# Presentation: 048348

## PROPOSED RULE RENEWAL OF ATLANTIC TUNAS LONGLINE LIMITED ACCESS PERMITS (ATLPs)& ATLANTIC SHARK IDENTIFICATION WORKSHOP ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS

- Highly Migratory Species Management Division
- NMFS/NOAA
- April 2008

## Process

- _April 11, 2008_ – Proposed Rule published in Federal Register (73 FR 19795)
- April 16, 2008 – HMS Advisory Panel review
- _May 1 - 7, 2008_ – Public hearings held in Gloucester, MA; St. Petersburg, FL; and, Silver Spring, MD
- _May 12, 2008_ – Comment period closes
- ~ _June 2008_ – Final Rule publishes
- ~ _July 2008_ – Regulations effective

## Introduction

- Proposed rule concerning regulatory changes to address technical/operational  constraints.
- Anticipated to result in some economic benefits to affected entities.
- Anticipated to result in only minor ecological impacts.

## Renewal of ATLPs(Background)  

- Follow-up to the “swordfish revitalization” final rule (72 FR 31688, June 7, 2007).
- modified upgrading restrictions for vessels concurrently issued all 3 LAPs as of: 8/6/07
- During implementation, NMFS found inconsistencies between swordfish/shark permits and the ATLP which were primarily due to differences in the permitting systems used to administer and issue these permits.

## Swordfish & Shark Permits

- Administered by SERO Permits Office.
- NMFS mails paper renewal applications to permit holders.
- Swordfish & shark permits may be held in “NOVESID” status.
- Swordfish and shark permits have a unique permit number that remains unchanged through time, even if permit is transferred.

## ATLPs

- Administered using www.hmspermits.gov.
- General permit renewal reminder letter mailed.
- “NOVESID” status _not_ available.  ATLP must be linked to a vessel.
- ATLP does _not_ have a unique number associated with it through transfer, ATLP permit number remains linked to vessel’s USCG Doc. or state registration number.
- “Ownership” of ATLP can be more difficult to track upon permit transfer(s).

## Current HMS Regulation

- § 635.4(m)(2) - .....Only persons holding a non-expired limited access permit(s) in the preceding year are eligible to renew a limited access permit(s)....

## Current Situation

- ATLP permit system constraints fully recognized in September 2007.
- ~ 40 permit holders that thought they were eligible for the ATLP were notified that it had been expired for more than one year and, thus, were ineligible to renew it.
- All of these permit holders have maintained their swordfish & shark permits since limited access implemented.

## Current Situation (continued)

- ~ 40 vessels are no longer allowed to retain swordfish, or tunas captured on longline gear.
- Must concurrently be issued: 1) swordfish permit (directed or incidental); 2) shark permit (directed or incidental); _and_ 3) an ATLP.
- The number of available ATLPs may be insufficient to match the number of available swordfish and shark permits.

## Objectives

- Amend HMS regulations to be more reflective of the operational capabilities.
- Ensure adequate number of ATLPs are available for swordfish and shark permit holders.
- Reinforce recent efforts by NMFS to revitalize swordfish fishery by providing a reasonable opportunity to harvest ICCAT-recommended quota.

## Alternatives for Renewal of ATLPs

- _Alternative 1_ – No action (s*tatus quo*).
- _Alternative 2_ – (*Preferred Alternative*) Allow for the renewal of ATLPs that have been expired for more than one year
- By the most recent permit holder of record;
- Provided that swordfish and shark permits have been maintained;
- All other requirements for permit renewal are met.

## Summary of Impacts

- Preferred alternative would _not_ increase number of ATLP permit holders beyond the number of current swordfish directed or incidental permits.
- Only persons holding non-expired _swordfish and shark_ permits in the preceding year are eligible to renew those permits.
- Requires possession of swordfish and shark permits to obtain an ATLP.
- Requires possession of 3 permits (swordfish, shark, and ATLP) to fish/retain HMS with PLL gear.

## Summary of Impacts(continued)

- Preferred alternative reflects operational capabilities of ATLP permit system, and would clarify operational practices.
- No significant changes to historical fishing practices, fishing effort, or economic impact anticipated.

## Shark ID Workshops (Background)

- Consolidated HMS FMP requires shark dealers/proxies to attend ID Workshop to renew permit (eff. 1/1/08).
- Dealers trained receive certificates for each location listed on their permit.
- If proxies trained, one _for each location listed on the dealer permit must attend_.
- Dealers may not receive shark products unless certificate is on the premises.

## Background(continued)

- Dealers might not receive shark products at all locations listed on their permit, thus making it unnecessary to require workshop certification for those locations.
- It is currently not feasible to modify NMFS permits database to identify only locations that actually receive shark products on the Atlantic shark dealer permit.

## Alternatives for Shark Workshops

- _Alternative 1_ – No action (s*tatus quo*).
- _Alternative 2_ – (*Preferred Alternative*) Require certificate (dealer or proxy) for _each place of business where Atlantic sharks are first received_, and require that dealer’s trucks and other conveyances possess a copy of a valid workshop certificate.

## Summary of Impacts

- Preferred alternative would _primarily_ affect dealers that:
- (1) opt to send proxies to the workshop;
- (2) have multiple locations listed on their dealer permit; and,
- (3) only receive shark products at some of the locations listed on their shark dealer permit.
- Preferred alternative would eliminate the need for a dealer to send a proxy to a workshop for a location that does not receive Atlantic shark products.

## Summary of Impacts(continued)

- Preferred alternative could reduce economic burden by reducing the number of proxies that may be required to attend workshops.
- Identification/reporting would not be compromised as locations that “first receive” sharks would be required to have a certificate.
- Dealer trucks and other conveyances would be considered extensions of the dealer and would be required to possess a copy of the dealers certificate.

## Public Hearings

- _May 1, 2008_: 3:30 - 5:30 p.m., NMFS Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.
- _May 6, 2008_: 6 - 8 p.m., NMFS Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, FL 33701.
- _May 7, 2008_: 3 - 5 p.m., NOAA Headquarters Auditorium, 1301 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910**.**

## Public Comments

- _Comment period closes_: 5:00 p.m. on May 12, 2008.
- _Mail_:  NMFS HMS Management Division, 263 13th Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, FL, 33701.  Please mark the outside of the envelope “Comments on Proposed Tuna Permits/Workshops Rule.”
- _Fax_:  (727) 824-5398
- _Federal e-Rulemaking Portal_: h_ttp//www.regulations.gov_.  Search on and include in the subject line the following identifier: RIN 0648-AW46.
- _For further information contact_: Richard A. Pearson, (727) 824-5399.