Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing Operations; Amendment to the Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan, 36965-36972 [2023-11761]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 6, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36965-36972]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11761]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 229

[Docket No. 230519-0135]
RIN 0648-BF90


Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing 
Operations; Amendment to the Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction 
Plan

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS is amending the regulations implementing the Atlantic 
Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan (hereinafter called the PLTRP or 
the Plan) to reduce mortality and serious injury of short-finned pilot 
whales (Globicephala macrorhynchus) incidental to the Atlantic portion 
of the Category I Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico large 
pelagics longline fishery (hereinafter called Atlantic pelagic longline 
fishery) to meet the long-term goal of the Plan as required by the 
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The amendments to the PLTRP are 
based on consensus recommendations submitted by the Atlantic Pelagic 
Longline Take Reduction Team (hereinafter called the PLTRT or the Team) 
and include both regulatory and non-regulatory management measures. 
Additionally, NMFS is removing Risso's dolphins (Grampus griseus) and 
long-finned pilot whales (Globicephala melas melas) from the purpose 
and scope of the Plan.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 6, 2023, except for the 
amendment to 50 CFR 229.36(d), in instruction number 4, which is 
effective July 8, 2024. (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for more 
details).

ADDRESSES: Public comments and other supporting materials are available 
at www.regulations.gov identified by docket number NOAA-NMFS-2016-0105. 
Background documents for the PLTRP can be downloaded from the Pelagic 
Longline Take Reduction Plan website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/pelagic-longline-take-reduction-plan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Erin Foug[egrave]res, NMFS, Southeast 
Region, at 727-824-5312 or [email protected], Kara Shervanick, 
NMFS, Southeast Region, at 727-824-5350 or [email protected], or 
Kristy Long, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources at 206-526-4792 or 
[email protected]. Individuals who use telecommunications devices 
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-
800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time, Monday through 
Friday, excluding Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Section 118(f) of the MMPA requires NMFS to develop and implement 
take reduction plans to assist in the recovery of, or prevent the 
depletion of, each strategic marine mammal stock that interacts with 
Category I or II fisheries. Category I fisheries are fisheries that 
have frequent incidental mortality and serious injury of marine 
mammals, and Category II fisheries are fisheries that have occasional 
incidental mortality and serious injury of marine mammals. The MMPA 
also provides NMFS discretion to develop and implement a take reduction 
plan for any other marine mammal stocks that interact with a Category I 
fishery, which the agency determines, after notice and opportunity for 
public comment, has a high level of mortality and serious injury across 
a number of such marine mammal stocks.
    The MMPA defines a strategic stock as a marine mammal stock: (1) 
for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds the 
potential biological removal (PBR) level; (2) which, based on the best 
available scientific information, is declining and is likely to be 
listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) 
in the foreseeable future; or (3) which is listed as threatened or 
endangered under the ESA, or is designated as a depleted species under 
the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1362(19)). The PBR level is the maximum number of 
animals, not including natural mortalities, which can be removed 
annually from a stock, while allowing that stock to reach or maintain 
its optimum sustainable population level (50 CFR 229.2).
    In accordance with section 118(f) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1387), the 
immediate goal of a take reduction plan is to reduce, within 6 months 
of its implementation, the incidental mortality or serious injury of 
marine mammals taken in the course of commercial fishing operations to 
levels less than the PBR level for the stock. The long-term goal of a 
take reduction plan is to reduce, within 5 years of its implementation, 
the incidental mortality or serious injury of marine mammals taken in 
the course of commercial fishing to insignificant levels approaching a 
zero mortality and serious injury rate (i.e., insignificance threshold 
or zero mortality rate goal), which is 10 percent of the PBR level for 
a marine mammal stock (69 FR 43338, July 20, 2004). The long-term goal 
takes into account the economics of the fishery, the availability of 
existing technology, and existing state or regional fishery management 
plans. The MMPA also requires NMFS to amend take reduction plans and 
implementing regulations as needed to meet these requirements and 
goals.

History of the PLTRT

    NMFS announced the establishment of the PLTRT on June 22, 2005, in 
the Federal Register (70 FR 36120). Four professionally-facilitated 
meetings and two full-team conference calls were held between June 2005 
and May 2006. The PLTRT reached consensus at the May 2006 meeting, and 
on June 8, 2006, submitted to NMFS a Draft PLTRP, including 
recommendations for take reduction measures, as well as research needs 
and other non-regulatory measures (PLTRT, 2006). Based on the Draft 
PLTRP, NMFS published a proposed rule (73 FR 35623, June 24, 2008) and 
a final rule (74 FR 23349, May 19, 2009) implementing the PLTRP,

[[Page 36966]]

which became effective on June 18, 2009 (50 CFR 229.36).
    The existing regulatory measures in the PLTRP, include (1) the Cape 
Hatteras Special Research Area (CHSRA) in the Mid-Atlantic Bight (MAB) 
with special observer and research participation requirements for 
fishermen operating in that area; (2) a 20 nmi (37.04 km) limit on 
mainline length for all Atlantic pelagic longline sets within the U.S. 
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) portion of the MAB; and (3) a requirement 
that an informational placard regarding marine mammal handling/release 
guidelines be posted inside the wheelhouse and on the working deck of 
all Atlantic pelagic longline vessels operating in the EEZ off the U.S. 
east coast.
    Since implementation of the PLTRP, the Team has continued to 
monitor the effectiveness of the Plan and review recent research 
relevant to the PLTRT and new scientific information on updated 
estimates of abundance and mortality and serious injury for pilot 
whales and Risso's dolphins. NMFS convened two professionally-
facilitated in-person meetings (August 2012 and December 2015) and six 
webinars/conference calls (September 2010, June 2014, March 2015, 
September 2016, October 2016, and September 2019). During the 2015 and 
2016 meetings, the discussions and ultimately the consensus 
recommendations were focused on reducing mortality and serious injury 
of the Western North Atlantic stock of short-finned pilot whales. The 
PLTRP has not yet met its long-term goal of effectively reducing short-
finned pilot whale mortality and serious injury incidental to the 
Atlantic pelagic longline fishery to below the insignificance threshold 
of 10 percent of the PBR level.
    The proposed rule to amend the PLTRP was published on December 15, 
2020 (85 FR 81168). NMFS received 16 public comments. Additional 
background information is provided in the proposed rule and is not 
repeated here.

Components of the PLTRP Amendment

    As described below, this amendment to the PLTRP includes the 
following regulatory components: (1) removes Risso's dolphins (Grampus 
griseus) and long-finned pilot whales (Globicephala melas melas) from 
the Plan's purpose and scope (2) removes the CHSRA and its special 
observer and research participation requirements, (3) modifies the 
current mainline length restrictions in the U.S. Atlantic EEZ portion 
of the Mid-Atlantic Bight (MAB) statistical area, and (4) implements 
terminal gear requirements in the U.S. Atlantic EEZ.
    The amendment also includes two non-regulatory measures of the 
PLTRP: (1) convening a safe handling and release work group to update 
protocols for marine mammal interactions in the Atlantic pelagic 
longline fishery, and (2) updating observer protocols and fishery 
observer data forms to increase information collected from marine 
mammal interaction and depredation events in the Atlantic pelagic 
longline fishery.
    The other requirements (e.g., posting the Marine Mammal Handling 
and Release Placard in the wheelhouse and on deck) of the original 
PLTRP remain unchanged. The requirements of the PLTRP apply to the 
owner or operator of any vessel that has been issued or is required to 
be issued an Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) tunas, swordfish, 
or shark permit under 50 CFR 635.4 and that has onboard pelagic 
longline gear as defined at 50 CFR 635.2 in the EEZ (as defined in 50 
CFR 600.10).

Removing Risso's Dolphins and Long-Finned Pilot Whales From the Plan's 
Purpose and Scope

    The long-term goal of a take reduction plan is to reduce the 
incidental mortality or serious injury of marine mammals to 
insignificant levels approaching a zero mortality and serious injury 
rate (i.e., insignificance threshold or zero mortality rate goal), 
which is defined as 10 percent of the PBR level for a marine mammal 
stock (69 FR 43338, July 20, 2004).
    Based on data from 2015 through 2019, PBR for the western North 
Atlantic stock of Risso's dolphins was 301 and average annual mortality 
and serious injury incidental to the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery 
was 5.0 (Coefficient of Variation, or CV = 0.44; Hayes et al., 2022). 
Thus, the average annual mortality and serious injury incidental to the 
Atlantic pelagic longline fishery is 1.7 percent of the stock's PBR 
level. Based on data from 2015 through 2019, PBR for the western North 
Atlantic stock of long-finned pilot whales was 306 and the average 
annual mortality and serious injury incidental to the Atlantic pelagic 
longline fishery was 1.5 long-finned pilot whales (CV = 0.49; Hayes et 
al., 2022). Thus, the average annual mortality and serious injury 
incidental to the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery is 0.5 percent of 
the stock's PBR level.
    For both Risso's dolphins and long-finned pilot whales, mortality 
and serious injury incidental to the pelagic longline fishery is 
currently below, and has been below, the insignificance threshold since 
the Plan's implementation. Therefore, NMFS is removing these stocks 
from the purpose and scope of the Plan.

Removing the Cape Hatteras Special Research Area

    This amendment removes the CHSRA, along with its special observer 
and research participation requirements, which includes a call-in 
requirement for vessels to provide at least 48 hours advance notice 
before fishing with pelagic longline gear in that area. NMFS created 
this regulation initially with the goal of encouraging partnerships 
between fishermen and researchers in that area. However, NMFS has not 
used the special observer and research participation requirements to 
place an observer on a vessel in the CHSRA since the regulations were 
implemented. Instead, researchers and fishermen have partnered 
independent of the regulations for research in that area. Therefore, 
NMFS is removing the CHSRA and associated requirements because it is 
not needed.

Modifying the Mid-Atlantic Bight Mainline Length Restrictions

    This amendment modifies the current 20 nmi (37.04 km) mainline 
length restrictions at 50 CFR 229.36(e) so that vessels in the EEZ 
portion of the MAB may set no more than one mainline in the water at 
any one time, not to exceed 32 nmi (59.26 km), subject to the following 
specifications: (1) there may be no more than 30 nmi (55.56 km) total 
of active gear (gear with leaders or hooks) deployed along the 
mainline, (2) a single section of active gear may not exceed 20 nmi 
(37.04 km), and (3) a section of active gear must be separated from 
other sections of active gear along the mainline by a gap without 
leaders or hooks (i.e., hookless line ``interrupt'') of at least 1 nmi 
(1.85 km).

Implementing Terminal Gear Requirements

    This amendment also implements terminal gear requirements in the 
U.S. Atlantic EEZ as part of the PLTRP. The intent of the terminal gear 
requirements is to enable hooks to straighten before leaders break, 
because interactions with marine mammals are less likely to result in a 
serious injury when hooks straighten and whales can self-release after 
a hooking event. The terminal gear requirements include: (1) circle 
hooks must have a round wire diameter not to exceed 4.05 mm (0.159 in) 
if the hooks are size 16/0, or 4.40 mm (0.173 in) if the hooks are size 
18/0, and must have a straightening force not to exceed 300

[[Page 36967]]

lb (136.08 kg), and (2) monofilament leaders and branch lines (i.e., 
gangions) must have a minimum diameter of 1.8 mm (0.071 in) and a 
breaking strength of at least 300 lb (136.08 kg). These requirements 
would apply to the EEZ portions of the Northeast Coastal (NEC), MAB, 
South Atlantic Bight (SAB), and Florida East Coast (FEC) pelagic 
longline statistical areas, which together compose the entirety of the 
U.S. Atlantic EEZ (east of the line of demarcation between the Atlantic 
Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico as defined in 50 CFR 600.105(c)).

New Non-Regulatory Components

    The non-regulatory components added to the PLTRP in this amendment 
include:
    1. Convening a safe handling and release work group to develop 
potential updates to the current safe handling and release protocols 
for marine mammal interactions in the Atlantic pelagic longline 
fishery. The work group would include PLTRT members, commercial 
fishermen, marine mammal health and disentanglement experts, and others 
with expertise and knowledge related to handling marine mammals and/or 
pelagic longline fishing practices.
    2. Updating observer protocols and fishery observer data forms to 
increase information collected from marine mammal interaction and 
depredation events in the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery.

Compliance and Enforcement Monitoring

    The current PLTRP Monitoring Strategy (NMFS, 2013) is a 
comprehensive plan that describes the methods for monitoring regulatory 
compliance and the effectiveness of the PLTRP. Compliance monitoring 
includes enforcement activities, research, collection of observer data, 
evaluation of self-reported fishing information, and education and 
outreach efforts. Effectiveness monitoring examines whether the long-
term statutory goals described in the MMPA (i.e., to reduce incidental 
mortality and serious injury of short-finned pilot whales to a level 
approaching the stock's insignificance threshold) are being achieved.
    NMFS intends to update the monitoring strategy to reflect the new 
regulatory and non-regulatory components of the PLTRP. In addition, 
although Risso's dolphins and long-finned pilot whales are being 
removed from the Plan, NMFS will continue to monitor their mortality 
and serious injury incidental to the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery.

Comments and Responses

    We published a proposed rule in the Federal Register on December 
15, 2020 (85 FR 81168) and requested comments and information from the 
public. During the 60-day comment period, we received 16 comments from 
the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission), Oceana, a joint letter from 
Whale and Dolphin Conservation and Defenders of Wildlife (WDC and DOW), 
Blue Water Fishermen's Association (BWFA), Blue Water Fishing and 
Tackle Co., American Sword and Tuna Harvesters (ASTH) and five of their 
members, and 6 private citizens. Only comments relevant to the proposed 
rule were included below. All comments can be found at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/NOAA-NMFS-2016-0105-0003/comment. Comment 
responses below are arranged in the following order: general comments, 
including whether it would be helpful to the regulated community to 
further clarify the statistical area definitions in the regulatory text 
in the final rule, comments on removing long-finned pilot whales and 
Risso's dolphin from the PLTRP, comments on removing the CHSRA, 
comments on changes to mainline length restrictions, and lastly, 
comments on implementing terminal gear regulations.

General Comments

    Comment 1: Five commenters (one member of the public, Blue Water 
Fishing Tackle Co., BWFA, Oceana, and the Commission) expressed general 
support for the entire proposed rule. Other commenters expressed their 
support for different aspects of the proposed rule. Two members of the 
public expressed support for removing Risso's dolphins and long-finned 
pilot whales from the PLTRP. One member of the public and BWFA 
expressed support for removing the CHSRA, while WDC and DOW stated that 
they did not oppose the removal of the CHSRA. Four members of the 
public and BWFA expressed support for both the mainline length and 
terminal gear requirements in the proposed rule. The Commission, WDC, 
and DOW expressed support for the terminal gear modifications and WDC 
and DOW stated that they did not oppose the mainline length 
restrictions. One member of the public and WDC and DOW expressed 
support for the non-regulatory recommendations in the proposed rule.
    Response: We acknowledge and appreciate the support.
    Comment 2: One member of the public acknowledged the trend of 
interactions has been declining, but suggested the regulatory and non-
regulatory provisions in the proposed rule, particularly those related 
to terminal gear, do not go far enough and that additional provisions 
should be made to ensure that the Plan's long-term goal will be met in 
a timely manner.
    Response: NMFS is amending the PLTRP in accordance with section 
118(f) of the MMPA to reduce incidental mortality and serious injury of 
marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing to insignificant levels 
approaching a zero mortality and serious injury rate (i.e., 
insignificance threshold or zero mortality rate goal), which is defined 
as 10 percent of the PBR level for a marine mammal stock (69 FR 43338, 
July 20, 2004). We will continue monitoring the effectiveness of the 
regulations after implementation to ensure the long-term goals of the 
plan are being met and will address future changes to the regulations, 
in coordination with the PLTRT, if needed.
    Comment 3: One member of the public urged NMFS to reconvene the 
PLTRT prior to finalizing the proposed rule to ``receive its advice on 
additional or alternative measures submitted by agencies, groups, and 
individuals in response to this proposed action as well as any further 
changes NMFS may itself deem warranted.''
    Response: NMFS convened the Team on February 10, 2021, during the 
public comment period of the proposed rule. The Key Outcomes Memo for 
this meeting can be found at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/pelagic-longline-take-reduction-plan.
    Comment 4: The ASTH stated their opposition to most of the 
proposals contained within the proposed rule, including removal of the 
CHSRA, mainline length restrictions, and terminal gear requirements.
    Response: We acknowledge the opposition. The regulatory and non-
regulatory measures in the rule are the result of deliberations and 
consensus recommendations by the multi-stakeholder PLTRT in accordance 
with section 118(f) of the MMPA. NMFS will be monitoring the 
effectiveness of the regulations after implementation to ensure the 
goals of the plan are being met and will address future changes to the 
regulations, in coordination with the PLTRT, if needed.
    Comment 5: The Commission, WDC, and DOW were concerned about the 
delay in rulemaking between the PLTRT's consensus recommendations and 
the publication of the proposed rule. Furthermore, WDC and DOW 
questioned why the non-regulatory recommendations were not

[[Page 36968]]

accomplished prior to the proposed rule.
    Response: We acknowledge the commenters' concerns. In this 
instance, the delays associated with this rule reflected the need to 
prioritize other legally-mandated, complex regulatory actions, 
including those associated with statutory and court-ordered deadlines, 
with limited available resources.
    Comment 6: WDC and DOW recommended that NMFS report back to the 
Team on the outcome of the Safe Handling and Release Work Group and the 
effectiveness of any updated safe handling and release techniques. They 
also recommended that NMFS report back to the Team on the progress and 
effectiveness of the updated observer protocols.
    Response: We acknowledge the commenters' recommendation and will 
update the PLTRT as appropriate.
    Comment 7: WDC and DOW expressed concern about the suspension of 
mandatory observer coverage in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and 
inquired about the Agency's plan to account for the loss of data and 
whether there was a process by which data can be accurately 
extrapolated for marine mammal Stock Assessment Reports (SARs), 
accounting for COVID restrictions on observer data collection.
    Response: In 2020, NMFS observers in the Pelagic Observer Program 
recorded 379 pelagic longline sets, which is an overall fishery 
coverage of 9 percent and in 2021, 415 pelagic longline sets were 
recorded, which is an overall fishery coverage of 9.7 percent. These 
coverage levels exceed the 8 percent observer coverage requirement 
under the May 2020 Biological Opinion for the pelagic longline fishery, 
suggesting that overall coverage was not impacted by the COVID 
restrictions. In the event that observer coverage for specific areas 
and quarters was impacted by the COVID restrictions, there are already 
methods in place that account for undersampling. For area-quarter 
strata that are not sampled or are poorly represented due to limited 
observer coverage, average bycatch rates from the prior 5 years of 
observations are used to estimate total bycatch. NMFS will evaluate the 
representativeness of observer data and take appropriate steps to 
reduce biases in bycatch estimation on an ongoing basis.
    Comment 8: One member of the public commented that this proposed 
rule should have been the subject of an Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) instead of an Environmental Assessment (EA).
    Response: The commenter did not provide any specific supporting 
details for this comment. Under the National Environmental Policy Act, 
a Federal agency may prepare an EA to determine whether a Federal 
action has the potential to cause significant environmental effects. If 
the agency determines that the action will not have significant 
environmental impacts, the agency will issue a Finding of No 
Significant Impact (FONSI). A FONSI is a document that presents the 
reasons why the agency has concluded that there are no significant 
environmental impacts projected to occur upon implementation of the 
action. If the EA determines that the environmental impacts of a 
proposed Federal action will be significant, an Environmental Impact 
Statement is prepared. In the case of this rulemaking, our EA led to 
the conclusion that the action will not have significant environmental 
impacts and a FONSI was prepared and an EIS was not required. The 
commenter did not identify any specific deficiencies in the Agency's 
draft EA.
    Comment 9: BWFA noted that the PBR and mortality and serious injury 
data presented in the proposed rule for short-finned pilot whales may 
not be the most recent available, as more recent data were presented at 
the PLTRT's September 18, 2020 meeting. They requested that the most 
recent data be used in the final rule.
    Response: We considered the most recent final SAR for short-finned 
pilot whales in preparation of the final rule, but because the 
mortality and serious injury estimates not notably different from the 
mortality and serious injury estimates used in the proposed rule, and 
remained well over PBR, we did not update the EA. At the time that the 
proposed rule was drafted, the most recent data available was from the 
2018 SAR (data years 2012-2016). Since then, the 2019 SAR (data years 
2013-2017) and the 2021 SAR (data years 2015-2019) for short-finned 
pilot whales have become available. The mean annual mortality and 
serious injury incidental to the PLL fishery as noted in the proposed 
rule (2018 SAR) was 168, or 71 percent of PBR. In the 2019 SAR, the 
mean annual mortality and serious injury was 160, or 68 percent of PBR, 
and in the 2021 SAR the mean annual mortality and serious injury is 
136, or 58 percent of PBR. As a result, the most recent SAR concludes 
that the total U.S. fishery-related mortality and serious injury 
attributed to short-finned pilot whales exceeds 10 percent of the 
calculated PBR and therefore cannot be considered insignificant and 
approaching a zero mortality and serious injury rate; therefore, the 
long-term goal of the PLTRP is not being met.
    Comment 10: WDC and DOW noted that they had no specific concerns 
about clarifying regional statistical area definitions in the 
regulatory text and encouraged industry input in the development of 
these clarifications. We did not receive other comments on this issue.
    Response: We acknowledge and appreciate WDC and DOW's input. As 
further discussed below in the Changes from the Proposed Rule section, 
we assessed the proposed rule's regulatory text and determined that the 
same geographic areas can be more simply described and are therefore 
changing the text of the area descriptions to facilitate understanding 
of the rule's area of applicability. Specifically, for the areas other 
than the MAB, we assert referring to the U.S. Atlantic EEZ (east of the 
line of demarcation between the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico 
as defined in 50 CFR 600.105(c)) accurately and more clearly identifies 
the areas subject to the new terminal gear requirements.
    Comment 11: One member of the ASTH commented that the rule would 
have significant impacts on their small business, but did not provide 
additional supporting information. They also expressed concerns about 
the process to coordinate our finding with the Small Business 
Administration (SBA) before making a final decision on this regulatory 
action.
    Response: We appreciate the opportunity to clarify several issues 
raised in this comment. We certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy 
of the SBA that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the SBA did not provide any comments on the proposed rule 
or on the adequacy of our assessment of impacts on small entities.
    An estimated 88 pelagic longline vessels owned by 76 small 
businesses would be directly affected by this rule. They represent 
approximately 36 percent of the 248 permitted pelagic longline vessels 
and 214 small businesses in the pelagic longline fleet. Removing the 
CHSRA call-in requirement and requiring minimum gangion size and 
strength, combined, are expected to have little to no additional 
economic impacts. Modifying the mainline length requirements would 
cause a change in the amount of active gear deployed within the MAB 
ranging from a 0.7 percent decrease to a 4.8 percent increase. Assuming 
a constant one-to-one correspondence between the length of active gear 
and dockside revenue, there would be a

[[Page 36969]]

corresponding change in dockside revenue from highly migratory species 
harvested from the MAB ranging from a 0.7 percent reduction to a 4.8 
percent increase. When dockside revenues from highly migratory species 
harvested from all east coast fishing areas are included, the 
percentages of the net reduction or net gain decline significantly. 
Requiring particular hook strengths could slightly increase the annual 
hook cost of 88 pelagic longline vessels that fish on the east coast by 
$60 to $75 per vessel, which represents from 0.07 percent to 0.08 
percent of annual trip costs.
    No changes to this final rule were made in response to public 
comments and there were no significant changes to the fishery between 
the proposed and final rule. As a result, a final regulatory 
flexibility analysis was not required and none was prepared.

Removing Species From the Purpose and Scope of the Plan

    Comment 12: Two members of the public disagreed with removing 
Risso's dolphins or long-finned pilot whales from the PLTRP because 
their distribution overlaps with pelagic longline fishing and there is 
limited information available on the species' migration and movement 
patterns and insufficient information to reliably calculate abundance 
and, therefore, PBR.
    Response: We acknowledge the commenters' concerns, and provide 
further clarification. Although the ranges of Risso's dolphins and 
long-finned pilot whales overlap with the fishery, observer data show 
that since the PLTRP was implemented, the mortality and serious injury 
of both species remains below 10 percent of PBR, thus meeting the long-
term goal of the PLTRP in accordance with section 118(f) of the MMPA.
    Comment 13: Two commenters requested that NMFS continue to monitor 
Risso's dolphin and long-finned pilot whale serious injury and 
mortality even though they will be removed from the Plan.
    Response: We agree and will continue to closely monitor mortality 
and serious injury for these and other marine mammal species through 
our annual stock assessment and pelagic longline bycatch reports.

Removing the CHSRA

    Comment 14: Three members of the public, the ASTH, and one ASTH 
member expressed opposition to removing the CHSRA, asking why NMFS 
would remove it if it is an important area for pilot whales and could 
impair future research.
    Response: We acknowledge the concerns and appreciate the 
opportunity to clarify several issues raised in these comments. 
Removing the CHSRA will not impair future research opportunities. In 
order to deploy or fish with pelagic longline gear in the CHSRA, the 
regulations required fishermen to call NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science 
Center at least 48 hours, but no more than 96 hours, prior to embarking 
on the fishing trip to see if they must take a special observer to 
conduct scientific investigations in support of PLTRP implementation 
(50 CFR 229.36(d)). This requirement was in addition to any existing 
observer coverage requirements under the Pelagic Observer Program. 
However, NMFS has not used the special observer and research 
participation requirements to place an observer on a vessel in the 
CHSRA since the regulations were implemented. Instead, researchers and 
fishermen have voluntarily partnered independent of the regulations for 
research in that area. Because the CHSRA is not currently an area 
prohibited to fishing, the removal of the CHSRA's special observer and 
research participation requirements is not expected to impact bycatch 
rates of pilot whales, as no other restrictions on fishing activities 
are specifically associated with the area.
    Comment 15: WDC and DOW commented on the importance of observer 
data throughout the fishery given the removal of the CHSRA.
    Response: We agree that collecting observer data throughout the 
fishery is an important component in monitoring the effectiveness of 
the PLTRP. Because the CHSRA was a special requirement in addition to 
the overall monitoring of the fishery by the Pelagic Observer Program, 
removing the CHSRA is not expected to impact observer data or resulting 
bycatch estimates.

Mainline Length Restriction

    Comment 16: Three commenters had questions and/or concerns about 
standardization and enforcement of mainline length restrictions and the 
lack of clarity in the rule as to how these will be addressed. 
Additionally, two commenters noted the importance of monitoring the 
effectiveness of the mainline measure.
    Response: NMFS will work closely with its Office of Law 
Enforcement, the U.S. Coast Guard, and state enforcement agents to 
ensure effective enforcement of the regulations described in this final 
rule, including mainline length limitations. To protect the integrity 
and effectiveness of an enforcement plan, specific details concerning 
law enforcement tactics, techniques, and procedures will not be made 
public. Furthermore, NMFS will be updating the monitoring plan and will 
be evaluating the effectiveness of the new measures as data become 
available.
    Comment 17: The ASTH and two of their members expressed opposition 
to the mainline requirement that prohibits setting multiple mainline 
sets, noting that multi-sets were a common practice and can decrease 
soak time.
    Response: The 20 nmi (37.04 km) mainline length restriction in the 
EEZ portion of the MAB was originally developed because, at the time, 
data suggested that pilot whale interaction rates were twice as high in 
pelagic longline sets with total mainline lengths greater than 20 nmi 
(37.04 km) than for pelagic longline sets with total mainline lengths 
less than 20 nmi (37.04 km). Operators of individual fishing vessels 
were allowed to fish multiple mainline sets at one time to 
``compensate'' for the reduction of hooks due to the reduced maximum 
mainline length of 20 nautical miles (PLTRT, 2006). Based on Team 
discussions, we presumed that less than 50 percent of fishing vessels 
in the MAB would set multiple mainlines to compensate for the reduced 
maximum mainline length. Beginning in 2013, however, fishing vessels in 
the MAB shifted from deploying mostly single mainline sets to also 
setting multiple mainlines in the water at one time (hereinafter 
referred to as ``multi-sets'') (PLTRT, 2015). From 1992 to 2012, 
multiple mainlines set as part of a multi-set represented 1 percent of 
all mainlines observed on pelagic longline fishing vessels in the Mid-
Atlantic Bight, but increased to 47 percent from 2013 to 2015 (PLTRT, 
2015). Analyses showed that the rate of pilot whales interactions were 
higher in multi-sets compared to single mainline sets and that pelagic 
longline multi-sets had longer soak durations than a similar length 
single mainline set (PLTRT, 2015). In light of this information, the 
Team recommended that NMFS increase the maximum mainline length from 20 
nmi (37.04 km) to 32 nmi (59.26 km) (with some restrictions), but limit 
vessels to a single mainline in the water at any one time to limit the 
total length of active gear in the water and reduce soak duration 
(PLTRT, 2016).
    Comment 18: Several members of the ASTH commented on the impact 
this rule would have on vessels who are using a deep set longline 
technique, as this technique uses a longer mainline and more hooks to 
reach depth.
    Response: The current regulations prohibit commercial vessels from 
deploying a pelagic mainline that

[[Page 36970]]

exceeds 20 nmi (37.04 km) in length in the MAB (50 CFR 229.36(e)), 
unless authorized to do so for research purposes. This rule increases 
the maximum length of mainline in the MAB from 20 nmi (37.94 km) to 32 
nmi (59.26 km). This rule applies to the owner or operator of any 
vessel that has been issued or is required to be issued an Atlantic HMS 
tunas, swordfish, or shark permit under 50 CFR 635.4 and that has 
onboard pelagic longline gear as defined at 50 CFR 635.2 in the EEZ (as 
defined in 50 CFR 600.10). At this time, Atlantic pelagic longline 
vessels using the deep set fishing technique are considered to be part 
of the pelagic longline fishery and are, therefore, subject to this 
rule. If those vessels are considered active then they were considered 
in the economic analysis. However, because this fishing technique is 
relatively new in this fishery, there are limited data on how, when, 
and where this type of fishing occurs. As such, any data from vessels 
using this technique were treated the same as data from a standard 
pelagic longline vessel for the mainline length analysis. We will 
update the Team as new information on this fishing technique becomes 
available.
    Comment 19: The ASTH and two of their members commented how the 
analysis of the economic impacts does not take into account the adverse 
impact on vessels and small businesses that are presently deploying 
more than 32 nmi (59.26 km) of mainline, such as those deploying 
mainline that is 45 or 50 nmi in length.
    Response: The regulations prohibit commercial vessels from 
deploying a pelagic mainline that exceeds 20 nmi (37.04 km) in length 
in the MAB (50 CFR 229.36(e)), unless authorized to do so for research 
purposes. This rule increases the maximum length of mainline in the MAB 
from 20 nmi (37.94 km) to 32 nmi (59.26 km), and is, therefore, 
expected to generate an economic benefit. We did not analyze the 
economic impacts of vessels fishing in the MAB deploying more than 20 
nmi of mainline length along a single mainline because it exceeds the 
legal limit.
    Mainline lengths are not currently regulated outside of the MAB, 
and this rule does not change that. Vessels fishing longer mainlines, 
such as 45 or 50 nmi, outside the MAB may continue to do so and 
experience no economic impacts. As a result, no changes to the economic 
analysis were made in response to public comments and there were no 
significant changes to the fishery requiring modifications to the 
economic analysis.

Terminal Gear Requirements

    Comment 20: In the proposed rule, NMFS sought comments on the 
length of time necessary to implement the terminal gear regulations. 
Three commenters addressed the length of time needed for manufacturers 
and industry to implement the new terminal gear requirements. WDC and 
DOW noted that manufacturers may need time to produce new hooks, but 
were concerned about additional delays to implementing regulations. 
BWFA and Blue Water Fishing and Tackle Co. suggested that at least 1 
full year would be needed to plan and implement the hook design and 
inventory changes that would be needed, but recommended that the 
fishery be given no less than 18 months following the publication of 
the final rule to implement the new hook requirements in order to work 
through existing inventories of hooks that would not meet the new 
regulatory requirements.
    Response: We acknowledge these comments and to meet the competing 
conservation needs for the species and economic needs of the pelagic 
longline industry, we are delaying implementation of the new terminal 
gear requirements for 1 year from the effective date of the final rule.
    Comment 21: In the proposed rule, NMFS sought comments on whether 
the proposed strength for gangions is sufficient for ensuring that the 
proposed hooks will straighten before the gangion breaks. BWFA and Blue 
Water Fishing and Tackle Co. provided information in support of the 
proposed strengths and noted that the test of a leader is generally a 
minimum strength, which means a 300 lb (136.08 kg) leader would likely 
require more than 300 lb before breaking, and that the leaders are 
changed out regularly to avoid having them degrade and weaken over time 
through use. In contrast, the Commission, Oceana, and one member of the 
public provided comments indicating that the proposed breaking 
strengths would be insufficient.
    Response: We acknowledge and appreciate the information provided by 
the commenters. Based on these comments, we did not change the proposed 
strength for gangions (i.e., leaders or branch lines) or hooks. 
Additionally, we will update the monitoring plan and evaluate the 
effectiveness of the new terminal gear requirements as data become 
available.
    Comment 22: The Commission commented that it does not support the 
use of 18/0 hooks and recommended that ``NMFS select and implement the 
`hooks' sub-action of alternative 3'' and strike 18/0 from the 
regulatory text.
    Response: We acknowledge the Commission's comment. When the PLTRT 
developed this consensus recommendation in 2015, discussion focused on 
hook types, with Team members drawing on a combination of NMFS 
Southeast Fisheries Science Center analysis, weak hook study (C. 
Bergmann) and hook testing (McLellan et al., 2014 and McLellan 
unpublished data) to identify hooks more likely to straighten under the 
force of a hooked pilot whale, which included 18/0 circle hooks with a 
4.40 mm (0.173 in) wire diameter (PLTRT, 2015). Once the terminal gear 
requirements go into effect, we will monitor the use of such gear to 
determine whether there is any difference between the marine mammal 
bycatch on 16/0 and 18/0 hooks and reevaluate in the future with the 
Team, as needed.
    Comment 23: Oceana, WDC, DOW, and one member of the public 
commented on the importance of monitoring the effectiveness of the 
terminal gear requirements, including collecting and analyzing data on 
straightened hooks, bare leaders, and updating the observer information 
collected. Additionally, a member of the public encouraged NMFS to have 
fishery observers collect straightened hooks in order to try to 
genetically identify the species involved in the straightening.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the importance of monitoring the 
effectiveness of these requirements. We will update the monitoring plan 
and evaluate the effectiveness of the new measures as data becomes 
available. Additionally, one of the non-regulatory components of the 
Plan is to update observer protocols and fishery observer forms to 
increase information collected from marine mammal interaction and 
depredation events in the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery.
    Comment 24: Several members of the ASTH expressed opposition to the 
terminal gear requirements because they think they will lose target 
catch and commented that the adverse economic impact would be similar 
to the adverse economic impact of the weak-hook requirement in the Gulf 
of Mexico.
    Response: The weak hooks required by this final rule in the 
Atlantic EEZ are not the same as those required in the Gulf of Mexico. 
The hooks required by this final rule are stronger than the ones 
required in the Gulf of Mexico and are currently used by pelagic 
longline fishermen in the area. Additionally, NMFS will update the 
monitoring plan and will evaluate the effectiveness of

[[Page 36971]]

the new terminal requirements as data become available.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    In the proposed rule, NMFS solicited comments on several items: (1) 
whether the proposed strength for gangions is sufficient for ensuring 
that the proposed hooks will straighten before the gangion breaks, (2) 
the length of time necessary for hook manufacturers to produce and 
supply hooks that meet the new specifications as well as the length of 
time the industry would need to implement the use of hooks and gangions 
that meet new specifications in the fishery and (3) the clarity of the 
manner in which four fishing areas (Northeast Coast, Mid-Atlantic 
Bight, South Atlantic Bight, and Florida East Coast) are defined, as 
well as the consistency of the definitions. As described below, as a 
result of the comments received on the third question, NMFS is making 
changes to the proposed rule. Additionally, as a result of comments 
received on the second question, NMFS is delaying implementation of the 
terminal gear requirements. NMFS is not making other changes as a 
result of the public comments summarized earlier but has made 
clarifying changes as needed throughout the regulatory text.

Terminal Gear Strength

    NMFS requested comments regarding whether the proposed strength for 
gangions (at least 300 lb (136.08 kg), based on manufacturer 
specifications when new) is sufficient for ensuring that the proposed 
hooks (with a straightening force not to exceed 300 lb based on 
manufacturer's specifications when new and a diameter not to exceed 
4.05 mm (0.159 in) for size 16/0 hooks or 4.40 mm (0.173 in) for size 
18/0 hooks) will straighten before the gangion (i.e., leaders or branch 
lines) breaks, thereby allowing a short-finned pilot whale to self-
release. We received comments from industry indicating that (a) the 
test of a gangion is generally a minimum strength, which means a 300 lb 
leader would likely require more than 300 lbs before breaking, and (b) 
the leaders are changed out regularly, and therefore are unlikely to 
degrade and weaken over time through use. Based on these comments, NMFS 
did not change the terminal gear requirements from the proposed rule. 
However, in line with comments from stakeholders, NMFS will continue to 
monitor the effectiveness of this requirement and reassess with the 
Team at a future meeting.

Delayed Implementation of Terminal Gear Requirements

    NMFS requested comments concerning the length of time necessary for 
hook manufacturers to produce and supply hooks that meet the new 
specifications as well as the length of time the industry would need to 
implement the use of hooks and gangions that meet new specifications in 
the fishery.
    Based on comments received from industry that they would need at 
least 12 months to comply with the new specifications, NMFS delayed 
implementation of the terminal gear requirements by 1 year, commencing 
30 days after the date of publication of this rule, in effect allowing 
13 months for production and supply of hooks that meet the final rule 
specifications. NMFS also notes that there are available hooks that 
meet the specifications of the final rule currently used by the fleet. 
In line with comments from industry stakeholders, NMFS will monitor for 
any supply chain issues associated with this requirement during the 
delayed implementation period.

Clarification of Where Terminal Gear Regulations Apply

    The proposed rule defined three new fishing areas (NEC, SAB and 
FEC), in addition to the MAB, in order to identify where the terminal 
gear requirements would apply. NMFS requested comments regarding the 
clarity of the manner in which the areas are defined, as well as the 
consistency of the definitions.
    To simplify the regulations, NMFS is changing the manner in which 
it describes where the terminal gear requirements apply, though the 
geographic scope of these requirements is unchanged. The proposed rule 
defined three new areas that are widely known to the pelagic longline 
fishery because they are statistical reporting areas depicted on maps, 
but are not currently defined in regulations. The NEC, SAB and FEC 
areas, along with the MAB area, are equivalent to the U.S. Atlantic EEZ 
(east of the line of demarcation between the Atlantic Ocean and the 
Gulf of Mexico as defined in 50 CFR 600.105(c)). Therefore, NMFS is 
clarifying the regulatory text for enforcement purposes that the 
terminal gear requirements apply to the entire U.S. Atlantic EEZ (east 
of the line of demarcation between the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of 
Mexico as defined in 50 CFR 600.105(c)) and is removing the proposed 
definitions for the NEC, SAB, FEC areas from the final rule.
    Furthermore, for enforcement purposes, NMFS is clarifying the 
definition of the MAB (where the mainline length restrictions apply) by 
using specific references to the latitude and longitude coordinates to 
identify the area. NMFS is not changing the geographic scope of the MAB 
area.

Classification

    An Environmental Assessment has been prepared, analyzing the 
impacts on the human environment that would result from this action and 
determining that the action will not have significant environmental 
impacts upon implementation of the action. A copy of the EA is 
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
    This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of 
Executive Order 12866.
    No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been 
identified. In addition, no new reporting or recordkeeping compliance 
requirements are introduced in this final rule. This final rule 
contains no information collection requirements under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995.
    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 rule 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. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy 
of the SBA did not file any comments on the proposed rule. While NMFS 
received several public comments on the economic effects of weak hooks 
and mainline length requirements, no changes to this final rule were 
made in response to public comments and there were no significant 
changes to the fishery between the proposed and final rule. As a 
result, a final regulatory flexibility analysis was not required and 
none was prepared.

References

    A complete list of all references cited in this final rule, along 
with other supporting documents can be found in the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016-0105 and 
is available upon request from the NMFS Southeast Regional Office in 
St. Petersburg, FL (see ADDRESSES).

[[Page 36972]]

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 229

    Administrative practice and procedure, Fisheries, Marine mammals, 
Pelagic Longline.

    Dated: May 22, 2023.
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 229 is amended 
as follows:

PART 229--AUTHORIZATION FOR COMMERCIAL FISHERIES UNDER THE MARINE 
MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT OF 1972

0
1. The authority citation for part 229 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.


0
2. Effective July 6, 2023, in Sec.  229.3, revise paragraphs (t) and 
(u) to read as follows:


Sec.  229.3  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (t) It is prohibited to deploy or fish with pelagic longline gear 
(as defined in 50 CFR 635.2) in the EEZ (as defined in 50 CFR 600.10) 
of the Atlantic Ocean east of the line of demarcation between the 
Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico (as defined in 50 CFR 
600.105(c)), unless the vessel complies with the requirements specified 
in Sec.  229.36(c) and (d).
    (u) It is prohibited to deploy or fish with pelagic longline gear 
(as defined in 50 CFR 635.2) in the Mid-Atlantic Bight (as defined in 
Sec.  229.36(b)(2)) unless the vessel complies with paragraph (t) of 
this section and the requirements specified in Sec.  229.36(e).
* * * * *

0
3. Effective July 6, 2023, in Sec.  229.36:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) and (2);
0
b. Remove paragraphs (b)(3) and (4);
0
c. Remove and reserve paragraph (d); and
0
d. Revise paragraph (e).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  229.36  Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan (PLTRP).

    (a) Purpose and scope. The purpose of this section is to implement 
the PLTRP to reduce incidental mortality and serious injury of short-
finned pilot whales in the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery off the 
U.S. East Coast, a component of the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of 
Mexico large pelagics longline fishery. The requirements in this 
section apply to the owner or operator of any vessel that has been 
issued or is required to be issued an Atlantic HMS tunas, swordfish, or 
shark permit (under 50 CFR 635.4) and that has onboard pelagic longline 
gear (as defined at 50 CFR 635.2) in the EEZ (as defined in 50 CFR 
600.10) of the Atlantic Ocean east of the line of demarcation between 
the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico (as defined in 50 CFR 
600.105(c)).
    (b) * * *
    (1) Active gear means mainline in the water with gangions (as 
defined in 50 CFR 635.2) or hooks attached.
    (2) Mid-Atlantic Bight means the area bounded by rhumb lines 
connecting the following points: 43[deg] N 77[deg] W; 43[deg] N 71[deg] 
W; 35[deg] N 71[deg] W; 35[deg] N 77[deg] W; and 43[deg] N 77[deg] W.
* * * * *
    (e) Mainline gear restrictions. Vessels operating in the portion of 
the Mid-Atlantic Bight in the EEZ (as defined in 50 CFR 600.10) may not 
deploy pelagic longline gear unless the gear meets the following 
mainline specifications:
    (1) Mainline setting. There can only be one piece of mainline in 
the water at any time. If the gear breaks or parts after setting, the 
vessel owner or operator must make every effort to remove the 
additional portions of the gear as soon as possible.
    (2) Mainline length. Mainline length cannot exceed 32 nmi.
    (3) Active gear. There can be no more than 30 nmi of active gear.
    (4) Maximum active gear length. A section of active gear cannot 
exceed 20 nmi.
    (5) Gaps. Between any two parts of active gear, there must be a gap 
of at least 1 nmi.

0
4. Effective July 8, 2024, in Sec.  229.36, add paragraph (d) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  229.36  Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan (PLTRP).

* * * * *
    (d) Hook and gangion requirements. Vessels operating in the EEZ (as 
defined in 50 CFR 600.10) of the Atlantic Ocean east of the line of 
demarcation between the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico (as 
defined in 50 CFR 600.105(c)) can only possess, use, and deploy hooks 
and gangions that meet the following specifications:
    (1) Hooks. The hook shank must be constructed of corrodible round 
wire stock that can be measured with a caliper or other appropriate 
gauge and meet the following specifications:
    (i) A 16/0 circle hook must not exceed 4.05 mm (0.159 in) in 
diameter and straighten with a force not to exceed 300 lb (136.08 kg), 
based on manufacturer specifications when new.
    (ii) A 18/0 circle hook must not exceed 4.40 mm (0.173 in) in 
diameter and straighten with a force not to exceed 300 lb (136.08 kg), 
based on manufacturer specifications when new.
    (2) Gangions. Any gangion (as defined in Sec.  635.2 of this 
title), must meet all of the following specifications:
    (i) Made of monofilament nylon. No other line material (e.g., wire) 
may be used; however, crimps and chafing gear are allowed.
    (ii) Have a diameter of 1.8 mm (0.071 in) or larger.
    (iii) Have a breaking strength of at least 300 lb, based on 
manufacturer specifications when new.
    (3) Exception for transit. If pelagic longline gear is 
appropriately stowed, a vessel may transit through the EEZ of the 
Atlantic Ocean east of the line of demarcation between the Atlantic 
Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico (as defined in 50 CFR 600.105(c)) without 
meeting the gear requirements specified in this paragraph. For the 
purpose of this paragraph, transit means non-stop progression through 
an area without any fishing activity occurring. Longline gear is stowed 
appropriately if all gangions and hooks are disconnected from the 
mainline and are stowed on or below deck, hooks are not baited, and all 
buoys and weights are disconnected from the mainline and drum (buoys 
may remain on deck).
    (4) Exception for research. No person may possess, use, or deploy 
hooks other than what is described in this section unless they have a 
written letter of authorization on board from the Southeast Regional 
Administrator to conduct scientific or gear research for reducing 
bycatch in the pelagic longline fishery. In order to obtain a written 
letter of authorization, the research must be consistent with the 
regulations at 50 CFR part 635 and be designed to:
    (i) Advance the long-term goal of reducing mortality and serious 
injury of short-finned pilot whales in the Atlantic pelagic longline 
fishery to insignificant levels approaching a zero mortality and 
serious injury rate; or,
    (ii) Reduce the bycatch of other listed, threatened, or protected 
species in the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-11761 Filed 6-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P