Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; 2015 and 2016 Sector Operations Plans and 2015 Contracts and Allocation of Northeast Multispecies Annual Catch Entitlements, 12380-12393 [2015-05386]
Download as PDF
12380
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 140821699–5191–01]
RIN 0648–XD461
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions;
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Northeast Multispecies
Fishery; 2015 and 2016 Sector
Operations Plans and 2015 Contracts
and Allocation of Northeast
Multispecies Annual Catch
Entitlements
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
We propose to approve 17
sector operations plans and contracts for
fishing years 2015 and 2016, grant
regulatory exemptions for fishing years
2015 and 2016, and provide Northeast
multispecies annual catch entitlements
to these sectors for fishing year 2015.
We request comment on the proposed
sector operations plans and contracts;
the environmental assessment analyzing
the impacts of the operations plans; and
our proposal to grant (in whole or
partially) 19 of the 22 regulatory
exemptions requested by the sectors.
Approval of sector operations plans is
necessary to allocate annual catch
entitlements to the sectors and for the
sectors to operate. The Northeast
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan
allows limited access permit holders to
form sectors, and requires sectors to
submit their operations plans and
contracts to us, NMFS, for approval or
disapproval. Approved sectors are
exempt from certain effort control
regulations and receive allocation of
Northeast multispecies based on its
members’ fishing history.
This document also announces the
target at-sea monitoring coverage rate for
sector trips for fishing year 2015.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before March 24, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2014–0111, by either of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20140111, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Liz Sullivan, 55 Great Republic Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/
A’’ in the required fields if you wish to
remain anonymous).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liz
Sullivan, Fishery Management
Specialist, phone (978) 282–8493, fax
(978) 281–9135. To review Federal
Register documents referenced in this
rule, you can visit: https://
www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/
sustainable/species/multispecies.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Amendment 13 to the Northeast (NE)
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan
(FMP) (69 FR 22906, April 27, 2004)
established a process for forming sectors
within the NE multispecies (groundfish)
fishery, and Amendment 16 to the FMP
(74 FR 18262, April 9, 2010), followed
by Framework Adjustment 45 to the
FMP (76 FR 23042, April 25, 2011) and
Framework 48 to the FMP (78 FR 26118;
May 3, 2013), expanded and revised
sector management.
The FMP defines 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 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.’’ Sectors are
self-selecting, meaning each sector can
choose its members.
The NE multispecies sector
management system allocates a portion
of the NE multispecies stocks to each
sector. These annual sector allocations
are known as annual catch entitlements
(ACE). These allocations are a portion of
a stock’s annual catch limit (ACL)
available to commercial NE
multispecies vessels, based on the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
collective fishing history of a sector’s
members. Currently, sectors may receive
allocations of most large-mesh NE
multispecies stocks with the exception
of Atlantic halibut, windowpane
flounder, Atlantic wolffish, and ocean
pout. A sector determines how to
harvest its ACEs and may decide to
consolidate operations to fewer vessels.
Because sectors elect to receive an
allocation under a quota-based system,
the FMP grants sector vessels several
‘‘universal’’ exemptions from the FMP’s
effort controls. These universal
exemptions apply to: Trip limits on
allocated stocks; the Georges Bank (GB)
Seasonal Closure Area; NE multispecies
days-at-sea (DAS) restrictions; the
requirement to use a 6.5-inch (16.5-cm)
mesh codend when fishing with
selective gear on GB; portions of the
Gulf of Maine (GOM) Rolling Closure
Areas (or as modified by Framework
53); and the at-sea monitoring (ASM)
coverage rate for sector vessels fishing
on a monkfish DAS in the Southern
New England (SNE) Broad Stock Area
(BSA) with extra-large mesh gillnets.
The FMP prohibits sectors from
requesting exemptions from permitting
restrictions, gear restrictions designed to
minimize habitat impacts, and reporting
requirements.
We received operations plans and
preliminary contracts for fishing years
2015 and 2016 from 17 sectors. The
operations plans are similar to
previously approved versions, but
propose operations spanning 2 fishing
years, and include additional exemption
requests and proposals for industryfunded ASM plans. This is the first year
that 2-year operations plans have been
submitted by the sectors, as allowed in
the Amendment 16 final rule. Two-year
sector operations plans will help
streamline the process for sector
managers and reduce administrative
burdens for both sectors and NMFS. Six
sectors that have operated in past years
did not submit operations plans or
contracts. Four of these sectors now
operate as state-operated permit banks
as described below.
We have made a preliminary
determination that the proposed 17
sector operations plans and contracts,
and 19 of the 22 regulatory exemptions,
in whole or partially, are consistent
with the FMP’s goals and objectives,
and meet sector requirements outlined
in the regulations at § 648.87. We
summarize many of the sector
requirements in this proposed rule and
request comments on the proposed
operations plans, the accompanying
environmental assessment (EA), and our
proposal to wholly or partially grant 19
of the 22 regulatory exemptions
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
requested by the sectors, but deny the
rest. Copies of the operations plans and
contracts, and the EA, are available at
https://www.regulations.gov and from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES). One of the 17
sectors, Northeast Fishery Sector (NEFS)
4, proposes to operate as a private leaseonly sector.
The six sectors that chose not to
submit operations plans and contracts
for fishing years 2015 and 2016 are the
Tri-State Sector, the GB Hook Sector,
and four state-operated permit bank
sectors as follows: The State of Maine
Permit Bank Sector, the State of New
Hampshire Permit Bank Sector, the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Permit
Bank Sector, and the State of Rhode
Island Permit Bank Sector. The final
rule implementing Amendment 17 to
the FMP allows a state-operated permit
bank to receive an allocation without
needing to comply with the
administrative and procedural
requirements for sectors (77 FR 16942,
March 23, 2012). These permit banks are
required to submit a list of participating
permits to us by a date specified in the
permit bank’s Memorandum of
Agreement, typically April 1.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Sector Allocations
Sectors typically submit membership
information to us on December 1 prior
to the start of the fishing year, which
begins each year on May 1. Due to a
delay in distributing a letter describing
each vessel’s potential contribution to a
sector’s quota for fishing year 2015, we
extended the deadline to join a sector
until February 18, 2014. Based on sector
enrollment trends from the past 5
fishing years, we expect sector
participation in fishing year 2015 will
be similar. Thus, we are using fishing
year 2014 rosters as a proxy for fishing
year 2015 sector membership and
calculating the fishing year 2015
projected allocations in this proposed
rule. In addition to the membership
delay, all permits that change
ownership after December 1, 2014,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
retain the ability to join a sector through
April 30, 2015. All permits enrolled in
a sector, and the vessels associated with
those permits, have until April 30, 2015,
to withdraw from a sector and fish in
the common pool for fishing year 2015.
For fishing year 2016, we will set
similar roster deadlines, notify permit
holders of the fishing year 2016
deadlines, and allow permit holders to
change sectors separate from the annual
approval process. We will publish final
sector ACEs and common pool sub-ACL
totals, based upon final rosters, as soon
as possible after the start of fishing year
2015, and again after the start of fishing
year 2016.
The allocations proposed in this rule
are based on the fishing year 2015
specifications recommended by the New
England Fishery Management Council
in Framework 53. These allocations are
not final, and are subject to the approval
of Framework 53. We expect a rule
proposing the Framework 53
management measures to publish in
March 2015.
We calculate the sector’s allocation
for each stock by summing its members’
potential sector contributions (PSC) for
a stock, as shown in Table 1. The
information presented in Table 1 is the
total percentage of each commercial
sub-ACL each sector would receive for
fishing year 2015, based on their fishing
year 2014 rosters. Tables 2 and 3 show
the allocations each sector would be
allocated for fishing year 2015, based on
their fishing year 2014 rosters. At the
start of the fishing year, after sector
enrollment is finalized, we provide the
final allocations, to the nearest pound,
to the individual sectors, and we use
those final allocations to monitor sector
catch. While the common pool does not
receive a specific allocation, the
common pool sub-ACLs have been
included in each of these tables for
comparison.
We do not assign an individual permit
separate PSCs for the Eastern GB cod or
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12381
Eastern GB haddock; instead, we assign
a permit a PSC for the GB cod stock and
GB haddock stock. Each sector’s GB cod
and GB haddock allocations are then
divided into an Eastern ACE and a
Western ACE, based on each sector’s
percentage of the GB cod and GB
haddock ACLs. For example, if a sector
is allocated 4 percent of the GB cod ACL
and 6 percent of the GB haddock ACL,
the sector is allocated 4 percent of the
commercial Eastern U.S./Canada Area
GB cod total allowable catch (TAC) and
6 percent of the commercial Eastern
U.S./Canada Area GB haddock TAC as
its Eastern GB cod and haddock ACEs.
These amounts are then subtracted from
the sector’s overall GB cod and haddock
allocations to determine its Western GB
cod and haddock ACEs. A sector may
only harvest its Eastern GB cod ACEs in
the Eastern U.S./Canada Area. However,
Framework 51 implemented a
mechanism that allows sectors to
‘‘convert’’ their Eastern GB haddock
allocation into Western GB haddock
allocation (79 FR 22421; April 22, 2014)
and fish that converted ACE in Western
GB.
At the start of fishing year 2015, we
will withhold 20 percent of each
sector’s fishing year 2015 allocation
until we finalize fishing year 2014 catch
information. Further, we will allow
sectors to transfer fishing year 2014 ACE
for 2 weeks of the fishing year following
the completion of year-end catch
accounting to reduce or eliminate any
fishing year 2014 overages. If necessary,
we will reduce any sector’s fishing year
2015 allocation to account for a
remaining overage in fishing year 2014.
We will follow the same process for
fishing year 2016. We will notify the
Council and sector managers of this
deadline in writing and will announce
this decision on our Web site at:
https://
www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12382
VerDate Sep<11>2014
I:"~L
Jkt 235001
~
{percentage) cacn sector would receive oy stocR tor nsnmg car .lUI~."'
8
'8
"'
"'
2
Jl
u
"'
"
0
"'
I
"'
S<
~
~
"'
"'
~
~~
"'~
0~
~~
il
~g
"'
~
"' ~
8~
UJg
z-
"'
"'
"'
=
·~
~
g
"'
~
<
"'~
0
j
B
~
~
s
"'
i
"'
"'
~ $
~-g
~~
"'
.
!~ I
I
< "
"' = II
~
~~
;;:
"
0
"'
~
;li
PO 00000
NEFS 1
0
0.030624848
0
0.002485194
0
0
0.0375564
0.00855701
0.012746569
9.55103E-07
,1.052060313
3.23398E-06
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0
0
NEFS 2
5.785593397
18 24336498
10 69102283
16.36546783
c .910229097
1444212376
1928095759
7.851111508
12.79803813
3.210723119
18.43848897
3.238568394
I
14.72518372
5.937102218
11 25997801
14.4542362
0.146586484
9.306432621
0.007146692
0 355112441
8865102541
4.054725495
2.838457122
0.019617753
9.535130101
0.766907566
I
1.342069606
4 74811863
2 346367103
_!;~!l6-'.6!1!._
GB Ccd Fixed Gear Sector (Fixed Gear Sec·or)
I
27 6?93ssoa
2.508069188
5 76053223
1.842510985
0 012338526
0 335349757
2 900535294
0.978206727
2.132068565
0.027279132
12 88328537
1.803764995
Maine Coast Communit Sector trvtCCS)
I
0.209472107
4.593908731
0.0387639<9
2.557156843
0.003529542
0659221791
1 050244077
7.550211604
5.059268898
O.OC6781752
1.964107993
o.192279966
i
Frm 00031
Maine Perm.t Bank
I
0.133517853
1.150017115
0.044321553
1.1218695"3
0.013781801
0031749784
0.317541132
1.163875492
0728726396
0.000217063
0.425383217
o.m903914
Northeast Coastal Commumties Sec:or{NCCS)
I C.173tl7914~
0.850781856
0 12156115
0.360314495
0 839234291
0 722094381
0 624502697
0.158814882
0.220566881
0.06824:!855
0.9286S6039
0.297060774
I
2.737307611
5 696352686
7.37B7719<11
2.49840078
4.391881855
3]83187256
c.820665465
1.651452916
1.687468044
c.431476083
0.812834313
0.507473595
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
NEFS 3
1.250350482
NEFS4
4141388572
8.266201641
9 585261~cg_ Ji.3342' 1202_ - - - - - - __2 1622~!J!l:>±_
6.811962892
0.778804124
0.012758113
1.0538226<5
0.290496157
-.611585586
22.56725432
0.482708693
0.500854279
0.665881485
0.513664818
DJ65815742
12.54858197 .
0.07677796
0.149356193
z.e66433258
2.954570521
2.922333454
3.853800992
2.703502218
5.260657286
3 734992188
3.890740903
5.203709303
1.504147303
4.554949429
1.93996288
I
5.303308676
3.909202713
3.293398898
-o 078BOr2
4 052928675
134400C053
3.5257f!7712
3 238628692
12 94879457
0 7467 1 628
511193640~
I
i
0 584Sl77028
0 821143888
0 709754587
I
NEFS 5
9.285854477
------·-- _8 493233037
0691705149
- - - - - - _22~:JZ2:1§9_1_ c-l.cB1664083 t~~33415!3<1:?__. _fi_Q_5_1~')?~8
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
4 661795742
0.389582664
4.614051211
QL69838734
NEFS 8
I
I
I
I
6.1<4290183
0.467653487
5.998225373
0.209189789
11.26214114
5 962375546
6.429443155
1.720618673
2.570311936
15.50532661
3.163884539
1o.o2149331
NEFS 9
I
I
14.22968847
1.7 45530387
11 59904763
4.8030668'2
26.77690025
7 896063683
10.42613668
8.267330649
8.274748241
39.53996927
2.4500€7748
18.36278683
NEFS 10
I
0.729079458
5.2' 1425491
0 25110816
2.537642334
0.001554983
0 547576942
12.6910265
1.70226778
2.39330£1197
O.u10736743
17.86097648
0.400460279
13 61584944
o.0381c2J35
3.214095399
0.001526991
0019512587
2 580229504
2.035916251
2.072650077
0.003308219
7.96206419'
0.897737741
15 96691598
0.952525702
24.74483888
18.82293704
4 990558725
5.158650568
6.203321063
c .0015200€7
1.139033486
0.000259498
0.0311743'2
2.03069E-05
1.8297E-05
0021775341
0.028468044
0.006158356
NEFS 6
NEFS 7
NEF311
NEFS 13
Nsw Hampshire Permit 3ank
I
S'Jstainable Harv"esl Sector 1
I
s~sta!noble
I
I
I
Harvesl Seclor 3
09MRP1
Common Pool
613956226
----------0.105160627
o.548979457
0.512752812
0.607472949
5.824426848
4.150679805
4.226744874
0.727751379
I
I
I
o.s45032258
o.893a30738
1.3882111)<18
2.248924914
o.c21803495
I
1.982725124
4.830691483
9.436352239
7.237218376
2.333512423
10.97508139
i
3.977258859
1.744848414
2.270555669
3.23661E-06
0:060320275
7.8048CE-05 I 0.0'9373158
0.081220063
0.110853509
39 56037962
I
i
Sectors Total
EP09MR15.000
~
~
"
&!
20.64126839
19 67078936
34 32389115
.:12.7G093197
14 08003285
8 306255132
13 24545693
39.48139985
.14.43846704
17 40442314
10 27273026
19.28481204
I
51 2369025
50 73902733
o.27688940"
0.148129006
0.381148141
0.065262008
2.m947963
2 389718695
1.109488783
0.617194407
0.616807632
0.567337392
1.31685818
uso121027
c.170949962
0.147986599
0 04944612
98.07105319
97.66970431
99.28521636
99.00946333
98.37637828
81.71936888
96.59511696
98.04988631
97.96509661
99.22949745
95.54514102
87.94836816
99.459531166
99.27018187
99.33113414
1.9279468'
2.330295592
0.714783536
0.990536672
'.623621723
18.28063112
3404883037
1.950113682
2.034903388
0.770502551
4.4548;58982
12.05163174
I
I
I
c.540469341
0.729818134
0.668265864
* The data in this table are based on fishing year 2014 sector rosters.
t For fishing year 2015,6,94 percent of the GB cod ACL would be allocated for the Eastern U.S./Canada Area, while 8L62 percent of the GB haddock ACL would be allocated for the
Eastern li.S,;Canada Area.
t SNE/MA Yellowtail Flounder refers to the SNE/Mid-Atlantic stock. CC/COM Yellowtail Flounder refers to the Cape Cod/GOM stock.
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
IaOIC 1. Lumutanvc
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
--
--------
-
,----7--- ----,7 ·-' ------7---
"'
E
"'
2
~
Jkt 235001
s
'-'
"'
(/)
1i)
s
"'
..,
"'
..,
LJJ
0
0
u
u
0
aJ
u
aJ
(.!)
(.!)
0
(.!)
"'
c:
u::
"'
u::
:a:
1-
0
c:::
(.!)
"'
aJ
::r:
aJ
L.L.
1-
::t:
"0
"0
>:::;;
~
2
(.!)
(.!)
1-
>-
>-
.52
::I
u::
"'
"'
§
u::
ill
c:
.s
~
3i:-1!5
c::: <::
-~
LJJ
::t:
:i§:
.c:
-~
.c:
0
~
<::
~
c:::
PO 00000
Frm 00032
666
545
2232
608
421
1146
4
1 i
200
158
510
153
39
0
4
29
30
29
1
111
MCCS
1
8
21
15
3
54
0
8
11
234
68
0
Maine Permit Bank
0
5
5
17
4
24
0
0
3
36
10
0
6
4
48
11
8
4
9
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
NEFS2
16
212
83
4186
943
346
8
18
19s
I
0
Fmt 4702
NEFS 3
3
46
66
57
13
197
0
4
9o
NEFS4
11
152
44
2089
470
175
9
29
55
"'
17
508
0
0
a..
s
52 I
6 i
2255
0
Vl
c.>
""
.52
0:::
11
0
-""
~
(.!)
1015
NEFS 1
15
0
(.!)
"'
"'
E
z
(/)
:i§:
aJ
~
UJLL:
~
3:
76
NCCS
~
~
0
.c:
u
c:
::I
::I
L.L.
E
"0
"C
c:
c:
-~
0
(/)
Fixed Gear Sector
c:
.52
0
0
"'
"'
c::
::I
:;;
:;;
:;;
..,
"0
'i'ij
c:
::I
::I
0
#
a;
c:
"0
---"0
"0
~
..,
"'
..,
0
(.!)
----
:;;
-""
c.>
"C
:i§:
--- --------
-"'
s
"'
"'
-""
0
"'
..,
::t:
"'
aJ
LJJ
"C
-----
1i)
1i)
1i)
----~-
I
I
I
5
3
3
8
9
I
105
78
0
0
0
0
oI
0
0
0
244
172
134
159
93
i
3582
568
3406
I
I
326
455
2060
1614
771
1857
32
126
38
1
82
22
288
114
29
54
37
i
5 i
Sfmt 4725
2
29
0
413
93
6
7
277
8
105
13
1144
258
81
12
65
38
NEFS 7
13
171
2
1807
407
10
43
50
24 I
16
9
21
1
19
14
121
NEFS 5
NEFS6
361 ;
70
63
39
56 i
1290
374
996
109
44
539
6
147 !
142
79
215
i
I
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
NEFS 8
17
225
2
2349
529
4
48
73
65
I
53
35
646
27
289 :
NEFS9
39
522
8
4542
1023
101
115
97
105 '
257
111
1648
21
529
NEFS 10
2
27
24
98
22
54
0
7
128
I
26 I
5o I
oI
53
32
0
154
NEFS 11
1
15
62
15
3
68
0
0
NEFS 13
22
292
4
6252
1408
20
106
231
New Hampshire Permit Bank
0
0
5
0
0
1
0
0
Sustainable Harvest Sector 1
56
757
90
13439
3026
903
61
102
134
Sustainable Harvest Sector 3
1
10
1
149
34
1
9
29
11
3596
446
38874
8753
2091
423
1003
65
28
0
19
160
83
302
20
1
0
0
1
134
49
184
I
21 I
1417
397
1278
133
86
420
1:
I
482
463
2854
I
968
167
687
5
8
34
I
11966
I
316
463
726
89
12464
4858
I
19
8
24
11
39
i
42
14
15
9751
3044
1317
4137
826
2532 I
24194
9505
30045
21
224
70
Common Pool
5
71
11
280
63
7
61
27
32
38
131
34 I
347 I
*The data in this table are based on fishing year 2014 sector rosters.
"Numbers are rounded to the nearest thousand lbs. In some cases, this table shows an allocation ofO, but that sector may be allocated a small amount of that stock in tens or hundreds pounds.
"The data in the table represent the total allocations to each sector. NMFS will withhold 20 percent of a sector's total ACE at the start of the fishing year.
t We have used preliminary ACLs to estimate each sector's ACE.
09MRP1
1226
0 :
555
202
Sectors Total
268
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
--·-
12383
EP09MR15.001
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12384
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
dACEC
'
(])
"'
UJ
"'
z
.....
.8
u
"0
0
(.)
IXl
(])
(.!)
(/)
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
09MRP1
must have been compliant with
reporting requirements from all
previous years, including the year-end
reporting requirements found at
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
the September 2, 2014, deadline for
fishing years 2015 and 2016. In order to
approve a sector’s operations plan for
fishing years 2015 and 2016, that sector
PO 00000
Fixed Gear Sector
MCCS
Maine Permit Bank
NCCS
NEFS 1
NEFS2
NEFS3
NEFS4 "- ---·---- ---- ----· -- - .
NEFS5
NEFS6
NEFS 7
NEFS8
NEFS9
NEFS10
NEFS 11
NEFS 13
New Hampshire Permit Bank
Sustainable Harvest Sector 1
Sustainable Harvest Sector 3
Sectors Total
Common Pool
·~·~~·-·-~----
tric tons). bv stock. f1
"
2014
EP09MR15.002
Table 3. P
12385
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
§ 648.87(b)(1)(vi)(C). Approved
operations plans, provided on our Web
site as a single document for each
sector, not only contain the rules under
which each sector would fish, but also
provide the legal contract that binds
each member to the sector for the length
of the sector’s operations plan. Each
sector’s operations plan, and sector
members, must comply with the
regulations governing sectors, found at
§ 648.87. In addition, each sector must
conduct fishing activities as detailed in
its approved operations plan.
Any permit holder with a limited
access NE multispecies permit that was
valid as of May 1, 2008, is eligible to
participate in a sector, including an
inactive permit currently held in
confirmation of permit history. If a
permit holder officially enrolls a permit
in a sector and the fishing year begins,
then that permit must remain in the
sector for the entire fishing year, and
cannot fish in the NE multispecies
fishery outside of the sector (i.e., in the
common pool) during the fishing year.
Participating vessels are required to
comply with all pertinent Federal
fishing regulations, except as
specifically exempted in the letter of
authorization (LOA) issued by the
Regional Administrator, which details
any approved exemptions from
regulations. If, during a fishing year, or
between fishing years 2015 and 2016, a
sector requests an exemption that we
have already approved, or proposes a
change to administrative provisions, we
may amend the sector operations plans.
Should any amendments require
modifications to LOAs, we would
include these changes in updated LOAs
and provide these to the appropriate
sector members.
As in previous years, we retain the
right to revoke exemptions in-season for
the following reasons: If we determine
that the exemption jeopardizes
management measures, objectives, or
rebuilding efforts; if the exemption
results in unforeseen negative impacts
on other managed fish stocks, habitat, or
protected resources; if the exemption
causes enforcement concerns; if catch
from trips utilizing the exemption
cannot properly be monitored; or if a
sector is not meeting certain
requirements. If it becomes necessary to
revoke the exemption, we will do so
through a process consistent with the
Administrative Procedure Act.
Each sector is required to ensure that
it does not exceed its ACE during the
fishing year. Sector vessels are required
to retain all legal-sized allocated NE
multispecies stocks, unless a sector is
granted an exemption allowing its
member vessels to discard legal-sized
unmarketable fish at sea. Catch (defined
as landings and discards) of all allocated
NE multispecies stocks by a sector’s
vessels count against the sector’s
allocation. Catch from a sector trip (e.g.,
not fishing under provisions of a NE
multispecies exempted fishery or with
exempted gear) targeting dogfish,
monkfish, skate, and lobster (with nontrap gear) would be deducted from the
sector’s ACE because these trips use
gear capable of catching groundfish.
Catch from a trip in an exempted fishery
does not count against a sector’s
allocation because the catch is assigned
to a separate ACL sub-component.
For fishing years 2010 and 2011, there
was no requirement for an industryfunded ASM program, and we were able
to fund an ASM program with a target
ASM coverage rate of 30 percent of all
trips. In addition, we provided 8percent observer coverage through the
Northeast Fishery Observer Program
(NEFOP), which helps to support the
Standardized Bycatch Reporting
Methodology (SBRM) and stock
assessments. This resulted in an overall
target coverage rate of 38 percent,
between ASM and NEFOP, for fishing
years 2010 and 2011. Beginning in
fishing year 2012, we have conducted
an annual analysis to determine the
total coverage that would be necessary
to achieve the same level of precision as
attained by the 38-percent total coverage
target used for fishing years 2010 and
2011. Since fishing year 2012, industry
has been required to pay for their costs
of ASM coverage, while we continued to
fund NEFOP. However, we were able to
fund the industry’s portion of ASM
costs and NEFOP coverage in fishing
years 2012 through 2014. Table 4 shows
the annual target coverage rates.
TABLE 4—HISTORIC TARGET COVERAGE RATE FOR MONITORING
Total coverage
rate
(percent)
Fishing year
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
Due to funding changes that would be
required by the proposed SBRM
amendment, we expect that sector
vessels will be responsible for paying atsea costs associated with the ASM
program before the end of the 2015
fishing year. Thus, sectors will be
responsible for designing,
implementing, and funding an ASM
program in fishing years 2015 and 2016
that will provide a level of ASM
coverage specified by NMFS.
Amendment 16 regulations require
NMFS to specify a level of ASM
coverage that is sufficient to meet the
same coefficient of variation (CV)
specified in the SBRM, and to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
ASM coverage
rate
(percent)
38
38
25
22
26
30
30
17
14
18
accurately monitor sector operations.
Framework 48 clarified the level of
ASM coverage necessary to meet these
goals. Regarding meeting the SBRM CV
level, Framework 48 determined that it
should be made at the overall stock
level, which is consistent with the level
NMFS determined was necessary in
fishing year 2013. Framework 48 also
amended the goals of the sector
monitoring program to include
achieving an accuracy level sufficient to
minimize effects of potential monitoring
bias.
Taking the provisions of Framework
48 into account, and interpreting the
ASM monitoring provision in the
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NEFOP coverage
rate
(percent)
8
8
8
8
8
Funding source
NMFS
NMFS
NMFS
NMFS
NMFS
context of Magnuson-Stevens Act
requirements and National Standards,
we have determined that the
appropriate level of ASM coverage
should be set at the level that meets the
CV requirement specified in the SBRM
and minimizes the cost burden to
sectors and NMFS to the extent
practicable, while still providing a
reliable estimate of overall catch by
sectors needed for monitoring ACEs and
ACLs. Based on this standard, NMFS
has determined that the appropriate
target coverage rate for fishing year 2015
is 24 percent. We expect ASM coverage
to be 20 percent and NEFOP coverage to
be 4 percent, covering a total of 24
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12386
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
percent of all sector trips, with the
exception of trips using a few specific
exemptions, as described later in this
rule. We will use discards derived from
these observed and monitored trips to
calculate discards for unobserved sector
trips. We have published a more
detailed summary of the supporting
information, explanation and
justification for this decision at: https://
www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/
ro/fso/reports/Sectors/ASM/FY2015_
Multispecies_Sector_ASM_
Requirements_Summary.pdf.
The draft operations plans submitted
in September 2014 included industryfunded ASM plans for fishing year 2015.
Therefore, we are proposing to approve
the sector’s ASM programs as described
in their operations plans. We gave
sectors the option to design their own
programs in compliance with
regulations, or opt for the program that
we have previously utilized in previous
fishing years. ASM programs proposed
by the sectors are described in detail
later in this proposed rule. The
proposed operations plans each contain
an ASM program sufficient to ensure
ASM coverage for fishing years 2015
and 2016, including once sectors
assume responsibility for funding their
ASM program, at the required levels
stated in this rule. Given the potential
for changes in the ASM program
funding for sectors, NMFS will verify
that all approved sectors continue to
comply with all ASM requirements,
including contracting with approved
providers in a timely fashion.
We are currently looking at how
industry funding of the ASM program
will affect our data collection systems,
especially the PTNS system, and have
begun working on an implementation
plan to help ensure a seamless
transition when the industry assumes
responsibility for at-sea costs in 2015.
To ensure that the ASM programs
continue to provide sufficient coverage,
the Regional Administrator is
authorized to adjust operational
standards such as vessel selection
protocols as needed, consistent with the
Administrative Procedure Act. We will
continue to keep the sector managers
informed about any changes or updates
to the situation.
Our ability to fund our portion of
costs for ASM coverage above SBRM
coverage levels for the entire 2015 and
2016 fishing years is not precisely
known at this time due to budget
uncertainties. Currently, funding for our
portion of ASM costs will expire before
the end of the 2015 fishing year. If we
have insufficient funding available for
our portion of coverage costs beyond
that time, we may need to consider
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
other measures, including emergency
action, to allow sectors to continue
fishing while still ensuring that we can
adequately monitor sector catch for
management purposes. We expect this
funding issue to be resolved before this
rule is effective, but are seeking
comments on possible measures to help
adequately monitor catch limits.
Sectors are required to monitor their
allocations and catch, and submit
weekly catch reports to us. If a sector
reaches an ACE threshold (specified in
the operations plan), the sector must
provide sector allocation usage reports
on a daily basis. Once a sector’s
allocation for a particular stock is
caught, that sector is required to cease
all fishing operations in that stock area
until it acquires more ACE. ACE may be
transferred between sectors, but
transfers to or from common pool
vessels is prohibited. Within 60 days of
when we complete year-end catch
accounting, each sector is required to
submit an annual report detailing the
sector’s catch (landings and discards),
enforcement actions, and pertinent
information necessary to evaluate the
biological, economic, and social impacts
of each sector.
Each sector contract provides
procedures to enforce the sector
operations plan, explains sector
monitoring and reporting requirements,
presents a schedule of penalties for
sector plan violations, and provides
sector managers with the authority to
issue stop fishing orders to sector
members who violate provisions of the
operations plan and contract. A sector
and sector members can be held jointly
and severally liable for ACE overages,
discarding legal-sized fish, and/or
misreporting catch (landings or
discards). Each sector operations plan
submitted for fishing years 2015 and
2016 states that the sector would
withhold an initial reserve from the
sector’s ACE sub-allocation to each
individual member to prevent the sector
from exceeding its ACE. Each sector
contract details the method for initial
ACE sub-allocation to sector members.
For fishing years 2015 and 2016, each
sector has proposed that each sector
member could harvest an amount of fish
equal to the amount each individual
member’s permit contributed to the
sector.
Requested Fishing Years 2015 and 2016
Exemptions
Sectors requested 22 exemptions from
the NE multispecies regulations through
their fishing years 2015 and 2016
operations plans. We evaluate each
exemption to determine whether it
allows for effective administration of
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and compliance with the operations
plan and sector allocation, and that it is
consistent with the goals and objectives
of the FMP. We propose to grant the
following for fishing years 2015 and
2016: 16 exemptions that were
previously granted; 1 exemption that
was previously granted, but has been
modified; 1 exemption that we propose
to partially grant; and 1 new exemption.
We propose to deny three exemption
requests for fishing years 2015 and
2016.
For fishing year 2014, sectors had
requested an exemption that would
allow access to year-round closed areas.
This request may be considered in a
separate action pending results from an
ongoing Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP)
(see Exemptions That May Be
Considered in a Separate Action).
A discussion of all 22 exemption
requests appears below; we request
public comment on the proposed sector
operations plans and our proposal to
grant 19 requested exemptions, in whole
or partially, and deny 3 requested
exemptions, as well as the EA prepared
for this action.
Exemptions We Propose To Grant (16)
In fishing year 2014, we exempted
sectors from the following requirements,
all of which have been requested for
fishing years 2015 and 2016, and which
we propose to grant again: (1) 120-day
block out of the fishery required for Day
gillnet vessels; (2) 20-day spawning
block out of the fishery required for all
vessels; (3) prohibition on a vessel
hauling another vessel’s gillnet gear; (4)
limits on the number of gillnets that
may be hauled on GB when fishing
under a NE multispecies/monkfish DAS;
(5) limits on the number of hooks that
may be fished; (6) DAS Leasing Program
length and horsepower restrictions; (7)
prohibition on discarding; (8) daily
catch reporting by sector managers for
sector vessels participating in the
Closed Area (CA) I Hook Gear Haddock
Special Access Program (SAP); (9)
prohibition on fishing inside and
outside of the CA I Hook Gear Haddock
SAP while on the same trip; (10)
prohibition on a vessel hauling another
vessel’s hook gear; (11) the requirement
to declare intent to fish in the Eastern
U.S./Canada SAP and the CA II
Yellowtail Flounder/Haddock SAP prior
to leaving the dock; (12) gear
requirements in the Eastern U.S./Canada
Management Area; (13) seasonal
restrictions for the Eastern U.S./Canada
Haddock SAP; (14) seasonal restrictions
for the CA II Yellowtail Flounder/
Haddock SAP; (15) sampling exemption;
and (16) prohibition on groundfish trips
in the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area.
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
12387
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
A detailed description of the previously
approved exemptions and rationale for
their approval can be found in the
applicable final rules identified in Table
5 below.
TABLE 5—EXEMPTIONS FROM PREVIOUS FISHING YEARS PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL IN FISHING YEARS 2015 AND 2016
Exemptions
1–8, 12 .......................
9–11 ...........................
13–15 .........................
16 ...............................
Rulemaking
Fishing
Fishing
Fishing
Fishing
Year
Year
Year
Year
2011
2012
2013
2014
Sector
Sector
Sector
Sector
Operations
Operations
Operations
Operations
Date
Final Rule ............................................
Final Rule ............................................
Interim Final Rule ................................
Final Rule ............................................
April 25, 2011 .................
May 2, 2012 ...................
May 2, 2013 ...................
April 28, 2014 .................
Citation
76
77
78
79
FR
FR
FR
FR
23076
26129
25591
23278
NE Multispecies Federal Register documents can be found at https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable/species/multispecies/.
(17) Prohibition on Combining Small
Mesh Exempted Fishery and Sector
Trips
For fishing year 2014, sectors
requested and we granted an exemption
that would allow vessels to possess and
use small-mesh and large-mesh trawl
gear on a single trip, within portions of
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Sector Small-Mesh Fishery Exemption
Area 1 is bounded by the following
coordinates connected in the order
listed by straight lines, except where
otherwise noted:
Point
A
B
C
D
E
F
......
......
......
......
......
......
N. Latitude
40°39.2′
40°34.0′
41°03.5′
41°23.0′
41°27.6′
41°18.3′
VerDate Sep<11>2014
W. Longitude
Note
73°07.0′
73°07.0′
71°34.0′
71°11.5′
71°11.5′
71°51.5′
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
(1)
Jkt 235001
the SNE regulated mesh areas (RMA).
Sectors proposed that vessels using this
exemption to fish with smaller mesh
would fish in two discrete areas that
have been shown to have minimal
amounts of regulated species and ocean
pout. See the 2014 Sector Final Rule (79
FR 23278; April 28, 2014) for a complete
description of the previously granted
exemption.
For fishing years 2015 and 2016,
sectors requested a similar exemption,
but with a revised northern border of
the eastern Small-Mesh Exemption Area
2, shifted 15 minutes north. This
expansion will allow for greater
opportunities for sector vessels to target
small-mesh species. The coordinates
and maps for these two areas are shown
in Figure 1.
For fishing years 2015 and 2016,
Sector Small-Mesh Fishery Exemption
G ...... 41°04.3′
71°51.5′
(2) Area 2 is bound by the following
A ...... 40°39.2′
73°07.0′
coordinates connected in the order
listed by straight lines. Sector vessels
1 From POINT E to POINT F along the
southernmost coastline of Rhode Island and cannot fish the small-mesh portion of
crossing all bays and inlets following the their trip using this exemption in the
COLREGS Demarcation Lines defined in 33 Nantucket Lighship Closed Area where
CFR part 80.
the two areas overlap.
2
Point
N. Latitude
W. Longitude
Note
From POINT G back to POINT A along the
southernmost coastline of Long Island, NY,
and crossing all bays and inlets following the
COLREGS Demarcation Lines defined in 33
CFR part 80.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Point
H ....................
I ......................
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
N. Latitude
41°15.0′ N
41°15.0′ N
W. Longitude
71°20.0′ W
70°00.0′ W
EP09MR15.003
Exemption We Propose To Approve, but
Have Modified From 2014(1)
12388
Point
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
J .....................
K ....................
H ....................
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
N. Latitude
40°27.0′ N
40°27.0′ N
41°15.0′ N
W. Longitude
70°00.0′ W
71°20.0′ W
71°20.0′ W
As was approved in fishing year 2014,
one of three trawl gear modifications
would be required when using small
mesh: Drop-chain sweep with a
minimum of 12 inches (30.48 cm) in
length; a large-mesh belly panel with a
minimum of 32-inch (81.28-cm) mesh
size; or an excluder grate secured
forward of the codend with an outlet
hole forward of the grate with bar
spacing of no more than 1.97 inches
(5.00 cm) wide. These gear
modifications, when fished properly,
have been shown to reduce the catch of
legal and sub-legal groundfish stocks.
Requiring these modifications is
intended to also reduce the incentive for
a sector vessel to target groundfish with
small mesh.
A vessel using this exemption is
required to meet the same NEFOP and
ASM coverage as standard groundfish
trips (i.e., a total of 24 percent in fishing
year 2015). The vessel would be
required to declare their intent to use
small mesh to target non-regulated
species by submitting a trip start hail
through its vessel monitoring system
(VMS) unit prior to departure, which
would be used for monitoring and
enforcement purposes. Trips declaring
this exemption must stow their smallmesh gear and use their large-mesh gear
first, and once finished with the large
mesh, would have to submit a
Multispecies Catch Report via VMS
with all catch on board at that time.
Once the Catch Report was sent, the
vessel could then deploy small mesh
with the required modifications in the
specific areas (see map above), outside
of the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area,
at which point, the large mesh could not
be redeployed. Any legal-sized allocated
groundfish stocks caught during these
small-mesh hauls must be landed and
the associated landed weight (dealer or
vessel trip report (VTR)) would be
deducted from the sector’s ACE.
As in fishing year 2014, we are
concerned about vessels potentially
catching groundfish, including bycatch
of juvenile fish, in the requested
exemption area with small-mesh nets.
The expansion of the Small-Mesh
Exemption Area 2 by 15 minutes north
could increase this potential, because
more groundfish are found in the
expansion area. The three gear
modifications proposed for this
exemption could mitigate catch of
regulated species when properly
installed, but none have been shown to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
completely eliminate the catch of
regulated species.
If approved, we will closely monitor
the catch from these exempted trips. If
it is determined that this exemption is
having a negative impact on groundfish
stocks, we would consider revoking this
exemption during the fishing year.
Exemption We Propose To Partially
Grant, and Partially Deny (1)
(18) Limits on the Number of Gillnets on
Day Gillnet Vessels
The FMP limits the number of gillnets
a Day gillnet vessel may fish in the
groundfish RMAs to prevent an
uncontrolled increase in the number of
nets being fished, thus undermining
applicable DAS effort controls. The
limits are specific to the type of gillnet
within each RMA: 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 Mid-Atlantic (MA) RMA
(§ 648.80(b)(2)(iv)). We previously
approved this exemption in fishing
years 2010, 2011, and 2012 to allow
sector vessels to fish up to 150 nets (any
combination of flatfish or roundfish
nets) in any RMA to provide greater
operational flexibility to sector vessels
in deploying gillnet gear. Sectors argued
that the gillnet limits were designed to
control fishing effort and are no longer
necessary because a sector’s ACE limits
overall fishing mortality.
Previous effort analysis of all sector
vessels using gillnet gear indicated an
increase in gear used in the RMA which
could lead to an increase in interactions
with protected species. While a sector’s
ACE is designed to limit a stock’s
fishing mortality, fishing effort may
affect other species. This increased
effort could ultimately lead to a rise in
interactions with protected species;
however, we do not expect this to be the
case, because a take reduction plan has
been implemented to reduce bycatch in
the fisheries affecting these species.
For fishing year 2013, based on the
comments received and the concern for
spawning GOM cod, we restricted the
use of this exemption to better protect
spawning cod. Therefore, a vessel
fishing in the GOM RMA was able to
use this exemption seasonally, but was
restricted to the 100-net gillnet limit in
blocks 124 and 125 in May, and in
blocks 132 and 133 in June. A vessel
fishing in the GB RMA, SNE RMA, MA
RMA, and the GOM outside of these
times and areas did not have this
additional restriction. We granted this
exemption with the same GOM seasonal
restrictions for fishing year 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The November 2014 interim action
implemented to protect GOM cod (79
FR 67362; November 13, 2014) revoked
this exemption for all of the GOM for
the remainder of fishing year 2014,
given concerns relating to mortality of
GOM cod caused by continuous fishing
by gillnets left in the water and the
potential to disrupt spawning when cod
are caught. For these same concerns, we
are proposing to partially grant the
exemption for fishing years 2015 and
2016 when fishing in all RMAs except
the GOM, and to deny the exemption for
the GOM. Therefore, vessels fishing in
the GOM under the Day boat gillnet
category would be restricted to no more
than 100 nets, only 50 of which may be
roundfish nets.
New Exemption Proposed (1)
(19) Regulated Mesh Size 6.5-Inch
(16.5-cm) or Greater, for Directed
Redfish Trips
Minimum mesh size restrictions
(§ 648.80(a)(3)(i), (a)(4)(i), (b)(2)(i), and
(c)(2)(i)) were implemented under
previous groundfish actions to reduce
overall mortality on groundfish stocks,
change the selection pattern of the
fishery to target larger fish, improve
survival of sublegal fish, and allow
sublegal fish more opportunity to spawn
before entering the fishery. Beginning in
fishing year 2012, we have approved
exemptions that allow sector vessels to
target redfish, the smallest species of
regulated groundfish, with a sub-legal
size mesh codend, ranging from 4.5
inches (11.4 cm) to 6 inches (15.2 cm)
(see Table 6). In order to use these
previous exemptions, sectors have been
required to meet an 80-percent
threshold of redfish catch, relative to
groundfish catch, and a 5-percent
discard threshold of total groundfish,
including redfish. These thresholds
were intended to ensure that a vessel
using the exemption effectively targets
redfish and does not target other species
with a smaller mesh, and attempts to
avoid catching sub-legal groundfish.
The thresholds were based on
Component 2 of the REDNET report
(Kanwit et al. 2013), which used a 4.5inch mesh codend, and observer data for
trips conducted in fishing year 2012.
REDNET is a group that includes the
Maine Department of Marine Resources,
the Massachusetts Division of Marine
Fisheries, and the University of
Massachusetts School for Marine
Science and Technology joined with
other members of the scientific
community and the industry to develop
a research plan to develop a sustainable,
directed, redfish trawl fishery in the
GOM. Each year, we have changed the
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
exemption at the sectors’ request in an
attempt to balance the goal of increasing
use of the exemption while preventing
12389
misuse and ensuring it is consistent
with the FMP’s goals and objectives.
TABLE 6—REDFISH EXEMPTIONS BY FISHING YEAR
Exemptions
Rulemaking
Date
Citation
6.0 inch (15.2 cm) with 100% NMFS-funded coverage.
4.5 inch (11.4 cm) with 100% NMFS-funded coverage.
4.5 inch (11.4 cm) with 100% Industry-funded coverage.
6.0 inch (15.2 cm) with standard observer coverage
FY 2012 Sector Operations Final Rule ....................
May 2, 2012 .....
77 FR 26129
FY 2012 Redfish Exemption Final Rule ...................
March 5, 2013 ..
78 FR 14226
FY 2013 Sector Operations Interim Final Rule ........
May 2, 2013 .....
78 FR 25591
FY 2014 Sector Operations Final Rule ....................
April 28, 2014 ...
79 FR 23278
NE Multispecies Federal Register documents can be found at https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable/species/multispecies.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
For fishing years 2012 and 2013, the
exemption required 100-percent
monitoring with either an ASM or
observer on every trip, primarily
because of concerns over a greater
retention of sub-legal groundfish, as
well as non-allocated species and
bycatch. In fishing year 2012, we found
that allowing trips that are randomly
selected for federally funded NEFOP or
ASM coverage provided an incentive to
take an exemption trip when selected
for coverage, thereby reducing the
number of observers/monitors available
to cover standard sector trips (i.e., trips
not utilizing this exemption). If fewer
observers/monitors deploy on standard
sector trips, then the exemption
undermines both the ability to meet
required coverage levels and the
reliability of discard rates calculated for
unobserved standard sector trips.
Therefore, in fishing year 2013, we
required sectors to pay for 100 percent
of the at-sea cost for a monitor on all
redfish exemption trips, which resulted
in sectors not taking a redfish trip that
fishing year.
For fishing year 2014, we granted an
exemption that allowed vessels to use a
6-inch (15.2-cm) or larger mesh codend
to target redfish when fishing in the
Redfish Exemption Area. The vessels
participating in the redfish fishery in
fishing year 2014 were subject to the
same NEFOP and ASM target coverage
as standard groundfish trips (26
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
percent). Vessels could fish with the
regulated mesh nets (6.5-inch [16.5-cm]
codends or larger) and with the 6.0-inch
(15.2-cm) mesh codends on the same
trip; however, for all trips (by sector, by
month) declaring this exemption, we
monitored landings for the entire trip to
determine if the vessel had met the 80percent redfish catch threshold and the
5-percent discard threshold.
Following approval of the exemption
in fishing year 2014, sectors indicated
that an 80-percent redfish catch
threshold, based on REDNET data
collected using a 4.5-inch (11.4-cm)
mesh codend, is not appropriate for all
mesh sizes (i.e., as mesh size increases,
the efficiency of catching redfish
decreases). Additionally, given the
average landed value of redfish, they
indicated that they do not consider it
economically viable to have an offload
comprised of 80 percent redfish.
Therefore, as of January 2015, few have
been taken under this exemption,
because, according to sectors, they
cannot effectively or profitably target
redfish to meet the 80-percent
threshold.
For fishing years 2015 and 2016, we
propose granting the sectors’ request to
use a 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh codend
when fishing in the redfish exemption.
A vessel would have the option to fish
the first portion of a trip with current
legal codend mesh size (6.5 inches; 16.5
cm), and then switch to a codend no
smaller than 5.5 inches (14.0 cm) for the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
redfish portion of their trip. Allowing
sectors to legally target groundfish on
the first portion of the trip would
provide flexibility and would address
the sector’s concern regarding
profitability. In addition, the sectors
have requested a 50-percent catch
threshold, which would only apply to
the second half of the trip. The sectors
argue that this threshold is more
appropriate for a 5.5-inch (14.0-cm)
codend, as data from Component 3 of
the REDNET report (Pol and He 2013)
indicates that as the codend mesh size
increases from 4.5 inches (11.4 cm) to
5.5 inches (14.0 cm), selectivity
decreases, making it more difficult for
vessels to catch only redfish. However,
the lower 50-percent threshold would
allow greater catch of other regulated
groundfish species with small mesh,
which could result in higher discards or
targeting of groundfish with small mesh.
We are proposing to address this by
implementing reporting requirements to
facilitate monitoring and enforcement. If
we detect vessels targeting non-redfish
socks, particularly stocks of concern, the
RA retains the right to rescind approval
of the exemption. We request comment
on this issue. The 5-percent discard
threshold for all groundfish, including
redfish, would still apply on the redfish
portion of observed trips.
Due to concern for GOM cod, we have
modified the redfish exemption area
(Figure 2) from 2014 (see Figure 2).
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
12390
The Redfish Exemption Area would
be bounded on the east by the U.S.Canada Maritime Boundary, and
bounded on the north, west, and south
by the following coordinates, connected
in the order listed by straight lines:
Point
N. Lat.
W. Long.
A ......
B ......
C ......
D ......
E ......
F ......
G ......
H ......
I ........
J .......
44°27.25′
44°16.25′
44°04.50′
43°52.25′
43°40.25′
43°28.25′
43°00.00′
43°00.00′
42°00.00′
42°00.00′
67°02.75′
67°30.00′
68°00.00′
68°30.00′
69°00.00′
69°30.00′
69°30.00′
70°00.00′
70°00.00′
(67°00.63′)
Note
Point
G ....................
H ....................
K ....................
L .....................
G ....................
(1)
1 The
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
intersection of 42°00′ N. latitude and
the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary, approximate longitude in parentheses.
We have modified the redfish
exemption area to exclude block 138 for
the entire fishing year, and allow only
seasonal access to block 131. Sector
vessels would not be allowed to use the
redfish exemption in block 131 in
February and March. We based this
decision on the closures implemented
by the November 2014 interim action
taken for the protection of cod; areas
138 and 131 were the only areas closed
by the interim action that overlapped
with the fishing year 2014 redfish
exemption area. These areas are known
to have higher levels of GOM cod catch
and/or spawning activity, and we
propose to close them to avoid
interaction with and bycatch of GOM
cod. Additionally, area 138 has
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:59 Mar 06, 2015
historically had very little redfish catch;
therefore, the exclusion of this area
should not limit sectors from targeting
redfish. The area is bounded on the east,
north, west, and south by the following
coordinates, connected by straight lines
in the order listed:
Jkt 235001
N. Lat.
43°00.00′
43°00.00′
42°30.00′
42°30.00′
43°00.00′
W. Long.
69°30.00′
70°00.00′
70°00.00′
69°30.00′
69°30.00′
Vessels must declare their trip in the
pre-trip notification system (PTNS)
under standard requirements, but there
are no additional monitoring
requirements above the target coverage
for the groundfish fishery. Prior to
leaving the dock, any vessel that intends
to use the redfish exemption on a trip
must declare so through the VMS trip
start hail by checking the box next to
‘‘Redfish Trip’’ under sector
exemptions. This notification must be
made if the vessel intends to use a 5.5inch (14.0-cm) codend or larger to target
redfish on any portion of the trip.
Any vessel declaring this exemption
must submit catch reports via VMS each
day for the entire trip. For the first
portion of the trip, a vessel may fish
using a 6.0-inch (15.2-cm) mesh codend
with selective gear in the GB BSA
(current mesh flexibility allowed from
Council exemption est. in 2010) or 6.5-
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
inch (16.5-cm) mesh codend in any
BSA, including the GOM. Any sub-legal
codend must be stowed below deck for
this entire portion of the trip. Catch
thresholds do not apply to this portion
of the trip.
When a vessel switches its codend to
target redfish, it must first transit to the
Redfish Exemption Area. Once the
vessel is in the Redfish Exemption Area,
it must declare via VMS that it is
switching to the 5.5-inch (14.0-cm)
mesh codend (or larger) and will be
conducting the remainder of its fishing
activity exclusively in the Redfish
Exemption Area. The vessel can then
retrieve the 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh
codend from below deck and begin
using it. All fishing activity for the
remainder of the trip must occur in the
Redfish Exemption area. For this
portion of the trip, at least 50 percent of
the total allocated groundfish kept must
be redfish, and on observed trips, no
more than 5 percent of all groundfish,
including redfish, may be discarded.
These thresholds will be used by NMFS
to determine if this sector exemption
should be revoked. The vessel must also
submit a final catch report and a Trip
End Hail via VMS at the end of the trip
to facilitate dockside enforcement.
There are enforcment concerns
associated with the additional flexibility
this exemption provides. Specifically,
enforcing different mesh size
restrictions on different portions of a
single fishing trip could be challenging
at sea, and there is the potential for
vessels to misreport the mesh size used
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
EP09MR15.004
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
to catch groundfish to avoid having the
exemption revoked for exceeding the
threshold.
Additionally, we are concerned about
vessels catching groundfish, including
their bycatch of juvenile fish, which
could potentially cause them to exceed
the discard threshold of 5 percent, in
the Redfish Exemption Area when
fishing with codend mesh sized nets
smaller than the GOM regulated mesh
size of 6.5 inches (16.5 cm). The 50percent catch threshold is meant to
reflect the likely proportion of redfish
catch while using a 5.5-inch (14.0-cm)
mesh codend, based on the results of
Component 3 of REDNET. We are
concerned, however, that it could allow
sectors to target groundfish when
fishing with a smaller codend and could
increase discards that would likely go
unreported, which could undermine the
protections of the 5-percent bycatch
threshold. Therefore, we are specifically
seeking comment on this exemption,
regarding the enforcement concerns, the
reporting concerns, and the
appropriateness of the threshold.
If the redfish exemption is approved,
we intend to monitor use of the
exemption carefully. For example,
should it be determined that vessels are
not using the exemption when assigned
an observer or ASM, and only using it
when unobserved, we would have
concerns about monitoring the
exemption. Additionally, if a vessel
does not submit daily catch reports or
the required declaration when switching
to the redfish portion of the trip, we
may not be able to adequately monitor
the exemption. The RA retains authority
to rescind approval of this exemption, if
it is needed. All vessels in a sector may
be held jointly and severally liable for
misreporting by a single vessel in a
sector.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Exemptions We Propose To Deny (3)
(20) GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh Exemption
in May, and January Through April
We propose to deny the GOM sink
gillnet mesh exemption request due to
concern for GOM cod. We did not
analyze this exemption in the EA
because no new information was
available to change the analyses
previously published in past EAs.
The GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh
Exemption was approved for fishing
years 2010 through 2012. This
exemption allowed sector vessels to use
6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh gillnets in the
GOM to target GOM haddock
seasonally. However, due to concerns
regarding the stock status of GOM
haddock and the potential increase in
interactions with protected species, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
exemption was denied for fishing year
2013 (78 FR 25591, May 2, 2013) and
fishing year 2014.
On November 12, 2014, at the request
of the New England Fishery
Management Council and in response a
stock assessment conducted by the
Northeast Fisheries Science Center, we
published an emergency action that
increased the GOM haddock ACL for
fishing year 2014 (79 FR 67090). This
action nearly doubled each sector’s ACE
for GOM haddock. Because sectors
anticipated that GOM haddock would
not be a concern for fishing year 2014,
they again requested this exemption for
fishing years 2015 and 2016.
While the stock status of GOM
haddock has improved, biomass has not
increased to the level it was in fishing
year 2010, when this exemption was
first approved. In addition, we are
concerned about the effects of this
exemption on GOM cod. The November
2014 interim action implemented to
protect GOM cod revoked an exemption
that resulted in decreasing the amount
of gillnet gear in the GOM, given
concerns relating to mortality of GOM
cod caused by continuous fishing by
gillnets left in the water and the
potential to disrupt spawning when cod
are caught. We are similarly concerned
that using nets smaller than the
minimum size may impact GOM cod
mortality. For these same concerns, we
are proposing to deny the GOM
Haddock Sink Gillnet Mesh exemption
for fishing years 2015 and 2016.
(21) Powering Vessel Monitoring
Systems (VMS) While at the Dock
Beginning in fishing year 2011, we
approved an exemption from the
requirement to keep the VMS units
powered while tied to the dock or on a
mooring. In fishing year 2012, the
NOAA Office of Law Enforcement (OLE)
recognized a lack of compliance. The
exemption was only applicable for
vessels that did not otherwise possess
Federal fishing permits for other FMPs
that required a VMS unit, and vessels
were required to follow certain
protocols, such as sending a powerdown
code before turning off the VMS unit.
Misuse of the exemption decreases our
confidence in our ability to adequately
monitor the fishery. During fishing year
2013, we worked with sector managers
to identify the sector members who
were out of compliance with the
exemption. However, in this time,
compliance did not improve. Therefore,
for fishing years 2015 and 2016, we
propose to not approve this exemption
due to lack of compliance.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12391
(22) Requirement To Use 6.5-Inch
(16.5-cm) Mesh Size or Greater for
Directed Redfish Trips, as Previously
Approved in Fishing Year 2014
The exemption request to use a 6.0inch (15.2-cm) mesh codend nets, with
a threshold of no lower than 80 percent
redfish of the total groundfish catch on
hauls using the redfish exemption, for
fishing years 2015 and 2016, is identical
to the exemption for fishing year 2014.
A second redfish exemption request,
described above (exemption #19), is
proposed for approval. Therefore, we
are proposing to deny this exemption
request.
Exemption That May Be Considered in
a Separate Action (1)
Prohibition on Groundfish Trips in
Closed Areas I and II
In fishing year 2013, we disapproved
an exemption that would have allowed
sector vessels restricted access to
portions of CAs I and II, provided each
trip carried an industry-funded ASM.
When we proposed allowing sector
access to these areas, we announced that
we did not have funding to pay for
monitoring the additional trips for
exemptions requiring a 100-percent
coverage level. Industry members
indicated that it was too expensive to
participate in the exemption, given the
requirement to pay for a monitor on
every trip. This, in combination with
extensive comment opposing access to
these areas to protect depleted stocks
and our concern about the impacts on
depleted stocks such as GB cod and GB
yellowtail flounder, resulted in
disapproval. For a detailed description
of the exemption request and
justifications for disapproval, see the
final rule (78 FR 41772, December 16,
2013).
For fishing year 2014, we remained
unable to fund monitoring costs for
exemptions requiring a 100-percent
coverage level. In addition, we had
some concerns about funding and
administering the shore-side portion of
any monitoring program for an
exemption that requires additional
ASM, such as the exemption to access
CAs I and II. However, we authorized
two EFPs to gather catch data from CAs
I and II, one in coordination with the
Northeast Fisheries Science Center, the
other with members of the industry.
Results from these EFPs could better
inform us, the industry, and the public,
regarding the economic efficacy of
accessing these CAs, while providing
information specific to bycatch of
depleted stocks. Trips taken under these
EFPs are attempting to address the
following questions: (1) Could enough
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
12392
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
fish be caught to adequately offset the
industry’s additional expense of having
an ASM on board, and (2) could catch
of groundfish stocks of concern be
addressed?
The two authorized EFPs have
allowed access to participating vessels
into the same portions of CAs I and II
that were originally proposed for access
to sectors. Vessels using the EFPs are
required to use specialized trawl gear to
reduce impacts on flounder species, are
restricted seasonally to avoid spawning
fish, and must adhere to an agreement
between the lobster and groundfish
fishery in CA II to avoid gear conflicts.
One of the two approved EFPs is still
ongoing. Upon review of the EFP
results, we will consider potential
access to these areas through a separate
action.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2014 Interim Cod Action
On November 13, 2014, at the request
of the New England Fishery
Management Council and in response a
stock assessment conducted by the
Northeast Fisheries Science Center, we
published an interim action
implemented to protect GOM cod. In
this action, one fishing year 2014
exemption (limits on the number of
gillnets on Day gillnet vessels,
exemption #18) was revoked when
fishing in the GOM because of its
potential to affect GOM cod; the
exemption as it applied in GB, SNE, and
MA remains in place. As described
above, we are proposing to not grant the
exemption for the limits on gillnets for
Day gillnet vessels in the GOM, but
grant it in the other RMAs.
Additionally, we have proposed to
modify the previously approved redfish
exemption area (as described in
exemption #19) due to concern for GOM
cod. There are several other exemptions
proposed in the GOM that also could
potentially affect GOM cod. These
exemptions include:
(1) 120-day block out of the fishery
required for Day gillnet vessels;
(2) 20-day spawning block out of the
fishery required for all vessels;
(3) Prohibition on a vessel hauling
another vessel’s gillnet gear;
(5) Limits on the number of hooks that
may be fished; and
(10) Prohibition on a vessel hauling
another vessel’s hook gear.
While we request comment on all
exemptions in fishing years 2015 and
2016, we specifically request the public
to comment on exemptions in the GOM
that could affect the GOM cod stock and
its ability to rebuild.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
Additional Sector Provisions
Inshore GOM Restrictions
Several sectors have proposed a
provision to limit and more accurately
document a vessel’s behavior when
fishing in what they consider the
inshore portion of the GOM BSA, or the
area to the west of 70° 15′ W. long. A
vessel that is carrying an observer or
ASM would remain free to fish without
restriction. As proposed under the
Inshore GOM Restriction provision, if a
vessel is not carrying an observer or
ASM and fishes any part of its trip in
the GOM west of 70° 15′ W. long., the
vessel would be prohibited from fishing
outside of the GOM BSA. Also, if a
vessel is not carrying an observer or
ASM and fishes any part of its trip
outside the GOM BSA, this provision
would prohibit a vessel from fishing
west of 70° 15′ W. long. in the GOM
BSA. The sectors’ proposal includes a
requirement for a vessel to declare
whether or not it intends to fish in the
inshore GOM area through the trip start
hail. We are providing sector managers
with the ability to monitor this
provision through the Sector
Information Management Module
(SIMM), a Web site where we currently
provide roster, trip, discard, and
observer information to sector managers.
If approved, final declaration
requirements would be included in each
vessel’s LOA. We propose to allow a
sector to use a federally funded NEFOP
observer or ASM on these trips because
we do not believe it will create bias in
coverage or discard estimates, as fishing
behavior is not expected to change as a
result of this provision.
Prohibition on a Vessel Hauling Another
Vessel’s Trap Gear To Target
Groundfish
Several sectors have proposed a
provision to allow a vessel to haul
another vessel’s fish trap gear, similar to
the current exemptions that allow a
vessel to haul another vessel’s gillnet
gear, or hook gear. These exemptions
have generally been referred to as
‘‘community’’ gear exemptions.
Regulations at § 648.84(a) require a
vessel to mark all bottom-tending fixed
gear, which would include fish trap gear
used to target groundfish. To facilitate
enforcement of that regulation, we
propose requiring that any community
fish trap gear be tagged by each vessel
that plans on hauling the gear, similar
to how this provision was implemented
in fishing year 2014. This would allow
one vessel to deploy the trap gear and
another vessel to haul the trap gear,
provided both vessels tag the gear prior
to deployment. This requirement would
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
be captured in the sector’s operations
plan to provide the opportunity for the
sector to monitor the use of this
provision and ensure that the OLE and
the U.S. Coast Guard can enforce the
provision.
At-Sea Monitoring Proposals
For fishing years 2015 and 2016, each
sector is required to develop and fund
an ASM program that must be reviewed
and approved by NMFS. In the event
that a proposed ASM program could not
be approved, all sectors were asked to
include an option to use the current
NMFS-designed ASM program as a
back-up. Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1
and 3, GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector,
Northeast Coastal Communities Sector,
and Maine Coast Community Sector
have proposed to use the ASM program
that we developed and used for fishing
years 2010–2014. We propose this
program for these sectors because we
believe the existing program to be
consistent with goals and objectives of
monitoring, and with regulatory
requirements. As requested, the
remaining 12 sectors stated that they
would use the NMFS-designed ASM
program in the event that we did not
approve their individual ASM program
for fishing years 2015 and 2016. NEFS
4 has not included provisions for an
ASM program because the sector
operates as a private permit bank and
explicitly prohibits fishing.
We propose to approve the ASM
programs proposed by the NEFS 1–13
(excluding NEFS 4). These programs
state that they will: Contract with a
NMFS-approved ASM provider; meet
the specified coverage level; and utilize
the PTNS for random selection of
monitored trips and notification to
providers. In addition, these proposed
ASM programs detail protocols for
waivers, incident reporting, and safety
requirements. We believe that the
proposed programs are consistent with
goals and objectives of monitoring, and
with regulatory requirements.
Although the current regulations
require a sector to fund its costs for its
ASM program beginning in fishing year
2013, we funded industry’s ASM costs
in fishing years 2013 and 2014. It is
unclear if the Agency will have money
to fund industry’s ASM costs, in whole
or in part, for fishing year 2015.
Additional information on funding and
implementation of ASM for fishing year
2015 will be provided at a future date.
Sector EA
To comply with NEPA, a
Programmatic EA was prepared
encompassing all 17 operations plans,
analyzing the impacts expected from the
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 45 / Monday, March 9, 2015 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
continued operation of the sectors over
the next six years. The sector EA is
tiered from the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) prepared for
Amendment 16. The EA examines the
biological, economic, and social impacts
unique to each sector’s proposed
operations, including requested
exemptions, and provides a cumulative
effect analysis that addresses the
combined impact of the direct and
indirect effects of approving all
proposed sector operations plans. The
summary findings of the EA conclude
that each sector would produce similar
effects that have non-significant
impacts. Visit https://
www.regulations.gov to view the EA
prepared for the 17 sectors that this rule
proposes to approve.
We decided to do a programmatic
assessment beginning in fishing year
2015 because the past four years of
sector operations have been relatively
homogeneous, and the EA covering the
management regime has changed little
since inception of the program. We
believe future sector operations would
likely operate similarly, and the impacts
associated with their activities would
also likely be similar in nature to past
years. However, we understand that it is
impossible to fully anticipate the future,
and that new requests for sector
exemptions may arise that could have
impacts outside the scope of this
programmatic document. In this case, a
supplementary EA may be necessary to
analyze future sector operations.
Classification
The Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. 553) requires advance notice of
rulemaking and opportunity for public
comment. The Council required
additional time to develop measures to
address GOM cod as part of Framework
53, which delayed our ability to present
this to the public. We are therefore
providing a 15-day comment period for
this rule. A longer comment period
would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest because we must
publish a final rule prior to the start of
fishing year 2015 on May 1, 2015, to
enable sectors to fish at the start of the
fishing year. A vessel enrolled in a
sector may not fish in fishing year 2015
unless its operations plan is approved.
If the final rule is not published prior to
May 1, the permits enrolled in sectors
must either stop fishing until their
operations plan is approved or elect to
fish in the common pool for the entirety
of fishing year 2015. Both of these
options would have very negative
impacts for the permits enrolled in the
sectors. Delaying the implementation
beyond May 1, 2015, would result in an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Mar 06, 2015
Jkt 235001
unnecessary economic loss to the sector
members because vessels would be
prevented from fishing in a month when
sector vessels landed approximately 10
percent of several allocations, including
GB cod east and GB winter flounder.
Finally, without a seamless transition
between fishing years 2014 and 2015, a
delay would require sector vessels to
remove gear that complies with an
exemption, and redeploy the gear once
the final rule is effective. Talking these
additional trips would require
additional fuel and staffing when catch
may not be landed.
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 proposed 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.
This proposed action is exempt from
the procedures of Executive Order
12866 because this action contains no
implementing regulations.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration (SBA)
that this proposed rule, if adopted,
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
As outlined in the preamble to this
proposed rule, the purpose of this action
is the implementation of fishing years
2015 and 2016 sector operations plans
and associated regulatory exemptions.
In an effort to rebuild the NE
multispecies complex, other actions
have reduced the allocations of several
stocks managed by the NE Multispecies
FMP, and the economic impacts of those
allocations have been analyzed in
accordance with their respective
actions. This action, if finalized, would
provide flexible fisheries management
options to reduce the potential social
and economic hardships resulting from
those allocation reductions.
The regulated entities most likely to
be affected by the proposed action are
the 102 groundfish-dependent
ownership entities that own permits
currently enrolled in sectors, all of
which are considered small under the
SBA’s definition of a small finfishing
business.
Under the proposed rule, sector
operations plans for fishing years 2015
and 2016 would be approved, allowing
sector participants to use the universal
sector exemptions granted under
Amendment 16. In addition to the
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
12393
universal sector exemptions granted
under the approval of individual sector
operations plans, sector participants
have requested relaxation of 22 other
gear, area, administrative, and seasonal
restrictions. This rule proposes to grant
19 of the 22 requested exemptions.
Because all of the regulated entities are
considered small businesses per the
SBA guidelines, there are no
disproportionate impacts for
participating in sectors and using the
universal exemptions and additional
exemptions requested by individual
sectors.
All of the requested sector-specific
exemptions in this proposed rule are
expected to have a positive economic
impact on participants, as they further
increase the flexibility of fishermen to
land their allocation at their discretion.
By choosing when and how to land their
allocations, sector participants have the
potential to reduce marginal costs,
increase revenues, and ultimately
increase profitability. Again, it is
expected that fishermen will only use
sector-specific exemptions that they
believe will maximize utility, and that
long-term stock impacts from the
collective exemptions will be minimal
and will be outweighed by benefits from
operational flexibility.
This rule would not impose
significant negative economic impacts
on any of the sector participants. No
small entities would be placed at a
competitive disadvantage to large
entities, and the regulations would not
reduce the profit for any small entities.
Therefore, this rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. As a result, an
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
not required and none has been
prepared.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: March 3, 2015.
Eileen Sobeck,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–05386 Filed 3–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM
09MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 45 (Monday, March 9, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12380-12393]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05386]
[[Page 12380]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 140821699-5191-01]
RIN 0648-XD461
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern
United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; 2015 and 2016 Sector
Operations Plans and 2015 Contracts and Allocation of Northeast
Multispecies Annual Catch Entitlements
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to approve 17 sector operations plans and contracts
for fishing years 2015 and 2016, grant regulatory exemptions for
fishing years 2015 and 2016, and provide Northeast multispecies annual
catch entitlements to these sectors for fishing year 2015. We request
comment on the proposed sector operations plans and contracts; the
environmental assessment analyzing the impacts of the operations plans;
and our proposal to grant (in whole or partially) 19 of the 22
regulatory exemptions requested by the sectors. Approval of sector
operations plans is necessary to allocate annual catch entitlements to
the sectors and for the sectors to operate. The Northeast Multispecies
Fishery Management Plan allows limited access permit holders to form
sectors, and requires sectors to submit their operations plans and
contracts to us, NMFS, for approval or disapproval. Approved sectors
are exempt from certain effort control regulations and receive
allocation of Northeast multispecies based on its members' fishing
history.
This document also announces the target at-sea monitoring coverage
rate for sector trips for fishing year 2015.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 24, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2014-0111, by either of the following methods:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-0111, click the
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or
attach your comments.
Mail: Submit written comments to Liz Sullivan, 55 Great
Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily
by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous
comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liz Sullivan, Fishery Management
Specialist, phone (978) 282-8493, fax (978) 281-9135. To review Federal
Register documents referenced in this rule, you can visit: https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable/species/multispecies.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Amendment 13 to the Northeast (NE) Multispecies Fishery Management
Plan (FMP) (69 FR 22906, April 27, 2004) established a process for
forming sectors within the NE multispecies (groundfish) fishery, and
Amendment 16 to the FMP (74 FR 18262, April 9, 2010), followed by
Framework Adjustment 45 to the FMP (76 FR 23042, April 25, 2011) and
Framework 48 to the FMP (78 FR 26118; May 3, 2013), expanded and
revised sector management.
The FMP defines 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 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.'' Sectors are self-selecting,
meaning each sector can choose its members.
The NE multispecies sector management system allocates a portion of
the NE multispecies stocks to each sector. These annual sector
allocations are known as annual catch entitlements (ACE). These
allocations are a portion of a stock's annual catch limit (ACL)
available to commercial NE multispecies vessels, based on the
collective fishing history of a sector's members. Currently, sectors
may receive allocations of most large-mesh NE multispecies stocks with
the exception of Atlantic halibut, windowpane flounder, Atlantic
wolffish, and ocean pout. A sector determines how to harvest its ACEs
and may decide to consolidate operations to fewer vessels.
Because sectors elect to receive an allocation under a quota-based
system, the FMP grants sector vessels several ``universal'' exemptions
from the FMP's effort controls. These universal exemptions apply to:
Trip limits on allocated stocks; the Georges Bank (GB) Seasonal Closure
Area; NE multispecies days-at-sea (DAS) restrictions; the requirement
to use a 6.5-inch (16.5-cm) mesh codend when fishing with selective
gear on GB; portions of the Gulf of Maine (GOM) Rolling Closure Areas
(or as modified by Framework 53); and the at-sea monitoring (ASM)
coverage rate for sector vessels fishing on a monkfish DAS in the
Southern New England (SNE) Broad Stock Area (BSA) with extra-large mesh
gillnets. The FMP prohibits sectors from requesting exemptions from
permitting restrictions, gear restrictions designed to minimize habitat
impacts, and reporting requirements.
We received operations plans and preliminary contracts for fishing
years 2015 and 2016 from 17 sectors. The operations plans are similar
to previously approved versions, but propose operations spanning 2
fishing years, and include additional exemption requests and proposals
for industry-funded ASM plans. This is the first year that 2-year
operations plans have been submitted by the sectors, as allowed in the
Amendment 16 final rule. Two-year sector operations plans will help
streamline the process for sector managers and reduce administrative
burdens for both sectors and NMFS. Six sectors that have operated in
past years did not submit operations plans or contracts. Four of these
sectors now operate as state-operated permit banks as described below.
We have made a preliminary determination that the proposed 17
sector operations plans and contracts, and 19 of the 22 regulatory
exemptions, in whole or partially, are consistent with the FMP's goals
and objectives, and meet sector requirements outlined in the
regulations at Sec. 648.87. We summarize many of the sector
requirements in this proposed rule and request comments on the proposed
operations plans, the accompanying environmental assessment (EA), and
our proposal to wholly or partially grant 19 of the 22 regulatory
exemptions
[[Page 12381]]
requested by the sectors, but deny the rest. Copies of the operations
plans and contracts, and the EA, are available at https://www.regulations.gov and from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). One of the 17
sectors, Northeast Fishery Sector (NEFS) 4, proposes to operate as a
private lease-only sector.
The six sectors that chose not to submit operations plans and
contracts for fishing years 2015 and 2016 are the Tri-State Sector, the
GB Hook Sector, and four state-operated permit bank sectors as follows:
The State of Maine Permit Bank Sector, the State of New Hampshire
Permit Bank Sector, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Permit Bank
Sector, and the State of Rhode Island Permit Bank Sector. The final
rule implementing Amendment 17 to the FMP allows a state-operated
permit bank to receive an allocation without needing to comply with the
administrative and procedural requirements for sectors (77 FR 16942,
March 23, 2012). These permit banks are required to submit a list of
participating permits to us by a date specified in the permit bank's
Memorandum of Agreement, typically April 1.
Sector Allocations
Sectors typically submit membership information to us on December 1
prior to the start of the fishing year, which begins each year on May
1. Due to a delay in distributing a letter describing each vessel's
potential contribution to a sector's quota for fishing year 2015, we
extended the deadline to join a sector until February 18, 2014. Based
on sector enrollment trends from the past 5 fishing years, we expect
sector participation in fishing year 2015 will be similar. Thus, we are
using fishing year 2014 rosters as a proxy for fishing year 2015 sector
membership and calculating the fishing year 2015 projected allocations
in this proposed rule. In addition to the membership delay, all permits
that change ownership after December 1, 2014, retain the ability to
join a sector through April 30, 2015. All permits enrolled in a sector,
and the vessels associated with those permits, have until April 30,
2015, to withdraw from a sector and fish in the common pool for fishing
year 2015. For fishing year 2016, we will set similar roster deadlines,
notify permit holders of the fishing year 2016 deadlines, and allow
permit holders to change sectors separate from the annual approval
process. We will publish final sector ACEs and common pool sub-ACL
totals, based upon final rosters, as soon as possible after the start
of fishing year 2015, and again after the start of fishing year 2016.
The allocations proposed in this rule are based on the fishing year
2015 specifications recommended by the New England Fishery Management
Council in Framework 53. These allocations are not final, and are
subject to the approval of Framework 53. We expect a rule proposing the
Framework 53 management measures to publish in March 2015.
We calculate the sector's allocation for each stock by summing its
members' potential sector contributions (PSC) for a stock, as shown in
Table 1. The information presented in Table 1 is the total percentage
of each commercial sub-ACL each sector would receive for fishing year
2015, based on their fishing year 2014 rosters. Tables 2 and 3 show the
allocations each sector would be allocated for fishing year 2015, based
on their fishing year 2014 rosters. At the start of the fishing year,
after sector enrollment is finalized, we provide the final allocations,
to the nearest pound, to the individual sectors, and we use those final
allocations to monitor sector catch. While the common pool does not
receive a specific allocation, the common pool sub-ACLs have been
included in each of these tables for comparison.
We do not assign an individual permit separate PSCs for the Eastern
GB cod or Eastern GB haddock; instead, we assign a permit a PSC for the
GB cod stock and GB haddock stock. Each sector's GB cod and GB haddock
allocations are then divided into an Eastern ACE and a Western ACE,
based on each sector's percentage of the GB cod and GB haddock ACLs.
For example, if a sector is allocated 4 percent of the GB cod ACL and 6
percent of the GB haddock ACL, the sector is allocated 4 percent of the
commercial Eastern U.S./Canada Area GB cod total allowable catch (TAC)
and 6 percent of the commercial Eastern U.S./Canada Area GB haddock TAC
as its Eastern GB cod and haddock ACEs. These amounts are then
subtracted from the sector's overall GB cod and haddock allocations to
determine its Western GB cod and haddock ACEs. A sector may only
harvest its Eastern GB cod ACEs in the Eastern U.S./Canada Area.
However, Framework 51 implemented a mechanism that allows sectors to
``convert'' their Eastern GB haddock allocation into Western GB haddock
allocation (79 FR 22421; April 22, 2014) and fish that converted ACE in
Western GB.
At the start of fishing year 2015, we will withhold 20 percent of
each sector's fishing year 2015 allocation until we finalize fishing
year 2014 catch information. Further, we will allow sectors to transfer
fishing year 2014 ACE for 2 weeks of the fishing year following the
completion of year-end catch accounting to reduce or eliminate any
fishing year 2014 overages. If necessary, we will reduce any sector's
fishing year 2015 allocation to account for a remaining overage in
fishing year 2014. We will follow the same process for fishing year
2016. We will notify the Council and sector managers of this deadline
in writing and will announce this decision on our Web site at: https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 12382]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09MR15.000
[[Page 12383]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09MR15.001
[[Page 12384]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09MR15.002
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Sector Operations Plans and Contracts
As stated previously, we received 17 sector operations plans and
contracts by the September 2, 2014, deadline for fishing years 2015 and
2016. In order to approve a sector's operations plan for fishing years
2015 and 2016, that sector must have been compliant with reporting
requirements from all previous years, including the year-end reporting
requirements found at
[[Page 12385]]
Sec. 648.87(b)(1)(vi)(C). Approved operations plans, provided on our
Web site as a single document for each sector, not only contain the
rules under which each sector would fish, but also provide the legal
contract that binds each member to the sector for the length of the
sector's operations plan. Each sector's operations plan, and sector
members, must comply with the regulations governing sectors, found at
Sec. 648.87. In addition, each sector must conduct fishing activities
as detailed in its approved operations plan.
Any permit holder with a limited access NE multispecies permit that
was valid as of May 1, 2008, is eligible to participate in a sector,
including an inactive permit currently held in confirmation of permit
history. If a permit holder officially enrolls a permit in a sector and
the fishing year begins, then that permit must remain in the sector for
the entire fishing year, and cannot fish in the NE multispecies fishery
outside of the sector (i.e., in the common pool) during the fishing
year. Participating vessels are required to comply with all pertinent
Federal fishing regulations, except as specifically exempted in the
letter of authorization (LOA) issued by the Regional Administrator,
which details any approved exemptions from regulations. If, during a
fishing year, or between fishing years 2015 and 2016, a sector requests
an exemption that we have already approved, or proposes a change to
administrative provisions, we may amend the sector operations plans.
Should any amendments require modifications to LOAs, we would include
these changes in updated LOAs and provide these to the appropriate
sector members.
As in previous years, we retain the right to revoke exemptions in-
season for the following reasons: If we determine that the exemption
jeopardizes management measures, objectives, or rebuilding efforts; if
the exemption results in unforeseen negative impacts on other managed
fish stocks, habitat, or protected resources; if the exemption causes
enforcement concerns; if catch from trips utilizing the exemption
cannot properly be monitored; or if a sector is not meeting certain
requirements. If it becomes necessary to revoke the exemption, we will
do so through a process consistent with the Administrative Procedure
Act.
Each sector is required to ensure that it does not exceed its ACE
during the fishing year. Sector vessels are required to retain all
legal-sized allocated NE multispecies stocks, unless a sector is
granted an exemption allowing its member vessels to discard legal-sized
unmarketable fish at sea. Catch (defined as landings and discards) of
all allocated NE multispecies stocks by a sector's vessels count
against the sector's allocation. Catch from a sector trip (e.g., not
fishing under provisions of a NE multispecies exempted fishery or with
exempted gear) targeting dogfish, monkfish, skate, and lobster (with
non-trap gear) would be deducted from the sector's ACE because these
trips use gear capable of catching groundfish. Catch from a trip in an
exempted fishery does not count against a sector's allocation because
the catch is assigned to a separate ACL sub-component.
For fishing years 2010 and 2011, there was no requirement for an
industry-funded ASM program, and we were able to fund an ASM program
with a target ASM coverage rate of 30 percent of all trips. In
addition, we provided 8-percent observer coverage through the Northeast
Fishery Observer Program (NEFOP), which helps to support the
Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology (SBRM) and stock
assessments. This resulted in an overall target coverage rate of 38
percent, between ASM and NEFOP, for fishing years 2010 and 2011.
Beginning in fishing year 2012, we have conducted an annual analysis to
determine the total coverage that would be necessary to achieve the
same level of precision as attained by the 38-percent total coverage
target used for fishing years 2010 and 2011. Since fishing year 2012,
industry has been required to pay for their costs of ASM coverage,
while we continued to fund NEFOP. However, we were able to fund the
industry's portion of ASM costs and NEFOP coverage in fishing years
2012 through 2014. Table 4 shows the annual target coverage rates.
Table 4--Historic Target Coverage Rate for Monitoring
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total coverage ASM coverage rate NEFOP coverage
Fishing year rate (percent) (percent) rate (percent) Funding source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010................................ 38 30 8 NMFS
2011................................ 38 30 8 NMFS
2012................................ 25 17 8 NMFS
2013................................ 22 14 8 NMFS
2014................................ 26 18 8 NMFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to funding changes that would be required by the proposed SBRM
amendment, we expect that sector vessels will be responsible for paying
at-sea costs associated with the ASM program before the end of the 2015
fishing year. Thus, sectors will be responsible for designing,
implementing, and funding an ASM program in fishing years 2015 and 2016
that will provide a level of ASM coverage specified by NMFS. Amendment
16 regulations require NMFS to specify a level of ASM coverage that is
sufficient to meet the same coefficient of variation (CV) specified in
the SBRM, and to accurately monitor sector operations. Framework 48
clarified the level of ASM coverage necessary to meet these goals.
Regarding meeting the SBRM CV level, Framework 48 determined that it
should be made at the overall stock level, which is consistent with the
level NMFS determined was necessary in fishing year 2013. Framework 48
also amended the goals of the sector monitoring program to include
achieving an accuracy level sufficient to minimize effects of potential
monitoring bias.
Taking the provisions of Framework 48 into account, and
interpreting the ASM monitoring provision in the context of Magnuson-
Stevens Act requirements and National Standards, we have determined
that the appropriate level of ASM coverage should be set at the level
that meets the CV requirement specified in the SBRM and minimizes the
cost burden to sectors and NMFS to the extent practicable, while still
providing a reliable estimate of overall catch by sectors needed for
monitoring ACEs and ACLs. Based on this standard, NMFS has determined
that the appropriate target coverage rate for fishing year 2015 is 24
percent. We expect ASM coverage to be 20 percent and NEFOP coverage to
be 4 percent, covering a total of 24
[[Page 12386]]
percent of all sector trips, with the exception of trips using a few
specific exemptions, as described later in this rule. We will use
discards derived from these observed and monitored trips to calculate
discards for unobserved sector trips. We have published a more detailed
summary of the supporting information, explanation and justification
for this decision at: https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/ro/fso/reports/Sectors/ASM/FY2015_Multispecies_Sector_ASM_Requirements_Summary.pdf.
The draft operations plans submitted in September 2014 included
industry-funded ASM plans for fishing year 2015. Therefore, we are
proposing to approve the sector's ASM programs as described in their
operations plans. We gave sectors the option to design their own
programs in compliance with regulations, or opt for the program that we
have previously utilized in previous fishing years. ASM programs
proposed by the sectors are described in detail later in this proposed
rule. The proposed operations plans each contain an ASM program
sufficient to ensure ASM coverage for fishing years 2015 and 2016,
including once sectors assume responsibility for funding their ASM
program, at the required levels stated in this rule. Given the
potential for changes in the ASM program funding for sectors, NMFS will
verify that all approved sectors continue to comply with all ASM
requirements, including contracting with approved providers in a timely
fashion.
We are currently looking at how industry funding of the ASM program
will affect our data collection systems, especially the PTNS system,
and have begun working on an implementation plan to help ensure a
seamless transition when the industry assumes responsibility for at-sea
costs in 2015. To ensure that the ASM programs continue to provide
sufficient coverage, the Regional Administrator is authorized to adjust
operational standards such as vessel selection protocols as needed,
consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act. We will continue to
keep the sector managers informed about any changes or updates to the
situation.
Our ability to fund our portion of costs for ASM coverage above
SBRM coverage levels for the entire 2015 and 2016 fishing years is not
precisely known at this time due to budget uncertainties. Currently,
funding for our portion of ASM costs will expire before the end of the
2015 fishing year. If we have insufficient funding available for our
portion of coverage costs beyond that time, we may need to consider
other measures, including emergency action, to allow sectors to
continue fishing while still ensuring that we can adequately monitor
sector catch for management purposes. We expect this funding issue to
be resolved before this rule is effective, but are seeking comments on
possible measures to help adequately monitor catch limits.
Sectors are required to monitor their allocations and catch, and
submit weekly catch reports to us. If a sector reaches an ACE threshold
(specified in the operations plan), the sector must provide sector
allocation usage reports on a daily basis. Once a sector's allocation
for a particular stock is caught, that sector is required to cease all
fishing operations in that stock area until it acquires more ACE. ACE
may be transferred between sectors, but transfers to or from common
pool vessels is prohibited. Within 60 days of when we complete year-end
catch accounting, each sector is required to submit an annual report
detailing the sector's catch (landings and discards), enforcement
actions, and pertinent information necessary to evaluate the
biological, economic, and social impacts of each sector.
Each sector contract provides procedures to enforce the sector
operations plan, explains sector monitoring and reporting requirements,
presents a schedule of penalties for sector plan violations, and
provides sector managers with the authority to issue stop fishing
orders to sector members who violate provisions of the operations plan
and contract. A sector and sector members can be held jointly and
severally liable for ACE overages, discarding legal-sized fish, and/or
misreporting catch (landings or discards). Each sector operations plan
submitted for fishing years 2015 and 2016 states that the sector would
withhold an initial reserve from the sector's ACE sub-allocation to
each individual member to prevent the sector from exceeding its ACE.
Each sector contract details the method for initial ACE sub-allocation
to sector members. For fishing years 2015 and 2016, each sector has
proposed that each sector member could harvest an amount of fish equal
to the amount each individual member's permit contributed to the
sector.
Requested Fishing Years 2015 and 2016 Exemptions
Sectors requested 22 exemptions from the NE multispecies
regulations through their fishing years 2015 and 2016 operations plans.
We evaluate each exemption to determine whether it allows for effective
administration of and compliance with the operations plan and sector
allocation, and that it is consistent with the goals and objectives of
the FMP. We propose to grant the following for fishing years 2015 and
2016: 16 exemptions that were previously granted; 1 exemption that was
previously granted, but has been modified; 1 exemption that we propose
to partially grant; and 1 new exemption. We propose to deny three
exemption requests for fishing years 2015 and 2016.
For fishing year 2014, sectors had requested an exemption that
would allow access to year-round closed areas. This request may be
considered in a separate action pending results from an ongoing
Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) (see Exemptions That May Be Considered in
a Separate Action).
A discussion of all 22 exemption requests appears below; we request
public comment on the proposed sector operations plans and our proposal
to grant 19 requested exemptions, in whole or partially, and deny 3
requested exemptions, as well as the EA prepared for this action.
Exemptions We Propose To Grant (16)
In fishing year 2014, we exempted sectors from the following
requirements, all of which have been requested for fishing years 2015
and 2016, and which we propose to grant again: (1) 120-day block out of
the fishery required for Day gillnet vessels; (2) 20-day spawning block
out of the fishery required for all vessels; (3) prohibition on a
vessel hauling another vessel's gillnet gear; (4) limits on the number
of gillnets that may be hauled on GB when fishing under a NE
multispecies/monkfish DAS; (5) limits on the number of hooks that may
be fished; (6) DAS Leasing Program length and horsepower restrictions;
(7) prohibition on discarding; (8) daily catch reporting by sector
managers for sector vessels participating in the Closed Area (CA) I
Hook Gear Haddock Special Access Program (SAP); (9) prohibition on
fishing inside and outside of the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP while on
the same trip; (10) prohibition on a vessel hauling another vessel's
hook gear; (11) the requirement to declare intent to fish in the
Eastern U.S./Canada SAP and the CA II Yellowtail Flounder/Haddock SAP
prior to leaving the dock; (12) gear requirements in the Eastern U.S./
Canada Management Area; (13) seasonal restrictions for the Eastern
U.S./Canada Haddock SAP; (14) seasonal restrictions for the CA II
Yellowtail Flounder/Haddock SAP; (15) sampling exemption; and (16)
prohibition on groundfish trips in the Nantucket Lightship Closed Area.
[[Page 12387]]
A detailed description of the previously approved exemptions and
rationale for their approval can be found in the applicable final rules
identified in Table 5 below.
Table 5--Exemptions From Previous Fishing Years Proposed for Approval in Fishing Years 2015 and 2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exemptions Rulemaking Date Citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-8, 12........................ Fishing Year 2011 Sector Operations April 25, 2011...... 76 FR 23076
Final Rule.
9-11........................... Fishing Year 2012 Sector Operations May 2, 2012......... 77 FR 26129
Final Rule.
13-15.......................... Fishing Year 2013 Sector Operations May 2, 2013......... 78 FR 25591
Interim Final Rule.
16............................. Fishing Year 2014 Sector Operations April 28, 2014...... 79 FR 23278
Final Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NE Multispecies Federal Register documents can be found at https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable/species/multispecies/ sustainable/species/multispecies/.
Exemption We Propose To Approve, but Have Modified From 2014(1)
(17) Prohibition on Combining Small Mesh Exempted Fishery and Sector
Trips
For fishing year 2014, sectors requested and we granted an
exemption that would allow vessels to possess and use small-mesh and
large-mesh trawl gear on a single trip, within portions of the SNE
regulated mesh areas (RMA). Sectors proposed that vessels using this
exemption to fish with smaller mesh would fish in two discrete areas
that have been shown to have minimal amounts of regulated species and
ocean pout. See the 2014 Sector Final Rule (79 FR 23278; April 28,
2014) for a complete description of the previously granted exemption.
For fishing years 2015 and 2016, sectors requested a similar
exemption, but with a revised northern border of the eastern Small-Mesh
Exemption Area 2, shifted 15 minutes north. This expansion will allow
for greater opportunities for sector vessels to target small-mesh
species. The coordinates and maps for these two areas are shown in
Figure 1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09MR15.003
Sector Small-Mesh Fishery Exemption Area 1 is bounded by the
following coordinates connected in the order listed by straight lines,
except where otherwise noted:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point N. Latitude W. Longitude Note
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A........................... 40[deg]39.2' 73[deg]07.0'
B........................... 40[deg]34.0' 73[deg]07.0'
C........................... 41[deg]03.5' 71[deg]34.0'
D........................... 41[deg]23.0' 71[deg]11.5'
E........................... 41[deg]27.6' 71[deg]11.5' (\1\)
F........................... 41[deg]18.3' 71[deg]51.5'
G........................... 41[deg]04.3' 71[deg]51.5' (\2\)
A........................... 40[deg]39.2' 73[deg]07.0'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ From POINT E to POINT F along the southernmost coastline of Rhode
Island and crossing all bays and inlets following the COLREGS
Demarcation Lines defined in 33 CFR part 80.
\2\ From POINT G back to POINT A along the southernmost coastline of
Long Island, NY, and crossing all bays and inlets following the
COLREGS Demarcation Lines defined in 33 CFR part 80.
For fishing years 2015 and 2016, Sector Small-Mesh Fishery
Exemption Area 2 is bound by the following coordinates connected in the
order listed by straight lines. Sector vessels cannot fish the small-
mesh portion of their trip using this exemption in the Nantucket
Lighship Closed Area where the two areas overlap.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point N. Latitude W. Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.............................. 41[deg]15.0' N 71[deg]20.0' W
I.............................. 41[deg]15.0' N 70[deg]00.0' W
[[Page 12388]]
J.............................. 40[deg]27.0' N 70[deg]00.0' W
K.............................. 40[deg]27.0' N 71[deg]20.0' W
H.............................. 41[deg]15.0' N 71[deg]20.0' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As was approved in fishing year 2014, one of three trawl gear
modifications would be required when using small mesh: Drop-chain sweep
with a minimum of 12 inches (30.48 cm) in length; a large-mesh belly
panel with a minimum of 32-inch (81.28-cm) mesh size; or an excluder
grate secured forward of the codend with an outlet hole forward of the
grate with bar spacing of no more than 1.97 inches (5.00 cm) wide.
These gear modifications, when fished properly, have been shown to
reduce the catch of legal and sub-legal groundfish stocks. Requiring
these modifications is intended to also reduce the incentive for a
sector vessel to target groundfish with small mesh.
A vessel using this exemption is required to meet the same NEFOP
and ASM coverage as standard groundfish trips (i.e., a total of 24
percent in fishing year 2015). The vessel would be required to declare
their intent to use small mesh to target non-regulated species by
submitting a trip start hail through its vessel monitoring system (VMS)
unit prior to departure, which would be used for monitoring and
enforcement purposes. Trips declaring this exemption must stow their
small-mesh gear and use their large-mesh gear first, and once finished
with the large mesh, would have to submit a Multispecies Catch Report
via VMS with all catch on board at that time. Once the Catch Report was
sent, the vessel could then deploy small mesh with the required
modifications in the specific areas (see map above), outside of the
Nantucket Lightship Closed Area, at which point, the large mesh could
not be redeployed. Any legal-sized allocated groundfish stocks caught
during these small-mesh hauls must be landed and the associated landed
weight (dealer or vessel trip report (VTR)) would be deducted from the
sector's ACE.
As in fishing year 2014, we are concerned about vessels potentially
catching groundfish, including bycatch of juvenile fish, in the
requested exemption area with small-mesh nets. The expansion of the
Small-Mesh Exemption Area 2 by 15 minutes north could increase this
potential, because more groundfish are found in the expansion area. The
three gear modifications proposed for this exemption could mitigate
catch of regulated species when properly installed, but none have been
shown to completely eliminate the catch of regulated species.
If approved, we will closely monitor the catch from these exempted
trips. If it is determined that this exemption is having a negative
impact on groundfish stocks, we would consider revoking this exemption
during the fishing year.
Exemption We Propose To Partially Grant, and Partially Deny (1)
(18) Limits on the Number of Gillnets on Day Gillnet Vessels
The FMP limits the number of gillnets a Day gillnet vessel may fish
in the groundfish RMAs to prevent an uncontrolled increase in the
number of nets being fished, thus undermining applicable DAS effort
controls. The limits are specific to the type of gillnet within each
RMA: 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 Mid-Atlantic (MA) RMA
(Sec. 648.80(b)(2)(iv)). We previously approved this exemption in
fishing years 2010, 2011, and 2012 to allow sector vessels to fish up
to 150 nets (any combination of flatfish or roundfish nets) in any RMA
to provide greater operational flexibility to sector vessels in
deploying gillnet gear. Sectors argued that the gillnet limits were
designed to control fishing effort and are no longer necessary because
a sector's ACE limits overall fishing mortality.
Previous effort analysis of all sector vessels using gillnet gear
indicated an increase in gear used in the RMA which could lead to an
increase in interactions with protected species. While a sector's ACE
is designed to limit a stock's fishing mortality, fishing effort may
affect other species. This increased effort could ultimately lead to a
rise in interactions with protected species; however, we do not expect
this to be the case, because a take reduction plan has been implemented
to reduce bycatch in the fisheries affecting these species.
For fishing year 2013, based on the comments received and the
concern for spawning GOM cod, we restricted the use of this exemption
to better protect spawning cod. Therefore, a vessel fishing in the GOM
RMA was able to use this exemption seasonally, but was restricted to
the 100-net gillnet limit in blocks 124 and 125 in May, and in blocks
132 and 133 in June. A vessel fishing in the GB RMA, SNE RMA, MA RMA,
and the GOM outside of these times and areas did not have this
additional restriction. We granted this exemption with the same GOM
seasonal restrictions for fishing year 2014.
The November 2014 interim action implemented to protect GOM cod (79
FR 67362; November 13, 2014) revoked this exemption for all of the GOM
for the remainder of fishing year 2014, given concerns relating to
mortality of GOM cod caused by continuous fishing by gillnets left in
the water and the potential to disrupt spawning when cod are caught.
For these same concerns, we are proposing to partially grant the
exemption for fishing years 2015 and 2016 when fishing in all RMAs
except the GOM, and to deny the exemption for the GOM. Therefore,
vessels fishing in the GOM under the Day boat gillnet category would be
restricted to no more than 100 nets, only 50 of which may be roundfish
nets.
New Exemption Proposed (1)
(19) Regulated Mesh Size 6.5-Inch (16.5-cm) or Greater, for Directed
Redfish Trips
Minimum mesh size restrictions (Sec. 648.80(a)(3)(i), (a)(4)(i),
(b)(2)(i), and (c)(2)(i)) were implemented under previous groundfish
actions to reduce overall mortality on groundfish stocks, change the
selection pattern of the fishery to target larger fish, improve
survival of sublegal fish, and allow sublegal fish more opportunity to
spawn before entering the fishery. Beginning in fishing year 2012, we
have approved exemptions that allow sector vessels to target redfish,
the smallest species of regulated groundfish, with a sub-legal size
mesh codend, ranging from 4.5 inches (11.4 cm) to 6 inches (15.2 cm)
(see Table 6). In order to use these previous exemptions, sectors have
been required to meet an 80-percent threshold of redfish catch,
relative to groundfish catch, and a 5-percent discard threshold of
total groundfish, including redfish. These thresholds were intended to
ensure that a vessel using the exemption effectively targets redfish
and does not target other species with a smaller mesh, and attempts to
avoid catching sub-legal groundfish. The thresholds were based on
Component 2 of the REDNET report (Kanwit et al. 2013), which used a
4.5-inch mesh codend, and observer data for trips conducted in fishing
year 2012. REDNET is a group that includes the Maine Department of
Marine Resources, the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, and
the University of Massachusetts School for Marine Science and
Technology joined with other members of the scientific community and
the industry to develop a research plan to develop a sustainable,
directed, redfish trawl fishery in the GOM. Each year, we have changed
the
[[Page 12389]]
exemption at the sectors' request in an attempt to balance the goal of
increasing use of the exemption while preventing misuse and ensuring it
is consistent with the FMP's goals and objectives.
Table 6--Redfish Exemptions by Fishing Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exemptions Rulemaking Date Citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.0 inch (15.2 cm) with 100% NMFS- FY 2012 Sector Operations May 2, 2012............. 77 FR 26129
funded coverage. Final Rule.
4.5 inch (11.4 cm) with 100% NMFS- FY 2012 Redfish Exemption March 5, 2013........... 78 FR 14226
funded coverage. Final Rule.
4.5 inch (11.4 cm) with 100% FY 2013 Sector Operations May 2, 2013............. 78 FR 25591
Industry-funded coverage. Interim Final Rule.
6.0 inch (15.2 cm) with standard FY 2014 Sector Operations April 28, 2014.......... 79 FR 23278
observer coverage. Final Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NE Multispecies Federal Register documents can be found at https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/sustainable/species/multispecies sustainable/species/multispecies.
For fishing years 2012 and 2013, the exemption required 100-percent
monitoring with either an ASM or observer on every trip, primarily
because of concerns over a greater retention of sub-legal groundfish,
as well as non-allocated species and bycatch. In fishing year 2012, we
found that allowing trips that are randomly selected for federally
funded NEFOP or ASM coverage provided an incentive to take an exemption
trip when selected for coverage, thereby reducing the number of
observers/monitors available to cover standard sector trips (i.e.,
trips not utilizing this exemption). If fewer observers/monitors deploy
on standard sector trips, then the exemption undermines both the
ability to meet required coverage levels and the reliability of discard
rates calculated for unobserved standard sector trips. Therefore, in
fishing year 2013, we required sectors to pay for 100 percent of the
at-sea cost for a monitor on all redfish exemption trips, which
resulted in sectors not taking a redfish trip that fishing year.
For fishing year 2014, we granted an exemption that allowed vessels
to use a 6-inch (15.2-cm) or larger mesh codend to target redfish when
fishing in the Redfish Exemption Area. The vessels participating in the
redfish fishery in fishing year 2014 were subject to the same NEFOP and
ASM target coverage as standard groundfish trips (26 percent). Vessels
could fish with the regulated mesh nets (6.5-inch [16.5-cm] codends or
larger) and with the 6.0-inch (15.2-cm) mesh codends on the same trip;
however, for all trips (by sector, by month) declaring this exemption,
we monitored landings for the entire trip to determine if the vessel
had met the 80-percent redfish catch threshold and the 5-percent
discard threshold.
Following approval of the exemption in fishing year 2014, sectors
indicated that an 80-percent redfish catch threshold, based on REDNET
data collected using a 4.5-inch (11.4-cm) mesh codend, is not
appropriate for all mesh sizes (i.e., as mesh size increases, the
efficiency of catching redfish decreases). Additionally, given the
average landed value of redfish, they indicated that they do not
consider it economically viable to have an offload comprised of 80
percent redfish. Therefore, as of January 2015, few have been taken
under this exemption, because, according to sectors, they cannot
effectively or profitably target redfish to meet the 80-percent
threshold.
For fishing years 2015 and 2016, we propose granting the sectors'
request to use a 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh codend when fishing in the
redfish exemption. A vessel would have the option to fish the first
portion of a trip with current legal codend mesh size (6.5 inches; 16.5
cm), and then switch to a codend no smaller than 5.5 inches (14.0 cm)
for the redfish portion of their trip. Allowing sectors to legally
target groundfish on the first portion of the trip would provide
flexibility and would address the sector's concern regarding
profitability. In addition, the sectors have requested a 50-percent
catch threshold, which would only apply to the second half of the trip.
The sectors argue that this threshold is more appropriate for a 5.5-
inch (14.0-cm) codend, as data from Component 3 of the REDNET report
(Pol and He 2013) indicates that as the codend mesh size increases from
4.5 inches (11.4 cm) to 5.5 inches (14.0 cm), selectivity decreases,
making it more difficult for vessels to catch only redfish. However,
the lower 50-percent threshold would allow greater catch of other
regulated groundfish species with small mesh, which could result in
higher discards or targeting of groundfish with small mesh. We are
proposing to address this by implementing reporting requirements to
facilitate monitoring and enforcement. If we detect vessels targeting
non-redfish socks, particularly stocks of concern, the RA retains the
right to rescind approval of the exemption. We request comment on this
issue. The 5-percent discard threshold for all groundfish, including
redfish, would still apply on the redfish portion of observed trips.
Due to concern for GOM cod, we have modified the redfish exemption
area (Figure 2) from 2014 (see Figure 2).
[[Page 12390]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09MR15.004
The Redfish Exemption Area would be bounded on the east by the
U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary, and bounded on the north, west, and
south by the following coordinates, connected in the order listed by
straight lines:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point N. Lat. W. Long. Note
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A........................... 44[deg]27.25' 67[deg]02.75'
B........................... 44[deg]16.25' 67[deg]30.00'
C........................... 44[deg]04.50' 68[deg]00.00'
D........................... 43[deg]52.25' 68[deg]30.00'
E........................... 43[deg]40.25' 69[deg]00.00'
F........................... 43[deg]28.25' 69[deg]30.00'
G........................... 43[deg]00.00' 69[deg]30.00'
H........................... 43[deg]00.00' 70[deg]00.00'
I........................... 42[deg]00.00' 70[deg]00.00'
J........................... 42[deg]00.00' (67[deg]00.63') (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The intersection of 42[deg]00' N. latitude and the U.S.-Canada
Maritime Boundary, approximate longitude in parentheses.
We have modified the redfish exemption area to exclude block 138
for the entire fishing year, and allow only seasonal access to block
131. Sector vessels would not be allowed to use the redfish exemption
in block 131 in February and March. We based this decision on the
closures implemented by the November 2014 interim action taken for the
protection of cod; areas 138 and 131 were the only areas closed by the
interim action that overlapped with the fishing year 2014 redfish
exemption area. These areas are known to have higher levels of GOM cod
catch and/or spawning activity, and we propose to close them to avoid
interaction with and bycatch of GOM cod. Additionally, area 138 has
historically had very little redfish catch; therefore, the exclusion of
this area should not limit sectors from targeting redfish. The area is
bounded on the east, north, west, and south by the following
coordinates, connected by straight lines in the order listed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point N. Lat. W. Long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.............................. 43[deg]00.00' 69[deg]30.00'
H.............................. 43[deg]00.00' 70[deg]00.00'
K.............................. 42[deg]30.00' 70[deg]00.00'
L.............................. 42[deg]30.00' 69[deg]30.00'
G.............................. 43[deg]00.00' 69[deg]30.00'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels must declare their trip in the pre-trip notification system
(PTNS) under standard requirements, but there are no additional
monitoring requirements above the target coverage for the groundfish
fishery. Prior to leaving the dock, any vessel that intends to use the
redfish exemption on a trip must declare so through the VMS trip start
hail by checking the box next to ``Redfish Trip'' under sector
exemptions. This notification must be made if the vessel intends to use
a 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) codend or larger to target redfish on any portion
of the trip.
Any vessel declaring this exemption must submit catch reports via
VMS each day for the entire trip. For the first portion of the trip, a
vessel may fish using a 6.0-inch (15.2-cm) mesh codend with selective
gear in the GB BSA (current mesh flexibility allowed from Council
exemption est. in 2010) or 6.5-inch (16.5-cm) mesh codend in any BSA,
including the GOM. Any sub-legal codend must be stowed below deck for
this entire portion of the trip. Catch thresholds do not apply to this
portion of the trip.
When a vessel switches its codend to target redfish, it must first
transit to the Redfish Exemption Area. Once the vessel is in the
Redfish Exemption Area, it must declare via VMS that it is switching to
the 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh codend (or larger) and will be conducting
the remainder of its fishing activity exclusively in the Redfish
Exemption Area. The vessel can then retrieve the 5.5-inch (14.0-cm)
mesh codend from below deck and begin using it. All fishing activity
for the remainder of the trip must occur in the Redfish Exemption area.
For this portion of the trip, at least 50 percent of the total
allocated groundfish kept must be redfish, and on observed trips, no
more than 5 percent of all groundfish, including redfish, may be
discarded. These thresholds will be used by NMFS to determine if this
sector exemption should be revoked. The vessel must also submit a final
catch report and a Trip End Hail via VMS at the end of the trip to
facilitate dockside enforcement.
There are enforcment concerns associated with the additional
flexibility this exemption provides. Specifically, enforcing different
mesh size restrictions on different portions of a single fishing trip
could be challenging at sea, and there is the potential for vessels to
misreport the mesh size used
[[Page 12391]]
to catch groundfish to avoid having the exemption revoked for exceeding
the threshold.
Additionally, we are concerned about vessels catching groundfish,
including their bycatch of juvenile fish, which could potentially cause
them to exceed the discard threshold of 5 percent, in the Redfish
Exemption Area when fishing with codend mesh sized nets smaller than
the GOM regulated mesh size of 6.5 inches (16.5 cm). The 50-percent
catch threshold is meant to reflect the likely proportion of redfish
catch while using a 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh codend, based on the
results of Component 3 of REDNET. We are concerned, however, that it
could allow sectors to target groundfish when fishing with a smaller
codend and could increase discards that would likely go unreported,
which could undermine the protections of the 5-percent bycatch
threshold. Therefore, we are specifically seeking comment on this
exemption, regarding the enforcement concerns, the reporting concerns,
and the appropriateness of the threshold.
If the redfish exemption is approved, we intend to monitor use of
the exemption carefully. For example, should it be determined that
vessels are not using the exemption when assigned an observer or ASM,
and only using it when unobserved, we would have concerns about
monitoring the exemption. Additionally, if a vessel does not submit
daily catch reports or the required declaration when switching to the
redfish portion of the trip, we may not be able to adequately monitor
the exemption. The RA retains authority to rescind approval of this
exemption, if it is needed. All vessels in a sector may be held jointly
and severally liable for misreporting by a single vessel in a sector.
Exemptions We Propose To Deny (3)
(20) GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh Exemption in May, and January Through April
We propose to deny the GOM sink gillnet mesh exemption request due
to concern for GOM cod. We did not analyze this exemption in the EA
because no new information was available to change the analyses
previously published in past EAs.
The GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh Exemption was approved for fishing years
2010 through 2012. This exemption allowed sector vessels to use 6-inch
(15.2-cm) mesh gillnets in the GOM to target GOM haddock seasonally.
However, due to concerns regarding the stock status of GOM haddock and
the potential increase in interactions with protected species, the
exemption was denied for fishing year 2013 (78 FR 25591, May 2, 2013)
and fishing year 2014.
On November 12, 2014, at the request of the New England Fishery
Management Council and in response a stock assessment conducted by the
Northeast Fisheries Science Center, we published an emergency action
that increased the GOM haddock ACL for fishing year 2014 (79 FR 67090).
This action nearly doubled each sector's ACE for GOM haddock. Because
sectors anticipated that GOM haddock would not be a concern for fishing
year 2014, they again requested this exemption for fishing years 2015
and 2016.
While the stock status of GOM haddock has improved, biomass has not
increased to the level it was in fishing year 2010, when this exemption
was first approved. In addition, we are concerned about the effects of
this exemption on GOM cod. The November 2014 interim action implemented
to protect GOM cod revoked an exemption that resulted in decreasing the
amount of gillnet gear in the GOM, given concerns relating to mortality
of GOM cod caused by continuous fishing by gillnets left in the water
and the potential to disrupt spawning when cod are caught. We are
similarly concerned that using nets smaller than the minimum size may
impact GOM cod mortality. For these same concerns, we are proposing to
deny the GOM Haddock Sink Gillnet Mesh exemption for fishing years 2015
and 2016.
(21) Powering Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) While at the Dock
Beginning in fishing year 2011, we approved an exemption from the
requirement to keep the VMS units powered while tied to the dock or on
a mooring. In fishing year 2012, the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement
(OLE) recognized a lack of compliance. The exemption was only
applicable for vessels that did not otherwise possess Federal fishing
permits for other FMPs that required a VMS unit, and vessels were
required to follow certain protocols, such as sending a powerdown code
before turning off the VMS unit. Misuse of the exemption decreases our
confidence in our ability to adequately monitor the fishery. During
fishing year 2013, we worked with sector managers to identify the
sector members who were out of compliance with the exemption. However,
in this time, compliance did not improve. Therefore, for fishing years
2015 and 2016, we propose to not approve this exemption due to lack of
compliance.
(22) Requirement To Use 6.5-Inch (16.5-cm) Mesh Size or Greater for
Directed Redfish Trips, as Previously Approved in Fishing Year 2014
The exemption request to use a 6.0-inch (15.2-cm) mesh codend nets,
with a threshold of no lower than 80 percent redfish of the total
groundfish catch on hauls using the redfish exemption, for fishing
years 2015 and 2016, is identical to the exemption for fishing year
2014. A second redfish exemption request, described above (exemption
#19), is proposed for approval. Therefore, we are proposing to deny
this exemption request.
Exemption That May Be Considered in a Separate Action (1)
Prohibition on Groundfish Trips in Closed Areas I and II
In fishing year 2013, we disapproved an exemption that would have
allowed sector vessels restricted access to portions of CAs I and II,
provided each trip carried an industry-funded ASM. When we proposed
allowing sector access to these areas, we announced that we did not
have funding to pay for monitoring the additional trips for exemptions
requiring a 100-percent coverage level. Industry members indicated that
it was too expensive to participate in the exemption, given the
requirement to pay for a monitor on every trip. This, in combination
with extensive comment opposing access to these areas to protect
depleted stocks and our concern about the impacts on depleted stocks
such as GB cod and GB yellowtail flounder, resulted in disapproval. For
a detailed description of the exemption request and justifications for
disapproval, see the final rule (78 FR 41772, December 16, 2013).
For fishing year 2014, we remained unable to fund monitoring costs
for exemptions requiring a 100-percent coverage level. In addition, we
had some concerns about funding and administering the shore-side
portion of any monitoring program for an exemption that requires
additional ASM, such as the exemption to access CAs I and II. However,
we authorized two EFPs to gather catch data from CAs I and II, one in
coordination with the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, the other
with members of the industry. Results from these EFPs could better
inform us, the industry, and the public, regarding the economic
efficacy of accessing these CAs, while providing information specific
to bycatch of depleted stocks. Trips taken under these EFPs are
attempting to address the following questions: (1) Could enough
[[Page 12392]]
fish be caught to adequately offset the industry's additional expense
of having an ASM on board, and (2) could catch of groundfish stocks of
concern be addressed?
The two authorized EFPs have allowed access to participating
vessels into the same portions of CAs I and II that were originally
proposed for access to sectors. Vessels using the EFPs are required to
use specialized trawl gear to reduce impacts on flounder species, are
restricted seasonally to avoid spawning fish, and must adhere to an
agreement between the lobster and groundfish fishery in CA II to avoid
gear conflicts. One of the two approved EFPs is still ongoing. Upon
review of the EFP results, we will consider potential access to these
areas through a separate action.
2014 Interim Cod Action
On November 13, 2014, at the request of the New England Fishery
Management Council and in response a stock assessment conducted by the
Northeast Fisheries Science Center, we published an interim action
implemented to protect GOM cod. In this action, one fishing year 2014
exemption (limits on the number of gillnets on Day gillnet vessels,
exemption #18) was revoked when fishing in the GOM because of its
potential to affect GOM cod; the exemption as it applied in GB, SNE,
and MA remains in place. As described above, we are proposing to not
grant the exemption for the limits on gillnets for Day gillnet vessels
in the GOM, but grant it in the other RMAs. Additionally, we have
proposed to modify the previously approved redfish exemption area (as
described in exemption #19) due to concern for GOM cod. There are
several other exemptions proposed in the GOM that also could
potentially affect GOM cod. These exemptions include:
(1) 120-day block out of the fishery required for Day gillnet
vessels;
(2) 20-day spawning block out of the fishery required for all
vessels;
(3) Prohibition on a vessel hauling another vessel's gillnet gear;
(5) Limits on the number of hooks that may be fished; and
(10) Prohibition on a vessel hauling another vessel's hook gear.
While we request comment on all exemptions in fishing years 2015
and 2016, we specifically request the public to comment on exemptions
in the GOM that could affect the GOM cod stock and its ability to
rebuild.
Additional Sector Provisions
Inshore GOM Restrictions
Several sectors have proposed a provision to limit and more
accurately document a vessel's behavior when fishing in what they
consider the inshore portion of the GOM BSA, or the area to the west of
70[deg] 15' W. long. A vessel that is carrying an observer or ASM would
remain free to fish without restriction. As proposed under the Inshore
GOM Restriction provision, if a vessel is not carrying an observer or
ASM and fishes any part of its trip in the GOM west of 70[deg] 15' W.
long., the vessel would be prohibited from fishing outside of the GOM
BSA. Also, if a vessel is not carrying an observer or ASM and fishes
any part of its trip outside the GOM BSA, this provision would prohibit
a vessel from fishing west of 70[deg] 15' W. long. in the GOM BSA. The
sectors' proposal includes a requirement for a vessel to declare
whether or not it intends to fish in the inshore GOM area through the
trip start hail. We are providing sector managers with the ability to
monitor this provision through the Sector Information Management Module
(SIMM), a Web site where we currently provide roster, trip, discard,
and observer information to sector managers. If approved, final
declaration requirements would be included in each vessel's LOA. We
propose to allow a sector to use a federally funded NEFOP observer or
ASM on these trips because we do not believe it will create bias in
coverage or discard estimates, as fishing behavior is not expected to
change as a result of this provision.
Prohibition on a Vessel Hauling Another Vessel's Trap Gear To Target
Groundfish
Several sectors have proposed a provision to allow a vessel to haul
another vessel's fish trap gear, similar to the current exemptions that
allow a vessel to haul another vessel's gillnet gear, or hook gear.
These exemptions have generally been referred to as ``community'' gear
exemptions. Regulations at Sec. 648.84(a) require a vessel to mark all
bottom-tending fixed gear, which would include fish trap gear used to
target groundfish. To facilitate enforcement of that regulation, we
propose requiring that any community fish trap gear be tagged by each
vessel that plans on hauling the gear, similar to how this provision
was implemented in fishing year 2014. This would allow one vessel to
deploy the trap gear and another vessel to haul the trap gear, provided
both vessels tag the gear prior to deployment. This requirement would
be captured in the sector's operations plan to provide the opportunity
for the sector to monitor the use of this provision and ensure that the
OLE and the U.S. Coast Guard can enforce the provision.
At-Sea Monitoring Proposals
For fishing years 2015 and 2016, each sector is required to develop
and fund an ASM program that must be reviewed and approved by NMFS. In
the event that a proposed ASM program could not be approved, all
sectors were asked to include an option to use the current NMFS-
designed ASM program as a back-up. Sustainable Harvest Sectors 1 and 3,
GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, Northeast Coastal Communities Sector, and
Maine Coast Community Sector have proposed to use the ASM program that
we developed and used for fishing years 2010-2014. We propose this
program for these sectors because we believe the existing program to be
consistent with goals and objectives of monitoring, and with regulatory
requirements. As requested, the remaining 12 sectors stated that they
would use the NMFS-designed ASM program in the event that we did not
approve their individual ASM program for fishing years 2015 and 2016.
NEFS 4 has not included provisions for an ASM program because the
sector operates as a private permit bank and explicitly prohibits
fishing.
We propose to approve the ASM programs proposed by the NEFS 1-13
(excluding NEFS 4). These programs state that they will: Contract with
a NMFS-approved ASM provider; meet the specified coverage level; and
utilize the PTNS for random selection of monitored trips and
notification to providers. In addition, these proposed ASM programs
detail protocols for waivers, incident reporting, and safety
requirements. We believe that the proposed programs are consistent with
goals and objectives of monitoring, and with regulatory requirements.
Although the current regulations require a sector to fund its costs
for its ASM program beginning in fishing year 2013, we funded
industry's ASM costs in fishing years 2013 and 2014. It is unclear if
the Agency will have money to fund industry's ASM costs, in whole or in
part, for fishing year 2015. Additional information on funding and
implementation of ASM for fishing year 2015 will be provided at a
future date.
Sector EA
To comply with NEPA, a Programmatic EA was prepared encompassing
all 17 operations plans, analyzing the impacts expected from the
[[Page 12393]]
continued operation of the sectors over the next six years. The sector
EA is tiered from the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for
Amendment 16. The EA examines the biological, economic, and social
impacts unique to each sector's proposed operations, including
requested exemptions, and provides a cumulative effect analysis that
addresses the combined impact of the direct and indirect effects of
approving all proposed sector operations plans. The summary findings of
the EA conclude that each sector would produce similar effects that
have non-significant impacts. Visit https://www.regulations.gov to view
the EA prepared for the 17 sectors that this rule proposes to approve.
We decided to do a programmatic assessment beginning in fishing
year 2015 because the past four years of sector operations have been
relatively homogeneous, and the EA covering the management regime has
changed little since inception of the program. We believe future sector
operations would likely operate similarly, and the impacts associated
with their activities would also likely be similar in nature to past
years. However, we understand that it is impossible to fully anticipate
the future, and that new requests for sector exemptions may arise that
could have impacts outside the scope of this programmatic document. In
this case, a supplementary EA may be necessary to analyze future sector
operations.
Classification
The Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requires advance
notice of rulemaking and opportunity for public comment. The Council
required additional time to develop measures to address GOM cod as part
of Framework 53, which delayed our ability to present this to the
public. We are therefore providing a 15-day comment period for this
rule. A longer comment period would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest because we must publish a final rule prior to the
start of fishing year 2015 on May 1, 2015, to enable sectors to fish at
the start of the fishing year. A vessel enrolled in a sector may not
fish in fishing year 2015 unless its operations plan is approved. If
the final rule is not published prior to May 1, the permits enrolled in
sectors must either stop fishing until their operations plan is
approved or elect to fish in the common pool for the entirety of
fishing year 2015. Both of these options would have very negative
impacts for the permits enrolled in the sectors. Delaying the
implementation beyond May 1, 2015, would result in an unnecessary
economic loss to the sector members because vessels would be prevented
from fishing in a month when sector vessels landed approximately 10
percent of several allocations, including GB cod east and GB winter
flounder. Finally, without a seamless transition between fishing years
2014 and 2015, a delay would require sector vessels to remove gear that
complies with an exemption, and redeploy the gear once the final rule
is effective. Talking these additional trips would require additional
fuel and staffing when catch may not be landed.
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 proposed 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.
This proposed action is exempt from the procedures of Executive
Order 12866 because this action contains no implementing regulations.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
As outlined in the preamble to this proposed rule, the purpose of
this action is the implementation of fishing years 2015 and 2016 sector
operations plans and associated regulatory exemptions. In an effort to
rebuild the NE multispecies complex, other actions have reduced the
allocations of several stocks managed by the NE Multispecies FMP, and
the economic impacts of those allocations have been analyzed in
accordance with their respective actions. This action, if finalized,
would provide flexible fisheries management options to reduce the
potential social and economic hardships resulting from those allocation
reductions.
The regulated entities most likely to be affected by the proposed
action are the 102 groundfish-dependent ownership entities that own
permits currently enrolled in sectors, all of which are considered
small under the SBA's definition of a small finfishing business.
Under the proposed rule, sector operations plans for fishing years
2015 and 2016 would be approved, allowing sector participants to use
the universal sector exemptions granted under Amendment 16. In addition
to the universal sector exemptions granted under the approval of
individual sector operations plans, sector participants have requested
relaxation of 22 other gear, area, administrative, and seasonal
restrictions. This rule proposes to grant 19 of the 22 requested
exemptions. Because all of the regulated entities are considered small
businesses per the SBA guidelines, there are no disproportionate
impacts for participating in sectors and using the universal exemptions
and additional exemptions requested by individual sectors.
All of the requested sector-specific exemptions in this proposed
rule are expected to have a positive economic impact on participants,
as they further increase the flexibility of fishermen to land their
allocation at their discretion. By choosing when and how to land their
allocations, sector participants have the potential to reduce marginal
costs, increase revenues, and ultimately increase profitability. Again,
it is expected that fishermen will only use sector-specific exemptions
that they believe will maximize utility, and that long-term stock
impacts from the collective exemptions will be minimal and will be
outweighed by benefits from operational flexibility.
This rule would not impose significant negative economic impacts on
any of the sector participants. No small entities would be placed at a
competitive disadvantage to large entities, and the regulations would
not reduce the profit for any small entities. Therefore, this rule
would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. As a result, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
not required and none has been prepared.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: March 3, 2015.
Eileen Sobeck,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-05386 Filed 3-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P