![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; Framework Adjustment 6
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: May 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 93)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27981-27984]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15my06-16]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 060503118-6118-01; I.D. 042606E]
RIN 0648-AT26
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder,
Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; Framework Adjustment 6
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes measures contained in Framework Adjustment 6
(Framework 6) to the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) that would allow regional conservation
equivalency in the summer flounder recreational fishery. The intent is
to provide flexibility and efficiency to the management of the summer
flounder recreational fishery, specifically by expanding the suite of
management tools available when conservation equivalency is implemented.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
? E-mail: FSBFW6@noaa.gov. Include in the subject line the
following identifier: ``Comments on Summer Flounder Framework 6.''
? Federal e-rulemaking portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
? Mail: Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, NMFS,
Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.
Mark the outside of the envelope: ``Comments on Summer Flounder
Framework 6.''
? Fax: (978) 281-9135.
Copies of the Environmental Assessment, Regulatory Impact Review,
and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) are available
from Daniel Furlong, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South New Street,
Dover, DE 19901-6790. The EA/RIR/IRFA is also accessible via the
Internet at http://www.nero.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah McLaughlin, Fishery Policy
Analyst, (978) 281-9279.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass fisheries are managed
cooperatively by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
(Commission) and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council),
in consultation with the New England and South Atlantic Fishery
Management Councils.
The management units specified in the FMP include summer flounder
(Paralichthys dentatus) in U.S. waters of the Atlantic Ocean from the
southern border of North Carolina northward to the U.S./Canada border,
and scup (Stenotomus chrysops) and black sea bass (Centropristis
striata) in U.S. waters of the Atlantic Ocean from 35[deg]15.3' N. lat.
(the latitude of Cape Hatteras Lighthouse, Buxton, NC) northward to the
U.S./Canada border.
The FMP and its implementing regulations, which are found at 50 CFR
part 648, subparts A (General Provisions), G (summer flounder), H
(scup), and I (black sea bass), describe the process for specifying
annual recreational measures that apply in the Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ). The states manage these fisheries within 3 miles of their
coasts, under the Commission's plan for summer flounder, scup, and
black sea bass. The Federal regulations govern vessels fishing in the
EEZ, as well as vessels possessing a Federal fisheries permit,
regardless of where they fish.
The Council and the Commission seek to expand the suite of
management tools available for management of the summer flounder
recreational fishery when conservation equivalency is recommended by
the Council. The Council initiated Framework 6, pursuant to Sec.
648.108, in order to address issues related to the administration of
the summer flounder recreational fishery, while continuing to achieve
the management objectives of the FMP. Framework 6 complements Addendum
XVII to the Interstate Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass FMP.
In 2001, NMFS implemented Framework Adjustment 2 to the FMP
(Framework 2), which established a process that makes conservation
equivalency an option for the summer flounder recreational fishery (66
FR 36208, July 11, 2001). Conservation equivalency allows each state to
establish its own recreational management measures (possession limits,
minimum fish size, and fishing seasons) to achieve its state harvest
limit, as long as the combined effect of all of the states' management
measures achieves the same level of conservation as would Federal
coastwide measures developed to achieve the overall recreational
harvest limit. Conservation equivalency has been approved for the
summer flounder recreational fishery each year since 2002.
During the development of Framework 2, the Council considered but
did not approve an alternative that would divide the recreational
harvest limit into three subregions: Northern (MA, RI, CT), Central
(NY, NJ, DE), and Southern (MD, Potomac River Fisheries Commission, VA,
and NC). Development of Framework 6 was necessary to allow for
modification of the state-specific conservation equivalency procedures
as established in Framework 2. Framework 6 would allow for the
voluntary formation of multi-state regions by two or more adjacent
states for the purpose of setting regional, conservation-equivalent
recreational summer flounder fishing measures. Using guidelines
approved by both the Council and the Commission, multi-state
conservation equivalency regions would develop fishing measures (i.e.,
minimum fish size, possession limits, and fishing seasons) intended to
maximize landings in the region, without resulting in overages of the
regional targets (in number of fish). All states forming a region would
be required to implement identical recreational fishery regulations.
Currently, the Council and Board recommend annually that either state-
[[Page 27982]]
specific recreational measures be developed (conservation equivalency)
or coastwide management measures be implemented by all states to ensure
that the recreational harvest limit will not be exceeded. The
Commission's conservation equivalency guidelines require the states to
determine and implement appropriate state-specific management measures
to achieve state-specific harvest limits. Under this approach, each
state may implement unique management measures appropriate to that
state, so long as these measures are determined by the Commission to
provide equivalent conservation as would Federal coastwide measures
developed to achieve the overall recreational harvest limit.
For each fishing year, if the Council recommends conservation
equivalency, the Board requires that each state submit its conservation
equivalency proposal to the Commission by January 15. The Commission's
Summer Flounder Technical Committee then evaluates the proposals and
advises the Board of each proposal's consistency with respect to
achieving the coastwide recreational harvest limit. The Commission
invites public participation in its review process by allowing public
comment on the state proposals at the Technical Committee meeting and
Board meeting. The Board meets in February to approve or disapprove the
state management proposals. Once the states select and submit their
final summer flounder management measures to the Commission, the
Commission officially notifies NMFS as to which state proposals have
been approved or disapproved. NMFS retains the final authority to
either approve or disapprove using conservation equivalency in place of
the coastwide measures and publishes its determination in the final
rule establishing the annual recreational measures for these fisheries.
If conservation equivalency is recommended, and following
confirmation that the proposed state measures would achieve
conservation equivalency, NMFS may waive the permit condition found at
Sec. 648.4(b), which requires federally permitted vessels to comply
with the more restrictive management measures when state and Federal
measures differ. Federally permitted charter/party permit holders and
recreational vessels fishing for summer flounder in the EEZ then would
be subject to the recreational fishing measures implemented by the
state in which they land summer flounder, rather than the coastwide
measures. In addition, the Council and the Board must recommend
precautionary default measures. The precautionary default measures
would be assigned to any state that either does not submit a summer
flounder management proposal to the Commission's Summer Flounder
Technical Committee, or that submits measures that are determined not
to achieve the required reduction. The precautionary default measures
are defined as the set of measures that would achieve the greatest
reduction in landings required for any state.
Under Framework 6, multi-state conservation equivalency measures
for each region would be developed in the same manner as state-specific
conservation equivalency measures, as specified in Framework 2. The
procedures and timeline associated with development of summer flounder
recreational management measures as determined in Framework 2 would
also apply to multi-state conservation equivalency, i.e., with regard
to distribution of multi-state conservation equivalency guidelines by
the Commission to each state, distribution of multi-state conservation
equivalency proposals to the Commission's Summer Flounder Technical
Committee, evaluation of conservation equivalency proposals, and
approval or disapproval of the proposals.
The recreational harvest limit for a multi-state region would be
the sum of the harvest limits for all of the states volunteering to
form that region. The Summer Flounder Technical Committee would develop
region-specific tables as necessary for use by a multi-state region in
determining recreational management measures expected to constrain
recreational landings to the regional harvest limit. For the purpose of
explanation, it should be assumed that a state or region makes its
plans for the current calendar year at the beginning of the calendar
year. To determine the multi-state conservation equivalency measures
for a current year, the prior year's recreational landings would be
pooled among the inclusive states and then compared to the current
year's region-specific recreational harvest limit to determine if any
reduction in landings would be required of that region. Each multi-
state region would then craft their regulations under the same
guidelines used to develop state-specific conservation equivalency
measures and under the same timeline identified in Framework 2.
There are two possible scenarios for how states could proceed based
on whether a region decides to maintain their voluntary regional
agreement or decides to dissolve the voluntary multi-state region and
resume state-specific conservation equivalency. First, in the event
that a multi-state region maintains its voluntary conservation
equivalency agreement, the region would again compare its regional
recreational landings for the prior year to the current year's region-
specific recreational harvest limit to determine if any necessary
reductions in landings would be required of that region. The region
would then adjust their regulations such that the region-specific
harvest limit would be achieved. Second, in the event the region
dissolves its agreement and opts for state-specific conservation
equivalency, state-specific harvest limits would apply and individual
states would compare their state-specific landings for the prior year
to the state-specific harvest limits in the current year. Each state
would then adjust their regulations such that the state-specific
harvest limits would be achieved. As established for individual states
in Framework 2, a multi-state region that does not exceed its regional
harvest limit in a given year may be allowed to set less restrictive
management measures for the following year, if the following year's
regional harvest limit is greater than the current year's regional
landings.
NMFS proposes to expand the scope of the regulations at Sec.
648.100(e) to allow states and/or multi-state regions to implement
conservation equivalent recreational fishing measures. The conservation
equivalency regulations at Sec. 648.107 would continue to apply, i.e.,
references to ``state'' would not be modified, since individual states
are ultimately responsible for implementation of the conservation
equivalent regulations (including those approved for a multi-state region).
Need for Clarification/Correction
NMFS has identified the need to clarify and to correct the
regulations regarding summer flounder commercial gear restrictions.
This proposed rule would clarify (at Sec. 648.104(b)) that, although
the minimum mesh size requirements specified for otter trawls would not
apply for a vessel issued a summer flounder small-mesh exemption
letter, other restrictions in part 648 may limit the area in which the
exemption letter may be used. This proposed rule would correct the
reference to net stowage requirements at Sec. 648.104(b)(1) to be
Sec. 648.104(e) rather than Sec. 648.100(e) as it was inadvertently
published in a final rule that consolidated regulations governing
multiple marine fisheries of the Northeast region into one new CFR part
(61 FR 34966, July 3, 1996).
[[Page 27983]]
In addition, NMFS proposes a non-substantive modification to the
regulatory text at Sec. 648.107(b) for clarification purposes.
Classification
NMFS has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the
FMP and preliminarily determined that the rule is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other
applicable laws.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
An IRFA was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this
proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description
of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this
action are contained at the beginning of this section of the preamble
and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A summary of the analysis
follows. A copy of this analysis is available from the Council (see
ADDRESSES).
This proposed rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with
other Federal rules.
The proposed action could affect any recreational angler who fishes
for summer flounder in the EEZ or on a party/charter vessel issued a
Federal permit for summer flounder. However, the IRFA focuses upon the
impacts on party/charter vessels issued a Federal summer flounder
permit because these vessels are considered small business entities for
the purposes of the RFA, i.e., businesses with receipts (gross
revenues) of up to $6.5 million. These small entities can be
specifically identified in the Federal vessel permit database and would
be impacted by the recreational measures, regardless of whether they
fish in Federal or state waters.
Data from the Northeast permit application database indicates that
in 2004 there were 803 party/charter vessels permitted to take part in
the summer flounder, scup, and/or black sea bass recreational fisheries
in the EEZ. Of those 803 party/charter vessels, 56 held a summer
flounder permit alone, and 683 held a summer flounder permit in
combination with a scup permit, black sea bass permit, or both.
However, only 284 of these vessels reported active participation in the
recreational summer flounder fishery in 2004. Although individual
recreational anglers may be impacted, they are not considered small
entities under the RFA. Also, there is no permit requirement to
participate in these fisheries; thus, it would be difficult to quantify
any impacts on recreational anglers in general.
In the EA/RIR/IRFA, the no-action alternative (i.e., maintenance of
the regulations as codified) is defined as continuance of the state-
specific conservation equivalency procedures as established in
Framework 2. The implications of the no-action alternative are not
substantial. State-specific summer flounder conservation equivalency,
which was designed to constrain landings to the annual recreational
harvest limit while allowing states the flexibility of determining
their own recreational management measures, has been recommended by the
Council and approved by NMFS each year since 2002.
The proposed action is not expected to result in negative impacts
to a significant number of small entities participating in the
recreational summer flounder fishery, relative to the status quo. The
coastwide recreational harvest limit for summer flounder would not be
altered. Multi-state conservation equivalency regions will develop
fishing measures that maximize the harvest of the region-specific
limit, without resulting in overages. This is similar to what is
currently done on a state-specific basis when conservation equivalency
is implemented, but on a larger scale. It is expected that the
conservation equivalent recreational management measures would allow
each state or multi-state region to develop specific summer flounder
recreational measures that allow the fishery to operate during critical
fishing periods, while still achieving conservation goals and
mitigating potential adverse economic effects in specific states.
There are no new reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained
in any of the alternatives considered for this action.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 09, 2006.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 648.100, paragraphs (e)(2) introductory text,
(e)(2)(i), and (e)(2)(ii) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.100 Catch quotas and other restrictions.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) Conservation equivalent measures. Individual states or regions
formed voluntarily by adjacent states (i.e., multi-state conservation
equivalency regions) may implement different combinations of minimum
fish sizes, possession limits, and closed seasons that achieve
equivalent conservation as the coastwide measures established under
paragraph (e)(1) of this section. Each state or multi-state
conservation equivalency region may implement measures by mode or area
only if the proportional standard error of Marine Recreational
Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) landings estimates by mode or area
for that state are less than 30 percent.
(i) After review of the recommendations, the Regional Administrator
will publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register on or about March
1 to implement the overall percent adjustment in recreational landings
required for the fishing year, the Council and Commission's
recommendation concerning conservation equivalency, the precautionary
default measures, and coastwide measures.
(ii) During the public comment period on the proposed rule, the
Commission will review conservation equivalency proposals and determine
whether or not they achieve the necessary adjustment to recreational
landings. The Commission will provide the Regional Administrator with
the individual state and/or multi-state region conservation measures
for the approved state and/or multi-state region proposals, and in the
case of disapproved state and/or multi-state region proposals, the
precautionary default measures.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 648.104, paragraphs (b) introductory text and (b)(1)
are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.104 Gear restrictions.
* * * * *
(b) Exemptions. Unless otherwise restricted by this part, the
minimum mesh-size requirements specified in
[[Page 27984]]
paragraph (a)(1) of this section do not apply to:
(1) Vessels issued a summer flounder moratorium permit, a summer
flounder small-mesh exemption area letter of authorization (LOA),
required under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, and fishing from
November 1 through April 30 in the exemption area, which is east of the
line that follows 72[deg]30.0' W. long. until it intersects the outer
boundary of the EEZ (copies of a map depicting the area are available
upon request from the Regional Administrator). Vessels fishing under
the LOA shall not fish west of the line. Vessels issued a permit under
Sec. 648.4(a)(3)(iii) may transit the area west or south of the line,
if the vessel's fishing gear is stowed in a manner prescribed under
Sec. 648.104(e), so that it is not ``available for immediate use''
outside the exempted area. The Regional Administrator may terminate
this exemption if he/she determines, after a review of sea sampling
data, that vessels fishing under the exemption are discarding more than
10 percent, by weight, of their entire catch of summer flounder per
trip. If the Regional Administrator makes such a determination, he/she
shall publish notification in the Federal Register terminating the
exemption for the remainder of the exemption season.
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 648.107, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.107 Conservation equivalent measures for the summer flounder
fishery.
* * * * *
(b) Federally permitted vessels subject to the recreational fishing
measures of this part, and other recreational fishing vessels subject
to the recreational fishing measures of this part and registered in
states whose fishery management measures are not determined by the
Regional Administrator to be the conservation equivalent of the season,
minimum size and possession limit prescribed in Sec. Sec. 648.102,
648.103(b) and 648.105(a), respectively, due to the lack of, or the
reversal of, a conservation equivalent recommendation from the Summer
Flounder Board of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission,
shall be subject to the following precautionary default measures:
Season - January 1 through December 31; minimum size - 18 inches (45.7
cm); and possession limit - one fish.
[FR Doc. E6-7357 Filed 5-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S