21658 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

§ 11.21 State and local area plans and FCC

mapbook.

EAS plans contain guidelines which

must be followed by broadcast and cable

personnel, emergency officials and

National Weather Service (NWS)

personnel to activate the EAS. The plans

include the EAS header codes and

messages that will be transmitted by key

EAS sources (NP, LP, SP and SR). State

and local plans contain unique methods

of EAS message distribution such as the

use of RBDS. The plans must be

reviewed and approved by the Chief,

Technical and Public Safety Division,

Enforcement Bureau, prior to

implementation to ensure that they are

consistent with national plans, FCC

regulations, and EAS operation.

* * * * *

5. Section 11.41 is amended by

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 11.41 Participation in EAS.

* * * * *

(c) All sources, including NN, must

have immediate access to an Operating

Handbook. They should contact the FCC

to ensure that they are on the FCC EAS

mailing list.

6. Section 11.47 is amended by

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 11.47 Optional use of other

communications methods and systems.

* * * * *

(b) Other technologies and public

service providers, such as DBS, low

earth orbiting satellites, etc., that wish

to participate in the EAS may contact

the FCC’s Technical and Public Safety

Division, Enforcement Bureau, or their

State Emergency Communications

Committee for information and

guidance.

§ 11.54 [Amended]

7. Section 11.54 is amended by

removing paragraph (b)(2) and

redesignating paragraphs (b)(3) through

(b)(15) as paragraphs (b)(2) through

(b)(14).

8. Section 11.55 is amended by

revising paragraph (c)(4) to read as

follows:

§ 11.55 EAS operation during a State or

Local Area emergency.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(4) Broadcast stations, cable systems

and wireless cable systems participating

in the State or Local Area EAS must

discontinue normal programming and

follow the procedures in the State and

Local area plans. Television stations

must comply with § 11.54(b)(6) and

cable systems and wireless cable

systems must comply with § 11.54(b)(7).

Broadcast stations providing foreign

language programming shall comply

with § 11.54(b)(8).

* * * * *

9. Section 11.61 is amended by

removing paragraph (a)(2)(i),

redesignating paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)

through (a)(2)(v) as (a)(2)(i) through

(a)(2)(iv), and revising paragraph (a)(6)

to read as follows:

§ 11.61 Tests of EAS procedures.

(a) * * *

(6) EAS activations and special tests.

The EAS may be activated for

emergencies or special tests at the State

or Local Area level by a broadcast

station, cable system or wireless cable

system instead of the monthly or weekly

tests required by this section. To

substitute for a monthly test, activation

must include transmission of the EAS

header codes, Attention Signal,

emergency message and EOM code and

comply with the visual message

requirements in § 11.51. To substitute

for the weekly test of the EAS header

codes and EOM codes in paragraph

(a)(2)(i) of this section, activation must

include transmission of the EAS header

and EOM codes. Television stations and

cable systems and wireless cable

systems shall comply with the aural and

visual message requirements in § 11.51.

Special EAS tests at the State and Local

Area levels may be conducted on a daily

basis following procedures in State and

Local Area EAS plans.

* * * * *

10. Section 11.62 is amended by

revising paragraphs (d) and (e)(2) to read

as follows:

§ 11.62 Closed circuit tests of national

level EAS facilities.

* * * * *

(d) Test announcements will originate

from a point selected by the White

House with program feed circuitry

connected to the telephone company

Toll Test Center at points coordinated

for each test. Participating common

carriers will connect, as required, the

facilities of the radio networks and other

test participants. Telephone companies

are not authorized to add any

participating independent broadcast

stations unless authorized by the FCC.

Authentication will be provided to the

Toll Test Center or other program entry

location responsible for test

arrangements.

(e) * * *

(2) Recipients immediately monitor

their radio network, and if participating,

their television network or cable system,

and check their wire service for the

receipt of the CCT Activation Message.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–10092 Filed 4–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 000407096-0096-01; I.D.

040300C]

RIN 0648–AN51

Fisheries of the Northeastern United

States; Northeast Multispecies

Fishery; Framework Adjustment 33 to

the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Management Plan

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule and 2000 target total

allowable catch (TAC) levels.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to

establish 2000 target TACs for five

Northeast multispecies fisheries and to

implement measures contained in

Framework Adjustment 33 of the

Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Management Plan (FMP). This final rule

implements management measures that

include the following:

A continuation of the current Gulf of

Maine (GOM) cod trip limit and the

current GOM area closures;

Two conditional 1-month closed areas

(portions of Massachusetts Bay and

Stellwagen Bank in January and Cashes

Ledge in November), which would

become effective if preliminary landings

through July 31, 2000, indicate that

more than 1.67 million lb (759 mt) of

GOM cod have been landed;

A 1-year extension of the Western

GOM year-round closure, which

otherwise would expire on April 30,

2001;

The closure of a portion of Georges

Bank (GB) east and southeast of Cape

Cod during May to vessels fishing for

multispecies and the removal of a

regulatory provision that gave the

Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS

(Regional Administrator), the authority

to reduce the GB cod trip limit;

A continuation of the GB cod landing

limit;

A haddock daily landing limit of

3,000 lb/days at sea (DAS) (1,360.8 kg/

DAS) with a maximum possession limit

of 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) per trip with

potential increases in landing limits;

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 21659

Establishment of a means to exempt

for a 3-month period vessels fishing

under charter/party regulations from

regulations prohibiting fishing in GOM

closed areas and of a prohibition on the

use of DAS during that 3-month

enrollment period; and A prohibition on any limited access

vessel from fishing under a multispecies

DAS while taking passengers for hire. Also, this action removes the

requirement to report GOM cod trip

limit overages by calling the cod hail

line.

The intent of this action is to address

overfishing of several stocks, in

particular GOM and GB cod, and to

achieve the rebuilding goals of the FMP

for the 2000 multispecies fishing year.

DATES: Effective June 1, 2000, except

§§ 648.10(f)(3)(ii), 648.14(a)(121), (b)

introductory text, (b)(1), (c)(24), and

(c)(30), 648.23(b)(4), 648.81(d) and (n),

648.86(a)(1), the removal of

§ 648.86(b)(1)(ii)(B) and (b)(1)(iii), and

the revision of § 648.86(b)(2), which are

effective May 1, 2000, and

§§ 648.14(b)(2), 648.81(g)(2)(iii) and

648.89(e), which contain information

collection requirements and are not

effective until approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB). When

OMB approval is received, the effective

date of §§ 648.14(b)(2), 648.81(g)(2)(iii)

and 648.89(e) will be announced in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Framework 33

document, its Regulatory Impact Review

(RIR), the Environmental Assessment

(EA), and other supporting documents

for the framework action are available

from Paul J. Howard, Executive Director,

New England Fishery Management

Council, 50 Water Street, Newburyport,

MA 01950. These documents are also

available online at http://

www.nefmc.org. Comments regarding the collection-ofinformation requirements contained in

this final rule should be sent to Patricia

A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator,

Northeast Region, NMFS, One

Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA

01930–2298 and to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB), Washington, DC 20503

