8780 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 120120056–2055–01] 

RIN 0648–XA797 

Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Northeast Multispecies 

Fishery; 2012 Sector Operations Plans 

and Contracts, and Allocation of 

Northeast Multispecies Annual Catch 

Entitlements 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This rule proposes 19 

Northeast (NE) multispecies 

(groundfish) sector operations plans and 

contracts for fishing year (FY) 2012, and 

would allocate quotas of NE 

multispecies to the sectors. The NE 

Multispecies Fishery Management Plan 

(FMP) requires sectors to submit their 

operations plans and contracts to NMFS 

for approval or disapproval. Approval of 

a sector operations plan and contract is 

necessary for that sector to be allocated 

fish, and allows the sector members to 

be exempted from certain effort control 

regulations. If a sector operations plan 

and contract is not approved, the 

members of that sector must fish in the 

common pool and comply with all 

existing regulations. This rule also 

notifies the public that NMFS is 

extending the deadline to join a sector 

for FY 2012 through April 30, 2012. 

NMFS is soliciting comment on the 

proposed operations plans and 

contracts, and our proposal to grant 25 

of the 49 exemptions requested, and 

deny the rest. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 1, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2011–0264, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal http:// 

www.regulations.gov. To submit 

comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, 

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

then enter NOAA–NMFS–2011–0264 in 

the keyword search. Locate the 

document you wish to comment on 

from the resulting list and click on the 

‘‘Submit a Comment’’ icon on the right 

of that line. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

Mark Grant, 55 Great Republic Drive, 

Gloucester, MA 01930. 

• Fax: 978–281–9135; Attn: Mark 

Grant. 

Instructions: Comments must be 

submitted by one of the above methods 

to ensure that the comments are 

received, documented, and considered 

by NMFS. Comments sent by any other 

method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered. All comments received are 

a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted for public viewing 

on http://www.regulations.gov without 

change. All personal identifying 

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

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. Do not submit 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive or protected 

information. NMFS will accept 

anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in 

the required fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

PDF file formats only. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Grant, Sector Policy Analyst, 

phone (978) 281–9145, fax (978) 281– 

9135. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The NE groundfish sector 

management system is a voluntary 

system that allocates a portion of 

groundfish stocks to self-selecting 

groups of permit holders, called sectors. 

Sector members are granted increased 

operational flexibility through 

exemptions from regulations in 

exchange for taking on additional 

responsibility. The annual allocations to 

sectors are called Annual Catch 

Entitlements (ACE) and are based on the 

collective fishing history of the sectors’ 

members. Sectors are self-selecting, 

meaning each sector can choose its 

members. Sectors may pool harvesting 

resources and consolidate operations to 

fewer vessels, if they desire. 

NMFS received operations plans and 

preliminary contracts for FY 2012 from 

19 sectors (see Table 1). The 

Administrator of NMFS for the NE 

Region (Regional Administrator) has 

made a preliminary determination that 

the 19 sector operations plans and 

contracts are consistent with the goals of 

the FMP, and comply with the measures 

that govern operation of a sector. This 

proposed rule summarizes many of the 

sector requirements and solicits 

comments on the proposed operations 

plans, our proposal to grant 25 of the 49 

regulatory exemptions requested by the 

sectors and deny the rest, and the 

environmental assessment (EA). Copies 

of the operations plans and contracts, 

and the EA are available at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and from NMFS 

(see ADDRESSES). 

Amendment 13 to the FMP (69 FR 

22906, April 27, 2004) established a 

process for forming sectors within the 

groundfish fishery, implemented 

restrictions applicable to all sectors, and 

authorized allocation of a total 

allowable catch (TAC) for specific 

groundfish species to a sector. 

Amendment 16 to the FMP (74 FR 

18262, April 9, 2010) expanded sector 

management, revised the 2 existing 

sectors to comply with the expanded 

sector rules (summarized below), and 

authorized an additional 17, for a total 

of 19 sectors. Framework Adjustment 

(FW) 45 to the FMP (76 FR 23042, April 

25, 2011) further revised the rules for 

sectors and authorized 5 new sectors 

(for a total of 24 sectors). 

The FMP defines a sector as ‘‘[a] 

group of persons (three or more persons, 

none of whom have an ownership 

interest in the other two persons in the 

sector) holding limited access vessel 

permits who have voluntarily entered 

into a contract and agree to certain 

fishing restrictions for a specified period 

of time, and which has been granted a 

TAC(s) [sic] in order to achieve 

objectives consistent with applicable 

FMP goals and objectives.’’ A sector’s 

TAC is referred to as an ACE. Regional 

Administrator approval is required for a 

sector to be authorized to fish and to be 

allocated an ACE for stocks of regulated 

NE multispecies. Each individual 

sector’s ACE for a particular stock 

represents a share of that stock’s annual 

catch limit (ACL) available to 

commercial NE multispecies vessels, 

and each ACE is based upon the 

landings history of permits participating 

in that sector. 

Nineteen sectors submitted operations 

plans and sector contracts, and 

requested allocation of stocks regulated 

under the FMP for FY 2012. The 

submitted operations plans are similar 

to previously approved versions, but 

incorporate changes to incorporate the 

requested exemptions. Five sectors 

chose not to submit operations plans 

and contracts for FY 2012: The Georges 

Bank (GB) Cod Hook Sector; Northeast 

Fishery Sector I; the State of New 

Hampshire Permit Bank Sector; the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts Permit 

Bank Sector; and the State of Rhode 

Island Permit Bank Sector. The State of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8781 

Maine Permit Bank Sector, Northeast 

Fishery Sector IV and Sustainable 

Harvest Sector 3 would operate as 

private lease-only sectors. The 

Sustainable Harvest Sector 3 has not 

explicitly prohibited fishing activity, 

and may transfer permits to active 

vessels. A separate rule (76 FR 77200, 

December 12, 2011) proposes 

Amendment 17, which would allocate 

ACE to state-operated permit banks 

without requiring those permit banks to 

comply with the administrative and 

procedural requirements for groundfish 

sectors. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8782 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15FE12.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8783 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15FE12.002</GPH>
8784 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Sector ACEs 

As of December 1, 2011, 843 of the 

1,475 eligible NE multispecies permits 

have preliminarily enrolled in a sector 

for FY 2012. These permits account for 

approximately 99 percent of the FY 

2012 commercial groundfish sub-ACL. 

Table 1 includes a summary of permits 

enrolled in a sector as of December 1, 

2011. Permits enrolled in a sector, and 

the vessels associated with those 

permits, have until April 30, 2012, to 

withdraw from a sector and fish in the 

common pool for FY 2012. NMFS will 

publish final sector ACEs and common 

pool sub-ACL totals, based upon final 

rosters, as soon as possible after the start 

of FY 2012. 

Sector ACEs are calculated by 

summing the potential sector 

contributions (PSC) of a sector’s 

members for a stock and then 

multiplying that percentage by the 

available commercial sub-ACL for that 

stock. Table 2 shows the cumulative 

percentage of each commercial sub-ACL 

each sector would receive, based on 

their rosters as of December 1, 2011. 

Tables 3 and 4 show the ACEs each 

sector would be allocated based on their 

December 1, 2011, sector rosters for FY 

2012. The final ACEs, to the nearest 

pound, are provided to the individual 

sectors by NMFS and NMFS uses those 

final ACEs for monitoring sector catch. 

While the common pool does not 

receive a specific allocation of ACE, the 

common pool sub-ACLs have been 

included in each of these tables for 

comparison. 

Individual permits are not assigned a 

PSC for Eastern GB cod or Eastern GB 

haddock; rather each sector’s GB cod 

and GB haddock allocation is divided 

into a Western ACE and an Eastern ACE 

for each stock. A sector’s Eastern GB cod 

and haddock ACEs are to be harvested 

exclusively in the Eastern U.S./Canada 

Area and are based on the sector’s 

percentage of the GB cod and haddock 

ACLs. For example, if a sector is 

allocated 4 percent of the GB cod ACL 

and 6 percent of the GB haddock ACL, 

the sector is allocated 4 percent of the 

Eastern U.S./Canada Area GB cod TAC 

and 6 percent of the Eastern U.S./ 

Canada Area GB haddock TAC as its 

Eastern GB cod and haddock ACEs. 

These amounts are then subtracted from 

the sector’s overall GB cod and haddock 

allocations to determine its Western GB 

cod and haddock ACEs. 

At the start of FY 2012, NMFS will 

withhold 20 percent of each sector’s FY 

2012 ACE for each stock to allow time 

to process any FY 2011 ACE transfers 

and to determine whether the FY 2012 

ACE allocated to any sector needs to be 

reduced, or any overage penalties need 

to be applied to accommodate an FY 

2011 ACE overage by that sector. Sectors 

will be allowed to trade ACE for 2 

weeks following the finalization of 

sector catch for FY 2012 to balance any 

overages. The New England Fishery 

Management Council (Council) and 

sector managers will be notified of this 

deadline in writing and the decision 

will be announced on the NMFS 

Northeast Regional Office (http:// 

www.nero.noaa.gov/). 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8785 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15FE12.003</GPH>
8786 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15FE12.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8787 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP15FE12.005</GPH>
8788 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Sector Operations Plans and Contracts 

NMFS received nineteen sector 

operations plans and contracts by the 

September 1, 2011, deadline, and 

subsequently received preliminary 

rosters by the December 1, 2011, 

deadline for FY 2012. Each sector has 

elected to submit a single document that 

is both the sector’s contract and the 

sector’s operations plan. Therefore, 

these submitted operations plans not 

only contain the rules under which each 

sector would fish, but also provide the 

legal contract that binds the sector’s 

members to the sector and its operations 

plan. 

Each sector conducts fishing activities 

according to its approved operations 

plan; however, each operations plan and 

sector member must comply with the 

regulations governing sectors, which are 

found at § 648.87. All permit holders 

with a limited access NE multispecies 

permit that was valid as of May 1, 2008, 

are eligible to participate in a sector, 

including holders of inactive permits 

currently held in confirmation of permit 

history (CPH). While membership in 

each sector is voluntary, each member 

(and his/her permits enrolled in the 

sector) must remain with the sector for 

the entire FY, and cannot fish in the NE 

multispecies days-at-sea (DAS) program 

outside of the sector (i.e., in the 

common pool) during the FY. 

Participating vessels are required to 

comply with all pertinent Federal 

fishing regulations, except as 

specifically exempted by a letter of 

authorization (LOA) issued by the 

Regional Administrator. Sector 

operations plans may be amended inseason if a change is necessary and 

agreed to by NMFS, provided the 

change is consistent with the sector 

administration provisions. These 

changes are included in updated LOAs 

issued to sector members and through 

amendments to the approved operations 

plan. 

Sectors are allocated all large-mesh 

groundfish stocks for which members 

have landings history, with the 

exception of Atlantic halibut, 

windowpane flounder, Atlantic 

wolffish, and the Southern New 

England/Mid-Atlantic (SNE/MA) stock 

of winter flounder. Atlantic halibut, 

ocean pout, northern windowpane 

flounder, and southern windowpane 

flounder are not allocated to sectors 

because these stocks have small ACLs, 

and vessels have limited landings 

history. Allocating these stocks to 

sectors would complicate monitoring of 

sector operations and would require a 

different scheme for determining each 

permit’s potential sector contribution. 

Sector vessels are required to retain 

all legal-sized allocated groundfish, 

unless an exemption is granted allowing 

sector vessels to discard legal-sized 

unmarketable fish at sea. Catch 

(including discards) of all allocated 

groundfish stocks by a sector’s vessels 

would count against the sector’s ACE, 

unless the catch is an element of a 

separate ACL sub-component, such as 

groundfish caught when fishing in an 

exempted fishery, or yellowtail flounder 

caught when fishing in the Atlantic sea 

scallop fishery. Sector vessels fishing for 

monkfish, skate, lobster (with non-trap 

gear), and spiny dogfish when on a 

sector trip (e.g., not fishing under 

provisions of a NE multispecies 

exempted fishery) would have their 

groundfish catch (including discards) on 

those trips debited against the sector’s 

ACE. Ratios to calculate discards on 

unobserved sector trips would be 

determined by NMFS based on observed 

trips. 

Each sector is required to ensure that 

its ACE is not exceeded during the FY. 

Amendment 16 required sectors to 

develop independent third-party 

dockside monitoring programs (DSM) to 

verify landings at the time they are 

weighed by the dealer, and to certify 

that the landing weights are accurate as 

reported by the dealer. FW 45 sets the 

required coverage level for DSM to the 

level that NMFS could fund. For FY 

2012, NMFS will not fund a DSM 

program; therefore, the DSM level for 

FY 2012 is zero. Amendment 16 also 

required that sectors design, implement, 

and fund an at-sea monitoring (ASM) 

program beginning in FY 2012. 

However, for 2012 NMFS will fund and 

operate an ASM program for all sectors. 

The ASM coverage rate target is 17 

percent, in addition to the expected 8- 

percent coverage rate of the Northeast 

Fishery Observer Program (NEFOP). 

These two programs are expected to 

result in coverage of 25 percent of all 

sector trips and will be the basis for 

calculating discards by sector vessels. 

This level of observer coverage has been 

considered sufficient to monitor sector 

fishing activity for purposes of 

calculating when ACLs have been 

achieved. 

Sectors are required to monitor their 

landings and available ACE, and submit 

weekly catch reports to NMFS. In 

addition, the sector manager is required 

to provide NMFS with aggregate sector 

reports on a daily basis when a 

threshold (specified in the operations 

plan) is reached. Once a sector’s ACE for 

a particular stock is caught, a sector is 

required to cease all fishing operations 

in that stock area until it could acquire 

additional ACE for that stock. ACE may 

be transferred between sectors, but ACE 

transfers to or from common pool 

vessels is prohibited. Each sector must 

submit an annual report to NMFS and 

the Council within 60 days of the end 

of the FY detailing the sector’s catch 

(landings and discards by the sector), 

enforcement actions, and pertinent 

information necessary to evaluate the 

biological, economic, and social impacts 

from the sector, as directed by NMFS. 

Each sector contract provides 

procedures to enforce the sector 

operations plan, explains sector 

monitoring and reporting requirements, 

presents a schedule of penalties, and 

provides authority to sector managers to 

issue stop fishing orders to sector 

members that violate provisions of the 

operations plan and contract. Sector 

members can be held jointly and 

severally liable for ACE overages, 

discarding of legal-sized fish, and/or 

misreporting of catch (landings or 

discards). Each sector operations plan 

submitted for FY 2012 states that the 

sector will withhold an initial reserve 

from the sector’s sub-allocation to each 

individual member to prevent the sector 

from exceeding its ACE. Each sector 

contract also details the method for 

initial ACE allocation to sector 

members; for FY 2012, each sector has 

proposed that each sector member could 

harvest an amount of fish equal to the 

amount each individual member’s 

permit contributed to the sector’s ACE. 

Amendment 16 contains several 

‘‘universal’’ exemptions that apply to all 

sectors. These universal exemptions 

apply to: Trip limits on allocated stocks; 

the GB Seasonal Closure Area; NE 

multispecies DAS restrictions; the 

requirement to use a 6.5-inch (16.5-cm) 

mesh codend when fishing with 

selective gear on GB; and portions of the 

Gulf of Maine (GOM) Rolling Closure 

Areas. 

Sectors may request additional 

exemptions from NE multispecies 

regulations through their sector 

operations plan. Amendment 16 

prohibits sectors from requesting 

exemptions from year-round closed 

areas (CA), permitting restrictions, gear 

restrictions designed to minimize 

habitat impacts, and reporting 

requirements (excluding DAS reporting 

requirements or DSM requirements). If 

an exemption is granted to a sector, each 

sector vessel is issued a LOA by NMFS 

authorizing the exemption for each such 

vessel. 

Requested FY 2012 Exemptions 

A total of 49 exemptions from the NE 

multispecies regulations have been 

requested by sectors through their FY 

2012 operations plans. These requests 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8789 

are grouped into several categories in 

this rule: Exemptions previously 

approved that we proposed to approve 

for FY 2012 (numbers 1–16); new 

exemption requests we proposed to 

approve for FY 2012 (numbers 17–25); 

and requested exemptions that we 

propose to deny because they are 

prohibited (numbers 26–38), were 

previously rejected and no new 

information was provided (numbers 39– 

46), or because they may jeopardize 

rebuilding of the GOM cod stock 

(numbers 47–49). The recent GOM cod 

stock assessment determined the GOM 

cod stock is overfished and undergoing 

overfishing, which requires reevaluation 

of management of the stock. A full 

discussion of the 25 exemptions 

proposed for approval appears below. 

Exemptions We Propose To Approve in 

FY 2012 

In FY 2011, sectors were exempted 

from the following; and these 

exemptions have again been requested 

for FY 2012: (1) 120-day block out of the 

fishery required for Day gillnet vessels; 

(2) 20-day spawning block out of the 

fishery required for all vessels; (3) limits 

on the number of gillnets imposed on 

Day gillnet vessels; (4) prohibition on a 

vessel hauling another vessel’s gillnet 

gear; (5) limits on the number of gillnets 

that may be hauled on GB when fishing 

under a groundfish/monkfish DAS; (6) 

limits on the number of hooks that may 

be fished; (7) DAS Leasing Program 

length and horsepower restrictions; (8) 

the GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh Exemption 

January through April; (9) extension of 

the GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh Exemption 

through May; (10) prohibition on 

discarding; (11) daily catch reporting by 

sector managers for sector vessels 

participating in the CA I Hook Gear 

Haddock Special Access Program (SAP); 

(12) gear requirements in the U.S./ 

Canada Management Area; (13) 

powering vessel monitoring systems 

(VMS) while at the dock; (14) DSM for 

vessels fishing west of 72°30′W. long.; 

(15) DSM for Handgear A-permitted 

sector vessels; and (16) DSM for 

monkfish trips in the monkfish 

Southern Fishery Management Area 

(SFMA). 

In addition, sectors have requested 

exemptions from the following 

requirements in FY 2012: (17) Seasonal 

restrictions for the Eastern U.S./Canada 

Haddock SAP; (18) seasonal restriction 

for the CA II Yellowtail Flounder/ 

Haddock SAP; (19) prohibition on 

fishing inside and outside of the CA I 

Hook Gear Haddock SAP while on the 

same trip; (20) maximum ACE carryover provision; (21) ACE buffer 

provision; (22) 6.5-inch (16.5-cm) 

minimum mesh size requirement for 

trawl nets; (23) minimum fish size 

provisions for haddock; (24) prohibition 

on a vessel hauling another vessel’s 

hook gear; and (25) the requirement to 

declare intent to fish in the Eastern 

U.S./Canada SAP and the CA II 

Yellowtail Flounder/Haddock SAP prior 

to leaving the dock. We propose to 

approve the above 25 exemption 

requests for FY 2012. 

Exemptions We Proposed To Deny for 

FY 2012 

We propose denying exemptions from 

the following 13 requirements because 

they are prohibited by FMP regulations: 

(26) Year-round access to the Cashes 

Ledge Closure Area; (27) year-round 

access to CA I; (28) year-round access to 

CA II; (29) year-round access to the 

Western GOM Closure Area; (30) 

extrapolation of discarded fish pieces 

across strata; (31) authorization to use 

video monitoring in place of ASM; (32) 

all hail requirements; (33) year-round 

access to the Eastern U.S./Canada Area; 

(34) ASM for sector vessels; (35) ASM 

for trips targeting dogfish; (36) ASM for 

hook-only and Handgear A vessels; (37) 

ASM for extra-large mesh gillnet 

vessels; and (38) the ASM standard for 

random trip selection. 

We propose denying exemptions from 

the following 8 requirements because 

they were previously rejected, and 

sector applicants provided no new 

information: (39) minimum fish sizes to 

allow 100-percent retention; (40) 

minimum fish sizes to retain 12-inch 

(30.5-cm) yellowtail flounder; (41) VMS 

messages be sent directly to NMFS; (42) 

weekly catch report requirements; (43) 

prohibition on pair trawling; (44) 

minimum hook size; (45) 6.5-inch (16.5- 

cm) minimum mesh size for trawls to 

allow 5-inch (12.7-cm) mesh when 

targeting redfish; and (46) to submit a 

sector roster by the deadline. 

Exemptions 39 through 46 are not 

analyzed in the EA because no new 

information was available to change the 

analyses previously published in past 

EAs. Detailed information on these 

exemption requests and the reasons they 

were previously denied is contained in 

the proposed and final sector rules for 

FY 2010 (74 FR 68015, December 22, 

2009, and 75 FR 18113, April 9, 2010, 

respectively) and the proposed and final 

sector rules for FY 2011 (76 FR 10852, 

February 28, 2011, and 76 FR 23076, 

April 25, 2011, respectively). 

We propose denying exemptions from 

the following 3 requirements because 

they may jeopardize rebuilding of the 

GOM cod stock: (47) the April GOM 

Rolling Closure Area (RCA); (48) the 

May GOM RCA; and (49) the June GOM 

RCA. The draft EA contains analysis of 

exemptions 47 through 49 that was 

developed prior to the recent GOM cod 

stock assessment. NMFS is not 

proposing these exemptions because of 

the recent stock assessment. Therefore, 

the analysis will not be included in the 

final EA and the final EA will list these 

exemptions as considered, but rejected. 

NMFS solicits public comment on the 

proposed sector operations plans and 

our proposal to grant 25 of the 49 

requested exemptions, and deny the 

rest, as well as the EA prepared for this 

action. NMFS is particularly interested 

in receiving comments on the proposed 

exemptions from SAP seasons (numbers 

17 and 18) and ACE carryover limits 

(number 20) because of concerns 

regarding the potential impacts of these 

exemptions. 

On February 3, 2012, NMFS listed the 

GOM distinct population segment (DPS) 

of Atlantic sturgeon as threatened, and 

listed the New York Bight, Chesapeake 

Bay, Carolina, and South Atlantic DPSs 

of Atlantic sturgeon as endangered. The 

Biological Opinion for the NE 

multispecies fisheries will be 

reinitiated, and additional evaluation 

will be included to describe any impacts 

of the fisheries on Atlantic sturgeon and 

define any measures needed to mitigate 

those impacts, if necessary. NMFS 

anticipates that any measures, terms and 

conditions included in an updated 

Biological Opinion will further reduce 

impacts to the species and that the 

Biological Opinion will be completed 

before the beginning of the 2012 NE 

multispecies fishing year on May 1, 

2012. 

Proposed Exemptions—Regulations 

That Were Previously Exempted for FY 

2011 

1. 120-Day Block Out of the Fishery 

Requirement for Day Gillnet Vessels 

The requirement for Day gillnet 

vessels to take 120 days out of the 

fishery was implemented in 1997 under 

FW 20 (62 FR 15381, April 1, 1997) to 

help ensure that management measures 

for Day gillnet vessels were comparable 

to effort controls placed on other fishing 

gear types, because gillnets continue to 

fish as long as they are in the water. 

Regulations at § 648.82(j)(1)(ii) require 

that each NE multispecies gillnet vessel 

declared into the Day gillnet category 

declare and take 120 days out of the 

non-exempt gillnet fishery. Each period 

of time taken out of the fishery must be 

a minimum of 7 consecutive days, and 

at least 21 of the 120 days must be taken 

between June 1 and September 30. An 

exemption from this requirement was 

previously approved for FYs 2010 and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8790 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2011 because this measure was designed 

to control fishing effort and, therefore, is 

no longer necessary for sectors because 

their ACEs limit overall fishing 

mortality. For additional information 

pertaining to this exemption and other 

exemptions first approved in FY 2010, 

please refer to the proposed and final 

sector rules for FY. This exemption 

would increase the operational 

flexibility of sector vessels and would 

be expected to increase profit margins of 

sector fishermen. 

2. 20-Day Spawning Block 

Vessels are required to declare out 

and be out of the NE multispecies DAS 

program for a 20-day period each 

calendar year between March 1 and May 

31, when spawning is most prevalent in 

the GOM (§ 648.82(g)). This regulation 

was developed to reduce fishing effort 

on spawning groundfish stocks and an 

exemption was approved for FYs 2010 

and 2011 because the sectors’ ACE will 

restrict fishing mortality, making this 

measure no longer necessary as an effort 

control. Exempting sectors from this 

requirement would provide vessel 

owners with greater flexibility to plan 

operations according to fishing and 

market conditions. 

3. Limit on the Number of Gillnets for 

Day Gillnet Vessels 

The NE Multispecies FMP limits the 

number of gillnets a Day gillnet vessel 

may fish in the groundfish regulated 

mesh areas (RMA). The limits are 

specific to the type of gillnet and the 

RMA: 100 gillnets (of which no more 

than 50 can be roundfish gillnets) in the 

GOM RMA (§ 648.80(a)(3)(iv)); 50 

gillnets in the GB RMA 

(§ 648.80(a)(4)(iv)); and 75 gillnets in the 

Mid-Atlantic (MA) RMA 

(§ 648.80(b)(2)(iv)). This exemption was 

previously approved in FYs 2010 and 

2011 to allow sector vessels to fish up 

to 150 nets (any combination of flatfish 

or roundfish nets) in any RMA to 

provide greater operational flexibility to 

sector vessels in deploying gillnet gear. 

This measure was designed to control 

fishing effort and, therefore, is no longer 

necessary for sectors because their ACEs 

limit overall fishing mortality. 

4. Prohibition on a Vessel Hauling 

Another Vessel’s Gillnet Gear 

Regulations at §§ 648.14(k)(6)(ii)(A) 

and 648.84(a) specify the manner in 

which gillnet gear must be tagged, 

requiring that information pertinent to 

the vessel owner or vessel be 

permanently affixed to the gear. No 

provisions exist in the regulations 

allowing for multiple vessels to haul the 

same gear. An exemption from this 

regulation was previously approved in 

FYs 2010 and 2011 to allow a sector to 

share fixed gear among sector vessels, 

thereby reducing costs. Consistent with 

the exemption as originally approved, 

the sectors requesting this exemption 

have proposed that all vessels utilizing 

community fixed gear be jointly liable 

for any violations associated with that 

gear. Additionally, each member 

intending to haul the same gear will be 

required to tag the gear with the 

appropriate gillnet tags, consistent with 

§ 648.84(a). 

5. Limit on the Number of Gillnets That 

May Be Hauled on GB When Fishing 

Under a Groundfish/Monkfish DAS 

Regulations at § 648.80(a)(4)(iv) 

prohibiting Day gillnet vessels fishing 

on a groundfish DAS from possessing, 

deploying, fishing, or hauling more than 

50 gillnets on GB were implemented as 

a groundfish mortality control under 

Amendment 13 in 2004. NMFS granted 

an exemption from the limit on the 

number of gillnets that may be hauled 

on GB when fishing under a groundfish/ 

monkfish in FYs 2010 and 2011 because 

the prohibition was designed to control 

fishing effort and, therefore, is no longer 

necessary for sectors because their ACEs 

limit overall fishing mortality. This 

exemption allows gillnets deployed 

under the Monkfish FMP to be hauled 

more efficiently by vessels that are 

issued permits under both the 

multispecies and the monkfish FMPs. 

6. Limits on the Number of Hooks That 

May Be Fished 

Vessels are prohibited from fishing or 

possessing more than 2,000 rigged 

hooks in the GOM RMA, more than 

3,600 rigged hooks in the GB RMA, 

more than 2,000 rigged hooks in the 

SNE RMA, or more than 4,500 rigged 

hooks in the MA RMA 

(§§ 648.80(a)(3)(iv)(B)(2), 

648.80(a)(4)(iv)(B)(2), 

648.80(b)(2)(iv)(B)(1), and 

648.80(c)(2)(v)(B)(1), respectively). This 

measure was initially implemented in 

2002 through an interim action (67 FR 

50292, August 1, 2002), and made 

permanent through Amendment 13, to 

control fishing effort and, therefore, is 

no longer necessary for sectors because 

their ACEs limit overall fishing 

mortality. An exemption from the 

number of hooks that a vessel may fish 

was approved for FYs 2010 and 2011 to 

allow sector vessels to more efficiently 

harvest ACE. This exemption was also 

previously granted to the GB Cod Hook 

Sector in FYs 2004–2009. 

7. DAS Leasing Program Length and 

Horsepower Restrictions 

While sector vessels are exempt from 

the requirement to use NE multispecies 

DAS to harvest groundfish, sector 

vessels are allocated, and must use, NE 

multispecies DAS for specific 

circumstances. For example, the 

Monkfish FMP requires that limited 

access monkfish Category C and D 

vessels harvesting more than the 

incidental monkfish possession limit 

must fish under both a monkfish DAS 

and a NE multispecies DAS. Therefore, 

sector vessels may still use, and lease, 

NE multispecies DAS. 

NMFS granted an exemption from the 

DAS Leasing Program length and 

horsepower baseline restrictions 

(§ 648.82(k)(1)(ix)) on DAS leases 

between vessels within an individual 

sector, as well as between vessels in 

different sectors with this exemption, in 

FYs 2010 and 2011. The DAS Leasing 

Program restricted transfers of DAS 

between vessels of different sizes to the 

existing replaced vessel upgrade 

restrictions because of concerns about 

how DAS leases might change the 

character of the fishery. Groundfish 

mortality and fishing effort of sector 

vessels is no longer controlled by DAS, 

but is instead controlled only by the 

sector’s available ACE. There are no 

vessel size restrictions on use of a 

sector’s ACE, so continuing the DAS 

Leasing Program restrictions is no 

longer an effective method to maintain 

the character of the NE multispecies 

fleet. Further, exemption from this 

restriction allows sector vessels greater 

flexibility in the utilization of ACE and 

DAS. ACE and DAS regulations would 

ensure negligible impacts to allocated 

target species, and non-allocated target 

species and bycatch by capping overall 

mortality. Even with these exemptions, 

sectors would still be subject to nonallocated target species and bycatch 

management measures to limit their 

catch and control mortality. Providing 

greater flexibility in the distribution of 

DAS could result in increased effort on 

non-allocated target stocks, such as 

monkfish and skates. However, sectors 

predicted little consolidation and 

redirection of effort in their FY 2012 

operations plans. In addition, any 

potential redirection in effort would be 

restricted by the sector’s ACE for each 

stock, as well as by effort controls in 

other fisheries (e.g., monkfish trip limits 

and DAS). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8791 

8. The GOM Sink Gillnet Mesh 

Exemption January Through April; and 

9. Extension of the GOM Sink Gillnet 

Mesh Exemption Through May 

Exemptions 8 and 9 are discussed 

together because of their interrelatedness; however, approval or 

disapproval of each of these exemptions 

is an independent decision. There is a 

minimum mesh size of 6.5-inch (16.5- 

cm) for gillnets in the GOM RMA 

(§ 648.80(a)(3)(iv)). Minimum mesh size 

requirements have been used to reduce 

overall mortality on groundfish stocks, 

as well as to reduce discarding, and 

improve survival, of sub-legal 

groundfish. Selectivity studies have 

indicated that 6.5-inch (16.5-cm) sink 

gillnets may not be effective at retaining 

haddock at the current legal minimum 

fish size. An exemption from this 

requirement was previously approved 

for FYs 2010 and 2011 to provide sector 

vessels the opportunity to potentially 

catch more GOM haddock, a fully 

rebuilt stock, during the months that 

haddock are most prevalent, and to 

provide sector participants the 

opportunity to more fully harvest their 

allocation of GOM haddock. This 

exemption was initially considered in a 

supplemental proposed and final rule to 

FY 2010 sector operations (75 FR 53939, 

September 2, 2010; and 75 FR 80720, 

December 23, 2010) and is functionally 

equivalent to a pilot program that was 

proposed by the Council in Amendment 

16. 

Together these exemptions allow 

sector vessels to use 6-inch (15.24-cm) 

mesh stand-up gillnets in the GOM 

RMA from January 1, 2013, to May 30, 

2013, when fishing for haddock. The 

designation of this season is consistent 

with the original pilot program proposal 

and is the time period when haddock 

are most available in the GOM. Sector 

vessels utilizing this exemption would 

be prohibited from using tie-down 

gillnets in the GOM during this period. 

Sector vessels may transit the GOM 

RMA with tie-down gillnets, provided 

they are properly stowed and not 

available for immediate use in 

accordance with one of the methods 

specified at § 648.23(b). 

Day gillnet vessels in sectors granted 

the exemption from Day gillnet net 

limits, as explained under exemption 

request 3, will not be subject to the 

general net limit in the GOM RMA, and 

will be able to fish up to 150 nets in the 

GOM RMA. In 2011, NMFS authorized 

vessels granted both exemptions to fish 

up to 150 6-inch (15.24-cm) mesh standup gillnets in the GOM RMA. For FY 

2012, NMFS proposes the same 

exemption and again requests public 

comment on the feasibility of allowing 

up to 150 nets when fishing under this 

exemption. The LOA issued to sector 

vessels that qualify for this exemption 

will specify the net restrictions to help 

ensure the provision is enforceable. 

There will be no limit on the number of 

nets that participating Trip gillnet 

vessels will be able to fish with, possess, 

haul, or deploy, during this period, 

because Trip gillnet vessels are required 

to remove all gillnet gear from the water 

before returning to port at the end of a 

fishing trip. 

NMFS believes that impacts to 

allocated target stocks resulting from 

this exemption would be negligible, 

given that fishing mortality by sector 

vessels is restricted by an ACE for 

allocated stocks, capping overall 

mortality. For FY 2010, this exemption 

was not authorized until the effective 

date of the FY 2010 Supplemental 

Sector rule, published in January 2011. 

Data indicate few trips in FY 2011 used 

this exemption. In January through May 

2011, 63 trips were taken, yielding a 

catch of 89,208 lb (40,464 kg) from sink 

gillnet vessels fishing with less than 6.5- 

inch (16.5-cm) mesh size in the GOM 

RMA. It is possible that a higher net 

limit for Day gillnet vessels 

participating in this program will 

increase the number of gillnets in the 

water at any one time and, therefore, 

potentially increase interactions with 

protected species. However, potential 

negative impacts to protected species 

from this exemption are expected to be 

low because additional nets may result 

in greater efficiency, thus potentially 

reducing interactions with protected 

species. In addition, sector vessels 

utilizing this exemption would still be 

required to comply with all 

requirements of the Harbor Porpoise 

Take Reduction Plan and Atlantic Large 

Whale Take Reduction Plan. 

10. Prohibition of Discarding 

Amendment 16 contains this 

provision to ensure that the sector’s 

ACE is accurately monitored. Sectors 

requested a partial exemption from this 

prohibition because of concerns that 

retaining and landing large amounts of 

unmarketable fish, including fish 

carcasses, creates operational 

difficulties and potentially unsafe 

working conditions for sector vessels at 

sea. The Regional Administrator 

considered a partial exemption from the 

requirement to retain all legal-sized fish 

in a proposed rule in FY 2010. However, 

due to problematic mid-season 

implementation issues, further 

consideration of this exemption was 

delayed until FY 2011. An exemption 

from this requirement was approved for 

FY 2011 to enhance operational 

flexibility, foster safer working 

conditions for sector vessels, and relieve 

the burden on sector vessels and their 

dealers to dispose of unmarketable fish. 

Under this proposed exemption, all 

legal-sized unmarketable allocated fish 

would be accounted for in the overall 

sector-specific discard rates in the same 

way discards at sea of undersized fish 

are currently accounted for, based on 

trips observed by the NEFOP and ASM. 

