeast Coastal Communities
Sector also asserted that granting this
exemption could increase the potential
for sector ACE overages as gillnets can
be left in the water for long periods of
time, increasing catch and mortality on
some stocks. DMF offered the same
comments on these exemptions that
they submitted in FY 2010 for the same
exemption request, i.e., supporting
requests for exemption from the 120-day
block requirement for gillnet vessels, the
exemption from the prohibition on a
vessel hauling another vessel’s gillnet
gear, the exemption from the limitation
on the number of gillnets that may be
hauled on GB when fishing under a
groundfish/monkfish DAS, the
exemption from the limitation on the
number of hooks that may be fished;
and opposing the requests for
exemption from the limitation on the
number of gillnets imposed on Day
gillnet vessels.
Response: NMFS approved these
gillnet and hook gear exemption
requests for FY 2010 because these
measures were designed to control
fishing effort and are no longer
necessary for sectors because sectors’
overall fishing mortality is limited by an
ACE. While RMA-specific limits on the
number of nets have been exempted,
NMFS has retained the overall 150-net
cap on the amount of gear that may be
deployed, as specified in the
regulations, because an increase in catch
per unit effort could result in the rapid
acquisition of the sectors’ ACEs, at
which point the sectors would remove
their fishing gear. The EA indicates that
this measure could result in longer soak
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
20-Day Spawning Block
Comment 12: Two industry groups
and DMF commented on the exemption
from the 20-day spawning block
requirement. NESSN and NSC
supported this exemption request. DMF
offered the same comments on these
exemptions that they submitted in FY
2010 for the same exemption request,
i.e., supporting the exemption from the
20-day spawning block, but raised an
additional concern about the potential
impacts to spawning aggregations of
GOM cod.
Response: The regulations specify that
the 20-day spawning block may be taken
anywhere in a span of 92 days (March
1 to May 31) and, therefore, it is
expected that some amount fishing
effort would be present during this
entire time period. While NMFS
supports the protection of spawning
stocks, prohibiting vessels from fishing
20 days within a 3-month spawning
period will likely provide minimal
benefit to the stocks, and thus NMFS
has approved this exemption for FY
2011.
regulation, which was implemented to
preserve the character of the fleet. DMF
also commented that similar baseline
restrictions should be implemented for
ACE transfers. Finally, DMF claimed
that unrestricted leasing could increase
mortality on monkfish and skates
through redirection of effort.
Response: NMFS approved this
exemption for FY 2010 because it will
help ease the transition into sector
management for limited access NE
multispecies permitted vessels also
issued a limited access monkfish permit
by allowing vessels to retain more
monkfish on a sector trip, resulting in
increased vessel profits and reduced
regulatory discards. NMFS maintains its
support for this exemption in FY 2011
for providing this additional flexibility
to sectors. This exemption is not
expected to change the character of the
fleet, because vessel replacements will
continue to be limited by length overall,
tonnage, and horsepower limits.
Regulations implementing Amendment
16 allow a sector to transfer ACE to
another sector in a given FY. ACE
transfers take place at the sector level,
not the vessel level. Although the
Council did not choose to implement
restrictions on ACE transfers in
Amendment 16, the Council has begun
development of Amendment 18 to
address ACE accumulation limits and
could consider restrictions on ACE
transfers at that time. Through the FY
2011 operations plans, sectors
summarized anticipated redirection of
effort to other species based on
information available to them from FY
2010. Most sectors stated that current
fishing behaviors and patterns were not
anticipated to change as a result of
operating under sector management.
DAS Leasing Program Length and
Horsepower Restrictions
Comment 13: Two industry support
groups, one sector, and DMF
commented on the exemption from the
DAS leasing program length and
horsepower restrictions. NESSN and the
NSC supported this exemption request.
The Northeast Coastal Communities
Sector raised concern that the
unrestricted free market has led to the
price of DAS leases rising above a level
which small-scale fishermen can afford.
DMF offered the same comments on
these exemptions that they submitted in
FY 2010 for the same exemption
request, i.e., questioned whether DAS
that otherwise would have been used by
sector vessels for groundfish fishing
could not be leased to sector vessels
targeting monkfish, but raised concern
that granting this exemption could
undermine the original intent of this
Sink Gillnet Mesh Size Restriction in
the GOM
Comment 14: Three comments were
received on the exemption from the sink
gillnet mesh size restriction in the GOM
from January through April and the
extension through May. NESSN and the
NSC supported the reauthorization of
this exemption request. The Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector raised
concern that scarcity of available space
to set this extra gear could potentially
lead to safety hazards on the water as
gear density and fishing pressure
increases. The sector also asserted that
granting this exemption could increase
the potential for sector ACE overages as
gillnets can be left in the water for long
periods of time, increasing catch and
mortality on some stocks.
Response: NMFS approved this
exemption request for FY 2010, stating
that the impacts to target allocated
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
times or gear left untended to hold
fishing ground, which could increase
inter-vessel conflicts. However, NMFS
has not received any reports of such
incidents occurring during FY 2010.
NMFS maintains that sectors are
responsible for managing the harvest of
ACE by its members, and sector
members remain jointly and severally
liable for any misreporting of catch.
NMFS has again approved these
exemptions for FY 2011, based on the
same rationale. Comments and
responses on the FY 2010 exemption
request can be found in the FY 2010
sector final rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23095
would be minimal because fishing
mortality by sector vessels is restricted
by an ACE for allocated stocks, which
caps overall mortality. While RMAspecific limits on the number of nets
have been exempted, NMFS has
retained the overall 150-net cap on the
amount of gear that may be deployed as
specified in the regulations because an
increase in catch per unit effort could
result in the rapid acquisition of the
ACE by sectors, at which point they
would remove their fishing gear. The EA
indicates that this measure could result
in longer soak times or gear left
untended to hold fishing ground, which
could increase inter-vessel conflicts.
However, NMFS has not received any
reports of such incidents occurring
during FY 2010. NMFS maintains that
sectors are responsible for managing the
harvest of ACE by their members, and
sector members remain jointly and
severally liable for any misreporting of
catch. NMFS has approved this
exemption for FY 2011, based on the
same rationale.
Discarding Exemption
Comment 15: Four comments were
received on the exemption from the
regulations prohibiting discarding of
unmarketable fish. NESSN and the NSC
supported the reauthorization of this
exemption request. The Sustainable
Harvest Sector commented that it
wished to withdraw its request for the
discarding exemption. The Sustainable
Harvest Sector was concerned about the
effect this exemption would have on
discard rates and stated that it has been
able to operate effectively under the
existing requirement to retain all legalsized fish for landing. The Sustainable
Harvest Sector does not object to the
exemption being granted to other sectors
that have requested it. The Council
commented that, if this exemption is
granted, it should be done in a way that
allows for the most accurate discard
estimates. The Council also commented
that the proposed rule does not define
the term ‘‘unmarketable’’ with regard to
the discarding of legal-sized
unmarketable fish. Further, the Council
asserted that ‘‘unmarketable’’ should
refer specifically to ‘‘fish that are
damaged and not to fish that are deemed
‘unmarketable’ for reasons such as little
demand, low price, etc.’’
Response: NMFS agrees that this
exemption must be implemented in a
way to most accurately capture discard
estimates. Under this exemption, sector
vessels are required to discard all legalsized fish at sea. This will ensure that
the discards observed by NEFOP
observers or at-sea monitors will
accurately represent the activities on
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23096
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
unobserved trips. The final rule
implementing amendments to FY 2010
sector operations plans initially defined
unmarketable fish as ‘‘any legal-sized
fish the vessel owner/captain elects not
to retain because of condition or
marketability problems.’’ The intent of
this exemption is to permit the
discarding of fish that are depredated or
otherwise damaged. NMFS agrees with
the Council that this definition should
be clarified and therefore, has revised
the definition of ‘‘unmarketable’’ fish to
be any legal-sized fish the vessel owner/
captain elects not to retain because of
poor quality as a result of damage prior
to, or from, harvest. For example, fish
may be damaged from sandfleas, seals,
cetaceans, or fishing gear. The definition
of unmarketable fish will be included in
the sector’s LOA. This exemption does
not authorize captains to discard legalsized allocated fish based on
marketability or availability of market if
the fish are not damaged. NMFS is
requesting additional comments on this
definition of ‘‘unmarketable’’ fish under
this interim final rule and, depending
on comments provided by the public,
may further revise the definition in a
future action. This exemption is not
authorized for members of the
Sustainable Harvest Sector, based on
that sector’s request.
Daily Catch Reporting by Sector
Managers for Vessels Participating in
the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP
Comment 16: The GB Cod Fixed Gear
Sector, which requested an exemption
from daily catch reporting by sector
managers for vessels participating in the
CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, raised a
concern regarding the alternative
reporting method highlighted in the
proposed rule, stating that modifications
to the sector manager weekly report are
expensive to implement. The sector
requested that, should this exemption
be approved, modifications should be
made to VMS software allowing for the
reports to be submitted to NMFS
without the extra cost of software
changes to the sector. The sector
asserted that sector monitoring would
not be impacted, as the sector maintains
the requirement to receive trip catch
data within 24 hr of landings. DMF
supported this exemption, as it only
changes the mechanism for the
submission of the reports.
Response: NMFS agrees with the GB
Cod Fixed Gear Sector that
modifications to existing databases and
systems could be costly to sectors.
Additionally, if NMFS required the
submission of CA I Hook Gear Haddock
SAP information through the sector
manager weekly report, and only a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
subset of sectors elected this exemption,
an unnecessary burden would be placed
on sectors not granted this exemption.
Due to these concerns, NMFS did not
pursue modifications to the sector
manager weekly report to collect this
information. NMFS has approved this
exemption, but will require that vessels
submit this information on a daily basis
to NMFS via VMS, which are the same
reporting requirements as common pool
vessels participating in the SAP. NMFS
believes that sectors will be able to
monitor landings appropriately and take
any necessary action through the
requirement for vessels to submit catch
data within 24 hr of landing.
Gear Requirements in the U.S./Canada
Management Area
Comment 17: DMF supported the
request for an exemption from gear
requirements when fishing in the U.S./
Canada Management Area, commenting
that they do not believe the current
flatfish net restriction in this area has
been effective.
Response: NMFS implemented
restrictions on trawl gear that could be
utilized in the U.S./Canada Management
Area to ensure that TACs are not
exceeded. These net restrictions were
implemented under DAS management
and were designed to control fishing
effort on certain stocks. The exemption
from these gear requirements has been
approved for sectors in FY 2011, given
that they are no longer necessary
because sectors are restricted to an ACE
for each groundfish stock, which limits
overall fishing mortality.
Requirement to Power a VMS While at
the Dock
Comment 18: The Council
commented on the exemption from the
requirement to power a VMS while at
the dock, stating that this requirement
may be considered a reporting
requirement, from which sectors are
prohibited from exemption. However,
the Council believes that this request
does not conflict with the intent of
management measures.
Response: Current NE VMS
regulations allow vessels to sign out of
the VMS program for a minimum of 30
consecutive days, through the request
and issuance of an LOA. NMFS believes
that the request of sectors to power
down VMS units while at the dock is an
extension of the current regulatory
exemption, and would grant sector
vessels additional flexibility by
reducing costs. Further, because sector
managers are responsible for ensuring
that vessels comply fully with the
regulations, issues of potential
enforcement concerns due to this
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
exemption are mitigated. NMFS has
approved this exemption for FY 2011,
but will revoke the exemption if it
undermines enforcement.
DSM Requirements for Handgear APermitted Sector Vessels
Comment 19: Two comments were
received on the requests for an
exemption from DSM requirements for
jig vessels and for DSM requirements,
roving monitoring, and hail
requirements for hook-only or handgear
vessels. The Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector commented in
support of gear-specific exemption
requests, citing the similarity of the
DSM exemption in FW 45 for handgearpermitted common pool vessels. The
Council commented that an exemption
request similar to the exemption for
common pool handgear vessels in FW
45 seemed sensible.
Response: NMFS has approved a
request for an exemption from DSM for
Handgear A-permitted sector vessels,
similar to the exemption in FW 45 for
handgear-permitted common pool
vessels, acknowledging that these
vessels land only small amounts of
groundfish. Without this exemption,
these vessels would likely pay
disproportionately higher DSM costs per
monitoring event.
DSM Requirements for Vessels Fishing
West of 72≥30′ W. long.
Comment 20: Two comments were
received on the request for an
exemption from DSM requirements for
vessels fishing west of 72°30′ W. long.
NSC expressed support for this
exemption in comments on FW 45. The
Council commented that it supported
requests specifying geographic
boundaries or requests for particular
gear types that catch small amounts of
groundfish bycatch.
Response: In a September 1, 2010,
letter, NMFS requested that the Council
consider establishing a geographic
boundary to prescribe where the
dockside monitoring requirements
apply, citing that having each sector
develops a dockside monitoring
program with different geographic
boundaries would be problematic. The
Council addressed this issue by
removing DSM from the list of
prohibited exemptions, thereby
allowing sectors to request such
exemptions. Amendment 16 specifies
that sectors must develop and
implement a dockside monitoring
system that is ‘‘satisfactory to NMFS for
monitoring landings and utilization of
ACE.’’ NMFS has approved this
exemption, given that few groundfish
were caught from the area. This
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
exemption will more efficiently utilize
the financial resources dedicated to the
DSM program.
DSM Requirements for Directed
Monkfish, Skate, and Dogfish Trips
Comment 21: Five comments were
received on the requested exemption
from DSM requirements for directed
monkfish, skate, and dogfish trips. The
Council stated that its support for
exemption requests specifying
geographic boundaries and particular
gear types that catch small amounts of
groundfish bycatch should not be
inferred to mean that it supports general
exemptions from DSM for trips targeting
other species such as monkfish or
skates. The Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector and NSC supported
this exemption request. The GB Cod
Fixed Gear Sector disagreed with the
proposed rule statement that it is
impossible to distinguish directed
dogfish trips from groundfish trips.
NESSN opposed, and NSC concurred
with, NMFS’s assertion that granting
this exemption would decrease
oversight and confidence in discard
rates, because NMFS does not use the
data generated from DSM to establish
discard rates.
Response: NMFS agrees that some
relief from DSM requirements can be
offered through exemptions, and has
therefore approved three requests for
exemption from DSM requirements for
FY 2011, for: Handgear A-permitted
vessels, consistent with a measure
included in FW 45 exempting handgearpermitted common pool vessels from
DSM; for vessels fishing exclusively
west of 72°30′ W. long; and for monkfish
Category C- and D-permitted vessels
fishing on a monkfish trip in the
monkfish SFMA when such vessels are
required to fish with nets containing 10inch (25.4-cm) mesh codends or gillnets.
The exemption from DSM for these
particular monkfish trips specifically
addresses identifiable trips with low
groundfish catch, since information in
NMFS databases show that catch of NE
multispecies on such trips is minimal
(11,345 lb (5,145.01 kg) in FY 2009 and
approximately 1,500 lb (680.39 kg)
thusfar in FY 2010). This approach is
consistent with the Council’s comment
about allowing sectors to request
exemptions from DSM requirements.
While the Council may not have
intended to allow for exemptions for
directed monkfish trips, NMFS believes
that the data show that groundfish catch
on this subset of monkfish trips is low,
and warrants an exemption.
NMFS will be able to identify such
trips through the required VMS
declaration, which specifies the area
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
fished. Granting additional exemptions
specific to directed skate and dogfish
trips is currently not possible because
these trips cannot be clearly identified.
Such trips utilize gear capable of
catching groundfish, and groundfish
retention is permitted, which therefore
requires vessels to declare into the NE
multispecies fishery.
Exemption Requests That Were Not
Approved
Access to GOM Rolling Closure Areas in
May and June
Comment 22: Three comments were
received supporting the granting of
additional access to GOM rolling
closure areas in May and June. The
Council commented that, contrary to the
justification provided by the Port Clyde
Community Groundfish Sector, NEFOP
does not collect information pertaining
to the amount of spawning fish, and
therefore observer data would not be
adequate to measure the impacts of
granting this exemption. The Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector asserted
that, if evidence supports the presence
of spawning activity in these areas
during May and June, the areas should
remain closed. DMF raised concerns
about the potential impacts to spawning
aggregations of GOM cod, stating that
these areas were originally intended to
protect spawning aggregations of fish,
and requested specific information on
sectors’ strategies for avoiding these
aggregations.
Response: NMFS agrees that the GOM
Rolling Closure Areas were initially
established to protect spawning fish,
specifically GOM cod. Table 177 in
Amendment 16 indicates that cod
spawn during the months of January
through May. Although this table does
not indicate cod spawning in June, the
scientific paper written by Wirgin et al,
2007 (referenced above in Exemption
18) indicates that there are some cod
spawning in the GOM in June. Other
groundfish of importance also spawn
during this timeframe. While previous
actions specifically addressed the
protection of spawning cod, NMFS
believes that the protection of spawning
stocks of all species managed under the
NE Multispecies FMP is relevant, and
necessary to the rebuilding and
maintaining of rebuilt stocks. NMFS
agrees with the Council that NEFOP
data cannot be relied upon by a sector
utilizing this exemption to measure the
impacts on spawning fish because
NEFOP observers to not collect
information pertaining to the amount of
spawning fish. Based on this
information, NMFS has disapproved all
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23097
GOM Rolling Closure Area exemption
requests for FY 2011.
Prohibition on Pair Trawling
Comment 23: Four comments were
received on the exemption from the
prohibition on pair-trawling. The
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector
raised concern with this exemption
request, stating that pair-trawling was
prohibited to protect rebuilding stocks
and that many of the NE multispecies
stocks are still undergoing rebuilding.
The Council also raised concerns,
suggesting that this configuration
should first be subject to an
experimental fishery to verify
performance. The Council also provided
comment on potential implementation
concerns. Finally, NESSN and NSC
supported the exemption request by
reiterating the justifications provided by
the sectors originally requesting the
exemption, e.g., that, because sectors are
managed under an ACE they should be
exempt from effort control measures.
Response: NMFS is concerned that
when fishing with a pair-trawl,
selectivity may be decreased, which
could result in increased catch of
prohibited stocks for which sectors have
no ACE. Without an ACE for these
stocks, sectors would have little
incentive to alter fishing behaviors.
Further, the overall impacts of the Ruhle
trawl when fished in a pair trawl
configuration are unknown. For these
reasons and others discussed in
Exemption 19 above, NMFS has
disapproved this exemption request.
Minimum Hook Size Requirements for
Demersal Longline Gear
Comment 24: Two comments were
received on the exemption from
minimum hook size requirements for
demersal longline gear. DMF
commented that the sector would
unlikely to be successful at targeting
flatfish with this exemption and the
exemption would likely have increased
catch of sub-legal-sized fish. The
Council provided comment on the
implementation of discard rates, should
this exemption be approved.
Response: NMFS agrees that granting
this exemption could impact sub-legal
fish, which could result in recruitment
overfishing, despite sectors’ overall
impact on mortality being constrained
by ACE. For this reason, NMFS
disapproved this exemption request.
Minimum Mesh Size Requirements on
Targeted Redfish Trips
Comment 25: Four comments were
received on the exemption request from
minimum mesh size requirements on
targeted redfish trips. NESSN and NSC
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23098
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
supported the exemption request by
reiterating the justifications originally
submitted by the sectors requesting this
exemption. The Council supported
granting sectors flexibility to target
healthy stocks, but commented that the
Council’s established scientific research
study process should consider the
proposed gear, which may lead to better
understanding of the impacts on nontarget species. DMF cited its
participation in the ongoing NMFSfunded redfish study to investigate
strategies and methods to sustainably
harvest the redfish resource, and believe
that, upon completion of the study,
additional data will be available to more
accurately evaluate the impacts of this
exemption.
Response: NMFS agrees that the
established Council process for review
and incorporation of scientific research
is the appropriate mechanism to
determine if this exemption request has
merit. Therefore, approval of this
exemption request is premature at this
time and, it was not approved.
Ruhle and Haddock Separator
Requirements To Utilize the 98.4 in x
15.7 in (250 cm x 40 cm) Eliminator
Trawl
Comment 26: NMFS received four
comments on the exemption request
from Ruhle and Haddock Separator
trawl requirements when fishing in
certain fishery management programs
and requested the use of a smaller trawl
size, the 98.4-inch x 15.7-inch (250-cm
x 40-cm) Eliminator Trawl. The Council
expressed concern that the process for
incorporating modifications to this trawl
gear should be evaluated using the
Council’s established research process.
However, the Council noted it may
support approval if the net design is
similar to previously approved gear.
DMF expressed general concern about
the enforceability of trawl gear
requirements and cautioned against
assuming that the impacts of this gear
would be the same as larger-scale nets
of similar design. DMF concluded by
recommending that approval of this
exemption should be conditional, based
on results of RSC review. NESSN
reiterated, and NSC concurred, with the
justification originally submitted by the
sectors requesting this exemption.
Response: NMFS agrees that the
Council’s established mechanism for the
review and incorporation of scientific
research is appropriate for such changes
to this gear. The RSC, which met on
March 16, 2011, to discuss this issue,
rejected the initial analysis of this gear
and requested additional analysis for
further review. NMFS awaits the
recommendation of the RSC and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
Council on the future approval of this
gear type for vessels fishing in the NE
multispecies fishery before approving
this exemption.
All DSM and Roving Monitoring
Requirements
Comment 27: Four comments were
received on the requested exemption
from all DSM and roving monitoring
requirements. NESSN and NSC
supported the exemption requests. The
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector
supported an exemption from all DSM
requirements, reiterating their concern
about the costs of DSM for vessels
landing small amounts of fish and
operating out of remote ports, stating
that these vessels are disproportionately
impacted by the costs of DSM. The
Council summarized the decisionmaking process behind allowing sectors
to request exemptions from DSM
requirements and stated its intent was to
allow, or support, requests specifying
geographic boundaries or for particular
gear types which catch small amount of
groundfish bycatch, similar to the
Handgear A exemption in FW 45 for
common pool vessels.
Response: NMFS agrees that some
relief from DSM requirements can be
offered through exemptions, and has
therefore approved three DSM
exemptions for FY 2011, for: Handgear
A-permitted vessels, consistent with a
measure included in FW 45 exempting
Handgear A-permitted common pool
vessels from DSM, for vessels fishing
west of 72°30′ W. long, and for monkfish
trips in the monkfish SFMA. The
exemption from DSM for trips
exclusively fishing west of 72°30′ W.
long., and for certain monkfish trips (see
above), specifically address identifiable
trips with low groundfish catch. This
approach is consistent with the
Council’s comment about allowing
sectors to request exemptions from DSM
requirements. Thus, although NMFS has
disapproved an exemption to all DSM
requirements, some exemptions to areaand gear-specific DSM requirements
have been approved, DSM Requirements
for Hook Vessels when the Sector has
Caught less than 10,000 lb (4,535.9 kg)
of Groundfish per Year.
Comment 28: Two comments were
received pertaining to the request for an
exemption from DSM requirements for
hook vessels when the sector has caught
less than 10,000 lb (4,535.9 kg) of
groundfish per year. The Council
supported exemption requests specific
to geographic boundaries or for
particular gear types that catch small
amounts of groundfish bycatch. The
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector
strongly urged consideration of this
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
request, believing the economic burden
outweighs compliance concerns, and
offered to work with NMFS to establish
a suitable threshold.
Response: NMFS agrees with the
Council that an exemption from DSM
requirements for certain vessels that
catch small amounts of groundfish is
appropriate. Therefore, NMFS approved
an exemption from DSM requirements
for Handgear A-permitted sector vessels,
consistent with a measure included in
FW 45 exempting handgear permitted
common pool vessels from DSM. NMFS
believes that this permit-based gear
exemption will help to address the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector’s
concerns for some of its members, and
minimizes enforceability concerns by
having multiple gear exemptions.
NMFS, however, does not support
exempting all hook vessels from DSM
when catching less than a specific
amount of groundfish, and has therefore
disapproved this exemption. To do so
would be inequitable to other gear
types, as well as administratively very
difficult to do. NMFS will continue to
reimburse DSM costs for FY 2011
through a grant to GMRI.
DSM Requirements in May When
Fishing in Certain MA Areas
Comment 29: Three comments were
received on the requested exemption
from DSM requirements for vessels
when fishing in certain MA areas. The
Council supported DSM exemption
requests specifying specific geographic
boundaries. NESSN and NSC supported
this request stating that historic data
show that little groundfish is caught in
these areas.
Response: NMFS agrees that a
geographic boundary for DSM should be
established and has approved an
exemption from DSM requirements for
vessels fishing west of 72°30′ W. long.
For a full response, please see Response
to Comment 21. NMFS believes that
establishing different boundaries within
New England waters where DSM was
exempt would be difficult from both an
administrative and enforcement
perspective, and therefore has not
approved this exemption.
DSM, Roving Monitoring, and Hail
Requirements for Vessels Using
Demersal Longline Gear, Jig Gear, and
Handgear While Targeting Spiny
Dogfish in Massachusetts State Waters
Comment 30: Three comments were
received on the exemption from DSM,
roving monitoring, and hail
requirements for vessels using demersal
longline gear, jig gear, and handgear
while targeting spiny dogfish in
Massachusetts state waters. The
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector
strongly supported consideration of this
request. The Council did not support
the exemption request. The GB Cod
Fixed Gear Sector commented on
NMFS’s inability to distinguish directed
dogfish trips from groundfish trips.
Response: NMFS agrees with the
Council that an exemption from DSM
requirements for vessels fishing in
certain areas that catch small amounts
of groundfish is appropriate, and
approved exemptions from DSM
requirements for vessels fishing
exclusively west of 72°30′ W. long.; and
for monkfish Category C- and Dpermitted vessels fishing on a monkfish
trip in the monkfish SFMA when such
vessels are required to fish with nets
containing 10-inch (25.4-cm) mesh
codends or gillnets. Granting an
additional exemption specific to
directed dogfish trips is currently not
possible because these trips cannot be
clearly identified. Such trips utilize gear
capable of catching groundfish, and
groundfish retention is permitted,
which therefore requires vessels to
declare into the NE multispecies fishery.
Due to these concerns, NMFS has
disapproved this exemption request.
DSM Requirements When a Trip Has
Been Monitored by Either an At-Sea
Monitor or Fishery Observer
Comment 31: Two comments were
received regarding the requested
exemption from DSM requirements
when a trip has been monitored by
either an at-sea monitor or fishery
observer. The Council commented on
this exemption related to the Council’s
November 18, 2011, motion
recommending that NMFS prioritize
trips for DSM that have not received an
at-sea monitor (including NEFOP
observers). The Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector strongly supported
consideration of this exemption,
commenting on the need to balance
monitoring with costs.
Response: The final rule
implementing FW 45 rectifies the DSM
standards to prioritize trips that do not
receive at-sea monitoring (including
NEFOP observers) for DSM selection.
Therefore, the request for an exemption
is not approved under this action since
it is being implemented under FW 45.
For FY 2011, NMFS anticipates funding
DSM coverage for all trips that do not
receive at-sea monitoring (including
NEFOP observers). The Requirement to
Delay Offloading Due to the Late Arrival
of an Assigned Dockside Monitor
Comment 32: The Council
commented on the request for an
exemption from the requirement to
delay offloading due to the late arrival
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
of an assigned dockside monitor, stating
that it might be sensible to set a window
establishing the timely arrival of a
monitor. The Council suggested that
after that window of time expires, a
vessel be allowed to proceed with the
offload of catch, assuming all hail
requirements were fulfilled.
Response: The regulations
implementing Amendment 16 prohibit a
vessel from offloading any fish from a
trip that was selected for DSM prior to
the arrival of the monitor. NMFS
believes that it is the responsibility of
the sector to resolve the late arrival of
a monitor with the sector’s dockside
monitoring provider(s) that the sector
has contracted with to fulfill the DSM
standards. Provisions to address
monitor tardiness could be captured in
individual contracts, therefore, NMFS
has disapproved this request.
Prohibition on Offloading of NonAllocated Species Prior to the Arrival of
the Monitor
Comment 33: The Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector commented on its
opposition to granting an exemption
from the prohibition on offloading nonallocated species prior to the arrival of
a monitor, asserting that allowing partial
offloading prior to the arrival of a
monitor handicaps the monitoring
process and decreases transparency.
Response: NMFS agrees and is
concerned that granting exemptions to
many components of DSM would create
serious loopholes in the existing
regulations. Allowing a portion of an
offload to be unmonitored would
undermine the value of the monitored
portion. Therefore, for compliance
purposes, NMFS has disapproved this
exemption request.
Exemptions Not Considered in This
Rulemaking
Delayed Opening of the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area
Comment 34: The Sustainable Harvest
Sector commented that NMFS did not
adequately address in the proposed rule
the request for its exemption from a
delay in the opening of the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area to trawl gear. The sector
believes that being granted an
exemption allowing vessels to fish in
this area during the summer months is
important for smaller vessels for safety
reasons and would facilitate harvesting
a higher percentage of the sector’s ACE
for stocks in that area.
Response: NMFS is not able to
consider the request for an exemption
from the delay in the opening of the
Eastern U.S./Canada Area to trawl gear
because a delay in opening the Eastern
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23099
U.S./Canada Area to trawl gear is not a
specific regulation to be exempted from,
but rather an in season action to modify
or close access to the U.S./Canada
Management Area at any time during
the FY, or prior to the start of the FY,
pursuant to § 648.85(a)(3)(iv)(D), which
governs the Regional Administrator’s
ability to implement such actions.
NMFS directs the public to the final rule
for FW 45, which announces that NMFS
is postponing the opening of the Eastern
U.S./Canada Area for common pool
(non-sector) vessels fishing with trawl
gear in FY 2011 from May 1, 2011, to
August 1, 2011.
Hail Requirements
Comment 35: The Council
commented that DSM trip-start and tripend hail requirements could be
considered a reporting requirement
instead of a part of the DSM program
and, therefore, cannot be exempted,
because the regulations prohibit sectors
from requesting exemptions from
reporting requirements.
Response: At its November 18, 2010,
meeting, the Council voted to remove
DSM requirements from the list of
reporting requirements, thereby
allowing sectors to request exemptions
from these requirements. The Council
was silent as to whether hails, a
component of DSM, should also be
removed from the list of reporting
requirements. Since the inception of the
DSM program, NMFS has interpreted
hail requirements to be reporting
requirements and believes hails to be
integral to successful compliance
monitoring of vessels participating in
NE multispecies sectors. Hails are used
by DSM providers to effectively deploy
resources, and by NMFS to assist in the
coordination of enforcement efforts.
Therefore, this exemption request has
been disapproved and the partial
exemptions from DSM provisions
granted in FY 2011 have retained hail
requirements for vessels utilizing the
exemptions.
Other Comments
Comment 36: One attorney,
submitting comments on behalf of an
unspecified number of individuals,
raised concerns with the
implementation of catch shares in the
NE multispecies fishery through
Amendment 16. The individual
submitted Amendment 16 litigation
materials as an attachment to the formal
comments.
Response: Concerns regarding
implementation of Amendment 16
sector provisions should more
appropriately be raised to the Council.
Any issues or concerns raised in the
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23100
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
ongoing litigation regarding
Amendment 16 is being decided by the
court in the litigation, and, therefore, it
is not appropriate to respond to them
here; nor are such issues and concerns
directly related to this action.
Sector EA
Comment 37: The CBD commented
that the EAs prepared in support of both
FW 45 and the FY 2011 sector
operations plans do not adequately
evaluate the impacts on a number of
species proposed for listing under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA),
particularly Atlantic sturgeon and
loggerhead sea turtles. The CBD noted
that three distinct population segments
(DPS) of Atlantic sturgeon were
proposed to be listed under the ESA by
NMFS’s Northeast Regional Office on
October 6, 2010 (75 FR 61872), while
the Northwest Atlantic loggerhead sea
turtle was proposed to be listed as
endangered under the ESA on March 16,
2010 (75 FR 12598). They contended
that the FW 45 and FY 2011 sector
operations plans EAs rely upon
previous assessments of impacts to
protected species specified in the
Amendment 16 EIS that was completed
on October 16, 2009. Therefore, they
claimed that the analysis for these
actions is not appropriate, given the
proposed listings of Atlantic sturgeon
and loggerhead sea turtles occurred after
this analysis was completed, and
requested that the analysis be updated.
Further, they questioned how the draft
FY 2011 sector operations plans EA
could conclude that the action would
not result in jeopardy to listed species
prior to completion of the ESA Section
7 informal consultation. The CBD also
noted that the FY 2011 sector operations
plans EA recommended conservation
actions be considered to limit the
potential for adverse effects to candidate
species, such as Atlantic bluefin tuna
and cusk, but described no such
measures under consideration.
Response: NMFS agrees that the
analysis originally included in the FY
2011 sector operations plans EA did not
adequately describe the impacts to DPS
of Atlantic sturgeon and loggerhead sea
turtles. In response to this comment,
NMFS has updated the analysis
supporting this action in the FY 2011
sector operations plans EA to include
analysis of measures on the DPS for
these species, and has concluded that
there will be no significant impact on
Atlantic sturgeon or loggerhead sea
turtles for the expected duration of this
regulation. NMFS is also addressing this
concern in connection with the
approval and implementation of FW 45.
The revised analysis concluded that the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
measures implemented under this final
rule are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of Atlantic sturgeon
between now and the time when a final
listing determination will be made, and
that a conference for the proposed
loggerhead sea turtle DPS is not
required based on determinations and
the incidental take statement in the
2010 Biological Opinion for the
Multispecies FMP. For Atlantic
sturgeon, NMFS Sustainable Fisheries
Division engaged in an informal
conference with NMFS Protected
Resources Division per the ESA
regulations and no additional measures
were recommended by NMFS Protected
Resources. While it is possible that there
may be interactions between Atlantic
sturgeon and gear used in the NE
multispecies fishery, the number of
interactions that will occur between
now and the time a final listing
determination will be made is not likely
to cause an appreciable reduction in
survival and recovery. A final listing
determination for the Atlantic sturgeon
DPS is expected by October 6, 2011.
With the publication of a final listing
rule, the Section 7 consultation for the
NE multispecies fishery would need to
be reinitiated, consistent with the
requirement to reinitiate formal
consultation where discretionary
Federal agency involvement or control
of the action has been retained and a
new species is listed that may be
affected by the action. During the
reinitiation, the effects of the NE
multispecies fishery on the five DPS for
Atlantic sturgeon would be fully
examined.
Furthermore, the draft EA included a
determination with respect to the ESA,
because the regulations at § 402.12(a)
governing the preparation and
submission of a Biological Assessment
(BA) specify that a BA shall include a
determination as to whether any listed
and proposed species and designated
and proposed critical habitat are likely
to be adversely affected by the proposed
action, for review and concurrence by
NMFS. Thus, the draft EA included
draft analysis and findings for review by
NMFS, and for use in the ESA Section
7 informal consultation on the proposed
FY 2011 sector operations plans.
The FY 2011 sector operations plans
EA has also been modified to clarify that
NMFS has initiated review of recent
stock assessments, bycatch information,
and other information for candidate and
proposed species, including Atlantic
bluefin tuna and cusk, which must be
completed to accurately characterize
recent interactions between fisheries
and the candidate/proposed species in
the context of stock sizes. Any
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
conservation measures deemed
appropriate for these species will follow
the information reviews.
Comment 38: One comment was
received stating that the term ‘‘sector’’
has several uses in the draft EA (e.g.,
‘‘sector’’ as a segment of the fishery vs.
‘‘sector’’ as an entity), and requested that
NMFS develop different terms to
distinguish between these different
meanings.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that
the term ‘‘sector’’ has multiple uses in
the draft EA. However, ‘‘sector’’ as an
entity was the term adopted by the
Council for groups of NE multispecies
permit holders in Amendment 13 and is
defined in the regulations at § 648.2.
Therefore, this term will continue to be
used by NMFS for NE multispecies
unless a future Council action renames
these entities.
Comment 39: The DMF supported
NMFS’s decision to consolidate
analyses of the 19 FY 2011 sector
operations plans into one EA, noting
this greatly simplified review.
Response: NMFS agrees that
consolidating the analysis of the 19
operations plans, based on their general
uniformity, rendered the EA more user
friendly, and will continue to try to
identify approaches to further simplify
the review process for future fishing
years.
Comment 40: DMF commented that
no analysis of FY 2010 sector operations
plans’ performance was included in the
draft EA, specifically commenting on a
lack of analysis regarding whether the
impacts of approved exemptions were
as predicted and whether there was any
consolidation and or redirection of
effort that occurred. They further
commented that the information that
was provided was general in nature and
mainly used to predict interactions for
FY 2011. DMF noted that, given the
timing of submission of annual reports
and sector operations plans, it appeared
that the analyses of proposed sector
operations plans would always use 2-yr
old datasets.
Response: As noted by DMF and in
section 1.2.2 of the draft EA, a complete
dataset from the first year of expanded
sector operations in FY 2010 was not yet
available to use in the analysis of
proposed FY 2011 sector operations
plans. NMFS acknowledges that the
concurrent operation of approved
sectors in a given FY, and development
of proposed sectors operations plan for
the following FY, creates a lag in the
data and analysis of actual sector fishing
activities and associated impacts.
However, NMFS uses the most complete
information available in the analysis of
sector operations plans each FY,
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
including predictions provided by the
sectors about the expected fishing
activities of their members in the
upcoming FY. As noted in section 1.2.2
of the Final EA, in future FYs, beginning
with FY 2012, NMFS will have sector
annual reports and complete datasets
from prior FYs, under sector
management, excluding the FY
underway during operations plan
review. This will include certain sectorspecific exemptions to use in the
analysis of newly proposed sector
operations plans for those specific
sectors.
Comment 41: DMF commented that
the data in the draft EA and in Table 4
of the proposed rule were inconsistent,
though they cited the same roster date
of September 10, 2010, and stated that
the proposed rule and all associated
documents should be based on the same
roster information.
Response: NMFS acknowledges
DMF’s concerns, but disagrees that all
associated documents need to be based
on the same roster information. Table 4
of the proposed rule summarized the
roster information that was submitted
by FY 2011 sectors on September 10,
2010, and that was used in preparation
of the IRFA. The roster information
contained in the draft EA was also based
on rosters submitted by September 10,
2010, but which had been updated as a
result of NMFS’s iterative review of
sector operations plans and contracts.
While the commenter might prefer that
all associated analyses be based on the
same roster information, September
roster submissions are only preliminary
estimates provided by sectors and are
used by NMFS to establish a basis and
scope for the analysis of proposed sector
operations plans, including a relative
maximum number of participants, ports,
and ACE. However, the September
roster information is not final, as permit
holders may withdraw and join the
common pool up through April 30 of
the following calendar year, and NMFS
may provide additional opportunities
for permit holders to join a sector prior
to the start of the FY, as it did this year
by extending the roster deadline to
December 1, 2010, which may lead to a
modification of sector membership.
Based on industry request, NMFS again
reopened the rosters for certain permit
holders who acquired permits after the
December 1, 2010, roster deadline. As
noted in section 1.0 of the Final EA,
such changes are minimal and do not
substantively affect the analyses. The
proposed rule contained the most up-todate information regarding sector
membership and proposed ACEs
available at the time of publication,
based on updates by sector managers or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
additions/changes as a result of
extensions to the roster deadline.
Because of this roster flexibility, NMFS
requested that the Council revise the
Amendment 16 roster deadline to
December 1 and the Council
incorporated that change into FW 45. In
future rulemakings, NMFS will
endeavor to note any consistencies in
roster information within the
appropriate documents.
Comment 42: DMF commented that
the Maine Permit Bank should be
referred to as a federally funded, stateoperated permit bank in section 3.2.2 of
the draft EA.
Response: NMFS agrees that section
3.2.2 of the draft EA incorrectly referred
to the Maine Permit Bank as a statefunded permit bank. NMFS has since
revised this and other sections to reflect
this correction.
Comment 43: A comment from DMF
noted that the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector proposed a strategy
in its FY 2011 operations plan (whereby
the sector would cap the percentage of
ACE that could be harvested from the
rolling closure areas and institute a
closure of the area if NEFOP data
indicated a significant amount of
spawning fish were being harvested) to
minimize its impact on spawning fish as
part of its rationale for a request for
exemption from portions of the GOM
Rolling Closure Areas in May and June,
which was described in the proposed
rule but not discussed in the draft EA.
Response: The Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector did propose such a
strategy; however, this strategy was not
analyzed in the EA because not all
sectors requesting exemptions from
GOM rolling closure areas put forward
this strategy. For the purposes of the
analysis, sector exemptions that were
similar were aggregated and the
broadest or ‘‘worst-case’’ scenario was
analyzed. NMFS reviewed the strategy
proposed by the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector and determined it is
not conservation equivalent to the
Rolling Closure Areas, because the
impacts discussed in the EA could
result from the exemption, regardless of
whether this mitigation strategy was
adopted by all sectors.
Classification
Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act), the NMFS
Assistant Administrator has determined
that this final rule is consistent with the
NE Multispecies FMP, other provisions
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other
applicable law, subject to further
consideration after public comment.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23101
This action is exempt from review
under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.
The Assistant Administration for
Fisheries (AA), NOAA, finds good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to establish an
effective date less than 30 days after the
date of publication for the measures
implemented by this final rule. Aspects
of this rule are conditional upon
approval and publication of the final
rule for FW 45. These rules must be in
effect at the beginning of FY 2011,
which begins on May 1, 2011, to fully
realize the environmental and economic
benefits. However, the time available for
this rulemaking and for the final rule for
FW 45 was constrained by multiple
factors, including the development of
FW 45, data availability, and the
scheduling of U.S. and international
management bodies. Due to these
constraints, the rulemaking could not be
completed further in advance of May 1,
2011, and in order to have this action
effective at the beginning of FY 2011, it
is necessary to waive the 30-day delay
period for this rule.
In addition, the AA finds that this
rule relieves several restrictions under
5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), because this rule
helps the NE multispecies fishery
mitigate the adverse economic impacts
resulting from continued efforts to end
overfishing and rebuild overfished
stocks, and increases the economic
efficiency of vessel operations through
the authorization of 19 sector operations
plans for FY 2011. As explained in
detail above, 17 exemptions have been
approved for FY 2011, which provide
increased flexibility to sectors by
exempting them from effort control
restrictions that would be onerous for
fishing vessels whose fishing activity is
constrained by a hard quota.
Failure to waive the 30-day delay in
effectiveness could result in short-term
adverse economic impacts to NE
multispecies vessels and associated
fishing communities, as well as to the
fish stocks subject to this rule. Without
this rule, vessels that have signed up to
join a sector in FY 2011 (836 vessels, 57
percent of eligible groundfish vessels)
would not be able to take advantage of
the flexibility in vessel operations this
rule implements. For example, sector
vessels would receive exemptions from
trip limits, DAS, and seasonal closure
areas that this rule allows. Moreover,
because vessels committed to a sector
may not fish in both the common pool
and a sector in the same FY, vessels
currently signed into a sector would be
forced to cease fishing operations
entirely during the delay in
effectiveness, or forego sector
membership for the entire FY, thereby
losing the mitigating economic
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23102
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
efficiencies of the restrictions relieved
for sector vessels. This would also
reduce the economic efficiency of the
majority of the fleet until such measures
become effective, and cause
unnecessary adverse economic impacts
to affected vessels. For the reasons
above, the requirement to delay
implementation of this rule for a period
of 30 days is hereby waived.
A Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) was prepared for this
rule, as required by section 604 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The
FRFA consists of and incorporates the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA), which was summarized in the
preamble of the proposed rule, the
relevant portions of the proposed rule
describing sector operations plans and
requested exemptions, the
corresponding analysis in the EA
prepared for this action, the discussions,
including responses to public comments
included in this rule, and this summary
of the FRFA.
Description and Estimate of the Number
of Small Entities to Which the Final
Rule Would Apply
This action will affect regulated
entities engaged in commercial fishing
for groundfish that have elected to join
any one of the 19 proposed sectors that
have submitted operations plans for FY
2011. Any limited access Federal permit
issued under the NE Multispecies FMP
is eligible to join a sector (Table 4). The
Small Business Administration (SBA)
size standard for commercial fishing
(NAICS code 114111) is $4 million in
sales. Available data indicate that, based
on 2005–2007 average conditions,
median gross annual sales by
commercial fishing vessels were just
over $200,000, and no single fishing
entity earned more than $2 million
annually. Although we acknowledge
there are likely to be entities that, based
on rules of affiliation, would qualify as
large business entities, due to lack of
reliable ownership affiliation data,
NMFS cannot apply the business size
standard at this time. Data are currently
being compiled on vessel ownership
that should permit a more refined
assessment and determination of the
number of large and small entities in the
groundfish fishery for future actions.
However, for this action, since available
data are not adequate to identify
affiliated vessels, each operating unit is
considered a small entity for purposes
of the RFA, and, therefore, there is no
differential impact between small and
large entities. As of February 1, 2011,
836 of 1,475 eligible permits had elected
to join a sector. Table 4 summarizes the
number and percent of individual
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
permits currently enrolled in a sector for
FY 2011, as well as those predicted to
be active. Since individuals may
withdraw from a sector at any time prior
to the beginning of FY 2011, the number
of permits participating in sectors on
May 1, 2011, and the resulting sector
ACE allocations, are likely to change.
Additionally, NMFS is allowing for a
limited reopening of the roster, through
April 30, 2011, for new permit holders
who acquired their permits through an
ownership change that occurred after
December 1, 2010.
Over the past decade, there has been
a significant amount of consolidation in
this fishery in response to management
measures to end overfishing of, and to
rebuild, groundfish stocks. The recent
implementation of ACLs and AMs, and
the expanded use of sectors under
Amendment 16, has affected fishing
patterns in ways that cannot yet be
quantified and analyzed. Sector
measures were intended to provide a
mechanism for vessels to pool
harvesting resources and consolidate
operations in fewer vessels, if desired,
and to provide a mechanism for
capacity reduction through
consolidation. The reasons why fewer
vessels have fished thus far in FY 2010,
in comparison to FY 2009, may be
related to owners with multiple vessels
fishing fewer vessels, or vessel owners
or sectors using quota differently and
waiting to fish later in the FY to
maximize revenue in response to some
of the efficiencies gained through the
implementation of sector measures in
2010. It is also likely that some vessels
that have not landed groundfish have
received revenue from leasing the
groundfish allocated to them by their
sector or have been fishing in other
fisheries. Thus, fewer vessels are
actively fishing for and landing
regulated species and ocean pout stocks,
with 10 percent of the fishing vessels
earning more than half of the revenues
from such stocks since 2005, leading to
a seemingly continuing trend of
consolidation in the fishery. However,
as alluded to above, this trend began
before the implementation and
expansion of the sector program and,
based on limited data available to date,
the trend is not significantly out of
proportion to FYs prior to the
implementation of Amendment 16.
Further, most proposed FY 2011 sectors
are anticipating no further consolidation
than previously occurred through FY
2010. Five sectors have reported that
they anticipate a smaller percentage of
permits to harvest groundfish for FY
2011 as compared to FY 2010. Based
upon concerns over consolidation raised
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
by the public during the development of
Amendment 16, the Council is currently
working on a white paper regarding fleet
diversity and accumulation limits, and
has begun development of an
amendment to the FMP to address
concerns identified (i.e., Amendment
18).
Description of the Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements of the Proposed Action
This rule contains no collection-ofinformation requirement subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
Description of Steps the Agency Has
Taken To Minimize the Economic
Impact on Small Entities Consistent
With the Stated Objectives of
Applicable Statutes
Joining a sector is voluntary. This
means that the decision whether or not
to join a sector may be based upon
which option—joining a sector or
fishing under effort controls in the
common pool—offers the greater
economic advantage. Since sectors
would be granted certain universal
exemptions, and may request and be
granted additional exemptions from
regulatory measures that will apply to
common pool vessels, sector vessels
would be afforded greater flexibility.
Sector members would no longer have
groundfish catch limited by DAS
allocations and would, instead, be
limited by their available ACE. In this
manner, the economic incentive
changes from maximizing the value of
throughput of all species on a DAS to
maximizing the value of the sector ACE.
This change places a premium on
timing of landings to market conditions,
as well as changes in the selectivity and
composition of species landed on
fishing trips.
Unlike common pool vessels, sectors
bear the administrative costs associated
with preparing an EA, as well as the
costs associated with sector
management, DSM, and at-sea
monitoring. However, FW 45 changes
the required coverage level for DSM to
the level NMFS is able to fund, up to
100-percent coverage through FY 2012,
prioritizing coverage for trips that have
not received at-sea or electronic
monitoring. The magnitude of the
administrative costs for sector formation
and operation is estimated to range from
$60,000 to $150,000 per sector, and the
potential cost for dockside and at-sea
monitoring ranges from $13,500 to
$17,800 per vessel. These estimates
serve to illustrate the fact that the
potential administrative costs associated
with joining a sector may be expected to
influence a vessel owner’s decision. The
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
majority of these administrative costs
was subsidized by NMFS in FY 2010
and will continue to be subsidized in
FY 2011. Whether these subsidies,
which include providing financial
support for preparation of sector EAs,
DSM, and at-sea monitoring, will
continue beyond FY 2011 is not known.
Nevertheless, these subsidies may make
joining a sector a more attractive
economic alternative for FY 2011.
The capability to form a sector in the
groundfish fishery was first
implemented in 2004 through
Amendment 13. Prior to FY 2010, there
were only two sectors operating and
only one sector had been operating
continuously from FY 2004 to FY 2010.
Available data (Table 5) suggest that the
economic performance of the two
sectors that had been operating prior to
FY 2010 was positive. Whether
improved profitability experienced by
these two sectors will translate into
improved performance for all 17 sectors
that were implemented during FY 2010
is not known since the FY is
incomplete. Amendment 16 revised and
expanded sector management and was
analyzed in an environmental impact
statement. The analysis conducted for
Amendment 16 posited that the
combination of relief from specific
regulations and the incentives to change
fishing practices would result in
improved ACL utilization compared to
TAC use rates while the majority of the
groundfish fleet was still operating
under DAS controls. Using a straightline projection approach suggests that
for most stocks the use rates for
aggregate sector ACLs will be higher
than the average observed TAC use rates
compared to FY 2007 and FY 2008. This
assumes that the average weekly catch
rates by sector vessels will remain
constant for the remainder of the FY.
Further, given substantial differences in
ACE across sectors and among members
within sectors, economic performance
may be expected to vary considerably.
Small entity impacts may differ
depending on sector-specific operations
plans. The number of permits that have
23103
enrolled in each sector, as well as the
operating characteristics of the sector,
may have an economic affect on sector
members (Table 1). The number of
permits enrolled in a sector ranges from
7 to 105. The allocation to any given
sector is based on the combined sum of
the PSC for each stock associated with
all permits enrolled in that sector. All
sector operations plans convert the total
ACE into an individual share
proportional to the PSC that each
member brings to the sector. This share
is then allocated to the member to be
fished by that member or traded to
another sector member.
Sector operations plans include a
number of harvesting rules designed to
track catches, as required, but also
contain provisions that require advance
notification of when the sector or sector
member may be approaching a harvest
share limit or the sector’s ACE for a
given stock. This system may provide
the information needed to allow sector
members to more fully utilize their
harvest share.
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF THE NUMBER AND PERCENT OF INDIVIDUAL PERMITS AND LIKELY ACTIVE PERMITS CURRENTLY
ENROLLED IN A SECTOR FOR FY 2011
Number of
individual
permits *
Sector
Percent of
individual
permits
Number of
active
permits *
Percent of
active
permits **
Northeast Fishery Sector II ..............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector III .............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector IV ............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector V .............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector VI ............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector VII ...........................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector VIII ..........................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector IX ............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector X .............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector XI ............................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector XII ...........................................................................
Northeast Fishery Sector XIII ..........................................................................
Fixed Gear Sector ...........................................................................................
Sustainable Harvest Sector 1 ..........................................................................
Sustainable Harvest Sector 3 ..........................................................................
Port Clyde Sector ............................................................................................
Tri-State Sector ................................................................................................
Northeast Coastal Community Sector .............................................................
Maine Permit Bank Sector ...............................................................................
85
95
43
34
19
20
20
60
51
46
11
35
100
105
18
39
19
30
7
5.76
6.44
2.92
2.31
1.29
1.36
1.36
4.07
3.46
3.12
0.75
2.37
6.78
7.12
1.22
2.64
1.29
2.03
0.47
42
47
0
27
5
13
16
25
21
21
6
29
40
38
0
24
6
10
0
49.41
49.47
0.00
79.41
26.32
65.00
80.00
41.67
41.18
45.65
54.55
82.86
40.00
36.19
0.00
61.54
31.58
33.33
0.00
All Sectors ................................................................................................
837
56.75
370
44.21
* Number of permits in each sector is from sector operation plans and EAs submitted as of February 1, 2011. These numbers may increase
due to changes in permit ownership or decrease due to a permit holder dropping out of a sector prior to the beginning of FY 2011.
** In 2010, 453 sector vessels were reported to be active vessels.
TABLE 5—SECTOR CATCHES AND PROJECTED ACL USE RATES FOR FY 2010
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
[May 1, 2010–March 26, 2010]
Percent sector
catch
Stock
GB Cod ........................................................................................................
GOM Cod .....................................................................................................
GB Haddock ................................................................................................
GOM Haddock .............................................................................................
GB Yellowtail Flounder ................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sector weekly
catch rate
(%/week)
69.3
81.0
16.1
41.8
63.6
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
1.4
1.7
0.3
0.9
1.3
25APR3
Projected
FY10 sector
ACL utilization
75.1
87.7
17.4
45.3
68.9
2007–2008
Average utilization rate
44
69
17
51
117
23104
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 5—SECTOR CATCHES AND PROJECTED ACL USE RATES FOR FY 2010—Continued
[May 1, 2010–March 26, 2010]
Percent sector
catch
Stock
SNE/MA Yellowtail Flounder .......................................................................
CC/GOM Yellowtail Flounder ......................................................................
Plaice ...........................................................................................................
Witch Flounder .............................................................................................
GB Winter Flounder .....................................................................................
GOM Winter Flounder .................................................................................
Redfish .........................................................................................................
White Hake ..................................................................................................
Pollock 1 .......................................................................................................
Sector weekly
catch rate
(%/week)
50.3
75.9
52.0
77.7
70.0
57.4
27.8
75.6
29.9
1.0
1.6
1.1
1.6
1.5
1.2
0.6
1.6
0.6
Projected
FY10 sector
ACL utilization
54.5
82.2
56.4
84.2
75.8
62.2
30.1
81.9
32.4
2007–2008
Average utilization rate
174
55
28
24
48
NA
46
114
82
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
1 The 2010 projection of the pollock sector use rate is significantly lower than that of the 2008–2009 average. This is because the revised pollock reference points raised the ACL substantially above the TAC-levels set for either 2007 or 2008.
This action will provide relief from
having to comply with specified
regulations. These regulatory
exemptions include a set of universal
exemptions in Amendment 16, as well
as the additional exemptions requested
by individual sectors. During FY 2010,
a number of exemptions were requested
by individual sectors. To provide
maximum regulatory relief, as well as to
reduce the cost of administering,
monitoring, and enforcing a unique set
of exemptions for each sector, these
sector-requested exemptions were
extended to additional sectors for the
remainder of FY 2010 through
supplemental rulemaking. The
exemptions in this rule were analyzed
as though they were approved for all
sectors, whether it had been requested
or not. However, unlike the universal
exemptions, any of the sector
exemptions approved during FY 2010
must be requested again for FY 2011.
All exemptions requested by the sectors
were intended to provide positive social
and economic effects to sector members
and ports.
The objective of sector management,
as originally developed and
implemented under Amendment 13 and
expanded under Amendment 16, is to
provide opportunities for like-minded
vessel operators to govern themselves so
that they can operate in a more effective
and efficient manner. Sectors developed
the proposed operations plans and
prospective members signed binding
sector contracts to abide by the
measures specified in the proposed
operations plan. NMFS is unable to
develop additional alternatives because
this would require NMFS to develop
sector operations plans, which is
counter to the intent of sectors, as
outlined in Amendment 16.
Accordingly, the proposed operations
plans reflect the management measures
preferred by participating vessels.
Therefore, no other alternatives in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
addition to the No Action and the
preferred alternative were considered.
Under the No Action alternative, none
of the FY 2011 sector operations plans
would be approved, none would be
approved to operate, none would
receive an authorization to fish, and no
exemptions would be granted in FY
2011. Therefore, no sector would
receive a LOA to fish or an allocation to
fish. Under this scenario, vessels would
remain in the common pool and fish
under the common pool regulations.
Because of effort control changes made
by both Amendment 16 and Framework
44, it is likely that vessels enrolled in a
sector for FY 2011 and forced to fish in
the common pool would experience
revenue losses in comparison to the
proposed action. It is more likely under
the No Action alternative that the ports
and fishing communities where sectors
plan to land their fish would be
negatively impacted.
Below is the analysis for the preferred
alternative, which is being implemented
in this final rule. An exemption for the
following requirements has been
granted to the requesting sectors
because each sector’s ACE reduces the
need for effort controls, and there are
perceived economic benefits from such
exemptions: (1) 120-day block out of the
fishery required for Day gillnet vessels;
(2) prohibition on a vessel hauling
another vessel’s gillnet gear; (3)
limitation on the number of gillnets that
may be hauled on GB when fishing
under a groundfish/monkfish DAS; (4)
limitation on the number of gillnets
imposed on Day gillnet vessels; (5) 20day spawning block out of the fishery
required for all vessels; (6) limits on the
number of hooks that may be fished;
and (7) DAS Leasing Program length and
horsepower restrictions; (8) prohibition
on the possession or use of squid or
mackerel in the CA I Hook Gear
Haddock SAP; (9) sink gillnet mesh size
restrictions on the GOM from January
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
through April; (10) extension of the sink
gillnet mesh size restrictions on the
GOM through the month of May; (11)
prohibition on discarding; (12) daily
catch reporting by Sector Managers for
vessels participating in the CA I Hook
Gear Haddock SAP; (13) trawl gear
restrictions in the U.S./Canada
Management Area; and (14) the
requirement to power a VMS while at
the dock; (16) DSM requirements for
Handgear A permitted sector vessels;
(16) DSM requirements for vessels
fishing west of 72°30′ W. long.; and (17)
DSM Requirements for monkfish trips
when fishing in the monkfish SFMA.
Exemption from the Day gillnet 120day block out of the fishery requirement
was requested by the GB Cod Fixed Gear
Sector; the Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector; Northeast Fishery
Sectors III, V–VIII, and X–XIII; the Port
Clyde Community Groundfish Sector;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and
the Tri-State Sector. Existing regulations
require that vessels using gillnet gear
remove all gear from the water for 120
days per year. Since the time out from
fishing is up to the vessel owner to
decide (with some restrictions), many
affected vessel owners have purchased
more than one vessel such that one may
be used while the other is taking its 120day block out of the groundfish fishery,
to provide for sustained fishing income.
Acquiring a second vessel adds the
expense of outfitting another vessel with
gear and maintaining that vessel. The
exemption from the 120-day block
allows sector members to realize the
cost savings associated with retiring the
redundant vessel. Furthermore, this
exemption provides additional
flexibility to sector vessels to maximize
the utility of other sector-specific and
universal exemptions, such as the
exemption from the GB Seasonal
Closure in May and portions of the
GOM Rolling Closure Areas.
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, VI–VIII,
and X–XII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector
requested exemption from the
prohibition on a vessel hauling gear that
was set by another vessel. The
community fixed-gear exemption allows
sector vessels in the Day gillnet category
to effectively pool gillnet gear that may
be hauled or set by sector members.
This provision reduces the total amount
of gear that would have to be purchased
and maintained by participating sector
members, resulting in some uncertain
level of cost savings, along with a
possible reduction in total gear fished.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, V–VIII,
and X–XIII; Sustainable Harvest Sectors
1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector was
requested to be exempt from the
limitation on the number of gillnets that
may be hauled on GB when fishing
under a groundfish/monkfish DAS.
Approving this exemption increases
operational flexibility and provide an
opportunity for a substantial portion of
the fleet to improve vessel profitability.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, V–VIII,
and X–XIII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector
requested an exemption from the limit
on the number of nets (not to exceed
150) that may be deployed by Day
gillnet vessels. This exemption provides
greater flexibility to deploy fishing gear
by participating sector members
according to operational and market
needs.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors II–III and V–
XIII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector
requested an exemption from the 20-day
spawning block out of the fishery
requirement. Exemption from the 20day spawning block improves flexibility
to match trip planning decisions to
existing fishing and market conditions.
Although vessel owners currently have
the flexibility to schedule their 20-day
block according to business needs
(within a 3-month window) and may
use that opportunity to perform routine
or scheduled maintenance, vessel
owners may prefer to schedule these
activities at other times of the year, or
may have unexpected repairs. Removing
this requirement may not have a
significant impact, but would still
provide vessel owners with greater
opportunity to make more efficient use
of their vessel.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, VI–VIII,
and X–XII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector
requested exemption from the number
of hooks that may be fished. These
exemptions provide vessel owners in
these sectors with the flexibility to
adapt the number of hooks fished to
existing fishing and market conditions.
This exemption also provides an
opportunity to improve vessel
profitability. The exemption from the
number of hooks that may be fished has
been granted to the GB Cod Hook Sector
every year since FY 2004, and was
granted to the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector
for FY 2010. Approving this exemption
for these additional sectors extends the
potential economic benefits to more
vessels in other sectors.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the
Maine Permit Bank Sector; all 12
Northeast Fishery Sectors; the Port
Clyde Community Groundfish Sector;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and
the Tri-State Sector requested an
exemption from regulations that
currently limit leasing of DAS to vessels
within specified length and horsepower
restrictions. Current restrictions create a
system in which a small vessel may
lease DAS from virtually any other
vessel, but is limited in the number of
vessels that small vessels may lease to.
The opposite is true for larger vessels.
Exemption from these restrictions
allows greater flexibility to lease DAS
between vessels of different sizes and
may be expected to expand the market
of potential lessees for some vessels.
The efficiency gains of this exemption
for a requesting sector would be limited
because the exemption would only
apply to leases within and between
sectors requesting this exemption. Since
DAS would not be required while
fishing for groundfish, the economic
importance of this exemption are
associated with the need to use
groundfish DAS when fishing in other
fisheries, for example, monkfish.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector
requested an exemption from the
prohibition on the use of squid or
mackerel as bait, or possessing squid or
mackerel on board vessels, when
participating in the CA I Hook Gear
Haddock SAP. Providing relief from the
bait restrictions provides participating
sector vessels with greater operational
flexibility to choose the bait that best
meets fishing circumstances.
Participating vessels are also able to use
the bait of their choice, depending on
expected catch, as well as the cost of
bait.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23105
The exemption from sink gillnet mesh
size restriction in the GOM from January
through April was requested by the GB
Cod Fixed Gear Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors III, VI–VIII, and X–XII;
the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1
and 3; and the Tri-State Sector. The
exemption allows the use of 6-inch
(15.24-cm) mesh gillnets in the GOM
RMA from January 1, 2012, through
April 30, 2012. This exemption provides
participating sector vessels an
opportunity to potentially retain more
GOM haddock, a healthy stock, and
share in the benefits from the stock
recovery. To utilize this exemption, it
would be necessary for participating
sector vessels to purchase 6-inch (15.24cm) mesh gillnets. However, it would
allow a greater catch of haddock, which
may increase revenues for gillnet
fishermen and the ports where they land
their fish, particularly if participating
vessels are able to change fishing
behavior to selectively target this stock
and minimize catch of other allocated
target stocks.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, and
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, VI–VIII,
and X requested an exemption from the
sink gillnet mesh size restriction in the
GOM in May, thereby extending the
sink gillnet mesh size exemption in the
GOM. This ancillary exemption to the
sink gillnet mesh size restriction in the
GOM provides participating sector
vessels an opportunity to achieve higher
profitability. Preliminary estimates
indicate that about half of the available
GOM haddock ACE will not be taken
during FY 2010. This does not
necessarily mean, however, that a larger
share of the GOM haddock ACE will not
be taken, as the FY has another 5
months.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; and
Northeast Fishery Sectors XI–XIII
requested an exemption from the
regulations that currently prohibit sector
vessels from discarding any legal-size
regulated species allocated to sectors.
Sector vessels have had to retain legalsize unmarketable fish, which requires
them to store this fish on the vessel
while at sea, in some cases in large
quantities in totes on deck, which
creates potential unsafe work
conditions. In addition, sector vessels
have had to determine a method of
disposal for any unmarketable fish
landed. Anecdotal information indicates
that some fish dealers dispose of
unmarketable fish for sector vessels as a
courtesy; however, the scope of this
occurrence and any operational costs
incurred by the dealer or vessels is
unknown. A partial exemption from this
regulation would allow sector vessels to
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
23106
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
discard unmarketable fish, and would
provide sector vessels more operational
flexibility and improves safety
conditions at sea. It also relieves the
burden, if any, on sector vessels and
their dealers to find a way to dispose of
the unmarketable fish once landed.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector and
the Northeast Coastal Communities
Sector requested an exemption from the
requirement that the sector manager
submit daily catch reports for the CA I
Hook Gear Haddock SAP, proposing
instead that members submit daily catch
reports directly to NMFS. Eliminating
the daily catch reporting by sector
managers provides some administrative
relief to the sector. Reporting burden of
individual participating vessels remains
unchanged, as they would merely
change the recipient of their current
daily report. This exemption may result
in some cost savings to the operation of
any given sector and therefore reduce
the transactions costs to all sector
members, not only to the individual
vessels or sector members that
participate in the SAP.
Northeast Fishery Sectors II and V,
the Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3,
and the Tri-State Sector requested an
exemption from the trawl gear
requirements in the U.S./Canada
Management Area. This exemption
allows the use of any groundfish trawl
gear, provided the gear conforms to
regulatory requirements for using trawl
gear to fish for groundfish in the GB
RMA. This exemption results in greater
operational flexibility to participating
sector vessels, as these vessels would be
able to better harvest allocation of ACE.
Whether this would result in increased
profitability depends on the ability to
achieve cost efficiencies by reducing the
amount and type of gear necessary to
prosecute the groundfish fishery in the
U.S./Canada Management Area and
elsewhere, and/or the ability to reduce
operating costs if the same amount of
ACE can be taken with less fishing time.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors IV, VI, and X;
the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector, and the Tri-State Sector
requested an exemption from the
requirement to power a VMS while at
the dock. Maintaining a VMS signal
while at the dock, or tied to a mooring,
requires constant power be delivered to
the vessel or constant use of onboard
generators at all times. These
requirements increase the cost of
operating a fishing vessel, whether the
vessel is fishing or not. This exemption
provides the opportunity to reduce the
overhead costs of maintaining a fishing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
operation and would result in some
improved profitability.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors III and V–XIII;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and
the Tri-State Sector requested partial
exemptions from DSM requirements.
NMFS has approved exemptions to
DSM requirements for Handgear A
permitted sector vessels, for vessels
fishing west of 72°30′ W. long., and an
exemption from DSM requirements for
gillnet and trawl vessels on concurrent
multispecies and monkfish DAS when
using 10-inch (24.4-cm) or greater mesh
fishing in the monkfish SFMA. The cost
of DSM for FY 2010 has been subsidized
by NMFS. Based on preliminary data,
the overall average cost associated with
DSM averaged about $0.02 per landed
pound of groundfish, but ranged from
approximately $0.01 to $0.06 per pound
of groundfish landed. The estimated
cost per pound landed for monitored
trips was based on invoices received by
sectors from May–February 2010.
However, not all sectors had sent in
invoices as of the date the average cost
reported herein were estimated, so the
actual costs may differ by sector and
may be substantially different once the
FY has been completed. Sectors are
reimbursed based upon an agreed-upon
formula between the Gulf of Maine
Research Institute and sector managers
to calculate reimbursement for DSM
services, which includes a per-pound
rate of $0.015, $33 per trip monitored,
and $27 per trip requiring a roving
monitor. Using methods similar to that
used to estimate expected revenues for
the FY 2011 and FY 2012 ACLs (i.e.,
based on a linear projection of average
ACL use rates and average discard
rates), the total estimated cost for DSM
for FY 2010 would be $616,000, or 0.8
percent of estimated FY 2010 revenues.
Through Amendment 16, DSM was
scheduled to be reduced to 20 percent
during FY 2011, and the estimated
monitoring cost would be $281,000, or
0.4 percent of the estimated FY 2011
groundfish revenues, however, FW 45
alters the coverage level. NMFS
anticipated that 62 percent of trips will
receive coverage in FY 2011. The actual
overall average DSM cost per pound
landed will be zero for any lease-only
sectors, and may be higher for sectors
with below average landings per trip,
since the trip cost gets spread out over
fewer pounds. Similarly, the average
cost per pound may be lower for sectors
with higher than average landings per
trip. Granting these exemptions will
alleviate all up-front costs associated
with this program, as well as the
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
unreimbursed costs for monitoring of
other stocks, and therefore provide the
opportunity to reduce the overhead
costs of operating a fishing vessel,
which may result in some improved
profitability.
NMFS received several comments on
those exemption requests that NMFS
identified as requests of concern in the
proposed rule; however, these
comments did not provide any new or
additional data to support approval of
these exemptions. For FY 2011, NMFS
did not approve requests for exemption
from the following requirements: (18)
Access to GOM Rolling Closure Areas in
May and June; (19) prohibition on pair
trawling; (20) minimum hook size
requirements for demersal longline gear;
(21) minimum mesh size requirement
on targeted redfish trips; (22) Ruhle and
Haddock Separator requirements to
utilize the 98.4-inch x 15.7-inch (250cm x 40-cm) Eliminator Trawl in areas
where these gear types are approved;
(23) all DSM and roving monitoring
requirements; (24) DSM requirements
for hook vessels when the sector has
caught less than 10,000 lb (4,535.9 kg)
of groundfish per year; (5) DSM
requirements in May when fishing in
several Mid-Atlantic NMFS Statistical
Areas; (26) DSM, roving monitoring, and
hail requirements for vessels using
demersal longline, jig, and handgear
while targeting spiny dogfish in
Massachusetts state waters of NMFS
Statistical Area 521; (27) DSM
requirements when at-sea monitoring
has previously observed the trip; (28)
the requirement to delay offloading due
to the late arrival of the assigned
monitor; (29) the prohibition on
offloading of non-allocated stocks prior
to the arrival of the monitor; and (30)
the requirement to provide a sector
roster to NMFS by the specified
deadline.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector,
Northeast Fishery Sectors II and III, the
Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector, and Sustainable Harvest Sectors
1 and 3 requested access to specific
blocks within the GOM Rolling Closure
Areas (Exemption 18), specifically
blocks 138 and 139 during May and/or
access to blocks 139, 145, and 146
during June. These closure areas were
selected primarily to reduce fishing
mortality on GOM cod at a time of year
where catch rates had been observed to
be high. However, they also serve to
protect spawning fish, as well as
protected species and therefore this
exemption request was not approved for
FY 2011. Given higher catch per unit
effort, sector vessels would have been
able to harvest available ACE at a lower
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
cost, since less fishing time would be
required to harvest the same amount of
available ACE. Whether this would have
resulted in higher profitability is
uncertain, since prices during May and
June tend to be lower due to larger
supplies and somewhat lower fish
quality. During FY 2010, average cod
prices have been above their historic
average. The price effect of increased
supplies of cod entering the market
early in the FY is uncertain, but could
have offset some of the cost savings
associated with being able to obtain
higher catch rates.
Northeast Fishery Sectors V–X and
XIII requested an exemption from the
prohibition on pair trawling (Exemption
19). Pair trawling was originally
prohibited because of its higher catch
rates and impacts to then-declining cod
and haddock stocks. Providing an
exemption allowing for pair trawling
would have provided participating
sector vessels with greater operational
flexibility. However, the high catch rates
that resulted from this fishing practice
while under DAS management may not
have been as advantageous under sector
management unless the practice could
be used to selectively target stocks for
which a sector has a comparatively large
ACE. That is, characterizing the use of
pair trawling as highly efficient may be
accurate from a technical standpoint,
but may not necessarily be economically
efficient unless catch rates of stocks
with limiting ACE can be reduced or
eliminated. This exemption was
disapproved in FY 2011 due to possible
diminished selectivity of the gear and
potential interactions between protected
species.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector and
the Northeast Coastal Communities
Sector requested an exemption from the
minimum hook size (Exemption 20).
This exemption may have improved
operational flexibility for participating
sector vessels, but it was uncertain
whether the ability to use alternative
hook sizes would translate into
improved profitability, particularly if
the larger hook does select for larger
fish, which do tend to fetch a premium
price. Nevertheless, the exemption
would have improved flexibility and
may have allowed delivery of a broader
range of fish sizes to final markets.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector and
Northeast Fishery Sectors II, V–X, and
XIII requested an exemption from the
trawl minimum mesh size when
targeting redfish, a healthy stock. The
6.5-inch (16.51-cm) mesh size has been
argued to be too large to catch Acadian
redfish in quantities that would have
permitted development of a targeted
fishery. The proposed exemption would
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
have offered participating sector vessels
greater operational flexibility. These
sectors proposed that the fishery using
this exemption would have been
monitored using 100-percent observer
coverage, and would have required
daily catch reporting to the sector
manager. Whether the potential
improved catch rates would offset these
added costs is uncertain. As long as the
at-sea monitoring or observer costs are
being subsidized, the only added cost
may have been the requirement for daily
reporting by the sector manager. The
extent to which observer costs would
continue to be subsidized is unknown,
but may have been needed to be taken
into account when assessing the
potential profitability that developing a
targeted redfish fishery may provide.
Northeast Fishery Sectors II, V–X, and
XIII requested an exemption from gear
restrictions in the U.S./Canada
Management Area, and would have
allowed for the use of the 98.4-inch x
15.7-inch (250-cm x 40-cm) Eliminator
Trawl. This exemption would have
allowed the use of a configuration of an
eliminator trawl that differs from what
is currently approved for specific areas,
including the U.S./Canada Management
Area. Allowing this exemption would
have offered greater operational
flexibility, but would still be limited to
the areas and conditions under which
the current eliminator or Ruhle trawl
has already been approved. While this
net may be used in open areas, the use
of this net is prohibited in the Special
Management Program, including the
SAPs, and Gear Restricted Areas. This
exemption was requested because the
specification for approved gear types for
these areas is too large to be utilized by
some of the participating sector vessels.
The extent to which this exemption may
have improved economic profitability is
uncertain, but would have been limited
to vessels that have already purchased
the gear, would have been able to re-rig
existing gear at low cost, and would
have accessed the areas where the Ruhle
trawl is already approved.
The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors II–III and V–
XIII; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and
3; and the Tri-State Sector requested
complete or additional partial
exemptions from DSM requirements. As
stated above, the cost of DSM for FY
2010 has been subsidized by NMFS.
Based on preliminary data, the overall
average cost associated with DSM
averaged about $0.02 per landed pound
of groundfish, but ranged from
approximately $0.01 to $0.06 per pound
of groundfish landed. The estimated
cost per pound landed for monitored
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
23107
trips was based on invoices received by
sectors from May–February 2010.
However, not all sectors had sent in
invoices as of the date the average cost
reported herein were estimated, so the
actual costs may differ by sector and
may be substantially different once the
FY has been completed. Sectors are
reimbursed based upon an agreed
formula between the Gulf of Maine
Research Institute and sector managers
to calculate reimbursement for DSM
services, which includes a per-pound
rate of $0.015, $33 per trip monitored,
and $27 per trip requiring a roving
monitor. Using methods similar to that
used to estimate expected revenues for
the FY 2011 and FY 2012 ACLs (i.e.,
based on a linear projection of average
ACL use rates and average discard
rates), the estimated cost for DSM for FY
2010 would be $616,000, or 0.8 percent
of estimated FY 2010 revenues. Through
Amendment 16, DSM was scheduled to
be reduced to 20 percent during FY
2011, and the estimated monitoring cost
would be $281,000, or 0.4 percent of the
estimated FY 2011 groundfish revenues,
however, FW 45 alters the coverage
level. The actual overall average DSM
cost per pound landed will be zero for
any lease-only sectors, and may have
been higher for sectors with below
average landings per trip, since the trip
cost gets spread out over fewer pounds.
Similarly, the average cost per pound
may be lower for sectors with higher
than average landings per trip. Granting
all or a portion of these exemptions
would have alleviated additional upfront costs associated with this program,
as well as the unreimbursed costs for
monitoring of other stocks, and
therefore would have provided
additional opportunity to reduce the
overhead costs of operating a fishing
vessel, which may have resulted in
some additional improved profitability.
Section 212 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1966 states that, for each rule or group
of related rules for which an agency is
required to prepare a FRFA, the agency
shall publish one or more guides to
assist small entities in complying with
the rule, and shall designate such
publications as ‘‘small entity compliance
guides.’’ The agency shall explain the
actions a small entity is required to take
to comply with a rule or group of rules.
As part of this rulemaking process, a
letter to sector members that also serves
as small entity compliance guide (the
guide) was prepared. Copies of this final
rule are available from the Regional
Administrator. The guide and this final
rule will be available upon request.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
23108
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: April 18, 2011.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–9711 Filed 4–19–11; 4:15 pm]
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES3
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:52 Apr 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\25APR3.SGM
25APR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 79 (Monday, April 25, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23076-23108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9711]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 110201085-1212-02]
RIN 0648-XY55
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern
United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; 2011 Sector Operations
Plans and Contracts, and Allocation of Northeast Multispecies Annual
Catch Entitlements
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule partially approves and implements 19
sector operations plans and contracts for fishing year (FY) 2011. NMFS
received sector operations plans and contracts from the following 22
sectors: The Georges Bank (GB) Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Maine Permit
Bank Sector; the Massachusetts Permit Bank Sector; the New Hampshire
Permit Bank Sector; the Northeast Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors II through XIII; the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; the Rhode Island Permit Bank Sector; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector. This interim final rule
partially approves the operations plans and contracts, and allocates an
annual catch entitlement (ACE) of certain NE multispecies stocks to the
following 19 sectors: The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Maine Permit
Bank Sector; the Northeast Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors II through XIII; the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
The Massachusetts Permit Bank Sector, the New Hampshire Permit Bank
Sector, and the Rhode Island Permit Bank Sector, were unable to fulfill
the roster requirements, and, therefore, were not approved to operate
in FY 2011. Certain exemptions proposed in the operations plans have
not been approved, as explained in detail below. Additionally, NMFS is
modifying, for the purposes of this rule, the definition for
``unmarketable'' fish (see Exemption 11) and will accept further
comment on this definition. NMFS is also accepting further comment on
final sector membership. NMFS will publish a subsequent final rule, if
necessary, making any further changes to this definition or in light of
additional comments on changes to membership of sectors since the
publication of this rule.
DATES: Effective May 1, 2011, through April 30, 2012. Written comments
must be received on or before May 10, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the new definition of
``unmarketable'' fish and changes to sector membership, identified by
0648-XY55, by any one of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Fax: (978) 281-9135, Attn: Allison Murphy.
Mail: Paper, disk, or CD-ROM comments should be sent to
Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.
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 publicly
accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or
otherwise sensitive or
[[Page 23077]]
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, Microsoft
Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
Copies of each sector's final operations plan, contract, the
environmental assessment (EA), and the Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) are available from the NMFS Northeast Regional Office:
Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. These documents
are also accessible via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison Murphy, Sector Policy Analyst,
phone (978) 281-9122, fax (978) 281-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposed rule soliciting public comment on
19 sector operations plans and contracts was published in the Federal
Register on February 28, 2011 (76 FR 10852), with public comments
accepted through March 15, 2011. After review of the public comments,
NMFS has partially approved 19 sector operations plans and contracts
after determining the operations plans to be consistent with the goals
of the NE Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP), as described in
Amendment 16 to the NE Multispecies FMP and other applicable laws, and
in compliance with the proposed measures that govern the development
and operation of a sector as specified in Section 4.2.3 of Amendment
16. Certain exemptions proposed in the operations plans have not been
approved, as explained in detail below.
Background
The final rule for Amendment 13 to the FMP (69 FR 22906, April 27,
2004) implemented the GB Cod Hook Sector in 2004, and the Framework
Adjustment 42 final rule (71 FR 62156, October 23, 2006) implemented
the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector in 2006. The final rule implementing
Amendment 16 (75 FR 18262; April 9, 2010) revised and expanded the
rules for sectors and authorized an additional 17 new sectors,
including the Northeast Coastal Communities Sector, Northeast Fishery
Sectors I through XIII, the Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector, the
Sustainable Harvest Sector, and the Tri-State Sector, in accordance
with the revised Amendment 16 rules. Framework Adjustment 45 (FW 45),
which is being implemented concurrently with this action, further
revises the rules for these existing sectors and authorizes five new
sectors (for a total of 24 sectors). The 5 sectors newly authorized by
FW 45 are the Maine Permit Bank Sector, the Massachusetts Permit Bank
Sector, the New Hampshire Permit Bank Sector, the Rhode Island Permit
Bank Sector, and Sustainable Harvest Sector 3.
In accordance with Amendment 16, the proposed rule for this action
discussed authorization of 22 sector operations plans and contracts for
FY 2011. As discussed in the proposed rule, NMFS received sector
operations plans and contracts from the following 22 sectors: The GB
Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Maine Permit Bank Sector; the Massachusetts
Permit Bank Sector; the New Hampshire Permit Bank Sector; the Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors II through XIII;
the Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector; the Rhode Island Permit
Bank Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State
Sector. This rule partially approves the operations plans and
contracts, and allocates an ACE of certain NE multispecies stocks to
the following 19 sectors: The GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Maine
Permit Bank Sector; the Northeast Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors II through XIII; the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
The Massachusetts Permit Bank Sector, the New Hampshire Permit Bank
Sector, and the Rhode Island Permit Bank Sector, were unable to fulfill
the roster requirements, and, therefore, their operations were not
approved for FY 2011. Since FW 45 revises some rules for all existing
sectors and authorizes an additional five sectors, NMFS suggests that
interested readers review the final rule for FW 45 to fully understand
the measures being implemented in this final rule.
Amendment 16 defined a sector as ``[a] group of persons (three or
more persons, none of whom have an ownership interest in the other two
persons in the sector) holding NE multispecies limited access vessel
permits who have voluntarily entered into a contract and agree to
certain fishing restrictions for a specified period of time, and which
has been granted a TAC(s) [sic] in order to achieve objectives
consistent with applicable FMP goals and objectives.'' A sector's total
allowable catch (TAC) is referred to as an ACE. Regional Administrator
approval is required for these sectors to be authorized to fish and to
be allocated an ACE for stocks of regulated NE multispecies during each
FY. Each individual sector's ACE for a particular stock represents a
share of that stock's annual catch limit (ACL) available to commercial
NE multispecies vessels, based upon the potential sector contribution
(PSC) of permits participating in that sector for that FY. Therefore,
sectors will be allocated all regulated multispecies stocks for which
members have landings history, with the exception of Atlantic halibut,
windowpane flounder, Atlantic wolffish, and Southern New England/Mid-
Atlantic (SNE/MA) winter flounder. Sectors will also not be allocated
ocean pout. Sectors are self-selecting, meaning each sector maintains
the ability to choose its members. Sectors may pool harvesting
resources and consolidate operations to fewer vessels, if they desire.
Concurrent with the implementation of FW 45, NMFS and the states of
Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island have entered into
separate Memoranda of Agreement (MOA) for the administration of state-
managed permit banks in accordance with grants awarded to these states.
Terms and conditions for permit banks include: The permit banks may
only transfer out ACE, it may not transfer in ACE; the permit banks may
only transfer ACE to sectors for use by vessels that are 45 ft (13.72
m) in length or smaller, based out of ports with a population of 30,000
residents or less.
For state permits banks to transfer ACE to approved sectors under
the current regulations, each state permit bank developed and submitted
an operations plan. Although the states of Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, and Rhode Island met deadline requirements when submitting
their operations plans and contracts, they were unable to fulfill
roster requirements in time for their sectors to be considered in this
rulemaking process for FY 2011. The Maine Permit Bank Sector, the only
permit bank sector that met all of the requirements, consists of two
privately held permits, as well as an additional five permits that are
owned by the State of Maine. The permits owned by the State of Maine
must abide by the terms of the MOA.
Sector ACEs
As of February 1, 2011, 836 of the 1,475 eligible NE multispecies
permits, which accounts for 98.8 percent of the historical commercial
NE multispecies landings during the Amendment 16 qualifying period,
have indicated their intent to participate in a sector for FY 2011 (see
Table 1). Following input
[[Page 23078]]
during the public comment period for FW 45, and based on industry
request, NMFS has allowed for a limited opportunity for additional
changes to sector rosters for FY 2011 to accommodate permit holders who
took ownership of their limited access NE multispecies permit(s) after
the December 1, 2010, roster deadline. Reopening the rosters provides
additional flexibility to new permit holders without disrupting the
organization of sectors; however, each sector may decide whether or not
a member may leave the sector and whether or not to accept new members.
This window to reopen FY 2011 sector rosters began on March 23, 2011,
and will end on April 30, 2011. An announcement of this limited
opportunity to reopen sector rosters was sent out to all sector
managers on March 16, 2011, and to all NE multispecies permit holders
on March 23, 2011. All permits enrolled in a sector, and the vessels
associated with those permits, have until April 30, 2011, to withdraw
from a sector and fish in the common pool for FY 2011, if they so
choose. NMFS will publish final sector ACEs, based upon final rosters
for FY 2011 and common pool sub-ACL totals, as soon as possible after
the start of FY 2011 on May 1, 2011. This final rule responds to public
comments on the proposed rule and implements the approved regulatory
exemptions that were requested by the individual sectors.
Table 2 details the maximum cumulative PSC (a percentage) each
sector will receive based on their rosters as of February 1, 2011.
Tables 3a and 3b detail the maximum ACEs (in thousands of pounds and
metric tons, respectively) each sector will be allocated based on their
February 1, 2011, sector rosters for FY 2011. While the common pool
does not receive a specific allocation of ACE, it has been included in
each of these tables for comparison.
Note that individual sector members are not assigned a PSC for
Eastern GB cod or Eastern GB haddock; rather each sector is allocated a
portion of the GB cod and GB haddock ACE to harvest exclusively in the
Eastern U.S./Canada Area. The amount of cod and haddock that a sector
may harvest in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area is calculated by
multiplying the cumulative PSC of the GB cod and GB haddock allocated
to a sector by the Eastern U.S./Canada Area by the GB cod and GB
haddock TACs, respectively.
Each sector is required to ensure that its ACE is not exceeded
during the FY. Sectors are required to monitor their landings, track
their available ACE, and submit weekly catch reports to NMFS. In
addition, the sector manager is required to provide NMFS with aggregate
sector reports on a daily basis when a threshold (specified in the
operations plan) is reached. Once a sector's ACE for a particular stock
is caught, a sector is required to cease all fishing operations in that
stock area until it acquires additional ACE for that stock. Each sector
must also submit an annual report to NMFS and the New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) within 60 days of the end of the FY
detailing all of the sector's catch (landings and discards of all
stocks by the sector), enforcement actions, and pertinent information
necessary to evaluate the biological, economic, and social impacts from
the sector, as directed by NMFS.
In accordance with Amendment 16, at the start of FY 2011, NMFS will
withhold 20 percent of each sector's FY 2011 ACE for each stock for a
period of up to 61 days, to allow time to process any FY 2010 ACE
transfers submitted after May 1, 2011, and to determine whether the FY
2011 ACE allocated to any sector needs to be reduced, or any overage
penalties need to be applied to accommodate an FY 2010 ACE overage by
that sector. At the request of the Council, NMFS is relaxing the May 14
deadline to submit ACE transfers for FY 2010. NMFS will allow sectors
to transfer FY 2010 ACE for 14 days after the date that NMFS provides
final FY 2010 catch data to sectors. NMFS will notify the Council and
sectors of this date in writing.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 23079]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP11.000
[[Page 23080]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP11.001
[[Page 23081]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP11.002
[[Page 23082]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP11.003
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
[[Page 23083]]
Sector Operations Plans and Contracts
All sectors must submit an operations plan and sector contract to
NMFS by a specified deadline to be authorized to fish and receive an
allocation of groundfish for the following FY. Of the 24 (19 current
and 5 newly authorized under FW 45) sectors, a total of 19 sectors met
the operations plan deadline and the roster deadline for FY 2011,
including the Maine Permit Bank Sector. Two of the 24 sectors, the GB
Cod Hook Sector and Northeast Fishery Sector I, again elected not to
submit operations plans for FY 2011, and three sectors, the
Massachusetts Permit Bank Sector, the New Hampshire Permit Bank Sector,
and the Rhode Island Permit Bank Sector, were unable to fulfill the
roster requirements, and, therefore, were not approved for operations
in FY 2011. Two of the FY 2011 sectors, Northeast Fishery Sector IV and
Sustainable Harvest Sector 3, will operate as private lease-only
sectors. The Sustainable Harvest Sector 3 has not explicitly prohibited
fishing activity, and may transfer permits onto active vessels. Each
sector operations plan contains the rules under which each approved
sector would fish. The sector contract provides the legal contract that
binds members to a sector and its operations plan. Most sectors
submitted one document to NMFS that encompasses both the operations
plan and contract.
While each sector conducts fishing activities according to its
approved operations plan, Amendment 16 contains numerous provisions
that apply to all sector operations plans and sector members. All
permit holders with a limited access NE multispecies permit that was
valid as of May 1, 2008, are eligible to participate in a sector,
including holders of permits currently held in confirmation of permit
history (CPH). While membership in each sector is voluntary, each
member (and his/her permits enrolled in the sector) must remain with
the sector for the entire FY, and cannot fish in the NE multispecies
days-at-sea (DAS) program outside of the sector (i.e., in the common
pool) during the FY. Participating vessels are required to comply with
all Federal fishing regulations, unless specifically exempted by a
letter of authorization (LOA) issued by the Regional Administrator, as
part of the approved sector's operations plan, as described further
below.
Sector operations plans may be amended in-season if a change is
necessary and agreed to by NMFS, provided the change is consistent with
the sector administration provisions. These changes would be included
in updated LOAs issued to sector members and through amendments to the
approved operations plan.
Sector vessels are required to retain all legal-sized allocated
groundfish, unless an exemption is granted allowing sector vessels to
discard legal-sized unmarketable fish at sea (see Exemption 10 below).
Catch (including discards) of all allocated groundfish stocks by a
sector's vessels counts against the sector's ACE, unless the catch is
an element of a separate ACL sub-component, such as groundfish bycatch
caught when fishing in an exempted fishery, or yellowtail flounder
caught when fishing in the Atlantic sea scallop fishery. Sector vessels
fishing for monkfish, skate, lobster (with non-trap gear), and spiny
dogfish when on a sector trip (e.g., not fishing under provisions of a
NE multispecies exempted fishery) shall have their groundfish catch
(including discards) on those trips debited against the sector's ACE.
Discard ratios applied to sectors will be determined by NMFS, based on
observed trips.
All vessels that fish in an approved sector, with the exception
noted below, must receive a LOA for FY 2011 to fish under regulations
that apply to the sector in which they are enrolled and to be exempted
from the regulations that otherwise would be applicable if the vessels
were not fishing as a sector vessel. Permits and vessels enrolled in
Northeast Fishery Sector IV, which is a lease-only sector, will not
receive an LOA to fish, as no vessels in that sector are authorized to
actively fish.
Amendment 16 required sectors to develop independent third-party
dockside monitoring programs (DSM) for monitoring landings and
utilization of ACE, and to verify landings at the time they are weighed
by the dealer to certify that the landing weights are accurate as
reported by the dealer. FW 45, which is being implemented concurrently
with this action, changes the required coverage level for DSM to the
level NMFS is able to fund, up to 100-percent coverage through FY 2012,
prioritizing coverage for trips that have not received at-sea or
electronic monitoring. In addition, FW 45 removes DSM requirements (a
reporting requirement) from the list of prohibited exemptions for
sectors.
Each sector operations plan and contract provides procedures to
enforce the sector operations plan, explains sector monitoring and
reporting requirements, presents a schedule of penalties, and provides
authority to sector managers to issue stop fishing orders to sector
members that violate provisions of the contract. Sector members may be
held jointly and severally liable for ACE overages, discarding of
legal-sized fish, and/or misreporting of catch (landings or discards).
Each sector operations plan and contract submitted for FY 2011
withholds an initial reserve from the sector's sub-allocation to each
individual member to prevent the sector from exceeding its ACE. Each
sector operations plan and contract also details the method for initial
ACE allocation to sector members; for FY 2011, each sector will allow
each member to harvest an amount of fish equal to the amount that
member's permit(s) contributed to the sector's ACE.
In order to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) in an efficient manner, a single EA was prepared analyzing all
19 operations plans. The sector EA is tiered from the Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for Amendment 16. The summary findings
of the EA conclude that each sector will likely produce similar effects
that result in non-significant impacts. An analysis of aggregate sector
impacts was also conducted and Finding of No Significant Impact for the
sector EA were issued by the Regional Administrator on April 13, 2011.
Amendment 16 created several universal exemptions that are
applicable to all sectors, including exemptions from: Trip limits on
allocated stocks; the GB Seasonal Closure Area; NE multispecies DAS
restrictions; the requirement to use a 6.5-inch (16.51-cm) mesh codend
when fishing with selective gear on GB; and portions of the GOM Rolling
Closure Areas. Amendment 16 prohibits sectors from requesting
exemptions from year-round closed areas, permitting restrictions, gear
restrictions designed to minimize habitat impacts, and reporting
requirements (not including DAS reporting requirements). FW 45 removes
DSM from the reporting requirements from which sectors may not be
exempted. Sectors may request additional exemptions from NE
multispecies regulations through their sector operations plan.
Additional background information on requested exemptions for FY 2011
can be found in the proposed rule for this action.
Approved FY 2011 Sector Exemption Requests
In addition to the universal exemptions in Amendment 16, sectors
requested 31 additional exemptions from the NE multispecies regulations
in their FY 2011 sector operations plans. After thorough review and
consideration of public comments on
[[Page 23084]]
the exemption requests, NMFS authorizes 17 exemptions from the
following regulations for the individual sectors that requested them,
the first 9 of which were previously approved in FY 2010: (1) 120-day
block out of the fishery required for Day gillnet vessels; (2)
prohibition on a vessel hauling another vessel's gillnet gear; (3)
limitation on the number of gillnets that may be hauled on GB when
fishing under a groundfish/monkfish DAS; (4) limitation on the number
of gillnets imposed on Day gillnet vessels; (5) 20-day spawning block
out of the fishery required for all vessels; (6) limits on the number
of hooks that may be fished; (7) DAS Leasing Program length and
horsepower restrictions; (8) prohibition on the possession or use of
squid or mackerel in the Closed Area I (CA I) Hook Gear Haddock Special
Access Program (SAP); (9) sink gillnet mesh size restrictions in the
GOM from January through April; (10) extension of sink gillnet mesh
size restrictions in the GOM through the month of May; (11) prohibition
on discarding; (12) daily catch reporting by Sector Managers for
vessels participating in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP; (13) trawl
gear restrictions in the U.S./Canada Management Area; (14) the
requirement to power a VMS while at the dock; (15) DSM requirements for
vessels fishing west of 72[deg]30' W. long.; (16) DSM requirements for
Handgear A-permitted Sector Vessels; and (17) DSM Requirements for
monkfish trips in the monkfish Southern Fishery Management Area (SFMA).
Details of these exemptions are discussed below.
This interim final rule approves FY 2011 exemption requests only
for sectors that requested those exemptions through their sector
operations plans and contracts. The accompanying EA has analyzed all
exemption requests as if all sectors had requested the exemptions.
Therefore, sectors not granted an approved exemption may request any of
the approved exemptions at any time during the FY, except the
discarding exemption, and could add these exemptions to their
operations plans and contracts through amendments. NMFS will accept
additional public comment on this approach.
1. 120-Day Block Out of the Fishery Requirement for Day Gillnet Vessels
The 120-day block out of the fishery requirement for Day gillnet
vessels was implemented in 1997 under Framework 20 (62 FR 15381; April
1, 1997) to help ensure that management measures for Day gillnet
vessels were comparable to effort controls placed on other fishing gear
types, given that gillnets continue to fish as long as they are in the
water. Regulations at 50 CFR 648.82(j)(1)(ii) require that each NE
multispecies gillnet vessel declared into the Day gillnet category
declare and take 120 days out of the non-exempt gillnet fishery each
FY. Each period of time taken must be a minimum of 7 consecutive days,
and at least 21 of the 120 days must be taken between June 1 and
September 30. An exemption from this requirement was previously
approved for FY 2010 based upon the rationale that this measure was
designed to control fishing effort and, therefore, is no longer
necessary for sectors because sectors are restricted to an ACE for each
groundfish stock, which limits overall fishing mortality. This
exemption is again approved in FY 2011 based on the same rationale.
Approval of this exemption increases the operational flexibility of
sector vessels and is expected to increase profit margins of sector
fishermen. For additional information pertaining to this exemption and
other exemptions previously approved in FY 2010, please refer to the
proposed and final sector rules for FY 2010 sectors (74 FR 68015,
December 22, 2009; and 75 FR 18113, April 9, 2010, respectively). The
exemption from the Day gillnet 120-day block requirement has been
approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors III, V-VIII, and X-XIII;
the Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors
1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
2. Prohibition on a Vessel Hauling Another Vessel's Gillnet Gear
Regulations at Sec. Sec. 648.14(k)(6)(ii)(A) and 648.84(a) specify
the manner in which gillnet gear must be tagged, requiring that
information pertinent to the vessel owner or vessel be permanently
affixed to the gear. No provisions exist in the regulations allowing
for multiple vessels to haul the same gear. An exemption from this
regulation, which was previously approved in FY 2010 because it was
determined that the regulations pertaining to hauling and setting
responsibilities are no longer necessary when sectors are confined to
an ACE for each stock, would allow a sector to share fixed gear among
vessels, thereby reducing costs. This exemption is again approved in FY
2011 based on the same rationale. Consistent with the exemption as
originally approved, the sectors requesting this exemption have agreed
that all vessels utilizing community fixed gear will be jointly liable
for any violations associated with that gear. Additionally, each member
intending to haul the same gear will be required to tag the gear with
the appropriate gillnet tags, consistent with Sec. 648.84(a). The
exemption from the prohibition against hauling another vessel's gear
has been approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; Northeast Fishery
Sectors III, VI-VIII, and X-XII; the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
3. Limitation on the Number of Gillnets That May Be Hauled on GB When
Fishing Under a Groundfish/Monkfish DAS
Regulations at Sec. 648.80(a)(4)(iv) prohibit Day gillnet vessels
fishing on a groundfish DAS from possessing, deploying, fishing, or
hauling more than 50 nets on GB were implemented as a groundfish
mortality control under Amendment 13. An exemption from the limit on
the number of gillnets that may be hauled on GB when fishing under a
groundfish/monkfish DAS was previously granted in FY 2010 because it
would allow nets deployed under existing net limits under the Monkfish
FMP to be hauled more efficiently by vessels dually permitted under
both FMPs. This exemption is again approved in FY 2011 based on the
same rationale. The exemption from the limitation on the number of
gillnets that may be hauled on GB when fishing under a groundfish/
monkfish DAS has been approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, V-VIII, and X-XIII; Sustainable Harvest
Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
4. Limitation on the Number of Gillnets for Day Gillnet Vessels
Current gear restrictions in the groundfish regulated mesh areas
(RMA) restrict Day gillnet vessels from fishing more than: 100 gillnets
(of which no more than 50 can be roundfish gillnets) in the GOM RMA
(Sec. 648.80(a)(3)(iv)); 50 gillnets in the GB RMA (Sec.
648.80(a)(4)(iv)); and 75 gillnets in the SNE and MA RMAs (Sec. Sec.
648.80(b)(2)(v) and 648.80(c)(2)(iv), respectively). This exemption was
previously approved in FY 2010, and allows sector Day gillnet vessels
to fish up to a maximum of 150 nets (any combination of flatfish or
roundfish nets) in any RMA, and provides greater operational
flexibility to sector vessels in deploying gillnet gear. This exemption
was previously approved for FY 2010 because it is designed to control
fishing effort and is no longer necessary, since each sector is
restricted by an ACE for each stock,
[[Page 23085]]
which caps overall fishing mortality. This exemption is again approved
in FY 2011 based on the same rationale. The exemption from the limit on
the number of gillnets for Day gillnet vessels has been approved for
the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors III, V-VIII,
and X-XIII; the Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector; Sustainable
Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
5. 20-Day Spawning Block
Regulations at Sec. Sec. 648.82(b)(6) and 648.82(g) require
vessels to refrain from fishing in NE multispecies DAS program for a
20-day period each calendar year between March 1 and May 31, when
spawning is most prevalent in the GOM. This 20-day period must be
declared in advance. This regulation was developed to reduce fishing
effort on spawning groundfish stocks and an exemption was approved for
FY 2010 sectors based upon the rationale that the sector's ACE will
restrict fishing mortality, making this measure no longer necessary as
an effort control. This exemption is again approved in FY 2011 based on
the same rationale. An exemption from this requirement provides vessel
owners greater flexibility to plan operations according to fishing and
market conditions. The exemption from the 20-day block requirement has
been approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Northeast Coastal
Communities Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors II-III and V-XIII; the
Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1
and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
6. Limitation on the Number of Hooks That May Be Fished
Current regulations for the GOM RMA, GB RMA, SNE RMA, and MA RMA at
Sec. Sec. 648.80(a)(3)(iv)(B)(2), 648.80(a)(4)(iv)(B)(2),
648.80(b)(2)(iv)(B)(1), and 648.80(c)(2)(v)(B)(1), respectively,
prohibit vessels from fishing or possessing more than 2,000 rigged
hooks in the GOM RMA, more than 3,600 rigged hooks in the GB RMA, more
than 2,000 rigged hooks in the SNE RMA, or more than 4,500 rigged hooks
in the MA RMA. This measure, which was initially implemented in 2002
through an interim action (67 FR 50292; August 1, 2002) and made
permanent through Amendment 13, was designed to control fishing effort.
An exemption from the limitation on the number of hooks that a vessel
may fish was approved for FY 2010 because it would allow sector vessels
to more efficiently harvest ACE and is no longer a necessary control on
effort by sector vessels. This exemption is again approved in FY 2011
based on the same rationale. The exemption from the limitation on the
number of hooks that may be fished has been approved for the GB Cod
Fixed Gear Sector; the Northeast Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors III, VI-VIII, and X-XII; the Port Clyde Community
Groundfish Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-
State Sector.
7. Length and Horsepower Restrictions on DAS Leasing
While sector vessels are exempt from the requirement to use NE
multispecies DAS to harvest groundfish, sector vessels have been
allocated, and still need to use, NE multispecies DAS for specific
circumstances. For example, the Monkfish FMP includes a requirement
that limited access monkfish Category C and D vessels harvesting more
than the incidental monkfish possession limit must fish under both a
monkfish and a groundfish DAS. Therefore, sector vessels may still use,
and lease, NE multispecies DAS.
An exemption from the DAS Leasing Program length and horsepower
baseline restrictions on DAS leases among vessels within individual
sectors, as well as between vessels in different sectors, was approved
in FY 2010. Restricting sectors to their ACEs eliminates the need to
use vessel characteristics to control groundfish fishing effort.
Further, exemption from this restriction allows sector vessels greater
flexibility in the utilization of ACE and DAS. Providing greater
flexibility in the distribution of DAS could result in increased effort
on non-allocated target stocks, such as monkfish and skates. However,
sectors predicted little consolidation and little redirection of effort
to non-allocated species in their FY 2010 operations plans. In
addition, any potential redirection in effort would be restricted by
the sector's ACE for each stock, as well as by effort controls in other
fisheries (e.g., monkfish trip limits and DAS). This exemption is again
approved in FY 2011 based on the same rationale. The exemption from the
length and horsepower restrictions on DAS leasing has been approved for
the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Maine Permit Bank Sector; all 12
Northeast Fishery Sectors; the Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector;
Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
8. Prohibition on the Possession or Use of Squid or Mackerel in the CA
I Hook Gear Haddock SAP
The restriction on the possession or use of squid or mackerel as
bait in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP was originally approved by the
Council in Framework 41, and analyzed in the FEIS for Framework 41, but
inadvertently not included in the regulations implementing Framework
41. To correct this oversight, this provision was implemented in the
Amendment 16 final rule. This restriction was intended to control the
catch rates of cod, as squid and mackerel have been demonstrated to
result in higher catch rates of cod. NMFS received comments on
Amendment 16 that the bait restrictions should not apply to sector
vessels. In the final rule implementing Amendment 16, NMFS stated that
``* * * because the Council did not provide for a specific exemption
from such bait restriction in Amendment 16, NMFS cannot provide a
sector an exemption from the bait requirements for this SAP in the
final rule.'' However, because the bait restriction in Framework 41 was
included under Section 4.2.2.2 ``Requirements for Vessels not in the
Hook Sector,'' NMFS has determined that Framework 41 specified that
this bait restriction applied only to vessels fishing outside of a
sector (i.e., the common pool). Based on this, NMFS intends to revise
the current regulations for this requirement in an upcoming correction
rule and, until the correction is effective, exempt any interested
sector from this provision for FY 2011. Until the correction rule
becomes effective, this exemption from this bait restriction has been
approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector.
9. Sink Gillnet Mesh Size Restrictions in the GOM From January Through
April
The regulations require a minimum mesh size of 6.5 inches (16.51
cm) for gillnets in the GOM RMA (Sec. 648.80(a)(3)(iv)). Minimum mesh
size requirements have been used to reduce overall mortality on
groundfish stocks, as well as to reduce discarding of, and improve
survival of, sub-legal groundfish. An exemption from this requirements
allows sector vessels to use 6-inch (15.24-cm) mesh stand-up gillnets
in the GOM RMA from January 1, 2012, to April 30, 2012, when fishing
for haddock. The designation of this season is consistent with the
pilot program originally proposed in Amendment 16 and is the time
period when haddock are most available in the GOM. Sector vessels
utilizing this exemption would be prohibited from using tie-down
gillnets on trips in the GOM, however, sector vessels may transit the
GOM RMA with tie-down gillnets, provided they are properly stowed and
not available for immediate
[[Page 23086]]
use in accordance with one of the methods specified at Sec. 648.23(b).
Day gillnet vessels granted the sector exemption from Day gillnet net
limits, as explained under Exemption 4, are not subject to the general
net limit in the GOM RMA, and thus are able to fish up to 150 nets in
the GOM RMA. To maximize the flexibility for vessels fishing under both
exemptions, NMFS is allowing Day gillnet vessels granted both the Sink
Gillnet Mesh Size Restrictions in the GOM exemption and the general net
limit exemption to fish up to 150 stand-up sink gillnets in the GOM RMA
during this period (up to 150 nets total in all RMAs). Day gillnets
vessels participating in a sector that have not also been approved for
the general net limit exemption are restricted to the limit of 50
stand-up sink gillnets during this period. To improve enforceability
and increase flexibility, vessels using this exemption must declare
their intent on a trip-by-trip basis through a VMS form. There is no
limit on the number of nets that participating Trip gillnet vessels are
able to fish with, possess, haul, or deploy, during this period,
because Trip gillnet vessels are required to remove all gillnet gear
from the water before returning to port at the end of a fishing trip.
For additional information pertaining to this exemption, please
refer to the proposed and final supplemental rules for FY 2010 sector
operations plans and contracts (75 FR 53939, September 2, 2010 and 75
FR 80720, December 23, 2010, respectively). The exemption from sink
gillnet mesh size restrictions in the GOM from January through April
has being approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; Northeast Fishery
Sectors III, VI-VIII, and X-XII; the Port Clyde Community Groundfish
Sector; Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3; and the Tri-State Sector.
10. Extension of the Sink Gillnet Mesh Size Restrictions in the GOM
Through May
For a full description of the Sink Gillnet Mesh Size Restrictions
in the GOM, please see Exemption 9 of this section. As stated above
under Exemption 9, the implementation of the sink gillnet mesh size
restriction in the GOM during the January through April season is
consistent with the pilot program originally proposed in Amendment 16
and is the time period when haddock are most available in the GOM.
Since fishing effort by sector vessels is restricted by ACE for
allocated stocks, overall mortality is capped. Extending this exemption
through May will provide sector vessels the opportunity to potentially
catch more GOM haddock, a fully rebuilt stock, and will also provide
sector participants the opportunity to more fully harvest their
allocation of GOM haddock, thereby increasing efficiency and revenues
for vessel participating in this program. All provisions specified
under Exemption 8 also apply to this exemption. The extension of the
exemption of the sink gillnet mesh size restriction in the GOM through
May has been being approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, and
Northeast Fishery Sectors III, VI-VIII, and X.
11. Prohibition on Discarding
Current regulations prohibit sector vessels from discarding legal-
sized fish of any of the 14 stocks allocated to sectors while at sea
(Sec. 648.87(b)(1)(v)(A)): GB cod, GOM cod, GB haddock, GOM haddock,
GB yellowtail flounder, SNE/MA yellowtail flounder, CC/GOM yellowtail
flounder, plaice, witch flounder, GB winter flounder, GOM winter
flounder, redfish, white hake, and pollock. Amendment 16 contained this
provision to ensure that the sector's ACE is accurately monitored.
Sectors requested a partial exemption from this prohibition because of
concerns that retaining and landing large amounts of unmarketable fish,
including fish carcasses, creates operational difficulties and
potentially unsafe working conditions for sector vessels at sea. NMFS
has approved a partial exemption from the requirement to retain all
legal-sized fish for FY 2011 sectors, which will allow sector vessels
to discard these fish. However, all legal-sized unmarketable allocated
fish will be accounted for in the overall sector-specific discard rates
in the same way discards of undersized fish are currently accounted
for, through observer and at-sea monitor coverage. The final
supplemental rule to implement amendments to 17 FY 2010 sector
operations plans and contracts initially defined unmarketable fish as
``any legal-sized fish the vessel owner/captain elects not to retain
because of condition or marketability problems.'' The intent of this
exemption is to permit the discarding of fish that cannot be sold
because of physical damage, not because of market price or
availability; the regulations implementing Amendment 16 were developed
to reduce the potential for any high-grading of catch. Therefore, NMFS
is revising its definition of ``unmarketable'' fish. For the purpose of
this regulatory exemption, ``unmarketable'' fish is re-defined as ``any
legal-sized fish the vessel owner/captain elects not to retain because
of poor quality as a result of damage prior to, or from, harvest.''
NMFS is requesting additional comments on this revised definition of
``unmarketable'' fish and, depending on comments provided by the
public, may further revise the definition in a future action. NMFS will
publish a subsequent final rule, if necessary, with any changes to this
definition. The definition of unmarketable fish will be included in the
sector's LOA.
All vessels in a sector opting for this exemption will be required
to discard legal-sized unmarketable fish at sea on all trips (i.e., not
just on select trips). Legal-sized unmarketable fish, as defined by the
vessel operator, will be prohibited from being landed to prevent the
potential to skew observed discards. NMFS intends to modify the sector-
specific discard rates for each sector utilizing this exemption because
this exemption represents a change to the treatment of unmarketable
fish (from landings to discards). Once the discarding exemption takes
effect and the discard rates have been modified, unmarketable fish
discarded by the sector's vessels on observed trips will be deducted
from the sector's ACE and incorporated into the sector's discard rates
to account for discarding under this exemption on unobserved trips.
This exemption will enhance operational flexibility, foster safer
working conditions for sector vessels, and relieve the burden on sector
vessels and their dealers from having to dispose of the unmarketable
fish upon landing. The determination of what fish should be discarded
under this exemption is at the discretion of the vessel operator, but
must be based on physical damage to the fish. There is an incentive for
vessel operators to retain and market as much of their catch of
allocated stocks as possible to maximize the value of the sector's ACE,
because discarded fish will still count against the sector's ACE and be
incorporated into the sector's discard rates, without any financial
benefit. Thus, it is unlikely that this exemption will lead to
additional mortality, but will provide flexibility to sector vessels.
This exemption is expected to result in negligible impacts to allocated
species, non-allocated species, and bycatch, because discarded
unmarketable fish are already dead. Impacts to protected resources and
the physical environment are also expected to be negligible because
overall effort by sectors is limited by an ACE. Implementation of this
exemption for all sectors may increase safety at sea, and may increase
the expected profit margins of fishermen by eliminating any costs
associated with disposal of unmarketable fish, thereby resulting in
[[Page 23087]]
a positive impact on sector participants. The discarding exemption, in
combination with the required reporting of legal-sized unmarketable
fish discarded, will improve the monitoring of this portion of sector
catch, particularly on unobserved sector trips. NMFS cannot add this
exemption to a sector's operations plan in season, because adjusting
sector-specific discard rates mid-season would disrupt the cumulative
year-long dataset used to monitor the sector's ACE. The discard
exemption has been approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; and
Northeast Fishery Sectors XI-XIII.
12. Daily Catch Reporting by Sector Managers for Vessels Participating
in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP
The regulations at Sec. 648.85(b)(7)(v)(C) require that sector
vessels that declare into the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP submit daily
catch reports to the sector manager, and that the sector manager report
catch information to NMFS on a daily basis. This reporting requirement
was originally implemented through Framework 40A, to facilitate real-
time monitoring of quotas by NMFS. Amendment 16 granted authority to
the Regional Administrator to determine if weekly sector reports were
sufficient for the monitoring of most SAPs. Through the final rule
implementing Amendment 16, the Regional Administrator alleviated
reporting requirements for sector vessels participating in other
Special Management Programs (SMPs), but reporting requirements were
retained for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, because NMFS must continue
to monitor an overall haddock TAC that applies to sector and common
pool vessels fishing in this SAP. This rule exempts sector managers
from the daily reporting requirement for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock
SAP.
NMFS evaluated the possibility of using the sector manager's weekly
report, rather than daily reports, to monitor the TAC. Sector weekly
reports are received in a timely enough manner to adequately monitor
other SAPs. However, the weekly reports, in their current form, would
not provide sufficient information, and would require NMFS and all
sectors to update their reporting systems to accommodate any change to
the weekly report to gather sufficient information. Requiring all
sectors to modify their individual systems would produce unnecessary
burden on sectors whose vessels do not participate in this SMP.
However, participating vessels could submit a daily VMS catch report
directly to NMFS containing all required information, analogous to the
requirements for common pool vessels to satisfy this reporting
requirement. Therefore, as proposed, an exemption from the daily catch
reporting requirements for sector managers for member vessels
participating in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP with the requirement
that sector vessels submit daily VMS catch reports directly to NMFS has
been approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector and the Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector.
13. Trawl Gear Requirements in the U.S./Canada Management Area
Current regulations require that a NE multispecies vessel fishing
with trawl gear in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area must fish with a Ruhle
trawl, a haddock separator trawl, or a flounder trawl net. The final
rule implementing Amendment 13 clarified that the restriction to use a
haddock separator trawl or a flounder trawl net was designed to
``ensure that the U.S./Canada TACs are not exceeded. Because both the
flounder net and haddock separator trawl are designed to affect cod
selectivity, and because the cod TAC is specific to the Eastern U.S./
Canada Area only, application of this gear requirement to the Western
U.S./Canada Area is not necessary to achieve the stated goal.'' The
requirement to utilize a Ruhle trawl in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area
was implemented through several inseason actions, and made permanent in
Amendment 16. This gear configuration was originally authorized for its
demonstrated ability to allow the targeting of haddock, an under-
harvested stock, while reducing bycatch of cod and yellowtail flounder
stocks, which were identified as overfished. The addition of the Ruhle
Trawl to gear previously approved (haddock separator trawl and flounder
trawl net) provided added flexibility to trawl vessels.
An exemption from these specific gear requirements will enhance
operational flexibility for sector vessels while not impacting overall
fishing mortality given that sectors are constrained by the allocated
ACE for each stock. An exemption from the gear requirements in the
U.S./Canada Management Area has been approved for Northeast Fishery
Sectors II and V, the Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3, and the Tri-
State Sector. Any trawl gear not currently approved for the U.S./Canada
Management Area, but utilized under this exemption, will be included in
the standard otter trawl discard rate strata. For sectors approved to
utilize this exemption, NMFS will apply the final sector-specific FY
2010 standard otter trawl rate derived for stocks in the Western GB
stock area as the initial discard rate for FY 2011, prior to
transitioning into an inseason discard rate based upon observed trips
in those strata.
14. Requirement To Power a VMS While at the Dock
The regulations at Sec. 648.10(b)(4) require that a vessel issued
certain categories of NE multispecies permits, or participating in a
sector, must have an operational VMS unit onboard. Additionally, the
regulations at Sec. 648.10(c)(1)(i) require that the VMS units onboard
a NE multispecies vessel transmit accurate positional information
(i.e., polling) at least every hour, 24 hr per day, throughout the
year. Amendment 5 first included the requirement for vessels to use VMS
(59 FR 9872; March 1, 1994). While the requirement to use VMS was
delayed until a later action (FW 42 ultimately implemented a VMS
requirement for NE multispecies DAS vessels), NMFS supported polling
due to its ability to insure adequacy of monitoring requirements and
address enforcement concerns, and because it could be beneficial in the
event of an at-sea emergency.
Under certain circumstances, the regulations at Sec. 648.10(c)(2)
allow NMFS to issue a LOA allowing vessels to sign out of the VMS
program for a minimum of 30 consecutive days. An exemption from the
requirement to power a VMS at the dock request is administrative in
nature, and is expected to have negligible impacts to allocated
species, non-allocated species, protected resources, and the physical
environment. Additionally, this exemption provides operational
flexibility for sector vessels and may help to lower the costs
associated with the operation of a VMS unit. Because sector managers
are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their sector members
adhere correctly to the operations plans requirements, the enforcement
concerns related to powering down at the dock are mitigated. For these
reasons, an exemption from the requirement to power a VMS while at the
dock has been approved for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector; the Northeast
Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast Fishery Sectors IV, VI, and X;
the Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector, and the Tri-State Sector.
Vessels will be granted this exemption provided the vessel is at the
dock and not underway. The Regional Administrator reserves the right to
revoke this exemption, should it be determined that the exemption is
being misused or abused. Vessels granted this exemption and electing to
[[Page 23088]]
power down must submit the appropriate VMS declaration, as specified on
the sector's LOA. Since sectors may only request exemptions from NE
multispecies regulations, this exemption only applies to NE
multispecies requirements; vessels must continue to comply with the
requirements of other FMPs for which the vessel is permitted. For
instance, a vessel in a sector granted this exemption that has a
surfclam/ocean quahog permit would still need to have an active VMS 24
hr a day, 7 days a week.
15. DSM Requirements for Vessels Fishing West of 72[deg]30' W. long.
Upon receiving requests for an exemption from the DSM requirement
(Sec. 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1)) for vessels fishing in SNE and MA waters
during FY 2010, the Regional Administrator, in a September 1, 2010,
letter to the Council, requested that the Council consider establishing
a geographic boundary outside of which DSM would not be required. At
its November 18, 2010, meeting, the Council considered this request and
voted to remove DSM from the list of prohibited exemptions.
Several Northeast Fishery Sectors and the Sustainable Harvest
Sector proposed exemptions from areas in the SNE and MA RMAs; the
Northeast Fishery Sectors requested an exemption from DSM requirements
when fishing in certain statistical areas (615, 616, 621, 622, 623,
625, 626, 627, 631, 632, 633, 635, 637, and 638) and the Sustainable
Harvest Sector requested an exemption from DSM requirements for vessels
fishing west of 72[deg]30' W. long. All noted that historical data
indicate that little groundfish incidental catch has been observed in
these areas, and monitoring of such trips is burdensome and not a
beneficial use of financial resources. Using VMS declarations and
Vessel Trip Report (VTR) data, NMFS has verified that little groundfish
has been landed from these areas. For example, VTR data from FY 2009
indicates that of 1,220 groundfish trips fishing west of 72[deg]30' W.
long., 74 trips (approximately 6 percent) landed a total of 11,345 lb
(5,146.01 kg) of groundfish. Similarly, VTR data available from FY 2010
(May 1, 2010 through February 3, 2011) indicates that 8 out of 390
trips (2 percent) fishing west of this line landed approximately 1,500
lb (680.39 kg) of groundfish.
NMFS believes that one exemption area based on a longitudinal line
will better facilitate enforcement and, therefore, has approved the
request for a southern boundary drawn along the 72[deg]30' W. long.
line, where vessels that fish exclusively west of this line on a
fishing trip would be exempted from DSM requirements for that trip.
Vessels fishing under this exemption must stow all gear capable of
catching groundfish consistent with the regulations at Sec. 648.23(b)
while steaming to or from areas west of 72[deg]30' W. long. Sectors
electing to utilize this exemption must coordinate with their
contracted DSM providers to establish a method to exclude these trips
from DSM.
Trip start and trip end hails are used by NMFS to coordinate the
deployment of enforcement resources in monitoring offloads. Therefore,
NMFS will continue to require vessels utilizing this exemption to
comply with all hail requirements. An exemption from DSM requirements
for vessels fishing west of 72[deg]30' W. long. has been approved for
the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, Northeast Fishery Sectors III, V-VI, X-
XII, Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3, and the Tri-State Sector; as
well as Northeast Fishery Sectors VII,VIII, and XIII, which requested
an exemption from DSM requirements when fishing in certain statistical
areas.
16. DSM Requirements for Handgear A-Permitted Sector Vessels
The FY 2011 proposed rule included two requests for exemption from
DSM requirements (Sec. 648.87(b)(1)(v)(B)(1)) for vessels using hook
gear (Exemption 22: DSM Requirements for Jig Vessels and Exemption 26:
DSM, Roving Monitoring, and Hail Requirements for Hook-only or Handgear
Vessels), noting that vessels utilizing this gear type are among the
smallest operators, have historically landed small amounts of
groundfish, and are able to target certain species with little
incidental catch of other allocated groundfish species. The sectors
pointed out that the cost of monitoring these trips is
disproportionately high, due to the comparatively small amount of catch
that this gear type yields, and that the proceeds from these trips may
be less than the cost of deploying monitors.
FW 45 removes DSM requirements in FY 2011 for Handgear A- and B-
permitted vessels, as well as for Small Vessel-permitted vessels
(Category HA, HB and C, respectively) in the common pool, because the
small quantities of groundfish landed by these permit categories would
make monitoring such trips uneconomical. Consistent with flexibility
provided for Handgear-permitted vessels in FW 45, NMFS has partially
approved the two exemption requests highlighted above, allowing limited
access Handgear A-permitted sector vessels to be exempt from DSM
requirements. As explained in the proposed rule, hail requirements
(including trip start and trip end hails) remain reporting
requirements, and sectors may not be exempted from such provisions.
Additionally, hails are used by NMFS to coordinate the deployment of
enforcement resources in monitoring offloads. An exemption from DSM
requirements for Handgear A-permitted sector vessels has been approved
for the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, the Northeast Coastal Communities
Sector, and Northeast Fishery Sectors VI and X.
17. DSM Requirements for Monkfish Trips in the Monkfish SFMA
Amendment 13 specified that sectors are responsible for monitoring
sector catch, and Amendment 16 expanded this requirement. Unless a
vessel is fishing in a NE multispecies exempted fishery specified in
Sec. 648.80, directed monkfish, skate and dogfish trips are considered
a sector trip. Several sectors requested exemptions from DSM while on
directed fishing trips for monkfish, skate, and/or dogfish, contending
that: Data collected from observed FY 2010 trips demonstrate that
little groundfish incidental catch occurs in these fisheries, making
the cost of DSM per pound of groundfish too low to support it; and that
the implementation of DSM in FY 2010 has not met the objectives stated
in Amendment 16 in an economically efficient manner.
NMFS cited several operational concerns about exempting these trips
from DSM in the proposed rule for this action. Vessels fishing on a
directed monkfish, dogfish, or skate trip, outside of an exempted
fishery, must declare a NE multispecies DAS or sector trip through VMS
or IVR prior to starting their trip because the gear utilized on such
trips has the ability to catch groundfish, and because groundfish
retention is permitted. It is currently impossible to distinguish most
directed fishing trips for monkfish, skate and/or dogfish from directed
fishing trips for groundfish because neither the skate nor the spiny
dogfish FMPs currently require VMS. It is not possible for a groundfish
action to implement VMS requirements for fisheries managed under other
FMPs.
Trawl vessels fishing on a NE multispecies DAS or on a sector trip
in the Southern New England RMA must use a minimum 6-inch (15.2-cm)
diamond mesh or 6.5-inch (16.5-cm) square mesh through the body and
6.5-inch (16.5-cm) square or diamond mesh applied to the codend of a
trawl net (648.80(b)(2)(i)). Day and Trip gillnet vessels must fish
with a minimum mesh size of 6.5 inches (16.5 cm) throughout the entire
net (Sec. 648.80(b)(2)(iv)). Monkfish management measures at
[[Page 23089]]
Sec. 648.91(c)(1)(i) require vessels fishing under the monkfish DAS
program with trawl gear in the SFMA to utilize a minimum 10-inch (25.4-
cm) square or 12-inch (30.5-cm) diamond mesh throughout the codend and
for at least 45 continuous meshes forward of the terminus of the net.
The monkfish regulations also require vessels fishing under the
monkfish DAS program with gillnet gear to fish with a minimum diamond
mesh size of 10 inches (25.4 cm) or larger (Sec. 648.91(c)(1)(iii)).
Vessels that are issued both monkfish limited access and NE
multispecies limited access permits must comply with the more
restrictive set of management measures. Therefore, a vessel that is
fishing under concurrent monkfish DAS and NE multispecies DAS on a
sector trip must abide by the more restrictive monkfish gear
requirements.
Since publication of the proposed rule for this action, NMFS was
able to identify a subset of groundfish trips under concurrent
monkfish/NE multispecies DAS. Data from VTRs from April 2010 through
March 2011 for this subset of trips show sector trips declared into the
SFMA monkfish fishery using 10-inch (25.4-cm) or larger mesh, as
required in the Monkfish FMP, landed only a small amount (1,248 lb, or
566.1 kg) of groundfish on 18 trips out of the 847 trips declared in
the monkfish SFMA through March, 31, 2011. Based on this information,
NMFS has approved an exemption from dockside monitoring for sector
trips declared into the SFMA when fishing on a concurrent monkfish/NE
multispecies DAS trip provided that the vessel fishes the entirety of
its trip in the SFMA. Sector vessels utilizing this exemption must have
non-conforming gear stowed as specified in Sec. 648.23(b), and comply
with dockside monitoring hail requirements specified at Sec.
648.87(b)(5)(i)(A). Sector vessels utilizing this exemption must
determine with their dockside monitoring provider how to notify their
provider that a given sector trip is utilizing this exemption.
Therefore, NMFS has partially approved an exemption from DSM
requirements for directed monkfish trips for gillnet and trawl vessels
on concurrent NE multispecies and monkfish DAS trips when declared into
the monkfish SFMA and fishing with 10-inch (25.4-cm) or greater mesh
size nets for the Northeast Coastal Communities Sector; Northeast
Fishery Sectors III, V-X, and XIII; and the Tri-State Sector.
Special Management Program (SMP) Reporting Requirements
Amendment 16 provided the Regional Administrator with the authority
to remove SMP-specific reporting requirements for sectors if it is
determined that the reporting requirements are unnecessary. Consistent
with the provisions adopted under Amendment 16, NMFS retained the
authority to reinstate such reporting requirements if it is later
determined that the weekly sector catch reports are insufficient to
adequately monitor catch by sector vessels in SMPs. For FY 2010, the
Regional Administrator determined that daily SMP-specific VMS catch
reports for vessels participating in sectors were unnecessary, because
sectors were allocated ACE for most NE multispecies regulated species,
and ocean pout, and, therefore, would not be subject to any SMP-
specific TACs or other restrictions on catch; would be responsible for
ensuring that sector allocations are not exceeded; and would provide
sufficient information to monitor all sector catch through the
submission of weekly sector catch reports. For these same reasons, the
Regional Administrator has determined, unless otherwise noted above,
that SMP-specific reporting requirements are not necessary to monitor
sector catch for FY 2011. This exemption from the SMP reporting
requirements for sector vessels will not apply to vessels participating
in the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, as this SAP includes an overall
haddock TAC that is applicable to both sector and common pool vessels
fishing in this SAP. Therefore, the existing requirement for sector
managers to provide daily catch reports by participating sector vessels
is maintained for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP only.
Disapproved Exemption Requests
After