Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 25669 

Authority 

The authority for this action is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Dated: April 20, 2012. 

Gregory E. Siekaniec, 

Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10451 Filed 4–30–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 120412411–2411–01] 

RIN 0648–BB75 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

North and South Atlantic Swordfish 

Quotas and Management Measures 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

implement the International 

Commission for the Conservation of 

Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) 

Recommendation 11–02, which 

maintains the U.S. North Atlantic 

swordfish base quota allocation, limits 

the annual underharvest carryover to 25 

percent of the base quota, and requires 

an annual quota transfer to Morocco. 

ICCAT Recommendation 11–02 also 

includes an alternative swordfish 

minimum size of 25-inches cleithrumcaudal keel (CK). 

This proposed rule also considers 

changes to swordfish minimum size 

requirements, including the 25-inch CK 

alternative swordfish minimum size and 

whether the bill of a swordfish must be 

attached when measuring swordfish 

using the existing lower jaw fork length 

minimum size requirement. The rule 

also includes regulatory modifications 

and clarifications regarding swordfish 

fishery season closures and the North 

Atlantic swordfish quota reserve 

category. 

Finally, this proposed rule would also 

adjust the North and South Atlantic 

swordfish quotas for the 2012 fishing 

year to account for 2011 underharvests 

and landings, as required by ICCAT 

Recommendations 11–02 and 09–03, 

and implemented in regulations at 50 

CFR 635.27. This proposed rule could 

affect commercial and recreational 

fishing for swordfish in the Atlantic 

Ocean, including the Caribbean Sea and 

Gulf of Mexico. This action implements 

ICCAT recommendations, consistent 

with the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act 

(ATCA), and furthers domestic 

management objectives under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by 5 p.m., local time, on June 

5, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2012–0094 by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal 

www.regulations.gov. To submit 

comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, 

first click the ‘‘submit a comment’’ icon, 

then enter NOAA–NMFS–2012–0094 in 

the keyword search. Locate the 

document you wish to comment on 

from the resulting list and click on the 

‘‘Submit a Comment’’ icon on the right 

of that line. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

Margo Schulze-Haugen, 1315 East West 

Highway, National Marine Fisheries 

Service, SSMC3, Silver Spring, MD 

20910. 

• Fax: 301–713–1917, Phone: 301– 

427–8503; Attn: Margo Schulze-Haugen. 

Instructions: Comments must be 

submitted by one of the above methods 

to ensure that the comments are 

received, documented, and considered 

by NMFS. Comments sent by any other 

method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered. All comments received are 

a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted for public viewing 

on www.regulations.gov without change. 

All personal identifying information 

(e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted 

voluntarily by the sender will be 

publicly accessible. Do not submit 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive or protected 

information. NMFS will accept 

anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in 

the required fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

PDF file formats only. 

NMFS will hold one conference call 

and three public hearings on this 

proposed rule on May 22, 23, 25, and 

31, 2012. The public hearings will be 

held in Fort Lauderdale, FL; Silver 

Spring, Maryland; and Manahawkin, 

New Jersey. For specific locations, dates 

and times see the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Copies of the supporting documents— 

including the draft Environmental 

Assessment (EA), Regulatory Impact 

Review (RIR), Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and the 

2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly 

Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery 

Management Plan (FMP)—are available 

from the HMS Web site at http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ or by 

contacting LeAnn Hogan at 301–427– 

8503. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steve Durkee by phone: 202–670–6637, 

or LeAnn Hogan or Delisse Ortiz by 

phone: 301–427–8503 or by fax: 301– 

713–1917. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: North and 

South Atlantic swordfish are managed 

under the dual authority of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act and ATCA, 

which authorizes the Secretary of 

Commerce (Secretary) to promulgate 

regulations as may be necessary and 

appropriate to implement ICCAT 

recommendations. The authority to 

issue regulations under the MagnusonStevens Act and ATCA has been 

delegated from the Secretary to the 

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 

NOAA (AA). On October 2, 2006, NMFS 

published in the Federal Register (71 

FR 58058) final regulations, effective 

November 1, 2006, implementing the 

2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory 

Species (HMS) Fishery Management 

Plan (FMP), which details management 

measures for Atlantic HMS fisheries. 

The implementing regulations for the 

Consolidated HMS FMP and its 

amendments are at 50 CFR part 635. 

ICCAT is responsible for the 

conservation of tuna and tuna-like 

species in the Atlantic Ocean and 

adjacent seas. ICCAT recommendations 

are binding on Contracting Parties, nonContracting Cooperating Parties, Entities 

and Fishing Entities (CPCs), unless 

Parties object pursuant to the treaty. All 

ICCAT recommendations are available 

on the ICCAT Web site at http:// 

www.iccat.int/en/. In November 2011, 

ICCAT adopted Recommendation 11–02 

for North Atlantic swordfish. This 

recommendation maintains the U.S. 

baseline quota of 2,937.6 metric tons 

(mt) dressed weight (dw) for 2012 and 

2013. Previous North Atlantic swordfish 

recommendations included a quota 

transfer of 18.8 mt dw from the United 

States to Canada; however, 

Recommendation 11–02 eliminates this 

quota transfer and includes a transfer of 

112.8 mt dw from the United States to 

Morocco to support joint scientific 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

25670 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

research and Morocco’s efforts to 

eliminate the use of driftnets. 

Recommendation 11–02 also includes a 

provision for the submission of annual 

swordfish management plans and a 

change to the underharvest carryover 

provisions. The recommendation limits 

the amount of underharvested quota 

that can be carried over by a CPC 

allocated a baseline quota greater than 

500 mt to 25 percent of the baseline 

quota. All other CPCs are limited to an 

underharvest carryover limit of 50 

percent of their baseline quota. This 

recommendation also includes an 

option for countries to use a CK 

minimum size measurement of 25 

inches. This recommendation was 

adopted by ICCAT based on the most 

recent North Atlantic swordfish stock 

assessment. 

In this proposed rule, NMFS 

considers changes to the HMS 

regulations at 50 CFR part 635 

consistent with ICCAT 

Recommendation 11–02. Specifically, 

NMFS proposes regulatory changes to 

the adjusted quotas and minimum sizes 

that would affect commercial and 

recreational vessels that catch Atlantic 

swordfish. Under ATCA, the United 

States promulgates regulations as may 

be necessary and appropriate to 

implement binding recommendations of 

ICCAT. NMFS prepared a draft 

Environmental Assessment (EA), 

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and an 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA), which present and analyze 

anticipated environmental, social, and 

economic impacts of each alternative 

contained in this proposed rule. A 

summary of the alternatives considered 

and related analyses are provided 

below. The complete list of alternatives 

and related analyses is provided in the 

draft EA/RIR/IRFA. A copy of the draft 

EA/RIR/IRFA prepared for this 

proposed rule is available from NMFS 

(see ADDRESSES). 

ICCAT North Atlantic Swordfish Quota 

Implementation 

In this action, NMFS proposes to 

maintain the U.S. base quota of 2,937.6 

mt dw and implement both of the other 

quota-related measures in ICCAT 

Recommendation 11–02 for North 

Atlantic swordfish. The first measure 

requires an annual quota transfer of 

112.8 mt dw from the United States to 

Morocco to support joint scientific 

research and Morocco’s efforts to 

eliminate the use of driftnets. The 

second measure limits the amount of 

underharvested quota relevant ICCAT 

parties can carryover to the subsequent 

fishing year. Previously, the ICCAT 

allowed underharvests of up to 50 

percent of the annual base quota 

(1,468.8 mt dw for the United States); 

however, ICCAT Recommendation 11– 

02 limits this carryover to 25 percent of 

the base quota (734.4 mt dw for the 

United States). Due to the quota transfer 

and reduced underharvest carryover 

limit, the maximum U.S. North Atlantic 

swordfish adjusted quota would be 

reduced to 3,559.2 mt dw (2,937.6 mt 

dw base quota + 734.4 mt dw 

underharvest¥112.8 mt dw transfer) 

compared to 4,406.4 mt dw under 

previous recommendations. These 

North Atlantic swordfish quotas would 

be maintained until the quotas are 

changed by ICCAT. 

This proposed action would likely 

have neutral ecological and economic 

impacts in the short-term because the 

United States is unlikely to achieve 100 

percent quota utilization in the shortterm. Consequently, minor changes to 

the adjusted quota through international 

quota transfers or through reduced 

underharvest carryover limits are 

unlikely to impact total annual revenues 

from the fishery, swordfish catch rates 

or mortality levels. In the long-term, 

however, the proposed action could 

have minor beneficial ecological 

impacts on the North Atlantic swordfish 

stock as the U.S. swordfish fishery nears 

100 percent quota utilization. 

With regard to long-term 

socioeconomic impacts, a lower 

adjusted quota could have minor 

adverse impacts assuming the U.S. 

swordfish fishery nears 100 percent 

quota utilization. At that time, an 

adjusted quota that reflects the annual 

quota transfer to Morocco and the lower 

underharvest carryover limit would lead 

to a lower available quota relative to the 

current adjusted quota. This lower level 

of adjusted quota would result in a 

decrease in total possible fishery-wide 

annual revenues. If NMFS deducts the 

112.8 mt dw quota transfer from the 

U.S. base quota of 2,937.6 mt dw and 

limits underharvest carryover to 25 

percent, the total U.S. adjusted quota 

could reach 3,559.2 mt dw (7,846,612 

lbs dw). Assuming an average ex-vessel 

price of $4.31 per pound and 100 

percent quota utilization, total possible 

gross revenues across the domestic 

fishery would be estimated to be 

$33,818,898 compared to $41,868,844 

under the current adjusted quota of 

4,406.4 mt dw. Therefore, this proposed 

action could result in annual gross 

revenues that are $8,049,946 less 

($41,868,844¥$33,818,898) than the 

possible annual gross revenues under 

the current adjusted quota of 4,406.4 mt 

dw. However, the quota transfer to 

Morocco and the reduction in the 

underharvest carryover limit are binding 

ICCAT measures and the United States 

is required to implement these measures 

as necessary and appropriate to comply 

with ICCAT Recommendation 11–02 

and ATCA. 

Swordfish Minimum Size Measures 

In this action, NMFS proposes to 

implement the swordfish minimum size 

provision of the 2011 ICCAT North 

Atlantic swordfish Recommendation 

11–02. This alternative minimum size is 

25 inches CK and would replace the 

existing 29-inch CK minimum size that 

is in place for the U.S. Atlantic 

swordfish fishery. The 25-inch CK 

minimum size is equivalent to a greater 

number of 47-inch LJFL swordfish as 

opposed to the 29-inch CK minimum 

size and was calculated to provide a 

scientifically-based equivalent 

measurement for dressed swordfish. 

Since the 25-inch CK minimum size is 

equivalent to the 47-inch LJFL 

minimum size, NMFS does not expect 

any ecological impacts to result from 

this action. The alternative CK 

minimum size would simplify and 

facilitate compliance and enforcement 

of the minimum size requirements. 

Simplifying enforcement and 

compliance could lead to an increase in 

the number of fish legally retained, but 

NMFS expects that this increase would 

be modest and well within the ICCAT 

SCRS minimum size requirements. 

Implementing the proposed 25-inch CK 

minimum size could better address the 

operational needs of the U.S. swordfish 

fleet while not leading to negative 

ecological impacts to swordfish stocks 

because any retention would still be 

within the specified quota limits. 

Implementing the 25-inch CK 

minimum size would likely have 

moderate beneficial socioeconomic 

impacts in both the short and long-term. 

Currently, fishermen do not have a 

minimum size measurement that allows 

for the retention of dressed swordfish 

that measure at or slightly above 47 

inches LJFL. If a fisherman catches a 

swordfish that meets the 47-inch LJFL 

minimum size, but not the current 29- 

inch CK minimum size, the fisherman 

must either land the fish with the head 

naturally attached or discard the fish. 

Due to storage capacity limitations and 

uncertainty in minimum size 

regulations, fishermen sometimes 

choose to discard legal fish that do not 

meet the 29-inch CK minimum size. 

Similarly, dealers sometimes will not 

accept fish that meet the 47-inch LJFL 

measurement but not the 29-inch CK 

minimum size. Even when these 

swordfish are landed with the head 

naturally attached, some dealers have 

expressed concern that, once the head is 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 25671 

removed, the fish could be in violation 

of minimum size requirements. For 

these reasons, implementing the ICCAT 

alternative minimum CK size of 25 

inches could lead to increased retention 

of fish that measure at or slightly above 

47 inches LJFL, since this CK minimum 

size is equivalent to a greater number of 

47-inch LJFL fish than the existing 29- 

inch CK minimum size. The increase in 

retained catch could lead to increased 

revenues for both fishermen and 

dealers. This increase would occur 

without any corresponding impact to 

the swordfish stock since all retained 

catch would continue to measure at 

least 47 inches LJFL which is the 

scientifically-determined sustainable 

minimum size. 

In this action, NMFS also proposes to 

allow the LJFL minimum size to be 

applied to swordfish without a bill, 

provided the bill has been removed 

forward of the anterior tip of the lower 

jaw. Due to morphological differences 

between individual swordfish, 

fishermen occasionally retain swordfish 

that meet the 47-inch LJFL minimum 

size, but not the current 29-inch CK 

minimum size. In these cases, the 

fishermen must leave the head of the 

swordfish naturally attached in order to 

maintain the carcass in a form that can 

be measured using the LJFL minimum 

size measurement. Scenarios such as 

this could continue even if NMFS 

implements the new ICCAT minimum 

CK length of 25 inches, although they 

would likely become less common. 

Currently, there is some confusion as to 

whether the head is still ‘‘naturally 

attached’’ if the bill is removed. The bill 

imposes a storage capacity cost, poses 

some safety concerns, and is not 

necessary for determining whether a 

swordfish is undersized. NMFS 

proposes to explicitly allow fishermen 

to remove the bill of the swordfish and 

still consider the head naturally 

attached, provided the bill is removed 

forward of the anterior tip of the lower 

jaw. Consequently, the LJFL minimum 

size standard could still be used. NMFS 

expects that this action would not have 

any ecological impacts on the Atlantic 

swordfish stock. Keeping the bill of a 

swordfish attached to the carcass is 

unnecessary when performing 

minimum size measurements as long as 

the lower jaw remains intact. Both the 

LJFL and CK minimum size 

measurements use two end points 

posterior to the bill; therefore, removing 

the bill would not have any impact on 

determining compliance with minimum 

size measurements. The action would 

not provide any additional impacts to 

the swordfish stock from increased 

catch or effort or contribute to the 

harvest of undersized individuals. 

Allowing the LJFL minimum size to 

be applied to swordfish without a bill 

would likely result in short and longterm minor beneficial socioeconomic 

impacts. Neither the LJFL nor the CK 

minimum size require the bill of the 

swordfish to be attached; therefore, the 

bill is unnecessary in determining if a 

swordfish is of legal size. However, the 

bill of a swordfish can complicate 

fishing operations by presenting safety 

concerns and imposing storage capacity 

costs. If NMFS allows fishermen to 

continue to employ the LJFL 

measurement in the absence of the bill, 

commercial vessels could more 

efficiently pack the swordfish catch, 

leaving more room for additional 

product. This proposed action provides 

increased flexibility for fisherman, 

increases safety, and allows for more 

efficient packing while not impacting 

the ability to determine if the fish meets 

the LJFL minimum size requirement. 

While NMFS is proposing to change the 

CK minimum size and allow for a 

swordfish to be measured using the 

LJFL measurement, even with its bill 

removed, NMFS also considered several 

other minimum size alternatives. These 

alternatives include eliminating the 

LJFL as an authorized size measurement 

and using only a CK measurement, and 

reinstating the 33 pound live weight 

measurement. These alternatives are 

fully described in the draft EA/RIR/ 

IRFA. 

Administrative Changes 

This proposed rule also makes several 

modifications to the regulatory text for 

clarification or management purposes. 

The current regulatory language found 

in § 635.27 (c)(2)(i) explicitly authorizes 

the inseason transfer of North Atlantic 

swordfish quota among the directed, 

incidental, and reserve categories. This 

rule proposes to allow NMFS to transfer 

quota from the directed category to the 

incidental or reserve quota categories as 

well. In this action, NMFS also analyzes 

the impacts of scientific research and 

exempted fishing permits on Atlantic 

swordfish and considers using quota in 

the reserve category to account for 

fishery-independent research landings. 

Therefore, the North Atlantic swordfish 

reserve category description is 

simplified and the annual reserve 

category allocation is explicitly stated to 

be 50 mt dw in § 635.27(c)(1)(i)(D). 

Additionally, the regulatory language is 

modified so that ICCAT-negotiated 

quota transfers will be removed from the 

North Atlantic swordfish baseline quota 

rather than the reserve category. 

2012 North and South Atlantic 

Swordfish Specifications 

North Atlantic Swordfish Quota 

At the 2011 ICCAT meeting, 

Recommendation 11–02 was adopted, 

maintaining the North Atlantic 

swordfish total allowable catch (TAC) of 

13,700 metric tons (mt) whole weight 

(ww) (10,301 mt dressed weight (dw)) 

through 2013. Of this TAC, the United 

States baseline quota is 2,937.6 mt dw 

(3,907.0 mt ww) per year. ICCAT 

Recommendation 11–02 also includes a 

new 112.8 mt dw annual quota transfer 

to Morocco and limits the underharvest 

carryover to 25 percent of the baseline 

quotas. Therefore, the United States may 

carry over a maximum of 734.4 mt dw 

of underharvests from the previous year 

(2011) to be added to the 2012 baseline 

quota. This proposed rule would adjust 

the U.S. baseline quota for the 2012 

fishing year to account for the annual 

quota transfer to Morocco and the 2011 

underharvest. The 2012 North Atlantic 

swordfish baseline quota is 2,937.6 mt 

dw. The preliminary North Atlantic 

swordfish underharvest for 2011 was 

2,750.1 mt dw, which exceeds the 

maximum carryover cap of 734.4 mt dw. 

Therefore, NMFS is proposing to carry 

forward the maximum amount allowed 

per ICCAT Recommendation 11–02. The 

baseline quota reduced by the 112.8 mt 

dw annual quota transfer to Morocco 

and increased by the underharvest 

carryover maximum of 734.4 mt dw 

equals 3,559.2 mt dw, which is the 

proposed adjusted quota for the 2012 

fishing year. From that proposed 

adjusted quota, the directed category 

would be allocated 3,209.2 mt dw and 

would be split equally into two seasons 

in 2012 (January through June, and July 

through December). The reserve 

category would be allocated 50 mt dw 

for inseason adjustments and research, 

and 300 mt dw would be allocated to 

the incidental category, which includes 

recreational landings and catch by 

incidental swordfish permit holders for 

the 2012 fishing season, per 

§ 635.27(c)(1)(i)(B) (Table 1). These 

landings are based on preliminary data. 

As late reports are received and the data 

undergo quality control processes, some 

data may change. Any changes will be 

described in the final rule, as 

appropriate. 

South Atlantic Swordfish Quota 

ICCAT Recommendation 06–03 

established the South Atlantic 

swordfish TAC at 17,000 mt ww for 

2007, 2008, and 2009. Of this, the 

United States received 75.2 mt dw (100 

mt ww). As with the North Atlantic 

swordfish recommendation, ICCAT 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

25672 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Recommendation 06–03 established a 

cap on the amount of underharvest that 

can be carried forward. For South 

Atlantic swordfish, the United States is 

limited to carrying forward 100 percent 

(75.2 mt dw). The most recent South 

Atlantic swordfish measure, 

Recommendation 09–03, is a 3-year 

measure that reduced the TAC to 15,000 

mt dw but maintains the previous years’ 

U.S. quota share of 75.2 mt dw (100 mt 

ww) and underharvest carryover limit 

through 2012. 

ICCAT Recommendation 09–03 also 

transfers a total of 75.2 mt dw (100 mt 

ww) of the U.S. South Atlantic 

swordfish quota to other countries. 

These transfers are 37.6 mt dw (50 mt 

ww) to Namibia, 18.8 mt dw (25 mt ww) 

to Cote d’Ivore, and 18.8 mt dw (25 mt 

ww) to Belize. In 2011, U.S. fishermen 

did not land any South Atlantic 

swordfish, therefore, 75.2 mt dw of 

underharvest is available to carry over 

to 2012 and can cover the entire 75.2 mt 

dw of annual international quota 

transfers outlined above. Therefore, the 

2012 adjusted quota for South Atlantic 

swordfish is 75.2 mt dw (Table 1). 

Impacts resulting from the 2012 North 

Atlantic swordfish specifications are 

analyzed in the Environmental 

Assessment (EA) accompanying this 

rule. The impacts are summarized above 

in the ICCAT North Atlantic Swordfish 

Quota Implementation section. The 

impacts resulting from the 2012 South 

Atlantic swordfish specifications were 

analyzed in the EA that was prepared 

for the 2007 Swordfish Quota 

Specification Final Rule published on 

October 5, 2007 (72 FR 56929). The 

quota adjustments would not increase 

overall quotas and are not expected to 

increase fishing effort, protected species 

interactions, or environmental effects 

beyond those considered in the 2007 

EA. Therefore, because there would be 

no changes to the South Atlantic 

swordfish management measures in this 

proposed rule, or the affected 

environment or any environmental 

effects that have not been previously 

analyzed, NMFS has determined that 

the South Atlantic swordfish 

specifications portion of this proposed 

rule and impacts to the human 

environment as a result of the quota 

adjustments do not require additional 

NEPA analysis beyond that discussed in 

the 2007 EA. 

TABLE 1—2012 NORTH AND SOUTH ATLANTIC SWORDFISH QUOTAS

North Atlantic swordfish quota (mt dw) 2012 

Baseline Quota .................................................................................................................................................................................... 2,937.6 

Quota Transfer to Morocco ................................................................................................................................................................. (¥)112.8 

Total Underharvest from Previous Year + ............................................................................................................................................ 2,750.1 

Underharvest Carryover from Previous Year + .................................................................................................................................... 734.4 

Adjusted Quota .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3,559.2 

Quota Allocation ........................................................................................................... Directed Category ..................................... 3,209.2 

Incidental Category ................................... 300 

Reserve Category ..................................... 50 

South Atlantic swordfish quota (mt dw) 2012 

Baseline Quota .................................................................................................................................................................................... 75.2 

International Quota Transfers * ............................................................................................................................................................ (¥)75.2 

Total Underharvest from Previous Year + ............................................................................................................................................ 75.2 

Underharvest Carryover from Previous Year + .................................................................................................................................... 75.2 

Adjusted quota ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 75.2 

+ Underharvest is capped at 25 percent of the baseline quota allocation for the North Atlantic and 75.2 dw (100 mt ww) for the South Atlantic. 

* Under 09–03, 100 mt ww of the U.S. underharvest and base quota, as necessary, was transferred to Namibia (37.6 mt dw, 50 mt ww), Cote 

d’Ivore (18.8 mt dw, 25 mt ww), and Belize (18.8 mt dw, 25 mt ww). 

Public Hearings 

Comments on this proposed rule may 

be submitted via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, mail, or fax and 

comments may also be submitted at a 

public hearing. NMFS solicits 

comments on this proposed rule by May 

31, 2012. During the comment period, 

NMFS will hold 3 public hearings and 

one conference call for this proposed 

rule. The hearing locations will be 

physically accessible to people with 

disabilities. Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Steve Durkee at 

202–670–6637, at least 7 days prior to 

the meeting. 

Location Date Time Address 

Conference call .................... May 22, 2012 .................... 2:30–5:30 p.m. .................. Conference line: 888–957–9840, Passcode: 3094714. 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL ............... May 23, 2012 .................... 5:00–8:00 p.m. .................. Broward County Main Library, 100 S. Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301. 

Silver Spring, MD ................ May 25, 2012 .................... 2:00–5:00 p.m. .................. NMFS Science Center, 1301 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. 

Manahawkin, NJ .................. May 31, 2012 .................... 5:00–8:00 p.m. .................. Stafford Branch Library, 129 N. Main Street, 

Manahawkin, NJ 08050. 

The public is reminded that NMFS 

expects participants at the public 

hearings to conduct themselves 

appropriately. At the beginning of each 

public hearing, a representative of 

NMFS will explain the ground rules 

(e.g., alcohol is prohibited from the 

hearing room; attendees will be called to 

give their comments in the order in 

which they registered to speak; each 

attendee will have an equal amount of 

time to speak; and attendees should not 

interrupt one another). The NMFS 

representative will attempt to structure 

the meeting so that all attending 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 25673 

members of the public will be able to 

comment, if they so choose, regardless 

of the controversial nature of the 

subject(s). Attendees are expected to 

respect the ground rules, and, if they do 

not, they will be asked to leave the 

hearing. 

Classification 

Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator 

has determined that the proposed rule is 

consistent with the 2006 Consolidated 

HMS FMP and its amendments, other 

provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, and other applicable law, subject to 

further consideration after public 

comment. 

NMFS prepared a draft EA for this 

rule that discusses the impact on the 

environment that would occur as a 

result of this proposed action. In this 

proposed action, NMFS is considering 

implementation of ICCAT 

Recommendation 11–02 including quota 

allocation, international quota transfers, 

and modifications to minimum size 

requirements per the alternative ICCAT 

minimum size and requests from 

commercial fishery participants. This 

draft EA also analyzes the impacts of 

deducting fishery independent research 

landings of swordfish from the reserve 

category quota. A copy of the EA is 

available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

An Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as 

required by section 603 of the RFA 

(RFA). The IRFA describes the 

economic impact this proposed rule 

would have on small entities if adopted. 

A description of the action, why it is 

being considered, and the legal basis for 

this action are contained at the 

beginning of this section in the 

preamble and in the SUMMARY section of 

the preamble. A summary of the 

analysis follows. A copy of this analysis 

is available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

In compliance with section 603(b)(1) 

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the 

purpose of this proposed rulemaking is, 

consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act and the 2006 Consolidated HMS 

FMP and its amendments, to implement 

recommendations of ICCAT pursuant to 

ATCA and to achieve domestic 

management objectives under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

In compliance with section 603(b)(2) 

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the 

objectives of this proposed rulemaking 

are to consider changes to the HMS 

regulations at 50 CFR part 635 

consistent with ICCAT 

recommendations. In this action, NMFS 

proposes to adjust the 2012 Atlantic 

swordfish quotas and implement ICCAT 

Recommendation 11–02, which 

includes quota allocation, underharvest 

carryover provisions, international 

quota transfer requirements, and a new 

alternative minimum size measurement 

for Atlantic swordfish, consistent with 

ATCA, the 2006 Consolidated HMS 

FMP and other applicable laws. The 

regulatory changes would affect vessels 

that catch Atlantic swordfish, including 

commercial vessels that deploy PLL gear 

or hold HMS Angling and Charter/ 

Headboat permits. In compliance with 

ATCA, NMFS is required to implement 

domestic regulations consistent with 

recommendations adopted by ICCAT as 

may be necessary and appropriate. 

Section 603(b)(3) requires Federal 

agencies to provide an estimate of the 

number of small entities to which the 

rule would apply. In accordance with 

the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) size standards, NMFS used the 

following thresholds to determine if an 

entity regulated under this action would 

be considered a small entity: Average 

annual receipts less than $4.0 million 

for fish-harvesting; average annual 

receipts less than $6.5 million for 

charter/party boats; 100 or fewer 

employees for wholesale dealers; or 500 

or fewer employees for seafood 

processors. Using these thresholds, 

NMFS determined that all HMS permit 

holders are small entities. Specifically, 

this proposed action would apply to all 

participants in the Atlantic HMS 

commercial and recreational fisheries 

that retain Atlantic swordfish. As of 

October 2011, 245 vessels held a 

directed or incidental commercial 

swordfish permit and are reasonably 

expected to use PLL gear, 78 held a 

commercial handgear permit, 23,138 

held an Atlantic HMS Angling permit, 

and 4,194 vessels held an Atlantic HMS 

Charter/Headboat permit. Vessels 

holding these permits could be affected 

by this action. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

any new reporting, recordkeeping, or 

other compliance requirements (5 U.S.C. 

603 (b)(4)). Similarly, this proposed rule 

would not conflict, duplicate, or overlap 

with other relevant Federal rules (5 

U.S.C. 603(b)(5)). Fishermen, dealers, 

and other participants in these fisheries 

must comply with a number of 

international agreements, domestic 

laws, and other FMPs. These include, 

but are not limited to, the MagnusonStevens Act, ATCA, the High Seas 

Fishing Compliance Act, the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered 

Species Act, the National 

Environmental Policy Act, the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, and the 

Coastal Zone Management Act. NMFS 

does not believe that the proposed 

regulations would duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with any relevant regulations, 

Federal or otherwise. 

Under section 603(c), agencies are 

required to describe any alternatives to 

the proposed rule which accomplish the 

stated objectives and which minimize 

any significant economic impacts. These 

impacts are discussed below and in the 

draft EA for the proposed action. 

Additionally, the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 603 (c) (1)–(4)) lists four 

general categories of significant 

alternatives that would assist an agency 

in the development of significant 

alternatives. These categories of 

alternatives are: (1) Establishment of 

differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) clarification, consolidation, 

or simplification of compliance and 

reporting requirements under the rule 

for such small entities; (3) use of 

performance rather than design 

standards; and, (4) exemptions from 

coverage of the rule for small entities. 

In order to meet the objectives of this 

proposed rule, consistent with 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS cannot 

exempt small entities or change the 

reporting requirements only for small 

entities because all the entities affected 

are considered small entities. Thus, 

there are no alternatives discussed that 

fall under the first, second, and fourth 

categories described above. NMFS does 

not know of any performance or design 

standards that would satisfy the 

aforementioned objectives of this 

rulemaking while, concurrently, 

complying with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. Thus, there are no alternatives 

considered under the third category. As 

described below, NMFS analyzed 

several different alternatives in this 

proposed rulemaking and provides 

rationale for identifying the preferred 

alternatives to achieve the desired 

objective. 

NMFS has prepared this IRFA to 

analyze the impacts on small entities of 

the alternatives for implementing 

ICCAT Recommendation 11–02 for all 

domestic fishing categories that fish for 

Atlantic swordfish. The IRFA assesses 

the impacts of the various alternatives 

on the vessels that participate in the 

Atlantic HMS commercial and 

recreational fisheries that retain Atlantic 

swordfish, all of which are considered 

small entities. Six alternatives were 

considered and analyzed and include: 

(1) No Action; (2) Implement the 2011 

ICCAT North Atlantic swordfish 

Recommendation 11–02, which 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

25674 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

includes an annual quota transfer of 

112.8 mt dw from the United States to 

Morocco and an annual underharvest 

carryover limit of 25 percent of the base 

quota (annual carryover limit of 734.4 

mt dw); maintain status quo for North 

Atlantic quotas—Preferred Alternative; 

(3) Implement the alternative swordfish 

CK minimum size measurement of 25 

inches per the 2011 ICCAT North 

Atlantic swordfish Recommendation 

11–02—Preferred Alternative; (4) Use 

the CK measurement as the sole 

minimum size and discontinue the use 

of the LJFL minimum length standard in 

U.S. domestic fisheries; (5) Allow the 

LJFL minimum size to be applied to 

swordfish without a bill, provided the 

bill has been removed forward of the 

anterior tip of the lower jaw– Preferred 

Alternative; and (6) Reintroduce the 33 

pound minimum weight standard. 

Under Alternative 1, NMFS would not 

implement any of the measures 

contained in the 2011 ICCAT North 

Atlantic swordfish Recommendation 

11–02, including the quota allocation, 

underharvest carryover limit, 

international quota transfer, or CK 

minimum size measurement. 

Alternative 1 would likely have net 

direct minor adverse socioeconomic 

impacts in the short-term. No impacts 

would be expected if NMFS does not 

implement the quota portion of ICCAT 

Recommendation 11–02; however, 

direct, minor, adverse socioeconomic 

short-term impacts could result if NMFS 

does not implement the alternative CK 

minimum size. The U.S. quota specified 

in ICCAT Recommendation 11–02 is 

unchanged from previous years; 

therefore, the base quota would not be 

affected. The only effect of non-action 

would be that the transferred quota 

would not be deducted from the U.S. 

base quota. Since the United States has 

not harvested the entire allocated 

swordfish quota and is unlikely to do so 

in the short-term, deducting the 

transferred quota from the domestic 

base quota is unlikely to result in 

changes to annual revenue or revenue to 

individual vessels. Similarly, if NMFS 

does not reduce the annual carryover 

limit from 50 percent to 25 percent, the 

higher annual adjusted quota is unlikely 

to be utilized and is unlikely to result 

in changes in landings or revenue to 

individual vessels. However, if NMFS 

does not implement the alternative CK 

minimum size, there could be direct, 

minor, adverse socioeconomic shortterm impacts. The 25-inch CK minimum 

size is equivalent to the existing 47-inch 

LJFL minimum size. Currently, 

fishermen do not have a minimum size 

measurement that allows for the 

retention of dressed swordfish that 

measure at or slightly above 47 inches 

LJFL. If a fisherman catches a swordfish 

that meets the 47-inch LJFL minimum 

size but not the current 29-inch CK 

minimum size, the fisherman must 

either land the fish with the head 

naturally attached or discard the fish. 

Due to storage capacity limitations and 

uncertainty in minimum size 

regulations, fishermen sometimes 

choose to discard fish that legally meet 

the 47-inch LJFL measurement but do 

not meet the 29-inch CK minimum size. 

Similarly, dealers sometimes will not 

accept fish that meet the 47-inch LJFL 

measurement but not the 29-inch CK 

minimum size. These fish are landed 

with the head naturally attached, but 

once removed, some dealers have 

expressed concern that they may be 

found out of compliance with minimum 

size regulations in the absence of proof 

that the fish was landed with the head 

and met the 47-inch LJFL measurement. 

For these reasons, if NMFS does not 

implement the alternative CK minimum 

size, fishermen would continue to 

discard (and not land) some fish that 

meet the LJFL minimum size but not the 

current CK minimum size, resulting in 

direct short-term minor adverse 

socioeconomic impacts. Quantifying the 

economic impact to individual vessels 

is difficult without estimates of the 

number of legal fish that are discarded; 

however, fish in this size range are often 

encountered by pelagic longline, 

handgear, and incidental (including 

squid trawl) swordfish permit holders. 

These permit holders would likely 

experience minor adverse economic 

impacts if the CK minimum size was not 

changed to 25 inches. 

In the long-term, Alternative 1 could 

have net, direct, minor beneficial 

socioeconomic impacts. Due to a variety 

of swordfish revitalization efforts within 

and outside of the Agency, NMFS 

expects that U.S. fishermen could 

achieve near 100 percent quota 

utilization. If NMFS does not take action 

to reduce the base quota due to the 

annual quota transfer to Morocco nor 

reduce the adjusted quota by limiting 

underharvest carryover, the domestic 

fishery could land more swordfish 

resulting in higher annual revenues. The 

United States is allocated 2,937.6 mt dw 

of North Atlantic swordfish. If 112.8 mt 

dw of quota is not transferred to 

Morocco, and if up to 50 percent of the 

base quota can be carried over, the total 

U.S. adjusted quota could reach 4406.4 

mt dw (9,714,349 lb dw). Assuming an 

average ex-vessel price of $4.31 per 

pound and 100 percent quota 

utilization, the total possible annual 

gross revenues across the domestic 

fishery would be estimated to be 

$41,868,844 under Alternative 1. In 

2011, there were 178 directed swordfish 

permit holders, 67 incidental swordfish 

permit holders, and 78 swordfish 

handgear permit holders. The Incidental 

HMS Squid Trawl Permit, which allows 

for limited retention of swordfish caught 

in the Illex squid trawl fishery, became 

effective toward the end of 2011; 

therefore, NMFS does not yet have a 

reliable estimate of the number of 

vessels that have or will avail 

themselves of this permit. Due to quota 

tracking complexities, NMFS does not 

have a proportional breakdown of the 

total landings by permit type; however, 

the average annual ex-vessel revenue 

across all swordfish permit types is 

$129,625 per vessel ($41,868,844/(178 

directed swordfish permit holders, 67 

incidental swordfish permit holders, 

and 78 swordfish handgear permit 

holders)). Since retention limits are 

higher for directed permit holders than 

incidental permit holders, actual per 

vessel revenue would likely be higher 

for directed permit holders and lower 

for incidental permit holders. Handgear 

permit holders do not have a retention 

limit; however, the gear used by these 

permit holders is less efficient, 

therefore, actual per vessel revenue is 

somewhere in between directed and 

incidental permit holders. As in the 

short-term, fishermen might still discard 

fish that meet the LJFL minimum size 

but not the current minimum size, 

precluding ex-vessel revenue from these 

landings; however, the larger quota 

would likely offset this impact. Under 

ATCA, the United States shall 

promulgate regulations as may be 

necessary and appropriate to implement 

binding recommendations of ICCAT and 

because this alternative would not 

implement ICCAT Recommendation 11– 

02, NMFS does not prefer this 

alternative at this time. 

Alternative 2 would implement the 

ICCAT Recommendation 11–02 

provisions pertaining to quota 

allocation, the underharvest carryover 

limit, and the quota transfer to Morocco. 

Alternative 2 would likely have direct 

neutral socioeconomic impacts in the 

short-term. As noted in the ecological 

impact discussion for Alternative 1, the 

United States is unlikely to achieve 100 

percent quota utilization in the shortterm. Consequently, minor changes to 

the base quota through international 

quota transfers or to the adjusted quota 

through reduced underharvest carryover 

limits are unlikely to impact swordfish 

fishing effort levels or annual revenues. 

In the long-term, however, Alternative 2 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 25675 

could have direct minor adverse 

socioeconomic impacts assuming the 

U.S. swordfish fishery nears 100 percent 

quota utilization. At that time, an 

adjusted quota that reflects the annual 

international quota transfer to Morocco 

and the lower underharvest carryover 

limit could lead to a lower available 

quota than the level possible under 

Alternative 1. This lower level of 

adjusted quota would result in a 

decrease in the total possible fisherywide annual revenue. If NMFS deducts 

the 112.8 mt dw quota transfer from the 

U.S. base quota of 2,937.6 mt dw and 

limits underharvest carryover to 25 

percent, the total U.S. adjusted quota 

could reach 3,559.2 mt dw (7,846,612 

lbs dw). Assuming an average ex-vessel 

price of $4.31 per pound and 100 

percent quota utilization, total possible 

gross revenues across the domestic 

fishery would be estimated to be 

$33,818,898 under Alternative 2. 

Therefore, Alternative 2 could result in 

annual gross revenues that are 

$8,049,946 less ($41,868,844— 

$33,818,898) than the possible annual 

gross revenues under Alternative 1. This 

potential decrease in average annual exvessel revenue across all swordfish 

permit types is $24,922 per vessel 

($8,049,946/(178 directed swordfish 

permit holders, 67 incidental swordfish 

permit holders, and 78 swordfish 

handgear permit holders)). Since 

retention limits are higher for directed 

permit holders than incidental permit 

holders, actual per vessel revenue loss 

would likely be higher for directed 

permit holders and lower for incidental 

permit holders. Handgear permit 

holders do not have a retention limit; 

however, the gear used by these permit 

holders is less efficient, therefore, actual 

per vessel revenue loss is somewhere in 

between directed and incidental permit 

holders. The United States, however, is 

required to implement these measures 

in order to be in compliance with 

ICCAT recommendation 11–02 under 

ATCA; therefore, NMFS prefers this 

alternative at this time. 

Under Alternative 3, NMFS would 

implement the swordfish minimum size 

portion of the 2011 ICCAT swordfish 

Recommendation 11–02, which allows a 

25-inch CK measurement. This 

alternative would likely have direct, 

moderate, beneficial socioeconomic 

impacts in both the short- and longterm. The 25-inch CK minimum size is 

equivalent to the existing 47-inch LJFL 

minimum size. Currently, fishermen do 

not have a minimum size measurement 

that allows for the retention of dressed 

swordfish that measure at or slightly 

above 47 inches LJFL. If a fisherman 

catches a swordfish that meets the 47- 

inch LJFL minimum size but not the 

current 29-inch CK minimum size, the 

fisherman must either land the fish with 

the head naturally attached or discard 

the fish. Due to storage capacity 

limitations and uncertainty in minimum 

size regulations, fishermen sometimes 

choose to discard fish that legally meet 

the 47-inch LJFL measurement but do 

not meet the 29-inch CK minimum size. 

Similarly, dealers sometimes will not 

accept fish that meet the 47-inch LJFL 

measurement but not the 29-inch CK 

minimum size. These fish are landed 

with the head naturally attached, but 

once removed, some dealers have 

expressed concern that a minimum size 

violation could occur in the absence of 

proof that the fish was landed with the 

head and met the 47-inch LJFL 

measurement. For these reasons, 

implementing the ICCAT alternative 

minimum CK size of 25 inches could 

lead to increased retention of previously 

discarded legal fish that measure at or 

slightly above 47 inches LJFL, since this 

CK minimum size is equivalent to a 

greater number of 47-inch LJFL fish. 

Fish in this size range are the most 

frequently encountered fish; therefore, 

increased landings of fish in this size 

range are not trivial. The increase in 

retained catch could lead to increased 

annual revenues for both fishermen and 

dealers, resulting in direct, moderate, 

beneficial socioeconomic impacts in 

both the short- and long-term. 

Quantifying the economic impact to 

individual vessels is difficult without 

estimates on the number of legal fish 

that are discarded; however, fish in this 

size range are often encountered by 

pelagic longline, handgear, and 

incidental (including squid trawl) 

swordfish permit holders. These permit 

holders would likely experience minor 

beneficial economic impacts if the CK 

minimum size is changed to 25 inches. 

Because this alternative provides these 

benefits to fishermen but does not lead 

to increased mortality of undersized 

swordfish, NMFS prefers this alternative 

at this time. 

Under Alternative 4, NMFS would 

use the CK measurement as the sole 

minimum size and discontinue the use 

of the LJFL minimum size in U.S. 

domestic fisheries. This alternative 

would be unlikely to have any direct 

socioeconomic impacts in the short- or 

long-term, provided that the new ICCAT 

alternative CK minimum size of 25 

inches is implemented under 

Alternative 4. The current LJFL 

minimum size of 47 inches and the 

proposed CK minimum size of 25 inches 

equate to the same size fish in the 

majority of instances. Therefore, the 

LJFL minimum size could be redundant 

with the CK minimum size. Removal of 

the LFJL minimum size and use of only 

the CK measurement could simplify 

enforcement and compliance with 

minimum size requirements. 

Additionally, since the two minimum 

sizes refer to the same size fish, removal 

of the LJFL minimum size is unlikely to 

result in increased landings for 

individual vessels. However, removing 

one of the minimum size measurements 

could reduce flexibility for fishermen in 

how they choose to measure and land 

swordfish; therefore NMFS does not 

prefer this alternative at this time. 

Under Alternative 5, NMFS would 

allow the LJFL minimum size to be 

applied to swordfish without a bill, 

provided the bill has been removed 

forward of the anterior tip of the lower 

jaw. Adoption of Alternative 5 would 

likely result in short- and long-term 

direct, minor, beneficial socioeconomic 

impacts. Swordfish are currently 

measured using either the lower jaw and 

fork of the tail (in the case of LJFL) or 

the cleithrum and caudal keel (in the 

case of CK) as endpoints. Neither of 

these measurement methods require the 

bill of the swordfish to be attached; 

therefore, the bill is unnecessary in 

determining if a swordfish is of legal 

size. The bill of a swordfish can 

complicate fishing operations by 

presenting safety concerns and 

imposing storage capacity costs. If 

NMFS allows fishermen to continue to 

employ the LJFL measurement in the 

absence of the bill, commercial vessels 

could more efficiently pack the 

swordfish catch, leaving more room for 

additional product. This additional 

product could increase revenues for 

both fishermen and dealers, although 

quantifying the economic benefits on a 

per-vessel basis is not possible. Because 

this alternative would simplify fishing 

operations and provide additional 

economic benefits for both fishermen 

and dealers without affecting 

compliance of minimum size 

requirements or impacting the 

sustainability of the stock, NMFS 

prefers Alternative 5 at this time. 

Under Alternative 6, NMFS would 

reintroduce the 33-pound minimum 

weight standard. This alternative would 

be unlikely to have any net direct 

socioeconomics in the short- or longterm, provided that the new ICCAT 

alternative CK minimum size of 25 

inches is implemented under 

Alternative 4. NMFS employed the 33- 

pound minimum weight, in 

combination with two minimum 

lengths, until 2009. At that time, NMFS 

removed the 33-pound minimum weight 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

25676 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

and specified landing condition-specific 

minimum sizes. The impetus for this 

change was twofold. First, the use of 

three minimum sizes (weight, LJFL, and 

CK) complicated minimum size 

enforcement because all three 

measurements had to be taken to prove 

that a fish was undersized. This can 

require substantial time investments, 

particularly in cases with thousands of 

pounds of swordfish. Second, neither 

enforcement agents nor fishermen could 

definitively determine the accurate 

weight and subsequent legality of fish 

while at sea, presenting both 

compliance and enforcement problems. 

To address these enforcement and 

compliance complexities, NMFS 

simplified the swordfish minimum size 

requirements by removing the 33-pound 

minimum weight and specified landing 

condition-specific minimum lengths. 

Reintroducing the minimum dressed 

weight could provide some benefits and 

some disadvantages. The 33-pound 

minimum weight and the proposed 25- 

inch CK minimum size equate to the 

same size fish in the majority of 

instances. The primary benefit is that 

fishermen might be able to retain more 

swordfish because some fish meet the 

minimum weight but not the minimum 

length. Reintroducing the minimum 

weight could provide the opportunity to 

retain these fish. Disadvantages include 

those discussed above, including the 

enforcement and compliance 

difficulties. Since a definitive weight 

cannot be taken at sea, fishermen are 

unlikely to be able to determine the 

legality of swordfish weighing near 33 

pounds. This presents uncertainties and 

compliance difficulties. The possible 

benefits and possible disadvantages, 

when taken together, result in neutral 

socioeconomic impacts across the 

fishery and to individual vessels. 

Additionally, since the 33-pound 

minimum weight and the proposed 25- 

inch CK minimum size equate to the 

same size fish in the majority of 

instances, reintroducing the minimum 

weight standard could be unnecessary. 

Since Alternative 7 poses enforcement 

and compliance concerns, and because 

the socioeconomic impacts may be 

neutral compared to the beneficial 

socioeconomic impacts under 

Alternatives 4 and 6, NMFS does not 

prefer this alternative at this time. 

However, should the enforcement and 

compliance issues be resolved in the 

future, NMFS may reconsider 

reintroduction of the 33-pound 

minimum weight standard. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635 

Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, 

Foreign relations, Imports, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Treaties. 

Dated: April 26, 2012. 

Alan D. Risenhoover, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For reasons set out in the preamble, 

50 CFR part 635 is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY 

MIGRATORY SPECIES 

1. The authority citation for part 635 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 

1801 et seq. 

2. In § 635.2, revise the definitions for 

‘‘LJFL’’ and ‘‘Naturally attached’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 635.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

LJFL (lower jaw-fork length) means 

the straight-line measurement of a fish 

from the anterior tip of the lower jaw to 

the fork of the caudal fin. The 

measurement is not made along the 

curve of the body. 

* * * * * 

Naturally attached, as it is used to 

describe shark fins refers to shark fins 

that remain attached to the shark carcass 

via at least some portion of uncut skin. 

As used to describe the head of a 

swordfish, naturally attached refers to 

the whole head remaining fully attached 

to the carcass except for the bill, which 

may be removed provided it has been 

removed forward of the anterior tip of 

the lower jaw. 

* * * * * 

3. In § 635.20, paragraph (f)(2) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 635.20 Size limits. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) If the head of a swordfish is no 

longer naturally attached, the CK 

measurement is the sole criterion for 

determining the size of a swordfish. No 

person shall take, retain, possess, or 

land a dressed North or South Atlantic 

swordfish taken from its management 

unit that is not equal to or greater than 

25 inches (63 cm) CK length. A 

swordfish that is damaged by shark bites 

may be retained only if the length of the 

remainder of the carcass is equal to or 

greater than 25 inches (63 cm) CK 

length. 

* * * * * 

4. In § 635.27, paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A), 

(c)(1)(i)(D), (c)(2)(ii), and (c)(3)(ii) are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 635.27 Quotas. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) A swordfish from the North 

Atlantic stock caught prior to the 

directed fishery closure by a vessel for 

which a directed fishery permit, or a 

handgear permit for swordfish, has been 

issued or is required to be issued is 

counted against the directed fishery 

quota. The total baseline annual fishery 

quota, before any adjustments, is 2,937.6 

mt dw for each fishing year. Consistent 

with applicable ICCAT 

recommendations, a portion of the total 

baseline annual fishery quota may be 

used for transfers to another ICCAT 

contracting party. The annual directed 

category quota is calculated by adjusting 

for over- or underharvests, dead 

discards, any applicable transfers, the 

incidental category quota, the reserve 

quota and other adjustments as needed, 

and is subdivided into two equal semiannual: one for January 1 through June 

30, and the other for July 1 through 

December 31. 

* * * * * 

(D) 50 mt of the annual fishery quota 

of North Atlantic swordfish may be held 

in reserve for inseason adjustments to 

fishing categories, to compensate for 

projected or actual overharvest in any 

category, for fishery research, or for 

other purposes consistent with 

management objectives. 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) If NMFS determines that the 

annual incidental catch quota will not 

be taken before the end of the fishing 

year, excess quota may be allocated to 

the directed fishery quota or to the 

reserve, as necessary. If NMFS 

determines that the annual directed 

catch quota will not be taken before the 

end of the fishing year, some of the 

excess quota may be allocated to the 

incidental fishery quota or to the 

reserve, as necessary. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) If consistent with applicable 

ICCAT recommendations, total landings 

above or below the specific North 

Atlantic or South Atlantic swordfish 

annual quota will be subtracted from, or 

added to, the following year’s quota for 

that area. As necessary to meet 

management objectives, such carryover 

adjustments may be apportioned to 

fishing categories and/or to the reserve. 

Carryover adjustments for the North 

Atlantic shall be limited to 25 percent 

of the baseline quota allocation for that 

year. Carryover adjustments for the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 25677 

South Atlantic shall be limited to 100 

mt ww (75.2 mt dw) for that year. Any 

adjustments to the 12-month directed 

fishery quota will be apportioned 

equally between the two semiannual 

fishing seasons. NMFS will file with the 

Office of the Federal Register for 

publication any adjustment or 

apportionment made under this 

paragraph. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–10459 Filed 4–30–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS