16356 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 

[Docket No. 150122069–5272–01] 

RIN 0648–XD740 

Endangered and Threatened Species; 

90–Day Finding on Two Petitions To 

List Porbeagle Sharks 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: 90-day petition finding; request 

for information. 

SUMMARY: We, NMFS, are accepting two 

2010 petitions to list porbeagle sharks 

(Lamna nasus) on the Federal List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

under the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) of 1973, as amended. This action 

is being taken in response to a December 

12, 2014, U.S. District Court decision 

that our previous rejection of the 

petitions in 2010 was arbitrary and 

capricious. To ensure a comprehensive 

review, we are soliciting scientific and 

commercial data and other information 

relevant to the status of porbeagle sharks 

worldwide. We will publish the results 

of that review and will make a finding 

as to whether the petitioned action is or 

is not warranted on or before December 

12, 2015. 

DATES: Written comments, data and 

information related to this petition 

finding must be received no later than 

5 p.m. local time on May 12, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2015–0013, by either of the 

following methods: 

Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. 

1. Go to www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D= NOAA-NMFS-2015- 

0013, 

2. Click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields 

3. Enter or attach your comments. 

- OR - 

Mail: Submit written comments to 

Assistant Regional Administrator, 

Protected Resources Division, Attn: 

Porbeagle Shark Status Review, Greater 

Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 55 

Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 

01930. 

Instructions: 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 without change for 

public viewing on www.regulations.gov. 

All personal identifying information 

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

business information, or otherwise 

sensitive information submitted 

voluntarily by the sender will be 

publicly accessible. We will accept 

anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in 

the required fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). 

The petitions and other pertinent 

information are also available 

electronically on our Web site at: http:// 

www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/

protected/pcp/soc/porbeagle_

shark.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, NMFS, 

Greater Atlantic Region, (978) 281–9328; 

or Marta Nammack, NMFS, HQ, (301) 

427–8469. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

We received a petition from Wild 

Earth Guardians (WEG) dated January 

20, 2010, requesting that we list 

porbeagle sharks (Lamna nasus) 

throughout their entire range, or as 

Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, 

and Mediterranean Distinct Population 

Segments (DPS) under the ESA, as well 

as designate critical habitat for the 

species. We also received a petition 

from the Humane Society of the United 

States (HSUS), dated January 21, 2010, 

requesting that we list a Northwest 

Atlantic DPS of porbeagle sharks as 

endangered in the North Atlantic under 

the ESA. Information contained in the 

petitions focused on the species’ 

imperilment due to historical and 

continued overfishing; modification of 

habitat through pollution, climate 

change, and ocean acidification; failure 

of regulatory mechanisms; and low 

productivity of the species. 

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA requires 

that, to the maximum extent practicable, 

within 90 days after receiving a petition, 

the Secretary make a finding whether 

the petition presents substantial 

scientific information indicating that the 

petitioned action may be warranted (90- 

day finding). The ESA implementing 

regulations for NMFS define 

‘‘substantial information’’ as the amount 

of information that would lead a 

reasonable person to believe that the 

measure proposed in the petition may 

be warranted (50 CFR 424.14(b)(1)). If a 

positive 90-day finding is made, then 

we must promptly conduct a review of 

the status of the species concerned and 

publish a finding indicating whether the 

petitioned action is or is not warranted 

within one year (1-year finding). 

On July 12, 2010, we published a 90- 

day finding in the Federal Register (75 

FR 39656; http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/

pr/species/frnotices/negative90d/

porbeagle_shark_75_fr_39656.pdf) 

stating that neither petition presented 

substantial information indicating that 

listing porbeagle sharks may be 

warranted. Accordingly, a status review 

of the species was not initiated. 

In August 2011, the petitioners filed 

complaints in the U.S. District Court for 

the District of Columbia challenging our 

denial of the petitions (Case 1:11–cv– 

01414–BJR HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE 

UNITED STATES v. BLANK et al.). On 

November 14, 2014, the court published 

a Memorandum Opinion vacating the 

2010 90-day finding for porbeagle shark, 

and ordering NMFS to prepare a new 

90-day finding. The court entered final 

judgment on December 12, 2014. This 

document represents our new 90-day 

finding. 

Given the length of time between 

when we received the petitions in 2010 

and this new 90-day finding, we have 

taken into account both information 

submitted with and referenced in the 

petitions as well as all other new 

information readily available in our files 

regarding porbeagle sharks globally. We 

have thoroughly reviewed the Court’s 

Memorandum Opinion, the 2010 

petitions and all other information 

available in our files in preparing our 

new finding. As we did in 2010, we 

consulted with experts within the 

Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries 

Office’s Sustainable Fisheries Division, 

NMFS’ Highly Migratory Species 

Management Division, Northeast 

Fisheries Science Center- Apex Predator 

Program, and the Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center in November and 

December 2014 to provide context for 

the petitions and the information in our 

files. 

The 2010 Petitions and New 

Information on Porbeagle Sharks 

Both petitions clearly identified 

themselves as petitions and included 

the identification information for the 

petitioner, as required in 50 CFR 

424.14(a). The petitions indicated their 

recommended administrative measure 

and gave the scientific and common 

names for porbeagle sharks. The WEG 

petition requested that we list under the 

ESA porbeagle sharks throughout their 

entire range. Alternatively, the WEG 

petition proposed that porbeagle be 

listed under the ESA as three distinct 

population segments (DPSs) as follows: 

The Northwest Atlantic DPS, the 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules 16357 

Northeast Atlantic DPS and the 

Mediterranean DPS. The petition states 

‘‘the species and DPSs face threats from 

historic and continued overfishing, as 

well as a low reproduction rate, which 

hinders its recovery.’’ The information 

contained in the WEG petition focuses 

on historical and continued overfishing 

of the above named DPSs of porbeagle 

sharks globally. The HSUS petition only 

addresses a Northwest Atlantic DPS of 

porbeagle sharks, requesting they be 

listed as endangered in the Northwest 

Atlantic. 

Several new references were available 

in our files since remand that were not 

available when the 2010 petitions were 

received. In 2009, the International 

Council for the Exploration of the Sea 

(ICES) and the International 

Commission for the Conservation of 

Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) conducted a 

stock assessment for porbeagle sharks 

(ICES/ICCAT, 2009). The information in 

this report was considered in our 2010 

90-day finding, and this report 

continues to be a good source of recent, 

comprehensive porbeagle shark data. 

However, there is a new Canadian 

assessment for the Northwest Atlantic 

stock based on information contained in 

Campana et al. 2012 (2012 Canadian 

assessment). Also, other new 

information is contained in recent 

ICCAT proceedings, regulatory 

documents, published literature and FR 

notices since the ICES/ICCAT 2009 

stock assessment (Andrushchenko et 

al./Canada, 2014; Bendall et al., 2013; 

Campana et al., 2012; Canada/ICCAT, 

2014; CPC/ICCAT, 2014; Gallagher et 

al., 2014; Kitamura and Matsunaga, 

2010; Marua et al., 2012; NEAFC/

ICCAT, 2013; NMFS/HMS, 2013; SCRS, 

2014; Semba et al., 2013; 75 FR 250; 79 

FR 75068; 50 CFR part 635). 

Additionally, several new 

management actions were implemented 

or became effective prior to remand, but 

after the 2010 petitions were received. 

These include the addition of porbeagle 

sharks to Appendix II of the Convention 

on International Trade in Endangered 

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, a 2013 

prohibition on directed fishing for 

porbeagle in Canada and increasing 

protections in the European Union (EU) 

which will more closely regulate trade 

of the species. 

In 2014, the Committee on the Status 

of Endangered Wildlife in Canada 

(COSEWIC) published a new assessment 

and status report on porbeagle sharks in 

Canada. The report reaffirms 

COSEWIC’s designation of the species 

as ‘‘endangered’’ due to COSEWIC 

criterion A2b under the Species at Risk 

Act. The report states the species meets 

this criterion ‘‘because the abundance of 

mature females has declined by 74–77% 

over the past 2.6 generations. Although 

the directed fishery has been 

suspended, the species continues to be 

taken as bycatch in a variety of other 

fisheries.’’ As noted throughout the 

report, the species decline has halted, 

and while numbers of porbeagle remain 

low compared to pre-exploitation levels, 

the information does indicate the 

species trend is stable. The report states 

that in Canada, the ‘‘greatest current 

threat to porbeagle is overfishing due to 

multiple bycatch fisheries, which are 

not closely monitored, where a large 

portion of the catch may be discarded 

and unreported.’’ While this report is an 

update of a 2004 COSEWIC report, 

relied upon by the petitioners, which 

also assessed porbeagle as endangered 

based on the decline that the species has 

experienced, the emphasis the new 

status report places on the potential 

threat to the species from ongoing, 

unregulated bycatch in Canada is of 

concern and represents new information 

not previously considered. A status 

review is the appropriate means for 

assessing this potential threat. 

COSEWIC also provides information 

on whether the Northwest Atlantic stock 

constitutes a single designatable unit. 

The report indicates that the Northeast 

and Northwest populations of porbeagle 

sharks are separate. This conclusion 

appears to be based solely on 

conventional tagging information, 

consistent with the petitions, and does 

not appear to incorporate any 

information from genetic studies. In our 

2010 finding, we concluded, based on 

genetic information, that porbeagle from 

the Northeast and Northwest Atlantic 

are not discrete. While we believe 

genetics are a more reliable indicator of 

discreteness than tagging information, 

we recognize the uncertainty about the 

existence of discrete populations. The 

appropriate means for addressing this 

uncertainty is to consider the 

information in a review of the status of 

the species. 

Petition Finding 

In light of the information described 

above, which indicates that the 

petitioned actions may be warranted, we 

are accepting the petitions and initiating 

a review of the status of the species. 

Information Solicited 

To ensure that the status review is 

complete and based on the best 

available scientific and commercial 

information, we are soliciting 

information concerning porbeagle 

sharks. We request information from the 

public, concerned governmental 

agencies, Native American tribes, the 

scientific community, conservation 

groups, industry, or any other interested 

parties concerning the current and/or 

historical status of porbeagle sharks. 

Specifically, we are soliciting 

information, including unpublished 

information, in the following areas: (1) 

Historical and current distribution and 

abundance of porbeagle sharks 

throughout their range; (2) historical 

and current population trends for 

porbeagle sharks; (3) life history and 

habitat requirements of porbeagle ; (4) 

genetics and population structure 

information (including morphology, 

ecology, behavior, etc.) for populations 

of porbeagle; (5) past, current, and 

future threats to porbeagle, including 

any current or planned activities that 

may adversely impact the species; (6) 

ongoing or planned efforts to protect 

and restore porbeagle and their habitat; 

and (7) management, regulatory, and 

enforcement information pertaining to 

porbeagle. We request that all 

information be accompanied by: (1) 

Supporting documentation such as 

maps, bibliographic references, or 

reprints of pertinent publications; and 

(2) the submitter’s name, address, and 

any association, institution, or business 

that the person represents. 

Please note that submissions merely 

stating support for or opposition to the 

action under consideration without 

providing supporting information, 

although noted, will not be considered 

in making a determination. Section 

4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA directs that a 

determination must be made ‘‘solely on 

the basis of the best scientific and 

commercial data available.’’ On or 

before December 12, 2015, we will issue 

a 12-month determination based on a 

review of the best scientific and 

commercial data available, including all 

relevant information received from the 

public in response to this 90-day 

finding. 

You may submit your information 

concerning this finding by one of the 

methods listed in the ADDRESSES

section. Please note that in our final 

determination we may not consider 

comments we receive after the date 

specified in the DATES section. If you 

submit your information via http://

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

submission including personal 

identifying information will be posted 

on the Web site. If your submission is 

made via hardcopy that includes 

personal identifying information, you 

may request at the top of your document 

that we withhold this information from 

public review. However, we cannot 

guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

We will post all hard copy submissions 

on http://www.regulations.gov. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16358 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Information and materials we receive, 

as well as supporting documentation we 

used in preparing this finding, will be 

available for public inspection, by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours at NMFS’ Greater Atlantic 

Regional Fisheries Office. 

Authority 

The authority for this action is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

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

Dated: March 23, 2015. 

Samuel D. Rauch, III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07073 Filed 3–26–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS