Fisheries Off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Fisheries; California Drift Gillnet Fishery; Implementation of a Federal Limited Entry Drift Gillnet Permit, 11146-11152 [2018-05186]
Download as PDF
11146
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, NARA amends 36 CFR part
1258 as follows:
PART 1258—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 1258
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 2126(c) and 44 U.S.C.
2307.
Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass
Fishery Management Plan quota transfer
provisions. This announcement informs
the public of the revised commercial
quotas for North Carolina and
Massachusetts.
Effective March 9, 2018, through
December 31, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cynthia Hanson, Fishery Management
Specialist, (978) 281–9180.
§ 1258.16
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulations governing the summer
flounder fishery are found in 50 CFR
648.100 through 648.110. These
regulations require annual specification
of a commercial quota that is
apportioned among the coastal states
from Maine through North Carolina. The
process to set the annual commercial
quota and the percent allocated to each
state is described in § 648.102, and the
initial 2018 allocations were published
on December 22, 2017 (82 FR 60682),
and corrected January 30, 2018 (83 FR
4165).
The final rule implementing
Amendment 5 to the Summer Flounder
Fishery Management Plan, as published
in the Federal Register on December 17,
1993 (58 FR 65936), provided a
mechanism for transferring summer
flounder commercial quota from one
state to another. Two or more states,
under mutual agreement and with the
concurrence of the NMFS Greater
Atlantic Regional Administrator, can
transfer or combine summer flounder
commercial quota under § 648.102(c)(2).
The Regional Administrator is required
to consider the criteria in
§ 648.102(c)(2)(i)(A) through (C) in the
evaluation of requests for quota transfers
or combinations.
North Carolina is transferring 5,450 lb
(2,472 kg) of summer flounder
commercial quota to Massachusetts.
This transfer was requested to repay
landings by a North Carolina-permitted
vessel that landed in Massachusetts
under a safe harbor agreement. Based on
the initial quotas published in the 2018
Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea
Bass Specifications and subsequent
adjustments, the revised summer
flounder quotas for calendar year 2018
are now: North Carolina, 1,755,989 lb
(796,503 kg); and Massachusetts,
410,192 lb (186,060 kg).
What is NARA’s refund policy?
* * * If you feel we processed your
order incorrectly or it contains errors,
please contact us within 30 days of your
delivery date to have your issue
verified. * * *
David S. Ferriero,
Archivist of the United States.
[FR Doc. 2018–05088 Filed 3–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7515–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 25
Satellite Communications
CFR Correction
In Title 47 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Parts 20 to 39, revised as of
October 1, 2017, on page 265, the
Effective Date Note at the end of
§ 25.220 is removed.
■
[FR Doc. 2018–05247 Filed 3–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301–00–D
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 170828822–70999–02]
RIN 0648–XG063
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Summer Flounder Fishery;
Quota Transfer
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; quota transfer.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
NMFS announces that the
State of North Carolina is transferring a
portion of its 2018 commercial summer
flounder quota to the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. This quota adjustment is
necessary to comply with the Summer
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Mar 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
[FR Doc. 2018–05169 Filed 3–9–18; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DATES:
2. Amend § 1258.16 by revising the
sixth sentence to read as follows:
■
Dated: March 9, 2018.
Emily H. Menashes,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Classification
This action is taken under 50 CFR
part 648 and is exempt from review
under Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 170817773–8213–02]
RIN 0648–BG81
Fisheries Off West Coast States;
Highly Migratory Fisheries; California
Drift Gillnet Fishery; Implementation of
a Federal Limited Entry Drift Gillnet
Permit
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS is issuing regulations
under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSA) to implement a
March 2017 recommendation by the
Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Pacific Council) to amend the Fishery
Management Plan for U.S. West Coast
Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species
(HMS FMP). The rule implements
Amendment 5 to the HMS FMP and
establishes a Federal limited entry (LE)
permit system for the California/Oregon
large-mesh drift gillnet (DGN) fishery
using standards that are very similar to
those used in the existing State of
California LE permit program for the
DGN fishery. Amendment 5 is intended
to streamline management and future
decision-making by placing all aspects
of DGN fishery management under MSA
authority. All current California LE DGN
permit holders are eligible to apply for,
and receive, a Federal LE DGN permit,
and no additional LE DGN permits are
created under this rule. This final rule
is administrative in nature and is not
anticipated to result in increased
activity, effort, or capacity in the
fishery.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
April 13, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting
documents that were prepared for this
final rule, including the Regulatory
Impact Review and the proposed rule,
are available via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA–
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14MRR1.SGM
14MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
NMFS–2017–0052. These documents
are also available from Lyle Enriquez,
NMFS West Coast Region, 501 W. Ocean
Blvd. Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA
90802, or Lyle.Enriquez@noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this final rule
may be submitted to the West Coast
Regional Office and by email to OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to (202)
395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lyle
Enriquez, NMFS, West Coast Region,
562–980–4025, or Lyle.Enriquez@
noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
California/Oregon large-mesh DGN
fishery is managed under the HMS FMP,
which was prepared by the Pacific
Council and implemented under the
authority of the MSA by regulations at
50 CFR part 660. Although it adopted all
conservation and management measures
in place under various Federal statutes
(e.g., the Marine Mammal Protection Act
and the Endangered Species Act) and
state regulations, the HMS FMP did not
incorporate the LE DGN permit
programs of California and Oregon.
California has an active LE DGN
program, Oregon no longer issues DGN
permits, and DGN fishing is prohibited
in waters off of Washington.
Background
On March 12, 2017, the Pacific
Council voted to recommend
Amendment 5 to the HMS FMP, which
establishes a LE DGN permit program
under MSA authority and entitles all
fishermen authorized to fish with largemesh DGN gear under state law, as of
the publication date of this final rule, to
be eligible to receive a Federal LE DGN
permit. On September 15, 2017, NMFS
published a Notice of Availability
(NOA) in the Federal Register (82 FR
43323) for Amendment 5 with a 60-day
public comment period. After
consideration of public comments on
Amendment 5, NMFS approved it on
December 14, 2017. With that approval,
Amendment 5, which requires
establishment of a Federal DGN program
under the HMS FMP, is now official
Federal policy.
On October 31, 2017, NMFS
published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register (82 FR 50366) that
would add regulations at 50 CFR part
660, subpart K, to implement
Amendment 5. The proposed rule
contained additional background
information, including information on
the basis for the new regulations and the
recommendations of the Pacific Council,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Mar 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
which is not repeated in this final rule.
The proposed rule was open to public
comment through December 15, 2017,
and the comments that NMFS received
are addressed in this final rule.
New Regulations
This rule adopts many of the current
State of California management
measures associated with the DGN
fishery. For example, NMFS adopts
current California requirements
regarding the assignment of a permit
(i.e., permits are issued to an individual
and assigned to a specific vessel), the
transfer of permits between permit
holders (i.e., a permit must be held for
three years before it is eligible to be
transferred), and an annual renewal
cycle.
As of the publication date of this final
rule, all 70 California LE DGN permit
holders are eligible to receive a Federal
LE DGN permit if they have renewed
their state LE DGN permit by March 31,
2018. Permit holders who fail to renew
their state DGN permit by March 31,
2018, are not eligible for a Federal LE
DGN permit. As of January 10, 2018, 68
permit holders have renewed their state
LE DGN permit. If a state LE DGN
permit was transferred after publication
of the proposed rule, the transferee, but
not the transferor, is eligible to receive
a Federal LE DGN permit.
Federal LE DGN permits will be
issued annually for the fishing year
starting April 1 and ending March 31 of
the following year. Permits expire on
March 31 of each year and, after initial
issuance (expected in 2018), the permit
renewal deadline is April 30 of each
fishing year. A completed LE DGN
permit renewal form must be received
by NMFS no later than close-of-business
April 30. Any renewal form received
after that date will result in the
permanent expiration of the Federal LE
DGN permit. A permit owner who fails
to submit a renewal form by the
deadline may submit a renewal form to
NMFS with a written statement that the
failure to renew the permit by the
deadline was proximately caused by the
permit owner’s illness or injury. When
a permit owner has died, the owner’s
estate or other personal representative
may submit a statement explaining that
the permit owner’s death prevented a
timely renewal. The permit holder, or in
the case of a deceased permit owner, the
estate or other personal representative,
will need to provide written proof of
illness, injury, or death. NMFS will not
consider any such renewal request made
after July 31. A permit holder needs to
hold a Federal LE DGN permit for a
vesting period of at least three years
before it is eligible to be transferred.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
11147
This vesting period extends across both
state and Federal permit programs (i.e.,
if a permit holder held a state LE DGN
permit for two years and a Federal LE
DGN permit for one year, the permit
may be transferred).
This rule also includes technical edits
to existing regulatory text. These edits
add the word ‘‘general’’ before instances
of ‘‘HMS permit’’ to distinguish the
existing HMS permit from the new LE
DGN permit; update a web address from
which permit applications may be
obtained; update the reference to the
NMFS ‘‘Southwest Region’’ to refer to
the West Coast Region, into which it
was incorporated; and update the
description of the NMFS regional
‘‘Sustainable Fisheries Division’’ to
describe it as part of the West Coast
Region.
Public Comment and Responses
NMFS received 17 written public
comments during the proposed
rulemaking stage. The summarized
comments and NMFS’ responses are
below.
Comment 1: The DGN fishery is
conducted in Federal waters and
belongs under Federal law and
permitting.
Response: NMFS agrees that the DGN
fishery belongs under Federal authority.
In 2004, NMFS approved the HMS FMP,
which included the DGN fishery as an
authorized fishery, bringing the fishery
under MSA authority for the first time.
Furthermore, the DGN fishery operates
only in Federal waters of the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) off of the States of
California and Oregon. California,
Oregon, and Washington do not allow
the DGN fishery to operate in state
waters.
Comment 2: Consolidating
management responsibility for all
aspects of the swordfish fishery under
one authority, including the permit
process, creates a higher level of
management efficacy that currently does
not exist.
Response: NMFS agrees. The 2004
HMS FMP included the DGN fishery as
an authorized fishery under MSA
authority and adopted state and Federal
regulations in place at that time, except
for the limited entry DGN permit
systems of Oregon and California.
Oregon no longer issues DGN permits,
and California maintains a state LE DGN
permit program. Currently, changes to
the number of LE DGN permits or
qualifications to possess a LE DGN
permit are made by the California State
Legislature. Creating a Federal LE DGN
permit may streamline implementation
of future DGN management measures
recommended by the Pacific Council.
E:\FR\FM\14MRR1.SGM
14MRR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
11148
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
For example, the Pacific Council may
recommend management measures
related to participation in the fishery,
and NMFS could implement a
recommendation (if approved) by
placing conditions on eligibility for
Federal LE DGN permits, without the
California State Legislature having to
take action.
Comment 3: Going forward, California
would continue to have influence
through its seats on the Pacific Council
and Pacific Offshore Cetacean Take
Reduction Team (POCTRT).
Response: NMFS agrees. The State of
California has voting representatives on
the Pacific Council and the POCTRT,
and these groups recommend DGN
management measures to NMFS. The
Pacific Council recommends
management measures related to all
fisheries under the HMS FMP, which
includes the DGN fishery and other
fisheries that harvest swordfish and
other HMS. The POCTRT was
established under section 118(f) of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, 16
U.S.C. 1387(f), specifically to make
recommendations addressing marine
mammal interactions in the DGN
fishery. For example, in 1996 the
POCTRT recommended that NMFS
require the use of acoustic pingers to
alert marine mammals to the presence of
the net during all DGN fishing activity.
NMFS implemented this measure in
1997 and it led to a significant reduction
in the number of marine mammals
entangled by the fishery. Further, in
2013 the POCTRT recommended that
NMFS implement emergency,
temporary regulations to limit the
number of sperm whales taken in the
fishery, require a Vessel Monitoring
System (VMS) on board each DGN
vessel, and establish a 100 percent
observer coverage zone. NMFS
implemented this recommendation in
2013, and later made the VMS
requirement permanent.
Comment 4: The rule only proposed
to create a Federal LE DGN permit
rather than replace the current
California state permit regime, as the
Council originally considered when it
began discussing a Federal LE DGN
permit in March 2014. The California
state permit regime should be placed
under Federal control, as the most
scientific resources are available at the
Federal level to make science-based
decisions for the fishery.
Response: In March 2017, the Pacific
Council voted to authorize a Federal LE
DGN permit. The Pacific Council
recommended that, as soon as possible
after Pacific Council final action, only
fishermen authorized to fish with largemesh DGN gear under state law would
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Mar 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
be entitled to a LE DGN permit issued
by NMFS. Fishermen who hold valid
state LE DGN permits on the date that
this final rule is published would be
eligible for the Federal LE DGN permit.
These permits could be transferred only
once every three years. The Pacific
Council did not include a
recommendation to repeal any state
permit requirements. This final rule
does not repeal any State of California
requirements related to the California
LE DGN permit. The California LE DGN
permit will continue to be required by
the state until and unless a change to
California Fish and Game Code is made
by the California State Legislature.
Comment 5: Several commenters
noted that the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife is currently in the
process of convening stakeholders to
discuss potential collaborative
solutions, including a buyout program,
to improve the sustainability of the DGN
fishery. The commenters support these
efforts and urge NMFS to delay
implementation of this rule until the
State of California has had the
opportunity to explore a collaborative
solution with fishermen and other
stakeholders under state authority.
Response: Section 304(b) of the MSA,
16 U.S.C. 1854(b), requires NMFS to
publish final implementing regulations
for FMP amendments within 30 days of
the close of the comment period on the
proposed rule, if the amendment has
been approved. Amendment 5 includes
no provision to delay implementation of
the Federal permit system. NMFS
understands that the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife has
convened meetings with California LE
DGN permit holders and environmental
non-governmental organizations to
discuss a potential buyout program to
reduce the number of California LE DGN
permits. The results of these discussions
are speculative and do not justify a
delay in implementing a Federal LE
DGN permit.
Comment 6: The NOA and proposed
rule note that NMFS’ intent is to
transition the State of California issued
LE DGN permit program to Federal
management under MSA authority. The
NOA and proposed rule both
specifically state ‘‘[a]fter the LE DGN
permit transitions from the State of
California to Federal management, each
participant will need to hold all of the
same permits and licenses, except that
the Federal LE DGN permit will take the
place of the State of California LE DGN
permit.’’ This statement incorrectly
implies that, upon implementation of
the Federal LE DGN program, the state
LE DGN permit will immediately cease
to be required. The state LE DGN permit
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
is required by California Fish and Game
Code section 8561. The state LE DGN
permit will continue to be required until
the California State Legislature repeals
or otherwise changes this requirement.
Thus, even after implementation of a
Federal LE DGN permit, each
participant will continue to be required
to possess all required state permits and
licenses, including the state general
gillnet permit and the state LE DGN
permit. If NMFS elects to proceed, it
should be made clear in the final rule
implementing the Federal LE DGN
permit that the state LE DGN permit will
continue to be required until a change
to Fish and Game Code, section 8561, is
made by the California State Legislature.
Response: To clarify, NMFS reiterates
that this final rule does not repeal any
State of California requirements related
to the California LE DGN permit.
Following implementation of the
Federal LE DGN permit, the California
LE DGN permit will continue to be
required by the state until and unless a
change to California Fish and Game
Code is made by the California State
Legislature.
Comment 7: Several commenters
stated that the proposed rule does not
explain the clear need for a Federal LE
DGN permit, because a State of
California LE DGN permit will continue
to be required to use DGN gear, absent
legislative action. Implementation of
this rule will merely create a duplicative
permit requirement.
Response: Although both permits will
continue to be required until and unless
the California State Legislature acts, the
Pacific Council recommended requiring
a Federal LE DGN permit in order to
streamline Federal management of the
DGN fishery. The fishery occurs in the
EEZ, not in state waters, and therefore
this is a Federal fishery shared by
residents of different states. Currently,
changes to the number of DGN permits
or qualifications to possess a DGN
permit can be made only through the
California State Legislature. As
described above, under Amendment 5,
the Pacific Council may recommend
future management measures related to
participation in the fishery, and, if
approved, NMFS could directly
implement them by placing conditions
on Federal LE DGN permits.
Comment 8: Several commenters
stated that DGN permitting authority
should remain with the State of
California, and that transitioning to
Federal management will limit
California’s ability to make decisions
that affect its natural resources or have
input on the use of resources that are
found in both Federal and state waters.
They state that, while the California
E:\FR\FM\14MRR1.SGM
14MRR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Department of Fish and Wildlife will
still be able to participate through the
Pacific Council, its ability to make
changes to the fishery will be diluted,
and that the California State Legislature
would potentially be cut out entirely
from the management process for this
fishery.
Response: The fishery occurs in the
EEZ, not in state waters, and therefore
this is a Federal resource shared by
residents of different states. Because the
HMS fisheries are a Federal resource,
the Council prepared and recommended
adoption of the HMS FMP under
Federal authority. With the exception of
the LE program, the DGN fishery has
been managed under Federal authority
for years. Even under Amendment 5, the
California State Legislature retains the
ability to manage fishery resources
wholly within state waters (within
roughly 3 nautical miles from the
coastline) and manage state-registered
vessels beyond state waters to the extent
such management does not conflict with
MSA regulations.
Comment 9: Several commenters
stated that Federal LE DGN permits
should only be issued upon
implementation of the Pacific Council’s
proposed management measures to (1)
establish protected species hard caps
(limits on the serious injury and
mortality of certain marine mammal and
sea turtle species); and (2) require 100
percent monitoring in the fishery, or
that the regulations implementing the
Federal LE DGN permit program should
require that permit holders operate
under hard caps and 100 percent
monitoring.
Response: The Pacific Council
recommended that NMFS implement
DGN hard caps and 100 percent
monitoring in September 2015. NMFS
proposed regulations to implement DGN
hard caps in October 2016. In a separate
action, the Pacific Council
recommended Amendment 5 (Federal
LE DGN permit program) in March
2017. Amendment 5 was not
conditioned on implementation of hard
caps or 100 percent monitoring. In June
2017, NMFS withdrew the proposed
regulations to establish protectedspecies hard caps for the DGN fishery,
after further analysis showed that the
action would have minor beneficial
effects to target and non-target fish
species and protected species, at the
cost of significant adverse economic
effects to the participants in the fishery
if and when closures would occur.
NMFS advised the Pacific Council of
revisions that would make the proposed
DGN hard caps regulations consistent
with the MSA and meet the purpose and
need for the action. NMFS continues to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Mar 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
analyze ways to implement the Pacific
Council’s recommendation for 100
percent DGN monitoring, and the
Pacific Council revised its purpose and
need for the action in November 2017.
Because Amendment 5 is not
conditioned on the establishment of
hard caps or 100 percent monitoring,
the status of those recommendations
does not support a delay in creating the
Federal LE DGN permit.
Comment 10: The commenter opposes
the proposed Federal permit program,
stating it disregards key objectives
outlined in the Pacific Council’s
Swordfish Management and Monitoring
Plan for achieving bycatch reduction
goals and limiting DGN fishing effort.
Response: The Federal LE DGN
permit is not intended to reduce
bycatch. Future actions to manage the
fishery may be streamlined by
establishing a Federal permit program.
Such potential future actions could be
intended to reduce bycatch in the DGN
fishery.
Comment 11: The commenter requests
that NMFS not finalize the proposed
rule and instead return it to the Pacific
Council to amend the purpose and need
for the action, reduce latent permits in
the DGN fishery, make clear that no
additional Federal LE DGN permits
shall be issued after the initial
allocation, make Federal DGN permits
non-transferrable, and connect the
Federal LE DGN program with the
authorization of deep-set buoy gear.
Response: NMFS is not returning the
proposed rule to the Pacific Council,
because the Pacific Council discussed
these restrictions when considering
establishing a Federal LE DGN permit,
and did not include them as part of its
recommendation to NMFS to create the
permit. As explained above, requiring
DGN vessels to operate under Federal
permits is a tool to augment the Federal
government’s ability to directly manage
participation and eligibility in this
fishery in the future.
Comment 12: Federalizing the drift
gillnet fishery will significantly impact
the environment. By preventing the
opportunity for future state action to
reduce environmental impacts, this
action will cause significant
environmental impacts, such as
continued interactions with endangered
species. These environmental impacts
are significant, and the action requires
full and appropriate analysis under the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). Reliance on a categorical
exclusion (CE) to satisfy NEPA
requirements would be inappropriate
for the proposed action, as it involves
several Extraordinary Circumstances,
including (1) adverse effects from the
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
11149
action on species or habitats protected
by the Endangered Species Act, the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, the
MSA, the National Marine Sanctuaries
Act, or the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
that are not negligible or discountable;
(2) a potential violation of Federal,
State, or local law or requirements
imposed for the protection of the
environment; and (3) highly
controversial environmental effects.
Response: The impacts of DGN fishing
are addressed adequately in the
combined August 2013 HMS FMP and
final environmental impact statement.
Amendment 5 is not expected in itself
to change fishing levels or practices.
NMFS has conducted the appropriate
NEPA analysis of this action and has
concluded that the proposed action
would not have a significant effect,
individually or cumulatively, on the
human environment, and does not
involve any extraordinary
circumstances. NMFS disagrees that a
CE is inappropriate for this action.
Specifically, this action fits under the
description of CE Category A1 in the
NAO 216–6A Companion Manual: ‘‘an
action that is a technical correction or
a change to a fishery management action
or regulation, which does not result in
a substantial change in any of the
following: fishing location, timing,
effort, authorized gear types, or harvest
levels.’’ However, NMFS notes it is
possible that Amendment 5 could
facilitate changes in the future that
affect fishing practices with impacts that
could be subject to NEPA analyses, as
appropriate.
Comment 13: NMFS must delay
taking action to federalize the LE system
until after a new Biological Opinion is
complete, as it will contain information
vital for the decision of whether and
how to federalize the fishery. In the
absence of a new Biological Opinion,
NMFS’ statement that they do not
anticipate significant environmental
impacts is unsupported by
environmental analysis and should not
be relied upon in deciding whether to
move finalize federalization.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Nothing
in this rule causes fishing activities to
affect endangered and threatened
species or critical habitat in any manner
not considered in prior consultations on
this fishery. This action is
administrative in nature and is not
expected to increase fishing activity or
change current fishing practices.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
No changes have been made to
regulatory text of the proposed rule.
E:\FR\FM\14MRR1.SGM
14MRR1
11150
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Classification
The Administrator, West Coast
Region, NMFS, determined that
Amendment 5 to the HMS FMP is
necessary for the conservation and
management of the DGN fishery and
that it is consistent with the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act and other applicable
laws.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866. This final rule
is not an Executive Order 13771
regulatory action because this final rule
is not significant under Executive Order
12866.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration during
the proposed rule stage that this action
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for the
certification was published in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
No comments were received regarding
this certification. As a result, a
regulatory flexibility analysis was not
required and none was prepared.
This final rule contains a collectionof-information requirement subject to
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and
which has been approved by OMB
under control number 0648–0204. The
public reporting burden for the
additional collection of information is
estimated to average 30 minutes per
response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information. Send comments
regarding these burden estimates or any
other aspect of this data collection,
including suggestions for reducing the
burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and
by email to OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov, or fax to 202–395–7285.
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 OMB control number.
All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be
viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/
services_programs/prasubs.html.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Mar 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
Dated: March 9, 2018.
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 660 is amended
as follows:
PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST
COAST STATES
1. The authority citation for part 660
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C.
773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.
2. In § 660.702, revise the definition of
‘‘Sustainable Fisheries Division’’ to read
as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
Sustainable Fisheries Division (SFD)
means the Assistant Regional
Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries,
West Coast Region, NMFS, or his or her
designee.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 660.707, revise paragraphs
(a)(1) and (4), (b)(1), (3), and (4), and (e)
and add paragraph (f) to read as follows:
■
§ 660.707
Permits.
(a) * * *
(1) A commercial fishing vessel of the
United States must be registered for use
under a general HMS permit that
authorizes the use of specific gear, and
a recreational charter vessel must be
registered for use under a HMS permit
if that vessel is used:
(i) To fish for HMS in the U.S. EEZ
off the States of California, Oregon, and
Washington; or
(ii) To land or transship HMS
shoreward of the outer boundary of the
U.S. EEZ off the States of California,
Oregon, and Washington.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Only a person eligible to own a
documented vessel under the terms of
46 U.S.C. 12102(a) may be issued or
may hold (by ownership or otherwise) a
general HMS permit.
(b) * * *
(1) Following publication of the final
rule implementing the FMP, NMFS will
issue general HMS permits to the
owners of those vessels on a list of
vessels obtained from owners
previously applying for a permit under
the authority of the High Seas Fishing
Compliance Act, the Tuna Conventions
Act of 1950, the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, and the Fishery
Management Plan for Pelagic Fisheries
of the Western Pacific Region, or whose
vessels are listed on the vessel register
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna
Commission.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) An owner of a vessel subject to
these requirements who has not
received a permit under this section
from NMFS and who wants to engage in
the fisheries must apply to the SFD for
the required permit in accordance with
the following:
(i) A West Coast Region Federal
Fisheries application form may be
obtained from the SFD or downloaded
from the West Coast Region home page
(https://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.
gov/permits/commercial_fishing_
research_permits.html) to apply for a
permit under this section. A completed
application is one that contains all the
necessary information and signatures
required.
(ii) A minimum of 15 days should be
allowed for processing a permit
application. If an incomplete or
improperly completed application is
filed, the applicant will be sent a notice
of deficiency. If the applicant fails to
correct the deficiency within 30 days
following the date of notification, the
application will be considered
abandoned.
(iii) A permit will be issued by the
SFD. If an application is denied, the
SFD will indicate the reasons for denial.
(iv)(A) Any applicant for an initial
permit may appeal the initial issuance
decision to the Regional Administrator.
To be considered by the Regional
Administrator, such appeal must be in
writing and state the reasons for the
appeal, and must be submitted within
30 days of the action by the Regional
Administrator. The appellant may
request an informal hearing on the
appeal.
(B) Upon receipt of an appeal
authorized by this section, the Regional
Administrator will notify the permit
applicant, or permit holder as
appropriate, and will request such
additional information and in such form
as will allow action upon the appeal.
(C) Upon receipt of sufficient
information, the Regional Administrator
will decide the appeal in accordance
with the permit provisions set forth in
this section at the time of the
application, based upon information
relative to the application on file at
NMFS and the Council and any
additional information submitted to or
obtained by the Regional Administrator,
the summary record kept of any hearing
and the hearing officer’s recommended
decision, if any, and such other
considerations as the Regional
Administrator deems appropriate. The
Regional Administrator will notify all
E:\FR\FM\14MRR1.SGM
14MRR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
interested persons of the decision, and
the reasons for the decision, in writing,
normally within 30 days of the receipt
of sufficient information, unless
additional time is needed for a hearing.
(D) If a hearing is requested, or if the
Regional Administrator determines that
one is appropriate, the Regional
Administrator may grant an informal
hearing before a hearing officer
designated for that purpose after first
giving notice of the time, place, and
subject matter of the hearing to the
applicant. The appellant, and, at the
discretion of the hearing officer, other
interested persons, may appear
personally or be represented by counsel
at the hearing and submit information
and present arguments as determined
appropriate by the hearing officer.
Within 30 days of the last day of the
hearing, the hearing officer shall
recommend in writing a decision to the
Regional Administrator.
(E) The Regional Administrator may
adopt the hearing officer’s
recommended decision, in whole or in
part, or may reject or modify it. In any
event, the Regional Administrator will
notify interested persons of the
decision, and the reason(s) therefore, in
writing, within 30 days of receipt of the
hearing officer’s recommended decision.
The Regional Administrator’s decision
will constitute the final administrative
action by NMFS on the matter.
(F) Any time limit prescribed in this
section may be extended for a period
not to exceed 30 days by the Regional
Administrator for good cause, either
upon his or her own motion or upon
written request from the appellant
stating the reason(s) therefore.
(4) General HMS permits issued under
this subpart will remain valid until the
first date of renewal, and permits may
be subsequently renewed for 2-year
terms. The first date of renewal will be
the last day of the vessel owner’s birth
month in the second calendar year after
the permit is issued (e.g., if the birth
month is March and the permit is issued
on October 3, 2007, the permit will
remain valid through March 31, 2009).
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Fees. An application for a permit,
or renewal of an existing permit under
this section will include a fee for each
vessel. The fee amount required will be
calculated in accordance with the
NOAA Finance Handbook and specified
on the application form.
(f) Federal limited entry drift gillnet
permit—(1) General. This section
applies to individuals fishing with
large-mesh (14 inch or greater stretched
mesh) drift gillnet (DGN) gear.
Individuals who target, retain,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Mar 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
transship, or land fish captured with a
large-mesh DGN must possess a valid
Federal limited entry DGN permit.
Federal limited entry DGN permits are
issued to an individual, and a vessel
must be specified on the permit.
(2) Initial qualification. Upon
publication of NMFS’ final rule to
establish the Federal limited entry DGN
permit, all State of California limited
entry DGN permit holders are eligible to
obtain a Federal limited entry DGN
permit. If a 2017–2018 California state
DGN permit renewal application is not
received by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or postmarked by
March 31, 2018, the permit holder is not
eligible to receive a 2018–2019 Federal
limited entry DGN permit.
(3) Documentation and burden of
proof. An individual applying for
issuance, renewal, transfer, or
assignment of a Federal limited entry
DGN permit must prove that they meet
the qualification requirements by
submitting the following
documentation, as applicable: A
certified copy of the assigned vessel’s
documentation as a fishing vessel of the
United States (U.S. Coast Guard or state)
is the best evidence of vessel
identification; a copy of a current State
of California limited entry DGN permit
is the best evidence of initial
qualification for a Federal limited entry
DGN permit; a copy of a written contract
reserving or conveying limited entry
rights is the best evidence of reserved or
acquired rights; and other relevant,
credible evidence that the applicant
may wish to submit or that the SFD may
request or require.
(4) Fees. Any processing fee will be
determined by the service costs needed
to process a permit request. If a fee is
required, it would cover administrative
expenses related to issuing limited entry
permits, as well as renewing,
transferring, assigning, and replacing
permits. The amount of any fee will be
calculated in accordance with the
procedures of the NOAA Finance
Handbook for determining the
administrative costs of each special
product or service. A fee may not
exceed such costs and is specified with
each application form. The appropriate
fee must accompany each application.
(5) Initial decisions. (i) The SFD will
make initial decisions regarding issuing,
renewing, transferring, and assigning
limited entry permits.
(ii) Adverse decisions shall be in
writing and shall state the reasons for
the adverse decision.
(iii) The SFD may decline to act on an
application for issuing, renewing,
transferring, or assigning a limited entry
permit and will notify the applicant, if
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
11151
the permit sanction provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act at 16 U.S.C.
1858(a) and implementing regulations at
15 CFR part 904, subpart D, apply.
(6) Issuance. Federal limited entry
DGN permits will be issued by the SFD.
If an application is denied, the SFD will
indicate the reasons for denial. A DGN
permit will be issued to an individual
and assigned to a specific vessel. A
permit holder may assign the permit to
another vessel once per permit year
(April 1 to March 31).
(7) Appeals. Any applicant for an
initial permit may appeal the initial
issuance decision to the Regional
Administrator. Appeals will be made
and processed following procedures as
described at paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this
section.
(8) Transfers. Federal limited entry
DGN permits may be transferred to
another individual only if the current
permit holder has held the Federal DGN
permit for a minimum of three
consecutive years (counted April 1 to
March 31 of the following year). At the
time of the establishment of the Federal
limited entry DGN permit system, the
length of time an individual has held a
State of California limited entry DGN
permit carries over (e.g., if an individual
has held a California DGN permit for
two years, they are eligible to transfer
the Federal DGN permit after holding
the Federal DGN permit for one year).
Exceptions to this limitation on permit
transfer may be made under the
following circumstances:
(i) The permit holder suffers from a
serious illness or permanent disability
that prevents the permit holder from
earning a livelihood from commercial
fishing.
(ii) If a deceased permit holder’s
estate or heirs submit a transfer request
within six months of the permit holder’s
death.
(iii) Upon dissolution of marriage if
the permit is held as community
property.
(9) Renewals. (i) The SFD will send
notices to renew limited entry permits
to the most recent address of the permit
holder on file.
(ii) The permit owner is responsible
for renewing a limited entry permit.
(iii) The deadline for receipt or
postmark of a Federal DGN permit
renewal application is April 30 of the
permit year (i.e., April 30, 2019 for
2019–2020 fishing season). Federal DGN
permits must be renewed yearly.
(iv) A DGN permit that is allowed to
expire will not be renewed unless the
permit owner requests reissuance by
July 31 (three months after the renewal
application deadline) and NMFS
determines that failure to renew was
E:\FR\FM\14MRR1.SGM
14MRR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
11152
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
proximately caused by illness, injury, or
death of the permit owner. If the permit
expires, it will be forfeited and NMFS
will not reissue the permit to anyone.
(10) Owner on-board requirement. (i)
Except as provided in paragraphs
(f)(10)(ii) through (v) of this section, the
DGN permit holder must be on-board
the vessel and in possession of a valid
Federal limited entry DGN permit when
engaged in DGN fishing activity.
(ii) A permit holder may designate
another individual to fish under their
permit for up to 15 days per fishing year
(April 1 to March 31 of the following
year); the substitute must comply with
all other Federal permitting
requirements. A permit holder shall
notify NMFS of a substitution at least 24
hours prior to the commencement of the
trip.
(iii) If the person who owns a Federal
DGN permit is prevented from being onboard a fishing vessel because the
person died, is ill, or is injured, NMFS
may allow an exemption to the owner
on-board requirement for more than 15
days. The person requesting the
exemption must send a letter to NMFS
requesting an exemption from the owner
on-board requirements, with
appropriate evidence as described at
paragraph (f)(10)(iv) or (v) of this
section. All exemptions for death,
injury, or illness will be evaluated by
NMFS and a decision will be made in
writing to the permit owner (or, in the
case of the death of the permit owner,
to the estate or heirs of the permit
owner) within 60 calendar days of
receipt of the original exemption
request.
(iv) Evidence of death of the permit
owner shall be provided to NMFS in the
form of a copy of a death certificate. In
the interim before the estate is settled,
if the deceased permit owner was
subject to the owner on-board
requirements, the estate of the deceased
permit owner may send a letter to
NMFS with a copy of the death
certificate, requesting an exemption
from the owner-on-board requirements.
An exemption due to death of the
permit owner will be effective only until
such time that the estate of the deceased
permit owner has registered the
deceased permit owner’s permit to a
beneficiary, transferred the permit to
another owner, or three years after the
date of death as proven by a death
certificate, whichever is earliest. An
exemption from the owner-on-board
requirement will be conveyed in a letter
from NMFS to the estate of the permit
owner and is required to be on the
vessel during DGN fishing operations.
(v) Evidence of illness or injury that
prevents the permit owner from
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:14 Mar 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
participating in the fishery shall be
provided to NMFS in the form of a letter
from a certified medical practitioner.
This letter must detail the relevant
medical conditions of the permit owner
and how those conditions prevent the
permit owner from being on-board a
fishing vessel during DGN fishing. An
exemption due to injury or illness will
be effective only for the fishing year of
the request for exemption. In order to
extend a medical exemption for a
succeeding year, the permit owner must
submit a new request and provide
documentation from a certified medical
practitioner detailing why the permit
owner is still unable to be on-board a
fishing vessel. An exemption from the
owner-on-board requirement will be
conveyed in a letter from NMFS to the
permit owner and is required to be on
the vessel during DGN fishing
operations.
[FR Doc. 2018–05186 Filed 3–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance
with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50
CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The A season allowance of the 2018
total allowable catch (TAC) of pollock in
Statistical Area 610 of the GOA is 1,317
metric tons (mt) as established by the
final 2018 and 2019 harvest
specifications for groundfish in the GOA
(83 FR 8768, March 1, 2018).
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i),
the Regional Administrator has
determined that the A season allowance
of the 2018 TAC of pollock in Statistical
Area 610 of the GOA will soon be
reached. Therefore, the Regional
Administrator is establishing a directed
fishing allowance of 1,167 mt and is
setting aside the remaining 150 mt as
bycatch to support other anticipated
groundfish fisheries. In accordance with
§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional
Administrator finds that this directed
fishing allowance has been reached.
Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting
directed fishing for pollock in Statistical
Area 610 of the GOA.
After the effective date of this closure
the maximum retainable amounts at
§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time
during a trip.
Classification
[Docket No. 170816769–8162–02]
RIN 0648–XF900
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in Statistical
Area 610 in the Gulf of Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
AGENCY:
NMFS is prohibiting directed
fishing for pollock in Statistical Area
610 in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This
action is necessary to prevent exceeding
the A season allowance of the 2018 total
allowable catch of pollock for Statistical
Area 610 in the GOA.
DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local
time (A.l.t.), March 9, 2018, through
1200 hrs, A.l.t., March 10, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh
Keaton, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
GOA exclusive economic zone
according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of
Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act. Regulations governing
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This action responds to the best
available information recently obtained
from the fishery. The Assistant
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA
(AA), finds good cause to waive the
requirement to provide prior notice and
opportunity for public comment
pursuant to the authority set forth at 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. This requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest as it would prevent NMFS from
responding to the most recent fisheries
data in a timely fashion and would
delay the closure of directed fishing for
pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the
GOA. NMFS was unable to publish a
notice providing time for public
comment because the most recent,
relevant data only became available as
of March 8, 2018.
The AA also finds good cause to
waive the 30-day delay in the effective
date of this action under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). This finding is based upon
the reasons provided above for waiver of
prior notice and opportunity for public
comment.
This action is required by § 679.20
and is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\14MRR1.SGM
14MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 14, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11146-11152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05186]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 170817773-8213-02]
RIN 0648-BG81
Fisheries Off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Fisheries;
California Drift Gillnet Fishery; Implementation of a Federal Limited
Entry Drift Gillnet Permit
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS is issuing regulations under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) to
implement a March 2017 recommendation by the Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Pacific Council) to amend the Fishery Management Plan for U.S.
West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP). The rule
implements Amendment 5 to the HMS FMP and establishes a Federal limited
entry (LE) permit system for the California/Oregon large-mesh drift
gillnet (DGN) fishery using standards that are very similar to those
used in the existing State of California LE permit program for the DGN
fishery. Amendment 5 is intended to streamline management and future
decision-making by placing all aspects of DGN fishery management under
MSA authority. All current California LE DGN permit holders are
eligible to apply for, and receive, a Federal LE DGN permit, and no
additional LE DGN permits are created under this rule. This final rule
is administrative in nature and is not anticipated to result in
increased activity, effort, or capacity in the fishery.
DATES: This final rule is effective on April 13, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting documents that were prepared for this
final rule, including the Regulatory Impact Review and the proposed
rule, are available via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA-
[[Page 11147]]
NMFS-2017-0052. These documents are also available from Lyle Enriquez,
NMFS West Coast Region, 501 W. Ocean Blvd. Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA
90802, or [email protected]. Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this final rule may be submitted to the West
Coast Regional Office and by email to [email protected] or
fax to (202) 395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lyle Enriquez, NMFS, West Coast
Region, 562-980-4025, or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The California/Oregon large-mesh DGN fishery
is managed under the HMS FMP, which was prepared by the Pacific Council
and implemented under the authority of the MSA by regulations at 50 CFR
part 660. Although it adopted all conservation and management measures
in place under various Federal statutes (e.g., the Marine Mammal
Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act) and state regulations,
the HMS FMP did not incorporate the LE DGN permit programs of
California and Oregon. California has an active LE DGN program, Oregon
no longer issues DGN permits, and DGN fishing is prohibited in waters
off of Washington.
Background
On March 12, 2017, the Pacific Council voted to recommend Amendment
5 to the HMS FMP, which establishes a LE DGN permit program under MSA
authority and entitles all fishermen authorized to fish with large-mesh
DGN gear under state law, as of the publication date of this final
rule, to be eligible to receive a Federal LE DGN permit. On September
15, 2017, NMFS published a Notice of Availability (NOA) in the Federal
Register (82 FR 43323) for Amendment 5 with a 60-day public comment
period. After consideration of public comments on Amendment 5, NMFS
approved it on December 14, 2017. With that approval, Amendment 5,
which requires establishment of a Federal DGN program under the HMS
FMP, is now official Federal policy.
On October 31, 2017, NMFS published a proposed rule in the Federal
Register (82 FR 50366) that would add regulations at 50 CFR part 660,
subpart K, to implement Amendment 5. The proposed rule contained
additional background information, including information on the basis
for the new regulations and the recommendations of the Pacific Council,
which is not repeated in this final rule. The proposed rule was open to
public comment through December 15, 2017, and the comments that NMFS
received are addressed in this final rule.
New Regulations
This rule adopts many of the current State of California management
measures associated with the DGN fishery. For example, NMFS adopts
current California requirements regarding the assignment of a permit
(i.e., permits are issued to an individual and assigned to a specific
vessel), the transfer of permits between permit holders (i.e., a permit
must be held for three years before it is eligible to be transferred),
and an annual renewal cycle.
As of the publication date of this final rule, all 70 California LE
DGN permit holders are eligible to receive a Federal LE DGN permit if
they have renewed their state LE DGN permit by March 31, 2018. Permit
holders who fail to renew their state DGN permit by March 31, 2018, are
not eligible for a Federal LE DGN permit. As of January 10, 2018, 68
permit holders have renewed their state LE DGN permit. If a state LE
DGN permit was transferred after publication of the proposed rule, the
transferee, but not the transferor, is eligible to receive a Federal LE
DGN permit.
Federal LE DGN permits will be issued annually for the fishing year
starting April 1 and ending March 31 of the following year. Permits
expire on March 31 of each year and, after initial issuance (expected
in 2018), the permit renewal deadline is April 30 of each fishing year.
A completed LE DGN permit renewal form must be received by NMFS no
later than close-of-business April 30. Any renewal form received after
that date will result in the permanent expiration of the Federal LE DGN
permit. A permit owner who fails to submit a renewal form by the
deadline may submit a renewal form to NMFS with a written statement
that the failure to renew the permit by the deadline was proximately
caused by the permit owner's illness or injury. When a permit owner has
died, the owner's estate or other personal representative may submit a
statement explaining that the permit owner's death prevented a timely
renewal. The permit holder, or in the case of a deceased permit owner,
the estate or other personal representative, will need to provide
written proof of illness, injury, or death. NMFS will not consider any
such renewal request made after July 31. A permit holder needs to hold
a Federal LE DGN permit for a vesting period of at least three years
before it is eligible to be transferred. This vesting period extends
across both state and Federal permit programs (i.e., if a permit holder
held a state LE DGN permit for two years and a Federal LE DGN permit
for one year, the permit may be transferred).
This rule also includes technical edits to existing regulatory
text. These edits add the word ``general'' before instances of ``HMS
permit'' to distinguish the existing HMS permit from the new LE DGN
permit; update a web address from which permit applications may be
obtained; update the reference to the NMFS ``Southwest Region'' to
refer to the West Coast Region, into which it was incorporated; and
update the description of the NMFS regional ``Sustainable Fisheries
Division'' to describe it as part of the West Coast Region.
Public Comment and Responses
NMFS received 17 written public comments during the proposed
rulemaking stage. The summarized comments and NMFS' responses are
below.
Comment 1: The DGN fishery is conducted in Federal waters and
belongs under Federal law and permitting.
Response: NMFS agrees that the DGN fishery belongs under Federal
authority. In 2004, NMFS approved the HMS FMP, which included the DGN
fishery as an authorized fishery, bringing the fishery under MSA
authority for the first time. Furthermore, the DGN fishery operates
only in Federal waters of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off of the
States of California and Oregon. California, Oregon, and Washington do
not allow the DGN fishery to operate in state waters.
Comment 2: Consolidating management responsibility for all aspects
of the swordfish fishery under one authority, including the permit
process, creates a higher level of management efficacy that currently
does not exist.
Response: NMFS agrees. The 2004 HMS FMP included the DGN fishery as
an authorized fishery under MSA authority and adopted state and Federal
regulations in place at that time, except for the limited entry DGN
permit systems of Oregon and California. Oregon no longer issues DGN
permits, and California maintains a state LE DGN permit program.
Currently, changes to the number of LE DGN permits or qualifications to
possess a LE DGN permit are made by the California State Legislature.
Creating a Federal LE DGN permit may streamline implementation of
future DGN management measures recommended by the Pacific Council.
[[Page 11148]]
For example, the Pacific Council may recommend management measures
related to participation in the fishery, and NMFS could implement a
recommendation (if approved) by placing conditions on eligibility for
Federal LE DGN permits, without the California State Legislature having
to take action.
Comment 3: Going forward, California would continue to have
influence through its seats on the Pacific Council and Pacific Offshore
Cetacean Take Reduction Team (POCTRT).
Response: NMFS agrees. The State of California has voting
representatives on the Pacific Council and the POCTRT, and these groups
recommend DGN management measures to NMFS. The Pacific Council
recommends management measures related to all fisheries under the HMS
FMP, which includes the DGN fishery and other fisheries that harvest
swordfish and other HMS. The POCTRT was established under section
118(f) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 1387(f),
specifically to make recommendations addressing marine mammal
interactions in the DGN fishery. For example, in 1996 the POCTRT
recommended that NMFS require the use of acoustic pingers to alert
marine mammals to the presence of the net during all DGN fishing
activity. NMFS implemented this measure in 1997 and it led to a
significant reduction in the number of marine mammals entangled by the
fishery. Further, in 2013 the POCTRT recommended that NMFS implement
emergency, temporary regulations to limit the number of sperm whales
taken in the fishery, require a Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) on board
each DGN vessel, and establish a 100 percent observer coverage zone.
NMFS implemented this recommendation in 2013, and later made the VMS
requirement permanent.
Comment 4: The rule only proposed to create a Federal LE DGN permit
rather than replace the current California state permit regime, as the
Council originally considered when it began discussing a Federal LE DGN
permit in March 2014. The California state permit regime should be
placed under Federal control, as the most scientific resources are
available at the Federal level to make science-based decisions for the
fishery.
Response: In March 2017, the Pacific Council voted to authorize a
Federal LE DGN permit. The Pacific Council recommended that, as soon as
possible after Pacific Council final action, only fishermen authorized
to fish with large-mesh DGN gear under state law would be entitled to a
LE DGN permit issued by NMFS. Fishermen who hold valid state LE DGN
permits on the date that this final rule is published would be eligible
for the Federal LE DGN permit. These permits could be transferred only
once every three years. The Pacific Council did not include a
recommendation to repeal any state permit requirements. This final rule
does not repeal any State of California requirements related to the
California LE DGN permit. The California LE DGN permit will continue to
be required by the state until and unless a change to California Fish
and Game Code is made by the California State Legislature.
Comment 5: Several commenters noted that the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife is currently in the process of convening
stakeholders to discuss potential collaborative solutions, including a
buyout program, to improve the sustainability of the DGN fishery. The
commenters support these efforts and urge NMFS to delay implementation
of this rule until the State of California has had the opportunity to
explore a collaborative solution with fishermen and other stakeholders
under state authority.
Response: Section 304(b) of the MSA, 16 U.S.C. 1854(b), requires
NMFS to publish final implementing regulations for FMP amendments
within 30 days of the close of the comment period on the proposed rule,
if the amendment has been approved. Amendment 5 includes no provision
to delay implementation of the Federal permit system. NMFS understands
that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife has convened
meetings with California LE DGN permit holders and environmental non-
governmental organizations to discuss a potential buyout program to
reduce the number of California LE DGN permits. The results of these
discussions are speculative and do not justify a delay in implementing
a Federal LE DGN permit.
Comment 6: The NOA and proposed rule note that NMFS' intent is to
transition the State of California issued LE DGN permit program to
Federal management under MSA authority. The NOA and proposed rule both
specifically state ``[a]fter the LE DGN permit transitions from the
State of California to Federal management, each participant will need
to hold all of the same permits and licenses, except that the Federal
LE DGN permit will take the place of the State of California LE DGN
permit.'' This statement incorrectly implies that, upon implementation
of the Federal LE DGN program, the state LE DGN permit will immediately
cease to be required. The state LE DGN permit is required by California
Fish and Game Code section 8561. The state LE DGN permit will continue
to be required until the California State Legislature repeals or
otherwise changes this requirement. Thus, even after implementation of
a Federal LE DGN permit, each participant will continue to be required
to possess all required state permits and licenses, including the state
general gillnet permit and the state LE DGN permit. If NMFS elects to
proceed, it should be made clear in the final rule implementing the
Federal LE DGN permit that the state LE DGN permit will continue to be
required until a change to Fish and Game Code, section 8561, is made by
the California State Legislature.
Response: To clarify, NMFS reiterates that this final rule does not
repeal any State of California requirements related to the California
LE DGN permit. Following implementation of the Federal LE DGN permit,
the California LE DGN permit will continue to be required by the state
until and unless a change to California Fish and Game Code is made by
the California State Legislature.
Comment 7: Several commenters stated that the proposed rule does
not explain the clear need for a Federal LE DGN permit, because a State
of California LE DGN permit will continue to be required to use DGN
gear, absent legislative action. Implementation of this rule will
merely create a duplicative permit requirement.
Response: Although both permits will continue to be required until
and unless the California State Legislature acts, the Pacific Council
recommended requiring a Federal LE DGN permit in order to streamline
Federal management of the DGN fishery. The fishery occurs in the EEZ,
not in state waters, and therefore this is a Federal fishery shared by
residents of different states. Currently, changes to the number of DGN
permits or qualifications to possess a DGN permit can be made only
through the California State Legislature. As described above, under
Amendment 5, the Pacific Council may recommend future management
measures related to participation in the fishery, and, if approved,
NMFS could directly implement them by placing conditions on Federal LE
DGN permits.
Comment 8: Several commenters stated that DGN permitting authority
should remain with the State of California, and that transitioning to
Federal management will limit California's ability to make decisions
that affect its natural resources or have input on the use of resources
that are found in both Federal and state waters. They state that, while
the California
[[Page 11149]]
Department of Fish and Wildlife will still be able to participate
through the Pacific Council, its ability to make changes to the fishery
will be diluted, and that the California State Legislature would
potentially be cut out entirely from the management process for this
fishery.
Response: The fishery occurs in the EEZ, not in state waters, and
therefore this is a Federal resource shared by residents of different
states. Because the HMS fisheries are a Federal resource, the Council
prepared and recommended adoption of the HMS FMP under Federal
authority. With the exception of the LE program, the DGN fishery has
been managed under Federal authority for years. Even under Amendment 5,
the California State Legislature retains the ability to manage fishery
resources wholly within state waters (within roughly 3 nautical miles
from the coastline) and manage state-registered vessels beyond state
waters to the extent such management does not conflict with MSA
regulations.
Comment 9: Several commenters stated that Federal LE DGN permits
should only be issued upon implementation of the Pacific Council's
proposed management measures to (1) establish protected species hard
caps (limits on the serious injury and mortality of certain marine
mammal and sea turtle species); and (2) require 100 percent monitoring
in the fishery, or that the regulations implementing the Federal LE DGN
permit program should require that permit holders operate under hard
caps and 100 percent monitoring.
Response: The Pacific Council recommended that NMFS implement DGN
hard caps and 100 percent monitoring in September 2015. NMFS proposed
regulations to implement DGN hard caps in October 2016. In a separate
action, the Pacific Council recommended Amendment 5 (Federal LE DGN
permit program) in March 2017. Amendment 5 was not conditioned on
implementation of hard caps or 100 percent monitoring. In June 2017,
NMFS withdrew the proposed regulations to establish protected-species
hard caps for the DGN fishery, after further analysis showed that the
action would have minor beneficial effects to target and non-target
fish species and protected species, at the cost of significant adverse
economic effects to the participants in the fishery if and when
closures would occur. NMFS advised the Pacific Council of revisions
that would make the proposed DGN hard caps regulations consistent with
the MSA and meet the purpose and need for the action. NMFS continues to
analyze ways to implement the Pacific Council's recommendation for 100
percent DGN monitoring, and the Pacific Council revised its purpose and
need for the action in November 2017. Because Amendment 5 is not
conditioned on the establishment of hard caps or 100 percent
monitoring, the status of those recommendations does not support a
delay in creating the Federal LE DGN permit.
Comment 10: The commenter opposes the proposed Federal permit
program, stating it disregards key objectives outlined in the Pacific
Council's Swordfish Management and Monitoring Plan for achieving
bycatch reduction goals and limiting DGN fishing effort.
Response: The Federal LE DGN permit is not intended to reduce
bycatch. Future actions to manage the fishery may be streamlined by
establishing a Federal permit program. Such potential future actions
could be intended to reduce bycatch in the DGN fishery.
Comment 11: The commenter requests that NMFS not finalize the
proposed rule and instead return it to the Pacific Council to amend the
purpose and need for the action, reduce latent permits in the DGN
fishery, make clear that no additional Federal LE DGN permits shall be
issued after the initial allocation, make Federal DGN permits non-
transferrable, and connect the Federal LE DGN program with the
authorization of deep-set buoy gear.
Response: NMFS is not returning the proposed rule to the Pacific
Council, because the Pacific Council discussed these restrictions when
considering establishing a Federal LE DGN permit, and did not include
them as part of its recommendation to NMFS to create the permit. As
explained above, requiring DGN vessels to operate under Federal permits
is a tool to augment the Federal government's ability to directly
manage participation and eligibility in this fishery in the future.
Comment 12: Federalizing the drift gillnet fishery will
significantly impact the environment. By preventing the opportunity for
future state action to reduce environmental impacts, this action will
cause significant environmental impacts, such as continued interactions
with endangered species. These environmental impacts are significant,
and the action requires full and appropriate analysis under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Reliance on a categorical
exclusion (CE) to satisfy NEPA requirements would be inappropriate for
the proposed action, as it involves several Extraordinary
Circumstances, including (1) adverse effects from the action on species
or habitats protected by the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, the MSA, the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, or the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act that are not negligible or discountable; (2)
a potential violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements
imposed for the protection of the environment; and (3) highly
controversial environmental effects.
Response: The impacts of DGN fishing are addressed adequately in
the combined August 2013 HMS FMP and final environmental impact
statement. Amendment 5 is not expected in itself to change fishing
levels or practices. NMFS has conducted the appropriate NEPA analysis
of this action and has concluded that the proposed action would not
have a significant effect, individually or cumulatively, on the human
environment, and does not involve any extraordinary circumstances. NMFS
disagrees that a CE is inappropriate for this action. Specifically,
this action fits under the description of CE Category A1 in the NAO
216-6A Companion Manual: ``an action that is a technical correction or
a change to a fishery management action or regulation, which does not
result in a substantial change in any of the following: fishing
location, timing, effort, authorized gear types, or harvest levels.''
However, NMFS notes it is possible that Amendment 5 could facilitate
changes in the future that affect fishing practices with impacts that
could be subject to NEPA analyses, as appropriate.
Comment 13: NMFS must delay taking action to federalize the LE
system until after a new Biological Opinion is complete, as it will
contain information vital for the decision of whether and how to
federalize the fishery. In the absence of a new Biological Opinion,
NMFS' statement that they do not anticipate significant environmental
impacts is unsupported by environmental analysis and should not be
relied upon in deciding whether to move finalize federalization.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Nothing in this rule causes fishing
activities to affect endangered and threatened species or critical
habitat in any manner not considered in prior consultations on this
fishery. This action is administrative in nature and is not expected to
increase fishing activity or change current fishing practices.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
No changes have been made to regulatory text of the proposed rule.
[[Page 11150]]
Classification
The Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, determined that
Amendment 5 to the HMS FMP is necessary for the conservation and
management of the DGN fishery and that it is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other
applicable laws.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866. This final rule is not an Executive
Order 13771 regulatory action because this final rule is not
significant under Executive Order 12866.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration during the proposed rule stage that this action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for the certification was published in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments were received
regarding this certification. As a result, a regulatory flexibility
analysis was not required and none was prepared.
This final rule contains a collection-of-information requirement
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and which has been
approved by OMB under control number 0648-0204. The public reporting
burden for the additional collection of information is estimated to
average 30 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Send comments regarding these burden
estimates or any other aspect of this data collection, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by
email to [email protected], or fax to 202-395-7285.
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 OMB control number. All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 9, 2018.
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 660 is amended
as follows:
PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES
0
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., and 16
U.S.C. 7001 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 660.702, revise the definition of ``Sustainable Fisheries
Division'' to read as follows:
* * * * *
Sustainable Fisheries Division (SFD) means the Assistant Regional
Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, West Coast Region, NMFS, or
his or her designee.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 660.707, revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (4), (b)(1), (3), and
(4), and (e) and add paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 660.707 Permits.
(a) * * *
(1) A commercial fishing vessel of the United States must be
registered for use under a general HMS permit that authorizes the use
of specific gear, and a recreational charter vessel must be registered
for use under a HMS permit if that vessel is used:
(i) To fish for HMS in the U.S. EEZ off the States of California,
Oregon, and Washington; or
(ii) To land or transship HMS shoreward of the outer boundary of
the U.S. EEZ off the States of California, Oregon, and Washington.
* * * * *
(4) Only a person eligible to own a documented vessel under the
terms of 46 U.S.C. 12102(a) may be issued or may hold (by ownership or
otherwise) a general HMS permit.
(b) * * *
(1) Following publication of the final rule implementing the FMP,
NMFS will issue general HMS permits to the owners of those vessels on a
list of vessels obtained from owners previously applying for a permit
under the authority of the High Seas Fishing Compliance Act, the Tuna
Conventions Act of 1950, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the
Fishery Management Plan for Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific
Region, or whose vessels are listed on the vessel register of the
Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission.
* * * * *
(3) An owner of a vessel subject to these requirements who has not
received a permit under this section from NMFS and who wants to engage
in the fisheries must apply to the SFD for the required permit in
accordance with the following:
(i) A West Coast Region Federal Fisheries application form may be
obtained from the SFD or downloaded from the West Coast Region home
page (https://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/permits/commercial_fishing_research_permits.html) to apply for a permit under
this section. A completed application is one that contains all the
necessary information and signatures required.
(ii) A minimum of 15 days should be allowed for processing a permit
application. If an incomplete or improperly completed application is
filed, the applicant will be sent a notice of deficiency. If the
applicant fails to correct the deficiency within 30 days following the
date of notification, the application will be considered abandoned.
(iii) A permit will be issued by the SFD. If an application is
denied, the SFD will indicate the reasons for denial.
(iv)(A) Any applicant for an initial permit may appeal the initial
issuance decision to the Regional Administrator. To be considered by
the Regional Administrator, such appeal must be in writing and state
the reasons for the appeal, and must be submitted within 30 days of the
action by the Regional Administrator. The appellant may request an
informal hearing on the appeal.
(B) Upon receipt of an appeal authorized by this section, the
Regional Administrator will notify the permit applicant, or permit
holder as appropriate, and will request such additional information and
in such form as will allow action upon the appeal.
(C) Upon receipt of sufficient information, the Regional
Administrator will decide the appeal in accordance with the permit
provisions set forth in this section at the time of the application,
based upon information relative to the application on file at NMFS and
the Council and any additional information submitted to or obtained by
the Regional Administrator, the summary record kept of any hearing and
the hearing officer's recommended decision, if any, and such other
considerations as the Regional Administrator deems appropriate. The
Regional Administrator will notify all
[[Page 11151]]
interested persons of the decision, and the reasons for the decision,
in writing, normally within 30 days of the receipt of sufficient
information, unless additional time is needed for a hearing.
(D) If a hearing is requested, or if the Regional Administrator
determines that one is appropriate, the Regional Administrator may
grant an informal hearing before a hearing officer designated for that
purpose after first giving notice of the time, place, and subject
matter of the hearing to the applicant. The appellant, and, at the
discretion of the hearing officer, other interested persons, may appear
personally or be represented by counsel at the hearing and submit
information and present arguments as determined appropriate by the
hearing officer. Within 30 days of the last day of the hearing, the
hearing officer shall recommend in writing a decision to the Regional
Administrator.
(E) The Regional Administrator may adopt the hearing officer's
recommended decision, in whole or in part, or may reject or modify it.
In any event, the Regional Administrator will notify interested persons
of the decision, and the reason(s) therefore, in writing, within 30
days of receipt of the hearing officer's recommended decision. The
Regional Administrator's decision will constitute the final
administrative action by NMFS on the matter.
(F) Any time limit prescribed in this section may be extended for a
period not to exceed 30 days by the Regional Administrator for good
cause, either upon his or her own motion or upon written request from
the appellant stating the reason(s) therefore.
(4) General HMS permits issued under this subpart will remain valid
until the first date of renewal, and permits may be subsequently
renewed for 2-year terms. The first date of renewal will be the last
day of the vessel owner's birth month in the second calendar year after
the permit is issued (e.g., if the birth month is March and the permit
is issued on October 3, 2007, the permit will remain valid through
March 31, 2009).
* * * * *
(e) Fees. An application for a permit, or renewal of an existing
permit under this section will include a fee for each vessel. The fee
amount required will be calculated in accordance with the NOAA Finance
Handbook and specified on the application form.
(f) Federal limited entry drift gillnet permit--(1) General. This
section applies to individuals fishing with large-mesh (14 inch or
greater stretched mesh) drift gillnet (DGN) gear. Individuals who
target, retain, transship, or land fish captured with a large-mesh DGN
must possess a valid Federal limited entry DGN permit. Federal limited
entry DGN permits are issued to an individual, and a vessel must be
specified on the permit.
(2) Initial qualification. Upon publication of NMFS' final rule to
establish the Federal limited entry DGN permit, all State of California
limited entry DGN permit holders are eligible to obtain a Federal
limited entry DGN permit. If a 2017-2018 California state DGN permit
renewal application is not received by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or postmarked by March 31, 2018, the permit holder is
not eligible to receive a 2018-2019 Federal limited entry DGN permit.
(3) Documentation and burden of proof. An individual applying for
issuance, renewal, transfer, or assignment of a Federal limited entry
DGN permit must prove that they meet the qualification requirements by
submitting the following documentation, as applicable: A certified copy
of the assigned vessel's documentation as a fishing vessel of the
United States (U.S. Coast Guard or state) is the best evidence of
vessel identification; a copy of a current State of California limited
entry DGN permit is the best evidence of initial qualification for a
Federal limited entry DGN permit; a copy of a written contract
reserving or conveying limited entry rights is the best evidence of
reserved or acquired rights; and other relevant, credible evidence that
the applicant may wish to submit or that the SFD may request or
require.
(4) Fees. Any processing fee will be determined by the service
costs needed to process a permit request. If a fee is required, it
would cover administrative expenses related to issuing limited entry
permits, as well as renewing, transferring, assigning, and replacing
permits. The amount of any fee will be calculated in accordance with
the procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook for determining the
administrative costs of each special product or service. A fee may not
exceed such costs and is specified with each application form. The
appropriate fee must accompany each application.
(5) Initial decisions. (i) The SFD will make initial decisions
regarding issuing, renewing, transferring, and assigning limited entry
permits.
(ii) Adverse decisions shall be in writing and shall state the
reasons for the adverse decision.
(iii) The SFD may decline to act on an application for issuing,
renewing, transferring, or assigning a limited entry permit and will
notify the applicant, if the permit sanction provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act at 16 U.S.C. 1858(a) and implementing regulations
at 15 CFR part 904, subpart D, apply.
(6) Issuance. Federal limited entry DGN permits will be issued by
the SFD. If an application is denied, the SFD will indicate the reasons
for denial. A DGN permit will be issued to an individual and assigned
to a specific vessel. A permit holder may assign the permit to another
vessel once per permit year (April 1 to March 31).
(7) Appeals. Any applicant for an initial permit may appeal the
initial issuance decision to the Regional Administrator. Appeals will
be made and processed following procedures as described at paragraph
(b)(3)(iv) of this section.
(8) Transfers. Federal limited entry DGN permits may be transferred
to another individual only if the current permit holder has held the
Federal DGN permit for a minimum of three consecutive years (counted
April 1 to March 31 of the following year). At the time of the
establishment of the Federal limited entry DGN permit system, the
length of time an individual has held a State of California limited
entry DGN permit carries over (e.g., if an individual has held a
California DGN permit for two years, they are eligible to transfer the
Federal DGN permit after holding the Federal DGN permit for one year).
Exceptions to this limitation on permit transfer may be made under the
following circumstances:
(i) The permit holder suffers from a serious illness or permanent
disability that prevents the permit holder from earning a livelihood
from commercial fishing.
(ii) If a deceased permit holder's estate or heirs submit a
transfer request within six months of the permit holder's death.
(iii) Upon dissolution of marriage if the permit is held as
community property.
(9) Renewals. (i) The SFD will send notices to renew limited entry
permits to the most recent address of the permit holder on file.
(ii) The permit owner is responsible for renewing a limited entry
permit.
(iii) The deadline for receipt or postmark of a Federal DGN permit
renewal application is April 30 of the permit year (i.e., April 30,
2019 for 2019-2020 fishing season). Federal DGN permits must be renewed
yearly.
(iv) A DGN permit that is allowed to expire will not be renewed
unless the permit owner requests reissuance by July 31 (three months
after the renewal application deadline) and NMFS determines that
failure to renew was
[[Page 11152]]
proximately caused by illness, injury, or death of the permit owner. If
the permit expires, it will be forfeited and NMFS will not reissue the
permit to anyone.
(10) Owner on-board requirement. (i) Except as provided in
paragraphs (f)(10)(ii) through (v) of this section, the DGN permit
holder must be on-board the vessel and in possession of a valid Federal
limited entry DGN permit when engaged in DGN fishing activity.
(ii) A permit holder may designate another individual to fish under
their permit for up to 15 days per fishing year (April 1 to March 31 of
the following year); the substitute must comply with all other Federal
permitting requirements. A permit holder shall notify NMFS of a
substitution at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of the trip.
(iii) If the person who owns a Federal DGN permit is prevented from
being on-board a fishing vessel because the person died, is ill, or is
injured, NMFS may allow an exemption to the owner on-board requirement
for more than 15 days. The person requesting the exemption must send a
letter to NMFS requesting an exemption from the owner on-board
requirements, with appropriate evidence as described at paragraph
(f)(10)(iv) or (v) of this section. All exemptions for death, injury,
or illness will be evaluated by NMFS and a decision will be made in
writing to the permit owner (or, in the case of the death of the permit
owner, to the estate or heirs of the permit owner) within 60 calendar
days of receipt of the original exemption request.
(iv) Evidence of death of the permit owner shall be provided to
NMFS in the form of a copy of a death certificate. In the interim
before the estate is settled, if the deceased permit owner was subject
to the owner on-board requirements, the estate of the deceased permit
owner may send a letter to NMFS with a copy of the death certificate,
requesting an exemption from the owner-on-board requirements. An
exemption due to death of the permit owner will be effective only until
such time that the estate of the deceased permit owner has registered
the deceased permit owner's permit to a beneficiary, transferred the
permit to another owner, or three years after the date of death as
proven by a death certificate, whichever is earliest. An exemption from
the owner-on-board requirement will be conveyed in a letter from NMFS
to the estate of the permit owner and is required to be on the vessel
during DGN fishing operations.
(v) Evidence of illness or injury that prevents the permit owner
from participating in the fishery shall be provided to NMFS in the form
of a letter from a certified medical practitioner. This letter must
detail the relevant medical conditions of the permit owner and how
those conditions prevent the permit owner from being on-board a fishing
vessel during DGN fishing. An exemption due to injury or illness will
be effective only for the fishing year of the request for exemption. In
order to extend a medical exemption for a succeeding year, the permit
owner must submit a new request and provide documentation from a
certified medical practitioner detailing why the permit owner is still
unable to be on-board a fishing vessel. An exemption from the owner-on-
board requirement will be conveyed in a letter from NMFS to the permit
owner and is required to be on the vessel during DGN fishing
operations.
[FR Doc. 2018-05186 Filed 3-13-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P