Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Skate Complex (Skate) Fisheries; Skate Fishery Management Plan

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
 
[Federal Register: June 4, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 107)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 33432-33442]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04jn03-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 030519127-3127-01; I.D. 042403A]
RIN 0648-AO10
 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast 
Skate Complex (Skate) Fisheries; Skate Fishery Management Plan

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement the Northeast (NE) 
Skate Fishery Management Plan (FMP). This proposed rule would 
establish: A possession limit for skate wings; a bait-only exemption to 
the wing possession limit restrictions; a procedure for the 
development, revision, and/or review of management measures on an 
annual, biennial, and interannual basis, including a framework 
adjustment process; open access permitting requirements for fishing 
vessels, operators, and dealers; new species-level reporting 
requirements for skate vessels and dealers; new discard reporting 
requirements for Federal vessels; and prohibitions on possessing smooth 
skates in the Gulf of Maine (GOM) Regulated Mesh Area (RMA), and thorny 
skates and barndoor skates throughout the management unit. This 
proposed rule would also implement other measures for administration 
and enforcement. The purpose of this proposed action is to manage the 
NE skate complex pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 
and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and the FMP and to prevent 
overfishing of skate resources.

DATES: Comments must be received at the appropriate address or fax 
number, (See ADDRESSES), on or before 5:00 p.m., local time, on July 7, 
2003.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to Patricia A. Kurkul, 
Regional Administrator, NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn 
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope, 
``Comments on Skate FMP.'' Comments also may be sent via facsimile 
(fax) to (978) 281-9135. Comments will not be accepted if submitted via 
e-mail or Internet.
    Comments regarding the collection-of-information requirements 
contained in this proposed rule should be sent to the Regional 
Administrator and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503 (Attn: NOAA 
Desk Officer).
    Copies of the FMP, its Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement (FEIS) are available from Paul J. Howard, Executive 
Director, New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, The 
Tannery-Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Pentony, Senior Policy 
Analyst, 978-281-9283, fax 978-281-9135.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FMP was developed by the New England Fishery Management Council 
(Council) in response to concerns that the continued harvest and 
increased landings in the skate fisheries required implementation of 
management measures to prevent overfishing and to allow for the 
collection of catch information on the status of the stocks. A notice 
of availability for the FMP was published in the Federal Register on 
May 1, 2003 (68 FR 23275). The comment period on the FMP ends on June 
30, 2003.

[[Page 33433]]

    Skates are harvested in two very different fisheries, one for 
lobster bait and one for wings for human consumption. The fishery for 
lobster bait is a more traditional and directed skate fishery that 
lands skates in whole form. The bait fishery involves vessels, 
primarily from ports in southern New England that target a combination 
of little skates (estimated to be £90 percent of landings) 
and, to a much lesser extent, juvenile winter skates (£10 
percent of landings). Juvenile winter skates and little skates are 
difficult to differentiate due to their nearly identical appearance. 
The fishery for skate wings evolved in the 1990s as skates were 
promoted as an underutilized species, and fishermen shifted effort from 
groundfish and other troubled fisheries to skates and dogfish. The wing 
fishery is a more incidental fishery that involves a larger number of 
vessels located throughout the region. Vessels tend to catch skates 
when targeting other species such as groundfish, monkfish, and 
scallops, and land them if the price is sufficient to warrant the labor 
associated with cutting the wings.
    On January 15, 1999, NMFS requested information from the public on 
barndoor skate for possible inclusion on the list of candidate species 
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In March and April 1999, 
several petitions were received from conservation groups requesting 
that NMFS immediately list barndoor skate as an endangered or 
threatened species and designate Georges Bank and other appropriate 
areas as critical habitat. This provided the impetus to complete a 
benchmark stock assessment for the entire skate complex. NMFS 
identified the need to develop an FMP to end overfishing and rebuild 
the resources based on the conclusions presented in late 1999 at the 
30th Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW 30).
    In March 2000, NMFS informed the Council of its decision to 
designate it as the responsible body for the development and management 
of the seven species included in the NE skate complex. In November 
2000, the Council's Skate Committee approved the scoping document for 
the FMP. During the development of the FMP, the Skate Plan Development 
Team (PDT) continued to update the status determinations for the skate 
species based on the biomass reference points used during SAW 30. 
Currently (through the autumn 2001 survey), only two species remain in 
an overfished condition: Barndoor and thorny skates. In January 2001, 
the Council published a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS) in the Federal Register, officially beginning 
the Council's FMP scoping process (66 FR 91).
    On September 27, 2002, NMFS published its findings relative to the 
petitions to list barndoor skate as an endangered species as a notice 
of petition finding in the Federal Register at 68 FR 61005. After 
review of the best available scientific and commercial information, 
NMFS determined that listing the barndoor skate was not warranted at 
this time. The following factors all indicate a positive trend for 
barndoor skate populations: Recent increases in abundance of barndoor 
skate observed during trawl surveys; the expansion of known areas where 
barndoor skate have been encountered; increases in size range; and an 
increase in the number of small barndoor skates collected.
    The Council held four public hearings on the draft FMP to provide 
an opportunity for public testimony by industry and other interested 
parties. During the public hearings, industry members expressed 
concerns about species identification problems in relation to the 
reporting requirements, as well as the species prohibitions (i.e., 
barndoor and thorny skates throughout their range, and smooth skates in 
the GOM RMA). Provincetown fishermen supported the lower trip limits, 
while New Bedford fishermen supported the higher trip limits. In terms 
of the proposed species prohibitions, many people were concerned about 
the potential for inadvertent retention of prohibited species that may 
result in violations, especially on high-volume trips. For this reason, 
some industry members did not support the prohibitions on possession 
and instead supported prohibitions on landing or sale. Overall, 
however, the proposed measures were generally well-supported and 
everyone who attended the public hearings and commented on the draft 
FMP agreed that it was important to collect more and better information 
on the skate resources.
    Very little information is available about the individual skate 
species and the fisheries of which they are a component. Because skates 
have not been managed through a Federal FMP, few accurate and complete 
fishery data are available (e.g., landings and discards by species, 
amount of skate bait sold directly to lobster vessels, etc.). While 
developing the measures proposed in the FMP, the Council wrestled with 
difficult issues related to overfishing definition reference points and 
appropriate management measures to address individual skate species in 
need of rebuilding. Moreover, effective plan monitoring and appropriate 
recommendations for management adjustments, especially for fisheries in 
which skates are caught incidentally, hinge on the availability of more 
comprehensive information about these species, which will come once the 
FMP is implemented.
    The biological, economic, and social impacts of these measures and 
the cumulative impacts associated with other FMPs and regulations are 
discussed in the FMP and FEIS.

Status of the Stock Complex

    There are no direct estimates of biomass available for the seven 
individual skate species in the complex, so biomass indices from the 
Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) trawl surveys have been used 
to characterize stock size. More specifically, for each species in the 
complex, information on the weight of the catch per tow (kg/tow) from 
the most representative trawl survey series over the longest possible 
time span was assembled. The data in the selected series were then used 
to characterize the distribution of biomass over the examined time 
period. Finally, candidate reference points were selected from the 
distribution so as to provide proxies for biomass targets that have a 
high probability of correctly characterizing the stock level that 
produces maximum sustainable yield (MSY).
    For the aggregate skate complex, the NEFSC spring survey index of 
biomass was relatively constant from 1968 to 1980, then increased 
significantly to peak levels in the mid to late 1980s. The biomass of 
large-sized skates (barndoor, winter, and thorny) has declined steadily 
since the mid-1980s, while the recent increase in aggregate skate 
biomass has been attributed to an increase in little skates.

Overfishing Definitions

    This FMP proposes overfishing definitions for each of the seven 
skate species in the complex, in accordance with the national standards 
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries 
Act (SFA) of 1996. Determining the maximum fishing mortality rate (F) 
threshold for the skate species is problematic, given the current 
inability to directly estimate fishery exploitation rates. Therefore, 
the approach chosen by the Council was to use biomass levels indexed by 
the NEFSC trawl surveys as an indicator of exploitation. More 
specifically, a decline in the biomass of a species (for several years 
or based on a moving average), would indicate that current/

[[Page 33434]]

recent removals are in excess of the stock's ability to maintain its 
current population size. If an analysis of biomass levels leads to the 
determination of overexploitation, the Council would adopt measures to 
eliminate overfishing via either a framework adjustment or an amendment 
to the FMP.
    The thresholds for F are based on annual percentage declines of the 
three-year average of the NEFSC trawl survey (spring or autumn, 
depending on the species). The percentages are specified for each 
species individually, based on historical variation within the survey. 
The F thresholds also include a precautionary ``backstop'' that 
indicates that overfishing is occurring if the trawl survey mean weight 
per tow declines for three consecutive years. The reference points and 
selected time series could be re-specified through a peer-review 
process and/or as updated stock assessments are completed.

Winter and thorny skates

    Winter and thorny skates would be considered to be in an overfished 
condition when the three-year moving average of the autumn survey mean 
weight per tow is less than one-half of the 75th percentile of the mean 
weight per tow observed in the autumn trawl survey from the selected 
reference time series. Overfishing would be considered to be occurring 
when the three-year moving average of the autumn survey mean weight per 
tow declines by 20 percent or more, or when the autumn survey mean 
weight per tow declines for three consecutive years.

Smooth and clearnose skates

    Smooth and clearnose skates would be considered to be in an 
overfished condition when the three-year moving average of the autumn 
survey mean weight per tow is less than one-half of the 75th percentile 
of the mean weight per tow observed in the autumn trawl survey from the 
selected reference time series. Overfishing would be considered to be 
occurring when the three-year moving average of the autumn survey mean 
weight per tow declines by 30 percent or more, or when the autumn 
survey mean weight per tow declines for three consecutive years.

Barndoor skate

    Barndoor skate would be considered to be in an overfished condition 
when the three-year moving average of the autumn survey mean weight per 
tow is less than one-half of the mean weight per tow observed in the 
autumn trawl survey from 1963-1966 (currently 0.81 kg/tow). Overfishing 
would be considered to be occurring when the three-year moving average 
of the autumn survey mean weight per tow declines by 30 percent or 
more, or when the autumn survey mean weight per tow declines for three 
consecutive years.

Little skate

    Little skate would be considered to be in an overfished condition 
when the three-year moving average of the spring survey mean weight per 
tow is less than one-half of the 75th percentile of the mean weight per 
tow observed in the spring trawl survey from the selected reference 
time series. Overfishing would be considered to be occurring when the 
three-year moving average of the spring survey mean weight per tow 
declines by 20 percent or more, or when the spring survey mean weight 
per tow declines for three consecutive years.

Rosette skate

    Rosette skate would be considered to be in an overfished condition 
when the three-year moving average of the autumn survey mean weight per 
tow is less than one-half of the 75th percentile of the mean weight per 
tow observed in the autumn trawl survey from the selected reference 
time series. Overfishing would be considered to be occurring when the 
three-year moving average of the autumn survey mean weight per tow 
declines by 60 percent or more, or when the autumn survey mean weight 
per tow declines for three consecutive years.
    These proposed overfishing definitions incorporate the biomass 
targets and thresholds that were developed at SAW 30. The FMP contains 
additional discussion of the rationale for the biomass reference points 
for each skate species.

Optimum Yield (OY)

    The SAW 30 Working Group determined that the traditional approaches 
that are used to estimate MSY are not appropriate in the case of skates 
for two principal reasons: There is no reliable time series of 
commercial fishery landings or discards for any of the individual 
species, and the time series for the complex as a whole is considered 
to be incomplete; and, very little reliable and current growth and 
maturity information is available for any of the species in the complex 
and very little information is available on the length composition of 
the landings and discards. Together, these factors preclude the 
estimation of MSY from sequential population (e.g., age- or length-
based virtual population analysis), biomass dynamics (e.g., surplus 
production models), or dynamic pool models (e.g., yield-per-recruit 
analysis). Therefore, MSY for the individual skate species and/or the 
complex as a whole cannot be estimated at this time. A discussion of 
the alternative methodologies that were considered to estimate MSY 
(e.g., sequential population analysis, dynamic pool models, catch 
history models, etc.) and the conclusions that were drawn are provided 
in the FMP.
    The National Standard Guidelines (NSGs) allow the specification of 
a fishery-wide OY for a mixed-stock fishery, where management measures 
for separate target harvest levels for individual stocks may be 
specified, but are not required. For the same reasons discussed 
relative to MSY, these approaches cannot be adopted to estimate OY at 
this time.
    The following OY specifications for each species in the NE skate 
complex are based on the management measures that the Council included 
in the FMP. Consistent with the NSGs, the Council intends that OY 
cannot exceed MSY or the allowable portion of MSY necessary to be 
consistent with the MSY-based control rule. As better fishery 
information becomes available, these OY specifications may be revised 
and/or refined.

Winter skate

    Because fishery data are lacking, there is currently no time series 
of catch or landings of winter skate on which to base an absolute 
specification of OY. The OY for winter skate would therefore be defined 
as the amount of winter skates that are harvested legally under the 
provisions of the FMP and the yield that results from the management 
measures in other fisheries, to the extent that these measures further 
impact (and likely reduce) the harvest of winter skates.

Little skate

    Since abundance of the little skate resource has increased 
considerably over a time period that coincides with the operation of 
the bait fishery, it can be assumed that the resource is being 
harvested at an F that is below FMSY. The OY for little skate would 
therefore be defined as the amount of little skates that are harvested 
for bait legally under the provisions of the FMP.

Smooth, thorny, and barndoor skates

    The interaction of skate fishing and multispecies fishing suggests 
that even more benefits will be afforded to smooth, thorny, and 
barndoor skates as fishing effort is reduced further in the NE 
multispecies fishery. Moreover, the year-round groundfish closed areas 
in

[[Page 33435]]

the GOM, as they are currently defined, provide a great deal of 
protection to smooth, thorny, and barndoor skates.
    Because barndoor and thorny skates are currently in an overfished 
condition, the Council is proposing management action to rebuild these 
resources to their long-term sustainable level. Smooth skate is not 
overfished, but it has not yet rebuilt to its long-term biomass target. 
Therefore, to be as precautionary as possible, the Council proposes to 
set the OY for smooth, thorny, and barndoor skates at zero.

Clearnose and rosette skates

    Since abundance of the clearnose and rosette skates have increased 
considerably over a time period and in an area that coincides with the 
operation of many fisheries, it can be assumed that the resources are 
being harvested at an F that is below FMSY. Therefore, the OY for 
clearnose and rosette skates is proposed to be defined as the amount of 
clearnose and rosette skates that are harvested legally under the 
provisions of the FMP.
    Even in this situation of extremely sparse data, it is possible to 
judge whether current management strategies are sustainable or whether 
fishing effort needs to be curtailed to facilitate rebuilding. The 
Council has specified management measures in this FMP and in other 
fisheries that enhance the probability of future stock increases, with 
the expectation that progressively more data will become available to 
continually evaluate management strategies and more reliably estimate 
SFA reference points over time. Therefore, the specification of MSY and 
OY would be items that the Council could adjust through a framework 
adjustment to the FMP, provided that the specifications would not 
require management adjustments that are outside of the range of 
management measures that may be changed under the framework adjustment 
process.

Management Area

    The boundaries of the management area, also called the management 
unit, would be limited to the waters north of 35[deg]
15.3' N. lat., 
bounded by the coastline of the continental United States in the west 
and north, and the Hague Line and the seaward extent of the U.S. 
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the east. These boundaries for the 
management unit are consistent with other relevant NE FMPs.

Fishing Year

    The skate fishing year would be the same as the NE multispecies 
fishing year, currently May 1 April 30. If the multispecies fishing 
year changes in the future, the skate fishing year would change 
automatically to remain consistent with the NE multispecies fishing 
year.

Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

    The Council proposes to use relative abundance data to 
differentiate areas with relatively greater abundance of a species to 
identify EFH in contrast to areas with relatively lower abundance. 
Typically, areas of relatively high abundance or density are indicative 
of more suitable habitats. Research has demonstrated that, as 
populations decline, their range contracts and they are most abundant 
in available areas of best suited habitat.
    The Council proposes to use the best available information on the 
distribution and relative abundance of the skate species as reflected 
in the NMFS otter trawl survey data. There are data available from the 
Massachusetts Inshore Trawl Survey on all but barndoor skate, and there 
are data available from the Hudson-Raritan Trawl Survey for little and 
clearnose skates. The NOAA Estuarine Living Marine Resources Program 
(ELMR) information does not differentiate between different species of 
skates, but provides information on the occurrence of skate species in 
the estuaries and embayments of New England and the Mid-Atlantic for 
the skate complex (identified as Raja spp.) as a whole.

Permitting Requirements

    The owners of any commercial vessel that intends to fish for, 
catch, possess, transport, land, sell, trade, or barter skates in or 
from the skate management unit would be required to obtain an annual 
Federal skate permit (open-access).
    Dealers who purchase or receive skates or skate parts from any 
vessel would be required to obtain a Federal dealer permit on an annual 
basis. Skates harvested from the skate management unit could only be 
sold to federally permitted dealers.
    Operators of vessels issued a Federal skate vessel permit would be 
required to obtain a Federal operator permit. An individual who already 
holds an operator permit for another federally managed fishery would 
not need to reapply, since there is no qualification or test for this 
permit.

Vessel and Dealer Reporting Requirements

    The Council clearly recognizes the problems associated with skate 
species identification. Because species-specific information is 
critical to the long-term success of this FMP, the Council is working 
closely with NMFS and the NEFSC to develop a species identification 
guide for skate vessels and dealers, as well as sea samplers and 
enforcement agents. Vessels holding skate permits and dealers 
authorized to purchase skates would be required to report species-level 
information on skates in existing Vessel Trip Reports.
    The Council recognizes that mandating the reporting of discards by 
individual species may not be practical and may actually increase 
discard mortality for some species of skates. It is likely that 
unwanted skates would stay on the deck of a fishing vessel longer if 
the crew is required to sort the bycatch and differentiate the species 
that are being discarded. For this reason, the Council proposes that 
vessels holding Federal permits (regardless of the fishery) report 
skate discards by size category only (i.e., large and small skates).

Skate Wing Possession Restrictions

    The retention and landing of skate wings would be limited to 10,000 
lb (4,536 kg) per trip of less than or equal to 24 hours duration (and 
a limit of one trip per day) and 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) per trip 
exceeding 24 hours. The days-at-sea (DAS) call-in programs (groundfish, 
scallop, and monkfish) would be used to determine whether a vessel's 
trip is less than or greater than 24 hours.
    By discouraging large-scale directed fishing for skate wings, the 
possession limit is expected to reduce overall fishing mortality on 
winter skates. However, the benefits of a wing possession limit include 
not only fishing mortality reductions for winter skate, but also long-
term benefits to the wing species if the possession limit can 
discourage expansion of the fishery and/or an influx of new entrants 
into the fishery.

Bait-only Letter of Authorization (LOA)

    This action would allow vessel owners and operators that fish for 
skates as bait only to be exempt from the wing possession limits, 
provided they obtain an LOA from the Regional Administrator. Vessel 
owners/operators that fish for a combination of bait and wings and 
vessels that do not obtain the LOA would be subject to the wing 
possession limits.

Skate Possession Prohibitions

    Barndoor and thorny skates are in an overfished condition, so, in 
addition to the benefits that are likely to accrue to these species as 
a result of the NE multispecies regulations (closed areas,

[[Page 33436]]

DAS reductions, mesh increases), this action proposes to prohibit the 
possession of thorny skates and barndoor skates on all vessels fishing 
from, and all dealers who would purchase skates caught in, the EEZ 
portion of the Skate Management Unit. Although no longer considered to 
be in an overfished condition, the smooth skate resource is depleted 
and still well below its target biomass level. Therefore, in addition 
to the benefits that are likely to accrue to this species as a result 
of the NE multispecies regulations, this action proposes a prohibition 
on possession of smooth skates in the GOM RMA to conserve the smooth 
skate resource and promote the rebuilding of its biomass to target 
levels.

Annual Monitoring and Framework Adjustment Measures

    The skate fishery would be monitored on at least an annual basis 
starting 1 year after the implementation of the FMP. The status of the 
resource and the fishery would be reviewed by the Council, its Skate 
Oversight Committee and Advisory Panel, and the Skate PDT. The Council 
would prepare a biennial Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) 
Report for the NE skate complex. If the Council determined that an 
adjustment to the measures is needed, it would implement either a 
framework adjustment or an amendment to the FMP.
    The framework adjustment process would be similar to that used in 
other NE Region fisheries. This process would allow changes to measures 
below, as appropriate, to be made to the FMP or regulations in a timely 
manner, without going through the plan amendment process. The framework 
adjustment process may not be appropriate when it is determined that a 
proposed change would not be within the scope of the FMP, or the 
amendment process would be better suited to implement the proposed 
change. The framework process would provide a formal opportunity for 
public comment to supplement the customary public comment period 
provided by publishing a proposed rule. If changes to the management 
measures were contemplated in the FMP, and if sufficient opportunity 
for public comment on the framework action existed, NMFS could bypass 
the proposed rule stage and publish a final rule in the Federal 
Register, provided such rule complies with the requirements of the 
Administrative Procedure Act. The management measures and/or changes to 
them that could be implemented and adjusted through the framework 
process include the following: (1) Skate permitting and reporting 
requirements; (2) overfishing definitions and related targets and 
thresholds; (3) prohibitions on possession and/or landing of individual 
skate species; (4) skate possession limits; (5) skate closed areas (and 
consideration of exempted gears and fisheries); (6) seasonal skate 
fishery restrictions and specifications; (7) target TACs for individual 
skate species; (8) hard TACs/quotas for skates, including species-
specific quotas, fishery quotas, and/or bycatch quotas for non-directed 
fisheries; (9) establishing a mechanism for TAC set-asides to mitigate 
bycatch, conduct scientific research, or for other reasons; (10) 
onboard observer requirements; (11) gear modifications, requirements, 
restrictions, and/or prohibitions; (12) minimum and/or maximum sizes 
for skates; (13) adjustments to exemption area requirements, area 
coordinates, and/or management lines established by the FMP; (14) 
measures to address protected species issues, if necessary; (15) 
description and identification of EFH; (16) description and 
identification of habitat areas of particular concern; (17) measures to 
protect EFH; (18) adjustments and or/resetting of the ``baseline'' of 
management measures in other fisheries; (19) OY and/or MSY 
specifications; and (20) any other measures contained in the FMP.

Baseline Trigger and Review

    The FMP identifies and characterizes a ``baseline'' of management 
measures in other fisheries that provide conservation benefits to skate 
species. The FMP also establishes a process for reviewing changes to 
the management measures included in this baseline, particularly changes 
that make the measures less restrictive. This approach allows 
adjustments to management measures in other fisheries while ensuring 
that skate rebuilding is not compromised. The proposed baseline 
measures and review process are described in detail in the FMP and 
Classification section of this rule.
    The baseline review is intended to address potential significant 
impacts to skate mortality. Total skate mortality should be considered, 
including mortality resulting in increased directed fishing effort on 
skates and mortality resulting from the bycatch of skates. Therefore, 
this approach addresses National Standard 9, as considerations of 
bycatch and bycatch mortality are incorporated into the assessment of 
whether or not changes to the baseline measures will result in 
significant changes to skate mortality.
    The lack of fishery-specific data precludes a quantitative 
assessment of the impacts of current baseline measures on skates and is 
likely to preclude such an assessment of the impacts of changes to 
these measures, at least in the near future. Over time, as data are 
collected through the FMP permit and reporting requirements, increased 
observer coverage, study fleets, and efforts to collect better 
information in other fisheries, the Skate PDT's ability to quantify the 
impacts of management measures on skates should improve greatly. 
However, qualitative assessments must suffice in the short-term, as 
quantitative assessments cannot be completed at this time.

Classification

    At this time, NMFS has not determined that the FMP, which this 
proposed rule would implement, is consistent with the national 
standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, 
in making that determination, will take into account the data, views, 
and comments received during the comment period.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
the purposes of E.O. 12866.
    The Council prepared an FEIS for the FMP; a notice of availability 
for the DEIS was published on August 30, 2002 (67 FR 55858). A copy of 
the FEIS may be obtained from the Council (see ADDRESSES). The Council 
has selected a set of preferred alternatives intended to mitigate, to 
the extent possible, all possible social and economic adverse effects 
while minimizing risks to the skate resources and their environment. 
Overall, the proposed action is expected to have significant positive 
effects on the skate resources relative to the no action alternative.
    The Council prepared an IRFA, as required by section 603 of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), that 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 the action, are contained in the preamble to this rule and in 
the SUMMARY. This rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with 
any relevant Federal rules.
    Quantitative information is limited for the NE skate fisheries 
because the detailed reporting requirements necessary to collect 
sufficient quantitative information do not currently exist. When 
possible, the quantitative impacts of the alternatives were considered, 
but in many instances it was only possible to describe potential 
impacts qualitatively. Because

[[Page 33437]]

costs of individual vessel operations were not available, gross 
revenues were used as a proxy for vessel profitability.
    The proposed measures, and the alternatives, for addressing 
management of the NE skate fisheries could affect any commercial vessel 
holding an active Federal NE fishing permit. Data from the NE permit 
application database show that 4,828 vessels are currently permitted to 
fish in Federal waters, with 1,722 vessels permitted to fish for NE 
multispecies, monkfish, and/or sea scallops. Of these vessels, the 
Council considered the economic impacts on 775 vessels that have 
reported landings of skates or skate parts at least once in the last 3 
years, and on another 120 from which skates or skate parts were 
reported to have been purchased at least once in the last 3 years. 
These 895 vessels are considered the universe of vessels most likely to 
be directly affected by the proposed action. All of the federally 
permitted vessels considered in this analysis readily fall within the 
Small Business Administration's (SBA's) definition of small business 
and the RFA's definition of ``small entity.'' Therefore, there are no 
disproportionate economic impacts between large and small entities.
    In addition to the proposed action, the Council considered 
alternatives to the management measures, including a ``no action'' 
alternative. The ``no action'' alternative represents the regulatory 
environment that would exist if the Council did not initiate management 
of the NE skate complex and develop an FMP. A summary of the IRFA 
follows:
    The proposed action would establish a skate wing possession limit 
of 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) per day and 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) per trip. 
Possession limits of 10,000 lb (4,536 kg), 20,000 lb (9,072 kg), and 
30,000 lb (13,608 kg) were considered for both daily and trip limits. 
Based on the average ex-vessel price received for wings in 2000 ($0.36/
lb ($0.16/kg)), the expected per trip revenue loss for vessels that 
would have exceeded the limit would be approximately $2,500 with a 
10,000-lb (4,536-kg) possession limit, $2,400 with a 20,000-lb (9,072-
kg) possession limit, and $2,700 with a 30,000-lb (13,608-kg) 
possession limit. Per vessel, the expected revenue loss would be 
approximately $3,100/year with a 30,000-lb (13,608-kg) possession 
limit, approximately $5,000/year with a 20,000-lb (9,072-kg) possession 
limit, and approximately $8,500/year with a 10,000-lb (4,536-kg) 
possession limit. The Council chose a combination of the 10,000-lb 
(4,536-kg) and 20,000-lb (9,072-kg) options to provide limits on 
landings in the wing fishery and protect winter skate while minimizing 
economic impacts on the industry. Impacts on annual vessel revenues are 
likely to be even smaller than these data might suggest, once the 
landings of other species on the same trips and in other fisheries are 
considered. For example, the potential revenue loss for the 18 vessels 
that landed more than 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) of skate wings on at least 
one trip during 2000 was less than 5 percent of total annual revenues 
for each vessel; the impact was less than 1 percent for 14 of these 
vessels.
    The Council rejected the 30,000-lb (13,608-kg) possession limit 
because the analysis showed that only a very small conservation benefit 
could be expected with such a high possession limit. Options 1 and 2, 
when combined, were shown to produce up to a 14-percent reduction in 
landings and yet maintain income for both nearshore and offshore 
fishermen.
    The impacts of the prohibitions on possession of barndoor skate, 
thorny skate, and smooth skate in the GOM cannot be quantified, but the 
status of these resources and information provided by industry suggest 
little, if any, impact would be expected on fishermen.
    The options to prohibit either the landing or sale of these skate 
species, rather than the proposed prohibition on possession, would not 
be expected to make any difference from an economic perspective, as 
under all three options, the sale of these species would be prohibited 
and any potential revenue from these species would be foregone. Only 
the no action alternative could mitigate any adverse economic impacts, 
but this option was not acceptable from a conservation perspective.
    The proposed action would also establish a geographical limit for 
the prohibition on possession of smooth skate. The overlap of the 
smooth skate resource with the skate bait fishery is unknown; for this 
reason, the prohibition would be limited to the GOM RMA. The majority 
of smooth skates are distributed in the GOM, so the geographical 
limitation should not compromise the conservation benefits of this 
action. Because smooth skates are not targeted in the GOM/GB skate 
fishery and are therefore not a significant component of the skate 
landings, this is expected to have only minimal economic impacts on 
vessels fishing in the GOM.
    The proposed action would require Federal open-access skate permits 
for vessels, operators, and dealers engaged in any aspect of the skate 
fisheries. Some vessels, operators, and dealers are currently issued 
permits as a result of their participation in other managed fisheries. 
For these entities, the skate fishery would be added to an existing 
permit and there would be no additional impacts. Some vessel owners, 
operators, and dealers may have to obtain Federal permits for the first 
time. In these instances, the estimated costs associated with 
completing the necessary applications would be: Vessel permit, $4.50/
applicant; dealer permit, $2.00/applicant; and operator permit, $30.00/
applicant.
    In order to collect information necessary to monitor the 
effectiveness of the FMP and to better understand the skate species and 
the skate fisheries, vessels landing skates or skate parts would need 
to submit logbook reports, and dealers purchasing skates or skate parts 
would need to submit dealer reports. Annual costs associated with 
completing vessel trip reports are estimated at $30.00/vessel. Annual 
costs associated with dealer reporting are estimated at $13.00/dealer.
    The proposed action would allow vessels that fish for skates as 
bait only to obtain an LOA from NMFS so as to be exempt from the skate 
wing possession limits, but would require these vessels to only land 
whole skates smaller than 23 inches (58.42 cm) total length. This 
action would not have an economic impact on fishing vessels. The only 
significant alternative to this measure considered by the Council was 
to not implement the LOA program. This would have resulted in adverse 
economic impacts because bait-only vessels would have been subject to 
the potentially restrictive skate wing possession limit.
    The FMP and FEIS discuss alternatives to the proposed action, 
including those considered by the Council but ultimately not 
recommended. The potential impacts of several of the proposed measures 
were mitigated by the Council's recommendations, as follows:
    1.The proposed prohibition on possession of smooth skates was 
restricted to the GOM RMA, thus mitigating the potential adverse 
economic impact to vessels participating in the southern New England 
bait fishery.
    2.The Council combined two of the possession limit options for the 
skate wing fishery. The 10,000-lb (4,536-kg) limit applies to short 
trips (24 hours or less) where it would be much less likely to result 
in adverse economic impacts to fishermen.
    3.Requirements to land skates whole for identification purposes 
would create significant amounts of shoreside waste for processors. The 
additional cost

[[Page 33438]]

borne by dealers and processors would reduce dockside prices for 
fishermen. For these reasons, the Council did not recommend this 
measure.
    4.The Council recommended against restricting the bait fishery to 
little skates only (as a method of protecting small winter skates) 
because it is too difficult to tell the two species apart. The time 
required to differentiate these two species in the high-volume bait 
fishery would have resulted in an adverse economic impact on fishing 
operations.
    5.Potential possession limits in the bait-only fishery were 
rejected due to potential adverse economic impacts on the lobster 
fishery, which utilizes skates as bait.
    6.A proposal to require heavier twine in sink gillnet fisheries to 
reduce incidental catches of skates was rejected because gillnet 
fishermen land only about 20 percent of total skates and the added 
costs to gillnet fisheries were perceived to be out of proportion with 
the expected conservation benefits.

Collection-of-Information Requirements

    This rule contains eight collection-of-information requirements, 
which have been submitted to OMB for approval. The public's reporting 
burden for the collection-of-information requirements includes the time 
for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering 
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection-of-information requirements.
    The new and revised reporting requirements and the estimated time 
for a response are as follows: 8 minutes for a vessel trip report; 3 
minutes for a dealer purchase report; 15 minutes for an open access 
vessel permit; 5 minutes for a dealer permit; 60 minutes for an 
operator permit; 2 minutes for a notification for observer deployment; 
2 minutes for a bait-only fishery exemption notification (Letter of 
Authorization); and 2 minutes for bait transfer-at-sea documentation.
    Public comment is sought regarding: Whether the proposed collection 
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions 
of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the 
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and 
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including 
through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of 
the collection of information to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and to OMB at the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget, Washington, DC 20503 (Attn: NOAA Desk Officer).
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required 
to respond to nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure 
to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) unless that collection-of-
information displays a currently valid OMB control number.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

    Fishing, Fisheries, Vessel permits, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: May 23, 2003.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
    For the reasons set out 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.  648.1, the first sentence of paragraph (a) is revised 
to read as follows:

Sec.  648.1  Purpose and scope.

    (a) This part implements the fishery management plans (FMPs) for 
the Atlantic mackerel, squid, and butterfish fisheries (Atlantic 
Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish FMP); Atlantic salmon (Atlantic Salmon 
FMP); the Atlantic sea scallop fishery (Scallop FMP); the Atlantic surf 
clam and ocean quahog fisheries (Atlantic Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog 
FMP); the NE multispecies and monkfish fisheries ((NE Multispecies FMP) 
and (Monkfish FMP)); the summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass 
fisheries (Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass FMP); the Atlantic 
bluefish fishery (Atlantic Bluefish FMP); the Atlantic herring fishery 
(Atlantic Herring FMP); the spiny dogfish fishery (Spiny Dogfish FMP); 
the Atlantic deep-sea red crab fishery (Deep-Sea Red Crab FMP); the 
tilefish fishery (Tilefish FMP); and the NE skate complex fisheries 
(Skate FMP). * * *
* * * * *
    3. In Sec.  648.2, the definitions of ``Council'' and ``fishing 
year'' and ``skate'' are revised, and new definitions for ``NE skate 
complex (skates)'', and ``Skate Management Unit'' are added in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:

Sec.  648.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Council means the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) 
for the Atlantic herring, Atlantic sea scallop, Atlantic deep-sea red 
crab, NE multispecies and monkfish fisheries; and NE skate fisheries; 
or the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC) for the Atlantic 
mackerel, squid, and butterfish; Atlantic surf clam and ocean quahog; 
summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass; spiny dogfish; Atlantic 
bluefish; and tilefish.
* * * * *
    Fishing year means: (1) For the Atlantic sea scallop and Atlantic 
deep-sea red crab fisheries, from March 1 through the last day of 
February of the following year. (2) For the NE multispecies, monkfish 
and skate fisheries, from May 1 through April 30 of the following year. 
(3) For all other fisheries in this part, from January 1 through 
December 31.
* * * * *
    NE Skate Complex (skates) means Leucoraja ocellata (winter skate); 
Dipturis laevis (barndoor skate); Amblyraja radiata (thorny skate); 
Malacoraja senta (smooth skate); Leucoraja erinacea (little skate); 
Raja eglanteria (clearnose skate); and Leucoraja garmani (rosette 
skate).
* * * * *
    Skate means members of the Family Rajidae, including: Leucoraja 
ocellata (winter skate); Dipturis laevis (barndoor skate); Amblyraja 
radiata (thorny skate); Malacoraja senta (smooth skate); Leucoraja 
erinacea (little skate); Raja eglanteria (clearnose skate); and 
Leucoraja garmani (rosette skate).
* * * * *
    Skate Management Unit means an area of the Atlantic Ocean from 
35[deg]15.3' N. Lat., the approximate latitude of Cape Hatteras Light, 
NC, northward to the U.S.-Canada border, extending eastward from the 
shore to the outer boundary of the EEZ and northward to the U.S.-Canada 
border in which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction over 
all skates fished for, possessed, caught or retained in or from such 
area.
* * * * *
    4. In Sec.  648.4, paragraph (a)(14) is added to read as follows:

Sec.  648.4  Vessel permits.

    (a) * * *
    (14) Skate vessels. Any vessel of the United States must have been 
issued and have on board a valid skate vessel permit to fish for, 
possess, transport, sell, or land skates in or from the EEZ portion of 
the Skate Management Unit.

[[Page 33439]]

    5. In Sec.  648.5, the first sentence in paragraph (a) is revised 
to read as follows:

Sec.  648.5  Operator permits.

    (a) * * * Any operator of a vessel fishing for or possessing 
Atlantic sea scallops in excess of 40 lb (18.1 kg), NE multispecies, 
spiny dogfish, monkfish, Atlantic herring, Atlantic surf clam, ocean 
quahog, Atlantic mackerel, squid, butterfish, scup, black sea bass, or 
bluefish, harvested in or from the EEZ; tilefish harvested in or from 
the EEZ portion of the Tilefish Management Unit; skates harvested in or 
from the EEZ portion of the Skate Management Unit; or Atlantic deep-sea 
red crab harvested in or from the EEZ portion of the Red Crab 
Management Unit, issued a permit, including carrier and processing 
permits, for these species under this part, must have been issued under 
this section, and carry on board, a valid operator permit. * * *
* * * * *
    6. In Sec.  648.6, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  648.6  Dealer/processor permits.

    (a) * * *
    (1) All dealers of NE multispecies, monkfish, skates, Atlantic 
herring, Atlantic sea scallop, Atlantic deep-sea red crab, spiny 
dogfish, summer flounder, Atlantic surf clam, ocean quahog, Atlantic 
mackerel, squid, butterfish, scup, bluefish, tilefish, and black sea 
bass; Atlantic surf clam and ocean quahog processors; and Atlantic 
herring processors or dealers, as described in Sec.  648.2; must have 
been issued under this section, and have in their possession, a valid 
permit or permits for these species. A person who meets the 
requirements of both the dealer and processor definitions of any of the 
aforementioned species' fishery regulations may need to obtain both a 
dealer and a processor permit, consistent with the requirements of that 
particular species' fishery regulations. Persons aboard vessels 
receiving small-mesh multispecies and/or Atlantic herring at sea for 
their own use exclusively as bait are deemed not to be dealers, and are 
not required to possess a valid dealer permit under this section, for 
purposes of receiving such small-mesh multispecies and/or Atlantic 
herring, provided the vessel complies with the provisions of Sec.  
648.13.
* * * * *
    7. In 648.7, paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (b)(1)(iii) are added, and 
the last sentence of paragraph (b)(1)(i) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  648.7  Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Dealer reporting requirements for skates. In addition to the 
requirements under paragraph (i) of this section, dealers shall report 
the species of skates received. Species of skates shall be identified 
according to the following categories: Winter skate, little skate, 
little/winter skate, barndoor skate, smooth skate, thorny skate, 
clearnose skate, rosette skate, and unclassified skate. Dealers will be 
provided with a skate species identification guide.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * * With the exception of those vessel owners or operators 
fishing under a surfclam or ocean quahog permit, at least the following 
information and any other information required by the Regional 
Administrator must be provided: Vessel name; USCG documentation number 
(or state registration number, if undocumented); permit number; date/
time sailed; date/time landed; trip type; number of crew; number of 
anglers (if a charter or party boat); gear fished; quantity and size of 
gear; mesh/ring size; chart area fished; average depth; latitude/
longitude (or loran station and bearings); total hauls per area fished; 
average tow time duration; hail weight, in pounds (or count of 
individual fish, if a party or charter vessel), by species, of all 
species, or parts of species, such as monkfish livers, landed or 
discarded; and in the case of skate discards, ``small'' (i.e., less 
than 23 inches (58.42 cm), total length) or ``large'' (i.e., 23 inches 
(58.42 cm) or greater, total length) skates; dealer permit number; 
dealer name; date sold, port and state landed; and vessel operator's 
name, signature, and operator's permit number (if applicable).
* * * * *
    (iii) Vessel reporting requirements for skates. In addition to the 
requirements under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, the owner or 
operator of any vessel issued a skate permit shall report the species 
of all skates landed. Species of skates shall be identified according 
to the following categories: Winter skate, little skate, little/winter 
skate, barndoor skate, smooth skate, thorny skate, clearnose skate, 
rosette skate, and unclassified skate. Discards of skates shall be 
reported according to two size classes, large skates (greater than or 
equal to 23 inches (58.42 cm) in total length) and small skates (less 
than 23 inches (58.42 cm) in total length). All other vessel reporting 
requirements remain unchanged. Vessel owners or operators that intend 
to land skates will be provided with a skate identification guide to 
assist in this data collection program.
* * * * *
    8. In Sec.  648.11, paragraphs (a) and (e) are revised to read as 
follows:

Sec.  648.11  At-sea sampler/observer coverage.

    (a) The Regional Administrator may request any vessel holding a 
permit for Atlantic sea scallops, NE multispecies, monkfish, skates, 
Atlantic mackerel, squid, butterfish, scup, black sea bass, bluefish, 
spiny dogfish, Atlantic herring, tilefish, or Atlantic deep-sea red 
crab; or a moratorium permit for summer flounder; to carry a NMFS-
approved sea sampler/observer.
* * * * *
    (e) The owner or operator of a vessel issued a summer flounder 
moratorium permit, a scup moratorium permit, a black sea bass 
moratorium permit, a bluefish permit, a spiny dogfish permit, an 
Atlantic herring permit, an Atlantic deep-sea red crab permit, a skate 
permit, or a tilefish permit, if requested by the sea sampler/observer, 
also must:
    (1) Notify the sea sampler/observer of any sea turtles, marine 
mammals, summer flounder, scup, black sea bass, bluefish, spiny 
dogfish, Atlantic herring, Atlantic deep-sea red crab, tilefish, skates 
(including discards) or other specimens taken by the vessel.
    (2) Provide the sea sampler/observer with sea turtles, marine 
mammals, summer flounder, scup, black sea bass, bluefish, spiny 
dogfish, Atlantic herring, Atlantic deep-sea red crab, skates, 
tilefish, or other specimens taken by the vessel.
* * * * *
    9. In Sec.  648.12, the introductory text is revised to read as 
follows:

Sec.  648.12  Experimental fishing.

    The Regional Administrator may exempt any person or vessel from the 
requirements of subparts A (General provisions), B (Atlantic mackerel, 
squid, and butterfish), D (Atlantic sea scallop), E (Atlantic surf clam 
and ocean quahog), F (NE multispecies and monkfish), G (summer 
flounder), H (scup), I (black sea bass), J (Atlantic bluefish), K 
(Atlantic herring), L (spiny dogfish), M (Atlantic deep-sea red crab), 
N (tilefish), and O (skates) of this part for the conduct of 
experimental fishing beneficial to the management of the resources or 
fishery managed under that subpart. The Regional Administrator shall 
consult with the Executive Director of the MAFMC regarding such

[[Page 33440]]

exemptions for the Atlantic mackerel, squid, butterfish, summer 
flounder, scup, black sea bass, spiny dogfish, bluefish, and tilefish 
fisheries.
* * * * *
    10. In Sec.  648.13, paragraph (h) is added to read as follows:

Sec.  648.13  Transfers at sea.

* * * * *
    (h) Skates. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (h)(2) of this 
section, all persons or vessels issued a Federal skate permit are 
prohibited from transferring, or attempting to transfer, at sea any 
skates to any vessel, and all persons or vessels are prohibited from 
transferring, or attempting to transfer, or at sea to any vessel any 
skates while in the EEZ, or skates taken in or from the EEZ portion of 
the Skate Management Unit.
    (2) Vessels and vessel owners or operators issued Federal skate 
permits under Sec.  648.4(a)(14) may transfer at sea skates taken in or 
from the EEZ portion of the Skate Management Unit provided:
    (i) The transferring vessel possesses on board a letter of 
authorization issued by the Regional Administrator as specified under 
Sec.  648.322(b);
    (ii) The vessel and vessel owner or operator comply with the 
requirements specified at Sec.  648.322(b);
    (iii) The transferring vessel maintains a record of the quantity of 
skates transferred according to the requirements at Sec.  648.7; and
    (iv) The transferring vessel provides the receiving vessel 
documentation showing the date and the amount of skates transferred, 
whether or not a monetary exchange is involved in the transfer, and the 
transferring vessel maintains onboard, for a minimum of one year from 
the date of the transfer, a copy of said documentation.
    11. In Sec.  648.14, paragraphs (x)(13), (ee), and (ff) are added 
to read as follows:

Sec.  648.14  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (x) * * *
    (13) Skates. All skates retained or possessed on a vessel are 
deemed to have been harvested in or from the Skate Management Unit, 
unless the preponderance of all submitted evidence demonstrates that 
such skates were harvested by a vessel, that has not been issued a 
Federal skate permit, fishing exclusively outside of the EEZ portion of 
the Skate Management Unit or only in state waters.
* * * * *
    (ee) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in Sec.  
600.725 of this chapter and in paragraph (a) of this section, it is 
unlawful for any person to fish for, possess, or land skates in or from 
the EEZ portion of the Skate Management Unit, unless in possession of a 
valid Federal skate vessel permit or onboard a federally permitted 
lobster vessel in possession of whole skates less than the maximum size 
specified at Sec.  648.322(b)(2) for use as bait only.
    (ff) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in Sec.  
600.725 of this chapter and in paragraph (a) of this section, it is 
unlawful for any owner or operator of a vessel holding a valid Federal 
skate permit to do any of the following:
    (1) Fail to comply with the conditions of the skate wing possession 
and landing limits for winter skates specified at Sec.  648.322, unless 
holding a letter of authorization to fish for and land skates as bait 
only at Sec.  648.322(b).
    (2) Fail to comply with the recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements of Sec.  648.7(a)(1)(iii) and (b)(1)(iii).
    (3) Transfer at sea or attempt to transfer at sea to any vessel, 
any skates taken in or from the EEZ portion of the Skate Management 
Unit, unless in compliance with the provisions of Sec. Sec.  648.13(b) 
and 648.322(b).
    (4) Purchase, possess, trade, barter or receive skates caught in 
the EEZ portion of the Skate Management Unit by a vessel that has not 
been issued a valid Federal skate permit under this part.
    (5) Fail to comply with the provisions of the DAS notification 
program specified in Sec. Sec.  648.82, 648.53, and 648.92, for the 
multispecies, scallop, and monkfish fisheries, respectively, when 
issued a valid skate permit and fishing under the skate wing possession 
limits at Sec.  648.322.
    (6) Fish for, catch, possess, transport, land, sell, trade, or 
barter whole skates and skate wings in excess of the possession limits 
specified at Sec.  648.322.
    (7) Retain, possess, or land barndoor or thorny skates taken in or 
from the EEZ portion of the Skate Management Unit specified at Sec.  
648.322(c).
    (8) Retain, possess, or land smooth skates taken in or from the GOM 
RMA described at Sec.  648.80(a)(1)(i).
    (9) Fail to comply with the restrictions under the SNE Trawl and 
Gillnet Exemption areas for the NE skate fisheries at Sec. Sec.  
648.80(b)(5)(i)(B) and 648.80(b)(6)(i)(B).
    12. In Sec.  648.80, paragraphs (b)(5)(i)(C) and (b)(6)(i)(D) are 
added and paragraphs (b)(5) introductory text, (b)(5)(i)(A), (b)(6) 
introductory text, (b)(6)(i)(A), and (h)(2)(i)(8) are revised to read 
as follows:

Sec.  648.80  Multispecies regulated mesh areas and restrictions on 
gear and methods of fishing.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) SNE Monkfish and Skate Trawl Exemption Area. Unless otherwise 
required or prohibited by monkfish or skate regulations under this 
part, a vessel may fish with trawl gear in the SNE Monkfish and Skate 
Trawl Fishery Exemption Area when not operating under a NE multispecies 
DAS if the vessel complies with the requirements specified in paragraph 
(b)(5)(i) of this section and the monkfish and skate regulations, as 
applicable under this part. The SNE Monkfish and Skate Trawl Fishery 
Exemption Area is defined as the area bounded on the north by a line 
extending eastward along 40[deg]10' N. lat., and bounded on the west by 
the western boundary of the SNE Exemption Area as defined in paragraph 
(b)(10)(ii) of this section.
    (i) * * * (A) A vessel fishing under this exemption may only fish 
for, possess on board, or land monkfish and incidentally caught species 
up to the amounts specified in paragraph (b)(3) of this section;
* * * * *
    (C) A vessel not operating under a multispecies DAS may fish for, 
possess on board or land skates, provided:
    (1) The vessel is called into the monkfish DAS program (Sec.  
648.92) and complies with the skate possession limit restrictions at 
Sec.  648.322; or
    (2) The vessel has an LOA on board to fish for skates as bait only, 
and complies with the requirements specified at Sec.  648.322(b); or
    (3) The vessel possesses and/or lands skates or skate parts in an 
amount not to exceed 10 percent by weight of all other species on board 
as specified at Sec.  648.80(b)(3).
* * * * *
    (6) SNE Monkfish and Skate Gillnet Exemption Area. Unless otherwise 
required by monkfish regulations under this part, a vessel may fish 
with gillnet gear in the SNE Monkfish and Skate Gillnet Fishery 
Exemption Area when not operating under a NE multispecies DAS if the 
vessel complies with the requirements specified in paragraph (b)(6)(i) 
of this section, the monkfish regulations, as applicable under 
Sec. Sec.  648.91 through 648.94, and the skate regulations, as 
applicable under Sec. Sec.  648.4 and 648.322. The SNE Monkfish and 
Skate Gillnet Fishery Exemption Area is defined by a line running from 
the Massachusetts shoreline at 41[deg]35' N. lat. and 70[deg]00' W. 
long., south to its intersection with the

[[Page 33441]]

outer boundary of the EEZ, southwesterly along the outer boundary of 
the EEZ, and bounded on the west by the western boundary of the SNE 
Exemption Area as defined in paragraph (b)(10)(ii) of this section.
    (i) * * * (A) A vessel fishing under this exemption may only fish 
for, possess on board, or land monkfish and incidentally caught species 
up to the amounts specified in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (D) A vessel not operating under a multispecies DAS may fish for, 
possess on board or land skates, provided:
    (1) The vessel is called into the monkfish DAS program (Sec.  
648.92) and complies with the skate possession limit restrictions at 
Sec.  648.322; or
    (2) The vessel has an LOA on board to fish for skates as bait only, 
and complies with the requirements specified at Sec.  648.322(b); or
    (3) The vessel possesses and/or lands skates or skate parts in an 
amount not to exceed 10 percent by weight of all other species on board 
as specified at Sec.  648.80(b)(3).
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (8) The vessel does not fish for, possess, or land any species of 
fish other than winter flounder and the exempted small-mesh species 
specified under paragraphs (a)(5)(i), (a)(9)(i), (b)(3), and (c)(4) of 
this section when fishing in the areas specified under paragraphs 
(a)(5), (a)(9), (b)(10), and (c)(5) of this section, respectively. 
Vessels fishing under this exemption in New York and Connecticut state 
waters and permitted to fish for skates may also possess and land 
skates in amounts not to exceed 10 percent by weight of all other 
species on board.
* * * * *
    13. Subpart O is added to read as follows:

Subpart O--Management Measures for the NE Skate Complex Fisheries

Sec.
648.320 Skate FMP review and monitoring.
648.321 Framework adjustment process.
648.322 Skate possession and landing restrictions.

Sec.  648.320  Skate FMP review and monitoring.

    (a) Annual review. The Council, its Skate Plan Development Team 
(PDT), and its Skate Advisory Panel shall monitor the status of the 
fishery and the skate resources following implementation of the Skate 
FMP.
    (1) Starting 1 year after implementation of the Skate FMP, the 
Skate PDT shall meet at least annually to review the status of the 
species in the skate complex. At a minimum, this review shall include 
annual updates to survey indices and a re-evaluation of stock status 
based on the updated survey indices and the FMP's overfishing 
definitions.
    (2) If new and/or additional information becomes available, the PDT 
shall consider it during this annual review. Based on this review, the 
Skate PDT may provide guidance to the Skate Committee and the Council 
regarding the need to adjust measures in the Skate FMP to better 
achieve the FMP's objectives. Any suggested revisions to management 
measures may be implemented through the framework process specified in 
Sec.  648.321, or through an amendment to the FMP.
    (b) Biennial review. The Skate PDT shall prepare a biennial Stock 
Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) Report for the NE skate 
complex. The SAFE Report shall be the primary vehicle for the 
presentation of all updated biological and socio-economic information 
regarding the NE skate complex and its associated fisheries. The SAFE 
report shall provide source data for any adjustments to the management 
measures that may be needed to continue to meet the goals and 
objectives of the FMP.
    (c) Baseline review--(1) Baseline review process. If the Council 
initiates an action in another FMP that may make less restrictive one 
or more of the baseline measures described in paragraph (c)(2) of this 
section and as identified in the Skate FMP, or may change one or more 
of the baseline measures such that the change is likely to have an 
effect the overall mortality for a species of skate subject to a formal 
rebuilding program, the Skate PDT shall take the following action prior 
to the Council's final decision on the initiating action:
    (i) Evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed changes on 
rebuilding skate populations and overall mortality for the skate 
species subject to a formal rebuilding program, and develop, if the 
action would be inconsistent with the rebuilding plans, management 
measures (or modifications to the proposed action) to mitigate the 
impacts of the changes to the baseline measure(s) on rebuilding skates.
    (ii) If the Skate PDT recommends management measures to mitigate 
impacts, the Council shall include in the initiating action management 
measures to offset the changes to the baseline measures. The management 
measures recommended by the Council may be one or more of the measures 
recommended by the Skate PDT, or other suitable measures developed by 
the Council.
    (iii) If the Council fails to include in the initiating action 
management measures to offset the changes to the baseline measures when 
the Skate PDT recommends action, and cannot justify this lack of 
action, the Regional Administrator may implement one or more of the 
measures recommended by the Skate PDT through rulemaking consistent 
with the Administrative Procedure Act.
    (2) Baseline measures. The baseline review process, as described in 
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, is initiated by changes to any of the 
following management measures:
    (i) Multispecies year-round closed areas (Sec.  648.81);
    (ii) Multispecies DAS restrictions (Sec.  648.82);
    (iii) Gillnet gear restrictions (Sec.  648.82(k));
    (iv) Lobster restricted gear areas (Sec.  697.23);
    (v) Gear restrictions for small mesh fisheries (Sec.  Sec.  
648.80(a)(5), (a)(9), and (a)(15));
    (vi) Monkfish DAS restrictions for Monkfish-Only permit holders 
(Sec.  648.92); or
    (vii) Scallop DAS restrictions (Sec.  648.53).

Sec.  648.321  Framework adjustment process.

    (a) Adjustment process. To implement a framework adjustment for the 
Skate FMP, the Council shall develop and analyze proposed actions over 
the span of at least two Council meetings (the initial meeting agenda 
must include notification of the impending proposal for a framework 
adjustment) and provide advance public notice of the availability of 
both the proposals and the analyses. Opportunity to provide written and 
oral comments shall be provided throughout the process before the 
Council submits its recommendations to the Regional Administrator.
    (1) Council review and analyses. In response to the annual review, 
or at any other time, the Council may initiate action to add or adjust 
management measures if it finds that action is necessary to meet or be 
consistent with the goals and objectives of the Skate FMP. After a 
framework action has been initiated, the Council will develop and 
analyze appropriate management actions within the scope of measures 
specified at Sec.  648.312(b). The Council will publish notice of its 
intent to take action and provide the public with any

[[Page 33442]]

relevant analyses and opportunity to comment on any possible actions. 
Documentation and analyses for the framework adjustment shall be 
available at least 1 week before the final meeting.
    (2) Council recommendation. After developing management actions and 
receiving public testimony, the Council may make a recommendation to 
the Regional Administrator. The Council's recommendation shall include 
supporting rationale, an analysis of impacts required under paragraph 
(a)(1) of this section and a recommendation to the Regional 
Administrator on whether to issue the management measures as a final 
rule. If the Council recommends that the management measures should be 
issued directly as a final rule, the Council shall consider at least 
the following factors and provide support and analysis for each factor 
considered:
    (i) Whether the availability of data on which the recommended 
management measures are based allows for adequate time to publish a 
proposed rule, and whether regulations have to be in place for an 
entire harvest/fishing season;
    (ii) Whether there has been adequate notice and opportunity for 
participation by the public and members of the affected industry in the 
development of the Council's recommended management measures;
    (iii) Whether there is an immediate need to protect the resource or 
to impose management measures to resolve gear conflicts; and
    (iv) Whether there will be a continuing evaluation of management 
measures adopted following their implementation as a final rule.
    (3) If the Regional Administrator concurs with the Council's 
recommended management measures, they shall be published in the Federal 
Register. If the Council's recommendation is first published as a 
proposed rule and the Regional Administrator concurs with the Council's 
recommendation after receiving additional public comment, the measures 
shall then be published as a final rule in the Federal Register.
    (4) If the Regional Administrator approves the Council's 
recommendations, the Secretary may, for good cause found under the 
standard of the Administrative Procedure Act, waive the requirement for 
a proposed rule and opportunity for public comment in the Federal 
Register. The Secretary, in so doing, shall publish only the final 
rule. Submission of recommendations does not preclude the Secretary 
from deciding to provide additional opportunity for prior notice and 
comment in the Federal Register.
    (5) The Regional Administrator may approve, disapprove, or 
partially approve the Council's recommendation. If the Regional 
Administrator does not approve the Council's specific recommendation, 
the Regional Administrator must notify the Council in writing of the 
reasons for the action prior to the first Council meeting following 
publication of such decision.
    (b) Possible framework adjustment measures. Measures that may be 
changed or implemented through framework action, provided that any 
corresponding management adjustments can also be implemented through a 
framework adjustment, include:
    (1) Skate permitting and reporting requirements;
    (2) Overfishing definitions and related targets and thresholds;
    (3) Prohibitions on possession and/or landing of individual skate 
species;
    (4) Skate possession limits;
    (5) Skate closed areas (and consideration of exempted gears and 
fisheries);
    (6) Seasonal skate fishery restrictions and specifications;
    (7) Target TACs for individual skate species;
    (8) Hard TACs/quotas for skates, including species-specific quotas, 
fishery quotas, and/or bycatch quotas for non-directed fisheries;
    (9) Establishing a mechanism for TAC set-asides to mitigate 
bycatch, conduct scientific research, or for other reasons;
    (10) Onboard observer requirements;
    (11) Gear modifications, requirements, restrictions, and/or 
prohibitions;
    (12) Minimum and/or maximum sizes for skates;
    (13) Adjustments to exemption area requirements, area coordinates 
and/or management lines established by the FMP;
    (14) Measures to address protected species issues, if necessary;
    (15) Description and identification of EFH;
    (16) Description and identification of habitat areas of particular 
concern;
    (17) Measures to protect EFH;
    (18) Adjustments and or/resetting of the ``baseline'' of management 
measures in other fisheries, described in Sec.  648.320(c);
    (19) OY and/or MSY specifications; and
    (20) Any other measures contained in the FMP.
    (c) Emergency action. Nothing in this section is meant to derogate 
from the authority of the Secretary to take emergency action under 
section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Sec.  648.322  Skate possession and landing restrictions.

    (a) Skate wing possession and landing limit. A vessel or operator 
of a vessel that has been issued a valid Federal skate permit under 
this part, provided the vessel fishes under a multispecies, scallop, or 
monkfish DAS as specified at Sec. Sec.  648.82, 648.53, and 648.92, 
respectively, unless otherwise exempted under paragraph (b) of this 
section, may fish for, possess, and/or land up to the allowable daily 
and per trip limits specified as follows:
    (1) Possess up to 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) of skate wings (45,400 lb 
(20,593 kg) whole weight) per trip of greater than 24 hours in 
duration; or
    (2) Land up to 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) of skate wings (22,700 lb 
(10,296 kg) whole weight) per trip of 24 hours or less in duration.
    (b) Bait Letter of Authorization (LOA). A skate vessel owner or 
operator under this part may request and receive from the Regional 
Administrator an exemption from the skate wing possession limit 
restrictions, provided that the following requirements and conditions 
are met:
    (1) The vessel owner or operator obtains an LOA. LOAs are available 
upon request from the Regional Administrator.
    (2) The vessel owner/operator possesses and/or lands only whole 
skates less than 23 inches (58.42 cm) total length.
    (3) The vessel owner or operator fishes for, possesses, or lands 
skates only for use as bait.
    (4) Vessels that fish for, possess, and/or land any combination of 
skate wings and whole skates less than 23 inches (58.42 cm) total 
length must comply with the possession limit restrictions under 
paragraph (a) of this section for all skates or skate parts on board.
    (5) Any vessel owner/operator meets the requirements at Sec.  
648.13(h).
    (6) The vessel owner or operator possesses and lands skates in 
compliance with this subpart for a minimum of 1 month.
    (c) Prohibitions on possession of skates. All vessels fishing in 
the EEZ portion of the Skate Management Unit are subject to the 
following prohibitions:
    (1) A vessel may not retain, possess, or land barndoor or thorny 
skates taken in or from the EEZ portion of the Skate Management Unit.
    (2) A vessel may not retain, possess, or land smooth skates taken 
in or from the GOM RMA described at Sec.  648.80(a)(1)(i).

[FR Doc. 03-13726 Filed 6-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
Notices For
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Skate Complex (Skate) Fisheries; Skate Fishery Management Plan

Local Navigation