(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Pearson, Fishery Policy

Analyst, 978–281–9279.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Framework 33 was prepared by the New

England Fishery Management Council

(Council), under the rebuilding program

established by Amendment 7 to the

FMP. Amendment 7, which became

effective on July 1, 1996, established a

procedure for setting annual target TACs

for GOM and GB cod, GB haddock, and

GB and Southern New England (SNE)

yellowtail flounder stocks and an

aggregate TAC for the combined stocks

of the other regulated multispecies

simultaneously managed under the

FMP. A Multispecies Monitoring

Committee (MMC) was established to

annually review the best available

scientific information, set the annual

target TACs, and identify management

options to achieve FMP objectives for

the regulated multispecies. The MMC

annual review process provides an

opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness

of the multispecies management

program and to make recommendations

on the need for adjustments to the

management program. Calculation of the

annual TACs is based on the biological

reference points of Fmax for GOM cod

and F0.1 for the remaining stocks of cod,

haddock, and yellowtail flounder. In

consideration of the severely depleted

status of GOM cod, the Council also

directed the MMC to estimate a target

TAC for GOM cod based on the more

precautionary and conservative F0.1

reference point. For the 1999 fishing

year, the Council used the F0.1

precautionary target as a goal to assure

that the Fmax target was not exceeded.

For the 2000 fishing year, the Council

directed the MMC to estimate F0.1 for

reference purposes. The adoption of

measures designed to achieve a fishing

mortality rate of F0.1 would increase the

likelihood of actually achieving the

target of Fmax.

The last full assessment of the five

principal stocks managed under

Amendment 7 was Stock Assessment

Workshop 27 (SAW 27). The SAW 27

results were presented to the Council in

August 1998. In July 1999, the SAW

Northern Demersal Working Group

(NDWG) met and prepared an updated

assessment with data through 1998 for

11 groundfish stocks, including GOM

and GB cod, GOM haddock, and GB and

SNE yellowtail flounder. The MMC

utilized the NDWG assessment results

as the technical basis for its 1999 annual

report to estimate the TACs for the five

primary stocks and to develop the

management options contained in the

report.

In summary, the MMC report

concluded that fishing mortality rates

(F) on GOM cod and GB cod need to be

reduced from calendar year 1998 fishing

mortality rates for those species in order

to achieve the Amendment 7 F targets.

The 1998 GOM cod fishing mortality

rate was 0.64, compared with the

Amendment 7 mortality rate target of

0.27. The fishing mortality rate on GB

cod was 0.26 in calendar year 1998, as

opposed to the target rate of 0.18.

The Amendment 7 target levels do not

reflect the Sustainable Fisheries Act

(SFA) requirements. A management

program for Atlantic cod (GOM and GB),

haddock (GOM and GB), pollock,

redfish, white hake, yellowtail flounder

(GB, SNE, Mid-Atlantic and Cape Cod),

windowpane flounder (north and

south), winter flounder (GB, GOM, SNE/

Mid-Atlantic), American plaice, white

flounder, and Atlantic halibut that will

meet the SFA requirements is currently

being developed and analyzed as part of

Amendment 13 to the Northeast

Multispecies FMP.

Based on projected 2000 stock sizes

and the Amendment 7 fishing mortality

targets, the MMC proposed target TACs

for the 2000 fishing year for the five

primary stocks managed under

Amendment 7 (GOM cod, GB haddock,

GB cod, GB yellowtail flounder, and

SNE yellowtail flounder). The MMC

also provided an F0.1 target TAC for

GOM cod for reference purposes. An

aggregate target TAC for the remaining

regulated multispecies was not provided

in the 1999 MMC annual report, and the

Council did not include an aggregate

target TAC in the Framework 33

document. The target TACs for the 2000

fishing year, as proposed by the MMC,

are as follows:

(IN METRIC TONS)

Species/area 2000 Target

TACs

1999 Target

TACs

Georges Bank cod ................................................................................................................................................... 4,145 5,354

Georges Bank haddock ........................................................................................................................................... 6,252 5,600

Georges Bank yellowtail flounder ............................................................................................................................ 4,618 2,725

Southern New England yellowtail flounder .............................................................................................................. 951 1,115

Gulf of Maine cod (Fmax) .......................................................................................................................................... 1,918 1,340

Gulf of Maine cod (F0.1) ........................................................................................................................................... 1,118 782

21660 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

To keep the target TACs from being

exceeded, the MMC also provided the

Council with four specific management

options to achieve the GOM cod target

TAC and with five alternative options to

achieve the GB cod target TAC. The

MMC GOM and GB cod options were

based on DAS reductions, trip limits,

area closures, and gear reductions in

various combinations. These options

relied, to a large extent, upon a

continuation of many of the measures

that were implemented for the 1999

multispecies fishing year under

Framework Adjustments 27, 30, and 31.

The MMC report also contained

options and recommendations for

management of the recreational fishery,

the haddock fishery, and other elements

of the FMP.

In addition to the MMC

recommendations, in September 1999,

the Council also solicited proposals

from the public. Six proposals were

received from state and industry groups

in response to this solicitation for initial

consideration for Framework 33.

Following review, a proposal

submitted by the Gulf of Maine

Fishermen’s Alliance (GOMFA) was

recommended by the Groundfish

Committee and the Council for

subsequent analysis and inclusion as an

option in the final Framework 33

document. The remaining industry

proposals were consolidated into a

single proposal by the Groundfish

Committee, and this consolidated

proposal was recommended by the

Council for subsequent analysis and

inclusion in the final Framework 33

document. Ultimately, four GOM cod

proposals were included for analysis in

the final Framework 33 document.

These included two of the MMC

options: the GOMFA option and the

consolidated industry proposal.

The Council considered management

measures for GOM cod, GB cod, and

haddock separately in Framework 33.

The Council also included measures in

Framework 33 to regulate access to

GOM closed areas by vessels that fish

under charter/party regulations in order

to prohibit the use of multispecies DAS

when carrying passengers for hire and to

change the Multispecies Large Mesh

Permit Category qualification criteria

and enrollment period.

There were several multispecies

actions during the 1999 fishing year that

modified the landing limits, area

closures, and calculation of the

allowance for trip limit overages:

Framework 27 published on May 5,

1999 (64 FR 24066); an interim rule

published on August 3, 1999 (64 FR

42042); Framework 30 published on

August 3, 1999 (64 FR 42045); and

Framework 31 published on January 5,

2000 (65 FR 377). A key reason why the

MMC recommended, and the Council

adopted, the measures in Framework 33

was to achieve the FMP fishing

mortality objectives while maintaining

some stability in the multispecies

management program.

GOM Cod Measures

The most recent assessment of the

status of GOM cod uses data from 1998.

The status is similar to that in 1997:

Recruitment is at record low levels, and

spawning stock biomass is at the lowest

level ever observed. However, the actual

reduction in spawning stock biomass in

1999 was not as large as the 37–percent

reduction predicted in the 1998 MMC

report. A sensitivity analysis conducted

by the MMC indicated that, if discarding

did not appreciably increase in 1999,

the 1999 GOM cod fishing mortality rate

may be approaching the Amendment 7

target level.

In light of the extremely dire

condition of GOM cod, the Council has

progressively adopted more restrictive

measures in the GOM to protect cod.

These measures may be beginning to

have the effect of reversing the

downward trend in abundance of GOM

cod. However, without reliable data on

discarding and additional analysis of

recent survey trawl data, it is currently

not possible to be certain whether the

measures are having such an effect. For

this reason, in the annual report, the

MMC recommended that the Council, at

a minimum, continue with the current

suite of measures in the GOM and also

adopt additional measures to address

discards and to help attain mortality

objectives. The MMC’s rationale for this

recommendation, similar to its rationale

for its recommendations for 1999, was

that the adoption of measures designed

to achieve a fishing mortality rate of F0.1

would increase the likelihood of

actually achieving the target of Fmax.

The Council considered four options

for GOM cod: The two MMC options,

the GOMFA option, and the

consolidated industry proposal. Upon

analysis, the Groundfish Plan

Development Team (PDT) determined

that the GOMFA proposal and the

consolidated industry proposal resulted

in landings above the TAC associated

with Fmax for GOM cod. Therefore, the

Groundfish Committee and the Council

focused their discussion on the two

MMC options.

After due consideration, the Council

rejected the MMC option that contained

layover days and approved the MMC

option that (1) included the existing

method of counting DAS; (2) continued

the area closures implemented in

fishing year 1999; (3) extended for 1

year the WGOM closed area (originally

scheduled to expire on May 1, 2001); (4)

maintained the GOM daily cod landing

limit of 400 lb/DAS (181.4 kg/DAS) with

a maximum possession limit of 4,000 lb

(1,814.4 kg) per trip; and (5)

recommended the conditional closure of

Cashes Ledge in November 2000, and a

portion of Massachusetts Bay and

Stellwagen Bank in January 2001, if

preliminary landings data through July

31, 2000, indicate that more than 1.67

million lb (759 mt) of GOM cod have

been landed.

The Council adopted the conditional

closure strategy to discourage directed

fishing on GOM cod during the first 3

months of the fishing year and to

provide additional protection for GOM

cod during early spawning aggregations

if landings are high early in the year.

The trigger (1.67 million lb (759 mt)) is

established at a level that is 50 percent

of the TAC midway between the TACs

associated with F0.1 and Fmax. It is not

set at such a low level that the

conditional closures are a certainty. In

order to rebuild the stock, the MMC, in

recent years, has consistently

recommended that there be no directed

fishing on GOM cod. If commercial

vessels make a conscientious effort to

avoid directing effort on GOM cod, then

the trigger level may not be achieved.

On the other hand, if early GOM cod

landings are high, the additional

closures will provide essential

protection to early spawning

aggregations next January. In addition, a

triggered closure is preferable to a

triggered trip limit reduction because it

does not create the discard problems

that occurred last year with the lower

GOM cod trip limits.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 21661

Although recent data indicate that the

fishing mortality rate associated with

landings of GOM cod for the 1999

fishing year may be approaching Fmax,

the actual mortality could exceed Fmax if

discarding was excessive in 1999.

Because the fishing industry indicated

that high discards occurred, it is

prudent to establish the conditional

closures to provide greater assurance of

achieving the 2000 fishing mortality

objectives, in light of existing

uncertainty regarding the discard

mortality that occurred in 1999.

GB Cod Measures

Framework 33 and this rule extend

the current GB cod daily landing limit

of 2,000 lb/DAS (907.2 kg/DAS), with a

maximum possession limit of 20,000 lb

(9,072 kg) per trip. Framework 33 and

this rule also close an area to the east

and southeast of Cape Cod to fishing for

multispecies during the month of May.

This area closure is intended to

compensate for the removal in

Framework 33 of the regulatory

provision that gave the Regional

Administrator the authority to reduce

the GB cod trip limit in order to achieve

the GB cod mortality objective.

Haddock Measures

In response to the continued growth

in the GB haddock biomass projected for

the fishing year starting May 1, 2000,

and the below-target fishing mortality

rate on that stock, Framework 33 and

this rule increases the haddock daily

landing limit during the May-September

period to 3,000 lb/DAS (1,360.7 kg/

DAS), or part of a DAS, with a

maximum possession limit of 30,000 lb

(13,608 kg) per trip. The daily landing

limit will increase on October 1, 2000,

to 5,000 lb/DAS (2,268 kg/DAS), with a

maximum possession limit of 50,000 lb

(22,680 kg) per trip. If, at any time

during the fishing year, the Regional

Administrator determines that a

different trip limit is needed to land at

least 75 percent of the target TAC, but

not to exceed the TAC, NMFS may

adjust the trip limit to the appropriate

level by publishing a notification in the

Federal Register.

Measures Regarding Access to GOM

Closed Areas by Vessels Fishing Under

Charter/party Regulations

The regulations implementing

Amendment 7 to the FMP for the

recreational and charter/party

multispecies fishery differ from those

for the commercial sector fishery. These

rules included a larger minimum fish

size, a prohibition on the sale of fish,

and an exemption for vessels fishing

under charter/party regulations from

commercial trip limits and area closure

restrictions.

The Council indicated concern about

the application of the regulations to

vessels fishing as charter/party vessels

that have also qualified for multispecies

limited access permits. These vessels

may either fish commercially under a

DAS and other commercial regulations,

including a smaller minimum fish size

and the ability to sell the catch, or fish

under charter/party regulations. This is

problematic because a vessel with a

limited access permit fishing under

charter/party regulations could fish as a

charter/party vessel in a closed area,

with no trip limit, on one day. Then, on

the next day, the same vessel could fish

under a DAS and, subsequently, sell the

fish that were caught by fishing in the

closed area on the previous day.

The Council seeks to alleviate the

problem of commercial vessels

switching to fishing under charter/party

regulations by requiring charter/party

vessels to obtain a certificate in

exchange for access to the GOM closed

areas. The Council considered three

different options regarding the

enrollment period for the certificate and

recommended a 3-month enrollment

period. As a condition of the certificate,

the vessel owner must agree not to

utilize DAS during the 3 months

covered by the certificate. NMFS

approved these recommendations in

Framework 33 and implements them by

this rule.

Prohibition on the Use of DAS When

Carrying Passengers for Hire

The Council indicated that the ability

of some vessels to carry passengers for

hire while simultaneously fishing under

limited access permits and under a DAS

created a perceived inequity among

charter/party vessels fishing in the same

area and out of the same ports because

charter/party vessels without limited

access permits could not all avail

themselves of the opportunity to fish

commercially. Accordingly, to resolve

the issue of which vessels may fish

under the commercial regulations, the

Council determined that it is

appropriate to distinguish between

vessels with passengers for hire and

other, more traditional, commercial

vessels. To do this, the Council

recommended a measure in Framework

33 that prohibits vessels with limited

access multispecies permits from fishing

under a multispecies DAS while taking

passengers for hire. NMFS approved

this recommendation and implements it

by this rule.

Disapproved Measure for Change in

Large Mesh Permit Category

Amendment 7 to the Northeast

Multispecies FMP established a Large

Mesh Permit Category that provides an

opportunity for gillnet and otter trawl

vessels electing to fish with mesh larger

than the minimum required size to be

allocated an increase of 36 percent in

their DAS. Otter trawl vessels in this

permit category must fish with a mesh

size no smaller than an 8–inch (20.3–

cm) diamond mesh throughout the

entire net. Currently, no trawl vessels

are in the Large Mesh Permit Category.

Framework 33 includes a provision

that would have reduced the minimum

mesh size for otter trawl vessels fishing

in the Large Mesh Permit Category from

8–inch (20.3–cm) to 7–inch (17.8–cm)

and that would have reduced the DAS

incentive from 36 percent additional

DAS to 25 percent. Both gillnet and

otter trawl vessels in this category

would be able to exit this category after

1 month under Framework 33, rather

than having to commit to it for the

entire fishing year, as currently

required.

NMFS believes that making the Large

Mesh Permit Category more attractive

for trawl vessels is a reasonable

objective. However, no scientific

analysis was provided in Framework 33

to correlate a 7–inch (17.8–cm)

minimum trawl mesh size with a

corresponding 25–percent increase in

allocated DAS. The Framework

document indicates this is because of

the lack of selectivity data for 7–inch

(17.8–cm) and 8–inch (20.3–cm) trawl

net codend mesh sizes and because of

the inability to predict the level of

participation that might occur as a result

of this change. For these reasons, the

Framework 33 document states that the

net impact on fishing mortality cannot

be determined at this time.

NMFS has disapproved this measure

because it may not be conservationneutral and, therefore, would not be

consistent with national standard 1.

There is currently not enough

information on the potential biological

impacts to justify the approval of a

measure that could have the effect of

increasing effort, or DAS, at a time when

two important stocks require a

reduction in fishing mortality. Under

the annual adjustment framework

procedures, this measure may be

disapproved because it is not integral to

either the overall set of measures

recommended by the Council or the

analysis of impacts prepared for this

rule.

21662 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Technical Changes

The implementation of the interim

rule published on August 3, 1999 (64 FR

42042), and regulations for Framework

Adjustment 31 published on January 5,

2000, (65 FR 377), render the GOM cod

landing limit hail line unnecessary and

is removed by this rule. The final rule

implementing Framework Adjustment

20 (62 FR 15381, April 1, 1997)

implemented a measure to allow vessel

operators who exceeded the landing

limit of cod to retain excess fish but not

to call-out of the multispecies DAS

program until total DAS per trip

corresponded to the total allowable

weight of cod off-loaded per trip. There

was only an indirect limit on the

running clock, which required vessels to

call-out of the DAS program after 14

days. Vessels that exceeded the cod

landing limit were required to report

their hailed weight of cod on board

under a separate call-in system upon

entering port. Interim regulations

published August 3, 1999 (64 FR

42042), and made permanent by a final

rule implementing Framework 31 (65

FR 377, January 5, 2000) implemented

measures that revised the method used

to count DAS in relation to the daily

GOM cod trip limit and limited the

amount of allowed overage to the

equivalent of 1 day’s landing limit.

Because the running clock is now

limited to no more than a 24–hour

period, the requirement to call the GOM

cod landing limit hail line is no longer

necessary and is removed by this rule.

Accordingly, to eliminate the hail line,

§§ 648.10(f)(3)(ii) and 648.14(c)(24) are

amended; § 648.86(b)(1)(ii)(B) is

removed and reserved; and

§ 648.86(b)(1)(iii) is removed.

In § 648.14(b), a reference to a letter

of authorization that has not been

available since 1998 is removed by this

rule.

In § 648.14(c), a reference to a letter of

authorization that has not been available

since 1998 is removed by this rule.

In § 648.80(h)(2), the requirement for

combination vessels to comply with all

of the trip limits specified in § 648.80,

unless otherwise restricted by § 648.86,

has been modified to reflect the

restriction added to § 648.86 by the

recently implemented halibut trip limit.

Due to an oversight, this modification

was not made in the regulations when

the halibut trip limit was originally

implemented (64 FR 55821, October 15,

1999).

Abbreviated Rulemaking

NMFS is making these revisions to the

regulations under the framework

abbreviated rulemaking procedure

codified at 50 CFR part 648, subpart F.

This procedure requires the Council,

when making specifically allowed

adjustments to the FMP, to develop and

analyze the actions over the span of at

least two Council meetings at which

comments are accepted. The Council

must provide the public with advance

notice of both the framework proposals

and the associated analysis and provide

an opportunity to comment upon them

specifically before and during the

second Council meeting. Upon review

of the analysis and public comment, the

Council may recommend to the

Regional Administrator that the

measures be published as a final rule or,

if additional public comment is

necessary, as a proposed rule. The

initial and final meetings for Framework

33 were on November 16–19, 1999, and

January 18–20, 2000, respectively. The

Council’s Groundfish Committee and

Industry Advisory Panel also held joint

meetings and took public comment on

the proposals on November 10–11 and

December 13, 1999. The Industry

Advisory Panel and Groundfish

committee also met separately on

January 13 and 14, 2000, respectively.

Documents summarizing the

Council’s proposed action and the

analysis of biological, economic, and

social impacts of this and alternative

actions were available for public review

1 week before the final meeting, as

required under the framework

adjustment process. Written comments

were accepted up to, and during, that

meeting. A summary of oral and written

comments received by the Council

during the time period when

Framework Adjustment 33 was being

developed, and responses thereto,

follow.

Comments and Responses

Comment 1: Several fishing industry

members and industry representatives

supported the GOMFA Option for GOM

cod (Option 4) because, by opening

certain areas to fishing, it provided a

greater opportunity for inshore vessels

to fish on other regulated multispecies

with reduced cod bycatch. They also

commented that the GOMFA proposal

would reduce fishing effort in important

inshore grounds during the cod

spawning season by limiting DAS or

trips to 25 from February through May.

Response: The Council considered

Option 4, but rejected it because the

analysis indicated the measures would

result in GOM cod landings above the

target TAC. The Council provided the

proponents of this option several

opportunities to modify the measures so

that it could achieve the FMP objectives.

The final version of the proposal did not

meet the conservation goals of the FMP.

Comment 2: Several fishing industry

members, industry representatives, and

elected officials from the City of

Gloucester expressed support for

continuing the 1999 fishing year

measures for GOM cod without the

conditional closures. They expressed

concern regarding the impacts of any

additional closures on the City of

Gloucester.

Response: In order to evaluate these

concerns, a supplemental examination

of a study fleet was conducted by NMFS

to assess vessel gross revenues from

species harvested both inside and

outside the GOM. The study fleet was

composed of vessels from Gloucester for

the fishing years 1995 to 1998. The

study concluded that the overall

number of trips and vessels declined

during the study period. Sixteen vessels

exited the fishery for unknown reasons,

possibly as a result of the buyout

program, unseaworthiness, or economic

insolvency. Similarly, the total number

of trips declined each year. However,

unlike the downward trend in numbers

of vessels, trips, and average revenue for

the vessels in the study fleet for the

entire time period increased by about 6

percent. The increased vessel revenues

were primarily derived from species in

other areas outside the GOM. Over the

study period, the contribution of

multispecies from other areas to average

vessel revenues rose from 18 percent to

43 percent, while the contribution of

GOM multispecies to average vessel

revenues correspondingly decreased

from 52 percent to 33 percent. The

study also indicated that for vessels less

than or equal to 45 ft (13.7 m) in length,

average revenue per vessel declined by

about 8.5 percent during the study

period.

The study results indicate that,

overall, Gloucester vessels have been

able to compensate for management

measures implemented in the past 4

years by increasing the amount of

revenue obtained from species in stock

areas outside the GOM. However,

smaller vessels, which have more

limited mobility, are less able to fish

outside the GOM and, thus, were not

able to compensate as well by fishing in

other stock areas.

Comment 3: Members of the fishing

industry, including the Council’s

Industry Advisory Panel, recommended

that the Council not change the method

of counting DAS on the first day of a

trip to count any fishing trip less than

24 hours automatically as either 15

hours or 24 hours. The commenters

were concerned about the uneven

distribution of impacts between day

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 21663

boats and trip boats as a result of this

proposal.

Response: The Council considered

these comments, as well as available

analysis, and decided not to change the

method of counting DAS at this time.

The Council noted that it may consider

the concept further in Amendment 13,

as recommended by the Industry

Advisory Panel.

Comment 4: Several fishing industry

members commented that the layover

days proposed in the MMC Option

(Option 1) were unfair because the

proposal would impact some sectors of

the fleet, while having minimal impact

on other sectors. They noted that, while

the measure was intended to reduce

excessive fishing during periods when

GOM cod are most readily available, it

would also impact vessels fishing in the

GOM that do not catch significant

amounts of cod. They also raised safety

concerns with layover days during

November and December because it

could create longer trips. These

commenters supported the area closure

options in MMC Option 2 that would be

focused on the times and areas where

cod is caught.

Response: Based on these public

comments, the Council rejected the

layover-day option in MMC Option 1

and adopted Option 2, which includes

conditional area closures to prevent

exceeding the target TAC.

Comment 5: Several recreational

fishermen and recreational fishing

associations and clubs urged the

Council not to further restrict

recreational fishing. They stated that

until the fishing effort on the

commercial sector was sufficiently

controlled and no longer exceeded the

target TAC, restrictions on the

recreational sector were not justified.

They also stated that the recreational

sector had achieved its reductions. On

the same subject, several commercial

industry members commented that it is

unfair and contrary to the rebuilding

strategy of the FMP to allow party and

charter vessels, which they considered

to be commercial vessels, to fish in the

closed areas, particularly during the

spawning season. They noted that the

current regulations make it too easy for

vessels to fish as party or charter vessels

in the closed areas and, then, sell their

catch.

Response: The Council considered the

best data available on the recreational

and charter/party sector and determined

that additional restrictions on the

recreational harvest are not warranted at

this time, largely because reductions in

recreational landings, in terms of

numbers of cod, appear to be relatively

consistent with reductions in

commercial landings to date. Effort from

the recreational sector has not increased

in recent years. However, in response to

these concerns, the Council adopted a

requirement for charter/party vessels to

obtain a letter of authorization that

allows these vessels to gain access to the

GOM closed areas for a minimum of 3

months. During this 3-month period, a

charter/party vessel may not fish under

a DAS, and is, therefore, prohibited

from selling any of the regulated

multispecies.

Comment 6: Several individuals and

the Industry Advisory Panel members

questioned the appropriateness of the

proposed 36–percent increase in

allocated DAS for otter trawl vessels

that enroll in the Large Mesh Permit

Category when the minimum mesh size

would have been reduced from 8 inches

(20.3 cm) to 7 inches (17.7 cm). They

commented that the proposal may result

in an increase in fishing mortality.

Response: The Council modified its

original proposal so that otter trawl

vessels in the Large Mesh Permit

Category would receive a 25–percent

increase in allocated DAS rather than a

36–percent increase. NMFS has

subsequently disapproved the measure

due to a lack of information on the effect

of this measure on fishing mortality.

Classification

The Regional Administrator

determined that this annual framework

adjustment to the Northeast

Multispecies FMP is necessary for the

conservation and management of the

Northeast multispecies fishery and that

it is consistent with the MagnusonStevens Act and other applicable laws.

The Assistant Administrator for

Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds that,

because public meetings held by the

Council to discuss the management

measures implemented by this rule

provided adequate prior notice and

opportunity for public comment, further

notice and opportunity to comment on

this rule is unnecessary. Because of the

need to reduce or maintain fishing

mortality rates below the Amendment 7

rebuilding targets at the start of the

fishing year on May 1, 2000, it would

also be contrary to the public interest to

provide further notice and further

opportunity for public comment. Also,

because the technical amendments to

the rule merely remove outdated

regulatory text and add cross-references

to the recently implemented halibut trip

limit that were inadvertently left out of

the rule implementing that trip limit,

they do not effect a substantive change

to the existing regulations; thus, prior

notice and opportunity for public

comment are unnecessary. Therefore,

the AA, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), finds

good cause to waive prior notice and

opportunity for public comment on this

rule.

The AA finds, under 5 U.S.C.

553(d)(1), that it is unnecessary to delay

for 30 days the effective date of

provisions increasing the haddock trip

limit and removing the requirement to

report GOM cod trip limit overages to

the cod hail line because they relieve

restrictions. The haddock landing limit

was increased during fishing year 1999

from 2,000 lb/DAS (907.2 kg/DAS), with

a maximum possession limit of 20,000

lb (9.071.8 kg) per trip, to a haddock

landing limit of 5,000 lb/DAS (2,268 kg/

DAS), with a maximum possession limit

of 50,000 lb (22,680 kg) per trip, for the

period November 5, 1999, through April

30, 2000. However, beginning on May 1,

2000, the haddock trip limit reverts to

2,000 lb/DAS (907.2 kg/DAS), with a

maximum possession limit of 20,000 lb

(9.071.8 kg) per trip. To implement

Framework 33, this rule relieves a

restriction by increasing the landing

limit to 3,000 lbs/DAS (2,268 kg/DAS),

with a maximum possession limit of

30,000 lb (13,680 kg) per trip. With the

recent modifications to the running

clock provision (64 FR 42042, August 3,

1999, and 65 FR 377, January 5, 2000),

the requirement to call the cod hail line

is no longer necessary. Because

increasing the haddock landing limits

and removing the requirement to call

the cod hail line relieve restrictions, the

AA finds, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), that

it is not necessary to delay for 30 days

the effectiveness of the revised haddock

landing limits in §§ 648.86(a)(1)(i)

through (iii) and related prohibition in

§ 648.14(b)(1), and the revisions to

§§ 648.10(f)(3)(ii), and 648.14(c)(24);

and the removal of § 648.86(b)(1)(ii)(B)

and (b)(1)(iii).

Implementation of the GB Seasonal

Area Closure contained in § 648.81(n)

for the month of May effective on May

1, 2000, is necessary to reduce the risk

of exceeding the target TAC and to

increase the likelihood of achieving GB

cod mortality objectives. Fishermen will

be notified of the GB Seasonal Area

Closure and of the continuation of the

GB cod possession limits via NOAA

weather radio, Coast Guard

announcements, and letters to permit

holders. Also effective on May 1, 2000,

are related transiting and stowage

provisions for the GB Seasonal Area

Closure contained in §§ 648.23(b)(4) and

648.81(d) and related prohibitions

contained in § 648.14(a)(121) and

(c)(30). Implementation of those

provisions at the same time as the

closure is necessary for enforcement of

that closure. In addition, the GB

21664 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Seasonal Area Closure is intended to

compensate for this rule’s removal of

the regulatory provision that gave the

Regional Administrator the authority to

reduce the GB cod trip limit in order to

achieve the GB cod mortality objective.

Because this removal of the Regional

Administrator’s authority does not affect

the public and is counterbalanced by

another provision promoting the

conservation of cod, delaying the

removal of that authority is

unnecessary. Therefore, the AA finds

good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) not

to delay for 30 days the effectiveness of

the GB Seasonal Area Closure contained

in § 648.81(n) and in related transiting

and stowage provisions and

prohibitions and the removal of the

Regional Administrator’s authority to

reduce the GB cod trip limit contained

in § 648.86(b)(2).

Because prior notice and opportunity

for public comment are not required for

this rule by 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq., or any

other law, the analytical requirements of

the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.

601 et seq., are inapplicable.

Consequently, a regulatory flexibility

analysis has not been prepared.

Nevertheless, the socioeconomic

impacts on affected small entities were

considered in the Regulatory Impact

Review (RIR) contained in the

supporting analysis for Framework 33.

Also, various alternatives that would

have different impacts on various fleet

sectors and fishing communities were

taken into consideration by the Council,

consistent with national standard 8 of

the Magnuson-Stevens Act. In addition,

in response to public comments, NMFS

examined a study fleet in Gloucester,

MA, to assess the impacts of recent

management measures on vessel

revenues.

The short-term impacts of the

measures were summarized in the RIR.

Virtually all entities affected by this rule

are small entities. No change in

revenues and costs are expected from

1999 as a result of a continuation of the

existing GOM closures and landing

limits for the fishing year 2000. If the

conditional GOM cod closures are

implemented, the analysis indicates that

a reduction in fleet revenues ranging

from $161,600 (if 75 percent of the

fishing trips are redirected into other

open areas), to $646,500 (if vessels do

not redirect any effort into other open

areas) will occur. Reauthorization of the

WGOM closure for an additional year

will result in a potential fleet revenue

loss, ranging between $1.8 million (if 75

percent of the fishing trips are

redirected into other open areas) and

$7.4 million (if vessels do not redirect

any effort into other open areas). The

analysis also indicated that, if the

WGOM area were reopened, other

restrictions on catch and effort would

likely be required. The GB Seasonal

Area Closure in May will result in a

total revenue decline for groundfish

vessels between $0.3 million (if 100

percent of the fishing trips are

redirected into other open areas) and

$4.1 million (if vessels do not redirect

any effort into other open areas). The

analysis of the economic impact of the

requirement for charter/party vessels to

obtain a letter of authorization to fish in

GOM closed areas indicates that one

vessel would lose 7 percent of its annual

income. The prohibition on vessels

fishing under a DAS when carrying

passengers for hire could have negative

impacts, but the magnitude could not be

quantified. The haddock trip limit and

TAC increases provide an opportunity

for increased revenues because it would

allow fishermen to land more fish, but

the extent of the increase was not

quantifiable.

Notwithstanding any other provision

of law, no person is required to respond

to nor shall any person be subject to a

penalty for failure to comply with a

collection of information subject to the

requirements of the Paperwork

Reduction Act (PRA) unless that

collection of information displays a

currently valid OMB control number.

This rule contains a collection-ofinformation requirement subject to the

PRA. This collection-of-information

requirement has been submitted to OMB

for approval. The estimated time per

response for a telephone call to request

a Multispecies Charter/party GOM

Closed Area Exemption Certificate is 2

minutes. The estimated total annual cost

to the public is $264.00 (528

respondents X $.50) for the telephone

call.

Public comment is sought regarding

whether this proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

agency, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

the accuracy of the burden estimate;

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology. Send comments

regarding these reporting burden

estimates or any other aspect of the

collection of information, including

suggestions for reducing the burden, to

NMFS and OMB (see ADDRESSES).

This final rule has been determined to

be not significant for the purposes of

E.O. 12866.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and

Recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: April 12, 2000.

Andrew A. Rosenberg,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is amended

as follows:

PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE

NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

1. The authority citation for part 648

continues to read as follows:

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

2. In § 648.10, paragraph (f)(3)(ii) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 648.10 DAS notification requirements.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(3) * * *

(ii) A vessel subject to the cod landing

limit restriction specified in

§ 648.86(b)(1)(i) that exceeds or is

expected to exceed the allowable limit

of cod based on the duration of the trip

must enter port no later than 14 DAS

after starting a multispecies DAS trip.

Such vessel must remain in port, unless

for transiting purposes as allowed in

§ 648.86(b)(3), until sufficient time has

elapsed to account for and justify the

amount of cod on board in accordance

with § 648.86(b)(1)(ii), and may not

begin its next fishing trip until the

vessel has called out of the multispecies

DAS program to end its trip.

3. In § 648.14, paragraphs (a)(52), (b),

and (c)(24) are revised; paragraph (c)(31)

is redesignated as paragraph (c)(27);

newly redesignated paragraph (c)(27) is

revised; and paragraphs (a)(121), and

(c)(28) through (c)(31) are added to read

as follows:

§ 648.14 Prohibitions.

(a) * * *

(52) Enter, be on a fishing vessel in,

or fail to remove gear from, the EEZ

portion of the areas described in

§ 648.81 (g)(1) through (i)(1), and (o)(1)

if effective during the time periods

specified, except as provided in

§ 648.81(d), (g)(2), (h)(2), and (i)(2).

* * * * *

(121) Enter, be on a fishing vessel in,

or fail to remove gear from, the EEZ

portion of the areas described in

§ 648.81(n) during the time periods

specified, except as provided in

§ 648.81(d) and (n)(2).

(b) In addition to the general

prohibitions specified in § 600.725 of

this chapter and in paragraph (a) of this

section, it is unlawful for any owner or

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 21665

operator of a vessel holding a valid

multispecies permit, or any person

issued an operator’s permit or issued a

letter under § 648.4(a)(1)(i)(M)(3), to do

any of the following:

(1) Land, or possess on board a vessel,

more than the possession or landing

limits specified in § 648.86(a), (b), (c),

(d), and (e), or to violate any of the other

provisions of § 648.86, unless otherwise

specified in § 648.17.

(2) If the vessel has been issued a

charter/party permit or is fishing under

charter/party regulations, fail to comply

with the requirements specified in

§ 648.81(g)(2)(iii) when fishing in the

areas described in § 648.81(g)(1) through

(i)(1), and (o)(1) if it becomes effective,

during the time periods specified in

those sections.

(c) * * *

(24) Enter port, while on a

multispecies DAS trip, in possession of

more that the allowable limit of cod

specified in § 648.86(b)(1)(i), unless the

vessel is fishing under the cod

exemption specified in § 648.86(b)(4).

Under no circumstances may such trip

exceed 14 days in length.

* * * * *

(27) Possess or land per trip more

than the possession or landing limit

specified under § 648.86(c).

(28) Participate in the DAS program

pursuant to § 648.82 when carrying

passengers for hire on board the vessel

during any portion of a fishing trip.

(29) Enter, be on a fishing vessel in,

or fail to remove gear from, the areas

described in § 648.81(g)(1) through

(i)(1), and paragraph (o)(1) if it becomes

effective, during the time periods

specified, except as provided in

§ 648.81(d), (g)(2), (h)(2) and (i)(2).

(30) Enter, be on a fishing vessel in,

or fail to remove gear from, the areas

described in § 648.81(n) during the time

periods specified, except as provided in

§ 648.81(d) and (n)(2).

(31) If the vessel has been issued a

Charter/Party permit or is fishing under

charter/party regulations, fail to comply

with the requirements specified in

§ 648.81(g)(2)(iii) when fishing in the

areas described in § 648.81(g)(1) through

(i)(1), and (o)(1) if it becomes effective,

during the time periods specified in

those sections.

* * * * *

4. In § 648.23, paragraph (b)(4) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 648.23 Gear restrictions.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) On-reel stowage for vessels

transiting the GOM Rolling Closure

Areas, the GB Seasonal Area Closure,

and the Conditional Gulf of Maine

Rolling Closure Area.

* * * * *

5. In § 648.80, paragraph (h)(2) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 648.80 Multispecies regulated mesh

areas and restrictions on gear and methods

of fishing.

* * * * *

(h)* * *

(2) Combination vessels fishing under

a NE multispecies DAS are subject to

the gear restriction specified in § 648.80

and may possess and land unlimited

amounts of regulated species, unless

otherwise restricted by § 648.86. Such

vessels may simultaneously fish under a

scallop DAS.

* * * * *

6. In § 648.81, paragraphs (d),

(g)(1)(vi), (g)(2)(iii), and (i)(1) are

revised, and paragraphs (n) and (o) are

added to read as follows:

§ 648.81 Multispecies closed areas.

* * * * *

(d) Transiting. Vessels may transit

Closed Area I, the Nantucket Lightship

Closed Area, the GOM Rolling Closure

Areas, the Cashes Ledge Closure Area,

the Western Gulf of Maine Closure Area,

the Georges Bank Seasonal Area

Closure, and the Conditional Cashes

Ledge and Gulf of Maine Rolling

Closure Areas (if applicable), as defined

in paragraphs (a)(1), (c)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1),

(h)(1), (i)(1), (n)(1), and (o)(1),

respectively, of this section, provided

that their gear is stowed in accordance

with the provisions of paragraph (e) of

this section.

* * * * *

(g) * * *

(1) * * *

(vi) Rolling Closure Area VI. From

February 1 through February 28, or

February 29 if applicable, the

restrictions specified in paragraph (g)(1)

of this section apply to Rolling Closure

Area VI, which is the area bounded by

the straight lines connecting the

following points in the order stated:

ROLLING CLOSURE AREA VI

[February 1 - February 28]

Point N. Lat. W.

Long.(1)

GM1 .......................... 42°00’ (2)

GM2 .......................... 42°00’ (3)

GM3 .......................... 42°00’ (4)

GM4 .......................... 42°00’ 70°00’

GM8 .......................... 42°30’ 70°00’

GM9 .......................... 42°30’ (2)

1 or other intersecting line:

2 Massachusetts shoreline

3 Cape Cod shoreline on Cape Cod Bay

4 Cape Cod shoreline on the Atlantic Ocean

(2) * * *

(iii) That are fishing under charter/

party or recreational regulations,

provided that—

(A) For vessels fishing under charter/

party regulations, it has on board a letter

of authorization issued by the Regional

Administrator, which is valid for a

minimum enrollment period of 3

months;

(B) Fish harvested or possessed by the

vessel are not sold or intended for trade,

barter or sale regardless of where the

fish are caught;

(C) The vessel has no gear other than

rod and reel or handline gear on board;

and

(D) The vessel does not use any DAS

during the entire period of enrollment.

* * * * *

(i) Western GOM Area Closure. (1)

From May 1, 1998, through April 30,

2002, no fishing vessel or person on a

fishing vessel may enter, fish in, or be

in and no fishing gear capable of

catching multispecies, unless otherwise

allowed in this part, may be in, or on

board a vessel in, the area known as the

Western GOM Area Closure (a chart

depicting this area is available from the

Regional Administrator upon request,

see Table 1 to § 600.502 of this chapter),

as defined by straight lines connecting

the following points in the order stated,

except as specified in paragraphs (d)

and (i)(2) of this section:

WESTERN GOM AREA CLOSURE

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

WGM1 ....................... 42°15’ 70°15’

WGM2 ....................... 42°15’ 69°55’

WGM3 ....................... 43°15’ 69°55’

WGM4 ....................... 43°15’ 70°15’

WGM1 ....................... 42°15’ 70°15’

* * * * *

(n) Georges Bank Seasonal Closure

Area. (1) From May 1 through May 31,

no fishing vessel or person on a fishing

vessel may enter, fish in, or be in, and

no fishing gear capable of catching

multispecies, unless otherwise allowed

in this part, may be in the area known

as the Georges Bank Seasonal Closure

Area as defined as the straight lines

connecting the following points in the

order stated, except as specified in

paragraphs (d) and (n)(2) of this section:

GEORGES BANK SEASONAL CLOSURE

AREAS

[May 1 - May 31]

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

GB1 ................... 42°00’ (1)

GB2 ................... 42°00’ 67°20’

GB3 ................... 41°30’ 67°20’

21666 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

GEORGES BANK SEASONAL CLOSURE

AREAS—Continued

[May 1 - May 31]

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

GB4 ................... 41°30’ 69°23’

GB5 ................... (2) 69°00’

GB6 ................... 41°00’ 69°00’

GB7 ................... 41°00’ 70°00’

GB1 ................... 42°00’ (1)

1 Cape Cod shoreline on Atlantic Ocean.

2Western boundary of Closed Area 1.