If this exemption is approved, 

unmarketable fish discarded by a 

sector’s vessels on observed trips will be 

deducted from that sector’s ACE and 

incorporated into that sector’s discard 

rates to account for discarding on 

unobserved trips. Vessels in a sector 

opting for this exemption will be 

required to discard all legal-sized 

unmarketable fish at sea (i.e., not just on 

select trips). Legal-sized unmarketable 

fish would be prohibited from being 

landed to prevent the potential to skew 

observed discards. The discarding 

exemption, in combination with the 

enhanced reporting of legal-sized 

unmarketable fish, would improve the 

monitoring of this unmarketable portion 

of sector catch, particularly on 

unobserved sector trips. 

11. Daily Catch Reporting By Sector 

Managers for Vessels Participating in 

the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP 

Sector vessels declared into the CA I 

Hook Gear Haddock SAP are required to 

submit daily catch reports to their sector 

manager, and their sector manager must 

report the catch information to NMFS 

on a daily basis (§ 648.85(b)(7)(v)(C)). 

This reporting requirement was 

originally implemented through FW 

40A (69 FR 67780, November 19, 2004) 

to facilitate real-time monitoring of 

quotas by both the sector manager and 

NMFS. Amendment 16 grants authority 

to the Regional Administrator to 

determine if weekly sector reports were 

sufficient for the monitoring of most 

SAPs. Through the final rule 

implementing Amendment 16, the 

Regional Administrator alleviated 

reporting requirements for sector vessels 

participating in other Special 

Management Programs (SMPs), but 

reporting requirements were retained for 

the CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP 

because NMFS must continue to 

monitor an overall haddock TAC that 

applies to sector and common pool 

vessels fishing in this SAP. An 

exemption was granted in FY 2011 to 

allow sector vessels participating in the 

CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP to submit 

a daily VMS catch report directly to 

NMFS. This exemption is consistent 

with the requirement for common pool 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8792 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

vessels participating in this SAP and 

provides NMFS with the timely 

information necessary to manage the 

SAP quota. 

12. Gear Requirements in the U.S./ 

Canada Management Area 

Any NE multispecies vessel fishing 

with trawl gear in the Eastern U.S./ 

Canada Area must fish with either a 

Ruhle trawl, a haddock separator trawl, 

or a flounder trawl (§ 648.85(a)(3)(iii)). 

The final rule implementing 

Amendment 13 clarifies that the 

requirement to use a haddock separator 

trawl or a flounder trawl net was 

designed to ‘‘ensure that the U.S./ 

Canada TACs are not exceeded. Because 

both the flounder net and haddock 

separator trawl are designed to affect 

cod selectivity, and because the cod 

TAC is specific to the Eastern U.S./ 

Canada Area only, application of this 

gear requirement to the Western U.S./ 

Canada Area is not necessary to achieve 

the stated goal.’’ 

The option to utilize a Ruhle trawl in 

the Eastern U.S./Canada Area was 

initially implemented through several 

in-season actions, and was made 

permanent in Amendment 16. This gear 

configuration was originally authorized 

for its demonstrated ability to allow the 

targeting of haddock, an underharvested stock, while reducing bycatch 

of cod and yellowtail flounder stocks, 

which were identified as overfished. 

The addition of the Ruhle Trawl to gear 

previously approved (haddock separator 

trawl and flounder trawl net) provided 

added flexibility to trawl vessels. 

An exemption from this requirement 

was granted in FY 2011 to enhance 

operational flexibility of sectors because 

overall fishing mortality would continue 

to be restrained by the sector ACEs. 

13. Requirement To Power a VMS While 

at the Dock 

Sector vessels are required to have an 

operational VMS unit onboard 

(§ 648.10(b)(4)) that transmits accurate 

positional information (i.e., polling) at 

least every hour, 24 hr per day, 

throughout the year (§ 648.10(c)(1)(i)). 

Amendment 5 (59 FR 9872, March 1, 

1994) first included the requirement for 

vessels to use VMS. While the 

requirement to use VMS was delayed 

until implemented by FW 42 (72 FR 

73274, December 27, 2007), NMFS 

supported polling to insure adequacy of 

monitoring requirements, address 

enforcement concerns, and because it 

could be beneficial in the event of an atsea emergency. 

An exemption from this requirement 

was granted in FY 2011 to lower costs 

associated with VMS for sector vessels. 

This exemption is administrative in 

nature and is anticipated to have 

negligible impacts beyond cost-savings. 

Vessels granted the exemption must 

continue to comply with other reporting 

requirements (trip end hails, VMS 

declarations, etc.) and must submit an 

appropriate powerdown VMS 

declaration, as explained on their LOA, 

any time the vessel is underway or away 

from the dock. In granting the 

exemption for FY 2011, the Regional 

Administrator reserved the right to 

revoke the exemption if it was 

determined the exemption was being 

misused or abused, and proposes to do 

so again if this exemption is granted in 

FY 2012. 

14. DSM Requirements for Vessels 

Fishing West of 72°30′ W. Long 

In response to FY 2010 requests for 

exemption from the DSM requirement 

for vessels fishing in SNE and MA 

waters, the Regional Administrator 

requested that the Council consider 

establishing a geographic boundary 

outside of which DSM would not be 

required. The Council responded in FW 

45 by removing DSM from the list of 

prohibited exemptions to allow sectors 

to request geographic- and gear-based 

exemptions from DSM. This exemption 

was granted in FYs 2010 and 2011 based 

on data showing that little groundfish is 

caught in the area. 

Generally, sectors using this 

exemption must still comply with any 

DSM program specified by NMFS in FY 

2012 (§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)). The required 

DSM coverage level for FY 2012 will be 

zero percent, because NMFS will not be 

funding DSM. However, should that 

change, then vessels would once again 

be subject to DSM. This exemption 

would reduce the burden of any DSM 

coverage level above zero. 

15. DSM Requirements for Handgear APermitted Sector Vessels 

FW 45 removed the DSM 

requirements for common pool vessels 

with handgear (Categories HA and HB) 

or Small Vessel (Category C) permits. 

Consistent with that flexibility, NMFS 

exempted sector vessels with handgear 

permits (Category HA) from DSM 

requirements due to the comparatively 

small catch of these vessels and 

disproportionately high DSM costs they 

would incur. 

In general, sectors must comply with 

any DSM program specified by NMFS in 

FY 2012 (§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)). The 

required DSM coverage level for FY 

2012 will be zero percent because 

NMFS will not be funding DSM. 

However, should that change, then 

sector handgear vessels would once 

again be subject to DSM. This 

exemption would reduce the burden of 

any DSM coverage level above zero for 

sector handgear vessels. 

16. DSM Requirements for Monkfish 

Trips in the Monkfish SFMA 

Several sectors requested exemptions 

for FY 2011 from DSM requirements for 

trips targeting monkfish, skate and/or 

dogfish. NMFS highlighted a number of 

operational concerns about exempting 

these trips in the proposed rule for FY 

2011. In the final rule for FY 2011, 

NMFS approved an exemption from 

DSM for sector trips declared into the 

SFMA when fishing on a concurrent 

monkfish/NE multispecies DAS fishing 

with 10-inch (25.4-cm) or greater mesh, 

provided that the vessel fishes the 

entirety of its trip in the SFMA. This 

exemption was granted because of the 

small catch of these vessels and 

disproportionately high DSM costs they 

would incur. 

Sectors must comply with any DSM 

program specified by NMFS in FY 2012 

(§ 648.87(b)(1)(v)). The required DSM 

coverage level for FY 2012 will be zero 

percent because NMFS will not be 

funding DSM. However, should that 

change, then sector vessels would once 

again be subject to DSM. This 

exemption would reduce the burden of 

any DSM coverage level above zero for 

a sector vessel fishing with 10-inch 

(25.4-cm) or greater mesh when fishing 

the entirety of its trip in the SFMA. 

Proposed Exemptions—Additional 

Regulations With New Exemption 

Requests 

17. Seasonal Restriction for the Eastern 

U.S./Canada Haddock SAP 

The Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock 

SAP was implemented by FW 40A in 

2004 to provide an opportunity to target 

haddock while fishing on a Category B 

DAS in, and near, CA II (69 FR 67780, 

November 19, 2004). The SAP required 

vessels to use gear that reduced the 

catch of cod and other stocks of 

concern. The SAP had a season of May 

1 through December 31 to reduce effort 

during periods of groundfish spawning. 

In 2006, FW 42 extended this SAP and 

shortened the season to August 1 

through December 31 to reduce cod 

catch. Subsequent actions approved 

additional gear types for use in this 

SAP. 

For sector vessels, the only benefit of 

this SAP is that it provides access to the 

northern tip of CA II. Amendment 16 

exempts sectors from the gear 

requirements of this SAP because sector 

catch is constrained by ACEs, but 

sectors are still required to comply with 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8793 

reporting requirements and the 

restricted season from August 1 through 

December 31 (§ 648.85(b)(3)(iv)). Sectors 

argue that their catch is restricted by 

ACE and their access to the SAP area in 

the northern tip of CA II should not be 

seasonally restricted. Sectors further 

argue that impacts to the physical 

environment and essential fish habitat 

(EFH) will be negligible because any 

increase in effort will be minor and the 

portion of CA II included in this SAP is 

outside any habitat areas of particular 

concern (HAPC). NMFS has some 

concern that this exemption may have 

negative effects on allocated stocks by 

allowing an increase in effort in a time 

and place where those stocks, 

particularly haddock, aggregate to 

spawn. 

Amendment 16 prohibits sectors from 

being granted exemptions from closed 

areas. NMFS requests comment on 

whether it is appropriate to exempt 

sectors from a SAP season, given that 

the portion of the SAP in the closed area 

is already open part of the year, or if the 

current prohibition on allowing 

exemptions from closed areas applies to 

SAPs. 

18. Seasonal Restriction for the CA II 

Yellowtail Flounder/Haddock SAP 

The CA II Yellowtail Flounder/ 

Haddock SAP was implemented by 

Amendment 13 in 2004 to provide an 

opportunity to target yellowtail flounder 

in CA II on a Category B DAS. The SAP 

required vessels to use either a flounder 

net or other gears approved for use in 

the Eastern U.S./Canada Area. The SAP 

season ran from June 1 through 

December 31. In 2005, FW 40 B 

extended this SAP and shortened the 

season to July 1 through December 31 to 

reduce interference with spawning 

yellowtail flounder (70 FR 31323, June 

1, 2005). 

Amendment 16 further revised this 

SAP by opening the SAP to target 

haddock from August 1 through January 

31, when the SAP is not open to allow 

targeting of GB yellowtail flounder. 

Sectors are required to comply with the 

SAP reporting requirements and the 

restricted season of August 1 through 

January 31 (§ 648.85(b)(3)(iii)). When 

open only to target haddock, the 

flounder net is not authorized and only 

approved trawl gears or hook gear may 

be used. The gear requirements were 

implemented to avoid catching 

yellowtail flounder when the SAP was 

open only to the targeting of haddock. 

Unlike the Eastern U.S./Canada 

Haddock SAP, the CA II Yellowtail 

Flounder/Haddock SAP provides access 

to a large area in CA II. Sectors are 

required to use the same approved gears 

as the common pool to reduce the 

advantage sector vessels have over 

common pool vessels. Sectors argue that 

their catch is restricted by ACE and 

their access to the SAP area in CA II 

should not be restricted. 

The seasonal restriction on this SAP 

was put in place to allow vessels to 

target denser populations of yellowtail 

flounder and haddock while avoiding 

cod in the summer and spawning 

groundfish in the spring. Impacts to the 

physical environment and EFH would 

be negligible because any increase in 

effort would be minor and the portion 

of CA II included in this SAP is outside 

any HAPC. NMFS has some concern 

that this exemption could have negative 

effects on allocated stocks by increasing 

effort in a time and place where those 

stocks, particularly haddock, aggregate 

to spawn. 

Amendment 16 prohibits sectors from 

being granted exemptions from closed 

areas. NMFS requests comment on 

whether it is appropriate to consider 

exemptions from a SAP season, given 

that the portion of the SAP in the closed 

area is already open part of the year, or 

if the current prohibition on allowing 

exemptions from closed areas applies to 

SAPs. 

19. Prohibition on Fishing Inside and 

Outside the CA I Hook Gear Haddock 

SAP While on the Same Trip 

FW 40A established the CA I Hook 

Gear Haddock SAP. NE multispecies 

vessels fishing on a trip within this SAP 

are prohibited from deploying fishing 

gear outside of the SAP on the same trip 

when they are declared into the SAP 

(§ 648.85(b)(7)(ii)(G)). This restriction 

was established to avoid potential quota 

monitoring and enforcement 

complications that could arise when a 

vessel fishes both inside and outside the 

SAP on the same trip. This exemption 

request would allow sector vessels to 

fish both inside and outside the CA I 

Hook Gear Haddock SAP on the same 

trip. To identify catch from inside and 

outside the SAP on the same trip, sector 

vessels would be required to send 

NMFS a VMS catch report that 

specifically identifies GB haddock (and 

any other shared allocation) catch from 

inside the SAP prior to the end of the 

trip or within 24 hr of landing. Sectors 

are requesting this exemption to 

increase their operational flexibility and 

efficiency. NMFS has no reason to 

believe that this particular catch report 

would be any less accurate than the 

existing sector catch reports. 

20. Maximum ACE Carryover Provision 

Amendment 16 allows each sector to 

carry over up to 10 percent of its 

original ACE allocation of each stock 

from one FY to the next, with the 

exception of GB yellowtail flounder 

(§ 648.87(b)(1)(i)(C)). Allowing a sector 

to carry over a portion of its allocation 

reduces concern that a sector may leave 

ACE uncaught out of concern it may 

accidentally exceed its ACE. An 

exemption was requested to allow 

sectors to carry over up to 50 percent of 

unused ACE into the following FY. 

Allowing sectors to carry over ACE 

would provide for greater flexibility in 

when and how they fish during a given 

FY. 

NMFS has conducted a preliminary 

analysis of ACE carryover limits and the 

potential for overfishing in the 

subsequent year. Based on the 

preliminary analysis, there may be a 

possibility to allow sectors to carry over 

11 percent to 30 percent of each stock’s 

ACE (except GB yellowtail flounder and 

GOM cod) from one FY to the next, but 

only to the extent that there is sufficient 

information to conclude that such 

carryover does not result in overfishing, 

impede rebuilding objectives or threaten 

the health of the stock. Moreover, any 

such carryover must be consistent with 

Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements 

and the setting of ABCs and ACLs. This 

means that additional carryover must be 

factored into, and accounted for, in the 

setting of over-fishing limits (OFL), 

allowable biological catches (ABC) and 

ACLs for any given fishing year. GB 

yellowtail flounder is excluded by 

Amendment 16 and its implementing 

regulations because it is a 

transboundary stock managed under the 

U.S./Canada Resource Sharing 

Understanding, and therefore has quotas 

set by an informal agreement between 

the Northeast Region of NMFS and the 

Maritimes Region of the Department of 

Fisheries and Ocean of Canada. In 

addition, NMFS proposes to exclude 

GOM cod from any increase in the 

carry-over provision due to the results 

of a new stock assessment (SAW 53, 

2012; copies available from NMFS, see 

ADDRESSES), which determined that 

GOM cod is overfished, overfishing is 

occurring, and is in poor condition; 

thus, raising concern about the longterm health of this stock. 

The preliminary ACE carryover 

analysis considered seven groundfish 

stocks, representing a broad range of life 

spans and growth rates. A deterministic 

model was used to evaluate the effect of 

different percentages of ACE carryover 

on fishing mortality in the following 

year. The primary constraint on the 

model was that the percentage of ACE 

carryover could not allow overfishing in 

the following year. Despite a wide range 

of differences in biology among the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8794 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

stocks, the maximum carryover 

percentage was little affected by these 

differences. Instead, the primary factor 

affecting the maximum carryover 

percentage was the relationship between 

the ABC and the overfishing threshold 

in the following year. The NE 

multispecies FMP sets the ABC based 

on the target rate for fishing mortality 

being 75% of the mortality rate that 

would achieve maximum sustainable 

yield (Fmsy). If the actual fishing 

mortality rate in the following year is 

near the target fishing mortality rate 

(75% of Fmsy), then the maximum ACE 

carryover could be about 28 percent to 

30 percent, while avoiding overfishing. 

The analysis further indicates that 

carryover at 28 percent to 30 percent 

would not undermine rebuilding 

programs or stock health, again, 

provided the actual fishing mortality 

rate does not exceed the target fishing 

mortality rate. 

NMFS provided the analysis to the 

Council with a request that its Scientific 

and Statistical Committee (SSC) review 

it. In a letter dated January 20, 2012, the 

Council raised a number of questions 

about the preliminary analysis and the 

legality of such carryovers in light of 

Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements. 

These questions included: 

1. Is it consistent with the MagnusonStevens Act to allow carryover that 

results in allocating an amount of fish 

greater than the ABC? 

2. Is it consistent with the National 

Standards Guidelines to allow a 

carryover amount that reduces the 

amount of uncertainty buffer between 

the overfishing level and the ABC to 

zero without explicit concurrence of the 

SSC? 

3. How does the variable recruitment 

of rebuilding stocks affect the analysis’ 

assumptions about allowable ACE 

carryover? 

4. If carryover allows catches to 

exceed the ABC for a rebuilding 

program, how is the rebuilding program 

affected? 

5. If a stock ABC is declining, 

carryover may result in allocating an 

amount of fish greater than the overfishing limit. Is this consistent with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act? 

6. Does a declining ABC affect the 

amount of permissible ACE carryover? 

and, 

7. Do fluctuations in ABC need to be 

considered in setting permissible ACE 

carryover levels? 

NMFS will consider any input from 

the SSC, if received in a timely manner, 

and the questions raised by the Council, 

to help determining whether increased 

carryover is justified for FY 2012 and, 

if so, at what level it should be set so 

that carryover does not result in 

overfishing, impede rebuilding 

objectives, or threaten the health of the 

stock, and otherwise satisfy the legal 

requirements for setting ABCs and 

ACLs. NMFS invites comments on the 

requests for additional carryover, 

including the preliminary analysis 

described above and the issues raised by 

the Council. 

21. ACE Buffer Provision 

Amendment 16 implemented the ACE 

buffer provision to ensure that each 

sector would have 20 percent of its ACE 

available to account for any potential 

overage from the previous year. At the 

beginning of each FY, NMFS withholds 

20 percent of a sector’s ACE for each 

stock for up to 61 days (i.e., through 

June 30), or longer 

(§ 648.87(b)(1)(iii)(C)). This hold gives 

NMFS time to finalize sector catch and 

ACE trades that take place after the end 

of the FY, and to apply any overage 

penalties to a sector that exceeded its 

ACE. Sectors are requesting to be 

exempted from this 20-percent ACE 

buffer restriction when a sector manager 

reports that the sector has not exceeded 

any of its ACE. Sectors seek to increase 

operational flexibility and efficiency to 

bring additional revenue into the sector. 

NMFS has some concern with this 

request because it has no ability to 

verify whether a sector manager’s report 

is accurate until the annual 

reconciliation process, as discussed 

above, is complete. Therefore, sectors 

could potentially exceed their ACE in a 

subsequent FY after an overage before 

the second year’s ACE is reduced by the 

first year’s overage. For example, if a 

sector was allocated 100 mt of a stock 

in year 1, but caught 120 mt, the sector 

would be required to pay back 20 mt in 

year two. However, if the sector fished 

its complete allocation for year 2 before 

NMFS discovered the overage from year 

1, the sector would then have overfished 

the reduced year 2 allocation. 

22. 6.5-Inch (16.5-Cm) Minimum Mesh 

Size Requirement for Trawl Nets 

Minimum mesh sizes were initially 

adopted through interim rules in 2001 

and 2002 (67 FR 21140, April 29, 2002; 

67 FR 50292, August 1, 2002), and made 

permanent through Amendment 13. FW 

42 further modified the mesh 

regulations in the SNE and MA RMAs 

to reduce discards of yellowtail 

flounder. The regulations at § 648.80 

specify the minimum mesh size that 

may be used in fishing nets on vessels 

fishing in the GOM, GB, SNE, and MA 

RMAs. Minimum mesh size restrictions 

have been used with other management 

measures to reduce overall mortality on 

groundfish stocks, as well as to reduce 

discarding, and improve survival, of 

sub-legal groundfish. These 

requirements were intended to protect 

spawning fish and increase the size of 

targeted fish. 

This exemption would allow sector 

vessels to use 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh 

codends on trawl nets to target redfish. 

The exemption is intended to increase 

the catch rate of redfish. The requesting 

sectors argue that this exemption could 

increase the operational flexibility of 

sector vessels and could increase profit 

margins of sector fishermen. 

The sectors making the request have 

proposed that sector vessels 

participating in the directed redfish 

fishery be required to declare their 

intentions to the Sector Manager and 

NMFS at least 48 hr prior to departure, 

and that at-sea monitors be present on 

all trips using this exemption to monitor 

catch and bycatch. In addition, daily 

catch reports will be submitted to the 

Sector Manager to ensure that all catch 

is harvested within the sector’s ACE. 

The exemption is intended to retain a 

greater proportion of redfish in the trawl 

codend. 

This exemption is similar to 

exemptions requested and denied in 

previous years. This exemption could 

result in greater retention of sub-legal 

groundfish, as well as non-allocated 

species and bycatch. Habitat could also 

be negatively impacted due to the 

anticipated increased use of trawl gear. 

Should an exemption from minimum 

mesh size restrictions increase sub-legal 

groundfish bycatch by sector vessels, 

juvenile escapement, stock age 

structure, and overall mortality 

reduction objectives could be 

undermined. An exemption could raise 

additional equity concerns if sub-legal 

bycatch triggered management actions 

affecting the entire fishery, including 

non-sector vessels. Furthermore, an 

exemption from minimum mesh size 

restrictions could be difficult to enforce 

at-sea, because it would require 

enforcement personnel to differentiate 

the appropriate mesh size applicable to 

exempt vessels from that applicable to 

non-exempt vessels. 

NMFS is currently funding a study 

through the Northeast Cooperative 

Research Partners Program to investigate 

strategies and methods to sustainably 

harvest the redfish resource in the GOM 

through a network approach, including 

fishing enterprises, gear manufacturers, 

researchers, social and economic 

experts, and managers. This approach 

will include investigating success of 

various mesh sizes within the fishery. 

Given that the use of this smaller mesh 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8795 

could negatively impact spawning fish 

and populations of flounders, which the 

current minimum mesh sizes were 

intended to protect, NMFS has 

reservations about approving this 

exemption, until the results from this 

study can be considered. 

23. Minimum Fish Size Provisions for 

Haddock 

Commercial haddock catch must 

measure a minimum of 18 inches (45.7 

cm) to be retained by a vessel 

(§ 648.83(a)(1)). This restriction includes 

whole fish or any part of a fish while 

possessed on board a vessel, with the 

exception of a small amount of fish (up 

to 25 lb (11.3 kg)) that each person on 

board may retain for at-home 

consumption (§ 648.83(a)(2)). The 18- 

inch (45.7-cm) minimum size for 

haddock was first implemented by an 

interim action in 2009 (74 FR 17030, 

April 13, 2009). This was a reduction 

from the previous minimum size of 19 

inches (48.3 cm), designed to reduce 

discards and increase yield. The 18-inch 

(45.7-cm) minimum size was made 

permanent by Amendment 16. 

Sectors requested an exemption from 

the minimum size regulation so they 

could land headed and gutted haddock 

that are less than 18 inches (45.7-cm) as 

a value-added product. This exemption 

would simply allow legal-sized fish that 

were previously landed whole to be 

landed headed, or headed and gutted. 

There would be no change to the actual 

size composition of the catch. 

Regulations similar to this exist in other 

fisheries, such as monkfish. These 

fisheries use a conversion ratio to 

account for size and/or weight 

differences. If approved, NMFS would 

need to develop a ratio to account for 

the size/weight differences for haddock 

landed headed and/or headed and 

gutted. Allowing this exemption could 

present significant enforcement issues 

by allowing different legal minimum 

fish sizes at sea. 

24. Prohibition on a Vessel Hauling 

Another Vessel’s Hook Gear 

Current regulations prohibit one 

vessel from hauling another vessel’s 

hook gear (§§ 648.14(k)(6)(ii)(B)). No 

provisions exist in the regulations 

allowing for multiple vessels to haul the 

same gear. The regulations facilitate the 

enforcement of existing hook 

regulations created as mortality 

controls, because a single vessel is 

associated with each set of gear. Sectors 

have requested an exemption from this 

prohibition to allow fishermen from 

within the same sector to haul each 

other’s hook gear. All vessels 

participating in ‘‘community’’ fixed gear 

would be jointly liable for any 

violations associated with that gear. 

This joint liability would assist in the 

enforcement of regulations. The 

increased flexibility afforded by this 

exemption could increase efficiency. 

25. Requirement To Declare Intent To 

Fish in the Eastern U.S./Canada SAP 

and the CA II Yellowtail Flounder/ 

Haddock SAP Prior To Leaving the Dock 

NE multispecies vessels are required 

to declare that they will be fishing in 

either the Eastern US/CA Haddock SAP 

or the CA II Yellowtail Flounder/ 

Haddock SAP prior to leaving the dock 

(§ 648.85(b)(8)(v)(D) and 

§ 648.85(b)(3)(v)). Framework 40A 

implemented this measure so that 

vessels fishing exclusively in those 

areas could be credited DAS for their 

transit time to and from these SAPs. 

Sectors are requesting an exemption 

from having to declare their intent to 

fish in those areas prior to departing the 

dock because they are no longer limited 

by NE multispecies DAS and their catch 

is limited to their ACE. Sectors seek to 

increase their efficiency with this 

exemption. 

Requested Exemptions We Propose To 

Deny Because They Are Prohibited 

Amendment 16 contains several 

‘‘universal’’ exemptions applicable to all 

sectors and authorized sectors to request 

additional exemptions from NE 

multispecies regulations through their 

sector operations plans. However, 

Amendment 16 also prohibits sectors 

from requesting exemptions from yearround closed areas, permitting 

restrictions, gear restrictions designed to 

minimize habitat impacts, and reporting 

requirements (excluding DAS reporting 

requirements or DSM requirements). 

Exemptions were requested by several 

sectors that are specifically prohibited 

(e.g., access to permanent closed areas) 

or that fall outside of the NE 

multispecies regulations (e.g., Eastern 

U.S./Canada in-season actions). 

In a letter dated September 1, 2010, 

NMFS notified the Council that NMFS 

interprets the reporting requirement 

exemption prohibition broadly to apply 

to all monitoring requirements, 

including ASM, DSM, ACE monitoring, 

and the counting of discards against 

sector ACE. In this letter (copies are 

available from NMFS, see ADDRESSES), 

NMFS also requested that the Council 

define which regulations sectors may 

not be exempted from. On November 18, 

2010, the Council addressed this letter 

by voting to include in FW 45 the 

removal of DSM from the list of 

regulations that sectors may not be 

exempted from, but did not take such 

action for ASM, ACE monitoring, VTR 

regulations, or counting of discards 

against ACE. 

We propose denying, and do not 

analyze in the EA, exemptions from the 

following 13 requirements because they 

are prohibited: (26) Year-round access to 

the Cashes Ledge Closure Area; (27) 

year-round access to CA I; (28) yearround access to CA II; (29) year-round 

access to the Western GOM Closure 

Area; (30) from extrapolation of 

discarded fish pieces across strata; (31) 

authorization to use video monitoring in 

place of ASM; (32) from hail 

requirements; (33) year-round access to 

the Eastern U.S./Canada Area; (34) from 

ASM for sector vessels; (35) from ASM 

for trips targeting dogfish; (36) from 

ASM for hook-only and Handgear A 

vessels; (37) from ASM for extra-large 

mesh gillnet vessels; and (38) from the 

ASM standard for random trip selection. 

Requested Exemptions We Propose To 

Deny Because They Were Previously 

Rejected and No New Information Was 

Provided 

We propose denying exemptions from 

the following 8 requirements because 

they were previously rejected and 

sectors provided no new information in 

support: (39) Minimum fish sizes, to 

allow 100-percent retention; (40) 

minimum fish sizes, to retain 12-inch 

(30.5-cm) yellowtail flounder; (41) that 

VMS messages be sent directly to 

NMFS; (42) weekly catch report 

requirements; (43) no pair trawling; (44) 

minimum hook size; (45) 6.5-inch (16.5- 

cm) minimum mesh size for trawls to 

allow 5-inch (12.7-cm) mesh when 

targeting redfish; and (46) submitting a 

roster by the deadline. Exemptions 39 

through 46 are not analyzed in the EA 

because no new information was 

available to change the analyses 

previously published in past EAs. The 

details of these exemption requests, 

analysis of these exemptions, and the 

reasons they were previously denied are 

contained in the final rules approving 

sectors for FYs 2010 and 2011, and their 

accompanying EAs. The requesting 

sectors have provided no new 

information, justification, rationale, or 

mitigation to address these concerns. 

Accordingly, we proposed to deny these 

exemptions in this rule. 

Requested Exemptions We Proposed To 

Deny Because They May Jeopardize 

Rebuilding of the GOM Cod Stock 

We propose denying exemptions from 

the following 3 requirements because 

they may jeopardize rebuilding of the 

GOM cod stock, which a new stock 

assessment has determined is overfished 

and experiencing overfishing: (47) April 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8796 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

GOM Rolling Closure Area; (48) May 

GOM Rolling Closure Area; and (49) 

June GOM Rolling Closure Area. 

NMFS denied requests for additional 

exemptions from GOM Rolling Closure 

Areas in FYs 2010 and 2011 because of 

concerns that directly targeting 

spawning aggregations can adversely 

impact the reproductive potential of a 

stock, as opposed to post-spawning 

mortality. In addition, those requests 

were disapproved because the existing 

GOM Rolling Closure Areas provide 

some protection to harbor porpoise and 

other marine mammals. 

In response to requests for additional 

exemptions from GOM Rolling Closure 

Areas (including new exemption 

requests that would exclude gillnet gear) 

and discussions about increasing access 

to these areas at the Council’s Lessons 

Learned Sector Workshop, the Regional 

Administrator considered proposing 

partial exemption from some of the 

closures as a short-term solution while 

the Council considered the long-term 

future of these closures as part of the 

pending omnibus habitat amendment. 

Options considered for possible 

exemptions would have required trawl 

vessels to use selective trawl gears, 

excluded gillnet gear, and prohibited 

hook gear from using squid or mackerel 

as bait. However, given the new status 

of the GOM cod stock, no additional 

exemptions from the GOM RCAs are 

proposed in this rule. 

Deadline To Join a Sector for FY 2012 

The regulations currently provide that 

each sector must submit a final roster to 

NMFS by December 1, prior to the FY 

in which the sector intends to begin 

operations, unless otherwise instructed 

by NMFS. The deadline for FY 2012 was 

previously announced as December 1, 

2011, or April 30, 2012, for permits that 

changed ownership after December 1. 

NMFS is extending the FY 2012 sector 

roster deadline for all permits through 

April 30, 2012. This opportunity is 

being provided to address concerns 

raised at the January 31–February 2, 

2012, Council meeting regarding the 

recent GOM cod assessment and the 

potential disproportional impacts on the 

inshore GOM fleet due to the common 

pool trimester quotas that go into effect 

on May 1, 2012. The GOM cod stock 

assessment was not available before the 

December 1 deadline and indicates the 

need for a significant reduction in the 

ACL for this stock. Because permit 

holders were not aware of this 

significant reduction before the 

deadline, NMFS has determined that 

extending the deadline is appropriate to 

allow these vessels to reconsider 

whether to join a sector in light of the 

new assessment. Please note, however, 

that it is at the sector’s discretion as to 

whether it will allow new members to 

join their sector for FY 2012. 

Sector EA 

The Administrative Procedure Act (5 

U.S.C. 553) requires advance notice of 

rulemaking and opportunity for public 

comment. NMFS is providing a 15-day 

comment period for this rule. A longer 

comment period would be impracticable 

and contrary to the public interest 

because a final rule must be published 

prior to the start of FY 2012 on May 1. 

Vessels enrolled in a sector may not fish 

in FY 2012 unless their sector 

operations plan is approved. Therefore, 

if the final rule is not published prior to 

May 1, the permits enrolled in sectors 

must either stop fishing until their 

operations plan is approved, or elect to 

fish in the common pool for the entirety 

of FY 2012. Both of these options would 

have negative impacts for the permits 

enrolled in the sectors. 

In order to comply with NEPA, one 

EA was prepared encompassing all 19 

operations plans. The sector EA is tiered 

from the Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) prepared for 

Amendment 16. The EA examines the 

biological, economic, and social impacts 

unique to each sector’s proposed 

operations, including requested 

exemptions, and provides a cumulative 

effects analysis (CEA) that addresses the 

combined impact of the direct and 

indirect effects of approving all 

proposed sector operations plans. The 

summary findings of the EA conclude 

that each sector would produce similar 

effects that have non-significant 

impacts. Visit http:// 

www.regulations.gov to view the EA 

prepared for the 19 sectors that this rule 

proposes to approve. 

Classification 

Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), the NMFS 

Assistant Administrator has determined 

that this proposed rule is consistent 

with the NE Multispecies FMP, other 

provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, and other applicable law, subject to 

further consideration after public 

comment. 

This action is exempt from review 

under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866. 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 

5 U.S.C. 601–612, requires agencies to 

assess the economic impacts of their 

proposed regulations on small entities. 

The objective of the RFA is to consider 

the impacts of a rulemaking on small 

entities, and the capacity of those 

affected by regulations to bear the direct 

and indirect costs of regulation. Size 

standards have been established for all 

for-profit economic activities or 

industries in the North American 

Industry Classification System. The SBA 

defines a small business in the 

commercial fishing and recreational 

fishing sector, as a firm with receipts 

(gross revenues) of up to $4 million. 

An Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (IRFA) has been prepared, as 

required by section 603 of the RFA. The 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(FRFA) will be prepared after the 

comment period for this proposed rule, 

and will be published with the final 

rule. The IRFA describes the economic 

impact that this proposed rule, if 

adopted, would have on small entities. 

The IRFA consists of this section, the 

SUMMARY section of the preamble of this 

proposed rule, and the EA prepared for 

this action. A description of the action, 

why it is being considered, and the legal 

basis for this action are contained in the 

preamble to this proposed rule and in 

Sections 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 of the EA 

prepared for this action, and is not 

repeated here. A summary of the 

analysis follows. A copy of this analysis 

is available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

This action will likely affect 843 

entities, which represents the number of 

permits enrolled in sectors that have 

requested additional exemptions. Each 

of these permits would be considered a 

small entity, based on the definition as 

stated above. The economic impact 

resulting from this action on these small 

entities is positive, since the action, if 

implemented, would provide additional 

operational flexibility to vessels 

participating in NE multispecies sectors 

for FY 2012. In addition, this action 

would further mitigate negative impacts 

from the implementation of Amendment 

16, FW 44, and FW 45, which have 

placed additional effort restrictions on 

the groundfish fleet. 

Description of the Reasons Why Action 

by Agency Is Being Considered 

The flexibility afforded sectors 

includes exemptions from certain 

specified regulations as well as the 

ability to request additional exemptions. 

Sector members no longer have 

groundfish catch limited by DAS 

allocations and are instead limited by 

their available ACE. In this manner, the 

economic incentive changes from 

maximizing the value of throughput of 

all species on a DAS to maximizing the 

value of the sector ACE, which places a 

premium on timing landings to market 

conditions, as well as changes in the 

selectivity and composition of species 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8797 

landed on fishing trips. Further 

description of the purpose and need for 

the proposed action is contained in 

Section 2.0 of the EA prepared for this 

action. 

Over the past decade, there has been 

a significant amount of consolidation in 

the NE groundfish fishery in response to 

management measures to end 

overfishing of, and to rebuild, 

groundfish stocks. The number of active 

vessels steadily declined during the 

period 2007–2010. The number of active 

groundfish vessels making any fishing 

trips declined by 16.8 percent between 

2007 (1,082 vessels) and 2010 (900 

vessels). A 7.5-percent decline (i.e., 73 

vessels) occurred between 2009 and 

2010. Similarly, from 2007 to 2010 there 

was a 31.6-percent decline in the 

number vessels making at least one 

groundfish trip (658 to 450), with a 

20.5% reduction (116 vessels) between 

2009 and 2010. It is not possible to 

reliably identify the cause for the 

reduction in the number of active 

vessels that has been occurring for a 

number of years, including before 2007. 

Amendment 13 implemented DAS 

leasing and transfer programs, allowing 

vessels to fish the DAS of multiple other 

vessels. Amendment 16 implemented a 

number of measures that facilitated the 

consolidation of fishing effort to fewer 

active fishing vessels as a means to 

reduce the operational expenses for 

owners of multiple permits. For 

example, that action allows owners of 

permits held in CPH and not associated 

with an actual fishing vessel to 

participate in sectors (i.e., contribute the 

CPH’s landing history to calculate a 

sector’s yearly allocation of ACE) and 

lease DAS. Further, it is not possible to 

identify the extent to which inactive 

vessels in sectors may benefit if other 

sector vessels harvest their allocation. 

In 2010, 447 vessels (33 percent) were 

inactive (no landings). Of these inactive 

vessels, 296 were sector vessels and 151 

were common pool vessels. The number 

of inactive vessels in 2010 can be 

compared to the number of inactive 

vessels in other years: 331 vessels (32 

percent) in 2007, 398 vessels (28 

percent) in 2008, and 408 vessels (30 

percent) in 2009. Some vessel inactivity 

may be due to participation in DAS 

leasing or transfer programs and/or 

internal sector management decisions. 

Data are not currently available to 

evaluate how inactive vessels in sectors 

may have benefited from agreeing to 

have other vessels catch the sector’s 

allocation. 

The recent implementation of ACLs 

and accountability measures (AM), and 

the expanded use of sectors under 

Amendment 16, has affected fishing 

patterns in ways that cannot yet be 

quantified and analyzed. Sector 

measures were intended to provide a 

mechanism for vessels to pool 

harvesting resources and consolidate 

operations in fewer vessels, if desired, 

and to provide a mechanism for 

capacity reduction through 

consolidation. Reasons why fewer 

vessels fished in FY 2010, in 

comparison to FY 2009, may be related 

to owners with multiple vessels fishing 

fewer vessels. It is also likely that some 

vessels that have not landed groundfish 

have received revenue from leasing their 

groundfish allocation or have been 

fishing in other fisheries. Thus, fewer 

vessels are actively fishing for, and 

landing, regulated species and ocean 

pout, with 10 percent of the fishing 

vessels earning more than half of the 

revenues from such stocks since 2005, 

leading to a seemingly continuing trend 

of consolidation in the fishery. 

However, this trend began before the 

implementation and expansion of the 

sector program, and based on limited 

data available to date, the trend is not 

significantly out of proportion to FYs 

prior to the expansion of sector 

management by Amendment 16. 

The Objectives and Legal Basis for the 

Proposed Action 

The objective of the proposed action 

is to authorize the operations of 19 

sectors in FY 2012, and to allow the 

benefits of sector operations to accrue to 

843 permits enrolled in sectors and the 

New England communities where they 

dock and land. The legal basis for the 

proposed action is the NE Multispecies 

FMP and promulgating regulations at 

§ 648.87. 

Estimate of the Number of Small 

Entities 

The SBA size standard for commercial 

fishing (North American Industry 

Classification System code 114111) is $4 

million in annual sales. Available data 

indicate that, based on 2005–2007 

average conditions, median gross annual 

sales by commercial fishing vessels 

were just over $200,000, and no single 

fishing entity earned more than $2 

million annually. Although NMFS 

acknowledges there may be entities that, 

based on rules of affiliation, would 

qualify as large business entities, due to 

lack of reliable ownership affiliation 

data we cannot apply the business size 

standard based on affiliation at this 

time. For this action, since available 

data are not adequate to identify 

affiliated vessels, each operating unit is 

considered a small entity for purposes 

of the RFA, and, therefore, there is no 

differential impact between small and 

large entities. The maximum number of 

entities that could be affected by the 

proposed exemptions is 843 permits— 

the number of vessels enrolled in the 19 

sectors that have submitted an 

operations plan for FY 2012. Since 

individuals may withdraw from a sector 

at any time prior to the beginning of FY 

2012, the number of permits 

participating in sectors on May 1, 2012, 

and the resulting sector ACE allocations, 

are likely to change. Additionally, new 

permit holders who acquire their 

permits through an ownership change 

that occurred after December 1, 2011, 

may enroll their permit in a sector or 

change the permit’s sector affiliation 

through April 30, 2012. 

Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 

Compliance Requirements 

This proposed rule contains no 

collection-of-information requirement 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

The proposed action reduces reporting 

requirements compared to the no-action 

alternative. Exemptions implemented 

through this action would be 

documented in a LOA issued to each 

vessel participating in an approved 

sector. The exemptions from the 20-day 

spawning block and the 120-day gillnet 

block would reduce the reporting 

burden for sector vessels, because 

exemptions from these requirements 

eliminate the need to report the blocks 

to the NMFS Interactive Voice Response 

system. 

Sector vessels receiving an exemption 

from the gillnet limit (up to 150 nets) 

would also be exempt from current 

tagging requirements, and would 

instead be required to tag gillnets with 

one tag per net. Compliance with the 

tagging requirement would not 

necessarily require sector vessels to 

purchase additional net tags, as each 

vessel is already issued up to 150 tags. 

However, sector vessels that have not 

previously purchased the maximum 

number of gillnet tags may find it 

necessary to purchase additional tags to 

comply with this requirement at a cost 

of $1.20 per tag. 

The exemption to allow a vessel to 

haul another vessel’s gillnet gear would 

require each vessel to tag all gear it is 

authorized to haul. Because of the 

existing 150-tag limit, no additional tags 

could be purchased. 

The exemption from the limit on the 

number of hooks does not involve 

reporting requirements, but may result 

in increased costs for hooks and rigging 

(groundline, gangions, anchors) if a 

vessel chooses to increase the amount of 

gear fished. Circle hooks of the legal 

minimum size (12/0) cost about $0.19 

each without rigging. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8798 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

The GOM Sink Gillnet exemption 

does not involve additional reporting 

requirements. However, to fully utilize 

this exemption, sector vessels would 

need to purchase 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh 

gillnet nets. At the time this IRFA was 

prepared, no cost information was 

available for a 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh 

gillnet panel. However, the cost of a 6.5- 

inch (16.5-cm) mesh 300-ft (91.4-m) 

gillnet panel, complete with floats and 

break-away links, is estimated at $310. 

The quantity of 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh 

gillnets purchased by a vessel to 

participate in this program would 

depend on the vessel’s gillnet 

designation (a Day gillnet vessel would 

have a 150-net limit) and the perceived 

economic benefits of utilizing the 

exemption, which may be based on 

market conditions. 

Exempting sectors from the 

requirement to submit a daily catch 

report for all vessels participating in the 

CA I Hook Gear Haddock SAP will not 

change the reporting burden of 

individual participating vessels, as the 

vessels would merely change the 

recipient of their current daily report. 

Other exemptions proposed in this 

action involve no additional reporting 

requirements. Sector reporting and 

recordkeeping regulations do not 

exempt participants from state and 

Federal reporting and recordkeeping, 

but are mandated above and beyond 

current state and Federal requirements. 

A full list of compliance, recording, and 

recordkeeping requirements can be 

found in the final rules implementing 

Amendment 16, each approved FY 2011 

sector operations plan, and in the draft 

FY 2012 sector operations plans. 

Duplication, Overlap or Conflict With 

Other Federal Rules 

The proposed action is authorized by 

the regulations implementing the NE 

Multispecies FMP. It does not duplicate, 

overlap, or conflict with other Federal 

rules. 

Alternatives Which Minimize Any 

Significant Economic Impact of 

Proposed Action on Small Entities 

The proposed action would create a 

positive economic impact for the 

participating sector vessels because it 

would mitigate the impacts from 

restrictive management measures 

implemented under NE Multispecies 

FMP. Little quantitative data on the 

precise economic impacts to individual 

vessels is available. The 2010 Final 

Report on the Performance of the 

Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) 

Fishery (May 2010–April 2011) (copies 

are available from NMFS, see 

ADDRESSES) documents that all 

measures of gross revenue per trip and 

per day absent in 2010 were higher for 

the average sector vessel and lower for 

the average common pool vessel. 

However, the report stipulates this 

comparison is not useful for evaluating 

the relative performance of DAS and 

sector–based management because of 

fundamental differences between these 

groups of vessels, which were not 

accounted for in the analyses. 

Accordingly, quantitative analysis of the 

impacts of sector operations plans is 

still limited. NMFS anticipates that by 

switching from effort controls of the 

common pool regime to operating under 

a sector ACE, sector members will 

remain economically viable while 

adjusting to changing economic and 

fishing conditions. Thus, the proposed 

action provides benefits to sector 

members that they would not have 

under the No Action Alternative. 

Economic Impacts on Small Entities 

Resulting From Proposed Action 

The EIS for Amendment 16 compares 

economic impacts of sector vessels with 

common pool vessels and analyzes costs 

and benefits of the universal 

exemptions. The final rule for the 

approval of the FY 2010 sector 

operations plans and contracts (75 FR 

18113, April 9, 2010) and its 

accompanying EAs discussed the 

economic impacts of the exemptions 

requested by sectors that year. The final 

rule for the supplemental sector rule (75 

FR 80720, December 23, 2010) and its 

accompanying supplemental EA 

discussed the impacts of additional 

exemptions requested by sectors. The 

final rule for the approval of the FY 

2011 sector operations plans and 

contracts (76 FR 23076, April 25, 2011) 

and its accompanying EA discussed the 

economic impacts of the exemptions 

requested by sectors that year. 

The EA prepared for this rule 

evaluates the impacts of each exemption 

individually relative to the no-action 

alternative (i.e., no sectors are 

approved), and the exemptions may be 

approved or disapproved individually 

or as a group. The impacts associated 

with the implementation of each of the 

exemptions proposed in this rule are 

analyzed as if each exemption would be 

implemented for all sectors; however, 

each exemption will only be 

implemented for the sector(s) which 

requested that exemption. 

Increased ‘‘operational flexibility’’ 

generally has positive impacts on 

human communities as sectors and their 

associated exemptions grant fishermen 

some measure of increased operational 

flexibility. By removing the limitations 

on vessel effort (amount of gear used, 

number of days declared out of fishery, 

trip limits and area closures) sectors 

help create a more simplified regulatory 

environment. This simplified regulatory 

environment grants fishers greater 

control over how, when, and where they 

fish, without working under 

increasingly complex fishing regulations 

with higher risk of inadvertently 

violating one of the many regulations. 

The increased control granted by the 

sectors and their associated exemptions 

may also allow fishermen to maximize 

the ex-vessel price of landings by timing 

them based on the market. Generally, 

increased operational flexibility can 

result in reduced costs and/or increased 

revenues. All exemptions contained in 

the proposed FY 2012 sector operations 

plans are expected to generate positive 

social and economic effects for sector 

members and ports. In general, profits 

can be increased by increasing revenues 

or decreasing costs. Similarly, profits 

decrease when revenues decline or costs 

rise. The following discussion 

concentrates on cost and revenues in 

order to focus on the mechanism by 

which profits are expected to change 

due to the exemptions granted by this 

action. 

Exemption From the Day Gillnet 120- 

Day Block Out of the Fishery 

Existing regulations require that 

vessels using gillnet gear remove all 

gillnet gear from the water for 120 days 

per year. Under an output-control 

management system, this type of input 

control is unnecessary. Many affected 

vessel owners have purchased 

additional vessels in order to be able to 

fish continuously. The exemption from 

the 120-day block allows sector 

members to reduce costs by retiring the 

redundant vessel. Furthermore, this 

exemption may allow sector vessels to 

take advantage of other exemptions, 

such as the exemption from the GB 

Seasonal Closure in May and portions of 

the GOM Rolling Closure Areas. 

Exemption From the 20-Day Spawning 

Block Out of the Fishery 

Exemption from the 20-day spawning 

block would improve operational 

flexibility by allowing participants to 

match trip planning decisions to 

environmental and economic 

conditions. The increased operational 

flexibility may result in higher revenues 

(improved timing of delivery to market) 

or lower costs for participating vessels. 

Exemption From the Limit on the 

Number of Nets for Day Gillnet Vessels 

This exemption would increase 

operational flexibility by allowing 

participating sector members to deploy 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 8799 

fishing gear according to operational 

and market needs. The increased 

flexibility is likely to result in higher 

revenues or lower costs for participating 

vessels. 

Exemption From the Prohibition on a 

Vessel Hauling Another Vessels’ Gillnet 

Gear 

This community fixed-gear exemption 

would allow sector vessels in the Day 

gillnet category to share gillnet gear. 

This exemption would reduce the total 

amount of gear that would have to be 

purchased and maintained by 

participating sector members, resulting 

in lower costs and possibly lower 

amount of gear fished. 

Exemption From the Limitation on the 

Number of Gillnets That May Be Hauled 

on GB When Fishing Under a 

Groundfish/Monkfish DAS 

This exemption would increase 

operational flexibility by allowing a 

sector vessel to haul its monkfish 

gillnets and groundfish gillnets on the 

same trip. This exemption may reduce 

costs for these sector participants. 

Exemption From the Limitation on the 

Number of Hooks That May Be Fished 

This exemption would increase 

operational flexibility by allowing 

operators to adapt to environmental and 

economic conditions. This exemption 

may result in higher revenues or 

reduced costs. 

Exemption From DAS Leasing Program 

Length and Horsepower Restrictions 

This exemption would increase 

operational flexibility by allowing 

participating sector members to deploy 

fishing gear according to operational 

and market needs. The increased 

operational flexibility is likely to result 

in either higher revenues or lower costs 

for participating vessels. Because DAS 

are no required while fishing for 

groundfish, vessels participating in 

other fisheries (e.g., monkfish) which 

require the use of DAS are likely to be 

positively impacted by this exemption. 

GOM Sink Gillnet Exemption (January 

Through April) 

This exemption would allow sector 

members to use 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh 

gillnets in the GOM RMA from January 

1, 2013, through April 30, 2013. This 

exemption will allow participating 

sector vessels to retain more GOM 

haddock and increase revenues. To take 

advantage of this exemption, 

participating sector vessels would need 

to purchase 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh 

gillnets; however, this gear change 

would be voluntary and the gear would 

be adopted only if the vessels 

anticipated positive returns from the 

switch. In FY 2010, 34.7 percent of the 

available GOM haddock ACE was not 

caught. 

GOM Sink Gillnet Exemption (May) 

This exemption would allow vessels 

to use 6-inch mesh gillnets in the GOM 

RMA from May 1, 2012, through May 

31, 2012. This exemption will allow 

participating sector vessels to retain 

more GOM haddock and increase 

revenues. To take advantage of this 

exemption, participating sector vessels 

will need to purchase 6-inch mesh 

gillnets; however, this gear change 

would be voluntary and this gear would 

be adopted only if anticipated higher 

profits. In FY 2010, 34.7% of the 

available GOM haddock ACE was not 

caught. 

Exemption From Prohibition of 

Discarding Legal-Size Allocated Species 

Sector vessels are required to retain 

legal-size unmarketable fish, which 

must be stored on the vessel while at 

sea. This requirement may create unsafe 

work conditions and reduce safety at 

sea. In addition, sector vessels must 

determine a method of disposal for 

landed unmarketable fish. An 

exemption from this regulation would 

allow sector vessels to discard 

unmarketable fish, increasing flexibility, 

improving safety conditions at sea, and 

reducing costs associated with 

disposing of the landed unmarketable 

fish. 

Exemption From the Requirement That 

the Sector Manager Submit Daily Catch 

Reports for the CA I Hook Gear Haddock 

SAP 

Eliminating the daily catch reporting 

by sector managers would reduce the 

administrative burden on the sector 

managers. The reporting burden of 

individual participating vessels remains 

unchanged. In addition to reducing 

administrative burden, this exemption 

may result in slightly lower operating 

costs for sectors. 

Exemption From the Trawl Gear 

Requirements in the U.S./Canada 

Management Area 

This exemption would allow the use 

of any groundfish trawl gear, rather than 

approved conservation gears, provided 

the gear conforms to regulatory 

requirements for using trawl gear to fish 

for groundfish in the GB RMA. This 

exemption would result in greater 

operational flexibility to participating 

sector vessels. This increased 

operational flexibility may translate into 

lower costs if vessels can reduce the 

amount of gear, effort or type of gear 

necessary to catch groundfish in the 

U.S./Canada Management Area. 

Exemption From the Requirement To 

Power a VMS While at the Dock 

Maintaining a VMS signal while at the 

dock, or tied to a mooring, requires 

constant power be delivered to the 

vessel or constant use of onboard 

generators. This exemption will reduce 

the operating costs for fishing 

operations and would result in some 

improved profitability. 

Exemption From DSM Requirements for 

Handgear A-Permitted Sector Vessels, 

Vessels Fishing West of 72°30′ W. Long., 

and Vessels on Monkfish DAS When 

Using 10-Inch (25.4-cm) or Greater Mesh 

in the Monkfish SFMA 

FW 45 revised DSM requirements and 

stipulated that sectors must comply 

with any DSM program specified by 

NMFS in FY 2012. For FY 2012 there is 

no required DSM coverage because 

NMFS will not be funding DSM. This 

exemption would reduce the regulatory 

cost and burden of any DSM coverage 

level above zero. The vessels qualifying 

for these exemptions generally are the 

smallest operations, or have the smallest 

amount of groundfish catch, and so 

would otherwise be disproportionately 

burdened compared to larger operations. 

Exemption From Seasonal Restriction 

for the Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock 

SAP 

The Eastern U.S./Canada Haddock 

SAP was implemented by FW 40A in 

2004 to provide an opportunity to target 

haddock. In 2006, FW 42 shortened the 

season of this SAP to August 1 through 

December 31 to reduce cod catch. For 

sector vessels, the SAP provides access 

to the northern tip of CA II, which may 

increase haddock catch and revenue for 

fishermen. 

Exemption From Seasonal Restriction 

for the CA II Yellowtail Flounder/ 

Haddock SAP 

The CA II Yellowtail Flounder/ 

Haddock SAP was implemented by 

Amendment 13 in 2004 to provide an 

opportunity to target yellowtail flounder 

in CA II. In 2005, FW 40B shortened the 

season of this SAP to July 1 through 

December 31 to reduce interference with 

spawning yellowtail flounder. 

Amendment 16 further revised this SAP 

to allow participating vessels to target 

haddock from August 1 through January 

31. This exemption would increase a 

sector’s operational flexibility and 

efficiency by allowing the opportunity 

to fish year-round in the SAP area. It 

could allow for a greater catch of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8800 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

haddock and increased revenues for 

fishermen. 

Exemption From the Prohibition on 

Fishing Inside and Outside the CA I 

Hook Gear Haddock SAP While on the 

Same Trip 

FW 40A established the CA I Hook 

Gear Haddock SAP. Multispecies 

vessels fishing on a trip within this SAP 

are prohibited from deploying fishing 

gear outside of the SAP on the same trip 

when they are declared into the SAP. 

This exemption would increase 

operational flexibility by allowing sector 

vessels to fish both inside and outside 

the SAP on the same trip. This 

exemption would reduce costs by 

reducing the amount of travel time to 

haul gear in the SAP and in other areas. 

Exemption From the Maximum ACE 

Carryover Provision 

Each sector is allowed to carry over 

up to 10 percent of its original ACE 

allocation of each stock from one fishing 

year to the next, with the exception of 

GB yellowtail flounder, to reduce the 

possibility that a sector may 

accidentally exceed its allocation while 

trying to utilize its entire ACE. Allowing 

sectors to carry over a larger portion of 

their ACE would provide for greater 

operational flexibility in when and how 

they fish during a given fishing year. 

This could increase revenues of sectors 

which frequently catch less than 90% of 

their ACE allocations. 

Exemption From the ACE Buffer 

Provision 

At the beginning of each fishing year, 

NMFS withholds 20 percent of a sector’s 

ACE for each stock for a period of up to 

61 days, or longer. Exemption from this 

provision would increase operational 

flexibility by allowing more ACE to be 

available at the beginning of the fishing 

year. This effect is expected to be 

greatest for stocks which are seasonally 

available early in the fishing year. 

Exemption From the 6.5-Inch (16.5-cm) 

Minimum Mesh Size Requirement for 

Trawl Nets 

This exemption would allow sector 

vessels to use 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh 

codends on trawl nets to target redfish. 

The exemption could increase the 

operational flexibility of sector vessels 

and could increase revenues of sector 

fishermen if they are able to increase the 

catch rate of redfish. 

Exemption From the 18-Inch (45.7-cm) 

Minimum Fish Size Provision for 

Haddock 

This restriction includes whole fish or 

any part of a fish while possessed on 

board a vessel, with the exception of a 

small amount of fish (up to 25 lb (11.3 

kg)) that each person on board may 

retain for at-home consumption. This 

exemption would increase operational 

flexibility by allowing vessels to land 

headed and gutted haddock which are 

less than 18 inches (45.7 cm). Vessels 

would be able to store more fish in the 

hold and may land more edible meat by 

processing and removing undesirable 

parts of the fish at sea. Vessel revenues 

increase if higher prices are received for 

processed fish. However, few vessels are 

currently equipped to take advantage of 

this exemption. Other vessels would 

need to make voluntary upgrades to 

their vessels in order to take advantage 

of this regulation. 

Exemption From the Prohibition on a 

Vessel Hauling Another Vessel’s Hook 

Gear 

This exemption would reduce the 

total amount of gear that would have to 

be purchased and maintained by 

participating sector members, resulting 

in lower costs and a possible reduction 

in total gear fished. 

Exemption From the Requirement To 

Declare Intent To Fish in the Eastern 

U.S./Canada SAP and the CA II 

Yellowtail Flounder/Haddock SAP Prior 

To Leaving the Dock 

Multispecies vessels are currently 

required to declare that they will be 

fishing in the Eastern U.S./CA Haddock 

SAP or the CA II Yellowtail Flounder/ 

Haddock SAP prior to leaving the dock. 

The requested exemption would reduce 

the administrative burden of declaring 

intent to fish and increase operational 

flexibility by allowing the vessel to 

make trip planning decisions while atsea. This exemption could reduce costs 

by reducing the amount of travel time to 

fish in the SAP without first returning 

to port. 

Other Significant Alternatives 

There were several exemptions 

requested by the sectors for FY 2012 

that the regulations implemented by 

Amendment 16 prohibited NMFS from 

considering. NMFS also received 

requests for exemptions that NMFS 

previously disapproved in FY 2010 or 

FY 2011; however, no new data or 

information has become available that 

would convince NMFS to reconsider the 

previously disapproved exemptions 

further in FY 2012. 

Regulations under the MagnusonStevens Act require publication of this 

notification to provide interested parties 

the opportunity to comment on 

proposed sector operations plans and 

TAC allocations. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: February 9, 2012. 

Alan D. Risenhoover, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3565 Filed 2–14–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS