Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; Atlantic Menhaden Fishery, 71329-71332 [2019-27834]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 248 / Friday, December 27, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Household Worksheet in the National
Lifeline Accountability Database if and
only if the subscriber shares an address
with an existing Lifeline subscriber, as
reported by the National Lifeline
Accountability Database.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. Effective upon publication of a
rule document in the Federal Register
announcing the effective date, § 54.410
is further amended by revising
paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2)(iii), and (f)(3)(iii)
to read as follows:
§ 54.410 Subscriber eligibility
determination and certification.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) All eligible telecommunications
carriers must annually re-certify all
subscribers, except for subscribers in
states where the National Verifier, state
Lifeline administrator, or other state
agency is responsible for the annual recertification of subscribers’ Lifeline
eligibility.
(2) * * *
(iii) If the subscriber’s program-based
or income-based eligibility for Lifeline
cannot be determined by accessing one
or more eligibility databases, then the
eligible telecommunications carrier
must obtain a signed certification from
the subscriber confirming the
subscriber’s continued eligibility. If the
subscriber’s eligibility was previously
confirmed through an eligibility
database during enrollment or a prior
recertification and the subscriber is no
longer included in any eligibility
database, the eligible
telecommunications carrier must obtain
both an Annual Recertification Form
and documentation meeting the
requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B) or
(c)(1)(i)(B) from that subscriber to
complete the process. Eligible
telecommunications carriers must use
the Wireline Competition Bureauapproved universal Annual
Recertification Form, except where state
law, state regulation, a state Lifeline
administrator, or a state agency requires
eligible telecommunications carriers to
use state-specific Lifeline recertification
forms.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(iii) If the subscriber’s program-based
or income-based eligibility for Lifeline
cannot be determined by accessing one
or more eligibility databases, then the
National Verifier, state Lifeline
administrator, or state agency must
obtain a signed certification from the
subscriber confirming the subscriber’s
continued eligibility. If the subscriber’s
eligibility was previously confirmed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Dec 26, 2019
Jkt 250001
through an eligibility database during
enrollment or a prior recertification and
the subscriber is no longer included in
any eligibility database, the National
Verifier, state Lifeline administrator, or
state agency must obtain both an
approved Annual Recertification Form
and documentation meeting the
requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B) or
(c)(1)(i)(B) from that subscriber to
complete the certification process.
Entities responsible for re-certification
under this section must use the Wireline
Competition Bureau-approved universal
Annual Recertification Form, except
where state law, state regulation, a state
Lifeline administrator, or a state agency
requires eligible telecommunications
carriers to use state-specific Lifeline
recertification forms, or where the
National Verifier Recertification Form is
required.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. Effective January 27, 2020, amend
§ 54.420 by revising paragraphs (a)
introductory text and (a)(1) to read as
follows:
§ 54.420
Low income program audits.
(a) Independent audit requirements
for eligible telecommunications carriers.
Eligible telecommunications carriers
identified by USAC must obtain a thirdparty biennial audit of their compliance
with the rules in this subpart. Such
engagements shall be agreed upon
performance attestations to assess the
company’s overall compliance with the
rules in this subpart and the company’s
internal controls regarding the
regulatory requirements in this subpart.
(1) Eligible telecommunications
carriers will be selected for audit based
on risk-based criteria developed by
USAC and approved by the Office of
Managing Director and the Wireline
Competition Bureau.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–27220 Filed 12–26–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 697
RIN 0648–XV136
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative
Management Act Provisions; Atlantic
Menhaden Fishery
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71329
Notification of determination of
non-compliance; declaration of a
moratorium.
ACTION:
In accordance with the
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative
Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act),
the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary)
has determined that the Commonwealth
of Virginia has failed to carry out its
responsibilities under the Atlantic
States Marine Fisheries Commission’s
(Commission) Interstate Fishery
Management Plan (ISFMP) for Atlantic
Menhaden and that the measure
Virginia has failed to implement and
enforce is necessary for the conservation
of the Atlantic menhaden resource. This
determination is consistent with the
findings of the Commission on October
31, 2019. Pursuant to the Atlantic
Coastal Act, a Federal moratorium on
fishing for Atlantic menhaden in
Virginia state waters and possession and
landing of Atlantic menhaden harvested
in Virginia State waters is hereby
declared and will be effective on June
17, 2020. The moratorium will be
terminated when the Commission
notifies the Secretary that Virginia is
found to have come back into
compliance with the Commission’s
ISFMP for Atlantic menhaden.
DATES: June 17, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Derek Orner, Fishery Management
Specialist, (301) 427–8567,
derek.orner@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Non-Compliance Statutory Background
The Atlantic Coastal Act, 16 U.S.C.
5101 et seq., sets forth a non-compliance
review and determination process that
is triggered when the Commission finds
that a State has not implemented
measures specified in an ISFMP and
refers that determination to the
Secretary for review and potential
concurrence.
The Atlantic Coastal Act’s noncompliance process involves two stages
of decision-making. In the first stage, the
Secretary must make two findings: (1)
Whether the State in question has failed
to carry out its responsibility under the
Commission ISFMP; and if so (2)
whether the measures that the State
failed to implement and enforce are
necessary for the conservation of the
fishery in question. These initial
findings must be made within 30 days
after receipt of the Commission’s noncompliance referral and consequently,
this first stage of decision-making is
referred to as the 30-Day Determination.
A positive 30-Day Determination
triggers the second stage of Atlantic
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
71330
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 248 / Friday, December 27, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Commission Referral of NonCompliance
On October 31, 2019, the Commission
found that the Commonwealth of
Virginia is out of compliance with the
Commission’s ISFMP for Atlantic
menhaden. Specifically, the
Commission required Virginia to
implement a total allowable harvest
from the Chesapeake Bay Reduction
Fishery that would not exceed 51,000
mt. Amendment 3 was approved in the
fall 2017, and was to be fully
implemented by the Commonwealth of
Virginia for the 2018 fishing season.
Virginia, however, did not implement
the Commission’s recommended 51,000
mt cap and instead maintained its preexisting 87,216 mt cap and in 2019, the
Reduction Fishery exceeded the
Commission’s Bay cap by approximately
15,000 mt (or about 30 percent). The
Virginia delegation to the Commission
agreed it was out of compliance and
voted for a non-compliance finding at
the Commission’s Atlantic Menhaden
and Policy Boards as well as the
Commission’s Business Section. On
October 31, 2019, the Commission
found the Commonwealth of Virginia
out of compliance for not fully and
effectively implementing and enforcing
the Amendment 3 measures.
to the Commission, advising them of the
Atlantic Coastal Act’s non-compliance
process, inviting them to provide
commentary on the issues, and in the
case of Virginia, inviting the
Commonwealth to meet with the agency
to present its position in person or
provide written comments on the
Comission’s findings. NMFS also
advised the public of the referral in a
Federal Register notice dated November
29, 2019 (84 FR 65787).
On November 22, 2019, Matthew
Strickler, Secretary Virginia Natural
Resources, other Virginia staff, and
NMFS staff met via a conference call.
During this meeting, the Commonwealth
of Virginia agreed that Virginia was out
of compliance and that it did not contest
the conservation necessity of the
Commission’s Atlantic menhaden
measures. Virginia described its legal
and regulatory framework for its
menhaden fishery and confirmed its
intent to pursue legislation to comply
with the measures identified in
Amendment 3 as soon as feasible.
Specifically, Virginia representatives
stated that the Atlantic menhaden
fishery is managed through the Virginia
legislature, which does not provide the
Virginia Marine Resources Commission
(VMRC) the regulatory authority to
manage menhaden fisheries.
The Secretary received numerous
comments in response to the referral of
non-compliance. Omega Protein along
with 6 members of the Virginia
legislature and one Congressman, and
several others oppose the noncompliance finding. Other stakeholders,
including the Commission, the Fishery
Management Councils, Atlantic Coastal
states, nine East Coast Governors,
recreational fishing groups, NonGovernmental Organizations and
numerous members of the public
(∼12,000 signatures), strongly support a
non-compliance finding due to the
scientific research supporting the
importance of menhaden to the Bay
ecosystem.
Agency Action in Response to
Commission Non-Compliance Referral
The Commission forwarded its
finding of their October 31st vote in a
formal non-compliance referral letter
that the Secretary received November
15, 2019. In response to receipt of this
letter, the Secretary began the Atlantic
Coastal Act’s 30-day determination
clock. On November 19, 2019, NMFS
sent letters to the Commonwealth of
Virginia, the New England Fishery
Management Council, Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council,
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
Agency’s Findings
The Secretary’s finding in this matter
supports a positive 30-Day
Determination of non-compliance.
Specifically, the facts and best available
science suggest both that Virginia did
not fulfill its responsibilities under the
Commission’s ISFMP and that the
measures that Virginia failed to
implement are necessary to the
conservation of Atlantic menhaden.
Virginia concurs that the involved
measures are necessary for conservation.
Specifically, in voting itself out of
compliance three separate times at the
Commission in October 2019, Virginia
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Coastal Act non-compliance decisionmaking, which occurs contemporaneous
with the first decision. That is, if the
Secretary determines non-compliance in
the first stage, the Atlantic Coastal Act
mandates that a moratorium on fishing
in State waters in the fishery in question
occur. The timing of the moratorium,
however, is at the discretion of the
Secretary, so long as it is implemented
within six (6) months of the 30-Day
Determination. In other words, although
the implementation of the moratorium
is non-discretionary, the Secretary has
the discretion to decide when the
moratorium will be implemented
subject to the Atlantic Coastal Act’s six
(6) month deadline.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Dec 26, 2019
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
admitted that failure to implement the
measures would jeopardize the
conservation of Atlantic menhaden.
Virginia also admitted to such in its
November 20, 2019 letter and during its
November 22, 2019 hearing with NMFS.
NMFS’ analysis also supports such a
finding.
Single Species: Recent studies
investigating the contribution of various
nursery grounds along the Atlantic coast
and their impacts to the coastwide
population structure of Atlantic
menhaden have indicated that the
Chesapeake Bay is considered one of the
most important nursery areas for
menhaden and contributes
approximately 30 percent of new
recruits (age 1) to the coastal stock. The
implementation of the Chesapeake Bay
cap does not limit the coastwide total
allowable catch of menhaden for the
reduction fishery, but rather attempts to
distribute the reduction fishery’s catch
in order to protect the important Bay
nursery area. The science suggests that
overharvesting within Chesapeake Bay
leads to the removal of smaller, younger
age-classes of menhaden that eventually
migrate into the older, coastwide
population.
In addition, based on the current
Commission-adopted benchmarks, the
Atlantic menhaden stock status is not
overfished and overfishing is not
occurring. The stock is currently below
the current fishing mortality target and
above the current fecundity (measure of
productivity) target. The stock is
considered a unit stock for management
purposes and from this single-species
perspective, there is no major concern
with total removals and the total
Virginia or coastwide quotas have not
been exceeded.
Ecosystem Function: The Atlantic
Coastal Act requires the Secretary to
consider whether the measures that the
State failed to implement and enforce
are necessary for the conservation of the
fishery in question. The fishery in
question is the Atlantic menhaden
fishery. The statute defines conservation
as restoring, rebuilding, and
maintaining of any coastal fishery
resource and the marine environment,
in order to assure the availability of
coastal fishery resources on a long-term
basis (16 U.S.C. 5102(4)). Thus, in
considering whether the measure is
necessary for the ‘‘conservation of the
fishery in question,’’ the Secretary is not
limited solely to looking at whether the
measure preserves the biomass of
menhaden but also whether the measure
maintains the role of menhaden in the
marine environment. Menhaden play an
important role as a forage base for a
number of other stocks, like striped
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 248 / Friday, December 27, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
bass. Those other stocks are part of the
marine environment for which
menhaden conservation, including the
Bay cap, is directed.
In short, the Commission, its member
states including Virginia, found that the
involved measure is necessary for the
conservation of Atlantic menhaden. The
Secretary sees the measures Virginia has
failed to implement as necessary for the
conservation of the menhaden resource.
The best available information shows
that menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay
are an important component of the
overall health of the stock, and further
that their role as forage for predator
species in the Chesapeake Bay is critical
to the marine environment. Further, the
Secretary notes the degraded status of
the Chesapeake Bay and the
Commission’s efforts to do its part
under its authority to ensure the
sustainability of the fisheries in the
Chesapeake Bay, specifically by
conserving menhaden. Accordingly, the
Commission is thus attempting to
maintain the menhaden forage base
while its scientists study menhaden’s
role in the degraded Bay ecosystem and
develop ecological reference points. The
Secretary agrees with its logic in doing
so.
The Atlantic Coastal Act requires that
the Secretary declare a moratorium
when it finds that a state has failed to
carry out its responsibilities and that the
measures it failed to implement are
necessary for conservation. The
Secretary determines that the required
moratirum should begin on June 17,
2020. This moratorium would prohibit
fishing for Atlantic menhaden in
Virginia State waters, and possession of
and landing of Atlantic menhaden
harvested in Virginia state waters. A
June 17, 2020 implementation date
represents the maximum allowed time
period to begin a moratorium under the
Atlantic Coastal Act. The Secretary
analyzed the timing of potential
moratoria and believes the June 17, 2020
date is appropriate for two principal
reasons. First, although the involved
measure is necessary for conservation,
the immediacy of that need is less
critical given the 2020 fishing season
will not begin until spring 2020 and the
51,000 mt Bay cap has never been
reached, or even come close to being
reached by mid-June. Second, a June
closure date will give Virginia the time
necessary for its legislature to bring
these regulations back into compliance.
Moratorium Prohibitions
The Secretary declares that the
moratorium shall be in effect
commencing June 17, 2020 and will be
based upon the Atlantic Coastal Act’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Dec 26, 2019
Jkt 250001
moratorium prohibitions, 16 U.S.C.
5106(e). The moratorium shall make it
unlawful to do the following:
(1) Engage in fishing for menhaden within
the waters of Virginia (Note: under the
Atlantic Coastal Act, the definition of
‘‘fishing’’ includes catching, taking or
harvesting of fish);
(2) Land, attempt to land, or possess fish
that are caught, taken, or harvested in
violation of the moratorium;
(3) Fail to return to the water immediately,
with a minimum of injury, any fish to which
the moratorium applies that are taken
incidental to fishing for species other than
those to which the moratorium applies;
(4) Refuse to permit any officer authorized
to enforce the provisions of this moratorium
to board a fishing vessel subject to such
person’s control for purposes of conducting
any search or inspection in connection with
the enforcement of this moratorium;
(5) Forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede,
intimidate, or interfere with any such
authorized officer in the conduct of any
search or inspection under this moratorium;
(6) Resist a lawful arrest for any act
prohibited by this moratorium;
(7) Ship, transport, offer for sale, sell,
purchase, import, or have custody, control, or
possession of, any fish taken or retained in
violation of this moratorium; or
(8) Interfere with, delay, or prevent, by any
means, the apprehension or arrest of another
person, knowing that such other person has
committed any act prohibited by this
moratorium.
This moratorium will apply to Atlantic
menhaden as identified in the Commission’s
ISFMP and would start June 17, 2020. When
the Commission notifies the Secretary that
Virginia has come into compliance, the
Secretary shall immediately determine
whether the State is in compliance, and if so,
shall terminate the moratorium.
Classification
This declaration of a moratorium is
consistent with the Atlantic Coastal Act
at 16 U.S.C. 5106 insofar as Virginia has
been found to have failed to carry out
its responsibilities under the
Commission’s Atlantic Menhaden
ISFMP and the measures that Virginia
has failed to implement and enforce are
necessary for the conservation of the
Atlantic menhaden fishery. Further, the
moratorium prohibits fishing in Virginia
State waters and processing and/or
landing Atlantic menhaden if harvested
in Virginia State waters and is being
implemented within six months of the
agency findings. The Secretary
conducted the Atlantic Coastal Act’s
non-compliance process by informal
adjudication as set forth in the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) at
5 U.S.C. 555. More specifically, the
agency gave Virginia prompt notice of
the proceeding and an opportunity to
meet in person to discuss the matter.
Matthew Strickler, Secretary of
Virginia’s Natural Resources, and other
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71331
Virginia staff met with NMFS and
NOAA staff on November 22, 2019.
Virginia Governor Ralph Northam also
provided a letter dated November 20,
2019, to the Secretary stating the
management measures as outlined in
Amendment 3 are necessary to conserve
menhaden and other fisheries that
depend on them for survival and that a
moratorium is the most appropriate way
to bring about a shift to responsible
management of Atlantic menhaden in
Virginia. Notice and an opportunity for
comment were also provided to the New
England Fishery Management Council,
Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council, the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, the Commission,
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
the Commonwealth of Virginia. NMFS
also promptly notified the public of this
proceeding in a Federal Register notice
(84 FR 65787; November 29, 2019).
Further, the Secretary is providing
Virginia with immediate notice of his
findings, which the State will receive
prior to actual closure of the fishery,
and notifies the public of the Secretary’s
decision in this Federal Register
document prior to closure.
Public comment is not required under
the Act because the rigid timeline can
make it impracticable and would
potentially delay mandatory agency
action, and also because the issue has
been considerably vetted in public
forums, such as before the Commission
in the months prior to the referral
through development of Amendment 3
to the Atlantic menhaden ISFMP.
Nevertheless, NMFS did notify the
public of this action in its Federal
Register notice dated November 29,
2019. The agency received
approximately 40 comment letters. Four
opposed a moratorium while the
remaining letters (including more than
12,000 signatures) supported a
moratorium.
The declaration of a moratorium does
not trigger the analytical requirements
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq. because the action
was not the result of notice and
comment rulemaking under Section 553
of the APA.
The declaration of a moratorium does
not fall under review under Executive
Order 12866 insofar as the moratorium
is not a regulatory action of the agency
but is an action mandated by Congress
upon the findings of certain conditions
precedent set forth in the Atlantic
Coastal Act, which also prescribes the
nature and extent of the moratorium.
This action is required by 16 U.S.C.
5101 and is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866.
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
71332
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 248 / Friday, December 27, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
The moratorium is not the result of a
policy formulated or implemented by
the agency, but instead is the result of
the application of found facts to the
Congressional standards set forth in the
Atlantic Coastal Act and as such, the
declaration does not implicate
federalism in the manner contemplated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Dec 26, 2019
Jkt 250001
by Executive Order 13132. The agency,
however, has nevertheless consulted, to
the extent practicable, with appropriate
state and local administrative and law
enforcement officials to address the
principles, criteria, and requirements of
E.O. 13132.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: December 19, 2019.
Christopher Wayne Oliver,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–27834 Filed 12–19–19; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 248 (Friday, December 27, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71329-71332]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27834]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 697
RIN 0648-XV136
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions;
Atlantic Menhaden Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notification of determination of non-compliance; declaration of
a moratorium.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative
Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act), the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary) has determined that the Commonwealth of Virginia has failed
to carry out its responsibilities under the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission's (Commission) Interstate Fishery Management Plan
(ISFMP) for Atlantic Menhaden and that the measure Virginia has failed
to implement and enforce is necessary for the conservation of the
Atlantic menhaden resource. This determination is consistent with the
findings of the Commission on October 31, 2019. Pursuant to the
Atlantic Coastal Act, a Federal moratorium on fishing for Atlantic
menhaden in Virginia state waters and possession and landing of
Atlantic menhaden harvested in Virginia State waters is hereby declared
and will be effective on June 17, 2020. The moratorium will be
terminated when the Commission notifies the Secretary that Virginia is
found to have come back into compliance with the Commission's ISFMP for
Atlantic menhaden.
DATES: June 17, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Derek Orner, Fishery Management
Specialist, (301) 427-8567, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Non-Compliance Statutory Background
The Atlantic Coastal Act, 16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq., sets forth a non-
compliance review and determination process that is triggered when the
Commission finds that a State has not implemented measures specified in
an ISFMP and refers that determination to the Secretary for review and
potential concurrence.
The Atlantic Coastal Act's non-compliance process involves two
stages of decision-making. In the first stage, the Secretary must make
two findings: (1) Whether the State in question has failed to carry out
its responsibility under the Commission ISFMP; and if so (2) whether
the measures that the State failed to implement and enforce are
necessary for the conservation of the fishery in question. These
initial findings must be made within 30 days after receipt of the
Commission's non-compliance referral and consequently, this first stage
of decision-making is referred to as the 30-Day Determination.
A positive 30-Day Determination triggers the second stage of
Atlantic
[[Page 71330]]
Coastal Act non-compliance decision-making, which occurs
contemporaneous with the first decision. That is, if the Secretary
determines non-compliance in the first stage, the Atlantic Coastal Act
mandates that a moratorium on fishing in State waters in the fishery in
question occur. The timing of the moratorium, however, is at the
discretion of the Secretary, so long as it is implemented within six
(6) months of the 30-Day Determination. In other words, although the
implementation of the moratorium is non-discretionary, the Secretary
has the discretion to decide when the moratorium will be implemented
subject to the Atlantic Coastal Act's six (6) month deadline.
Commission Referral of Non-Compliance
On October 31, 2019, the Commission found that the Commonwealth of
Virginia is out of compliance with the Commission's ISFMP for Atlantic
menhaden. Specifically, the Commission required Virginia to implement a
total allowable harvest from the Chesapeake Bay Reduction Fishery that
would not exceed 51,000 mt. Amendment 3 was approved in the fall 2017,
and was to be fully implemented by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the
2018 fishing season. Virginia, however, did not implement the
Commission's recommended 51,000 mt cap and instead maintained its pre-
existing 87,216 mt cap and in 2019, the Reduction Fishery exceeded the
Commission's Bay cap by approximately 15,000 mt (or about 30 percent).
The Virginia delegation to the Commission agreed it was out of
compliance and voted for a non-compliance finding at the Commission's
Atlantic Menhaden and Policy Boards as well as the Commission's
Business Section. On October 31, 2019, the Commission found the
Commonwealth of Virginia out of compliance for not fully and
effectively implementing and enforcing the Amendment 3 measures.
Agency Action in Response to Commission Non-Compliance Referral
The Commission forwarded its finding of their October 31st vote in
a formal non-compliance referral letter that the Secretary received
November 15, 2019. In response to receipt of this letter, the Secretary
began the Atlantic Coastal Act's 30-day determination clock. On
November 19, 2019, NMFS sent letters to the Commonwealth of Virginia,
the New England Fishery Management Council, Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, and to the Commission, advising them of the
Atlantic Coastal Act's non-compliance process, inviting them to provide
commentary on the issues, and in the case of Virginia, inviting the
Commonwealth to meet with the agency to present its position in person
or provide written comments on the Comission's findings. NMFS also
advised the public of the referral in a Federal Register notice dated
November 29, 2019 (84 FR 65787).
On November 22, 2019, Matthew Strickler, Secretary Virginia Natural
Resources, other Virginia staff, and NMFS staff met via a conference
call. During this meeting, the Commonwealth of Virginia agreed that
Virginia was out of compliance and that it did not contest the
conservation necessity of the Commission's Atlantic menhaden measures.
Virginia described its legal and regulatory framework for its menhaden
fishery and confirmed its intent to pursue legislation to comply with
the measures identified in Amendment 3 as soon as feasible.
Specifically, Virginia representatives stated that the Atlantic
menhaden fishery is managed through the Virginia legislature, which
does not provide the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) the
regulatory authority to manage menhaden fisheries.
The Secretary received numerous comments in response to the
referral of non-compliance. Omega Protein along with 6 members of the
Virginia legislature and one Congressman, and several others oppose the
non-compliance finding. Other stakeholders, including the Commission,
the Fishery Management Councils, Atlantic Coastal states, nine East
Coast Governors, recreational fishing groups, Non-Governmental
Organizations and numerous members of the public (~12,000 signatures),
strongly support a non-compliance finding due to the scientific
research supporting the importance of menhaden to the Bay ecosystem.
Agency's Findings
The Secretary's finding in this matter supports a positive 30-Day
Determination of non-compliance. Specifically, the facts and best
available science suggest both that Virginia did not fulfill its
responsibilities under the Commission's ISFMP and that the measures
that Virginia failed to implement are necessary to the conservation of
Atlantic menhaden. Virginia concurs that the involved measures are
necessary for conservation. Specifically, in voting itself out of
compliance three separate times at the Commission in October 2019,
Virginia admitted that failure to implement the measures would
jeopardize the conservation of Atlantic menhaden. Virginia also
admitted to such in its November 20, 2019 letter and during its
November 22, 2019 hearing with NMFS. NMFS' analysis also supports such
a finding.
Single Species: Recent studies investigating the contribution of
various nursery grounds along the Atlantic coast and their impacts to
the coastwide population structure of Atlantic menhaden have indicated
that the Chesapeake Bay is considered one of the most important nursery
areas for menhaden and contributes approximately 30 percent of new
recruits (age 1) to the coastal stock. The implementation of the
Chesapeake Bay cap does not limit the coastwide total allowable catch
of menhaden for the reduction fishery, but rather attempts to
distribute the reduction fishery's catch in order to protect the
important Bay nursery area. The science suggests that overharvesting
within Chesapeake Bay leads to the removal of smaller, younger age-
classes of menhaden that eventually migrate into the older, coastwide
population.
In addition, based on the current Commission-adopted benchmarks,
the Atlantic menhaden stock status is not overfished and overfishing is
not occurring. The stock is currently below the current fishing
mortality target and above the current fecundity (measure of
productivity) target. The stock is considered a unit stock for
management purposes and from this single-species perspective, there is
no major concern with total removals and the total Virginia or
coastwide quotas have not been exceeded.
Ecosystem Function: The Atlantic Coastal Act requires the Secretary
to consider whether the measures that the State failed to implement and
enforce are necessary for the conservation of the fishery in question.
The fishery in question is the Atlantic menhaden fishery. The statute
defines conservation as restoring, rebuilding, and maintaining of any
coastal fishery resource and the marine environment, in order to assure
the availability of coastal fishery resources on a long-term basis (16
U.S.C. 5102(4)). Thus, in considering whether the measure is necessary
for the ``conservation of the fishery in question,'' the Secretary is
not limited solely to looking at whether the measure preserves the
biomass of menhaden but also whether the measure maintains the role of
menhaden in the marine environment. Menhaden play an important role as
a forage base for a number of other stocks, like striped
[[Page 71331]]
bass. Those other stocks are part of the marine environment for which
menhaden conservation, including the Bay cap, is directed.
In short, the Commission, its member states including Virginia,
found that the involved measure is necessary for the conservation of
Atlantic menhaden. The Secretary sees the measures Virginia has failed
to implement as necessary for the conservation of the menhaden
resource. The best available information shows that menhaden in the
Chesapeake Bay are an important component of the overall health of the
stock, and further that their role as forage for predator species in
the Chesapeake Bay is critical to the marine environment. Further, the
Secretary notes the degraded status of the Chesapeake Bay and the
Commission's efforts to do its part under its authority to ensure the
sustainability of the fisheries in the Chesapeake Bay, specifically by
conserving menhaden. Accordingly, the Commission is thus attempting to
maintain the menhaden forage base while its scientists study menhaden's
role in the degraded Bay ecosystem and develop ecological reference
points. The Secretary agrees with its logic in doing so.
The Atlantic Coastal Act requires that the Secretary declare a
moratorium when it finds that a state has failed to carry out its
responsibilities and that the measures it failed to implement are
necessary for conservation. The Secretary determines that the required
moratirum should begin on June 17, 2020. This moratorium would prohibit
fishing for Atlantic menhaden in Virginia State waters, and possession
of and landing of Atlantic menhaden harvested in Virginia state waters.
A June 17, 2020 implementation date represents the maximum allowed time
period to begin a moratorium under the Atlantic Coastal Act. The
Secretary analyzed the timing of potential moratoria and believes the
June 17, 2020 date is appropriate for two principal reasons. First,
although the involved measure is necessary for conservation, the
immediacy of that need is less critical given the 2020 fishing season
will not begin until spring 2020 and the 51,000 mt Bay cap has never
been reached, or even come close to being reached by mid-June. Second,
a June closure date will give Virginia the time necessary for its
legislature to bring these regulations back into compliance.
Moratorium Prohibitions
The Secretary declares that the moratorium shall be in effect
commencing June 17, 2020 and will be based upon the Atlantic Coastal
Act's moratorium prohibitions, 16 U.S.C. 5106(e). The moratorium shall
make it unlawful to do the following:
(1) Engage in fishing for menhaden within the waters of Virginia
(Note: under the Atlantic Coastal Act, the definition of ``fishing''
includes catching, taking or harvesting of fish);
(2) Land, attempt to land, or possess fish that are caught,
taken, or harvested in violation of the moratorium;
(3) Fail to return to the water immediately, with a minimum of
injury, any fish to which the moratorium applies that are taken
incidental to fishing for species other than those to which the
moratorium applies;
(4) Refuse to permit any officer authorized to enforce the
provisions of this moratorium to board a fishing vessel subject to
such person's control for purposes of conducting any search or
inspection in connection with the enforcement of this moratorium;
(5) Forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, or
interfere with any such authorized officer in the conduct of any
search or inspection under this moratorium;
(6) Resist a lawful arrest for any act prohibited by this
moratorium;
(7) Ship, transport, offer for sale, sell, purchase, import, or
have custody, control, or possession of, any fish taken or retained
in violation of this moratorium; or
(8) Interfere with, delay, or prevent, by any means, the
apprehension or arrest of another person, knowing that such other
person has committed any act prohibited by this moratorium.
This moratorium will apply to Atlantic menhaden as identified in
the Commission's ISFMP and would start June 17, 2020. When the
Commission notifies the Secretary that Virginia has come into
compliance, the Secretary shall immediately determine whether the
State is in compliance, and if so, shall terminate the moratorium.
Classification
This declaration of a moratorium is consistent with the Atlantic
Coastal Act at 16 U.S.C. 5106 insofar as Virginia has been found to
have failed to carry out its responsibilities under the Commission's
Atlantic Menhaden ISFMP and the measures that Virginia has failed to
implement and enforce are necessary for the conservation of the
Atlantic menhaden fishery. Further, the moratorium prohibits fishing in
Virginia State waters and processing and/or landing Atlantic menhaden
if harvested in Virginia State waters and is being implemented within
six months of the agency findings. The Secretary conducted the Atlantic
Coastal Act's non-compliance process by informal adjudication as set
forth in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) at 5 U.S.C. 555. More
specifically, the agency gave Virginia prompt notice of the proceeding
and an opportunity to meet in person to discuss the matter. Matthew
Strickler, Secretary of Virginia's Natural Resources, and other
Virginia staff met with NMFS and NOAA staff on November 22, 2019.
Virginia Governor Ralph Northam also provided a letter dated November
20, 2019, to the Secretary stating the management measures as outlined
in Amendment 3 are necessary to conserve menhaden and other fisheries
that depend on them for survival and that a moratorium is the most
appropriate way to bring about a shift to responsible management of
Atlantic menhaden in Virginia. Notice and an opportunity for comment
were also provided to the New England Fishery Management Council, Mid-
Atlantic Fishery Management Council, the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, the Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
and the Commonwealth of Virginia. NMFS also promptly notified the
public of this proceeding in a Federal Register notice (84 FR 65787;
November 29, 2019). Further, the Secretary is providing Virginia with
immediate notice of his findings, which the State will receive prior to
actual closure of the fishery, and notifies the public of the
Secretary's decision in this Federal Register document prior to
closure.
Public comment is not required under the Act because the rigid
timeline can make it impracticable and would potentially delay
mandatory agency action, and also because the issue has been
considerably vetted in public forums, such as before the Commission in
the months prior to the referral through development of Amendment 3 to
the Atlantic menhaden ISFMP. Nevertheless, NMFS did notify the public
of this action in its Federal Register notice dated November 29, 2019.
The agency received approximately 40 comment letters. Four opposed a
moratorium while the remaining letters (including more than 12,000
signatures) supported a moratorium.
The declaration of a moratorium does not trigger the analytical
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
because the action was not the result of notice and comment rulemaking
under Section 553 of the APA.
The declaration of a moratorium does not fall under review under
Executive Order 12866 insofar as the moratorium is not a regulatory
action of the agency but is an action mandated by Congress upon the
findings of certain conditions precedent set forth in the Atlantic
Coastal Act, which also prescribes the nature and extent of the
moratorium. This action is required by 16 U.S.C. 5101 and is exempt
from review under Executive Order 12866.
[[Page 71332]]
The moratorium is not the result of a policy formulated or
implemented by the agency, but instead is the result of the application
of found facts to the Congressional standards set forth in the Atlantic
Coastal Act and as such, the declaration does not implicate federalism
in the manner contemplated by Executive Order 13132. The agency,
however, has nevertheless consulted, to the extent practicable, with
appropriate state and local administrative and law enforcement
officials to address the principles, criteria, and requirements of E.O.
13132.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: December 19, 2019.
Christopher Wayne Oliver,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-27834 Filed 12-19-19; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P