International Fisheries; Tuna and Tuna-Like Species in the Eastern Pacific Ocean; Silky Shark Fishing Restrictions and Fish Aggregating Device Data Collection and Identification, 70080-70084 [2016-24444]
Download as PDF
70080
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Proposed Rules
measure or plan: includes a clear
description of the factors for decline to
be addressed and how they will be
reduced; establishes specific
conservation objectives; identifies
necessary steps to reduce threats;
includes quantifiable performance
measures for monitoring compliance
and effectiveness; employs principles of
adaptive management; and is certain to
improve the species’ status at the time
of listing determination. We request that
any information submitted with respect
to conservation measures, regulatory
mechanisms, or other protective efforts,
that have yet to be implemented or
show effectiveness, explicitly address
the criteria in the PECE policy.
We request that all information be
accompanied by: (1) Supporting
documentation such as maps,
bibliographic references, or reprints of
pertinent publications; and (2) the
submitter’s name, address, and any
association, institution, or business that
the person represents.
References Cited
The complete citations for the
references used in this document can be
obtained by contacting NMFS (See FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or on
our Web page at:
www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov.
Authority: The authority for this action is
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16. U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: September 29, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–24477 Filed 10–7–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 300
[Docket No. 160801681–6857–01]
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
RIN 0648–BG22
International Fisheries; Tuna and
Tuna-Like Species in the Eastern
Pacific Ocean; Silky Shark Fishing
Restrictions and Fish Aggregating
Device Data Collection and
Identification
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Oct 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
NMFS proposes regulations
under the Tuna Conventions Act to
implement provisions of two
Resolutions adopted by the InterAmerican Tropical Tuna Commission
(IATTC) in 2016: Resolution C–16–01
(Collection and Analyses of Data On
Fish-Aggregating Devices) and
Resolution C–16–06 (Conservation
Measures for Shark Species, with
Special Emphasis on the Silky Shark
(Carcharhinus Falciformis) for the Years
2017, 2018, and 2019). Per Resolution
C–16–01, these regulations would
require the owner or operator of a U.S.
purse seine vessel to ensure characters
of a unique code be marked indelibly on
each fish aggregating device (FAD)
deployed or modified on or after
January 1, 2017, in the IATTC
Convention Area. The vessel owner or
operator would also be required to
record and submit information about the
FAD, as described in Annex I of the
Resolution C–16–01. Per Resolution C–
16–06, these regulations would prohibit
the owner or operator of a U.S. purse
seine vessel from retaining on board,
transshipping, landing, or storing, in
part or whole, carcasses of silky sharks
caught by purse-seine vessels in the
IATTC Convention Area. These
regulations would also provide limits on
the retained catch of silky sharks caught
in the IATTC Convention Area. This
proposed rule is necessary for the
United States to satisfy its obligations as
a member of the IATTC.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
and supporting documents must be
submitted in writing by November 10,
2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2016–0106, by any of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20160106, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Rachael Wadsworth, NMFS West Coast
Region Long Beach Office, 501 W.
Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach,
CA 90802. Include the identifier
‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2016–0106’’ in the
comments.
Instructions: Comments must be
submitted by one of the above methods
to ensure they are received,
documented, and considered by NMFS.
Comments sent by any other method, to
any other address or individual, or
received after the end of the comment
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
period, may not be considered. 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.) submitted
voluntarily by the sender will be
publicly accessible. Do not submit
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information. NMFS will accept
anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in
the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous).
Copies of the draft Regulatory Impact
Review and other supporting documents
are available via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA–
NMFS–2016–0106 or by contacting the
Regional Administrator, William W.
Stelle, Jr., NMFS West Coast Region,
7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Bldg 1,
Seattle, WA 98115–0070, or
RegionalAdministrator.WCRHMS@
noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachael Wadsworth, NMFS, West Coast
Region, 562–980–4036.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on the IATTC
The United States is a member of the
IATTC, which was established under
the 1949 Convention for the
Establishment of an Inter-American
Tropical Tuna Commission. In 2003, the
IATTC adopted the Convention for the
Strengthening of the IATTC Established
by the 1949 Convention between the
United States of America and the
Republic of Costa Rica (Antigua
Convention). The Antigua Convention
entered into force in 2010. The United
States acceded to the Antigua
Convention on February 24, 2016. The
full text of the Antigua Convention is
available at: https://www.iattc.org/
PDFFiles2/Antigua_Convention_Jun_
2003.pdf.
The IATTC consists of 21 member
nations and four cooperating nonmember nations and facilitates scientific
research into, as well as the
conservation and management of, tuna
and tuna-like species in the IATTC
Convention Area. The IATTC
Convention Area is defined as waters of
the eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO) within
the area bounded by the west coast of
the Americas and by 50° N. latitude,
150° W. longitude, and 50° S. latitude.
The IATTC maintains a scientific
research and fishery monitoring
program and regularly assesses the
status of tuna, sharks, and billfish stocks
in the EPO to determine appropriate
E:\FR\FM\11OCP1.SGM
11OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Proposed Rules
catch limits and other measures deemed
necessary to promote sustainable
fisheries and prevent the
overexploitation of these stocks.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
International Obligations of the United
States Under the Antigua Convention
As a Party to the Antigua Convention
and a member of the IATTC, the United
States is legally bound to implement
decisions of the IATTC. The Tuna
Conventions Act (16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.)
directs the Secretary of Commerce, in
consultation with the Secretary of State
and, with respect to enforcement
measures, the U.S. Coast Guard, to
promulgate such regulations as may be
necessary to carry out the United States’
obligations under the Antigua
Convention, including
recommendations and decisions
adopted by the IATTC. The authority of
the Secretary of Commerce to
promulgate such regulations has been
delegated to NMFS.
IATTC Resolution on FADs
In 2013, the IATTC adopted
Resolution C–13–04 (Collection and
Analyses of Data on Fish-Aggregating
Devices) in response to concerns that
incomplete data was being collected on
FADs and that the IATTC was unable to
track the activities on a FAD through
time in the Convention Area. The
Commission recognized that additional
information needed to be collected
before Commission-wide FAD
management measures could be
developed. In order to fully implement
Resolution C–13–04, the Commission
also needed to adopt a FAD
identification scheme. In 2014 and
2015, the IATTC scientific staff
provided options and recommendations
for a FAD identification scheme. In
2015, the Commission agreed on a
method to identify FADs and adopted
Resolution C–15–03, which amended
Resolution C–13–04, and included this
information. In 2016, the Commission
further agreed on modifications to
clarify the data collection requirements
and revisions to some of the dates for
implementing specific provisions in the
Resolution. The IATTC adopted
Resolution C–16–01 by consensus in
July 2016. The main objective of
Resolution C–16–01 is to collect data on
FADs in the EPO and to identify FADs
through a marking system.
IATTC Resolution on Silky Sharks
In 2016, the IATTC adopted
Resolution C–16–06 in response to
concerns for the stock status of the silky
shark in the EPO. The IATTC scientific
staff has provided conservation
recommendations for the silky shark
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Oct 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
since 2012, and Resolution C–16–06 is
consistent with the advice that the
IATTC scientific staff provided in 2016.
The main objective of Resolution C–16–
06 is to restrict retention of silky sharks
on purse seine vessels and to restrict
incidental catch of silky sharks on
longline vessels in the IATTC
Convention Area. U.S. commercial
fishing vessels in the EPO do not target
silky shark; they are caught incidentally
and primarily discarded.
Proposed Regulations
This proposed rule would implement
provisions of Resolutions C–16–01 and
C–16–06, described above, for U.S.
commercial fishing vessels that fish for
tuna or tuna-like species in the IATTC
Convention Area. This proposed rule
includes four elements: Two elements
regarding FADs and two elements
regarding silky shark.
The first element would require the
owner or operator of a U.S. purse seine
vessel to ensure characters of a unique
code be marked indelibly on each fish
aggregating device (FAD) deployed or
modified on or after January 1, 2017.
The vessel owner or operator would be
required to select one of the following
two options for the unique code for each
FAD: (1) Obtain a unique code from
NMFS West Coast Region that NMFS
has obtained from the IATTC
Secretariat, as specified in Annex I of
Resolution C–16–01 or (2) use an
existing unique identifier associated
with the FAD (e.g., the manufacturer
identification code for the attached
buoy).
The vessel owner or operator would
be required to ensure the characters for
the unique code be at least 5 centimeters
in height on the upper portion of the
attached radio or satellite buoy in a
location that does not cover the solar
cells used to power the equipment. For
FADs without attached radio or satellite
buoys, the characters would be required
to be marked indelibly on the
uppermost or emergent top portion of
the FAD. In other words, the vessel
owner or operator would be required to
ensure the marking is durable and will
not fade or be erased (e.g., marked using
an epoxy-based paint or an equivalent
in terms of lasting ability) and visible at
all times during daylight. In
circumstances where the observer is
unable to view the unique code, the
captain or crew would be required to
assist the observer (e.g., by providing
the unique code of the FAD to the
observer).
The second element would require
the vessel owner or operator of a FAD
that is deployed on or after January 1,
2017, to record and submit information
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70081
about the FAD to the address specified
by the Highly Migratory Species (HMS)
Branch. The HMS Branch is defined as
NMFS West Coast Region, Suite 4200,
501 W. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA
90802. In accordance with Annex I of
Resolution C–16–01, nine data fields
would be required to be recorded and
submitted: (1) Position; (2) date; (3)
hour; (4) FAD unique identifier; (5) FAD
type (e.g., drifting natural FAD, drifting
artificial FAD); (6) FAD design
characteristics (dimension and material
of the floating part and of the
underwater hanging structure); (7) the
type of activity (set, deployment,
hauling, retrieving, loss, intervention on
electronic equipment, other (if so,
specify)); (8) if the activity is a set, the
results of the set in terms of catch and
bycatch; and (9) characteristics of any
attached buoy or positioning equipment
(positioning system, whether equipped
with sonar, etc.). The IATTC Secretariat
is currently working on further
describing and defining each of these
data fields through the development of
a standard form. Owners and operators
of a FAD would be required to record
this information on the standard form
developed by the Secretariat and
provided to the owners and operators by
the HMS Branch.
The third element would prohibit the
crew, operator, and owner of a
commercial purse seine fishing vessel of
the United States used to fish for tuna
or tuna-like species from retaining on
board, transshipping, storing, or landing
any part or whole carcass of a silky
shark that is caught in the Convention
Area. U.S. purse seiners do not target
silky sharks; they are caught
incidentally and are primarily
discarded. The impacts of these
proposed regulations to purse seine
vessels are described in the
Classification section below.
The fourth element would require the
crew, operator, and owner of a
commercial longline fishing vessel of
the United States to limit the retention
of silky sharks caught in the IATTC
Convention Area to a maximum of 20%
by weight of the total catch of fish
during any fishing trip that occurred in
whole or in part in the IATTC
Convention Area. Although Resolution
C–16–06 provides that the ‘‘bycatch’’ of
silky shark be restricted, NMFS
proposes to use the term ‘‘retained
catch’’ in these proposed regulations.
U.S. longline vessels fishing in the
IATTC Convention Area do not target,
and infrequently catch, silky shark. Data
from 2008 to 2015 show that any
incidentally caught silky shark are
released, and almost all are released
alive. Silky shark are commonly
E:\FR\FM\11OCP1.SGM
11OCP1
70082
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
released by cutting the line or
dehooking the shark before it is brought
onboard the vessel. Weights for silky
shark are not recorded and weight
estimates for sharks released while still
in the water would likely not be
reliable. An evaluation of total catch per
longline trip where silky shark have
been caught and released shows that, if
the average weights of silky sharks are
approximated, the amount of silky shark
caught by U.S. longline vessels fishing
in the EPO would not come close to
20% by weight of the total catch of fish
during a fishing trip. NMFS is proposing
to use the term ‘‘retained catch’’ in the
proposed regulations to assist in
enforcement of these regulations. The
impacts of these proposed regulations to
longline vessels are described in the
Classification section below.
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator
has determined that this proposed rule
is consistent with the Tuna Conventions
Act and other applicable laws, subject to
further consideration after public
comment.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
NMFS is amending the supporting
statement for the Pacific Tuna Fisheries
Logbook Office of Management and
Business (OMB) Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) requirements (OMB Control
No. 0648–0148) to include the data
collection requirements for FADs as
described in the preamble. NMFS
estimates the public reporting burden
for this collection of information to
average 10 minutes per form, time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information. NMFS requests any
comments on the addition of the FAD
data collection form to the PRA package,
including whether the paperwork would
unnecessarily burden any vessel owners
and operators. Public comment is
sought regarding: Whether this
proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; the accuracy of the
burden estimate; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Send comments on these or any other
aspects of the collection of information
to the ADDRESSES above, and by email to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Oct 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax
to (202) 395–5806.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, nor shall any person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number.
All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be
viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/
services_programs/prasubs.html.
Regarding the elements of the
proposed rule pertaining to silky shark;
there are no new collection-ofinformation requirements associated
with this action that are subject to the
PRA, and existing collection-ofinformation requirements still apply
under the following Control Numbers:
0648–0593 and 0648–0214.
Notwithstanding any other provision of
the law, no person is required to
respond to, and no person shall be
subject to penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection-of-information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection-of-information displays a
currently valid Office of Management
and Budget control number.
An Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) was prepared as
required by section 603 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to analyze
whether the proposed rule to implement
provisions of Resolutions C–16–01 and
C–16–06 adopted by the IATTC in 2016
would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The IRFA is being published to
aid the public in commenting upon
NMFS conclusion that the proposed
actions will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
As described previously in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section, the
proposed regulations would require
FAD identification and data reporting as
well as fishing restrictions on silky
sharks. Alternatively, the failure to
promulgate the proposed action would
result in the provisions of these
Resolutions not being implemented and
would not allow the United States to
satisfy its obligations as a member of the
IATTC.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
July 1, 2016, and is to be used in place
of the U.S. Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) 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 for all NMFS rules, subject to
the RFA, published after July 1, 2016.
Id. at 81194.
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 commercial finfish
fishing businesses. The new standard
results in fewer commercial finfish
businesses being considered small.
The entities that would be affected by
the proposed action are (1) U.S. purse
seine vessels that use FADs to fish for
tuna or tuna-like species in the IATTC
Convention Area, and (2) U.S. purse
seine and longline vessels that catch
silky shark.
As of July 2016, there are 15 large
purse seine vessels (with at least 363
metric tons of fish hold volume) listed
on the IATTC Regional Vessel Register.
The number of U.S. large purse seine
vessels on the IATTC Regional Vessel
Register has increased substantially in
the past two years due to negotiations
regarding the South Pacific Tuna Treaty
(SPTT) and the interest expressed by
vessel owners that typically fish in the
WCPO in relocating to the EPO.
However, parties reached agreement in
principle on changes to the SPTT in
June 2016. U.S. large purse seine vessels
fishing in the EPO primarily land
yellowfin, skipjack, and bigeye tuna.
Estimates of ex-vessel revenues for large
U.S. purse seine vessels fishing in the
IATTC Convention Area from 2005 to
2014 have been confidential and may
not be publicly disclosed because of the
small number of vessels in the fishery.
However, in 2015, thirteen large purse
seine vessels fished either exclusively in
the EPO or fished in both the EPO and
WCPO, and so information for 2015 is
not confidential.
For large purse seine vessels that
fished exclusively in the EPO in 2015,
ex-vessel price information specific to
the individual vessels are not available
to NMFS because these vessels did not
land on the U.S. West Coast and the
cannery receipts are not available
through the IATTC. However, estimates
for large purse seine vessels based in the
WCPO that fish in both the EPO and
WCPO may be used as a proxy for U.S.
large purse seine vessels. The number of
these U.S. purse seine vessels is
approximated by the number with
WCPFC Area Endorsements, which are
E:\FR\FM\11OCP1.SGM
11OCP1
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Proposed Rules
the NMFS-issued authorizations
required to use a vessel to fish
commercially for HMS on the high seas
in the Convention Area. As of August
2016 the number of purse seine vessels
with WCPFC Area Endorsements was
42. Neither gross receipts nor ex-vessel
price information specific to individual
fishing vessels are available to NMFS, so
NMFS applied indicative regional
cannery prices—as approximations of
ex-vessel prices—to annual catches of
individual vessels to estimate their
annual receipts. Indicative regional
cannery prices are available through
2014 (developed by the Pacific Islands
Forum Fisheries Agency; available at
https://www.ffa.int/node/425), so NMFS
estimated vessels’ annual receipts
during 2012–2014. Using this approach,
NMFS estimates that among the affected
vessels, the range in annual average
receipts in 2012–2014 was $3 million to
$20 million and the median was about
$13 million. Thus, NMFS estimates that
slightly more than half of the affected
large purse seine vessels are small
entities. Purse seine vessels that use
FADs to fish for tuna or tuna-like
species and that catch silky shark in the
IATTC Convention Area are all large
vessels and are both large and small
entities.
There are two components to the U.S.
tuna purse seine fishery in the EPO: (1)
Large purse seine vessels with at least
363 metric tons of fish hold volume
(size class 6 vessels) that typically have
been based in the western and central
Pacific Ocean (WCPO), and (2) coastal
purse seine vessels with smaller fish
hold volume that are based on the U.S.
West Coast. Because only the large
purse seine vessels fish with FADs and
incidentally catch silky shark in the
EPO, the proposed action is not
expected to impact the coastal purse
seine vessels. U.S. purse seiners do not
target silky sharks in the EPO. Since
2005, the best available data from
observers show that the incidental
catches of silky shark are primarily
discarded; however, a small percentage
has been landed in the past ten years.
For example, in 2015, a year in which
more than three large purse seine
vessels fished in the EPO, about 3% of
the total catches of silky shark were
landed and the rest were discarded
either dead or alive. Since at least 2005,
the observer coverage rate on class size
6 vessels in the EPO has been 100
percent.
As of August 2016, the IATTC
Regional Vessel Register lists 158 U.S.
longline vessels that have the option to
fish in the IATTC Convention Area. The
majority of these longline vessels
possess Hawaii Longline Limited Access
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Oct 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
Permits (issued under 50 CFR 665.13).
Under the Hawaii longline limited
access program, no more than 164
permits may be issued. In addition,
there are U.S. longline vessels based on
the U.S. West Coast, some of which
operate solely under the Pacific HMS
permit. U.S. West Coast-based longline
vessels operating under the Pacific HMS
permit fish primarily in the EPO and are
currently restricted to fishing with deepset longline gear outside of the U.S.
West Coast EEZ. These vessels primarily
target tuna species with a small
percentage of swordfish and other
highly migratory species taken
incidentally.
There have been less than three West
Coast-based vessels operating under the
HMS permit since 2005; therefore,
landings and ex-vessel revenue are
confidential. However, the number of
Hawaii-permitted longline vessels that
have landed in West Coast ports has
increased from one vessel in 2006 to 14
vessels in 2014. In 2014, 621 mt of
highly migratory species were landed by
Hawaii permitted longline vessels with
an average ex-vessel revenue of
approximately $247,857 per vessel. For
the longline fishery, the ex-vessel value
of catches by the Hawaii longline fleet
in 2012 was about $87 million. With
129 active vessels in that year, pervessel average revenues were about $0.7
million, well below the $11 million
threshold for finfish harvesting
businesses. NMFS considers all longline
vessels, for which data is nonconfidential, that catch silky sharks in
the IATTC Convention Area to be small
entities for the purposes of the RFA.
U.S. longline vessels fishing in the
IATTC Convention Area, whether under
the Hawaii Longline Limited Access
Permit or the Pacific HMS permit, do
not target silky shark and all those
caught incidentally are released. From
2008 to 2015, logbook records recorded
by vessel owners and operators of U.S.
longline vessels fishing in the IATTC
Convention Area showed a total of four
silky sharks caught and released on four
separate trips. During this same time
period, observers did not record any
catch of silky shark on longline vessels
using shallow-set gear. The observer
data for the Hawaii deep-set longline
fishery showed a de minimis amount
was occasionally caught and nearly all
were released alive. Since at least 2008,
the observer coverage rates on shallowset and deep-set longline vessels in the
EPO have been a minimum of 100 and
20 percent, respectfully. An evaluation
of total catch per longline trip where
silky shark have been caught and
released shows that, if the average
weights of silky sharks are
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70083
approximated, the amount of silky shark
caught by U.S. longline vessels fishing
in the EPO do not come close to 20%
by weight of the total catch of fish
during a fishing trip.
NMFS considered a ‘‘No Action’’
alternative to the proposed action.
Under the ‘‘No Action’’ alternative, the
vessel owners and operators of large
purse seine vessels would not mark
FADs or collect data on FAD activities.
In addition, large purse seine vessels
would not need to release silky sharks
caught in the EPO and there would be
no restrictions on catch on longline
vessels. Under this alternative, the
United States would not implement
Resolutions C–16–01 and C–16–06 and
would not satisfy international
obligations as a Party to the Antigua
Convention.
Because the proposed action
implements Resolutions C–16–01 and
C–16–06 as agreed to by the United
States, there are also not any possible
additional alternatives that would be
consistent with U.S obligations as a
party to the Antigua Convention.
This IRFA was developed for this
action using NMFS’ 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 (80 FR 81194, December 29,
2015). The $11 million standard is used
in place of the U.S. SBA 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. NMFS has reviewed the
analyses prepared for this action in light
of the $11 million standard. Under this
size standard, the entities for which the
proposed action on FADs applies are
considered large and small business.
However, disproportional economic
effect between small and large
businesses is not expected; there will be
only minimal additional time burden for
owners and operators of large purse
seine vessels to ensure characters of a
unique code be marked indelibly on
their FADs and to record data for FAD
activities. And while the large purse
seine vessels impacted by the proposed
actions with respect to treatment of
silky sharks would be required to
release all silky sharks, U.S. purse seine
vessels do not target silky sharks, and
primarily release those caught
incidentally. However, there may be
some modifications to the fishing
practices of these large and small
entities to release all catch of silky
sharks.
E:\FR\FM\11OCP1.SGM
11OCP1
70084
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Proposed Rules
NMFS considers the longline vessels
for which the proposed action on silky
shark applies to be small entities and
the large purse seine vessels to also be
large and small entities. U.S. longline
vessels fishing in the EPO do not target
silky shark and release all those
incidentally caught. U.S. longline
vessels only occasionally catch a small
amount of silky sharks on fishing trips
in the EPO; therefore, this proposed
action is not expected to impact the
fishing practices of these longline
vessels.
Thus, these proposed actions are not
expected to substantially change the
typical fishing practices of affected
vessels. In addition, any impact to the
income of U.S. vessels would be minor.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
the proposed action is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Management of commercial fisheries
must comply with a number of
international agreements, domestic
laws, and Fisheries Management Plans.
These include, but are not limited to,
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, the
High Seas Fishing Compliance Act, the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, the
Endangered Species Act, the National
Environmental Policy Act, the
Paperwork Reduction Act, and the
Coastal Zone Management Act. NMFS
strives to ensure consistency among the
regulations with relevant agencies. The
proposed rule would not conflict with
any other statutes or regulations,
Federal or otherwise.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 300
Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing
vessels, International organizations,
Marine resources, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Treaties.
Dated: September 27, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 300 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:38 Oct 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
PART 300—INTERNATIONAL
FISHERIES REGULATIONS
Subpart C—Eastern Pacific Tuna
Fisheries
1. The authority citation for part 300,
subpart C, continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.
2. In § 300.21, add the definition for
‘‘Highly Migratory Species (HMS)
Branch’’ in alphabetical order to read as
follows:
■
§ 300.21
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Highly Migratory Species (HMS)
Branch means: National Marine
Fisheries Service West Coast Region,
Suite 4200, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Long
Beach CA 90802.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 300.24, add paragraphs (ee)
through (hh) to read as follows:
§ 300.24
Prohibitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(ee) Fail to ensure characters of a
unique code are marked indelibly on a
FAD deployed or modified on or after
January 1, 2017 in accordance with
§ 300.25 (h).
(ff) Fail to record and report data on
interactions or activities on FADs as
required in § 300.25 (i).
(gg) Use a commercial purse seine
fishing vessel of the United States to
retain on board, transship, store, or land
any part or whole carcass of a silky
shark (Carcharhinus falciformis) in
contravention of § 300.27 (e).
(hh) Use a U.S. longline vessel to
catch silky shark in contravention of
§ 300.27 (f).
■ 4. In § 300.25, add paragraphs (h) and
(i) to read as follows:
§ 300.25 Eastern Pacific fisheries
management.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) FAD identification requirements
for purse seine vessels.
(1) For each FAD deployed or
modified on or after January 1, 2017, in
the IATTC Convention Area, the vessel
owner or operator must either: obtain a
unique code from HMS Branch; or use
an existing unique identifier associated
with the FAD (e.g., the manufacturer
identification code for the attached
buoy).
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
(2) U.S. purse seine vessel owners and
operators shall ensure the characters of
the unique code or unique identifier be
marked indelibly at least 5 centimeters
in height on the upper portion of the
attached radio or satellite buoy in a
location that does not cover the solar
cells used to power the equipment. For
FADs without attached radio or satellite
buoys, the characters shall be on the
uppermost or emergent top portion of
the FAD. The vessel owner or operator
shall ensure the marking is visible at all
times during daylight. In circumstances
where the on-board observer is unable
to view the code, the captain or crew
shall assist the observer (e.g. by
providing the FAD identification code
to the observer).
(i) FAD data reporting for purse seine
vessels. U.S. vessel owners and
operators must ensure that any
interaction or activity with a FAD is
reported using a standard format
provided by the HMS Branch. The
owner and operator shall ensure that the
form is submitted to the address
specified by the HMS Branch.
■ 5. In § 300.27 paragraphs (e) through
(h) are redesignated as paragraph (g)
through (j) and new paragraphs (e) and
(f) are added to read as follows:
§ 300.27 Incidental catch and tuna
retention requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Silky shark restrictions for purse
seine vessels. The crew, operator, and
owner of a commercial purse seine
fishing vessel of the United States used
to fish for tuna or tuna-like species is
prohibited from retaining on board,
transshipping, storing, or landing any
part or whole carcass of a silky shark
(Carcharhinus falciformis) that is caught
in the Convention Area.
(f) Silky shark restrictions for longline
vessels. The crew, operator, and owner
of a longline vessel of the United States
used to fish for tuna or tuna-like species
must limit the retained catch of silky
sharks caught in the IATTC Convention
Area to a maximum of 20 percent in
weight of the total catch during each
fishing trip that occurs in whole or in
part in the IATTC Convention Area.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–24444 Filed 10–7–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\11OCP1.SGM
11OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 11, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70080-70084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24444]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 300
[Docket No. 160801681-6857-01]
RIN 0648-BG22
International Fisheries; Tuna and Tuna-Like Species in the
Eastern Pacific Ocean; Silky Shark Fishing Restrictions and Fish
Aggregating Device Data Collection and Identification
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations under the Tuna Conventions Act to
implement provisions of two Resolutions adopted by the Inter-American
Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) in 2016: Resolution C-16-01
(Collection and Analyses of Data On Fish-Aggregating Devices) and
Resolution C-16-06 (Conservation Measures for Shark Species, with
Special Emphasis on the Silky Shark (Carcharhinus Falciformis) for the
Years 2017, 2018, and 2019). Per Resolution C-16-01, these regulations
would require the owner or operator of a U.S. purse seine vessel to
ensure characters of a unique code be marked indelibly on each fish
aggregating device (FAD) deployed or modified on or after January 1,
2017, in the IATTC Convention Area. The vessel owner or operator would
also be required to record and submit information about the FAD, as
described in Annex I of the Resolution C-16-01. Per Resolution C-16-06,
these regulations would prohibit the owner or operator of a U.S. purse
seine vessel from retaining on board, transshipping, landing, or
storing, in part or whole, carcasses of silky sharks caught by purse-
seine vessels in the IATTC Convention Area. These regulations would
also provide limits on the retained catch of silky sharks caught in the
IATTC Convention Area. This proposed rule is necessary for the United
States to satisfy its obligations as a member of the IATTC.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule and supporting documents must be
submitted in writing by November 10, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2016-0106, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016-0106, click the
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or
attach your comments.
Mail: Submit written comments to Rachael Wadsworth, NMFS
West Coast Region Long Beach Office, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200,
Long Beach, CA 90802. Include the identifier ``NOAA-NMFS-2016-0106'' in
the comments.
Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above
methods to ensure they are received, documented, and considered by
NMFS. 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. 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.) submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly
accessible. Do not submit confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept
anonymous comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to
remain anonymous).
Copies of the draft Regulatory Impact Review and other supporting
documents are available via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA-NMFS-2016-0106 or by contacting the
Regional Administrator, William W. Stelle, Jr., NMFS West Coast Region,
7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Bldg 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0070, or
RegionalAdministrator.WCRHMS@noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachael Wadsworth, NMFS, West Coast
Region, 562-980-4036.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background on the IATTC
The United States is a member of the IATTC, which was established
under the 1949 Convention for the Establishment of an Inter-American
Tropical Tuna Commission. In 2003, the IATTC adopted the Convention for
the Strengthening of the IATTC Established by the 1949 Convention
between the United States of America and the Republic of Costa Rica
(Antigua Convention). The Antigua Convention entered into force in
2010. The United States acceded to the Antigua Convention on February
24, 2016. The full text of the Antigua Convention is available at:
https://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/Antigua_Convention_Jun_2003.pdf.
The IATTC consists of 21 member nations and four cooperating non-
member nations and facilitates scientific research into, as well as the
conservation and management of, tuna and tuna-like species in the IATTC
Convention Area. The IATTC Convention Area is defined as waters of the
eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO) within the area bounded by the west coast
of the Americas and by 50[deg] N. latitude, 150[deg] W. longitude, and
50[deg] S. latitude. The IATTC maintains a scientific research and
fishery monitoring program and regularly assesses the status of tuna,
sharks, and billfish stocks in the EPO to determine appropriate
[[Page 70081]]
catch limits and other measures deemed necessary to promote sustainable
fisheries and prevent the overexploitation of these stocks.
International Obligations of the United States Under the Antigua
Convention
As a Party to the Antigua Convention and a member of the IATTC, the
United States is legally bound to implement decisions of the IATTC. The
Tuna Conventions Act (16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.) directs the Secretary of
Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of State and, with respect
to enforcement measures, the U.S. Coast Guard, to promulgate such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the United States'
obligations under the Antigua Convention, including recommendations and
decisions adopted by the IATTC. The authority of the Secretary of
Commerce to promulgate such regulations has been delegated to NMFS.
IATTC Resolution on FADs
In 2013, the IATTC adopted Resolution C-13-04 (Collection and
Analyses of Data on Fish-Aggregating Devices) in response to concerns
that incomplete data was being collected on FADs and that the IATTC was
unable to track the activities on a FAD through time in the Convention
Area. The Commission recognized that additional information needed to
be collected before Commission-wide FAD management measures could be
developed. In order to fully implement Resolution C-13-04, the
Commission also needed to adopt a FAD identification scheme. In 2014
and 2015, the IATTC scientific staff provided options and
recommendations for a FAD identification scheme. In 2015, the
Commission agreed on a method to identify FADs and adopted Resolution
C-15-03, which amended Resolution C-13-04, and included this
information. In 2016, the Commission further agreed on modifications to
clarify the data collection requirements and revisions to some of the
dates for implementing specific provisions in the Resolution. The IATTC
adopted Resolution C-16-01 by consensus in July 2016. The main
objective of Resolution C-16-01 is to collect data on FADs in the EPO
and to identify FADs through a marking system.
IATTC Resolution on Silky Sharks
In 2016, the IATTC adopted Resolution C-16-06 in response to
concerns for the stock status of the silky shark in the EPO. The IATTC
scientific staff has provided conservation recommendations for the
silky shark since 2012, and Resolution C-16-06 is consistent with the
advice that the IATTC scientific staff provided in 2016. The main
objective of Resolution C-16-06 is to restrict retention of silky
sharks on purse seine vessels and to restrict incidental catch of silky
sharks on longline vessels in the IATTC Convention Area. U.S.
commercial fishing vessels in the EPO do not target silky shark; they
are caught incidentally and primarily discarded.
Proposed Regulations
This proposed rule would implement provisions of Resolutions C-16-
01 and C-16-06, described above, for U.S. commercial fishing vessels
that fish for tuna or tuna-like species in the IATTC Convention Area.
This proposed rule includes four elements: Two elements regarding FADs
and two elements regarding silky shark.
The first element would require the owner or operator of a U.S.
purse seine vessel to ensure characters of a unique code be marked
indelibly on each fish aggregating device (FAD) deployed or modified on
or after January 1, 2017. The vessel owner or operator would be
required to select one of the following two options for the unique code
for each FAD: (1) Obtain a unique code from NMFS West Coast Region that
NMFS has obtained from the IATTC Secretariat, as specified in Annex I
of Resolution C-16-01 or (2) use an existing unique identifier
associated with the FAD (e.g., the manufacturer identification code for
the attached buoy).
The vessel owner or operator would be required to ensure the
characters for the unique code be at least 5 centimeters in height on
the upper portion of the attached radio or satellite buoy in a location
that does not cover the solar cells used to power the equipment. For
FADs without attached radio or satellite buoys, the characters would be
required to be marked indelibly on the uppermost or emergent top
portion of the FAD. In other words, the vessel owner or operator would
be required to ensure the marking is durable and will not fade or be
erased (e.g., marked using an epoxy-based paint or an equivalent in
terms of lasting ability) and visible at all times during daylight. In
circumstances where the observer is unable to view the unique code, the
captain or crew would be required to assist the observer (e.g., by
providing the unique code of the FAD to the observer).
The second element would require the vessel owner or operator of a
FAD that is deployed on or after January 1, 2017, to record and submit
information about the FAD to the address specified by the Highly
Migratory Species (HMS) Branch. The HMS Branch is defined as NMFS West
Coast Region, Suite 4200, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90802. In
accordance with Annex I of Resolution C-16-01, nine data fields would
be required to be recorded and submitted: (1) Position; (2) date; (3)
hour; (4) FAD unique identifier; (5) FAD type (e.g., drifting natural
FAD, drifting artificial FAD); (6) FAD design characteristics
(dimension and material of the floating part and of the underwater
hanging structure); (7) the type of activity (set, deployment, hauling,
retrieving, loss, intervention on electronic equipment, other (if so,
specify)); (8) if the activity is a set, the results of the set in
terms of catch and bycatch; and (9) characteristics of any attached
buoy or positioning equipment (positioning system, whether equipped
with sonar, etc.). The IATTC Secretariat is currently working on
further describing and defining each of these data fields through the
development of a standard form. Owners and operators of a FAD would be
required to record this information on the standard form developed by
the Secretariat and provided to the owners and operators by the HMS
Branch.
The third element would prohibit the crew, operator, and owner of a
commercial purse seine fishing vessel of the United States used to fish
for tuna or tuna-like species from retaining on board, transshipping,
storing, or landing any part or whole carcass of a silky shark that is
caught in the Convention Area. U.S. purse seiners do not target silky
sharks; they are caught incidentally and are primarily discarded. The
impacts of these proposed regulations to purse seine vessels are
described in the Classification section below.
The fourth element would require the crew, operator, and owner of a
commercial longline fishing vessel of the United States to limit the
retention of silky sharks caught in the IATTC Convention Area to a
maximum of 20% by weight of the total catch of fish during any fishing
trip that occurred in whole or in part in the IATTC Convention Area.
Although Resolution C-16-06 provides that the ``bycatch'' of silky
shark be restricted, NMFS proposes to use the term ``retained catch''
in these proposed regulations.
U.S. longline vessels fishing in the IATTC Convention Area do not
target, and infrequently catch, silky shark. Data from 2008 to 2015
show that any incidentally caught silky shark are released, and almost
all are released alive. Silky shark are commonly
[[Page 70082]]
released by cutting the line or dehooking the shark before it is
brought onboard the vessel. Weights for silky shark are not recorded
and weight estimates for sharks released while still in the water would
likely not be reliable. An evaluation of total catch per longline trip
where silky shark have been caught and released shows that, if the
average weights of silky sharks are approximated, the amount of silky
shark caught by U.S. longline vessels fishing in the EPO would not come
close to 20% by weight of the total catch of fish during a fishing
trip. NMFS is proposing to use the term ``retained catch'' in the
proposed regulations to assist in enforcement of these regulations. The
impacts of these proposed regulations to longline vessels are described
in the Classification section below.
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed
rule is consistent with the Tuna Conventions Act and other applicable
laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
NMFS is amending the supporting statement for the Pacific Tuna
Fisheries Logbook Office of Management and Business (OMB) Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) requirements (OMB Control No. 0648-0148) to include
the data collection requirements for FADs as described in the preamble.
NMFS estimates the public reporting burden for this collection of
information to average 10 minutes per form, time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. NMFS requests any comments on the addition
of the FAD data collection form to the PRA package, including whether
the paperwork would unnecessarily burden any vessel owners and
operators. Public comment is sought regarding: Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to the
ADDRESSES above, and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax to
(202) 395-5806.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number. All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.
Regarding the elements of the proposed rule pertaining to silky
shark; there are no new collection-of-information requirements
associated with this action that are subject to the PRA, and existing
collection-of-information requirements still apply under the following
Control Numbers: 0648-0593 and 0648-0214. Notwithstanding any other
provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no
person shall be subject to penalty for failure to comply with, a
collection-of-information subject to the requirements of the PRA,
unless that collection-of-information displays a currently valid Office
of Management and Budget control number.
An Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was prepared as
required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act to analyze
whether the proposed rule to implement provisions of Resolutions C-16-
01 and C-16-06 adopted by the IATTC in 2016 would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The IRFA is
being published to aid the public in commenting upon NMFS conclusion
that the proposed actions will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
As described previously in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section,
the proposed regulations would require FAD identification and data
reporting as well as fishing restrictions on silky sharks.
Alternatively, the failure to promulgate the proposed action would
result in the provisions of these Resolutions not being implemented and
would not allow the United States to satisfy its obligations as a
member of the IATTC.
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 U.S. Small
Business Administration's (SBA) 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 for all NMFS rules,
subject to the RFA, published after July 1, 2016. Id. at 81194.
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 commercial finfish fishing
businesses. The new standard results in fewer commercial finfish
businesses being considered small.
The entities that would be affected by the proposed action are (1)
U.S. purse seine vessels that use FADs to fish for tuna or tuna-like
species in the IATTC Convention Area, and (2) U.S. purse seine and
longline vessels that catch silky shark.
As of July 2016, there are 15 large purse seine vessels (with at
least 363 metric tons of fish hold volume) listed on the IATTC Regional
Vessel Register. The number of U.S. large purse seine vessels on the
IATTC Regional Vessel Register has increased substantially in the past
two years due to negotiations regarding the South Pacific Tuna Treaty
(SPTT) and the interest expressed by vessel owners that typically fish
in the WCPO in relocating to the EPO. However, parties reached
agreement in principle on changes to the SPTT in June 2016. U.S. large
purse seine vessels fishing in the EPO primarily land yellowfin,
skipjack, and bigeye tuna. Estimates of ex-vessel revenues for large
U.S. purse seine vessels fishing in the IATTC Convention Area from 2005
to 2014 have been confidential and may not be publicly disclosed
because of the small number of vessels in the fishery. However, in
2015, thirteen large purse seine vessels fished either exclusively in
the EPO or fished in both the EPO and WCPO, and so information for 2015
is not confidential.
For large purse seine vessels that fished exclusively in the EPO in
2015, ex-vessel price information specific to the individual vessels
are not available to NMFS because these vessels did not land on the
U.S. West Coast and the cannery receipts are not available through the
IATTC. However, estimates for large purse seine vessels based in the
WCPO that fish in both the EPO and WCPO may be used as a proxy for U.S.
large purse seine vessels. The number of these U.S. purse seine vessels
is approximated by the number with WCPFC Area Endorsements, which are
[[Page 70083]]
the NMFS-issued authorizations required to use a vessel to fish
commercially for HMS on the high seas in the Convention Area. As of
August 2016 the number of purse seine vessels with WCPFC Area
Endorsements was 42. Neither gross receipts nor ex-vessel price
information specific to individual fishing vessels are available to
NMFS, so NMFS applied indicative regional cannery prices--as
approximations of ex-vessel prices--to annual catches of individual
vessels to estimate their annual receipts. Indicative regional cannery
prices are available through 2014 (developed by the Pacific Islands
Forum Fisheries Agency; available at https://www.ffa.int/node/425), so
NMFS estimated vessels' annual receipts during 2012-2014. Using this
approach, NMFS estimates that among the affected vessels, the range in
annual average receipts in 2012-2014 was $3 million to $20 million and
the median was about $13 million. Thus, NMFS estimates that slightly
more than half of the affected large purse seine vessels are small
entities. Purse seine vessels that use FADs to fish for tuna or tuna-
like species and that catch silky shark in the IATTC Convention Area
are all large vessels and are both large and small entities.
There are two components to the U.S. tuna purse seine fishery in
the EPO: (1) Large purse seine vessels with at least 363 metric tons of
fish hold volume (size class 6 vessels) that typically have been based
in the western and central Pacific Ocean (WCPO), and (2) coastal purse
seine vessels with smaller fish hold volume that are based on the U.S.
West Coast. Because only the large purse seine vessels fish with FADs
and incidentally catch silky shark in the EPO, the proposed action is
not expected to impact the coastal purse seine vessels. U.S. purse
seiners do not target silky sharks in the EPO. Since 2005, the best
available data from observers show that the incidental catches of silky
shark are primarily discarded; however, a small percentage has been
landed in the past ten years. For example, in 2015, a year in which
more than three large purse seine vessels fished in the EPO, about 3%
of the total catches of silky shark were landed and the rest were
discarded either dead or alive. Since at least 2005, the observer
coverage rate on class size 6 vessels in the EPO has been 100 percent.
As of August 2016, the IATTC Regional Vessel Register lists 158
U.S. longline vessels that have the option to fish in the IATTC
Convention Area. The majority of these longline vessels possess Hawaii
Longline Limited Access Permits (issued under 50 CFR 665.13). Under the
Hawaii longline limited access program, no more than 164 permits may be
issued. In addition, there are U.S. longline vessels based on the U.S.
West Coast, some of which operate solely under the Pacific HMS permit.
U.S. West Coast-based longline vessels operating under the Pacific HMS
permit fish primarily in the EPO and are currently restricted to
fishing with deep-set longline gear outside of the U.S. West Coast EEZ.
These vessels primarily target tuna species with a small percentage of
swordfish and other highly migratory species taken incidentally.
There have been less than three West Coast-based vessels operating
under the HMS permit since 2005; therefore, landings and ex-vessel
revenue are confidential. However, the number of Hawaii-permitted
longline vessels that have landed in West Coast ports has increased
from one vessel in 2006 to 14 vessels in 2014. In 2014, 621 mt of
highly migratory species were landed by Hawaii permitted longline
vessels with an average ex-vessel revenue of approximately $247,857 per
vessel. For the longline fishery, the ex-vessel value of catches by the
Hawaii longline fleet in 2012 was about $87 million. With 129 active
vessels in that year, per-vessel average revenues were about $0.7
million, well below the $11 million threshold for finfish harvesting
businesses. NMFS considers all longline vessels, for which data is non-
confidential, that catch silky sharks in the IATTC Convention Area to
be small entities for the purposes of the RFA.
U.S. longline vessels fishing in the IATTC Convention Area, whether
under the Hawaii Longline Limited Access Permit or the Pacific HMS
permit, do not target silky shark and all those caught incidentally are
released. From 2008 to 2015, logbook records recorded by vessel owners
and operators of U.S. longline vessels fishing in the IATTC Convention
Area showed a total of four silky sharks caught and released on four
separate trips. During this same time period, observers did not record
any catch of silky shark on longline vessels using shallow-set gear.
The observer data for the Hawaii deep-set longline fishery showed a de
minimis amount was occasionally caught and nearly all were released
alive. Since at least 2008, the observer coverage rates on shallow-set
and deep-set longline vessels in the EPO have been a minimum of 100 and
20 percent, respectfully. An evaluation of total catch per longline
trip where silky shark have been caught and released shows that, if the
average weights of silky sharks are approximated, the amount of silky
shark caught by U.S. longline vessels fishing in the EPO do not come
close to 20% by weight of the total catch of fish during a fishing
trip.
NMFS considered a ``No Action'' alternative to the proposed action.
Under the ``No Action'' alternative, the vessel owners and operators of
large purse seine vessels would not mark FADs or collect data on FAD
activities. In addition, large purse seine vessels would not need to
release silky sharks caught in the EPO and there would be no
restrictions on catch on longline vessels. Under this alternative, the
United States would not implement Resolutions C-16-01 and C-16-06 and
would not satisfy international obligations as a Party to the Antigua
Convention.
Because the proposed action implements Resolutions C-16-01 and C-
16-06 as agreed to by the United States, there are also not any
possible additional alternatives that would be consistent with U.S
obligations as a party to the Antigua Convention.
This IRFA was developed for this action using NMFS' 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 (80 FR
81194, December 29, 2015). The $11 million standard is used in place of
the U.S. SBA 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. NMFS has reviewed the analyses prepared for this
action in light of the $11 million standard. Under this size standard,
the entities for which the proposed action on FADs applies are
considered large and small business. However, disproportional economic
effect between small and large businesses is not expected; there will
be only minimal additional time burden for owners and operators of
large purse seine vessels to ensure characters of a unique code be
marked indelibly on their FADs and to record data for FAD activities.
And while the large purse seine vessels impacted by the proposed
actions with respect to treatment of silky sharks would be required to
release all silky sharks, U.S. purse seine vessels do not target silky
sharks, and primarily release those caught incidentally. However, there
may be some modifications to the fishing practices of these large and
small entities to release all catch of silky sharks.
[[Page 70084]]
NMFS considers the longline vessels for which the proposed action
on silky shark applies to be small entities and the large purse seine
vessels to also be large and small entities. U.S. longline vessels
fishing in the EPO do not target silky shark and release all those
incidentally caught. U.S. longline vessels only occasionally catch a
small amount of silky sharks on fishing trips in the EPO; therefore,
this proposed action is not expected to impact the fishing practices of
these longline vessels.
Thus, these proposed actions are not expected to substantially
change the typical fishing practices of affected vessels. In addition,
any impact to the income of U.S. vessels would be minor. Therefore,
NMFS has determined that the proposed action is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Management of commercial fisheries must comply with a number of
international agreements, domestic laws, and Fisheries Management
Plans. These include, but are not limited to, the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the High Seas Fishing
Compliance Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered
Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Paperwork
Reduction Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. NMFS strives to
ensure consistency among the regulations with relevant agencies. The
proposed rule would not conflict with any other statutes or
regulations, Federal or otherwise.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 300
Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, International
organizations, Marine resources, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Treaties.
Dated: September 27, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 300 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 300--INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS
Subpart C--Eastern Pacific Tuna Fisheries
0
1. The authority citation for part 300, subpart C, continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 300.21, add the definition for ``Highly Migratory Species
(HMS) Branch'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 300.21 Definitions.
* * * * *
Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Branch means: National Marine
Fisheries Service West Coast Region, Suite 4200, 501 W. Ocean Blvd.,
Long Beach CA 90802.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 300.24, add paragraphs (ee) through (hh) to read as
follows:
Sec. 300.24 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(ee) Fail to ensure characters of a unique code are marked
indelibly on a FAD deployed or modified on or after January 1, 2017 in
accordance with Sec. 300.25 (h).
(ff) Fail to record and report data on interactions or activities
on FADs as required in Sec. 300.25 (i).
(gg) Use a commercial purse seine fishing vessel of the United
States to retain on board, transship, store, or land any part or whole
carcass of a silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis) in contravention of
Sec. 300.27 (e).
(hh) Use a U.S. longline vessel to catch silky shark in
contravention of Sec. 300.27 (f).
0
4. In Sec. 300.25, add paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 300.25 Eastern Pacific fisheries management.
* * * * *
(h) FAD identification requirements for purse seine vessels.
(1) For each FAD deployed or modified on or after January 1, 2017,
in the IATTC Convention Area, the vessel owner or operator must either:
obtain a unique code from HMS Branch; or use an existing unique
identifier associated with the FAD (e.g., the manufacturer
identification code for the attached buoy).
(2) U.S. purse seine vessel owners and operators shall ensure the
characters of the unique code or unique identifier be marked indelibly
at least 5 centimeters in height on the upper portion of the attached
radio or satellite buoy in a location that does not cover the solar
cells used to power the equipment. For FADs without attached radio or
satellite buoys, the characters shall be on the uppermost or emergent
top portion of the FAD. The vessel owner or operator shall ensure the
marking is visible at all times during daylight. In circumstances where
the on-board observer is unable to view the code, the captain or crew
shall assist the observer (e.g. by providing the FAD identification
code to the observer).
(i) FAD data reporting for purse seine vessels. U.S. vessel owners
and operators must ensure that any interaction or activity with a FAD
is reported using a standard format provided by the HMS Branch. The
owner and operator shall ensure that the form is submitted to the
address specified by the HMS Branch.
0
5. In Sec. 300.27 paragraphs (e) through (h) are redesignated as
paragraph (g) through (j) and new paragraphs (e) and (f) are added to
read as follows:
Sec. 300.27 Incidental catch and tuna retention requirements.
* * * * *
(e) Silky shark restrictions for purse seine vessels. The crew,
operator, and owner of a commercial purse seine fishing vessel of the
United States used to fish for tuna or tuna-like species is prohibited
from retaining on board, transshipping, storing, or landing any part or
whole carcass of a silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis) that is
caught in the Convention Area.
(f) Silky shark restrictions for longline vessels. The crew,
operator, and owner of a longline vessel of the United States used to
fish for tuna or tuna-like species must limit the retained catch of
silky sharks caught in the IATTC Convention Area to a maximum of 20
percent in weight of the total catch during each fishing trip that
occurs in whole or in part in the IATTC Convention Area.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-24444 Filed 10-7-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P