86878 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

captive rail shippers to utility 

customers, favoring an approach that 

conforms to Generally Accepted 

Accounting Principles (GAAP), and 

determining that removing the effect of 

deferred taxes led to a more accurate 

representation of railroad profitability. 

See id. at 272–75; Consol. Rail Corp. v. 

United States, 855 F.2d 78, 93 (3rd Cir. 

1988) (affirming the ICC’s decision and 

finding that the ‘‘adjustment of its 

formula in the interests of accuracy is 

rational’’). Does the ICC’s reasoning for 

adopting the utility method remain 

valid, specifically with respect to 

analogizing captive shippers to utility 

customers, determining whether the 

utility method continues to conform 

with GAAP today, and finding that the 

utility method led to a more accurate 

representation of railroad profitability? 

Additionally, the Joint Carriers will be 

requested to file workpapers sufficient 

to replicate the analysis underlying their 

proposals and to make those 

workpapers available, upon request, to 

other participants in this proceeding, 

under an appropriate protective order. 

Interested persons may file comments 

by March 1, 2021. If any comments are 

filed, replies will be due by March 31, 

2021. 

It is ordered: 

1. A rulemaking proceeding is 

initiated, as discussed above. 

2. Comments are due March 1, 2021; 

replies are due March 31, 2021. 

3. The Joint Carriers are requested to 

file workpapers sufficient to replicate 

the analysis underlying their proposals 

and to make those workpapers available, 

upon request, to other participants in 

this proceeding, under an appropriate 

protective order. 

4. Notice of this decision will be 

published in the Federal Register. 

5. This decision is effective on its 

service date. 

Decided Date: December 22, 2020. 

By the Board, Board Members Begeman, 

Fuchs, and Oberman. 

Andrea Pope-Matheson, 

Clearance Clerk. 

[FR Doc. 2020–28864 Filed 12–30–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 229 and 697 

[Docket No. 201221–0351] 

RIN 0648–BJ09 

Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental 

to Commercial Fishing Operations; 

Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction 

Plan Regulations; Atlantic Coastal 

Fisheries Cooperative Management 

Act Provisions; American Lobster 

Fishery 

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 

Large Whale Take Reduction Plan to 

reduce the incidental mortality and 

serious injury to North Atlantic right 

whales (Eubalaena glacialis), fin whales 

(Balaenoptera physalus), and humpback 

whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in 

northeast commercial lobster and crab 

trap/pot fisheries to meet the goals of 

the Marine Mammal Protection Act and 

the Endangered Species Act. In 

addition, this action also proposes a 

small revision to Federal regulations 

implemented under the Atlantic State 

Marine Fisheries Commissions’ 

Interstate Fishery Management Plan for 

Lobster to increase the maximum length 

of a lobster trap trawl groundline. This 

action is necessary to reduce the risks to 

North Atlantic right whales and other 

large whales associated with the 

presence of fishing gear in waters used 

by these animals. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

March 1, 2021. 

Public Hearings: Eight or more remote 

public meetings will be held during the 

public comment period. See ADDRESSES

to obtain public hearing notification 

details. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by NOAA–NMFS–2020–0031, 

by either of the following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2020- 

0031, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon 

and complete the required fields, and 

enter or attach your comments. 

Instructions: All comments received 

that are timely and properly submitted 

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.), confidential 

business information, or otherwise 

sensitive information submitted 

voluntarily by the sender will be 

publicly accessible. We will accept 

anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in 

the required fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). 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 by us. 

Oral Comments: Remote public 

meeting access information will be 

posted on the Plan website 

fisheries.noaa.gov/ALWTRP or contact 

Colleen Coogan for information on 

locations and dates. Contact information 

below. 

Copies of this action, including the 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

(DEIS) and the Regulatory Impact 

Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (DEIS/RIR/IRFA) prepared in 

support of this action, are available via 

the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov/ or by contacting 

Colleen Coogan at the contact 

information below. 

Several of the background documents 

for the Plan and the take reduction 

planning process can be downloaded 

from the Plan website. Copies of the 

DEIS/RIR/IRFA for this action can also 

be obtained from the Plan website. 

Information on the Decision Support 

Tool and Co-Occurrence model used to 

support the development and analysis 

of the proposed regulations can be 

found in appendices to the DEIS. The 

complete text of current regulations 

implementing the Plan can be found in 

50 CFR 229.32 or downloaded from the 

Plan’s website, along with outreach 

compliance guides to current 

regulations. The complete text of 

current regulations implementing the 

Lobster Plan can be found at 50 CFR 

part 697. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Colleen Coogan, NMFS, Greater Atlantic 

Regional Fisheries Office, 978–281– 

9181, Colleen.Coogan@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

Background 

Summary of Proposed Changes 

Changes Proposed To Reduce the Number of 

Vertical Buoy Lines 

Changes to Closure Areas 

Gear Modifications To Include Weak Line or 

Weak Insertions in Buoy Lines 

Gear Marking Changes 

Addition to Definitions 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86879 

Change in the Maximum Length of a Lobster 

Trap Trawl 

Classification 

References 

Background 

The Atlantic Large Whale Take 

Reduction Plan (ALWTRP, or Plan) was 

originally developed pursuant to section 

118 of the Marine Mammal Protection 

Act (MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1387 to reduce 

the level of mortality and serious injury 

of three stocks of large whales (fin, 

humpback, and North Atlantic right) 

interacting with Category I and II 

fisheries. Under the MMPA a strategic 

stock of marine mammals is defined as 

a 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 of 1973 (ESA) 

within the foreseeable future; or (3) 

which is listed as a threatened or 

endangered species under the ESA or is 

designated as depleted under the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1362(19)). When 

incidental mortality or serious injury of 

marine mammals from commercial 

fishing is over the PBR level, NMFS 

convenes a take reduction team made 

up of stakeholders from the fishing 

industry, fishery management councils 

and commissions, state and Federal 

resource management agencies, the 

scientific community and conservation 

organizations. 

The Atlantic Large Whale Take 

Reduction Team (ALWTRT or Team) 

was established in 1996 and is made up 

of 60 members, including about 22 trap/ 

pot and gillnet fishermen or fishery 

representatives. Because both right 

whales and fin whales are listed as 

endangered, they are considered 

strategic stocks under the MMPA. Due 

to population growth, in 2016 certain 

stocks of humpback whales, which are 

taken in the Atlantic Category I and II 

fisheries regulated under the ALWTRP, 

are no longer listed as endangered or 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act (81 FR 62259). However, 

although they are not currently a 

strategic stock, they continue to be 

included in the Plan because they are 

taken in Category I fisheries and will 

continue to benefit from Plan 

requirements and proposed revisions. 

Specific Category I and II fisheries 

addressed by the Plan include the 

Northeast sink gillnet, Northeast drift 

gillnet, Northeast anchored float gillnet, 

Southeast Atlantic gillnet, Mid-Atlantic 

gillnet, Southeastern U.S. Atlantic shark 

gillnet, Atlantic mixed species trap/pot, 

Atlantic blue crab trap/pot, and 

Northeast/Mid-Atlantic American 

lobster trap/pot. Proposed modifications 

for this rulemaking are limited in scope 

to the crab and trap/pot fisheries in the 

Northeast Region Trap/Pot Management 

Area (Northeast Region). The Northeast 

Region encompasses those waters where 

year-round trap/pot measures are 

required as described in 50 CFR 229.32. 

This area includes the Northern Inshore 

State Trap/Pot Waters, the Northern 

Nearshore Trap/Pot Waters Areas, the 

Massachusetts Restricted Area, the Great 

South Channel Restricted Trap/Pot 

Area, the Jordan Basin, Jeffreys Ledge, 

and Stellwagen Bank Restricted Areas 

and the northeast Offshore Trap/Pot 

Waters Area that are within the area 

bounded on the west by a straight line 

running south from the coast at 41°18.2′ 

N latitude, 71°51.5′ W longitude to 

40°00′ N latitude, and then bounded on 

the south by a line running east along 

40°00′ N latitude to the eastern edge of 

the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) 

(Figure 1). 

The background for the take reduction 

planning process and initial 

development of the Plan is provided in 

the preambles to the proposed (62 FR 

16519, April 7, 1997), interim final (62 

FR 39157, July 22, 1997), and final (64 

FR 7529, February 16, 1999) rules that 

implemented the original plan. 

Since its 1997 implementation, the 

Plan has been modified several times to 

reduce the risk of mortality and serious 

injury of large whales incidentally taken 

in commercial sink gillnet and trap/pot 

gear. The most recent final rule was 

published in May 2015 (80 FR 30367, 

May 28, 2015). Because of the declining 

population and the persistent incidental 

entanglement mortalities and serious 

injuries above the stock’s PBR, Plan 

modifications have, and continue to be, 

directed primarily at reducing the risk 

of commercial fisheries on the North 

Atlantic right whale. 

Right Whale Population Decline 

In a peer-reviewed scientific paper 

published in 2017, Pace et al. (see 

References section at end of this 

preamble), confirmed that due to 

decreased calving rates and increased 

mortality, much of it unseen, the North 

Atlantic right whale population had 

been in decline since 2010 (Pace et al. 

2017). Seventeen right whale mortalities 

were documented in 2017, causing 

NMFS to declare an Unusual Mortality 

Event, which continues through 2020. 

Although most right whale mortalities 

in 2017 occurred in Canadian waters 

and not all were confirmed to be 

entanglement related, three mortalities 

first seen in U.S. waters exhibited signs 

of entanglement. The evidence of a 

declining population exacerbated by 

high mortalities caused NMFS to 

convene subgroups of the ALWTRT in 

early 2018 to investigate the feasibility 

of risk reduction measures. A meeting of 

the full Team was held in October 2018 

to develop recommendations for 

modifying the Take Reduction Plan. 

As described in detail in Chapter 3 of 

the DEIS prepared in support of this 

action and very briefly below, the 

location and exact fishery in which each 

entanglement incident occurs can rarely 

be determined. However, over 95 

percent of vertical buoy lines fished 

along the U.S. East Coast in waters not 

currently exempt from Plan 

requirements are fished by the lobster 

and Jonah crab trap/pot fishery—93 

percent within the Northeast Region. 

For this reason and given the magnitude 

of the issue, NMFS is addressing this 

issue in phases to expedite rulemaking. 

The initial phase focused the scope of 

the Team meetings on developing 

recommendations for the Northeast 

Region lobster and Jonah crab trap/pot 

fisheries. In 2021, the ALWTRT will be 

asked to recommend modifications to 

the Take Reduction Plan to address risk 

in the remaining fixed gear fisheries that 

use buoy lines, including other trap/pot 

fisheries and gillnet fisheries coastwide. 

Table 2.3 in the DEIS provides 

additional information supporting 

prioritizing the lobster and Jonah crab 

trap/pot fisheries in the Northeast 

Region first. 

Team members submitted risk 

reduction proposals for the October 

2018 in-person ALWTRT meeting. The 

lack of agreement on whether or how 

much risk reduction was necessary, or 

metrics to compare the wide range of 

proposal elements, challenged the 

Team’s ability to develop 

recommendations. In anticipation of a 

spring 2019 meeting, the Team created 

workplans for NMFS identifying data 

needs to support decision making on 

Plan modification recommendations. 

While the MMPA establishes PBR as 

a goal for take reduction, the Team 

identified the need for a risk reduction 

target that better described what their 

recommendations should achieve. 

NMFS estimated that to reduce serious 

injury and mortality below PBR, 

entanglement risk across U.S. fisheries 

needs to be reduced by 60 to 80 percent. 

There is much uncertainty regarding the 

source of entanglement mortality to the 

North Atlantic right whale population. 

There is no gear present or retrieved 

from most documented incidents of 

dead or seriously injured right whales. 

When gear is retrieved, it can rarely be 

identified to a fishery or to a location. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86880 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

For the years 2009 through 2018, an 

average of five entanglement-related 

serious injuries and mortalities a year 

were observed. Only 0.2 a year could be 

attributed with certainty to U.S. 

fisheries and only 0.7 a year to Canadian 

fisheries. An annual average of four 

documented incidental entanglement 

mortalities and serious injuries could 

not be attributed to a country. 

NMFS’ has produced Guidelines for 

Assessing Marine Mammal Stocks to 

address how to consider PBR for 

transboundary stocks if certain 

information is available. Those 

Guidelines specify that in 

transboundary situations where a 

stock’s range spans international 

boundaries or the boundary of the U.S. 

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), the 

best approach is to establish an 

international management agreement for 

the species and to evaluate all sources 

of human-caused mortality and serious 

injury (U.S. and non-U.S.) relative to the 

PBR for the entire stock range. In the 

interim, if a transboundary stock is 

migratory and it is reasonable to do so, 

the fraction of time the stock spends in 

U.S. waters should be noted, and the 

PBR for U.S. fisheries should be 

apportioned from the total PBR based on 

this fraction. For non-migratory 

transboundary stocks (e.g., stocks with 

broad pelagic distributions that extend 

into international waters), if there are 

estimates of mortality and serious injury 

from U.S. and other sources throughout 

the stock’s range, then PBR calculations 

should be based upon a range-wide 

abundance estimate for the stock 

whenever possible. 

Therefore, if a stock spends half its 

time in U.S. waters, PBR would be 

divided by two, resulting in a U.S. PBR 

for right whales of 0.5. Thus, the U.S. 

fishery related mortality would need to 

be reduced to below 0.5 (instead of 0.9 

as is currently the goal). The Atlantic 

Scientific Review Group (established 

under MMPA sec. 117) that advises 

NMFS on Stock Assessment Reports, 

including PBR calculations, does not 

support this approach yet because we 

do not have sufficient information to 

apportion time spent in U.S. versus 

Canadian waters. Therefore, the U.S. 

target goal remains 0.9; however, NMFS 

did consider the relative threat 

including the time right whales spend 

in U.S. and Canadian waters when 

apportioning the unattributed 

entanglement incidents to create the risk 

reduction target, as described below. 

For the purposes of creating a risk 

reduction target, NMFS assigned half of 

these right whale entanglement 

incidents of unknown origin to U.S. 

fisheries. Under this assumption, a 60 

percent reduction in serious injury or 

mortality would be needed to reduce 

right whale serious injury and mortality 

in U.S. commercial fisheries, from an 

annual average of 2.2 to a PBR of 0.9 per 

year. 

The upper bound of the risk reduction 

target (80 percent) considered estimated 

but unseen right whale mortalities, 

generated by a new population model 

(described in Hayes et al. 2019). 

Because all observed mortalities that 

can be attributed to a source have been 

caused by either entanglements or 

vessel strikes (except for some natural 

neonate mortalities), estimated nonobserved mortalities are likely caused 

primarily by entanglements and vessels 

strikes. However, there is no way to 

definitively apportion unseen but 

estimated mortality across causes or 

country of origin (United States or 

Canada). For the purposes of developing 

a conservative target, NMFS assumed 

that half of the unseen mortalities 

occurred in U.S. waters and were 

caused primarily by incidental 

entanglements. 

However, given the additional sources 

of uncertainty in the 80 percent target, 

as well as the challenges achieving such 

a target without large economic impacts 

to the fishery, the Take Reduction Team 

focused on recommendations to achieve 

the lower 60 percent target. 

Additionally, to support the April 

2019 Team meeting, the NMFS 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

created a preliminary decision support 

tool (DST): A model for analyzing and 

comparing how various proposal 

elements contributed toward the target 

risk reduction. 

Both the target risk reduction and the 

DST generated a common 

understanding of the scope of measures 

that NMFS determined were necessary 

to reduce mortality and serious injury to 

below the PBR level for right whales. 

After some discussion, there was 

general agreement that risk reduction 

should be shared across jurisdictions so 

that no one state or fishing area would 

bear the bulk of the restrictions. This 

encouraged adoption of measures across 

the Northeast Region that would be 

resilient to changes in North Atlantic 

right whale distribution within the 

region. All but one Team member 

agreed that NMFS should move forward 

on a framework of recommended 

modifications to achieve 60 percent risk 

reduction. The dissenting Team member 

did not believe that the recommended 

modifications were sufficient to achieve 

PBR. The Team’s recommendations was 

essentially a framework, largely 

dependent on extensive buoy line 

reduction goals and expansive 

requirements to use weak rope or weak 

insertions with breaking strengths of 

1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.) or less that would 

allow large whales to break free of gear 

before a serious injury or mortality can 

occur (Knowlton et al. 2016). 

In acknowledgement of the regional 

diversity of the fisheries, New England 

states sought and were given the lead in 

developing measures and 

implementation details related to the 

Team’s near-consensus 

recommendation. Maine, New 

Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Rhode 

Island conducted public meetings before 

and after drafting measures. NMFS also 

worked closely with the Team members 

that represent the Atlantic Offshore 

Lobster Association on measures for the 

northeast Offshore Trap/Pot Waters 

Area, widely referred to as Lobster 

Management Area (LMA) 3. NMFS 

conducted its own scoping in August 

2019 (84 FR 37822, August 2, 2019), 

receiving over 130 unique written 

comments as well as over 89,000 form 

emails generated by about a dozen 

campaigns. Oral comments were also 

collected during eight public meetings 

attended by over 800 stakeholders. The 

measures proposed in this rule are 

drawn largely from proposals received 

from New England states. Those 

proposals can be found in Appendix 3.2 

of the DEIS. As described in the DEIS 

associated with this action, some Plan 

modifications in state waters will be 

implemented by Maine and 

Massachusetts under state laws and so 

are not included in the proposed 

Federal measures. Additionally, some 

measures proposed by the states for this 

rulemaking were not adopted in the 

regulations proposed here because they 

were inconsistent between adjacent 

states. Public comments received during 

scoping were considered throughout the 

development of the DEIS and proposed 

rule (Appendix 3.3 of the DEIS). 

It should be noted that a draft 

population estimate developed by the 

North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium 

for their October 2020 meeting indicates 

that the right whale population has 

declined further, to about 366 right 

whales as of January 2019. Further peer 

review of this preliminary estimate is 

anticipated during Scientific Review 

Group meetings in early 2021 in 

preparation for an updated stock 

assessment. The updated stock 

assessment information along with other 

updates and analyses will be considered 

in drafting the final rule and 

environmental impact statement. 

Summary of Proposed Changes 

NMFS proposes changes for lobster 

and crab trap/pot gear in the Northeast 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86881 

Region. The proposed measures detailed 

below seek to reduce large whale 

entanglement largely through risk 

reduction measures consistent with the 

April 2019 Team recommendations, 

which can be found in Table 3.1 in the 

DEIS. The proposed changes fall into 

four primary categories: (1) Gear 

modifications to reduce the number of 

vertical lines; (2) seasonal restricted 

areas that allow ropeless fishing but 

would be seasonally closed to fishing 

with persistent buoy lines; (3) gear 

modifications to include replacement of 

buoy lines with weak rope or weak 

insertions placed in intervals in buoy 

lines; and (4) additional gear marking 

and expansion of gear marking 

requirements throughout the Northeast 

Region. 

Gear configuration changes to reduce 

line numbers include increases to the 

minimum number of traps per trawl 

(trawling up) in varying degrees related 

to distance from shore and area fished. 

In LMA 3, an extension of the maximum 

trawl length (distance between endlines) 

is also proposed to accommodate the 

increase in traps per trawl proposed for 

that area. Modified gear configuration to 

require weak rope in buoy lines or weak 

insertion at prescribed intervals in buoy 

lines are proposed across the Northeast 

Region crab/lobster fisheries. An 

alternative to allow fishermen the 

option of moving the weak link at the 

buoy connection to the surface system 

connect below the buoy is also 

proposed. 

We are co-proposing three 

alternatives, as described in more detail 

below, for consideration concerning 

seasonal restricted areas. Under the first 

alternative, analyzed in the DEIS, we 

propose two new seasonal restricted 

areas that would be open to harvest of 

lobster and Jonah crab using ropeless 

fishing technology that does not require 

the use of persistent buoy lines, as well 

as changes to existing Northeast Region 

seasonal restricted areas to allow fishing 

in those areas with ropeless technology. 

Northeast state-specific gear marking 

modifications are also proposed. Under 

the second alternative, there would be 

only one new seasonal restricted area 

south of Cape Cod and Nantucket 

Island. Under the third alternative, 

NMFS is co-proposing provisions under 

which the imposition of seasonal 

restrictions on fishing in an area 

proposed for seasonal restrictions in 

LMA1 offshore of Maine would be 

triggered only if certain determinations 

are made in the future. We are soliciting 

comment on the relative merits of the 

three co-proposed approaches, 

including comment concerning the 

factual justifications for each approach, 

the legal adequacy of each approach, 

and the impacts of each approach on 

fishermen and other affected 

stakeholders. 

In addition to the proposed Federal 

regulatory measures reflected in the 

proposed rule, modifications to the Plan 

to achieve at least a 60 percent risk 

reduction includes some risk reduction 

measures that will be implemented by 

the states of Maine and Massachusetts 

in exempted or state waters. 

Specifically, in waters currently 

exempted from regulations under the 

ALWTRP, the Maine Department of 

Marine Resources (MEDMR) will require 

the use of a weak insertion that breaks 

at 1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.) or less halfway 

down the buoy line. Maine has already 

implemented gear marking requirements 

consistent with gear marking 

modifications proposed here. The gear 

marking changes in Maine become 

effective September 1, 2020 for all 

Maine lobster fishermen, including 

those in Maine exempted waters. The 

Massachusetts Department of Marine 

Fisheries (MADMF) will continue their 

recent practice of extending the state 

waters closure of the Massachusetts 

Restricted Area into May until surveys 

demonstrate right whales have left the 

area. The DEIS includes an analysis of 

the risk reduction of the Maine weak 

insertions and the Massachusetts 

closure of the state waters of the 

Massachusetts Restricted Area because 

they contribute to the required risk 

reduction. The economic impacts of 

state measures are not included in the 

economic analysis of the Federal 

rulemaking, however. Massachusetts 

will also restrict buoy line diameters to 

no greater than 3⁄8 inch (0.95 cm) within 

state waters to restrain the introduction 

of larger diameter line into the fishery. 

Even 3⁄8 inch (0.95 cm) diameter rope 

can break at strengths much greater than 

1,700 lbs; therefore, while this measure 

may contribute to future risk reduction 

by constraining line diameter, that 

cannot be assumed, and it is difficult to 

estimate a quantitative risk reduction. 

As described fully in Chapter 3 of the 

DEIS, there are three categories of 

measures that contribute toward the 

target 60 percent risk reduction relative 

to the 2017 baseline: 

• The proposed measures in this 

rulemaking 

• the risk reduction measures that will 

be implemented by Massachusetts 

and Maine, and 

• the lobster fishery management 

measures in LMA2 and LMA3 that 

have been implemented or are on a 

parallel regulatory track with 

ALWTRP modifications 

The measures in this proposed rule 

were selected because they include 

those developed by Maine, 

Massachusetts, and to a lesser extent 

Rhode Island after extensive stakeholder 

outreach, supplemented by additional 

proposed measures and estimated by the 

DST to, together with the state and 

existing and anticipated Federal fishery 

management measures, achieve the 60- 

percent risk reduction target. Additional 

analyses using a co-occurrence model 

developed by IEC Inc. for NMFS 

demonstrated that proposed plan 

modifications should reduce the cooccurrence of North Atlantic right 

whales with lobster and crab buoy lines 

in the Northeast Region by about 69 

percent. 

Estimating the risk reduction of the 

weak insertion measures is more 

difficult. Nearly all Northeast lobster 

and crab trap/pot buoy lines would be 

modified with weak insertion. However, 

following the state proposals, the 

proposed rule would not require the 

insertions at intervals of every 40 feet 

(12.2 m), which was discussed by the 

Team as the interval needed to ensure 

it is equivalent to weak rope. The depth 

of the lowest weak insertion is also 

significant, as a whale that encounters a 

line above the lowest weak insertion can 

break away from the trawl, reducing the 

burden of gear on the whale. The risk 

reduction analysis takes an average of a 

lower bound of risk reduction estimate 

that compares the number of insertions 

to the number that would be required to 

be equivalent to weak rope and an 

upper bound estimate that considers the 

amount of rope above the lowest weak 

insertion to be weak. By this estimate, 

the proposed weak rope measures 

would modify nearly 26 percent of the 

rope in buoy lines to break at 1,700 lbs. 

(771 kgs.) or less. 

The economic analysis does not 

estimate the number of vessels affected 

under the Maine measures within Maine 

exempted waters. Beyond the Maine 

exemption area, 3,970 vessels would be 

impacted, with first year compliance 

costs estimated at $6.9 million to $15.4 

million (DEIS Table 6.22). Over the first 

six years (selected as the average span 

of time between amendments and 

consistent with buoy line replacement 

timing), there will continue to be costs 

associated with catch losses due to trawl 

up and closure requirements. The 

average annual cost in those out years 

is estimated to be $5.7 million to $12.3 

million at a three percent discount rate. 

If Maine and Massachusetts do not 

implement the state measures identified 

in their proposals, and upcoming LMA3 

aggregated trap measures are not 

finalized, further modifications to the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86882 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

Plan would be required to achieve at 

least the 60 percent target risk reduction 

in the Northeast Region lobster and 

Jonah crab trap/pot fisheries to reduce 

mortality and serious injury to below 

PBR for North Atlantic right whales. 

Compliance costs would increase if 

states did not take these actions and 

NMFS were to include in Federal 

regulation the Maine exemption area 

measures and the extension of the 

Massachusetts Restricted Area in state 

waters. As noted above, we are coproposing three alternatives for 

consideration concerning seasonal 

restricted areas. As the first alternative, 

NMFS proposes two new seasonal 

restricted areas that would restrict buoy 

lines but would be open to ropeless 

fishing; that is, harvesting lobster and 

Jonah crabs would be allowed using 

trap/pot trawls that would be retrieved 

without the use of persistent buoy lines. 

The purpose of these restricted areas 

would be to achieve risk reduction and 

reduce mortalities and serious injuries 

to below PBR for right whales when 

combined with the other proposed 

measures described in this rulemaking. 

The addition of restricted areas open to 

ropeless fishing was not included in the 

ALWTRT framework recommendations, 

but a seasonal closure south of Cape 

Cod and Nantucket was proposed by the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts to 

increase risk reduction in southern New 

England. A restricted area open to 

ropeless fishing in LMA1 was not 

included in any state proposal but is 

proposed here at § 229.32(c)(6)(ii) to 

achieve sufficient risk reduction in the 

northern Gulf of Maine. 

While NMFS has included both 

seasonal restricted areas in the proposed 

regulatory text below, and analyzed 

them in the DEIS, NMFS has not yet 

made a final determination as to 

whether the LMA1 closure is necessary 

to meet the goal of a 60 percent risk 

reduction. Accordingly, NMFS is coproposing two additional alternative 

options regarding this issue, and is 

seeking public comment as set forth 

below: 

Alternative 1–A (second co-proposed 

alternative): Not Including the LMA1 

Seasonal Restricted Area. 

NMFS is seeking comment on the 

option to not include the LMA1 

seasonal restricted area in the final rule. 

Commenters that believe this additional 

restricted area is not warranted to 

achieve PBR are encouraged to provide 

specific information or analysis in 

support of not including the restricted 

area in the final rule. If NOAA receives 

information indicating that we can 

achieve the 60 percent risk reduction 

without the restricted area, we would 

consider not including the restricted 

area in the final rule. Additionally, if 

commenters believe that information 

will be available after issuance of the 

final rule on this topic, commenters 

should articulate the nature of that 

information, describe how the 

information might affect the decision, 

and propose a mechanism for evaluating 

that information in determining whether 

or not to continue with the restricted 

area. 

Alternative 1–B (third co-proposed 

alternative): Implementing the LMA1 

Seasonal Restricted Areas Only If 

Certain Triggers are Met. 

NMFS is seeking comment on a 

proposal to provide that the Regional 

Administrator may implement the 

LMA1 closure only if certain triggers are 

met in the future. This option would 

require the Regional Administrator to 

examine the available information in 

advance of October in any given year 

and determine whether the closure is 

necessary. Specifically, the Regional 

Administrator would implement the 

closure if he or she determines that the 

frequency of entanglements has not 

been reduced below 60 percent from the 

effective date of the final rule. NMFS is 

considering the following specific 

language to implement this provision 

and is interested in any comments on 

this textual change (see § 229.32(c)(6)(ii) 

Alternative 1–B). 

The Regional Administrator may 

determine whether the frequency of 

entanglements from the trap/pot gear in 

the Northeast region has been reduced 

by 60 percent from [the effective date of 

this rule] within a time period that 

allows meaningful analysis. If the 

Regional Administrator determines that 

the frequency of such entanglements has 

not been reduced by 60 percent, then 

from October 1 to January 31, it shall be 

prohibited to fish with, set, or possess 

trap/pot gear in this area unless it is 

fished without buoy lines or with buoy 

lines that are stored on the bottom until 

they can be remotely released for 

hauling, or the trap/pot gear is stowed 

in accordance with § 229.2. 

Authorizations for fishing without buoy 

lines must be obtained if such fishing 

would not be in accordance with surface 

marking requirements of §§ 697.21 and 

648.84. 

As relevant to the first and third coproposed alternatives, the proposed rule 

would also modify two existing 

restricted areas to allow fishing without 

buoy lines. This modification was also 

not in the Team recommendations or 

state proposals, but is proposed here to 

accelerate research and development of 

ropeless (buoyless) fishing methods so 

that in the future, commercial fishing 

using ropeless technology can be used 

instead of seasonal closures to allow 

trap pot fishing while protecting right 

whales. NOAA has invested a 

substantial amount of funding in the 

industry’s development of ropeless gear, 

in specific geographic areas and in 

general. We anticipate that these efforts 

to facilitate and support the industry’s 

development of ropeless gear will 

continue, pending appropriations. 

Finally, a number of housekeeping 

edits were made in the existing 

regulatory text. The initiation point was 

added as the final endpoint to the table 

describing the Great South Channel 

Area (see table 11 at 50 CFR 

229.32(c)(5)(i) in amended text) to fully 

enclose the restricted area. In a number 

of places, revisions were made 

describing the availability of guidance 

created to aid in compliance with gear 

configuration and marking measures. In 

a number of places, state abbreviations 

were replaced with the complete state 

names. 

See ADDRESSES for information on 

access to the DEIS for a detailed analysis 

of the impacts of the proposed measures 

and other measures considered. 

Changes Proposed To Reduce the 

Number of Vertical Buoy Lines 

The proposed rule would reduce the 

number of vertical buoy lines fished 

outside of areas exempted under the 

Plan by increasing the minimum 

number of traps required per trawl 

(known as trawling-up), based on area 

fished and distance from shore as 

indicated in Table 1. Concerns have 

been raised that the trawling-up 

requirement of 45 traps per trawl in 

LMA3 may present a safety concern to 

a handful of LMA3 vessels that have 

insufficient deck space or rope storage 

capacity. NMFS requests LMA3 fishery 

participants and other reviewers’ 

comments on the feasibility of permitspecific conditions that would result in 

an average of 45 traps per trawl in 

LMA3, to achieve the same buoy line 

reduction. 

The trawling-up measures included in 

this proposed rule were proposed by the 

states or by LMA3 ALWTRT fishing 

industry participants. Outside of waters 

exempted from trawling up 

requirements under the ALWTRP, an 

estimated 19 percent reduction in buoy 

line numbers would be achieved by the 

proposed trawling-up measures 

described on Table 1. Note that MEDMR 

proposed an option for lobstermen to 

use fewer traps per trawl using one buoy 

line in a manner resulting in the same 

line proportion of buoy lines to pots 

(four traps on a single buoy between 

three and six miles, eight trap per single 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86883 

buoy between 6 and 12 miles). NMFS is 

not proposing this at this time because 

past gear modifications allowing more 

than three pots per buoy were rescinded 

due to comments that those gear 

configurations resulted in gear conflicts 

and safety concerns. Outside of three 

miles, this option would also require 

modifications to regulations on lobster 

gear configuration found at 50 CFR 

697.21(b)(2) requiring trawls of more 

than three traps to mark both ends of the 

trawl with buoys and radar reflectors. 

Although not proposed here, comments 

on this option are requested. 

Additionally, the proposed rule would 

require 45 traps per trawl in the 

Northeast LMA3 management area. This 

trawl configuration may pose logistic 

and safety concerns for a few smaller 

vessels permitted to fish in LMA3. 

Offshore lobster fishermen have 

suggested that they would consider 

individual permit conditions requiring 

some vessels to fish more traps/trawl to 

ensure that the average traps/trawl 

fished in the area, and therefore, the 

buoy line numbers will be the same as 

that analyzed for the proposed rule. 

Reviewers are asked to provide 

comments on whether equivalencies 

implemented through fishing permit 

conditions should be considered. 

TABLE 1—PROPOSED REGULATORY CRAB/LOBSTER NORTHEAST REGION BUOY LINE REDUCTION MODIFICATIONS TO THE

ATLANTIC LARGE WHALE TAKE REDUCTION PLAN

Component Area Distance from shore if applicable Proposed measure 

Modify minimum traps per trawl requirements.Maine state waters ....................... Maine Exemption line to 3 nmi 

(5.56 km).

3 traps/trawl. 

Offshore Maine ............................. 3 nmi (5.56 km) to the 6 mi line ... 8 traps/trawl. 

All LMA1 ....................................... 6 mi line to 12 nmi (22.22 km) ..... 15 traps/trawl. 

LMA2 and Outer Cape Cod ......... 3–12 nmi (5.56–22.22 km) ........... 15 traps/trawl. 

LMA1 and LMA2 ........................... >12 nmi (22.22 km) ...................... 25 traps/trawl. 

Northeast LMA3 ............................ ....................................................... 45 traps/trawl. 

Increase maximum trawl length to 

accommodate traps/trawl.

Northeast LMA3 ............................ ....................................................... Extend maximum trawl length to

1.75 nm (3.24 km). 

Note: See 50 CFR 229.32 for delineations of regulated waters and associated terms, such as exempted waters. The ‘‘6-mile line’’ refers to an 

approximation, described in 50 CFR 229.32(a)(2)(ii). 

Changes to Restricted Areas 

The proposed measures, summarized 

in Table 2, would modify current 

Northeast Region restricted areas to 

allow commercial trap/pot fisheries to 

harvest lobster and crabs if they fish 

with ropeless gear, without persistent 

buoy lines. The proposed modifications 

would affect two existing seasonal 

restricted areas currently closed to 

fishing: the Massachusetts Restricted 

Area (50 CFR 229.32(c)(3)) and the Great 

South Channel Restricted Trap/Pot Area 

(50 CFR 229.32(c)(4)). However, no 

changes are proposed to the surface 

system requirements (buoys and radar 

reflectors required at either end of 

lobster trawls or bottom tending fixed 

gear) under the Atlantic Coastal 

Fisheries Cooperative Management Act 

(ACFCMA), 16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. See 

50 CFR 697.21. Therefore, fishermen 

harvesting lobster in these areas would 

need to get authorization from the 

appropriate state or Federal agency to be 

exempted from these surface marking 

requirements. 

This measure is not expected to 

introduce substantial fishing effort into 

the currently restricted areas, and any 

exempted fishing authorization would 

require methods, monitoring, and 

reporting that minimize the possibility 

of impacts on large whales. The purpose 

of this measure is to encourage 

fishermen to participate in the 

development of ropeless fishing, to 

improve operational feasibility and 

accelerate the timeline for adoption 

within commercial fishery operations. 

NMFS continues to prioritize ropeless 

fishing development and has initiated a 

pilot program to support ropeless 

experimentation and develop other 

innovative fishing gear technologies to 

reduce North Atlantic right whale 

entanglements in U.S. commercial 

fisheries as supported by fiscal year 

2020 appropriations described in Senate 

Report 116–127. We anticipate that 

these efforts to facilitate and support the 

industry’s development of ropeless gear 

will continue, pending appropriation. 

Reviewers are asked to comment on this 

proposed measure. 

Two new seasonal restricted areas 

that would allow harvest of lobster and 

Jonah crab using bottom trap/pot trawl 

gear but without the use of persistent 

buoy lines are also proposed and 

summarized in Table 2 and illustrated 

in Figure 1: (1) Offshore of Maine along 

the LMA1 and LMA3 border and (2) 

south of Cape Cod and Nantucket. The 

first proposed new seasonal lobster and 

crab trap/pot buoy line restricted area 

from October through January about 30 

miles (48 km) offshore of Maine along 

the LMA1 and LMA3 border was 

discussed with MEDMR but was not 

included in their proposal to NMFS. 

This buoy line restricted area is 

proposed at 229.32(c)(6)(ii) to ensure 

that the risk reduction measures in 

LMA1 approach the regional target risk 

reduction of 60 percent. The amount of 

risk reduction relative to the economic 

impact of the restricted area may vary in 

unpredictable ways during the restricted 

season. NMFS seeks comment as to 

whether restricted areas during certain 

months may have a disproportionately 

higher amount of economic impact. 

NMFS also seeks comment as to 

whether the proposed closure is 

necessary to achieve a sufficient level of 

risk reduction across the region or 

whether the buoy line closures should 

be excluded from the final rule. 

Additionally, as noted above and 

analyzed in the DEIS, while NMFS has 

included both proposed seasonal 

restricted areas in the proposed 

regulatory text below, NMFS has not yet 

made a final determination as to 

whether the LMA1 closure is necessary 

to meet the goal of a 60 percent risk 

reduction. As such, NMFS is also 

considering two alternative options 

regarding this requirement, and is 

seeking public comment on these two 

options as well as the proposed 

restricted area as set forth below: 

Alternative Option 1–A. Invite 

Comment on not including the LMA1 

Seasonal Restricted Area. 

As an alternative to the proposed 

seasonal restricted areas, NMFS is also 

seeking comment on the option to not 

include the LMA1 seasonal restricted 

area. Commenters that believe this 

additional restricted area is not 

warranted to achieve PBR are 

encouraged to provide specific 

information or analysis in support of 

recommended removal of the restricted 

area from the proposed rule. If NOAA 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86884 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

receives information indicating that we 

can achieve the 60 percent risk 

reduction without the restricted area, 

we would consider not including the 

restricted area in the final rule. 

Additionally, if commenters believe that 

information will be available after 

issuance of the final rule on this topic, 

commenters should articulate the nature 

of that information, how the information 

might affect the decision, and propose a 

mechanism for evaluating that 

information in determining whether or 

not to continue with the restricted area. 

Alternative Option 1–B: Invite 

Comment on not including the LMA1 

Seasonal Restricted Areas Unless 

Certain Triggers are Met. 

As an alternative to the proposed 

seasonal restricted areas, NMFS is also 

seeking comment on the option to 

modify the regulatory structure such 

that the Regional Administrator may 

implement the LMA1 closure if certain 

triggers are met in the future. This 

proposal would require the Regional 

Administrator to examine the available 

information in advance of October in 

any given year and determine whether 

the closure is necessary. Specifically, 

the Regional Administrator would 

implement the closure if he or she 

determines that the frequency of 

entanglements has not been reduced 

below 60 percent from the effective date 

of the final rule. NMFS is considering 

the following specific language to 

implement this provision and is 

interested in any comments on this 

textual change at § 229.32(c)(6)(ii) 

Alternative 1–B. 

The Regional Administrator may 

determine whether the frequency of 

entanglements from the trap/pot gear in 

the Northeast region has been reduced 

by 60 percent from [the effective date of 

this rule] within a time period that 

allows meaningful analysis. If the 

Regional Administrator determines that 

the frequency of such entanglements has 

not been reduced by 60 percent, then 

from October 1 to January 31, it shall be 

prohibited to fish with, set, or possess 

trap/pot gear in this area unless it is 

fished without buoy lines or with buoy 

lines that are stored on the bottom until 

they can be remotely released for 

hauling, or the trap/pot gear is stowed 

in accordance with § 229.2. 

Authorizations for fishing without buoy 

lines must be obtained if such fishing 

would not be in accordance with surface 

marking requirements of §§ 697.21 and 

648.84. 

The second proposed new seasonal 

lobster and crab trap/pot buoy line 

closure area was proposed by MADMF 

south of Cape Cod and Nantucket from 

February through April. These seasonal 

restricted areas closures are proposed as 

closures to buoy lines so that ropeless 

fishing for lobster and crab could occur 

with appropriate exemptions, as 

described above in discussion of 

changes to closure current restricted 

areas. 

Rhode Island fishermen may also be 

affected by the Massachusetts South 

Island Restricted Area in LMA2, and a 

restriction of buoy lines was not 

included in the Rhode Island Division 

of Marine Fisheries (RIDMF) proposal. 

RIDMF instead proposed that LMA2 

fishermen fish with two weak buoy 

lines (considered to be top 75 percent of 

the buoy line, allowing 25 percent 

chafing line where the line makes 

contact with the ocean floor) to achieve 

60 percent risk reduction. Although 

weak buoy lines are analyzed within 

Alternative 3 in the DEIS, the 

Massachusetts South of Island closure 

was selected for proposed rulemaking 

due to the demonstrated value of the 

Massachusetts Restricted Area to North 

Atlantic right whale protection and 

recent use by right whales in the area 

south of Nantucket. 

Through flexible state rulemaking, 

Massachusetts extends the current 

closure of state waters within the 

Massachusetts Restricted Area in May if 

whales remain. Taken together with line 

reduction measures and the two 

proposed buoy line closures, cooccurrence of trap/pot buoy lines with 

North Atlantic right whales would be 

reduced by an estimated 69 percent 

(Table 5.4, DEIS). 

TABLE 2—PROPOSED REGULATORY CHANGES TO EXISTING NORTHEAST REGION RESTRICTED AREAS AND ADDITION OF

TWO NEW AREAS PROHIBITING PERSISTENT BUOY LINES

Component Proposed area Measure 

Northeast Region Lobster and Crab Trap/Pot Fishery 

seasonal closures to persistent buoy lines, open to 

harvest of lobster and Jonah crab using ropeless technology; Ropeless fishing would be allowed with appropriate state and Federal authorizations for exemption 

from Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act surface marking requirements.

Massachusetts Restricted 

Area (50 CFR 

229.32(c)(3)) and Great 

South Channel Restricted 

Trap/Pot Area (50 CFR 

229.32(c)(4)).

Would change the trap/pot fishery restricted areas from 

complete fishing closures to closures to buoy lines. 

Would allow ropeless fishing for crab and lobster with 

appropriate state and Federal authorization for exemption from the remaining surface system marking 

requirements under the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries 

Cooperative Management Act and the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. 

New LMA1 Restricted 

Areas, across Maine Lobster Zones C/D/E.

October–January proposed restricted area; open to 

fishing with ropeless technology but closed to trap/ 

pot fishing with persistent buoy lines. See Figure 1. 

Alternative 1–A No Closure. Alternative 1–B Open 

unless a determination is made by the Regional Administrator that the frequency of entanglements has 

not been reduced by 60 percent, in which case the 

area shall be open from October–January to fishing 

with ropeless technology but closed to trap/pot fishing with persistent buoy lines. 

New Massachusetts South 

Island Restricted Area.

February–April proposed restricted area; open to fishing 

with ropeless technology but closed to trap/pot fishing with persistent buoy lines. See Figure 1. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86885 

Gear Modifications To Include Weak 

Line or Weak Insertions in Buoy Lines 

The proposed rule also identifies areaspecific modifications to buoy lines to 

introduce weak rope or weak insertions 

breaking at 1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.) or less 

at various depths on the buoy line to 

increase the likelihood that a large 

whale would break the line prior to 

becoming entangled in a manner that 

causes a serious injury or mortality 

(Table 3). NMFS has confirmed with 

gear manufacturers that they can 

include one alternate color in threestrand buoy lines that are manufactured 

to break at less than 1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.) 

to distinguish them from strong line of 

the same diameter. Publication of this 

proposed rule would be an indicator of 

future market demand that may spur the 

production of weak line that can be 

visibly differentiated. 

Weak insertions create places along 

the rope that have a breaking strength of 

1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.) or less. The 

proposed regulations require a 

stipulation regarding the depths of weak 

insertions. Large whales including right 

whales appear to use the entire water 

column; therefore, encounters at depth 

can happen. We assume no risk 

reduction below the insertion. A large 

right whale encountering the rope above 

the weak insertion should be able to 

break free of the gear below the 

insertion with a lesser chance of serious 

injury. The closer the distance between 

weak insertions, the greater the benefit 

to right whales, with an ideal interval 

proposed by some Team members of 40 

ft. (12.19 m), the average length of a 

right whale. 

The proposed weak rope and weak 

insertion measures included in the 

proposed rule are taken directly from 

state proposals. MEDMR is evaluating 

the breaking strength of weak insertion 

devices, and some that have effectively 

broken at or below 1,700 lbs (771 kgs) 

include: Use of an engineered rope 

designed to have a tensile strength of up 

to 1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.); spliced insertion 

into a buoy line of a 3 to 6 ft. (0.91 to 

1.83 m) long length of rope engineered 

to break at 1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.); and 

insertion of a 3 to 6 ft. (0.91 to 1.83 m) 

length of South Shore Lobster 

Fishermen’s Association sleeve, a 

hollow braided sleeve that can be 

quickly integrated into typical three 

strand 5⁄16 and 3⁄8 inch (0.79 and 0.95 

cm) diameter buoy line. Preliminary 

results of MEDMRs evaluations can be 

found in their proposal in Appendix 3.2 

of the DEIS. Fishermen continue to test 

additional weak insertion 

configurations; therefore, additional 

options that demonstrate appropriate 

breaking strengths may be identified by 

the time of final rulemaking. The 

proposed rule requires inserts or weak 

line that has been demonstrated to break 

under forces greater than 1,700 lbs. (771 

kgs.), but allows the Regional 

Administrator to approve new weak 

insertion devices as they are developed 

and proven effective to respond to the 

diversity in fishing practices and 

available materials across the Northeast 

Region. 

The proposed requirements do not 

require weak insertions in the Maine 

exemption area because MEDMR will be 

requiring one insertion halfway down 

the buoy line in the exemption area 

through state regulations. The elements 

within the Preferred Alternative 

(Alternative 2) were selected because 

the DST estimated together they would 

achieve a greater than 60-percent risk 

reduction. The analysis includes 

Maine’s intention to require a weak 

insertion in their exemption waters. The 

weak line and weak insertion 

modifications proposed below estimates 

that outside of the Maine exemption 

area, all buoy lines in the Northeast 

Region would be modified under the 

proposed rule and more than 26 percent 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALSEP31DE20.046</GPH>
86886 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

of the rope in crab and lobster buoy 

lines would be weakened to 1,700 lbs. 

(771 kgs.) or less. Planned state 

regulations would modify all buoy lines 

in Maine exempted waters so that an 

additional 31.7 percent of line would be 

equivalent to weak rope. If MEDMR 

does not implement weak insertion 

requirements in the exemption area, 

further modifications to the Plan may be 

needed to reduce risk of serious injury 

and mortality of North Atlantic right 

whales due to entanglement in the 

commercial Northeast Region lobster 

and crab trap/pot fisheries by 60 

percent. 

In addition to weak rope and weak 

insertions along the length of the buoy 

lines, the proposed rule would also 

modify the current weak link 

requirement at the buoy. The rule would 

allow fishermen the option of inserting 

the weak links (at current area-specific 

strengths) where the surface system 

connects to the buoy line rather than 

requiring it at the buoy itself. This 

modification was requested by 

fishermen for operational reasons rather 

than risk reduction reasons. The change 

would not increase risk, and may allow 

a whale to break away from entire 

surface system, which can include 

multiple lines, buoys, and radar 

reflectors, rather than just releasing the 

buoys. This may have a positive benefits 

due to a reduction in entanglement 

complexity. Comments from fishermen 

and the public on this measure 

specifically are encouraged. 

We propose modifying the buoy weak 

link to provide fishermen with two 

options, the current connection close to 

the buoy or a weak link connecting the 

base of the surface system to the single 

buoy line. Moving the weak link to the 

base of the surface system could be 

required if there is information 

demonstrating this is a large risk 

reduction improvement. Finally, the 

non-preferred alternative in the DEIS 

(Alternative 3) considers removing the 

buoy weak link requirement for all buoy 

lines that would be required to have 

weak line or weak insertions farther 

down the buoy line. Under this 

configuration, a retained buoy could 

provide resistance that helps the buoy 

line to part lower down, or the buoy 

could pull the line away from the 

whale, increasing the possibility that it 

will fall from the whale. A retained 

buoy could also be helpful to large 

whale disentanglement responders, and 

buoys from commercial fisheries are 

usually required to be marked with 

vessel specific information that would 

provide information on the original 

location of entanglement. NMFS invites 

comments on all of these options. 

TABLE 3—PROPOSED REGULATORY CHANGES TO REQUIRE WEAK ROPE, WEAK INSERTIONS ON BUOY LINES AND

CHANGE TO WEAK LINK REQUIREMENT ON NORTHEAST REGION CRAB AND LOBSTER TRAP/POT BUOY LINES

Component Area including distance from shore Proposed measure 

Weak line/Weak Insertion .................... From Maine exemption line to 3 nmi (5.56 km) ..... 2 weak insertions, at 25 percent and 50 percent 

down buoy line. 

New Hampshire/Massachusetts/Rhode Island. 

From coast to 3 nmi (5.56 km).

1 weak insertion, at 50 percent down the buoy 

line. 

All Northeast Region. 3–12 nmi (5.56 km–22.22 

km).

2 weak insertions, at 25 percent and 50 percent 

down line. 

LMA1, LMA2, and Outer Cape Cod. >12 nmi 

(22.22 km).

1 weak insertion, at 35 percent down the line. 

Northeast LMA 3 ..................................................... The top 75 percent of one buoy line weak. 

Weak link placement option ................. Entire Northeast Region (Figure 1) ......................... Allow option to place weak link as a connection 

between the surface system and the single buoy 

line. 

Gear Marking Changes 

Finally, the proposed rule would 

modify current gear marking 

requirements, introducing colored 

marks that identify state of permit 

issuance, as well as a 6-inch (15.24 cm) 

mark that distinguishes Northeast 

Region lobster and crab trap trawls in 

Federal waters from state waters. The 

rule would also add a 3 ft. (0.91 m) long 

mark within 2 fathoms of the buoys to 

increase the possibility of detection and 

identification to state fishery from 

vessels and aerial survey aircraft. 

Proposed modifications are summarized 

in Table 4. The gear markings are based 

on proposals received from or discussed 

with New England States. Maine has 

already published gear marking 

requirements analogous to these 

measures, requiring gear marking on 

every Maine permitted lobster buoy 

line, effective in September 2020. 

Maine’s gear marks for Federal waters 

are mirrored in these regulations. 

Multiple marking methods would be 

allowed including paint, tape, or 

colored rope insertions. 

While existing gear marking 

requirements have increased the amount 

of retrieved gear with marks, they do not 

provide sufficient entanglement location 

information. The proposed gear marking 

scheme would increase the number of 

marks present by approximately 56 

percent (not including Maine exempt 

waters, which are regulated under state 

requirements and will substantially 

increase the number of marked lobster 

buoy lines there), increasing the chances 

that gear will be recovered with visible 

marks. The proposed gear marking 

would not impact the probability of 

whales becoming entangled in 

commercial fishing gear nor would they 

affect the severity of an entanglement 

should one occur. However, the 

markings would increase the 

information available regarding the 

fishery and state of origin of large whale 

entanglements to aid the efforts of 

NMFS and the ALWTRT in assessing, 

and if needed reducing, entanglements 

in U.S. commercial fisheries that cause 

mortalities and serious injuries of North 

Atlantic right whales and other large 

whales. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86887 

TABLE 4—PROPOSED REGULATORY CHANGES TO GEAR MARKING ON NORTHEAST CRAB AND LOBSTER TRAP/POT BUOY

LINES

Area Proposed gear marking measure 

Entire Northeast Management Area 

(see figure 1) except Maine exemption area.

3-ft long state-specific mark (see color below) within 2 fathoms of the buoy. In Federal waters, an additional 6-inch green mark within 1 ft. of 3-ft mark. 

Maine Exemption Area ................... 3-ft long mark within 2 fathoms of the buoy. One or two additional 1-ft marks (depth dependent) through 

state regulation only. 

Maine Non-Exempt ......................... Purple. Three 1-ft marks: At top, middle and bottom of line. In Federal waters, an additional 6-inch green 

buoy line mark within 2 fathoms of buoy. 

New Hampshire .............................. Yellow. In state waters: Two 1-ft marks in the top half and bottom half of buoy line. Beyond state waters, 

three 1-ft marks: At top, middle and bottom of line. In Federal waters, an additional 6-inch green mark 

within 1 ft. of 3-ft mark within 2 fathoms of buoy. 

Massachusetts ................................ Red. In state waters: Two 1-ft marks in the top half and bottom half of buoy line. Beyond state waters 

three 1-ft marks: At top, middle and bottom of line. In Federal waters, an additional 6-inch green mark 

within 1 ft. of 3-ft mark within 2 fathoms of buoy. 

Rhode Island ................................... Silver/Gray. In state waters: Two 1-ft marks in the top half and bottom half of buoy line. Beyond state waters three 1-ft marks at top, middle and bottom of line. In Federal waters, an additional 6-inch green 

mark within 1 ft. of 3-ft mark within 2 fathoms of buoy. 

LMA 3 .............................................. Retain Black. In Federal waters add a 3-ft long mark within 2 fathoms of the buoy, and an additional 6-inch 

green mark within 1 ft. of 3-ft mark within 2 fathoms of buoy. 

Addition to Definitions 

To ensure clarity related to the 

management areas that are referenced 

but were developed for the American 

lobster fishery, a definition for ‘‘Lobster 

Management Area’’ is provided, citing 

the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries 

Cooperative Management Act 

regulations at 50 CFR 697.18. 

For clarity related to proposed 

changes in weak link and gear marking 

requirements, the proposed rule would 

add a definition for ‘‘surface system’’ to 

the definitions in § 229.2. 

Change in the Maximum Length of a 

Lobster Trap Trawl 

In addition to changes to 50 CFR part 

229, the proposed rule would revise 

Federal regulations implemented under 

the Atlantic State Marine Fisheries 

Commission’s Interstate Fishery 

Management Plan for Lobster at 50 CFR 

697.21. The proposed modification 

would increase the maximum length of 

a lobster trap trawl from 1.5 nm (2.78 

km) to 1.75 nm (3.24 km) in LMA3 as 

measured from radar reflector to radar 

reflector, to accommodate a proposed 

increase in the minimum number of 

traps per trawl in LMA3. 

Risk Reduction Target of 60 Percent 

The proposed changes are intended to 

achieve a regional risk reduction target 

of at least 60 percent within the 

Northeast Region lobster and Jonah crab 

trap/pot fisheries. The Team will be 

convened to develop recommendations 

to modify the Plan to reduce risk in 

other U.S. Atlantic fisheries in meetings 

in 2021. A 60 percent risk reduction 

across U.S. commercial fisheries is the 

minimum that NMFS believes is 

necessary to reduce the incidental 

mortalities and serious injuries to below 

the potential biological removal level for 

right whales (0.9 potential biological 

removal level to 0.9 right whales (see 

Section 2.1.5 of the DEIS) based on 

documented serious injuries and 

mortalities. This rulemaking is intended 

to reduce the risk of entanglement 

within the Northeast Region lobster and 

Jonah crab fisheries by 60 percent, 

which fish about 93 percent of the buoy 

lines that occur in areas in the United 

States where right whales occur. NMFS 

will develop measures to reduce the risk 

within other fisheries by a similar 

amount so that the risk reduction target 

of 60 percent across U.S. commercial 

fisheries is achieved. NMFS seeks 

comment as to whether the allocation of 

risk reduction in the proposed rule is 

appropriate relative to other fixed gear 

fisheries (e.g., gillnets) in the region that 

contribute to the risk of entanglement. 

Commenters that believe a lower target 

for risk reduction is warranted should 

provide specific information or analysis 

in support of any recommended level. 

Classification 

The NMFS Assistant Administrator 

has determined that this proposed rule 

is consistent with the Plan and the 

provisions of the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act, the Atlantic Coastal 

Fisheries Cooperative Management Act, 

and other applicable law, subject to 

further consideration after public 

comment. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

NMFS prepared a DEIS for this 

proposed rule that discusses the 

potential impacts of proposed changes 

to the ALWTRP on the environment. In 

addition to the status quo (Alternative 

1), two alternatives are analyzed, 

Alternative 2 (preferred and the basis of 

this proposed rule) and Alternative 3. 

Alternatives 2 and 3 would both modify 

existing seasonal restricted areas from 

closure areas to areas closed to 

persistent buoy lines rather than closed 

to harvesting lobster and crab, reduce 

the number of vertical buoy lines fished 

in northeast lobster and crab trap/pot 

fisheries, deploy weak rope to allow 

whales to break free before being killed 

or seriously injured, seasonally close 

some areas to crab and lobster trap/pot 

fishing with persistent buoy lines, and 

increase gear marking requirements 

across the Northeast Region lobster and 

crab trap/pot fisheries. Alternative 2 

would reduce buoy lines through an 

increase in minimum traps/trawl based 

on area fished. Alternative 3 would 

reduce lines by providing a line 

allocation in Federal waters capped at 

half the lines fished in 2017. While 

Alternative 2 weak buoy line provisions 

allow the use of a small number of weak 

insertions, under Alternative 3 those 

insertions would be required every 40 ft. 

along the buoy line or engineered weak 

rope would be required. Alternative 3 

has more and larger seasonal restricted 

areas closed to buoy lines. An analysis 

of the impacts of the Federal portion of 

the two action alternatives estimates 

that Alternative 2 would reduce the cooccurrence of North Atlantic right 

whales and buoy lines in these fisheries 

by 69 percent and would modify 26 

percent of the rope in vertical buoy lines 

to be weakened lines. Co-occurrence of 

humpback and fin whales with vertical 

lines would also be reduced by 19 and 

27 percent, respectively. Alternative 3 

would reduce the co-occurrence of 

North Atlantic right whales by 86 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86888 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

percent or greater and would modify 75 

percent of rope in remaining vertical 

buoy lines to be weakened lines. Cooccurrence of fin and humpback whales 

with buoy lines would also be reduced 

by over 56 percent and 58 percent, 

respectively, in Alternative 3. Because 

of the extensive gear marking and weak 

rope provisions under both alternatives, 

3,970 vessels would be affected. The 

estimated annualized compliance costs 

of each action alternative are $5.7 to 

$12.3 million for Alternative 2 and 

$16.3 to $31.8 million for Alternative 3. 

A copy of the DEIS is available in the 

docket or from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

Reviewers are asked to comment on and 

identify support for Alternative 1, 2 or 

3. 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and Executive 

Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and 

Controlling Regulatory Costs 

This proposed rule has been 

determined significant for the purposes 

of Executive Order 12866. This 

proposed rule is expected to be an 

Executive Order 13771 regulatory 

action. Depending on the assumptions 

used, the estimated total cost of this rule 

over the first six years of 

implementation, in 2020 dollars, is 

between $24.5 and $53.5 million. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

NMFS prepared an IRFA as required 

by section 603 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA 

describes the economic impact this 

proposed rule, if adopted, would have 

on small entities. A description of the 

action, why it is being considered, and 

the legal basis for this action are 

contained at the beginning of this 

section in the preamble and in the 

SUMMARY section of the preamble. A 

copy of this analysis is available in the 

docket or from NMFS (see ADDRESSES), 

and a summary follows. 

Description and Estimate of Number of 

Small Entities To Which This Proposed 

Rule Would Apply 

For RFA purposes only, NMFS has 

established a small business size 

standard for businesses, including their 

affiliates, whose primary industry is 

commercial fishing (see 50 CFR 200.2). 

A business primarily engaged in 

commercial fishing (North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code 11411) is classified by NMFS as 

including those businesses, including 

their affiliates, whose primary industry 

is commercial fishing and who have $11 

million or less in annual gross receipts. 

This standard applies to all businesses 

classified under NAICS code 11411 for 

commercial fishing, including all 

businesses classified as commercial 

finfish fishing (NAICS 114111), 

commercial shellfish fishing (NAICS 

114112), and other commercial marine 

fishing (NAICS 114119) businesses. Data 

are not available to ascertain nonownership interests needed to confirm 

the Small Business Act definition of 

‘‘affiliations;’’ therefore, the Social 

Sciences Branch (SSB) of the NMFS 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

created an affiliated database. There are 

three major components of this dataset: 

Vessel affiliation information, landing 

values by species, and vessel permits. 

All federally permitted vessels in the 

Northeast Region from 2016 to 2018 are 

included in this dataset. Vessels are 

affiliated into entities according to 

common owners. The entity definition 

used by the SSB uses only unique 

combinations of owners. 

Since this proposed regulation applies 

only to the crab and lobster pot/trap 

vessels in the Northeast Region, entities 

that possess one or more of these 

permits are evaluated. For each 

affiliation, the revenues from all 

member vessels of the entity are 

summed into affiliation revenue in each 

year. On December 29, 2015, NMFS 

issued a final rule establishing a small 

business size standard of $11 million in 

annual gross receipts for all businesses 

primarily engaged in the commercial 

fishing industry (NAICS 11411) for RFA 

compliance purposes only. The $11 

million standard became effective on 

July 1, 2016. Thus, the RFA defines a 

small business in the lobster fishery as 

a firm that is independently owned and 

operated with receipts of $11 million or 

less annually. Based on this size 

standard, if the three-year average 

(2016–2018) affiliation revenue is 

greater than $11 million, the fishing 

business is considered to be a large 

entity, otherwise it is a small entity. 

Within the Northeast Fisheries 

Science Center (NEFSC) SSB database, 

1,591 distinct entities were identified as 

regulated entities. Using landings data, 

four of these entities are considered 

large entities. Because the regulations 

will also affect fishermen holding only 

state permits, the vertical buoy line 

estimates within the NMFS/IEC CoOccurrence model were used to identify 

an addition estimate of 1,913 active 

vessels fishing in state waters that 

would be regulated by the proposed 

rule. In total, therefore, there are 3,504 

regulated entities. 

While we do not have data to 

determine the dependence of state 

permitted vessels on lobster landings, if 

they are analogous to the small entities 

fishing under Federal permits, they are 

likely to be dependent on lobster 

landings, as further described below. To 

determine the number of impacted 

entities within the NEFSC data, we 

identified whether one or more 

members of an affiliation landed lobster 

in 2018. These are entities likely to be 

impacted by the proposed regulations. 

The determination of whether an entity 

is a large or small entity is based on 

three-year average affiliation revenue 

from 2016 to 2018. Based on these 

characteristics, we identified 1,591 

distinct entities as regulated entities, 

including 259 entities with no fishing 

revenue in 2018, and 111 entities (one 

large, 110 small) with no 2018 lobster 

landings. That is, there are 1,221 

federally permitted vessels that would 

be impacted by the proposed rule 

because at least one vessel in the entity 

landed lobster in the past year (Table 5). 

Only three of the affected entities would 

be considered large entities; 1,218 are 

Federally-permitted small entities. We 

assume that in addition to those, the 

1,912 vessels in state waters would also 

be impacted, for a total of 3,130 

impacted small entities. 

As estimated in Chapter 9 of the DEIS, 

Table 5 displays the average profit for 

all large and small entities, compared to 

their mean total revenue. Results 

indicate the profitability for large 

entities is 1.77 percent and for small 

entities is 18.48 percent. As such, we 

could conclude that the action would 

not create more significant economic 

impact on small entities compared to 

large entities. 

TABLE 5—PROFITABILITY OF LARGE AND SMALL ENTITIES

Mean profit Mean total 

revenue 

Profitability 

(%) 

Large Entity .................................................................................................................................. $469,784 $26,485,600 1.77 

Small Entity .................................................................................................................................. 52,235 282,586 18.48 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86889 

Under Alternative Two, a few 

measures are proposed to reduce the 

probability of serious injury and 

mortality of North Atlantic right whales 

including weak ropes, minimum trawl 

length requirement, and restricted areas. 

A gear marking requirement is also 

proposed to increase the chance of 

threat identification. All these measures 

generate a series of compliance costs for 

small entities. 

As discussed in Chapter 6 of the DEIS, 

we assume the rulemaking cycle is six 

years, considered the approximate 

replacement time for buoy lines. Table 

6 displays the compliance costs for all 

affected entities from Year 1 to Year 6. 

Year 0 is the status quo, so the 

compliance cost is zero, and we do not 

include it in the table. The discount rate 

of three percent and seven percent are 

used for the annualized value 

calculation. Weak rope only generate 

costs in Year 1, while gear marking 

needs to be replaced every year. 

Trawling up and restricted area 

measures have costs in the subsequent 

years due to the catch reduction 

impacts. At seven percent discount rate, 

the trawling up measures have the 

highest annual cost of $2.8 to $9.4 

million. Gear marking would cost $2.5 

million each year. Weak rope and 

restricted areas (seasonal buoy line 

closures) cost less than half a million 

dollars annually. The total annual cost 

of all measures ranges from $5.9 million 

to $12.8 million. If applied to roughly 

3,100 affected small entities, each entity 

would have to bear a compliance cost of 

$1,900 to $4,100 per year for six years. 

If we are applying a three percent 

discount rate, the final cost for each 

vessel would be around $1,700 to 

$3,600 per year. In terms of realized 

Year 1 costs, compliance costs would 

range between $2,200 and $5,000 but 

would be lower in Years 2–6. The Year 

1 costs would result in an estimated 

reduction in profit ranging from 4.3 

percent to 9.5 percent. 

TABLE 6—YEARLY COMPLIANCE COST OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Year Gear 

marking 

Weak 

rope 

Trawling 

up lower 

Trawling 

up upper 

Restricted 

area lower 

Restricted 

area upper 

Total 

lower 

Total 

upper 

1 ........................................................................ $2,017,283 $2,152,497 $2,660,792 $10,957,354 $106,259 $315,300 $6,936,831 $15,442,434 

2 ........................................................................ 2,017,283 0 4,239,722 12,236,593 106,259 315,300 6,363,264 14,569,176 

3 ........................................................................ 2,017,283 0 3,179,791 9,517,350 106,259 315,300 5,303,333 11,849,933 

4 ........................................................................ 2,017,283 0 2,119,861 6,798,107 106,259 315,300 4,243,403 9,130,690 

5 ........................................................................ 2,017,283 0 1,059,930 4,078,864 106,259 315,300 3,183,472 6,411,447 

6 ........................................................................ 2,017,283 0 0 1,359,621 106,259 315,300 2,123,542 3,692,204 

PV ...................................................................... 12,103,698 2,152,497 13,260,096 44,947,889 637,554 1,891,800 28,153,845 61,095,884 

AV (3%) ............................................................. 2,234,312 397,346 2,447,781 8,297,268 117,691 349,222 5,197,129 11,278,147 

AV (7%) ............................................................. 2,539,305 451,585 2,781,912 9,429,878 133,756 396,892 5,906,558 12,817,660 

Notes: 1. Year 1 to year 6 values are in 2017 dollars. 

2. PV represents net present value of year 1 to year 6, also in 2017 dollars. 

3. AV represents annualized value of the net present value. It is an equalized yearly cost during the 6-year time period with 3% and 7% discount rate. 

Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The gear marking requirements in this 

proposed rule constitute a revision to 

the information collection burden 

estimates, subject to review and 

approval by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), OMB Control 

Number 0648–0364. The DEIS includes 

two alternatives which both include 

gear marking modifications and on 

which NMFS is soliciting comment 

here. 

Comments are requested on 

assumptions made in estimating the 

public reporting burden associated with 

gear marking, including proposed 

revisions. In addition to new marks that 

would be required under this proposed 

rulemaking, we have revised past 

assumptions that fishermen replace 

about 20 percent of their buoy lines 

each year and therefore replace 20 

percent of the gear marks annually. 

Based on new information from a NMFS 

gear specialist, burden estimates now 

include an assumption that fishermen 

will recreate every mark each year. The 

estimated time required to mark buoy 

lines has also increased to account for 

the new marks required and based on 

new information that the estimated time 

to make each mark is about 8.4 minutes 

for each mark. We estimate an average 

of 334.4 marks for each vessel, for a total 

reporting burden of an average of 47 

hours per year for each of the 1,670 

vessels, including the time and costs in 

acquiring gear marking materials. The 

total labor cost is estimated to be 

$1,963,949. Previous burden estimates 

assumed that 3,672 fishermen 

(including Maine fishermen outside of 

the Maine exempted waters) would 

replace an average of about 47 marks per 

vessel each year, with each mark taking 

5 minutes, and a total burden cost 

estimate of $199,540 per year. 

Reviewers are asked to comment and 

provide data on whether this proposed 

revision to the collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

and function of the agency, including: 

The practical utility of the information; 

the accuracy of the burden estimate; the 

opportunities to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and the ways to minimize 

the burden of the collection of 

information, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Send comments on these or any other 

aspects of the collection of information 

to the NMFS Greater Atlantic Region at 

the ADDRESSES above. Notwithstanding 

any other provision of the law, no 

person is required to respond to, and no 

person shall be subject to penalty for 

failure to comply with, a collection of 

information subject to the requirements 

of the PRA, unless that collection of 

information is conducted under OMB 

Control Number 0648–0364. 

Federal Rules Which May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rule 

This action does not duplicate, 

overlap, or conflict with any other 

Federal rules. 

Description of Significant Alternatives 

to the Proposed Action Which 

Accomplish the Stated Objectives of 

Applicable Statutes and Which 

Minimize Any Significant Economic 

Impact on Small Entities 

This rule proposes to amend the 

ALWTRP to reduce the incidental 

mortality and serious injury to North 

Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena 

glacialis), humpback (Megaptera 

Novaeangliae) and fin whales 

(Balaenoptera physalus) in the northeast 

commercial lobster and crab trap/pot 

fisheries to meet the goals of the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and 

the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In 

addition, this action also proposes a 

small revision to Federal regulations 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86890 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

implemented under the Atlantic State 

Marine Fisheries Commissions’ 

Interstate Fishery Management Plan for 

Lobster to increase the maximum length 

of a lobster trap trawl groundline to 

accommodate a gear configuration 

modification proposed in the Plan 

amendment. 

Because incidental entanglementrelated serious injury and mortality of 

North Atlantic right whales is above 

PBR, and the population is declining, 

the primary purpose of the proposed 

modifications is to reduce mortality and 

serious injury of right whales incidental 

to northeast U.S. crab and lobster trap/ 

pot gear to below by greater than 60 

percent. A reduction in entanglement 

incidents and serious injuries would 

also reduce sub-lethal impacts to right 

whales. NMFS estimated that to reduce 

mortality and serious injury to below 

PBR, entanglement risk across U.S. 

fisheries needs to be reduced by 60 to 

80 percent. Non-preferred alternatives 

would likely not accomplish these 

objectives for this action or would be 

less cost effective. 

Alternative 1 (status quo) would not 

modify the Plan or reduce the risk of 

mortality or serious injury of right 

whales to below its PBR level as 

required by the MMPA. 

Alternative 3 would reduce the 

amount of line in the water via a line 

cap allocation to 50 percent of the lines 

fished in 2017, implemented in Federal 

and non-exempt waters except in 

LMA3. An increase in the minimum 

traps per trawl requirement would be 

implemented in LMA3. Under this 

alternative, existing closures to fishing 

would be modified to be closed to 

fishing with persistent buoy lines. The 

Massachusetts Bay Restricted area 

would also be extended with a soft 

closure through May, opening if surveys 

demonstrate that whales have left the 

restriction area. Three new seasonal 

restricted areas would allow ropeless 

fishing but be closed to buoy lines, 

including a longer restricted period for 

the LMA1 Restricted Area and a 

summer buoy line restriction in an area 

north of George’s Bank at Georges Basin. 

Two alternative buoy line restricted area 

options are analyzed south of Cape Cod. 

Additional measures in Alternative 3 

include conversion of a portion of the 

top 75 percent of all lobster and crab 

trap/pot vertical buoy lines to weaker 

rope with a maximum breaking strength 

of 1, 700 lbs. (771.1 kgs.). The 

Alternative also includes a more robust 

gear marking requirement that 

differentiates buoy lines by state and 

fishery and expands into areas 

previously exempt from gear marking. 

Alternative 3 demonstrated better risk 

reduction than Alternative 2, but at a 

much greater cost. The DST estimated 

the preferred alternative proposed in 

this rulemaking would achieve over 60 

percent risk reduction for lobster and 

crab trap/pot buoys in the Northeast 

Region, within the target established for 

reaching right whale PBR. The CoOccurrence model suggested that cooccurrence would be reduced by over 69 

percent and that more than 26 percent 

of the buoy lines in the regulated area 

would be modified to weak lines. The 

estimated cost of bringing gear into 

compliance and lost landings in the first 

year ranges from $6.04 to $14.5 million. 

The DST estimated that Alternative 3 

achieved a risk reduction score of nearly 

70 percent, and the Co-occurrence 

Model estimated a co-occurrence 

reduction of greater than 86 percent. 

This alternative would increase the 

likelihood of reducing mortality and 

serious injury to below PBR for right 

whales even when taking into account 

cryptic mortality (estimated but 

unseen). However, the estimated costs 

associated with Alternative Three are 

substantially higher; ranging from $35.0 

million to $53.6 million in first year 

implementation costs. 

Alternative 2 was selected as the 

preferred alternative and is proposed for 

rule making because it addresses the 

Purpose and Need for Action stated in 

this DEIS, is made up primarily of 

measures proposed by New England 

states with extensive input from fishing 

industry stakeholders who will be 

directly affected by the measures, and 

includes measures that will help to 

conserve large whales by reducing the 

potential for and severity of interactions 

with commercial fishing gear that may 

lead to mortalities and serious injuries. 

In addition, NMFS believes that its 

preferred alternative achieves these 

goals while reducing, to the extent 

possible, the adverse socioeconomic 

impacts of the rule. On this basis, NMFS 

believes that Alternative 2 (Preferred) 

offers the best option for achieving 

compliance with MMPA requirements. 

Coastal Zone Management 

NMFS has determined that this action 

is consistent to the maximum extent 

practicable with the approved coastal 

management programs of the U.S. 

Atlantic coastal states. This 

determination has been submitted for 

review by the responsible state agencies 

under section 307 of the Coastal Zone 

Management Act. 

Federalism 

This proposed rule contains policies 

with federalism implications as that 

term is defined in Executive Order 

13132. Accordingly, the Assistant 

Secretary for Legislative and 

Intergovernmental Affairs will provide 

notice and invite for appropriate 

participation in the proceedings for the 

proposed action to the appropriate 

official(s) of affected state, local, and/or 

tribal governments. 

Endangered Species Act 

An Endangered Species Act Section 7 

consultation has been initiated and will 

be completed prior to publication of a 

final rule. Previously, NMFS completed 

an ESA Section 7 consultation on the 

implementation of the Plan on July 15, 

1997, and concluded that the action was 

not likely to adversely affect any ESAlisted species under NMFS jurisdiction. 

Three subsequent consultations were 

concluded in 2004, 2008, 2014, and 

2015, when NMFS amended the Plan. 

NMFS, as both the action agency and 

the consulting agency, reviewed the 

changes and determined that the 

measures as revised through rulemaking 

would not affect ESA-listed species 

under NMFS jurisdiction in a manner 

that had not been previously 

considered. 

References 

Knowlton, A.R., J. Robbins, S. Landry, H.A. 

McKenna, S.D. Kraus, and T.B. Werner. 

2016. Effects of fishing rope strength on 

the severity of large whale 

entanglements. Conserv Biol 30:318–328. 

Pace, R.M., 3rd, P.J. Corkeron, and S.D. 

Kraus. 2017. State-space mark-recapture 

estimates reveal a recent decline in 

abundance of North Atlantic right 

whales. Ecology and Evolution 7:8730– 

8741. 

List of Subjects 

50 CFR Part 229 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Endangered species, 

Fisheries, Marine mammals, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

50 CFR Part 697 

Fisheries, Fishing. 

Dated: December 22, 2020. 

Samuel D. Rauch, III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR parts 229 and 697 are 

proposed to be amended as follows: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86891 

PART 229—AUTHORIZATION FOR 

COMMERCIAL FISHERIES UNDER THE 

MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT 

OF 1972 

■ 1. The authority citation for 50 CFR 

part 229 continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 229.32(f) also issued under 16 U.S.C. 1531 

et seq. 

■ 2. In § 229.2, add definitions for 

‘‘Lobster Management Area’’ and 

‘‘Surface system’’ in alphabetical order 

to read as follows: 

§ 229.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Lobster Management Area as used in 

this part means the management areas 

defined in the American Lobster Fishery 

regulations found at § 697.18 of this 

title. 

* * * * * 

Surface system, with reference to 

trap/pot and fixed gillnet gear, includes 

the components at the sea surface to 

identify the presence of stationary 

bottom fishing gear, and includes buoys, 

radar reflectors, and high flyers as well 

as the rope that connect these 

components to the vertical buoy line 

that connects to the bottom gear. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Revise § 229.32 to read as follows: 

§ 229.32 Atlantic large whale take 

reduction plan regulations. 

(a) Purpose and scope—(1) Whales 

and fixed gear fisheries. The purpose of 

this section is to implement the Atlantic 

Large Whale Take Reduction Plan to 

reduce incidental mortality and serious 

injury of fin, humpback, and right 

whales in specific Category I and 

Category II commercial fisheries from 

Maine through Florida. Specific 

Category I and II commercial fisheries 

within the scope of the Plan are 

identified and updated in the annual 

List of Fisheries. The measures 

identified in the Atlantic Large Whale 

Take Reduction Plan are also intended 

to benefit minke whales, which are not 

designated as a strategic stock, but are 

known to be taken incidentally in 

gillnet and trap/pot fisheries. The gear 

types affected by this plan include 

gillnets (e.g., anchored, drift, and shark) 

and traps/pots. The Assistant 

Administrator may revise the 

requirements set forth in this section in 

accordance with paragraph (i) of this 

section. 

(2) Regulated waters—(i) U.S. Atlantic 

waters. The regulations in this section 

apply to all U.S. waters in the Atlantic 

except for the areas exempted in 

paragraph (a)(3) of this section. 

(ii) Six-mile line. The six-mile line 

referred to in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this 

section is a line connecting the 

following points (Machias Seal to 

Provincetown): 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(2)(ii) 

44°31.98′ N lat., 67°9.72′ W long (Machias Seal) 

44°3.42′ N lat., 68°10.26′ W long (Mount Desert Island) 

43°40.98′ N lat., 68°48.84′ W long (Matinicus) 

43°39.24′ N lat., 69°18.54′ W long (Monhegan) 

43°29.4′ N lat., 70°5.88′ W long (Casco Bay) 

42°55.38′ N lat., 70°28.68′ W long (Isle of Shoals) 

42°49.53′ N lat., 70°32.84′ W long 

42°46.74′ N lat., 70°27.70′ W long 

42°44.18′ N lat., 70°24.91′ W long 

42°41.61′ N lat., 70°23.84′ W long 

42°38.18′ N lat., 70°24.06′ W long 

42°35.39′ N lat., 70°25.77′ W long 

42°32.61′ N lat., 70°27.91′ W long 

42°30.00′ N lat., 70°30.60′ W long 

42°17.19′ N lat., 70°34.80′ W long 

42°12.48′ N lat., 70°32.20′ W long 

42°12.27′ N lat., 70°25.98′ W long 

42°11.62′ N lat., 70°16.78′ W long 

42°12.27′ N lat., 70°10.14′ W long 

42°12.05′ N lat., 70°54.26′ W long 

42°11.20′ N lat., 70°17.86′ W long 

42°09.55′ N lat., 69°58.80′ W long (Provincetown) 

(iii) Maine pocket waters. The pocket 

waters referred to in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) 

of this section are defined as follows: 

TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(2)(iii) 

West of Monhegan Island in the area north of the line 43°42.17′ N lat., 69°34.27′ W long and 43°42.25′ N lat., 69°19.3′ W long 

East of Monhegan Island in the area located north of the line 43°44′ N lat., 69°15.08′ W long and 43°48.17′ N lat., 69°8.02′ W long 

South of Vinalhaven Island in the area located west of the line 43°52.31′ N lat., 68°40′ W long and 43°58.12′ N lat., 68°32.95′ W long 

South of Bois Bubert Island in the area located northwest of the line 44°19.27′ N lat., 67°49.5′ W long and 44°23.67′ N lat., 67°40.5′ W long 

(3) Exempted waters—(i) COLREGS 

demarcation line. The regulations in 

this section do not apply to waters 

landward of the 72 COLREGS 

demarcation lines (International 

Regulations for Preventing Collisions at 

Sea, 1972), as depicted or noted on 

nautical charts published by the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (Coast Charts 1:80,000 

scale), and as described in 33 CFR part 

80 with the exception of the COLREGS 

lines for Casco Bay (Maine), Portsmouth 

Harbor (New Hampshire), Gardiners Bay 

and Long Island Sound (New York), and 

the State of Massachusetts. 

(ii) Other exempted waters—(A) 

Maine. The regulations in this section 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86892 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

do not apply to waters landward of a 

line connecting the following points 

(Quoddy Narrows/U.S.-Canada border 

to Odiornes Pt., Portsmouth, New 

Hampshire): 

TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(3)(ii)(A) 

44°49.67′ N lat., 66°57.77′ W long. (R N ‘‘2’’, Quoddy Narrows) 

44°48.64′ N lat., 66°56.43′ W long. (G ‘‘1’’ Whistle, West Quoddy Head) 

44°47.36′ N lat., 66°59.25′ W long. (R N ‘‘2’’, Morton Ledge) 

44°45.51′ N lat., 67°02.87′ W long. (R ‘‘28M’’ Whistle, Baileys Mistake) 

44°37.70′ N lat., 67°09.75′ W long. (Obstruction, Southeast of Cutler) 

44°27.77′ N lat., 67°32.86′ W long. (Freeman Rock, East of Great Wass Island) 

44°25.74′ N lat., 67°38.39′ W long. (R ‘‘2SR’’ Bell, Seahorse Rock, West of Great Wass Island) 

44°21.66′ N lat., 67°51.78′ W long. (R N ‘‘2’’, Petit Manan Island) 

44°19.08′ N lat., 68°02.05′ W long. (R ‘‘2S’’ Bell, Schoodic Island) 

44°13.55′ N lat., 68°10.71′ W long. (R ‘‘8BI’’ Whistle, Baker Island) 

44°08.36′ N lat., 68°14.75′ W long. (Southern Point, Great Duck Island) 

43°59.36′ N lat., 68°37.95′ W long. (R ‘‘2’’ Bell, Roaring Bull Ledge, Isle Au Haut) 

43°59.83′ N lat., 68°50.06′ W long. (R ‘‘2A’’ Bell, Old Horse Ledge) 

43°56.72′ N lat., 69°04.89′ W long. (G ‘‘5TB’’ Bell, Two Bush Channel) 

43°50.28′ N lat., 69°18.86′ W long. (R ‘‘2 OM’’ Whistle, Old Man Ledge) 

43°48.96′ N lat., 69°31.15′ W long. (GR C ‘‘PL’’, Pemaquid Ledge) 

43°43.64′ N lat., 69°37.58′ W long. (R ‘‘2BR’’ Bell, Bantam Rock) 

43°41.44′ N lat., 69°45.27′ W long. (R ‘‘20ML’’ Bell, Mile Ledge) 

43°36.04′ N lat., 70°03.98′ W long. (RG N ‘‘BS’’, Bulwark Shoal) 

43°31.94′ N lat., 70°08.68′ W long. (G ‘‘1’’, East Hue and Cry) 

43°27.63′ N lat., 70°17.48′ W long. (RW ‘‘WI’’ Whistle, Wood Island) 

43°20.23′ N lat., 70°23.64′ W long. (RW ‘‘CP’’ Whistle, Cape Porpoise) 

43°04.06′ N lat., 70°36.70′ W long. (R N ‘‘2MR’’, Murray Rock) 

43°02.93′ N lat., 70°41.47′ W long. (R ‘‘2KR’’ Whistle, Kittery Point) 

43°02.55′ N lat., 70°43.33′ W long. (Odiornes Pt., Portsmouth, New Hampshire) 

(B) New Hampshire. New Hampshire 

State waters are exempt from the 

minimum number of traps per trawl 

requirement in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of 

this section. Harbor waters landward of 

the following lines are exempt from all 

the regulations in this section. 

TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(3)(ii)(B) 

A line from 42°53.691′ N lat., 70°48.516′ W long. to 42°53.516′ N lat., 70°48.748′ W long. (Hampton Harbor) 

A line from 42°59.986′ N lat., 70°44.654′ W long. to 42°59.956′ N, 70°44.737′ W long. (Rye Harbor) 

(C) Rhode Island. Rhode Island State 

waters are exempt from the minimum 

number of traps per trawl requirement 

in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this section. 

Harbor waters landward of the following 

lines are exempt from all the regulations 

in this section. 

TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(3)(ii)(C) 

A line from 41°22.441′ N lat., 71°30.781′ W long. to 41°22.447′ N lat., 71°30.893′ W long. (Pt. Judith Pond Inlet) 

A line from 41°21.310′ N lat., 71°38.300′ W long. to 41°21.300′ N lat., 71°38.330′ W long. (Ninigret Pond Inlet) 

A line from 41°19.875′ N lat., 71°43.061′ W long. to 41°19.879′ N lat., 71°43.115′ W long. (Quonochontaug Pond Inlet) 

A line from 41°19.660′ N lat., 71°45.750′ W long. to 41°19.660′ N lat., 71°45.780′ W long. (Weekapaug Pond Inlet) 

A line from 41°26.550′ N lat., 71°26.400′ W long. to 41°26.500′ N lat., 71°26.505′ W long. (Pettaquamscutt Inlet) 

(D) New York. The regulations in this 

section do not apply to waters landward 

of a line that follows the territorial sea 

baseline through Block Island Sound 

(Watch Hill Point, RI, to Montauk Point, 

NY). 

(E) Massachusetts. The regulations in 

this section do not apply to waters 

landward of the first bridge over any 

embayment, harbor, or inlet in 

Massachusetts. The following 

Massachusetts State waters are exempt 

from the minimum number of traps per 

trawl requirement in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) 

of this section: 

(1) Exempt waters of Massachusetts 

Bay and Outer Cape. Heading From the 

New Hampshire border to 70° W 

longitude south of Cape Cod, waters in 

EEZ Nearshore Management Area 1 and 

the Outer Cape Lobster Management 

Area (as defined in the American 

Lobster Fishery regulations under 

§ 697.18 of this title), from the shoreline 

to 3 nautical miles from shore, and 

including waters of Cape Cod Bay 

southeast of a straight line connecting 

41°55.8′ N lat., 70°8.4′ W long. and 

41°47.2′ N lat., 70°19.5′ W long. 

(2) Exempt waters of southern 

Massachusetts. Heading From 70° W 

longitude south of Cape Cod to the 

Rhode Island border, all Massachusetts 

State waters in EEZ Nearshore 

Management Area 2 and the Outer Cape 

Lobster Management Area (as defined in 

the American Lobster Fishery 

regulations under § 697.18 of this title), 

including Federal waters of Nantucket 

Sound west of 70° W longitude. 

(F) South Carolina. The regulations in 

this section do not apply to waters 

landward of a line connecting the 

following points from 32°34.717′ N lat., 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86893 

80°08.565′ W long. to 32°34.686′ N lat., 

80°08.642′ W long. (Captain Sams Inlet). 

(4) Sinking groundline exemption. 

The fisheries regulated under this 

section are exempt from the requirement 

to have groundlines composed of 

sinking line if their groundline is at a 

depth equal to or greater than 280 

fathoms (1,680 ft or 512.1 m). 

(5) Net panel weak link and anchoring 

exemption. The anchored gillnet 

fisheries regulated under this section are 

exempt from the requirement to install 

weak links in the net panel and anchor 

each end of the net string if the float-line 

is at a depth equal to or greater than 280 

fathoms (1,680 ft or 512.1 m). 

(6) Island buffer. Those fishing in 

waters within 1⁄4 nautical miles of the 

following Maine islands are exempt 

from the minimum number of traps per 

trawl requirement in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) 

of this section: Monhegan Island, 

Matinicus Island Group (Metinic Island, 

Small Green Island, Large Green Island, 

Seal Island, Wooden Ball Island, 

Matinicus Island, Ragged Island), and 

Isles of Shoals Island Group (Duck 

Island, Appledore Island, Cedar Island, 

Smuttynose Island). 

(b) Gear marking requirements—(1) 

Specified areas. Except for when fishing 

in LMA3 and Maine exempted waters, 

Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, 

and Rhode Island lobster and crab trap/ 

pot fishermen will follow the color code 

scheme assigned to the state that 

permits their vessel, indicated in 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section. For all 

other trap/pot and gillnet gear, 

excluding shark gillnet, the following 

areas are specified for gear marking 

purposes: Northern Inshore State Trap/ 

Pot Waters, Cape Cod Bay Restricted 

Area, Massachusetts Restricted Area, 

Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge 

Restricted Area, Northern Nearshore 

Trap/Pot Waters Area, Great South 

Channel Restricted Trap/Pot Area, Great 

South Channel Restricted Gillnet Area, 

Great South Channel Sliver Restricted 

Area, Southern Nearshore Trap/Pot 

Waters Area, Offshore Trap/Pot Waters 

Area, Other Northeast Gillnet Waters 

Area, Mid/South Atlantic Gillnet Waters 

Area, Other Southeast Gillnet Waters 

Area, Southeast U.S. Restricted Areas, 

and Southeast U.S. Monitoring Area. 

(i) Jordan Basin. The Jordan Basin 

Restricted Area is bounded by the 

following points connected by straight 

lines in the order listed: 

TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(1)(i) 

Point N lat. W long. 

JBRA1 ........... 43°15′ 68°50′ 

JBRA2 ........... 43°35′ 68°20′ 

TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(1)(i)— 

Continued 

Point N lat. W long. 

JBRA3 ........... 43°25′ 68°05′ 

JBRA4 ........... 43°05′ 68°20′ 

JBRA5 ........... 43°05′ 68°35′ 

JBRA1 ........... 43°15′ 68°50′ 

(ii) Jeffreys Ledge Restricted Area. The 

Jeffreys Ledge Restricted Area is 

bounded by the following points 

connected by a straight line in the order 

listed: 

TABLE 6 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(1)(ii) 

Point N lat. W long. 

JLRA1 ............ 43°15′ 70°25′ 

JLRA2 ............ 43°15′ 70°00′ 

JLRA3 ............ 42°50′ 70°00′ 

JLRA4 ............ 42°50′ 70°25′ 

JLRA1 ............ 43°15′ 70°25 

(2) Markings. All specified gear in 

specified areas must be marked with the 

color code shown in paragraph (b)(3) of 

this section. The color must be 

permanently marked on or along the 

line or lines specified under paragraphs 

(b)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section. 

Each colored mark must be clearly 

visible when the gear is hauled or 

removed from the water, including if the 

color of the rope is the same as or 

similar to the respective color code. 

(i) Northeast crab and lobster buoy 

line markings. For all Northeast Region 

crab and lobster trap/pot gear regulated 

under this section, the surface system 

ropes must be marked with a solid 36- 

inch mark (91.4 cm) within two-fathoms 

(3.7 m) of the buoy. When fishing in 

Federal waters, all Northeast Region 

crab and lobster trap/pot surface system 

lines must have an additional 6-inch 

(15.24 cm) green mark one-foot (30.05 

cm) below the 36-inch (91.4 cm) mark. 

These surface system marks must be 

solid marks that may be dyed, painted, 

or heat-shrink tubing, insertion of a 

colored rope or braided sleeve, or the 

line may be marked as approved in 

writing by the Assistant Administrator. 

When fishing in state waters, the buoy 

line must be marked at least two 

additional times (top half, bottom half) 

and each mark must total 12-inches 

(30.5 cm) for a total of four marks in 

state waters. When in Federal waters, 

the buoy line must be marked at least 

three additional times (top, middle, and 

bottom) and each mark must total 12- 

inches (30.5 cm) for a total of five marks 

in Federal waters. In marking or affixing 

the color code for buoy line below the 

surface system for gear regulated under 

this paragraph (b)(2)(i), the line may be: 

Dyed; painted, marked with thin 

colored whipping line, thin colored 

plastic, or heat-shrink tubing; spliced in 

insertion of a colored rope or braided 

sleeve or other material, or a thin line 

may be woven into or through the line; 

or the line may be marked as approved 

in writing by the Assistant 

Administrator. 

(ii) Other buoy line markings. For all 

other trap/pot and gillnet gear regulated 

under this section, the buoy line must 

be marked at least three times (top, 

middle, bottom) and each mark must 

total 12 inches (30.5 cm) in length. If the 

mark consists of two colors then each 

color mark may be 6 inches (15.25 cm) 

for a total mark of 12 inches (30.5 cm). 

In marking or affixing the color code for 

gear regulated under this paragraph 

(b)(2)(ii), the line may be: Dyed, painted, 

marked with thin colored whipping 

line, thin colored plastic, or heat-shrink 

tubing, spliced in insertion of a colored 

rope or braided sleeve or other material, 

or a thin line may be woven into or 

through the line, or the line may be 

marked as approved in writing by the 

Assistant Administrator. An outreach 

guide illustrating the techniques for 

marking gear is available from the 

Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater 

Atlantic Region upon request and 

posted on the NMFS, Greater Atlantic 

Region Atlantic Large Whale Take 

Reduction Plan website https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-englandmid-atlantic/marine-mammalprotection/atlantic-large-whale-takereduction-plan#outreach. 

(iii) Net panel markings. Shark gillnet 

gear net panels in the Southeast U.S. 

Restricted Area S, Southeast U.S. 

Monitoring Area and Other Southeast 

Gillnet Waters is required to be marked. 

The net panel must be marked along 

both the floatline and the leadline at 

least once every 100 yards (91.4 m). 

(iv) Surface buoy markings. Trap/pot 

and gillnet gear regulated under this 

section must mark all surface buoys to 

identify the vessel or fishery with one 

of the following: The owner’s motorboat 

registration number, the owner’s U.S. 

vessel documentation number, the 

Federal commercial fishing permit 

number, or whatever positive 

identification marking is required by the 

vessel’s home-port state. When marking 

of surface buoys is not already required 

by state or Federal regulations, the 

letters and numbers used to mark the 

gear to identify the vessel or fishery 

must be at least 1 inch (2.5 cm) in height 

in block letters or Arabic numbers in a 

color that contrasts with the background 

color of the buoy. An outreach guide 

illustrating the techniques for marking 

gear is available from the Regional 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86894 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic 

Region upon request and posted on the 

NMFS, Greater Atlantic Region Atlantic 

Large Whale Take Reduction Plan 

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

new-england-mid-atlantic/marinemammal-protection/atlantic-largewhale-take-reduction-plan#outreach. 

(3) Color code. Gear must be marked 

with the appropriate colors to designate 

gear types and areas as follows. 

TABLE 7 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(3) 

Color code scheme 

Plan management area Color 

Northeast Region, Lobster and Crab Trap/Pot Gear 

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of Maine when fished in state waters ........................... Purple. 

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of Maine when fished in Federal LMA 1 waters ........... Purple, Green (Surface System). 

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of New Hampshire when fished in state waters ........... Yellow. 

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of New Hampshire when fished in Federal LMA 1 waters.Yellow, Green (Surface System). 

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of Massachusetts when fished in state waters ............. Red. 

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of Massachusetts in Federal waters of LMA 1, OC, 

LMA 2 (including 2⁄3 overlap).

Red, Green (Surface System). 

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of Rhode Island in state waters .................................... Silver/Gray.

Trawls fished by vessels permitted by the state of Rhode Island in Federal waters of LMA 2 (including 2⁄3 overlap).Silver/Gray Green (Surface System). 

Trawls fished in the Northeast EEZ Offshore Management Area 3 (LMA3) excluding the 2⁄3 overlap .... Black, Green (Surface system). 

Northeast Region, Other Trap/Pot Gear 

Massachusetts Restricted Area ................................................................................................................. Red. 

Northern Nearshore ................................................................................................................................... Red. 

Northern Inshore State .............................................................................................................................. Red. 

Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge Restricted Area ..................................................................................... Red. 

Great South Channel Restricted Area overlapping with LMA 2 and/or Outer Cape ................................ Red. 

Exempt Rhode Island state waters (single traps) ...................................................................................... Red and Blue. 

Exempt Massachusetts state waters in LMA 1 (single traps) ................................................................... Red and White. 

Exempt Massachusetts state waters in LMA 2 (single traps) ................................................................... Red and Black. 

Exempt Massachusetts state waters in Outer Cape (single traps) ........................................................... Red and Yellow. 

Isles of Shoals, ME (single traps) .............................................................................................................. Red and Orange. 

Great South Channel Restricted Area overlapping with LMA 2/3 and/or LMA 3 ...................................... Black. 

Jordan Basin .............................................................................................................................................. Black and Purple (LMA 3), Red and Purple (LMA 1). 

Jeffreys Ledge ........................................................................................................................................... Red and Green. 

Trap/Pot Gear 

Southern Nearshore ................................................................................................................................... Orange. 

Southeast Restricted Area North (State Waters) ...................................................................................... Blue and Orange. 

Southeast Restricted Area North (Federal Waters) ................................................................................... Green and Orange. 

Offshore ..................................................................................................................................................... Black. 

Gillnet Excluding Shark Gillnet 

Cape Cod Bay Restricted Area ................................................................................................................. Green. 

Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge Restricted Area ..................................................................................... Green. 

Great South Channel Restricted Area ....................................................................................................... Green. 

Great South Channel Restricted Sliver Area ............................................................................................. Green. 

Other Northeast Gillnet Waters ................................................................................................................. Green. 

Jordan Basin .............................................................................................................................................. Green and Yellow. 

Jeffreys Ledge ........................................................................................................................................... Green and Black. 

Mid/South Atlantic Gillnet Waters .............................................................................................................. Blue. 

Southeast U.S. Restricted Area South ...................................................................................................... Yellow. 

Other Southeast Gillnet Waters ................................................................................................................. Yellow. 

Shark Gillnet (With Webbing of 5′′ or Greater) 

Southeast U.S. Restricted Area South ...................................................................................................... Green and Blue. 

Southeast Monitoring Area ........................................................................................................................ Green and Blue. 

Other Southeast Waters ............................................................................................................................ Green and Blue. 

(c) Restrictions applicable to trap/pot 

gear in regulated waters—(1) Universal 

trap/pot gear requirements. In addition 

to the gear marking requirements listed 

in paragraph (b) of this section and the 

area-specific measures listed in 

paragraphs (c)(2) through (12) of this 

section, all trap/pot gear in regulated 

waters, including the Northern Inshore 

State Trap/Pot Waters Area, must 

comply with the universal gear 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86895 

1Fishermen are also encouraged to maintain their 

buoy lines to be as knot-free as possible. Splices are 

considered to be less of an entanglement threat and 

are thus preferable to knots. 

requirements listed in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.1

(i) No buoy line floating at the 

surface. No person or vessel may fish 

with trap/pot gear that has any portion 

of the buoy line floating at the surface 

at any time when the buoy line is 

directly connected to the gear at the 

ocean bottom. If more than one buoy is 

attached to a single buoy line or if a 

high flyer and a buoy are used together 

on a single buoy line, floating line may 

be used between these objects. 

(ii) No wet storage of gear. Trap/pot 

gear must be hauled out of the water at 

least once every 30 days. 

(iii) Groundlines. All groundlines 

must be composed entirely of sinking 

line. The attachment of buoys, toggles, 

or other floatation devices to 

groundlines is prohibited. 

(2) Area specific gear requirements. 

Trap/pot gear must be set according to 

the requirements outlined in paragraphs 

(c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section and 

in Table 8 to paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this 

section. 

(i) Single traps and multiple-trap 

trawls. All traps must be set according 

to the configuration outlined in Table 8 

to paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this section. 

Trawls up to and including five traps 

must only have one buoy line unless 

specified otherwise in Table 8 to 

paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this section. 

(ii) Buoy line weak links. All buoys, 

flotation devices and/or weights (except 

traps/pots, anchors, and leadline woven 

into the buoy line), such as surface 

buoys, high flyers, radar reflectors, 

subsurface buoys, toggles, window 

weights, etc., must be attached to the 

buoy line with a weak link placed either 

as close to each individual buoy, 

flotation device and/or weight as 

operationally feasible, or at the base of 

the surface system where the surface 

system attaches to the single buoy line, 

and that meets the following 

specifications: 

(A) Weak link breaking strengths. The 

breaking strength of the weak links must 

not exceed the breaking strength listed 

in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this section for 

a specified management area. 

(B) Approved weak links. The weak 

link must be chosen from the following 

list approved by NMFS: Swivels, plastic 

weak links, rope of appropriate breaking 

strength, hog rings, rope stapled to a 

buoy stick, or other materials or devices 

approved in writing by the Assistant 

Administrator. An outreach guide 

illustrating the techniques for making 

weak links is available from the 

Regional Administrator, NMFS, Greater 

Atlantic Region upon request and 

posted on the NMFS, Greater Atlantic 

Region Atlantic Large Whale Take 

Reduction Plan website https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-englandmid-atlantic/marine-mammalprotection/atlantic-large-whale-takereduction-plan#outreach. 

(C) Clean breaks. Weak links must 

break cleanly leaving behind the bitter 

end of the line. The bitter end of the line 

must be free of any knots when the 

weak link breaks. Splices are not 

considered to be knots for the purposes 

of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C). 

(iii) Weak buoy lines and weak 

insertion devices. All crab and lobster 

trap buoy lines in the management areas 

and configurations outlined in Table 8 

to paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this section 

must use weak line or must insert weak 

devices along the buoy line as described 

in Table 8 to paragraph (c)(2)(iv). The 

weak line and weak insert devices must 

meet the following specifications: 

(A) Breaking strength. The breaking 

strength of the weak buoy lines and 

weak insert devices must not exceed 

1,700 lbs. (771 kgs.). 

(B) Distance between weak insertions. 

Weak insertion devices must be inserted 

in the specified intervals from the 

surface system and must be devices 

chosen from the following list approved 

by NMFS: Three-foot long hollow 

braided sleeves such as those known as 

the South Shore Sleeve, spliced insert of 

three-foot long weak buoy line that is no 

thinner than five sixteenths inches 

(8mm) in diameter, three-foot (.91 m) 

long ‘‘lazy splice’’ loop and double tuck 

of three eighths inch (9.5 mm) diameter 

line with three eighths inch (9.5 mm) 

diameter line, or a loop and double tuck 

(lazy splice) of three eighths inch 

(9.5mm) diameter line with five 

sixteenths inch (8 mm) diameter line, or 

other materials or devices approved in 

writing by the Assistant Administrator. 

An outreach guide illustrating the 

techniques for making weak insert 

devices is available from the Regional 

Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic 

Region upon request and posted on the 

NMFS, Greater Atlantic Region Atlantic 

Large Whale Take Reduction Plan 

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

new-england-mid-atlantic/marinemammal-protection/atlantic-largewhale-take-reduction-plan#outreach. 

(C) Clean breaks. Weak line and weak 

inserts must break cleanly leaving 

behind the bitter end of the line. The 

bitter end of the line must be free of any 

knots when the weak insert breaks. 

Splices are not considered to be knots 

for the purposes of this paragraph 

(c)(2)(iii)(C). 

(iv) Table of area specific trap/pot 

gear requirements. 

TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2)(iv) 

Mgmt area; location Minimum number traps/trawl Weak link strength Weak rope or weak insertion 

configuration 

Northeast Lobster/Crab Trap/Pot 

Northern Inshore State; Maine State 

and Pocket Waters 1.

3 (1 buoy line) ...................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or two weak insertion devices, one at 25 percent and one at 

50 percent buoy line length from top. 

Northern Nearshore; Maine Zones A–G 

(3–6 miles).

8 ........................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or two weak insertion devices, one at 25 percent and one at 

50 percent buoy line length from top. 

Northern Inshore State and Massachusetts Restricted Area; Massachusetts 

State Waters 2.

No minimum number of traps per 

trawl. Trawls up to and including 3 

or fewer traps must only have one 

buoy line.

≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 50 percent buoy line length 

from top. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86896 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2)(iv)—Continued 

Mgmt area; location Minimum number traps/trawl Weak link strength Weak rope or weak insertion 

configuration 

Northern Inshore State and Massachusetts Restricted Area; Other Massachusetts State Waters.2 (1 buoy line) Trawls up to and including 3 or fewer traps must only 

have one buoy line.

≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 50 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Northern Inshore State; New Hampshire 

State Waters.

No minimum trap/trawl ......................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 50 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Northern Nearshore; New Hampshire 

and Massachusetts (3–6 miles).

10 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or two weak insertion devices, one at 25 percent and one at 

50 percent buoy line length from top. 

Northern Nearshore, Massachusetts Restricted Area, and Stellwagen Bank/ 

Jeffreys Ledge Restricted Area; LMA 

1 (6–12 miles).

15 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or two weak insertion devices, one at 25 percent and one at 

50 percent buoy line length from top. 

Northern Nearshore and LMA1 Restricted Area; LMA1 (12 + miles).25 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 35 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 35 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Northern Inshore State and Massachusetts Restricted Area; LMA1/OC 

Overlap (0–3 miles).

No minimum number of traps per trawl ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 50 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Northern Inshore State, Massachusetts 

Restricted Area, and Massachusetts 

South Island Restricted Area; OC (0– 

3 miles).

No minimum number of traps per trawl ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 50 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Northern Nearshore and Massachusetts 

Restricted Area; OC (3–12 miles).

15 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or two weak insertion devices, one at 25 percent and one at 

50 percent buoy line length from top. 

Northern Nearshore and Great South 

Channel Restricted Area; OC (12 + 

miles).

20 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 35 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 35 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Northern Inshore State; RI State Waters No minimum number of traps per trawl ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 50 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Northern Nearshore; LMA 2 (3–12 

miles).

15 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 50 percent of the 

buoy line or two weak insertion devices, one at 25 percent and one at 

50 percent buoy line length from top. 

Northern Nearshore, Great South Channel Restricted Area, and Massachusetts South of Island Restricted Area; 

LMA 2 (12 + miles).

25 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs ................ Weak line for the top 35 percent of the 

buoy line or one weak insertion device at 35 percent buoy line length 

from top. 

Offshore, Great South Channel Restricted Area, and Massachusetts 

South Island Restricted Area; LMA 2⁄3

Overlap (12 + miles).

25 ......................................................... ≤1500 lbs (2,000 

lbs if red crab 

trap/pot).

Weak line for the top 35 percent portion of the buoy line or one weak insertion device at 35 percent buoy 

line length from top. 

Northeast Offshore waters North of 40°, 

Great South Channel Restricted Area, 

and Massachusetts South Island Restricted Area; LMA 3 (12 + miles).

45 ......................................................... ≤1500 lbs (2,000 

lbs if red crab 

trap/pot).

Weak line for the top 75 percent of the 

buoy line. 

Other Trap/Pot 

Northern Inshore State; Maine State 

and Pocket Waters 1.

2 (1 buoy line) ...................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore; Maine Zones A–G 

(3–6 miles) 1.

3 (1 buoy line) ...................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore; Maine Zones A–C 

(6–12 miles) 1.

5 (1 buoy line) ...................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore; Maine Zones D–G 

(6–12 miles) 1.

10 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore, Offshore, and 

LMA1 Restricted Area; Maine Zones 

A–E (12 + miles).

15 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs (≤1500 

lbs in offshore, 

2,000 lbs if red 

crab trap/pot).


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86897 

TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2)(iv)—Continued 

Mgmt area; location Minimum number traps/trawl Weak link strength Weak rope or weak insertion 

configuration 

Northern Nearshore, Offshore, and 

LMA1 Restricted Area; Maine Zones 

F–G (12 + miles).

15 (Mar 1–Oct 31) 20 (Nov 1–Feb 28/ 

29).

≤600 lbs (≤1500 

lbs in offshore, 

2,000 lbs if red 

crab trap/pot).

Northern Inshore State and Massachusetts Restricted Area; Massachusetts 

State Waters 2.

No minimum number of traps per 

trawl. Trawls up to and including 3 

or fewer traps must only have one 

buoy line.

≤600 lbs.

Northern Inshore State, Massachusetts 

Restricted Area, and Massachusetts 

South Island Restricted Area; Other 

Massachusetts State Waters.

2 (1 buoy line) Trawls up to and including 3 or fewer traps must only 

have one buoy line.

≤600 lbs.

Northern Inshore State; New Hampshire 

State Waters.

No minimum trap/trawl ......................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore and Massachusetts 

Restricted Area and Stellwagen Bank/ 

Jeffreys Ledge Restricted Area; LMA 

1 (3–12 miles).

10 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore and LMA1 Restricted Area; LMA 1 (12 + miles).20 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Inshore State and Massachusetts Restricted Area; LMA1/OC 

Overlap (0–3 miles).

No minimum number of traps per trawl ≤600 lbs.

Northern Inshore State and Massachusetts Restricted Area; OC (0–3 miles).No minimum number of traps per trawl ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore and Massachusetts 

Restricted Area; OC (3–12 miles).

10 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore and Great South 

Channel Restricted Area; OC (12 + 

miles).

20 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Inshore State; Rhode Island 

State Waters.

No minimum number of traps per trawl ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore, and Massachusetts South Island Restricted Area; 

LMA 2 (3–12 miles).

10 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northern Nearshore, Great South Channel Restricted Area; LMA 2 (12 + 

miles).

20 ......................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Northeast Offshore and Great South 

Channel Restricted Area, and Massachusetts South Island Restricted 

Area; LMA 2⁄3 Overlap (12 + miles).

20 ......................................................... ≤1500 lbs (2,000 

lbs if red crab 

trap/pot).

Northeast Offshore waters, Great South 

Channel Restricted Area, and Massachusetts South Island Restricted 

Area; LMA 3 (12 + miles).

20 ......................................................... ≤1500 lbs (2,000 

lbs if red crab 

trap/pot).

Southern Nearshore; LMA 4,5,6 ............ ............................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Southeast U.S. Restricted Area North; 3

Florida State Waters.

1 ........................................................... ≤200 lbs.

Southeast U.S. Restricted Area North; 3

Georgia State Waters.

1 ........................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Southeast U.S. Restricted Area North; 3

South Carolina State Waters.

1 ........................................................... ≤600 lbs.

Southeast U.S. Restricted Area North; 3

Federal Waters off Florida, Georgia, 

South Carolina.

1 ........................................................... ≤600 lbs.

1The pocket waters and 6-mile line are defined in paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section. 

2 Massachusetts State waters as defined as paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section. 

3See paragraph (f)(1) of this section for description of area. 

(3) Massachusetts Restricted Area—(i) 

Area. The Massachusetts Restricted 

Area is bounded by the following points 

connected by straight lines in the order 

listed, and bounded on the west by the 

shoreline of Cape Cod, Massachusetts. 

TABLE 9 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3)(i) 

Point N lat. W long. 

MRA1 ............. 42°12′ 70°44′ 

MRA2 ............. 42°12′ 70°30′ 

MRA3 ............. 42°30′ 70°30′ 

MRA4 ............. 42°30′ 69°45′ 

MRA5 ............. 41°56.5′ 69°45′ 

TABLE 9 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3)(i)— 

Continued 

Point N lat. W long. 

MRA6 ............. 41°21.5′ 69°16′ 

MRA7 ............. 41°15.3′ 69°57.9′ 

MRA8 ............. 41°20.3′ 70°00′ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86898 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 9 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3)(i)— 

Continued 

Point N lat. W long. 

MRA9 ............. 41°40.2′ 70°00′ 

MRA1 ............. 42°12′ 70°44′ 

(ii) Closure to fishing with buoy lines. 

From February 1 to April 30, it is 

prohibited to fish with, set, or possess 

trap/pot gear in the area in paragraph 

(c)(3)(i) unless it is fished without buoy 

lines or with buoy lines that are stored 

on the bottom until it can be remotely 

released for hauling, or it is stowed in 

accordance with § 229.2. Authorizations 

for fishing without buoy lines must be 

obtained if such fishing would not be in 

accordance with surface marking 

requirements of §§ 697.21 and 648.84 of 

this chapter. 

(iii) Area-specific gear or vessel 

requirements. From May 1 through 

January 31, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Massachusetts Restricted Area unless 

that gear complies with the gear 

marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, and the area-specific 

requirements listed in paragraph (c)(2) 

of this section, or unless the gear is 

stowed as specified in § 229.2. 

(4) Massachusetts South Island 

Restricted Area—(i) Area. The 

Massachusetts South Island Restricted 

Area is bounded by the following points 

connected by straight lines in the order 

listed, and bounded on the north by the 

shoreline of Nantucket, Massachusetts. 

TABLE 10 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(4)(i) 

Point N lat. W long. 

MSI1 .............. 41°15.3′ 70°18.9′ 

MSI2 .............. 41°15.3′ 70°10.6′ 

MSI3 .............. 41°15.3′ 69°57.9′ 

MSI4 .............. 41°21.5′ 69°16′ 

MSI5 .............. 40°37.02′ 69°16′ 

MSI6 .............. 40°37.02′ 70°18.9′ 

MSI1 .............. 41°15.3′ 70°18.9′ 

(ii) Closure to fishing with buoy lines. 

From February 1 to April 30, it is 

prohibited to fish with, set, or possess 

trap/pot gear in the area in paragraph 

(c)(4)(i) unless it is fished without buoy 

lines or with buoy lines that are stored 

on the bottom until they can be 

remotely released for hauling, or the 

trap/pot gear is stowed in accordance 

with § 229.2. Authorizations for fishing 

without buoy lines must be obtained if 

such fishing would not be in accordance 

with surface marking requirements of 

§§ 697.21 and 648.84 of this chapter. 

(iii) Area-specific gear or vessel 

requirements. From May 1 through 

January 31, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Massachusetts South Island Restricted 

Area unless that gear complies with the 

gear marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, and the area-specific 

requirements listed in paragraph (c)(2) 

of this section, or unless the gear is 

stowed as specified in § 229.2. 

(5) Great South Channel Restricted 

Trap/Pot Area—(i) Area. The Great 

South Channel Restricted Trap/Pot Area 

consists of the area bounded by the 

following points. 

TABLE 11 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(5)(i) 

Point N Lat. W Long. 

GSC1 ............. 41°40′ 69°45′ 

GSC2 ............. 41°0′ 69°05′ 

GSC3 ............. 41°38′ 68°13′ 

GSC4 ............. 42°10′ 68°31′ 

GSC1 ............. 41°40′ 69°45′ 

(ii) Closure to fishing with buoy lines. 

From April 1 through June 30, it is 

prohibited to fish with, set, or possess 

trap/pot gear in the area in paragraph 

(c)(5)(i) unless it is fished without buoy 

lines or with buoy lines that are stored 

on the bottom until they can be 

remotely released for hauling, or the 

trap/pot gear is stowed in accordance 

with § 229.2. Authorizations for fishing 

without buoy lines must be obtained if 

such fishing would not be in accordance 

with surface marking requirements of 

§§ 697.21 and 648.84 of this chapter. 

(iii) Area-specific gear or vessel 

requirements. From July 1 through 

March 31, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Great South Channel Restricted Trap/ 

Pot Area unless that gear complies with 

the gear marking requirements specified 

in paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, and the area-specific 

requirements listed in paragraph (c)(2) 

of this section, or unless the gear is 

stowed as specified in § 229.2. 

(6) Lobster Management Area One 

Restricted Area—(i) Area. The Lobster 

Management Area One Restricted Area 

(LMRA1) is bounded by the following 

points connected by straight lines in the 

order listed. 

TABLE 12 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(6)(i) 

Point N lat. W long. 

LMRA1 1 ....... 43°06′ 69°36.77′ 

TABLE 12 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(6)(i)— 

Continued 

Point N lat. W long. 

LMRA1 2 ....... 43°44′ 68°21.6′ 

LMRA1 3 ....... 43°32.68′ 68°17.27′ 

LMRA1 4 ....... 42°53.52′ 69°32.16′ 

LMRA1 1 ....... 43°06′ 69°36.77′ 

(ii) Restrictions to fishing with buoy 

lines. From October 1 to January 31, it 

is prohibited to fish with, set, or possess 

trap/pot gear in the area in paragraph 

(c)(6)(i) unless it is fished without buoy 

lines or with buoy lines that are stored 

on the bottom until they can be 

remotely released for hauling, or the 

trap/pot gear is stowed in accordance 

with § 229.2. Authorizations for fishing 

without buoy lines must be obtained if 

such fishing would not be in accordance 

with surface marking requirements of 

§§ 697.21 and 648.84 of this chapter. 

Alternative 1–A (for Paragraph (c)(6)(ii)) 

(ii) Restrictions to fishing with buoy 

lines. There are no seasonal restrictions 

to fishing with buoy lines. 

Alternative 1–B (for Paragraph (c)(6)(ii)) 

(ii) Restrictions to fishing with buoy 

lines. The Regional Administrator may 

determine whether the frequency of 

entanglements from trap/pot gear in the 

Northeast region has been reduced by 60 

percent from [effective date of the final 

rule] within a time period that allows 

for meaningful analysis. If the Regional 

Administrator determines that the 

frequency of such entanglements has 

not been reduced by 60 percent, then 

from October 1 to January 31, it shall be 

prohibited to fish with, set, or possess 

trap/pot gear in the area in paragraph 

(c)(6)(i) unless it is fished without buoy 

lines or with buoy lines that are stored 

on the bottom until they can be 

remotely released for hauling, or the 

trap/pot gear is stowed in accordance 

with § 229.2. Authorizations for fishing 

without buoy lines must be obtained if 

such fishing would not be in accordance 

with surface marking requirements of 

§§ 697.21 and 648.84 of this chapter. 

(iii) Area-specific gear or vessel 

requirements. From February 1 through 

September 30, no person or vessel may 

fish with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Lobster Management Area One 

Restricted Area unless that gear 

complies with the gear marking 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section, the universal trap/pot 

gear requirements specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, and the 

area-specific requirements listed in 

paragraph (c)(2) of this section, or 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 86899 

2Fishermen using red crab trap/pot gear should 

refer to paragraph (c)(12) of this section for the 

restrictions applicable to the red crab trap/pot 

fishery. 

3Fishermen using red crab trap/pot gear should 

refer to paragraph (c)(12) of this section for the 

restrictions applicable to the red crab trap/pot 

fishery. 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(7) Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge 

Restricted Area—(i) Area. The 

Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge 

Restricted Area includes all Federal 

waters of the Gulf of Maine, except 

those designated as the Massachusetts 

Restricted Area in paragraph (c)(3) of 

this section, that lie south of 43°15′ N 

lat. and west of 70°00′ W long. 

(ii) Year round area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. No person or vessel 

may fish with or possess trap/pot gear 

in the Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge 

Restricted Area unless that gear 

complies with the gear marking 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section, the universal trap/pot 

gear requirements specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, and the 

area-specific requirements listed in 

paragraph (c)(2) of this section, or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(8) Offshore Trap/Pot 2 Waters Area— 

(i) Area. The Offshore Trap/Pot Waters 

Area includes all Federal waters of the 

EEZ Offshore Management Area known 

as Lobster Management Area 3, 

including the area known as the Area 2⁄3

Overlap and Area 3⁄5 Overlap as defined 

in the American Lobster Fishery 

regulations at § 697.18 of this title, with 

the exception of the Great South 

Channel Restricted Trap/Pot Area and 

Southeast Restricted Area, and 

extending south along the 100-fathom 

(600-ft or 182.9-m) depth contour from 

35°14′ N lat. South to 27°51′ N lat., and 

east to the eastern edge of the EEZ. 

(ii) Year-round area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. No person or vessel 

may fish with or possess trap/pot gear 

in the northeast portion of Offshore 

Trap/Pot Waters Area that overlaps an 

area from the U.S./Canada border south 

to a straight line from 41°18.2′ N lat., 

71°51.5′ W long. (Watch Hill Point, RI) 

south to 40°00′ N lat., and then east to 

the eastern edge of the EEZ, unless that 

gear complies with the gear marking 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section, the universal trap/pot 

gear requirements specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, and the 

area-specific requirements listed in 

paragraph (c)(2) of this section, or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(iii) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From September 1 

to May 31, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Offshore Trap/Pot Waters Area that 

overlaps an area bounded on the north 

by a straight line from 41°18.2′ N lat., 

71°51.5′ W long. (Watch Hill Point, RI) 

south to 40°00′ N lat. and then east to 

the eastern edge of the EEZ, and 

bounded on the south by a line at 32°00′ 

N lat., and east to the eastern edge of the 

EEZ, unless that gear complies with the 

gear marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, and area-specific requirements 

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(iv) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From November 15 

to April 15, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Offshore Trap/Pot Waters Area that 

overlaps an area from 32°00′ N lat. south 

to 29°00′ N lat. and east to the eastern 

edge of the EEZ, unless that gear 

complies with the gear marking 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section, the universal trap/pot 

gear requirements specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, the areaspecific requirements in paragraph (c)(2) 

of this section or unless the gear is 

stowed as specified in § 229.2. 

(v) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From December 1 

to March 31, no person or vessel may 

fish with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Offshore Trap/Pot Waters Area that 

overlaps an area from 29°00′ N lat. south 

to 27°51′ N lat. and east to the eastern 

edge of the EEZ, unless that gear 

complies with the gear marking 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section, the universal trap/pot 

gear requirements specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, the areaspecific requirements in paragraph (c)(2) 

in this section, or unless the gear is 

stowed as specified in § 229.2. 

(vi) [Reserved] 

(9) Northern Inshore State Trap/Pot 

Waters Area—(i) Area. The Northern 

Inshore State Trap/Pot Waters Area 

includes the State waters of Rhode 

Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 

and Maine, with the exception of 

Massachusetts Restricted Area and those 

waters exempted under paragraph (a)(3) 

of this section. Federal waters west of 

70°00′ N lat. in Nantucket Sound are 

also included in the Northern Inshore 

State Trap/Pot Waters Area. 

(ii) Year-round area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. No person or vessel 

may fish with or possess trap/pot gear 

in the Northern Inshore State Trap/Pot 

Waters Area unless that gear complies 

with the gear marking requirements 

specified in paragraph (b) of this 

section, the universal trap/pot gear 

requirements specified in paragraph 

(c)(1) of this section, the area-specific 

requirements in paragraph (c)(2) of this 

section or unless the gear is stowed as 

specified in § 229.2. 

(10) Northern Nearshore Trap/Pot 

Waters Area—(i) Area. The Northern 

Nearshore Trap/Pot Waters Area 

includes all Federal waters of EEZ 

Nearshore Management Area 1, Area 2, 

and the Outer Cape Lobster 

Management Area (as defined in the 

American Lobster Fishery regulations at 

§ 697.18 of this title), with the exception 

of the Great South Channel Restricted 

Trap/Pot Area, Massachusetts Restricted 

Area, Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge 

Restricted Area, and Federal waters 

west of 70°00′ N lat. in Nantucket Sound 

(included in the Northern Inshore State 

Trap/Pot Waters Area) and those waters 

exempted under paragraph (a)(3) of this 

section. 

(ii) Year-round area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. No person or vessel 

may fish with or possess trap/pot gear 

in the Northern Nearshore Trap/Pot 

Waters Area unless that gear complies 

with the gear marking requirements 

specified in paragraph (b) of this 

section, the universal trap/pot gear 

requirements specified in paragraph 

(c)(1) of this section, the area-specific 

requirements in paragraph (c)(2) of this 

section, or unless the gear is stowed as 

specified in § 229.2. 

(11) Southern Nearshore 3 Trap/Pot 

Waters Area—(i) Area. The Southern 

Nearshore Trap/Pot Waters Area 

includes all State and Federal waters 

that fall within EEZ Nearshore 

Management Area 4, EEZ Nearshore 

Management Area 5, and EEZ Nearshore 

Management Area 6 (as defined in the 

American Lobster Fishery regulations in 

§ 697.18 of this title, and excluding the 

Area 3⁄5 Overlap), and inside the 100- 

fathom (600-ft or 182.9-m) depth 

contour line from 35°30′ N lat. south to 

27°51′ N lat. and extending inshore to 

the shoreline or exemption line, with 

the exception of those waters exempted 

under paragraph (a)(3) of this section 

and those waters in the Southeast 

Restricted Area defined in paragraph 

(f)(1) of this section. 

(ii) Year-round area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. No person or vessel 

may fish with or possess trap/pot gear 

in the Southern Nearshore Trap/Pot 

Waters Area that is east of a straight line 

from 41°18.2′ N lat., 71°51.5′ W long. 

(Watch Hill Point, RI) south to 40°00′ N 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
86900 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 251 / Thursday, December 31, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

lat., unless that gear complies with the 

gear marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, the area-specific requirements 

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(iii) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From September 1 

to May 31, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Southern Nearshore Trap/Pot Waters 

Area that overlaps an area bounded on 

the north by a straight line from 41°18.2′ 

N lat., 71°51.5′ W long. (Watch Hill 

Point, RI) south to 40°00′ N lat. and then 

east to the eastern edge of the EEZ, and 

bounded on the south by 32°00′ N lat., 

and east to the eastern edge of the EEZ, 

unless that gear complies with the gear 

marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, the areaspecific requirements in paragraph (c)(2) 

of this section or unless the gear is 

stowed as specified in § 229.2. 

(iv) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From November 15 

to April 15, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Southern Nearshore Trap/Pot Waters 

Area that overlaps an area from 32°00′ 

N lat. south to 29°00′ N lat. and east to 

the eastern edge of the EEZ, unless that 

gear complies with the gear marking 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section, the universal trap/pot 

gear requirements specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, the areaspecific requirements in paragraph (c)(2) 

of this section or unless the gear is 

stowed as specified in § 229.2. 

(v) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From December 1 

to March 31, no person or vessel may 

fish with or possess trap/pot gear in the 

Southern Nearshore Trap/Pot Waters 

Area that overlaps an area from 29°00′ 

N lat. south to 27°51′ N lat. and east to 

the eastern edge of the EEZ, unless that 

gear complies with the gear marking 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section, the universal trap/pot 

gear requirements specified in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, the areaspecific requirements in (c)(2) of this 

section or unless the gear is stowed as 

specified in § 229.2. 

(vi) [Reserved] 

(12) Restrictions applicable to the red 

crab trap/pot fishery—(i) Area. The red 

crab trap/pot fishery is regulated in the 

waters identified in paragraphs (c)(6)(i) 

and (c)(9)(i) of this section. 

(ii) Year-round area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. No person or vessel 

may fish with or possess red crab trap/ 

pot gear in the area identified in 

paragraph (c)(12)(i) of this section that 

overlaps an area from the U.S./Canada 

border south to a straight line from 41° 

18.2′ N lat., 71°51.5′ W long. (Watch Hill 

Point, RI) south to 40°00′ N lat., and 

then east to the eastern edge of the EEZ, 

unless that gear complies with the gear 

marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, the area-specific requirements 

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(iii) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From September 1 

to May 31, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess red crab trap/pot gear in 

the area identified in paragraph 

(c)(12)(i) of this section that overlaps an 

area bounded on the north by a straight 

line from 41°18.2′ N lat., 71°51.5′ W 

long. (Watch Hill Point, RI) south to 

40°00′ N lat. and then east to the eastern 

edge of the EEZ, and bounded on the 

south by a line at 32°00′ N lat., and east 

to the eastern edge of the EEZ, unless 

that gear complies with the gear 

marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, the area-specific requirements 

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(iv) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From November 15 

to April 15, no person or vessel may fish 

with or possess red crab trap/pot gear in 

the area identified in paragraph 

(c)(12)(i) of this section that overlaps an 

area from 32°00′ N lat. south to 29°00′ 

N lat. and east to the eastern edge of the 

EEZ, unless that gear complies with the 

gear marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, the area-specific requirements 

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(v) Seasonal area-specific gear or 

vessel requirements. From December 1 

to March 31, no person or vessel may 

fish with or possess red crab trap/pot 

gear in the area identified in paragraph 

(c)(12)(i) of this section that overlaps an 

area from 29°00′ N lat. south to 27°51′ 

N lat. and east to the eastern edge of the 

EEZ, unless that gear complies with the 

gear marking requirements specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section, the 

universal trap/pot gear requirements 

specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section, the area-specific requirements 

in paragraph (c)(2) of this section or 

unless the gear is stowed as specified in 

§ 229.2. 

(vi) [Reserved] 

PART 697—ATLANTIC COASTAL 

FISHERIES COOPERATIVE 

MANAGEMENT 

■ 4. The authority citation for 50 CFR 

part 697 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. 

■ 5. In § 697.21, revise paragraph (b)(3) 

to read as follows: 

§ 697.21 Gear identification and marking, 

escape vent, maximum trap size, and ghost 

panel requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) No American lobster trap trawl 

shall exceed 1.5 nautical miles (2.78 

km) in length, as measured from radar 

reflector to radar reflector, except in the 

EEZ Offshore Management Area 3 where 

the maximum length of a lobster trap 

trawl shall not exceed 1.75 nautical 

miles (3.24 km). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2020–28775 Filed 12–30–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS