80 FR 46519 - Fisheries off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan; Revision to Prohibited Species Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 150 (August 5, 2015)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 150 (August 5, 2015)
| Page Range | 46519-46520 | |
| FR Document | 2015-19157 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 2015)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 46519-46520] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-19157] [[Page 46519]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 660 [Docket No. 150112035-5658-02] RIN 0648-BE80 Fisheries off West Coast States; Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan; Revision to Prohibited Species Regulations AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: NMFS is issuing regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) to revise the prohibited species policy for highly migratory species off the U.S. West Coast. This action is necessary to accurately reflect the intent of the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species. DATES: The final rule is effective August 5, 2015. ADDRESSES: Copies of the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) and other supporting documents are available via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA-NMFS-2015-0006, or contact the Regional Administrator, William W. Stelle, Jr., NMFS West Coast Region, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Bldg 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0070, or RegionalAdministrator.WCRHMS@noaa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Taylor Debevec, NMFS, 562-980-4066. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On June 4, 2015, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (80 FR 31884) to resolve a discrepancy between the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species (HMS) \1\ and the regulations that implemented the FMP.\2\ This action was identified at the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) meeting in November 2014 and was discussed with broad support. The public comment period was open until July 19, 2015. No changes to the proposed rule were made in response to comments. This final rule is implemented under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq., by regulations at 50 CFR part 660. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/HMS-FMP-Jul11.pdf. \2\ Title 50, part 660, subpart K. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This final rule codifies two exceptions to the general prohibition on retention of prohibited species from the HMS FMP that were not included in the implementing regulations for the FMP. Species for which retention is, and will continue to be, prohibited are identified in the definition section, Sec. 660.702, under ``Prohibited species.'' This revision to the definition of ``prohibited species'' makes the language at Sec. 660.711(a) redundant and, therefore, it is deleted. Finally, the language at Sec. 660.705(e) clearly states the prohibition of targeting these species while fishing for HMS, as well as explicitly identifies all of the exceptions to the retention prohibition. These revisions make the regulations for prohibited species consistent with the policy and analysis of the HMS FMP. The proposed rule contains additional background information, including information on the history of the HMS FMP, the discrepancy between it and the regulations, and the need to rectify this discrepancy. Public Comments and Responses NMFS received one written public comment. The commenter expressed several concerns regarding more than one aspect of the rule, some being very similar; therefore, NMFS is responding to the common themes/ topics. The responses are summarized below. Specific issues that were beyond the scope of this rulemaking are not addressed here. Issue 1: The current HMS regulations already convey the prohibited species policy of the HMS FMP. Response: Three exceptions to the prohibited species policy were outlined in the FMP, but only one is in the regulations. Since two of the exceptions are missing, the regulations do not fully convey the intent of the FMP. Issue 2: The proposed revisions to the regulations would delete important aspects of the policy and do not make sense within the existing flow and outline of the subpart. Response: Although parts of the regulations (not the policy) are deleted, they are administrative in nature. The revisions remove nothing of substance, but rather reorganize the language for clarity and add the missing exceptions. Issue 3: The exceptions proposed for addition to the regulations have not been analyzed and are not consistent with the management plan. Response: These exceptions, which were written in the HMS FMP, were analyzed in the 2003 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the FMP. The EIS found that the prohibited species policy, including the exceptions, would ensure that neither the rare sharks nor the strict management of halibut and salmon are compromised by HMS fisheries. Issue 4: This action makes catching prohibited species legal. Response: The edited regulations continue to generally prohibit the retention of prohibited species, but add two limited circumstances in which they are allowed to be retained, as set forth in the FMP. Classification The Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, determined that this regulatory amendment under the HMS FMP is necessary for the conservation and management of the fishery, and that it is consistent with the MSA and other applicable laws. Administrative Procedure Act (APA) The Assistant Administrator finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This action revises the definition of prohibited species and codifies two exceptions to the general prohibition on retention of prohibited species. This action would benefit regulated entities by ensuring clarity in the definition of prohibited species, and consistency of the exceptions to the general prohibition on retention of prohibited species with the policy outlined in the HMS FMP, which allows for the retention of salmon and Pacific halibut, and basking, megamouth, and great white sharks under certain limited conditions. Executive Order 12866 This final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration during the proposed rule stage that this action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for the certification was published in the proposed rule and is not being repeated here. No comments were received regarding the certification. As a result, a final regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and one was not prepared. [[Page 46520]] List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: July 30, 2015. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is amended as follows: PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES 0 1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq. 0 2. In Sec. 660.702, revise the definition for ``Prohibited species'' to read as follows: Sec. 660.702 Definitions. * * * * * Prohibited species means any highly migratory species for which quotas or catch limits under the FMP have been achieved and the fishery closed; salmon; great white shark; basking shark; megamouth shark; and Pacific halibut. * * * * * 0 3. In Sec. 660.705, revise paragraph (e) to read as follows: Sec. 660.705 Prohibitions. * * * * * (e) When fishing for HMS, fail to return a prohibited species to the sea immediately with a minimum of injury, except under the following circumstances: (1) Any prohibited species may be retained for examination by an authorized observer or to return tagged fish as specified by the tagging agency. (2) Salmon may be retained if harvested in accordance with subpart H of this part, and other applicable law. (3) Great white sharks, basking sharks, and megamouth sharks may be retained if incidentally caught and subsequently sold or donated to a recognized scientific or educational organization for research or display purposes. (4) Pacific halibut may be retained if harvested in accordance with part 300, subpart E of this Title, and other applicable law. * * * * * Sec. 660.711 [Amended] 0 4. In Sec. 660.711, remove paragraph (a) and redesignate paragraphs (b) through (d) as (a) through (c). [FR Doc. 2015-19157 Filed 8-4-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 46519
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE comments. This final rule is Response: These exceptions, which
implemented under the Magnuson- were written in the HMS FMP, were
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Stevens Fishery Conservation and analyzed in the 2003 Environmental
Administration Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801, Impact Statement (EIS) for the FMP. The
et seq., by regulations at 50 CFR part EIS found that the prohibited species
50 CFR Part 660 660. policy, including the exceptions, would
This final rule codifies two exceptions ensure that neither the rare sharks nor
[Docket No. 150112035–5658–02]
to the general prohibition on retention the strict management of halibut and
RIN 0648–BE80 of prohibited species from the HMS salmon are compromised by HMS
FMP that were not included in the fisheries.
Fisheries off West Coast States; Highly implementing regulations for the FMP. Issue 4: This action makes catching
Migratory Species Fishery Species for which retention is, and will prohibited species legal.
Management Plan; Revision to continue to be, prohibited are identified
Prohibited Species Regulations Response: The edited regulations
in the definition section, § 660.702, continue to generally prohibit the
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries under ‘‘Prohibited species.’’ This retention of prohibited species, but add
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and revision to the definition of ‘‘prohibited two limited circumstances in which
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), species’’ makes the language at they are allowed to be retained, as set
Commerce. § 660.711(a) redundant and, therefore, it forth in the FMP.
ACTION: Final rule.
is deleted. Finally, the language at
§ 660.705(e) clearly states the Classification
SUMMARY: NMFS is issuing regulations prohibition of targeting these species The Administrator, West Coast
under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery while fishing for HMS, as well as Region, NMFS, determined that this
Conservation and Management Act explicitly identifies all of the exceptions regulatory amendment under the HMS
(MSA) to revise the prohibited species to the retention prohibition. These FMP is necessary for the conservation
policy for highly migratory species off revisions make the regulations for and management of the fishery, and that
the U.S. West Coast. This action is prohibited species consistent with the it is consistent with the MSA and other
necessary to accurately reflect the intent policy and analysis of the HMS FMP. applicable laws.
of the Fishery Management Plan for U.S. The proposed rule contains additional
West Coast Fisheries for Highly background information, including Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
Migratory Species. information on the history of the HMS The Assistant Administrator finds
DATES: The final rule is effective August FMP, the discrepancy between it and good cause to waive the 30-day delay in
5, 2015. the regulations, and the need to rectify the effective date of this action under 5
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Regulatory
this discrepancy. U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This action revises the
Impact Review (RIR) and other Public Comments and Responses definition of prohibited species and
supporting documents are available via NMFS received one written public codifies two exceptions to the general
the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// comment. The commenter expressed prohibition on retention of prohibited
www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA– several concerns regarding more than species. This action would benefit
NMFS–2015–0006, or contact the one aspect of the rule, some being very regulated entities by ensuring clarity in
Regional Administrator, William W. similar; therefore, NMFS is responding the definition of prohibited species, and
Stelle, Jr., NMFS West Coast Region, to the common themes/topics. The consistency of the exceptions to the
7600 Sand Point Way NE., Bldg 1, responses are summarized below. general prohibition on retention of
Seattle, WA 98115–0070, or Specific issues that were beyond the prohibited species with the policy
RegionalAdministrator.WCRHMS@ scope of this rulemaking are not outlined in the HMS FMP, which allows
noaa.gov. addressed here. for the retention of salmon and Pacific
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Issue 1: The current HMS regulations halibut, and basking, megamouth, and
Taylor Debevec, NMFS, 562–980–4066. already convey the prohibited species great white sharks under certain limited
policy of the HMS FMP. conditions.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Response: Three exceptions to the Executive Order 12866
Background prohibited species policy were outlined
On June 4, 2015, the National Marine in the FMP, but only one is in the This final rule has been determined to
Fisheries Service (NMFS) published a regulations. Since two of the exceptions be not significant for purposes of
proposed rule in the Federal Register are missing, the regulations do not fully Executive Order 12866.
(80 FR 31884) to resolve a discrepancy convey the intent of the FMP. Regulatory Flexibility Act
between the Fishery Management Plan Issue 2: The proposed revisions to the
(FMP) for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for regulations would delete important The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
Highly Migratory Species (HMS) 1 and aspects of the policy and do not make the Department of Commerce certified
the regulations that implemented the sense within the existing flow and to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
FMP.2 This action was identified at the outline of the subpart. Small Business Administration during
Pacific Fishery Management Council Response: Although parts of the the proposed rule stage that this action
(Council) meeting in November 2014 regulations (not the policy) are deleted, would not have a significant economic
and was discussed with broad support. they are administrative in nature. The impact on a substantial number of small
revisions remove nothing of substance, entities. The factual basis for the
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
The public comment period was open
until July 19, 2015. No changes to the but rather reorganize the language for certification was published in the
proposed rule were made in response to clarity and add the missing exceptions. proposed rule and is not being repeated
Issue 3: The exceptions proposed for here. No comments were received
1 http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/ addition to the regulations have not regarding the certification. As a result,
HMS-FMP-Jul11.pdf. been analyzed and are not consistent a final regulatory flexibility analysis is
2 Title 50, part 660, subpart K. with the management plan. not required and one was not prepared.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:23 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\05AUR1.SGM 05AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46669/page/1.svg)
![46520 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 150 / Wednesday, August 5, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 subpart E of this Title, and other The 2015 initial total allowable catch
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and applicable law. (TAC) for squids in the BSAI is 340
recordkeeping requirements. * * * * * metric tons as established by the final
2015 and 2016 harvest specifications for
Dated: July 30, 2015. § 660.711 [Amended] groundfish of the BSAI (80 FR 11919,
Samuel D. Rauch III, March 5, 2015).
■ 4. In § 660.711, remove paragraph (a)
Deputy Assistant Administrator for and redesignate paragraphs (b) through
Regulatory Programs, National Marine In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the
(d) as (a) through (c). Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–19157 Filed 8–4–15; 8:45 am] (Regional Administrator), has
For the reasons set out in the determined that the 2015 initial TAC of
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is amended squids in the BSAI has been reached.
as follows: Therefore, NMFS is requiring that
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE squids caught in the BSAI be treated as
PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST
COAST STATES prohibited species in accordance with
National Oceanic and Atmospheric § 679.21(b).
■ 1. The authority citation for part 660 Administration
Classification
continues to read as follows:
50 CFR Part 679
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. This action responds to the best
773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq. [Docket No. 141021887–5172–02] available information recently obtained
■ 2. In § 660.702, revise the definition RIN 0648–XE072 from the fishery. The Assistant
for ‘‘Prohibited species’’ to read as Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA
follows: Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic (AA), finds good cause to waive the
Zone Off Alaska; Squids in the Bering requirement to provide prior notice and
§ 660.702 Definitions. Sea and Aleutian Islands Management opportunity for public comment
* * * * * Area pursuant to the authority set forth at 5
Prohibited species means any highly U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is
migratory species for which quotas or AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries impracticable and contrary to the public
catch limits under the FMP have been Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and interest. This requirement is
achieved and the fishery closed; salmon; Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), impracticable and contrary to the public
great white shark; basking shark; Commerce. interest as it would prevent NMFS from
megamouth shark; and Pacific halibut. ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. responding to the most recent fisheries
* * * * * SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting retention data in a timely fashion and would
■ 3. In § 660.705, revise paragraph (e) to of squids in the Bering Sea and Aleutian delay prohibiting the retention of squids
read as follows: Islands management area (BSAI). This in the BSAI. NMFS was unable to
action is necessary because the 2015 publish a notice providing time for
§ 660.705 Prohibitions. public comment because the most
initial total allowable catch of squids in
* * * * * the BSAI has been reached. recent, relevant data only became
(e) When fishing for HMS, fail to available as of July 29, 2015.
DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local
return a prohibited species to the sea
time (A.l.t.), July 30, 2015, through 2400 The AA also finds good cause to
immediately with a minimum of injury,
hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2015. waive the 30-day delay in the effective
except under the following
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: date of this action under 5 U.S.C.
circumstances:
(1) Any prohibited species may be Obren Davis, 907–586–7228. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon
retained for examination by an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS the reasons provided above for waiver of
authorized observer or to return tagged manages the groundfish fishery in the prior notice and opportunity for public
fish as specified by the tagging agency. BSAI exclusive economic zone comment.
(2) Salmon may be retained if according to the Fishery Management This action is required by § 679.20
harvested in accordance with subpart H Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and § 679.21 and is exempt from review
of this part, and other applicable law. and Aleutian Islands management area under Executive Order 12866.
(3) Great white sharks, basking sharks, (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
and megamouth sharks may be retained Fishery Management Council under
if incidentally caught and subsequently authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Dated: July 30, 2015.
sold or donated to a recognized Fishery Conservation and Management Emily H. Menashes,
scientific or educational organization for Act. Regulations governing fishing by Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
research or display purposes. U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
(4) Pacific halibut may be retained if appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 [FR Doc. 2015–19094 Filed 7–30–15; 4:15 pm]
harvested in accordance with part 300, and 50 CFR part 679. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:23 Aug 04, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\05AUR1.SGM 05AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_46669/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-23 10:53:07
Document Modified: 2018-02-23 10:53:07
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | The final rule is effective August 5, 2015. | |
| Contact | Taylor Debevec, NMFS, 562-980-4066. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 46519 | |
| RIN Number | 0648-BE80 | |
| CFR Associated | Fisheries; Fishing and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR