[Federal Register: March 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 41)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 10612-10614]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02mr06-6]
[[Page 10612]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 600 and 648
[Docket No. 051209329-6046-02; I.D. 120205A]
RIN 0648-AT19
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel,
Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; 2006 Specifications
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; 2006 Atlantic mackerel, squid and butterfish
specifications.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces final specifications for the 2006 Atlantic
mackerel, squid, and butterfish (MSB) fisheries. The intent of this
final rule is to promote the development and conservation of the MSB
resources.
DATES: Effective April 3, 2006, through December 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting documents used by the Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council (Council), including the Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), are available from: Daniel Furlong,
Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115,
Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, DE 19904-6790. The
specifications document is also accessible via the Internet at http://www.nero.noaa.gov.
The FRFA consists of the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)and the summary of impacts and alternatives
contained in this final rule. No comments were received on the IRFA or
the economic impacts of the rule. Copies of the small entity compliance
guide are available from Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator,
Northeast Region, National Marine Fisheries Service, One Blackburn
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930 2298.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Jay Dolin, Fishery Policy
Analyst, (978) 281-9259, fax (978) 281-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Proposed 2006 specifications for the MSB fisheries were published
on December 27, 2005 (70 FR 76436), with public comment accepted
through January 11, 2006. These final specifications are unchanged from
those that were proposed (see Table 1). A complete discussion of the
development of the specifications appears in the preamble to the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
Regulations implementing the Fishery Management Plan for the
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries (FMP) appear at 50
CFR part 648, subpart B. Regulations governing foreign fishing appear
at 50 CFR part 600, subpart F. These regulations, at Sec. 648.21 and
Sec. 600.516(c), require that NMFS, based on the maximum optimum yield
(Max OY) of each fishery as established by the regulations, annually
publish a proposed rule specifying the amounts of the initial optimum
yield (IOY), allowable biological catch (ABC), domestic annual harvest
(DAH), and domestic annual processing (DAP), as well as, where
applicable, the amounts for total allowable level of foreign fishing
(TALFF) and joint venture processing (JVP) for the affected species
managed under the FMP. In addition, these regulations allow Loligo
squid specifications to be specified for up to 3 years, subject to
annual review. The regulations found in Sec. 648.21 also specify that
IOY for squid is equal to the combination of research quota and DAH,
with no TALFF specified for squid. For butterfish, the regulations
specify that a butterfish bycatch TALFF will be specified only if TALFF
is specified for Atlantic mackerel. In addition, the regulations at
Sec. 648.21(g) allow the specification of research quotas (RQ) to be
used for research purposes.
Table 1. Final Initial Annual Specifications, in Metric Tons (mt), for Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish
for the Fishing Year January 1 through December 31, 2006.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifications Loligo Illex Mackerel Butterfish
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max OY 26,000 24,000 N/A 12,175
ABC 17,000 24,000 335,000 4,545
IOY \1\ 24,000 \2\ 115,000 1,681
16,872.5
DAH 16,872.5 24,000 \3\ 115,000 1,681
DAP 16,872.5 24,000 100,000 1,681
JVP 0 0 0 0
TALFF 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes 127.5 mt for RQ.
\2\ IOY may be increased during the year, but the total ABC will not exceed 335,000 mt
\3\ Includes 15,000 mt of Atlantic mackerel recreational allocation.
Loligo squid
The Loligo squid quota is divided into quarterly allocations (See
Table 2).
Table 2. Percent Allocations of Loligo Quota
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metric
Quarter Percent Tons \1\ RQ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I (Jan-Mar) 33.23 5,606.70 N/A
II (Apr-Jun) 17.61 2,971.30 N/A
III (Jul-Sep) 17.30 2,918.90 N/A
IV (Oct-Dec) 31.86 5,375.60 N/A
Total 100 16,872.50 127.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Quarterly allocations after 127.5 mt RQ deduction.
The 2006 directed fishery for Loligo will be closed in Quarters I-
III when 80 percent of the period allocation is harvested, with vessels
thereafter restricted to a 2,500-lb (1,134-kg) Loligo squid trip limit
per single calender day until the end of the respective quarter. The
directed fishery will close when 95 percent of the total annual DAH has
been harvested, with vessels thereafter restricted to a 2,500-lb
(1,134-kg) Loligo squid trip limit per single calender day for the
remainder of
[[Page 10613]]
the year. Quota overages from Quarter I will be deducted from the
allocation in Quarter III, and any overage from Quarter II will be
deducted from Quarter IV. By default, quarterly underages from Quarters
II and III carry over into Quarter IV, because Quarter IV does not
close until 95 percent of the total annual quota has been harvested.
Additionally, if the Quarter I landings for Loligo squid are less than
80 percent of the Quarter I allocation, the underage below 80 percent
will be applied to Quarter III.
Comments and Responses
There were five sets of comments received. Four were from industry
members and associations: Garden State Seafood Association; the
American Pelagic Association; the East Coast Pelagic Association, and
Atlantic Pelagic Seafood. The fifth was from a private citizen.
Comment 1: Four commenters supported setting JVP and TALFF at zero.
Response: This action sets JVP and TALFF for mackerel at zero.
Comment 2: Four commenters were concerned about NMFS's ability to
use the FMP's in-season adjustment mechanism, should it become
necessary to raise mackerel OY, DAH, and DAP based on industry
performance, and two of them requested that the final 2006
specifications include a provision that would enable NMFS to implement
a speedier in-season adjustment.
Response: NMFS will keep close watch on mackerel catch throughout
2006 so that, should an in-season adjustment become necessary, NMFS can
get one in place as quickly as possible. The in-season adjustment
procedure is the only regulatory mechanism available for making such a
modification to the specifications outside of the annual specifications
process. This procedure is specified in the FMP, and Council action
would be required to enact a modification. NMFS will use all available
data sources and projection techniques to identify the need for such an
adjustment as early as possible.
Comment 3: One commenter stated that the proposed Atlantic mackerel
DAH was too low, and should be set at 165,000 mt.
Response: The Atlantic mackerel DAH is set at 100,000 mt to take
into account the actual performance of the fishery in recent years,
which has never exceeded 60,000 mt, and often has fallen well below
50,000 mt; and the industry's expectation of increased harvests in 2006
as a result of recent investments in vessels and shoreside processing
facilities. This figure represents a balance between actual past
harvest and reasonably expected increases in harvests for 2006.
Classification
This action is authorized by 50 CFR part 648 and has been
determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
This final rule contains the FRFA prepared pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
604(a). The FRFA consists of the IRFA and the summary of impacts and
alternatives contained in this final rule. No comments were received on
the IRFA or the economic impacts of the rule. A copy of the IRFA is
available from the Council (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the analysis
follows:
Statement of Objective and Need
A statement of the need for and objectives of the rule is contained
in the preamble to the proposed rule and is not repeated here.
Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule
Will Apply
The number of potential fishing vessels in the 2006 fisheries are
406 for Loligo squid/butterfish, 80 for Illex squid, 2,414 for Atlantic
mackerel, and 2,016 vessels with incidental catch permits for squid/
butterfish, based on vessel permit issuance. Because all entities
participating in this fishery are small entities, as defined in Section
601 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, there are no disproportionate
economic impacts on small entities. Many vessels participate in more
than one of these fisheries; therefore, the numbers are not additive.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
This action does not contain any new collection-of-information,
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. It does not
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.
Minimizing Significant Economic Impacts on Small Entities
The IOY specification under the action for Atlantic mackerel
(115,000 mt, with 15,000 mt allocated to recreational catch) represents
no constraint on vessels in this fishery. This level of landings has
not been achieved by vessels in this fishery in recent years. Mackerel
landings for 2001-2003 averaged 24,294 mt; in 2003 they were 30,738 mt;
and for 2004 they were 53,781 mt. Therefore, no reductions in revenues
for the mackerel fishery are expected as a result of this action.
However, there is the potential for an increase in revenues as a result
of this action. Based on 2004 data, the mackerel fishery could increase
its landings by 46,219 mt in 2006, if it takes the entire IOY. In 2003,
the last year for which there are complete financial data, the average
value for mackerel was $234 per mt. Using this value, the mackerel
fishery could see an increase in revenues of $10,815,246 as a result of
this action.
The IOY specification for Illex (24,000 mt) represents a slight
constraint on revenues in this fishery, as compared to the landings in
2004. Illex landings for 2001-2003 averaged 4,350 mt; in 2003 they were
6,389 mt; and in 2004 they were 25,059 mt. Therefore, the proposed
action represents a reduction in landings, from 2004, of 1,059 mt. In
2003, the last year for which there are complete financial data, the
average value for Illex was $626 per mt. Using this value, the Illex
fishery could see a decrease in revenues of $662,934 as a result of the
proposed action. But, the Illex landings for 2004 were 4.4 percent
higher than the approved quota for that year. Thus, the better
comparison to use in evaluating the impact of the action is how that
action compares to what would have happened had the 2004 landings
reached, but not exceeded the quota. If the quota had not been exceeded
in 2004, then this action would not represent a potential reduction in
Illex landings. This action thus represents no constraint on the
fishery in 2006.
Under the final specifications for butterfish (IOY = 1,681 mt),
landings will not be constrained relative to the 2001-2004 fisheries.
During the period 2001-2004, annual butterfish landings averaged 1,535
mt. Compared to the most recent 2 years for which complete information
is available, 2003 and 2004, when landings were 473 mt and 422 mt,
respectively, the action is not expected to reduce revenues in this
fishery, but could increase those revenues. Based on 2003 data, the
value of butterfish was $1,269 per mt.
The Council analysis evaluated two additional alternatives for
mackerel. One of these alternatives would have set the ABC at 347,000
mt. This was rejected on biological grounds because that level of ABC
is not consistent with preventing overfishing, as defined in the FMP
(the overfishing threshold, F=0.25, results in a yield estimate of
369,000 mt, minus the estimated Canadian catch of 34,000 mt, that is
less than 347,000 mt). Both of the alternatives would have set IOY at
165,000 mt. This IOY would not represent a constraint on vessels in
this
[[Page 10614]]
fishery, so no impacts on revenues in this fishery would be expected as
a result of either of these alternatives. However, an IOY of 165,000 mt
was rejected by the Council because it was too high in light of social
and economic concerns relating to TALFF. The specification of TALFF
would have limited the opportunities for the domestic fishery to
expand, and therefore would have resulted in negative social and
economic impacts to both U.S. harvesters and processors.
For Illex, one alternative considered would have set Max OY, ABC,
IOY, DAH, and DAP at 30,000 mt. This alternative would allow harvest
far in excess of recent landings in this fishery. Therefore, there
would be no constraints and, thus, no revenue reductions, associated
with that alternative. However, the Council considered this alternative
unacceptable because an ABC specification of 30,000 mt may not prevent
overfishing in years of moderate to low abundance of Illex squid.
For butterfish, one alternative considered would have set IOY at
5,900 mt, while another would have set it at 9,131 mt. Both of these
amounts exceed the landings of this species in recent years. Therefore,
neither alternative would represent a constraint on vessels in this
fishery or would reduce revenues in the fishery. However, both of these
alternatives were rejected by the Council because they would likely
result in overfishing and the additional depletion of the spawning
stock biomass of butterfish.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule, or group of related rules for
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule
and shall designate such publications as ``small entity compliance
guides.'' The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. As part of
this rulemaking process, a small entity compliance guide will be sent
to all holders of permits issued for the Atlantic mackerel, squid and
butterfish fisheries. In addition, copies of this final rule and guide
(i.e., permit holder letter) are available from the Regional
Administrator (see ADDRESSES) and may be found at the following Web
site: http://www.nero.noaa.gov.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: February 24, 2006.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 06-1963 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S