81168 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

Class E airspace designations are 

published in paragraph 6005 of FAA 

Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, 

and effective September 15, 2020, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, is 

published yearly and effective on 

September 15. 

Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

The FAA has determined that this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current, is non-controversial, and 

unlikely to result in adverse or negative 

comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1F, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final 

regulatory action. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me, the Federal 

Aviation Administration proposes to 

amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 

40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 

1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated July 21, 2020, and 

effective September 15, 2020, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6005. Class E Airspace Areas 

Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More 

Above the Surface of the Earth. 

* * * * * 

ACE KS E5 Leoti, KS [New] 

Mark Hoard Memorial Airport, KS 

(Lat. 38°27′27′′ N, long. 101°21′03′′ W) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile 

radius of Mark Hoard Memorial Airport. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on 

December 7, 2020. 

B.G. Chew, 

Acting Group Manager, Operations Support 

Group, Western Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27477 Filed 12–14–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 229 

[Docket No. 201123–0312] 

RIN 0648–BF90 

Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental 

to Commercial Fishing Operations; 

Amendment to the Atlantic Pelagic 

Longline Take Reduction Plan 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to amend the 

regulations implementing the Atlantic 

Pelagic Longline Take Reduction Plan 

(hereinafter called the PLTRP or the 

Plan) to reduce mortalities and serious 

injuries of short-finned pilot whales 

incidental to the Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery to meet the long-term 

goal of the Plan as required by the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA). The PLTRP currently contains 

both regulatory and non-regulatory 

management measures to reduce 

mortality and serious injury of pilot 

whales (Globicephala spp.) and Risso’s 

dolphins (Grampus griseus), in the 

Atlantic portion of the Category I 

Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico large pelagics longline fishery 

(hereinafter called Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery). The proposed 

amendments to the PLTRP are based on 

consensus recommendations submitted 

by the Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take 

Reduction Team (hereinafter called the 

PLTRT or the Team) and include: 

Removing the Cape Hatteras Special 

Research Area and the associated 

special observer and research 

participation requirements for 

fishermen operating in that area, 

modifying the mainline length 

restrictions for pelagic longline sets in 

the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) 

portion of the Mid-Atlantic Bight, and 

implementing required hook and 

gangion modifications in the EEZ 

portion of the Florida East Coast, South 

Atlantic Bight, Mid-Atlantic Bight and 

Northeast Coastal fishing areas. 

Furthermore, NMFS is removing Risso’s 

dolphins and long-finned pilot whales 

from the Plan’s scope. 

DATES: Written comments on the 

proposed rule must be received no later 

than 5 p.m. eastern time on February 16, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this proposed rule, identified by 

0648–BF90, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=

NOAA-NMFS-2016-0105, click the 

‘‘Comment Now!’ icon, complete the 

required fields, and enter or attach your 

comments. 

• Mail: Erin Fouge`res, Southeast 

Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th 

Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. 

Instructions: NMFS may not consider 

comments if they are sent by any other 

method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the 

comment period ends. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and NMFS will generally post for public 

viewing on to www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (for example, name, 

address, etc.), confidential business 

information, or otherwise sensitive 

information submitted voluntarily by 

the sender is publicly accessible. NMFS 

will accept anonymous comments (enter 

N/A in the required fields, if you wish 

to remain anonymous). You may submit 

attachments to electronic comments in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 

Adobe PDF file formats only. 

The draft Environmental Assessment, 

Regulatory Impact Review, Regulatory 

Flexibility Act Analysis, and references 

for the Proposed rule, can be found in 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal as 

supplementary document. Background 

documents for the PLTRP can be 

downloaded from the Take Reduction 

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 81169 

website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

pelagic-longline-take-reduction-plan, or 

by submitting a request to the Team 

coordinator, Erin Fouge`res, 727–824– 

5312. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin 

Fouge`res, NMFS, Southeast Region, 

727–824–5312, or Kristy Long, NMFS, 

Office of Protected Resources, 206–526– 

4792. Individuals who use 

telecommunications devices for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339 

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time, 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 118(f) of the MMPA requires 

NMFS to develop and implement take 

reduction plans to assist in the recovery 

of, or prevent the depletion of, each 

strategic marine mammal stock that 

interacts with Category I or II fisheries. 

Category I fisheries are fisheries that 

have frequent incidental mortality and 

serious injury of marine mammals, and 

Category II fisheries are fisheries that 

have occasional incidental mortality 

and serious injury of marine mammals. 

The MMPA also provides NMFS 

discretion to develop and implement a 

take reduction plan for any other marine 

mammal stocks that interact with a 

Category I fishery, which the agency 

determines, after notice and opportunity 

for public comment, has a high level of 

mortality and serious injury across a 

number of such marine mammal stocks. 

The MMPA defines a strategic stock 

as a marine mammal stock: (1) For 

which the level of direct human-caused 

mortality exceeds the potential 

biological removal (PBR) level; (2) 

which, based on the best available 

scientific information, is declining and 

is likely to be listed as a threatened 

species under the Endangered Species 

Act (ESA) in the foreseeable future; or 

(3) which is listed as threatened or 

endangered under the ESA, or is 

designated as a depleted species under 

the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1362(19)). The 

PBR level is the maximum number of 

animals, not including natural 

mortalities, which can be removed 

annually from a stock, while allowing 

that stock to reach or maintain its 

optimum sustainable population level 

(50 CFR 229.2). 

In accordance with section 118(f) of 

the MMPA (16 U.S.C 1387), the 

immediate goal of a take reduction plan 

is to reduce, within six months of its 

implementation, the incidental 

mortality or serious injury of marine 

mammals taken in the course of 

commercial fishing operations to levels 

less than the PBR level for the stock. 

The long-term goal of a take reduction 

plan is to reduce, within 5 years of its 

implementation, the incidental 

mortality or serious injury of marine 

mammals taken in the course of 

commercial fishing to insignificant 

levels approaching a zero mortality and 

serious injury rate (i.e., insignificance 

threshold or zero mortality rate goal), 

which is 10 percent of the PBR level for 

a marine mammal stock (69 FR 43338, 

July 20, 2004). The long-term goal takes 

into account the economics of the 

fishery, the availability of existing 

technology, and existing state or 

regional fishery management plans. The 

MMPA also requires NMFS to amend 

take reduction plans and implementing 

regulations as needed to meet these 

requirements and goals. 

History of the PLTRT 

The impetus for the PLTRP was a 

2003 settlement agreement between 

NMFS and the Center for Biological 

Diversity that required convening a 

Take Reduction Team (the PLTRT or the 

Team) under the MMPA by June 30, 

2005, to address mortality and serious 

injury of Western North Atlantic pilot 

whales (Globicephala spp.) and 

common dolphins (Delphinus delphis 

delphis) in the Atlantic pelagic longline 

fishery, which was then, and currently 

still is, listed as a Category I fishery. At 

the time of the settlement agreement, 

the western North Atlantic stocks of 

these species were identified as strategic 

stocks. 

However, as the Plan was being 

developed, long-finned pilot whales 

(Globicephala melas melas) and shortfinned pilot whales (Globicephala 

macrorhynchus) and common dolphins 

were all reclassified as non-strategic 

stocks (Waring et al. 2006). Because 

incidental mortality and serious injury 

of short-finned and long-finned pilot 

whales in the Atlantic pelagic longline 

fishery continued to exceed the 

insignificance threshold (although not 

the PBR level) for the stocks, these 

species were included under the PLTRP. 

Common dolphins, even though 

included in the settlement agreement, 

were not considered in the PLTRP 

because there had been no recent 

observed mortalities or serious injuries. 

Risso’s dolphins, on the other hand, 

were considered within the scope of the 

PLTRP, even though the species was not 

included in the settlement agreement 

and was not a strategic stock at the time, 

because mortalities and serious injuries 

incidental to the Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery exceeded the 

insignificance threshold (although not 

the PBR level) for the stock, similar to 

short-finned and long-finned pilot 

whales. 

In accordance with the MMPA and 

the settlement agreement, NMFS 

convened the PLTRT in June 2005. 

NMFS announced the establishment of 

the PLTRT on June 22, 2005, in the 

Federal Register (70 FR 36120). NMFS 

selected team members according to 

guidance provided in section 

118(f)(6)(C) of the MMPA. Members of 

the PLTRT include commercial 

fishermen and representatives of the 

Atlantic Pelagic Longline Fishing 

industry, environmental groups, marine 

mammal biologists, fisheries biologists, 

and representatives of the Mid-Atlantic 

Fishery Management Council, the 

Marine Mammal Commission, and 

NMFS. 

The incidental mortality and serious 

injury for both pilot whales and Risso’s 

dolphins exceeded the insignificance 

threshold, yet remained below the PBR 

level, and were considered non-strategic 

stocks that interact with a Category I 

fishery. Therefore, in accordance with 

the long-term goal of section 118(f)(2) of 

the MMPA, NMFS directed the PLTRT 

to develop and submit a draft Take 

Reduction Plan to the agency within 11 

months that focused on reducing 

incidental mortalities and serious 

injuries of pilot whales and Risso’s 

dolphins to a level approaching the 

insignificance threshold within five 

years of implementation of the Plan. 

Four professionally-facilitated 

meetings and two full-team conference 

calls were held between June 2005 and 

May 2006. The PLTRT reached 

consensus at the May 2006 meeting, and 

on June 8, 2006, submitted to NMFS a 

Draft PLTRP, including 

recommendations for take reduction 

measures, as well as research needs and 

other non-regulatory measures (PLTRT, 

2006). Based on the Draft PLTRP, NMFS 

published a proposed rule (73 FR 35623, 

June 24, 2008) and a final rule (74 FR 

23349, May 19, 2009) implementing the 

PLTRP, which became effective on June 

18, 2009 (50 CFR 229.36). Since 

implementation of the PLTRP, the Team 

has continued to monitor the 

effectiveness of the Plan and review 

recent research relevant to the PLTRT 

and new scientific information on 

updated estimates of abundance and 

mortality and serious injury for pilot 

whales and Risso’s dolphins. 

Western North Atlantic Pilot Whales 

The distribution of the western North 

Atlantic stock of short-finned pilot 

whale overlaps in some areas with that 

of the western North Atlantic longVerDate Sep<11>2014 17:10 Dec 14, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15DEP1.SGM 15DEP1
81170 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

finned pilot whale stock. The area of 

overlap between the western North 

Atlantic stocks of short-finned and longfinned pilot whales occurs primarily 

along the shelf break between 38°N and 

40°N latitude (Garrison and Rosel 2017). 

The full latitudinal range of each 

species remains uncertain; however, 

south of Cape Hatteras, NC, most pilot 

whale sightings are expected to be shortfinned pilot whales, while north of 

∼42°N most pilot whale sightings are 

expected to be long-finned pilot whales 

(Garrison and Rosel 2017). Additionally, 

these species are difficult to 

differentiate at sea and cannot be 

reliably visually identified during either 

abundance surveys or observations of 

fishery mortality without high-quality 

photographs (Rone and Pace 2012). 

Therefore, the ability to separately 

assess the two species in U.S. Atlantic 

waters is complex and requires 

additional information on seasonal 

spatial distribution (Hayes et al. 2019). 

All estimated mortalities and serious 

injuries of pilot whales incidental to the 

Atlantic pelagic longline fishery from 

2010 to 2013 were assigned exclusively 

to short-finned pilot whales (Hayes et al. 

2019). From 2014 to 2016, pilot whale 

estimated mortalities and serious 

injuries incidental to the Atlantic 

pelagic longline fishery were 

apportioned between the short-finned 

and long-finned pilot whale stocks 

according to a logistic regression model 

(Garrison and Rosel 2017). Short-finned 

pilot whales made up the majority of the 

apportioned estimated mortality and 

serious injury, with only 1 percent and 

4 percent of the estimated mortalities 

and serious injuries between 2014 and 

2016 being apportioned to long-finned 

pilot whales (Hayes et al. 2019). 

The minimum population estimate for 

short-finned pilot whales in the western 

North Atlantic is 23,637 (Hayes et al. 

2019). Based on the years 2012 through 

2016, the short-finned pilot whale PBR 

level was 236 and the estimated mean 

annual mortality and serious injury 

incidental to pelagic longline fishing 

was 168 short-finned pilot whales 

(Coefficient of Variation, or CV=0.13; 

Hayes et al., 2019). Thus, the average 

annual mortality and serious injury of 

the western North Atlantic stock of 

short-finned pilot whales incidental to 

the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery is 

approaching the PBR level (71 percent 

of the PBR level). 

The minimum population estimate for 

long-finned pilot whales in the western 

North Atlantic is 3,464 (Hayes et al. 

2019). Based on the years 2012 through 

2016, the long-finned pilot whale PBR 

level was 35 and the estimated mean 

annual mortality and serious injury 

incidental to pelagic longline fishing 

was 2.6 long-finned pilot whales 

(CV=0.34; Hayes et al. 2019). Thus, the 

average annual mortality and serious 

injury of the western North Atlantic 

stock of long-finned pilot whales 

incidental to the Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery is 7.4 percent of the 

PBR level, which is below the 

insignificance threshold of 10 percent of 

the PBR level. 

Western North Atlantic Risso’s 

Dolphins 

Risso’s dolphins occur worldwide in 

warm temperate and tropical waters, 

and in the Northwest Atlantic occur 

from Florida to eastern Newfoundland 

and in general, in the U.S. Atlantic EEZ, 

the population occupies the midAtlantic continental shelf edge year 

round, and is rarely seen in the Gulf of 

Maine (Hayes et al. 2019). The 

minimum population estimate for the 

western North Atlantic stock of Risso’s 

dolphin is 12,619 (Hayes et al., 2019). 

Based on the years 2012 through 2016, 

the Risso’s dolphin PBR level for the 

western North Atlantic stock was 126 

and average annual mortality and 

serious injury incidental to pelagic 

longline fishing was 9.8 (CV=0.41; 

Hayes et al., 2019). Thus, the average 

annual mortality and serious injury of 

the western North Atlantic stock of 

Risso’s dolphins incidental to the 

Atlantic pelagic longline fishery is 7.8 

percent of the PBR level, which is below 

the insignificance threshold of 10 

percent of the PBR level. 

Removing Long-Finned Pilot Whales 

and Risso’s Dolphins From the PLTRP 

Scope 

At the time the PLTRT was 

established (70 FR 36120; June 22, 2005) 

both long-finned and short-finned pilot 

whales were included in the Plan 

because the abundance estimate was 

combined for both species and separate 

mortality and serious injury estimates 

incidental to the Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery were unknown. 

However, since the Plan’s 

implementation, abundance estimates 

for each species have been developed 

(Waring et al., 2011). Additionally, 

mortality and serious injury estimates 

for the two species incidental to the 

Atlantic pelagic longline fishery have 

been calculated (Waring et al., 2014). 

More recent information has revealed 

that the long-finned pilot whale’s 

mortality and serious injury incidental 

to the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery 

(Hayes et al. 2019) has been below that 

stock’s insignificance threshold. 

Therefore, although the initial PLTRP 

addressed both short-finned and longfinned pilot whales, NMFS is proposing 

to remove long-finned pilot whales from 

consideration under the Plan. 

Similarly, the Team originally 

expanded the scope of the PLTRP to 

include Risso’s dolphins because the 

estimated mortality and serious injury 

levels were exceeding the insignificance 

threshold for the stock (PLTRP, 2006). 

Since the Plan was implemented in 

2009, the level of mortality and serious 

injury for Risso’s dolphins incidental to 

the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery has 

been below the stock’s insignificance 

threshold. Therefore, NMFS is 

proposing to remove Risso’s dolphin 

from consideration under the PLTRP. 

Amending the PLTRP 

Since implementation of the PLTRP 

in June 2009, NMFS convened two 

professionally-facilitated in-person 

meetings (August 2012 and December 

2015) and six webinars/conference calls 

(September 2010, June 2014, March 

2015, September 2016, October 2016, 

and September 2019) of the PLTRT. 

During the 2015 in-person meeting of 

the Team, best available data indicated 

that the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery 

had exceeded the insignificance 

threshold for the incidental takes of 

short-finned pilot whales since the 

implementation of the Plan and was 

expected to continue to exceed the 

insignificance threshold indicating that 

the PLTRP had not been effective in 

meeting the long-term goal of section 

118(f)(2) of the MMPA (i.e., to reduce 

incidental mortalities and serious 

injuries of short-finned pilot whales to 

a level approaching the stock’s 

insignificance threshold). As a result, 

the Team developed a suite of 

consensus non-regulatory and 

regulatory recommendations to amend 

the Plan (PLTRP, 2015; PLTRP, 2016). 

For more details on these recommended 

measures, please see the ADDRESSES

section for where to request the 

December 2015, September 2016, and 

October 2016 meeting summaries. 

Compliance and Enforcement 

Monitoring 

The PLTRP Monitoring Strategy 

(NMFS, 2013) is a comprehensive plan 

that describes the methods for 

monitoring regulatory compliance and 

the effectiveness of the PLTRP. 

Compliance monitoring includes 

enforcement activities, research, 

collection of observer data, evaluation of 

self-reported fishing information, and 

education and outreach efforts. 

Effectiveness monitoring examines 

whether the long-term statutory goals 

described in the MMPA (i.e., to reduce 

incidental mortalities and serious 

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 81171 

injuries of short-finned pilot whales to 

a level approaching the stock’s 

insignificance threshold) are being 

achieved. NMFS intends to update the 

monitoring strategy to reflect the new 

regulatory and non-regulatory 

components of the PLTRP. 

Proposed Non-Regulatory Changes to 

the PLTRP 

The non-regulatory changes to the 

PLTRP recommended by the PLTRT that 

NMFS proposes to implement include: 

1. Convene a safe handling and 

release work group to develop potential 

updates to the current safe handling and 

release protocols for marine mammal 

interactions in the Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery. The work group would 

include PLTRT members, commercial 

fishermen, marine mammal health and 

disentanglement experts, and others 

with expertise and knowledge related to 

handling marine mammals and/or 

pelagic longline fishing practices. 

2. Update observer protocols and 

fishery observer forms to increase 

information collected from marine 

mammal interaction and depredation 

events in the Atlantic pelagic longline 

fishery. 

Proposed Regulatory Changes to the 

PLTRP 

Although not currently exceeding the 

PBR level, estimated mean annual 

mortality and serious injury of shortfinned pilot whales incidental to the 

Atlantic pelagic longline fishery 

remains high at roughly 71 percent of 

the PBR level (Hayes et al. 2019). 

Consequently, mortality and serious 

injury of short-finned pilot whales 

incidental to the Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery remains above the 

insignificance threshold of 10 percent of 

the PBR level, and the long-term goal of 

the PLTRP is not being met. Therefore, 

NMFS proposes to implement the 

PLTRT’s December 2015 and October 

2016 consensus recommendations to 

amend the regulations for the Atlantic 

pelagic longline fishery. NMFS believes 

these measures are necessary to remove 

ineffective regulations and to implement 

new regulations to reduce mortality and 

serious injury of the western North 

Atlantic stock of short-finned pilot 

whales incidental to the Atlantic pelagic 

longline fishery. The implementing 

regulations for the PLTRP are at 50 CFR 

229.36, and related definitions are at 50 

CFR 229.2. 

The regulatory changes recommended 

by the PLTRT that NMFS proposes to 

implement include: 

1. Remove the Cape Hatteras Special 

Research Area, along with the special 

observer and research participation 

requirements for fishermen operating in 

that area (50 CFR 229.36(d)). 

When the Plan was developed, the 

area just north of Cape Hatteras, which 

became the Cape Hatteras Special 

Research Area (CHSRA), was a ‘‘hotspot’’ for pilot whale interactions 

(PLTRT, 2006). Because of this, the 

Team thought that it was an important 

area for research on both pilot whale 

spatial distribution and interactions 

with the pelagic longline fishery. Based 

on the Team’s recommendations, NMFS 

created the CHSRA and its special 

observer and research participation 

requirements for fishermen operating in 

that area with the goal of encouraging 

partnerships between fishermen and 

researchers in that area. However, 

NMFS has not used the special observer 

and research participation requirements 

to place an observer on a vessel in the 

CHSRA since the regulations were 

implemented. Instead, researchers and 

fishermen have partnered independent 

of the regulations for research in that 

area. Thus, the Team recommended that 

NMFS remove the CHSRA, and the 

associated special observer and research 

participation requirement, which also 

requires vessels to provide at least 48 

hours advance notice before fishing 

with pelagic longline gear in that area, 

because it is no longer needed (PLTRT, 

2015). 

2. Modify the current 20 nm mainline 

length restrictions at 50 CFR 229.36(e) 

so that vessels in the EEZ portion of the 

Mid-Atlantic Bight may set no more 

than one mainline set in the water at 

any one time, not to exceed 32 nm 

(59.26 km). There may be no more than 

30 nm (55.56 km) total of active gear 

(gear with leaders or hooks) deployed 

along the mainline set. A single length 

of active gear may not exceed 20 nm 

(37.04 km) and must be separated from 

other active gear along the mainline set 

by a gap without leaders or hooks (i.e., 

hookless line ‘‘interrupt’’) of at least one 

nm (1.85 km). 

The 20 nm mainline length restriction 

in the EEZ portion of the Mid-Atlantic 

Bight was originally developed because, 

at the time, data suggested that pilot 

whale interaction rates were twice as 

high in pelagic longline sets with total 

mainline lengths greater than 20 nm 

than for pelagic longline sets with total 

mainline lengths less than 20 nm. 

Operators of individual fishing vessels 

are allowed to fish multiple mainline 

sets at one time to ‘‘compensate’’ for the 

reduction of hooks due to the reduced 

maximum mainline length of 20 

nautical miles (PLTRT, 2006). NMFS 

initially presumed, based on Team 

discussions, that there would be 

minimal compensation by fishing 

vessels (less than 50 percent); however, 

beginning in 2013, fishing vessels in the 

Mid-Atlantic Bight shifted from setting 

mostly single mainline sets to also 

setting sets with multiple mainline 

(hereinafter also referred to as ‘‘multisets’’) (PLTRT, 2015). From 1992 to 

2012, multiple mainlines set as part of 

a multi-set represented 1 percent of all 

mainlines observed on pelagic longline 

fishing vessels in the Mid-Atlantic 

Bight, but increased to 47 percent from 

2013 to 2015 (PLTRT, 2015). A multi-set 

was defined, for analytical purposes, as 

a pelagic longline set with two 

mainlines, where the second mainline 

begins setting 30 minutes or less after 

the first mainline has finished setting. 

Analyses showed that the rate of pilot 

whales interactions were higher in 

multi-sets compared to single mainline 

sets and that pelagic longline multi-sets 

had longer soak durations than a similar 

length single mainline set (PLTRT, 

2015). In light of this information, the 

Team recommended that NMFS 

increase the maximum mainline length 

from 20 nm to 32 nm, but limit vessels 

to a single mainline set and only 30 nm 

of active gear (mainline with leaders or 

hooks attached) in an effort to limit the 

total length of active gear in the water 

and reduce soak duration by eliminating 

the time it takes to set and haul the 

second mainline associated with multisets (PLTRT, 2016). Additionally, the 

Team recommended a new measure— 

the hookless line ‘‘interrupt’’—a gap 

along the single mainline set of at least 

1 nm with no active gear, which the 

Team believed had the potential to 

reduce mortalities and serious injuries 

of marine mammals (PLTRT, 2016). 

3. Implement terminal gear 

requirements for the EEZ portion of the 

Florida East Coast, South Atlantic Bight, 

Mid-Atlantic Bight, and Northeast 

Coastal fishing areas with the goal of 

making the hooks the weakest part of 

the terminal gear. These terminal gear 

requirements include requirements for 

circle hooks with a round wire diameter 

not to exceed 4.05mm if 16/0 and 

4.40mm if 18/0 and a straightening 

force not to exceed 300 lb, and a 

minimum diameter of 1.8 mm and a 

breaking strength of at least 300 lb for 

monofilament leaders and branch lines 

(i.e., gangions). 

Though not included in the original 

plan, the Team recommended that 

NMFS implement terminal gear 

requirements in order to enable hooks to 

straighten before leaders break, because 

interactions with marine mammals are 

less likely to result in a serious injury 

when straightened hooks are returned 

from a hooking event (NMFS, 2014). If 

the gangions (i.e., leaders and branch 

81172 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

lines) are strong relative to the hook 

strength during a marine mammal 

hooking or entanglement, tension could 

be placed on the line (without the line 

breaking) to allow the hook to 

straighten, or the animal could be 

brought close to the vessel for 

disentanglement and/or dehooking 

attempts. Therefore, by limiting wire 

diameter and the straightening force of 

hooks, and increasing gangion size and 

strength, the proposed regulation aims 

to reduce line breaks and, in the event 

of lines breaks, increase the likelihood 

that the hook would straighten 

beforehand, thereby avoiding serious 

injury. 

Public Comments Solicited 

NMFS is soliciting comments on this 

proposed rule. Specifically, because the 

intention behind implementing the 

terminal gear requirements is to ensure 

that a hook caught on a short-finned 

pilot whale will straighten before the 

gangion breaks, NMFS is requesting 

comments regarding whether the 

proposed strength for gangions (at least 

300 lb, based on manufacturer 

specifications when new) is sufficient 

for ensuring that the proposed hooks 

(with a straightening force not to exceed 

300 lb based on manufacturer’s 

specifications when new and a diameter 

not to exceed 4.05 mm if 16/0 or 4.4 mm 

if 18/0) will straighten before the 

gangion breaks. NMFS will consider 

these comments and the need to make 

changes in the final rule. Additionally, 

NMFS will be considering a delayed 

implementation of the proposed 

terminal gear requirements. Therefore, 

NMFS is also requesting comments 

concerning the length of time necessary 

for hook manufacturers to produce and 

supply hooks that meet the new 

specifications as well as the length of 

time the industry would need to 

implement the use of hooks and 

gangions that meet new specifications in 

the fishery. 

Lastly, the proposed rule defines four 

fishing areas: Northeast Coast (NEC), 

Mid-Atlantic Bight (MAB), South 

Atlantic Bight (SAB), and Florida East 

Coast (FEC). The proposed definitions 

are modeled after an existing regulatory 

definition of the MAB in the Atlantic 

Highly Migratory Species regulations, 

50 CFR 635.2. NMFS is seeking 

comment on whether it would be 

helpful to the regulated community to 

further clarify these definitions in the 

final rule by providing more specific 

references to the latitude and longitude 

coordinates reflected on the charts in 

the draft Environmental Assessment. 

NMFS is not proposing changing the 

geographic areas, but is requesting 

comments regarding the clarity of the 

manner in which the areas are defined 

as well as the consistency of the 

definitions. 

Classifications 

A draft Environmental Assessment 

has been prepared, analyzing the 

impacts on the human environment that 

would result from this action and 

determining that the action will not 

have significant environmental impacts 

upon implementation of the action. 

Pursuant to section 307 of the Coastal 

Zone Management Act, NMFS has 

determined that this proposed rule is 

consistent with the enforceable policies 

of the approved coastal management 

programs of Florida, Georgia, South 

Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, 

Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New 

York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New 

Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Maine. 

This determination has been submitted 

for review by the responsible state 

agencies under section 307 of the 

Coastal Zone Management Act. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

policies with federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. The 

proposed rule would apply in the 

Exclusive Economic Zone beyond state 

jurisdiction. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

any new collection-of-information 

requirements for the purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act. 

This rule has been determined to be 

not significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. This proposed rule is not 

expected to be an E.O. 13771 regulatory 

action because this proposed rule is not 

significant under E.O. 12866. 

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of 

the Department of Commerce certified 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration that this 

proposed rule, if adopted, would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The factual basis for this certification is 

as follows. 

This rulemaking would directly apply 

to commercial fishing businesses 

(NAICS 11411) that operate vessels that 

use pelagic longline gear to harvest 

Atlantic HMS species within four 

specific areas of the EEZ. Any business 

with a vessel that uses pelagic longline 

to harvest tuna or swordfish must have 

an Atlantic tuna longline permit, a shark 

(directed or incidental) permit, and a 

swordfish (directed or incidental) 

permit. 

The number of Category I Atlantic 

Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico large 

pelagic longline fishery vessels in the 

Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic, with 

annual landings of HMS is substantially 

less than the number of vessels 

permitted to do so. In 2016, 85 (33.7 

percent) of 252 pelagic longline vessels 

were active, and in 2017, 88 (34.8 

percent) of 253 pelagic longline vessels 

were active. This analysis uses the 2017 

figure of 88 active vessels, which can be 

found in the Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis done for Amendment 11 to the 

2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory 

Fishery Management Plan. NMFS 

estimates that 76 businesses operate the 

88 active vessels. 

For Regulatory Flexibility Act 

purposes only, NMFS has established a 

small business size standard for 

businesses, including their affiliated 

operations, whose primary industry is 

commercial fishing (see 50 CFR 200.2). 

A business primarily engaged in 

commercial fishing is classified as a 

small business if it is independently 

owned and operated, is not dominant in 

its field of operation (including its 

affiliates), and has combined annual 

receipts not in excess of $11 million for 

all its affiliated operations worldwide. 

The maximum annual revenue for any 

pelagic longline vessel between 2006 

and 2016 was less than $1.9 million, 

well below the $11 million small 

business size standard for commercial 

fishing businesses established by NMFS. 

Therefore, 76 small commercial fishing 

businesses operate the 88 pelagic 

longline fishing vessels that could be 

directly affected by the rulemaking. 

Currently, a pelagic longline fishing 

vessel cannot fish in the CHSRA if it 

does not or cannot accommodate an 

observer assigned under the special 

observer requirements (50 CFR 

229.36(d)). Additionally, fishermen 

must call NMFS SEFSC at least 48 hours 

(and no more than 96 hours) prior to 

embarking on their fishing trip to 

provide sufficient notice and time to 

arrange for special observers, who may 

conduct scientific research aboard the 

fishing vessel. If upon calling in, the 

vessel is assigned an observer, it must 

take the observer during that fishing 

trip. If the vessel does not take the 

observer, it is prohibited from deploying 

or fishing with pelagic longline gear in 

the CHSRA for that trip. The proposed 

rule removes the CHSRA and its 

associated special observer and research 

participation requirements, including 

the advance notice requirements, which 

would give the small commercial 

fishing businesses flexibility to fish in 

those waters at times more effective for 

them. Therefore, the removal of the 

CHSRA is expected to have no adverse, 

and slightly beneficial, economic 

impacts on any of the small businesses 

that operate the 88 pelagic longline 

fishing vessels. 

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 81173 

Operators of Atlantic pelagic longline 

fishing vessels are currently allowed to 

deploy sets with multiple mainlines at 

one time, but each mainline length must 

not exceed 20 nm (37.04 km) in the EEZ 

portion of the MAB (50 CFR 229.36(e). 

That has allowed pelagic longline 

fishing vessels to use longer lengths of 

active gear (leaders and hooks in the 

water) across sets with multiple 

mainlines. Consequently, there have 

been pelagic longline fishing vessels 

deploying pelagic longline fishing sets 

with two mainline and more than 20 nm 

of active gear. The proposed rule would, 

in the MAB, prohibit pelagic longline 

sets with more than one mainline in the 

water at a time. It would also increase 

both the maximum length of a single 

mainline set from 20 nm (37.04 km) to 

32 nm (59.26 km) and maximum length 

of active gear from 20 nm (37.04 km) to 

30 nm (55.56 km), but require that any 

active gear in excess of 20 nm (37.04 

km) be separated from other active gear 

by a gap of at least 1 nm with no active 

gear. The proposed rule is expected to 

have an adverse impact on 101 reported 

multiple mainline sets deployed in the 

MAB by reducing the length of active 

gear by 4 nm per mainline set (because 

these mainline sets are currently 

deployed two at a time and collectively 

have more than 30 nm of active gear). 

The combined 404 nm reduction 

represents a reduction of total active 

gear in the MAB by 1.4 percent. If there 

is a one-to-one correspondence between 

the length of active gear and dockside 

revenue from HMS harvested by that 

gear, there would be a corresponding 1.4 

percent decrease in dockside revenue 

annually from HMS harvested within 

the MAB. When mainline sets and 

landings from outside the MAB are 

included, that percentage declines 

significantly. The proposed rule would 

also affect 1,200 reported single 

mainline sets deployed in the MAB by 

increasing the active gear from 1 nm up 

to a maximum of 10 nm per mainline 

set. Those increases would result in an 

increase in total active gear deployed in 

the MAB by those 1,200 reported single 

mainline sets ranging from 180 to 1,800 

nm, and those increases represent a 

range from 0.6 percent to 6.2 percent of 

total annual active gear deployed in the 

MAB, and potentially 0.6 percent to 6.2 

percent increases in dockside revenue 

from HMS landed from the pelagic 

longline sets. When all 1,573 average 

reported pelagic longline sets in the 

MAB are combined, the proposed rule 

would result in a change in the amount 

of active gear deployed in the MAB by 

the 88 pelagic longline fishing vessels 

ranging from a reduction of 0.7 percent 

to a gain of 4.8 percent. When pelagic 

longline sets and active gear deployed 

outside the MAB by these vessels are 

included in the total from all areas, 

these percentages decline significantly. 

The proposed rule would implement 

terminal gear requirements for leaders 

and hooks designed to make the hook 

the weakest part of the terminal gear in 

the EEZ portion of the FEC, MAB, NEC, 

and SAB areas. Hooks used in these 

areas would be required to meet the 

following criteria: To (i) 16/0 or 18/0 

circle hooks with hook shanks 

containing round wire that can be 

measured with a caliper or other 

appropriate gauge, with a wire diameter 

not to exceed 4.05 mm if 16/0 or 4.4 mm 

if 18/0; and (ii) a straightening force not 

to exceed 300 lb, based on 

manufacturer’s specifications. The 

proposed action would affect the small 

businesses with pelagic longline fishing 

vessels that presently use hooks in the 

FEC, MAB, NEC and SAB that do not 

meet the additional specifications. 

Currently manufactured hooks that meet 

the additional specifications include the 

Mustad 39960D 16/0, Mustad 39988D 

16/0, and Eagle-Claw L2048LM 16/0. 

NMFS assumes that none of the sets 

deployed in the four areas use hooks 

that meet the proposed criteria, 

although 25 percent or more may be a 

more likely figure. The price of a box or 

pack of 1,000 of the new hooks is 

estimated to range from $450 to $550 

per box and is expected to be, on 

average, $20 to $25 more than a box of 

1,000 of the currently used hooks. The 

average number of hooks per set in each 

of the four areas (FEC, MAB, NEC, and 

SAB) is much less than 1,000: 671 

(FEC), 622 (MAB), 905 (NEC), and 808 

(SAB). Thus, NMFS expects that one 

box of hooks is sufficient to equip a 

pelagic longline fishing vessel for its 

first trip with the new hooks. The 

combined additional annual cost to 88 

pelagic longline fishing vessels would 

be $1,760 to $2,200 (2018 $) for the first 

boxes of new hooks. Hooks are lost or 

damaged during a trip and need 

replacement. NMFS estimates that the 

difference in the costs of replacing the 

new hooks versus replacing the 

currently used hooks is approximately 

equivalent to the cost of purchasing a 

box of the new hooks every sixth to 

seventh trip, which is $20 to $25 (2018 

$) more per sixth or seventh trip. An 

annual average of 937 trips are made in 

the combined areas, and NMFS 

estimates that each of the 88 pelagic 

longline fishing vessels makes 10 to 11 

trips in the areas annually. Hence, the 

average pelagic longline fishing vessel 

has to buy an additional two boxes to 

replace hooks that are lost or damaged 

a year. The component of the proposed 

rule to require hooks meeting new 

specifications is expected to result in 

increased annual costs ranging from 

0.07 percent to 0.09 percent per vessel. 

Currently, pelagic longline fishing 

vessels that fish in the EEZ portion of 

the FEC, MAB, NEC and SAB can use 

monofilament nylon leaders of 

unspecified diameters, which can result 

in leaders being the weakest component 

of active gear. The proposed rule would 

require the pelagic longline fishing 

vessels in the EEZ portion of the FEC, 

MAB, NEC and SAB to use 

monofilament nylon leaders and/or 

branch lines that all have a diameter of 

1.8 mm or larger (certified by the 

manufacturer to at least 300 lb test 

strength when new) in those areas. No 

other line material could be used, but 

crimps and chafing gear would be 

allowed. NMFS expects that almost all 

to all of the pelagic longline fishing 

vessels that fish in the four areas use 

monofilament nylon leaders with 

diameters and a breaking force of at 

least 300 lb. Consequently, this 

component of the proposed rule is 

expected to have little to no additional 

economic effects. 

In summary, an estimated 88 pelagic 

longline fishing vessels owned by 76 

small businesses would be directly 

affected by this proposed rule, and they 

represent approximately 36 percent of 

the 248 permitted vessels and 214 small 

businesses in the pelagic longline fleet. 

The elimination of the CHSRA and 

associated requirements and the 

monofilament leader and/or branch line 

requirement, combined, are expected to 

have little to no additional economic 

impacts. The changes to mainline length 

restrictions would cause a change in the 

amount of active gear deployed within 

the MAB ranging from a 0.7 percent 

decrease to a 4.8 percent increase. 

Assuming a constant one-to-one 

correspondence between the length of 

active gear and dockside revenue, a 

corresponding change in dockside 

revenue from HMS harvested from the 

MAB would range from a 0.7 percent 

reduction to a 4.8 percent increase. 

When dockside revenues from HMS 

harvested from outside the MAB are 

included, however, the percentages of 

the net reduction or net gain decline 

significantly. Implementing the hook 

requirements could increase the annual 

hook cost of 88 pelagic longline vessels 

that fish in the FEC, MAB, NEC, and 

SAB by $60 to $75 per vessel, which 

represents from 0.07 percent to 0.08 

percent of annual trip costs. Combined, 

the actions are expected to have a net 

benefit for the affected small businesses. 

81174 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

Therefore, the proposed rule would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

References 

A complete list of all references cited 

in this proposed rule, along with other 

supporting documents can be found in 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=

NOAA-NMFS-2016-0105 and is 

available upon request from the NMFS 

Southeast Regional Office in St. 

Petersburg, FL (see ADDRESSES). 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 229 

Administrative practice and 

procedure; Fisheries; Marine mammals; 

Pelagic Longline. 

Dated: November 23, 2020. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, NOAA proposes to amend 50 

CFR part 229 as follows: 

PART 229—AUTHORIZATION FOR 

COMMERCIAL FISHERIES UNDER THE 

MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT 

OF 1972 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 229 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 229.3, revise paragraph (t)(2) 

and paragraph (u) to read as follows: 

§ 229.3 Prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(t) * * * 

(2) Complies with the requirements 

specified in § 229.36(d) and (e). 

(u) It is prohibited to deploy or fish 

with pelagic longline gear in the 

Northeast Coastal, South Atlantic Bight, 

or Florida East Coast fishing areas 

unless the vessel: 

(1) Complies with the placard posting 

requirement specified in § 229.36(c); 

and 

(2) Complies with the requirements 

specified in § 229.36(d). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 229.36: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (a); 

■ b. Revise paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(b)(4); 

■ c. Add paragraph (b)(5); 

■ d. Revise paragraphs (d) and (e). 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 229.36 Atlantic Pelagic Longline Take 

Reduction Plan (PLTRP). 

(a) Purpose and scope. The purpose of 

this section is to implement the PLTRP 

to reduce incidental mortality and 

serious injury of short-finned pilot 

whales in the Atlantic pelagic longline 

fishery off the U.S. East Coast, a 

component of the Atlantic Ocean, 

Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico large pelagics 

longline fishery. The requirements in 

this section apply to the owner or 

operator of any vessel that has been 

issued or is required to be issued an 

Atlantic HMS tunas, swordfish, or shark 

permit under § 635.4 of this title and 

that has onboard pelagic longline gear as 

defined at § 635.2 of this title in the EEZ 

(as defined in § 600.10 of this title). 

(b) * * * 

(1) Northeast Coastal (NEC) means the 

area bounded by straight lines 

connecting the northeast states’ internal 

waters extending between 71° W long. 

and 60° W long. and between 35° N lat. 

and 45° N lat. It also includes the box 

described by straight lines connecting 

65° W long. and 60° W long. and 

between 45° N lat. and 50° N lat. 

(2) Mid-Atlantic Bight (MAB) means 

the area bounded by straight lines 

connecting the mid-Atlantic states’ 

internal waters and extending to 71° W 

long. Between 35° N lat. and 43° N lat. 

(3) South Atlantic Bight (SAB) means 

the area bounded by straight lines 

connecting the south-Atlantic states’ 

internal waters and extending to 71° W 

long. between 30° N lat. and 35° N lat. 

(4) Florida East Coast (FEC) means the 

area bounded by straight lines 

connecting Florida’s internal waters and 

between 82° W long. and 71° W long. 

and between 22° N lat. and 30° N lat. 

(5) Active Gear means mainline in the 

water with gangions or hooks attached. 

* * * * * 

(d) Hook and gangion requirements. 

Vessels operating in the EEZ (as defined 

in § 600.10 of this title) portion of the 

NEC, MAB, SAB and FEC areas can only 

possess, use, and deploy hooks and 

gangions that meet the following 

specifications: 

(1) Hooks. The hook shank must be 

constructed of corrodible round wire 

stock that can be measured with a 

caliper or other appropriate gauge and 

meet the following specifications: 

(i) The round wire stock of a 16/0 

circle hook must not exceed 4.05 mm 

(0.159 in) in diameter and straighten 

with a force not to exceed 300 lb, based 

on manufacturer specifications when 

new. 

(ii) The round wire stock of a 18/0 

circle hook must not exceed 4.40 mm 

(0.173 in) in diameter and straighten 

with a force not to exceed 300 lb, based 

on manufacturer specifications when 

new. 

(2) Gangions. Any gangion, as defined 

at 50 CFR 635.2, must meet all of the 

following specifications: 

(i) Made of monofilament nylon. No 

other line material (e.g., wire) may be 

used; however, crimps and chafing gear 

are allowed. 

(ii) Have a diameter of 1.8 mm or 

larger. 

(iii) Have a breaking strength of at 

least 300 lb, based on manufacturer 

specifications when new. 

(3) Exception for transit. If pelagic 

longline gear is appropriately stowed, a 

vessel may transit through the NEC, 

MAB, SAB, and FEC without meeting 

the gear requirements specified in this 

paragraph. For the purpose of this 

paragraph, transit means non-stop 

progression through an area without any 

fishing activity occurring. Longline gear 

is stowed appropriately if all gangions 

and hooks are disconnected from the 

mainline and are stowed on or below 

deck, hooks are not baited, and all 

buoys and weights are disconnected 

from the mainline and drum (buoys may 

remain on deck). 

(4) Exception for research. No person 

may possess, use, or deploy hooks other 

than what is described in this section 

unless they have a written letter of 

authorization on board from the 

Southeast Regional Administrator to 

conduct scientific or gear research for 

reducing the bycatch in the pelagic 

longline fishery. In order to obtain a 

written letter of authorization, the 

research must be consistent with the 

regulations at 50 CFR part 635 and be 

designed to advance the long-term goal 

of reducing mortalities and serious 

injuries of short-finned pilot whales in 

the Atlantic pelagic longline fishery to 

insignificant levels approaching a zero 

mortality and serious injury rate, or 

reduce the bycatch of other listed, 

threatened, or protected species in the 

Atlantic pelagic longline fishery. 

(e) Mainline gear restrictions. Vessels 

operating in the EEZ (as defined in 

§ 600.10 of this title) portion of the MAB 

may not deploy pelagic longline gear 

unless the gear meets the following 

mainline specifications: 

(1) There can only be one piece of 

mainline in the water at any time. If the 

gear breaks or parts after setting, the 

vessel owner or operator must make 

every effort to remove the additional 

portions of the gear as soon as possible. 

(2) Mainline length cannot exceed 32 

nm. 

(3) There can be no more than 30 nm 

of active gear. 

(4) A section of active gear cannot 

exceed 20 nm. 

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules 81175 

(5) Between any two parts of active 

gear, there must be a gap of at least 1 

nm. 

[FR Doc. 2020–26288 Filed 12–14–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P