Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 17A, 47733-47736 [2016-17272]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
49 CFR 396.17, a rule that requires all
CMVs to be inspected at least once
every 12 months in accordance with
Appendix G to the FMCSRs (‘‘Minimum
Periodic Inspection Standards’’), and 49
CFR 396.23, a rule that identifies
alternative inspections that are
considered equivalent to the annual
inspection required under 49 CFR
396.17. The Agency interpreted the
regulations to permit a roadside
inspection to be considered as
equivalent to the annual inspection. The
regulatory guidance was republished on
April 4, 1997, at 62 FR 16370.
A final rule issued by FMCSA,
published elsewhere in today’s issue of
the Federal Register, amends 49 CFR
396.17(f) and removes 49 CFR 396.23(a)
to eliminate the option for a motor
carrier to meet the periodic inspection
requirements through roadside
inspections.
Because not every element of
Appendix G is reviewed/inspected
during a roadside inspection conducted
under the North American Standard
Inspection, most roadside inspections
do not meet the periodic (annual)
inspection requirements under 49 CFR
396.17. For this reason, FMCSA does
not believe it is appropriate to continue
to allow motor carriers to use roadside
inspections conducted by enforcement
officials to satisfy the annual inspection
requirements in 49 CFR 396.17(f). Motor
carriers or their agents will now be
required to complete a periodic
inspection of every CMV under their
control in accordance with Appendix G
at least once every 12 months,
irrespective of whether a roadside
inspection is performed, unless the
vehicle is subject to a mandatory State
inspection program in accordance with
49 CFR 396.23 which has been
determined to be as effective as the
requirements of 49 CFR 396.17.
Given the amendments to 49 CFR
396.17(f) discussed above, the final rule
also removes 49 CFR 396.23(a), which
currently permits a roadside inspection
program of a State or other jurisdiction
to be considered as meeting the periodic
inspection requirements of 49 CFR
396.17.
As a result of the final rule, and to
maintain consistency between the
amended FMCSRs and the published
regulatory guidance, two regulatory
guidance questions/answers are
amended as follows:
Section 396.17, Question 1
Question 1: Some of a motor carrier’s
vehicles are registered in a State with a
mandated inspection program which
has been determined to be as effective
as the Federal periodic inspection
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Jul 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
program, but these vehicles are not used
in that State. Is the motor carrier
required to make sure the vehicles are
inspected under that State’s program in
order to meet the Federal periodic
inspection requirements?
Guidance: If the State requires all
vehicles registered in the State to be
inspected through its mandatory
program, then the motor carrier must
use the State program to satisfy the
Federal requirements. If, however, the
State inspection program includes an
exception or exemption for vehicles
which are registered in the State but
domiciled outside of the State, then the
motor carrier may meet the Federal
requirements through a self-inspection,
a third party inspection, or a periodic
inspection performed in any State with
a program that the Federal Motor Carrier
Administration (FMCSA) determines is
comparable to, or as effective as, the
part 396 requirements.
Section 396.23, Question 1
Question 1: Can a violation-free
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance
(CVSA) Level I or Level V inspection be
used to satisfy the periodic inspection
requirements of § 396.17?
Guidance: No, a CVSA Level I or
Level V inspection is not equivalent to
the Federal periodic inspection
requirements.
Issued on July 14, 2016.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016–17362 Filed 7–21–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 160222132–6585–02]
RIN 0648–BF77
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; Shrimp
Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico;
Amendment 17A
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues regulations to
implement Amendment 17A to the
Fishery Management Plan for the
Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico
(FMP), as prepared and submitted by
the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) Fishery
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47733
Management Council (Council). This
final rule extends the current Gulf
commercial shrimp permit moratorium
for 10 more years. The intent of this
final rule and Amendment 17A is to
protect federally managed Gulf shrimp
stocks while promoting catch efficiency,
economic efficiency, and stability in the
fishery.
DATES: This rule is effective August 22,
2016.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of
Amendment 17A, which includes an
environmental assessment, a Regulatory
Flexibility Act analysis, and a regulatory
impact review, may be obtained from
the Southeast Regional Office Web site
at https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/
sustainable_fisheries/gulf_fisheries/
shrimp/2016/am17a/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Gerhart, telephone: 727–824–
5305, or email: Susan.Gerhart@
noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
shrimp fishery in the Gulf is managed
under the FMP. The FMP was prepared
by the Council and implemented
through regulations at 50 CFR part 622
under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens
Act).
On April 5, 2016, NMFS published a
notice of availability for Amendment
17A and requested public comment (81
FR 19547). On April 14, 2016, NMFS
published a proposed rule for
Amendment 17A and requested public
comment (81 FR 22042). The proposed
rule and Amendment 17A outline the
rationale for the actions contained in
this final rule. A summary of the action
implemented by Amendment 17A and
this final rule is provided below.
Management Measure Contained in
This Final Rule
This final rule extends the Gulf
shrimp Federal permit moratorium until
October 26, 2026. Through Amendment
13 to the FMP, the Council established
a 10-year moratorium on the issuance of
new Federal commercial shrimp vessel
permits (71 FR 56039, September 26,
2006). The moratorium on permits
indirectly controls shrimping effort in
Federal waters and thereby bycatch
levels of juvenile red snapper and sea
turtles. The final rule implementing the
moratorium became effective October
26, 2006, and the moratorium permits
became effective in March 2007.
Extending the moratorium for an
additional 10 years until October 26,
2026, is expected to maintain the
biological, social, and economic benefits
to the shrimp fishery achieved under
E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM
22JYR1
47734
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
the moratorium permit over the past 10
years.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received a total of 831
submissions from the public on
Amendment 17A and the proposed rule.
Of these submissions, 702 expressed
general support for an extension of the
permit moratorium. Some comments
within the submissions addressed issues
beyond the scope of Amendment 17A or
the proposed rule, such as prohibiting
shrimp trawling to reduce the impact on
sea turtles and other marine life and
modifying the requirements for turtle
excluder devices and observers. From
the submissions, NMFS has identified
six issues related to Amendment 17A
and the proposed rule. These comments
and NMFS’ respective responses are
summarized below.
Comment 1: Extending the permit
moratorium would protect and expand
gains in the shrimp fishery by limiting
potential exploitation. Gulf shrimp
landings have only slightly declined
during the past 10 years and catch per
day has increased.
Response: NMFS agrees that
continuing the moratorium would
constrain effort and protect economic
gains from higher catch rates. Returning
the fishery to open access could undo
any positive effects of the moratorium.
Removing the moratorium would
allow an unlimited number of new
entrants into the commercial shrimp
fishery and could have negative effects
if the fishery then became
overcapitalized. Overcapitalization or
effort increases could lead to increases
in sea turtle and red snapper bycatch
and could result in additional
requirements to reduce bycatch.
Before the moratorium was
implemented, increasing fuel costs,
decreasing shrimp prices, and
increasing foreign shrimp imports were
all contributing to the overcapitalization
of the commercial shrimp fleet. Since
implementation of the moratorium, the
catch per unit effort for the offshore
shrimp fishery increased and has
remained relatively constant. Additional
effort in the fishery could negate, or at
least lessen, profitability for the Gulf
shrimp fleet as a whole.
Comment 2: There is no need for
continuing the moratorium because of
the decreasing number of valid permits
over last 10 years.
Response: NMFS disagrees that the
moratorium should be allowed to
expire. The Council determined, and
NMFS agrees, that extending the
moratorium for an additional 10 years
will continue stability for the fishery. As
explained in the response to Comment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Jul 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
1, continuing the moratorium would
constrain effort and protect economic
gains from higher catch rates. The
moratorium also indirectly controls
effort and, therefore, bycatch levels of
juvenile red snapper and sea turtles.
Returning to an open access fishery
would promote a return to less stable
economic conditions.
Comment 3: Continuing the permit
moratorium will help protect sea turtles
and other marine life.
Response: NMFS agrees. In 2014,
NMFS issued a biological opinion on
the continued authorization of the
Southeast U.S. shrimp fisheries in
Federal waters on threatened and
endangered species (including sea
turtles) and designated critical habitat,
in accordance with the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). The sea turtle effects
analyses and incidental take statement
in the opinion were based on the
expectation that future total effort levels
in the southeastern shrimp fisheries
would remain at or below 2009 effort
levels. An increase in shrimp effort
greater than the 2009 level may require
re-initiation of the Endangered Species
Act consultation and further rulemaking
to address any increased effects on sea
turtles. Continuing the moratorium
would cap effort and reduce the chance
of exceeding the 2009 effort levels,
thereby continuing to limit any adverse
effects of the shrimp fishery on sea
turtles and other marine life.
Comment 4: Gulf shrimp permit
holders who have lost their moratorium
permit due to non-renewal should be
allowed to re-apply for a shrimp permit.
Response: NMFS disagrees. The
purpose of the moratorium was to limit
the number of permits available to fish
for shrimp because the fishery was
overcapitalized, as described in the
response to Comment 1.
The Federal Gulf shrimp moratorium
permit is renewable for up to 1 year
from its date of expiration. NMFS sends
a renewal letter and permit application
to the permit holder 1 month prior to
the permit’s expiration date. After a year
with no permit renewal, a permit is
terminated and permanently removed
from the permit pool. However, valid
permits are fully transferable, which
may allow someone who has lost a
permit as a result of non-renewal to
obtain a new permit.
Comment 5: As a result of the
moratorium, the current market price of
permits is too high.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Based on
the best available information, the
current average price of a moratorium
permit is approximately $5,000, and this
price has been relatively constant since
the moratorium was put in place. Thus,
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
permits are not any more costly than
they were 10 years ago, and in fact are
likely less costly in real (inflationadjusted) terms. Moreover, as previously
noted, average profitability in the
fishery has improved in recent years. An
economically efficient business desiring
to enter the fishery would be expected
to recoup this cost relatively quickly
and, thus, NMFS does not consider the
cost of obtaining a permit to be onerous
for businesses wanting to enter the
fishery.
Comment 6: Permit holders who sublease shrimp moratorium permits
should be required to forfeit the permits.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Although
shrimp moratorium permits are fully
transferable and a permit may be
transferred to a vessel that is leased,
there is no mechanism to sub-lease a
permit through NMFS. To the extent the
commenter is stating that the permits
should not be transferable, economic
efficiency is promoted when resources
are allowed to shift to their most
valuable use. The full transferability of
permits is expected to improve
economic efficiency by allowing those
who place the greatest economic value
on these permits to buy them. Any
restrictions on the transferability of
permits would be expected to reduce
economic efficiency in the fishery,
contrary to the objectives of
Amendment 17A and this final rule.
Classification
The Regional Administrator,
Southeast Region, NMFS has
determined that this final rule is
consistent with Amendment 17A, the
FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and
other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides
the statutory basis for this rule.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration (SBA)
during the proposed rule stage that this
rule, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
NMFS did not receive any comments
from SBA’s Office of Advocacy or the
public on the certification in the
proposed rule. NMFS received two
comments regarding the economic
analysis of Amendment 17A and the
proposed rule. One comment suggested
that the current market price of
moratorium permits is too high and the
other comment stated that permit
holders who sub-lease shrimp
moratorium permits should be required
E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM
22JYR1
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
to forfeit the permits. NMFS disagrees
with these comments as explained in
the responses to comments 5 and 6,
above. The factual basis for the
certification was published in the
proposed rule and is repeated below.
The current moratorium on Gulf
shrimp permits became effective on
October 26, 2006 (71 FR 56039,
September 26, 2006). This final rule
extends the current moratorium on
Federal Gulf shrimp permits until
October 26, 2026. The purpose of this
rule is to maintain the biological, social,
and economic benefits to the Gulf
shrimp fishery achieved under the
current moratorium. The objectives of
this rule are to protect federally
managed Gulf shrimp stocks, and
promote catch efficiency, economic
efficiency, and stability in the Gulf
shrimp fishery.
This final rule is expected to directly
regulate businesses that possess Federal
Gulf shrimp moratorium permits. As of
September 21, 2015, there were 1,464
vessels with valid or renewable Gulf
shrimp moratorium permits. Although
some permits are thought to be held by
businesses with the same or
substantively the same individual
owners, and thus would likely be
considered affiliated, ownership data for
Gulf shrimp permit holders is
incomplete and thus it is not currently
feasible to accurately determine whether
businesses that have these permits are
in fact affiliated. NMFS is currently
making changes to its permit
application forms so that such
determinations can be accurately made
for future regulatory actions in this
fishery. As a result of the incomplete
ownership data, for purposes of this
analysis, NMFS assumes each vessel is
independently owned by a single
business, which will result in an
overestimate of the actual number of
businesses directly regulated by this
final rule. Thus, NMFS estimates the
number of businesses directly regulated
by this final rule to be 1,464.
Based on landings and economic data
from 2013, which is the most current
year for which complete economic data
is available, all of these businesses are
thought to be primarily engaged in
shellfish harvesting activities (e.g., Gulf
shrimp, South Atlantic shrimp, and
Atlantic sea scallops fisheries). In 2013,
the primary source of gross revenue for
approximately 84 percent of these
businesses was landings from one or
more of these shellfish fisheries, while
the other 16 percent did not have
commercial landings in any fishery. A
certain percentage of businesses with
Gulf shrimp permits are usually inactive
in the Gulf shrimp fishery in a given
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Jul 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
year, because of economic conditions in
that fishery, other fisheries, or other
industries (e.g., oil and gas) in which
these businesses, their owners, and their
crew sometimes participate. Some
businesses may have also been inactive
due to issues associated with the
Deepwater Horizon MC252 event in
2010, and subsequent payouts from
British Petroleum (BP). NMFS only
possesses data on such payouts and
other transfer payments for a sample of
the permitted businesses, and thus
cannot confirm the extent to which such
payouts contributed to the lack of
commercial harvesting activity by all of
the inactive businesses. Given the lack
of data to the contrary and because these
businesses possess Gulf shrimp
moratorium permits, for the purpose of
this analysis, these 1,464 businesses are
assumed to be primarily engaged in
commercial shellfish harvesting.
From 2011 through 2013, the greatest
average annual gross revenue earned by
a single business was approximately
$2.48 million. On average, a business
with a Gulf shrimp moratorium permit
had an annual gross revenue of
approximately $247,000, annual net
revenue from operations (commercial
fishing activities) of approximately
$6,300, and an annual economic profit
of approximately $37,000. All monetary
estimates are in 2001 dollars. Average
annual economic profit was greater
between 2011 and 2013 compared to the
2006 through 2009 time period, and
greater than net revenue from
operations, partly because of nonfishing related income, mostly in the
form of payouts from BP (i.e., transfer
payments) due to the Deepwater
Horizon MC252 event in 2010. Thus,
although the average profit margin from
2011 through 2013 was nearly 15
percent of gross revenue, the average
margin from operations was only about
2.6 percent. Though relatively small,
this margin from operations is still
greater than what these businesses
earned between 2006 and 2009 when
net revenue from operations was
generally negative, on average.
On December 29, 2015, NMFS issued
a final rule establishing a small business
size standard of $11 million in annual
gross receipts for all businesses
primarily engaged in the commercial
fishing industry (NAICS 11411) for
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
compliance purposes only (80 FR
81194, December 29, 2015). The $11
million standard became effective on
July 1, 2016, and is to be used in place
of the SBA’s current standards of $20.5
million, $5.5 million, and $7.5 million
for the finfish (NAICS 114111), shellfish
(NAICS 114112), and other marine
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47735
fishing (NAICS 114119) sectors of the
U.S. commercial fishing industry in all
NMFS rules subject to the RFA after July
1, 2016. Id. at 81194.
Pursuant to the RFA, and prior to July
1, 2016, a certification was developed
for this regulatory action using SBA’s
size standards. NMFS has reviewed the
analyses prepared for this regulatory
action in light of the new size standard.
All of the entities directly regulated by
this regulatory action are shellfish
commercial fishing businesses and were
considered small under the SBA’s size
standards, and thus they all would
continue to be considered small under
the new standard. Thus, NMFS has
determined that the new size standard
does not affect analyses prepared for
this regulatory action.
Based on the information above, a
reduction in profits for a substantial
number of small entities is not expected.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the
Department of Commerce hereby
reaffirms that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Because this final rule, if implemented,
is not expected to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, a final
regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required and none has been prepared.
No duplicative, overlapping, or
conflicting Federal rules have been
identified. This final rule will not
establish any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
Commercial, Fisheries, Fishing, Gulf,
Permits, Shrimp.
Dated: July 14, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant for Regulatory Programs,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended
as follows:
PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE
CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND
SOUTH ATLANTIC
1. The authority citation for part 622
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In § 622.50, revise the introductory
text of paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 622.50 Permits, permit moratorium, and
endorsements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Moratorium on commercial vessel
permits for Gulf shrimp. The provisions
E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM
22JYR1
47736
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
of this paragraph (b) are applicable
through October 26, 2026.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–17272 Filed 7–21–16; 8:45 am]
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Jul 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\22JYR1.SGM
22JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47733-47736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17272]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 160222132-6585-02]
RIN 0648-BF77
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic;
Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 17A
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues regulations to implement Amendment 17A to the
Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico
(FMP), as prepared and submitted by the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) Fishery
Management Council (Council). This final rule extends the current Gulf
commercial shrimp permit moratorium for 10 more years. The intent of
this final rule and Amendment 17A is to protect federally managed Gulf
shrimp stocks while promoting catch efficiency, economic efficiency,
and stability in the fishery.
DATES: This rule is effective August 22, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of Amendment 17A, which includes an
environmental assessment, a Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, and a
regulatory impact review, may be obtained from the Southeast Regional
Office Web site at https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_fisheries/gulf_fisheries/shrimp/2016/am17a/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Gerhart, telephone: 727-824-
5305, or email: Susan.Gerhart@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The shrimp fishery in the Gulf is managed
under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and implemented
through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-
Stevens Act).
On April 5, 2016, NMFS published a notice of availability for
Amendment 17A and requested public comment (81 FR 19547). On April 14,
2016, NMFS published a proposed rule for Amendment 17A and requested
public comment (81 FR 22042). The proposed rule and Amendment 17A
outline the rationale for the actions contained in this final rule. A
summary of the action implemented by Amendment 17A and this final rule
is provided below.
Management Measure Contained in This Final Rule
This final rule extends the Gulf shrimp Federal permit moratorium
until October 26, 2026. Through Amendment 13 to the FMP, the Council
established a 10-year moratorium on the issuance of new Federal
commercial shrimp vessel permits (71 FR 56039, September 26, 2006). The
moratorium on permits indirectly controls shrimping effort in Federal
waters and thereby bycatch levels of juvenile red snapper and sea
turtles. The final rule implementing the moratorium became effective
October 26, 2006, and the moratorium permits became effective in March
2007. Extending the moratorium for an additional 10 years until October
26, 2026, is expected to maintain the biological, social, and economic
benefits to the shrimp fishery achieved under
[[Page 47734]]
the moratorium permit over the past 10 years.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received a total of 831 submissions from the public on
Amendment 17A and the proposed rule. Of these submissions, 702
expressed general support for an extension of the permit moratorium.
Some comments within the submissions addressed issues beyond the scope
of Amendment 17A or the proposed rule, such as prohibiting shrimp
trawling to reduce the impact on sea turtles and other marine life and
modifying the requirements for turtle excluder devices and observers.
From the submissions, NMFS has identified six issues related to
Amendment 17A and the proposed rule. These comments and NMFS'
respective responses are summarized below.
Comment 1: Extending the permit moratorium would protect and expand
gains in the shrimp fishery by limiting potential exploitation. Gulf
shrimp landings have only slightly declined during the past 10 years
and catch per day has increased.
Response: NMFS agrees that continuing the moratorium would
constrain effort and protect economic gains from higher catch rates.
Returning the fishery to open access could undo any positive effects of
the moratorium.
Removing the moratorium would allow an unlimited number of new
entrants into the commercial shrimp fishery and could have negative
effects if the fishery then became overcapitalized. Overcapitalization
or effort increases could lead to increases in sea turtle and red
snapper bycatch and could result in additional requirements to reduce
bycatch.
Before the moratorium was implemented, increasing fuel costs,
decreasing shrimp prices, and increasing foreign shrimp imports were
all contributing to the overcapitalization of the commercial shrimp
fleet. Since implementation of the moratorium, the catch per unit
effort for the offshore shrimp fishery increased and has remained
relatively constant. Additional effort in the fishery could negate, or
at least lessen, profitability for the Gulf shrimp fleet as a whole.
Comment 2: There is no need for continuing the moratorium because
of the decreasing number of valid permits over last 10 years.
Response: NMFS disagrees that the moratorium should be allowed to
expire. The Council determined, and NMFS agrees, that extending the
moratorium for an additional 10 years will continue stability for the
fishery. As explained in the response to Comment 1, continuing the
moratorium would constrain effort and protect economic gains from
higher catch rates. The moratorium also indirectly controls effort and,
therefore, bycatch levels of juvenile red snapper and sea turtles.
Returning to an open access fishery would promote a return to less
stable economic conditions.
Comment 3: Continuing the permit moratorium will help protect sea
turtles and other marine life.
Response: NMFS agrees. In 2014, NMFS issued a biological opinion on
the continued authorization of the Southeast U.S. shrimp fisheries in
Federal waters on threatened and endangered species (including sea
turtles) and designated critical habitat, in accordance with the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). The sea turtle effects analyses and
incidental take statement in the opinion were based on the expectation
that future total effort levels in the southeastern shrimp fisheries
would remain at or below 2009 effort levels. An increase in shrimp
effort greater than the 2009 level may require re-initiation of the
Endangered Species Act consultation and further rulemaking to address
any increased effects on sea turtles. Continuing the moratorium would
cap effort and reduce the chance of exceeding the 2009 effort levels,
thereby continuing to limit any adverse effects of the shrimp fishery
on sea turtles and other marine life.
Comment 4: Gulf shrimp permit holders who have lost their
moratorium permit due to non-renewal should be allowed to re-apply for
a shrimp permit.
Response: NMFS disagrees. The purpose of the moratorium was to
limit the number of permits available to fish for shrimp because the
fishery was overcapitalized, as described in the response to Comment 1.
The Federal Gulf shrimp moratorium permit is renewable for up to 1
year from its date of expiration. NMFS sends a renewal letter and
permit application to the permit holder 1 month prior to the permit's
expiration date. After a year with no permit renewal, a permit is
terminated and permanently removed from the permit pool. However, valid
permits are fully transferable, which may allow someone who has lost a
permit as a result of non-renewal to obtain a new permit.
Comment 5: As a result of the moratorium, the current market price
of permits is too high.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Based on the best available information,
the current average price of a moratorium permit is approximately
$5,000, and this price has been relatively constant since the
moratorium was put in place. Thus, permits are not any more costly than
they were 10 years ago, and in fact are likely less costly in real
(inflation-adjusted) terms. Moreover, as previously noted, average
profitability in the fishery has improved in recent years. An
economically efficient business desiring to enter the fishery would be
expected to recoup this cost relatively quickly and, thus, NMFS does
not consider the cost of obtaining a permit to be onerous for
businesses wanting to enter the fishery.
Comment 6: Permit holders who sub-lease shrimp moratorium permits
should be required to forfeit the permits.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Although shrimp moratorium permits are
fully transferable and a permit may be transferred to a vessel that is
leased, there is no mechanism to sub-lease a permit through NMFS. To
the extent the commenter is stating that the permits should not be
transferable, economic efficiency is promoted when resources are
allowed to shift to their most valuable use. The full transferability
of permits is expected to improve economic efficiency by allowing those
who place the greatest economic value on these permits to buy them. Any
restrictions on the transferability of permits would be expected to
reduce economic efficiency in the fishery, contrary to the objectives
of Amendment 17A and this final rule.
Classification
The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS has determined
that this final rule is consistent with Amendment 17A, the FMP, the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for this
rule.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration (SBA) during the proposed rule stage that this rule, if
adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. NMFS did not receive any comments from SBA's
Office of Advocacy or the public on the certification in the proposed
rule. NMFS received two comments regarding the economic analysis of
Amendment 17A and the proposed rule. One comment suggested that the
current market price of moratorium permits is too high and the other
comment stated that permit holders who sub-lease shrimp moratorium
permits should be required
[[Page 47735]]
to forfeit the permits. NMFS disagrees with these comments as explained
in the responses to comments 5 and 6, above. The factual basis for the
certification was published in the proposed rule and is repeated below.
The current moratorium on Gulf shrimp permits became effective on
October 26, 2006 (71 FR 56039, September 26, 2006). This final rule
extends the current moratorium on Federal Gulf shrimp permits until
October 26, 2026. The purpose of this rule is to maintain the
biological, social, and economic benefits to the Gulf shrimp fishery
achieved under the current moratorium. The objectives of this rule are
to protect federally managed Gulf shrimp stocks, and promote catch
efficiency, economic efficiency, and stability in the Gulf shrimp
fishery.
This final rule is expected to directly regulate businesses that
possess Federal Gulf shrimp moratorium permits. As of September 21,
2015, there were 1,464 vessels with valid or renewable Gulf shrimp
moratorium permits. Although some permits are thought to be held by
businesses with the same or substantively the same individual owners,
and thus would likely be considered affiliated, ownership data for Gulf
shrimp permit holders is incomplete and thus it is not currently
feasible to accurately determine whether businesses that have these
permits are in fact affiliated. NMFS is currently making changes to its
permit application forms so that such determinations can be accurately
made for future regulatory actions in this fishery. As a result of the
incomplete ownership data, for purposes of this analysis, NMFS assumes
each vessel is independently owned by a single business, which will
result in an overestimate of the actual number of businesses directly
regulated by this final rule. Thus, NMFS estimates the number of
businesses directly regulated by this final rule to be 1,464.
Based on landings and economic data from 2013, which is the most
current year for which complete economic data is available, all of
these businesses are thought to be primarily engaged in shellfish
harvesting activities (e.g., Gulf shrimp, South Atlantic shrimp, and
Atlantic sea scallops fisheries). In 2013, the primary source of gross
revenue for approximately 84 percent of these businesses was landings
from one or more of these shellfish fisheries, while the other 16
percent did not have commercial landings in any fishery. A certain
percentage of businesses with Gulf shrimp permits are usually inactive
in the Gulf shrimp fishery in a given year, because of economic
conditions in that fishery, other fisheries, or other industries (e.g.,
oil and gas) in which these businesses, their owners, and their crew
sometimes participate. Some businesses may have also been inactive due
to issues associated with the Deepwater Horizon MC252 event in 2010,
and subsequent payouts from British Petroleum (BP). NMFS only possesses
data on such payouts and other transfer payments for a sample of the
permitted businesses, and thus cannot confirm the extent to which such
payouts contributed to the lack of commercial harvesting activity by
all of the inactive businesses. Given the lack of data to the contrary
and because these businesses possess Gulf shrimp moratorium permits,
for the purpose of this analysis, these 1,464 businesses are assumed to
be primarily engaged in commercial shellfish harvesting.
From 2011 through 2013, the greatest average annual gross revenue
earned by a single business was approximately $2.48 million. On
average, a business with a Gulf shrimp moratorium permit had an annual
gross revenue of approximately $247,000, annual net revenue from
operations (commercial fishing activities) of approximately $6,300, and
an annual economic profit of approximately $37,000. All monetary
estimates are in 2001 dollars. Average annual economic profit was
greater between 2011 and 2013 compared to the 2006 through 2009 time
period, and greater than net revenue from operations, partly because of
non-fishing related income, mostly in the form of payouts from BP
(i.e., transfer payments) due to the Deepwater Horizon MC252 event in
2010. Thus, although the average profit margin from 2011 through 2013
was nearly 15 percent of gross revenue, the average margin from
operations was only about 2.6 percent. Though relatively small, this
margin from operations is still greater than what these businesses
earned between 2006 and 2009 when net revenue from operations was
generally negative, on average.
On December 29, 2015, NMFS issued a final rule establishing a small
business size standard of $11 million in annual gross receipts for all
businesses primarily engaged in the commercial fishing industry (NAICS
11411) for Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) compliance purposes only
(80 FR 81194, December 29, 2015). The $11 million standard became
effective on July 1, 2016, and is to be used in place of the SBA's
current standards of $20.5 million, $5.5 million, and $7.5 million for
the finfish (NAICS 114111), shellfish (NAICS 114112), and other marine
fishing (NAICS 114119) sectors of the U.S. commercial fishing industry
in all NMFS rules subject to the RFA after July 1, 2016. Id. at 81194.
Pursuant to the RFA, and prior to July 1, 2016, a certification was
developed for this regulatory action using SBA's size standards. NMFS
has reviewed the analyses prepared for this regulatory action in light
of the new size standard. All of the entities directly regulated by
this regulatory action are shellfish commercial fishing businesses and
were considered small under the SBA's size standards, and thus they all
would continue to be considered small under the new standard. Thus,
NMFS has determined that the new size standard does not affect analyses
prepared for this regulatory action.
Based on the information above, a reduction in profits for a
substantial number of small entities is not expected. The Chief Counsel
for Regulation of the Department of Commerce hereby reaffirms that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Because this final rule, if implemented, is
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, a final regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required and none has been prepared.
No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been
identified. This final rule will not establish any new reporting or
record-keeping requirements.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
Commercial, Fisheries, Fishing, Gulf, Permits, Shrimp.
Dated: July 14, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended
as follows:
PART 622--FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND SOUTH
ATLANTIC
0
1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 622.50, revise the introductory text of paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 622.50 Permits, permit moratorium, and endorsements.
* * * * *
(b) Moratorium on commercial vessel permits for Gulf shrimp. The
provisions
[[Page 47736]]
of this paragraph (b) are applicable through October 26, 2026.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-17272 Filed 7-21-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P