(2) Paragraph (n)(1) of this section

does not apply to persons on fishing

vessels or to fishing vessels:

(i) That meet the criteria in paragraph

(g)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section;

(ii) That are fishing as charter/party or

recreational vessels; or

(iii) That are fishing with or using

scallop dredge gear when fishing under

a scallop DAS or when lawfully fishing

in the Scallop Dredge Fishery

Exemption Area as described in

§ 648.80(a)(10), provided the vessel uses

an 8–inch (20.3–cm) twine top and

complies with the multispecies

possession restrictions for scallop

vessels specified at § 648.80(h).

(o) Conditional Cashes Ledge & Gulf

of Maine Rolling Closure Areas. (1) If

the Regional Administrator determines

that at least 50 percent of the average

between the F0.1 target TAC and the Fmax

target (an amount equal to 1.67 million

lb (759 mt) for the 2000 - 2001 fishing

year) has been landed as of, or before,

July 31 of each year, NMFS, through a

timely notification action in the Federal

Register, shall implement the following

closures:

(i) Cashes Ledge Closure Area. From

November 1 through November 30, no

fishing vessel or person on a fishing

vessel may enter, fish in, or be in, and

no fishing gear capable of catching NE

multispecies, unless otherwise allowed

in this part, may be in, or on board a

vessel in, the area known as the Cashes

Ledge Closure Area, as described in

§ 648.81(h)(1), except as provided in

§ 648.81(h)(2); and

(ii) Rolling Closure Area VI. From

January 1 through January 31, no fishing

vessel or person on a fishing vessel may

enter, fish in, or be in, and no fishing

gear capable of catching NE

multispecies, unless otherwise allowed

in this part, may be in, or on board a

vessel in, the area known as Rolling

Closure Area VI, as described in

§ 648.81(g)(1)(vi), except as provided in

§ 648.81(g)(2).

6. In § 648.82, paragraphs (a)

introductory text and (a)(2) are revised

to read as follows:

§ 648.82 Effort-control program for

multispecies limited access vessels.

(a) Except as provided in §§ 648.17

and 648.82(a)(2), a vessel issued a

limited access multispecies permit may

not fish for, possess, or land regulated

species, except during a DAS as

allocated under and in accordance with

the applicable DAS program described

in this section, unless otherwise

provided elsewhere in this part.

* * * * *

(2) Notwithstanding any other

provision of this part, any vessel issued

a multispecies limited access permit

may not call into the DAS program or

fish under a DAS, if such vessel carries

passengers for hire for any portion of a

fishing trip.

* * * * *

8. In § 648.86, paragraphs (a)(1) and

(b)(2) are revised; paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B)

is removed and reserved; and paragraph

(b)(1)(iii) is removed:

§ 648.86 Multispecies possession

restrictions.

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(1) NE multispecies DAS vessels. (i)

From May 1 through August 31, except

as provided in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of

this section, a vessel that fishes under

a NE multispecies DAS may land up to

3,000 lb (1,360.8 kg) of haddock per

DAS fished, or any part of a DAS fished,

up to 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) per trip,

provided it has at least one standard tote

on board. Haddock on board a vessel

subject to this landing limit must be

separated from other species of fish and

stored so as to be readily available for

inspection.

(ii) From September 1 through April

30, except as provided in paragraph

(a)(1)(iii) of this section, a vessel that

fishes under a NE multispecies DAS

may land up to 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) of

haddock per DAS fished, or any part of

a DAS fished, up to 50,000 lb (22,680

kg) per trip, provided it has at least one

standard tote on board. Haddock on

board a vessel subject to this landing

limit must be separated from other

species of fish and stored so as to be

readily available for inspection.

(iii) Adjustments—(A) Adjustment to

haddock trip limit to prevent exceeding

target TAC. At any time during the

fishing year, if the Regional

Administrator projects that the target

TAC for haddock (6,252 mt for 2000–

2001 fishing year) will be exceeded,

NMFS may adjust, through publication

of a notification in the Federal Register,

the trip limit per DAS and/or the

maximum trip limit to an amount that

the Regional Administrator determines

will prevent exceeding the target TAC.

(B) Adjustment of the haddock trip

limit to allow harvesting up to 75

percent of target TAC. At any time

during the fishing year, if the Regional

Administrator projects that less than 75

per cent of the target TAC for haddock

(4,689 mt for 2000–2001 fishing year)

will be harvested by the end of the

fishing year, NMFS may adjust, through

publication of a notification in the

Federal Register, the trip limit per DAS

and/or the maximum trip limit to an

amount that is determined to be

sufficient to allow harvesting of at least

75 percent of the target TAC, but not to

exceed the target TAC.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) Georges Bank Cod Landing and

Maximum Possession Limits. For each

fishing year, beginning on May 1, a

vessel that is exempt from the landing

limit described in paragraph (b)(1) of

this section fishing under a NE

multispecies DAS may land only up to

2,000 lb (907.2 kg) of cod per DAS, or

any part of a DAS, up to a maximum

possession limit of 20,000 lb (9,071.8

kg) per trip. The vessel must have a

standard tote on board. Cod on board a

vessel subject to these landing and

maximum possession limits must be

separated from other species of fish and

stored so as to be readily available for

inspection.

* * * * *

9. In § 648.89, paragraph (e) is added

to read as follows:

§ 648.89 Recreational and charter/party

restrictions.

* * * * *

(e) Charter/party vessel restrictions on

fishing in Gulf of Maine closed areas

and the Nantucket Lightship Closed

Area.

(1) Gulf of Maine Closed Areas. A

vessel fishing under charter/party

regulations may not fish in the Gulf of

Maine closed areas specified in

§ 648.81(g)(1) through (i)(1), and (o)(1) if

it becomes effective, during the time

periods specified in those sections,

unless the vessel has on board a letter

of authorization issued by the Regional

Administrator pursuant to

§§ 648.81(g)(2)(iii) and 648.89(e)(3). The

letter of authorization is valid for a

period of 3 months.

(2) Nantucket Lightship Closed Area.

A vessel fishing under charter/party

regulations may not fish in the

Nantucket Lightship Closed Area

specified in § 648.81(c)(1) unless the

vessel has on board a letter of

authorization issued by the Regional

Administrator pursuant to

§§ 648.81(c)(2)(iii) and 648.89(e)(3).

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 79 / Monday, April 24, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 21667

(3) Letters of Authorization. To obtain

either of the letters of authorization

specified in § 648.89(e)(1) and (e)(2), a

vessel owner must request a letter from

the Northeast Regional Office of NMFS,

either in writing or by phone (see Table

1 to § 600.502 of this chapter). As a

condition of these letters of

authorization, the vessel owner must

agree to the following:

(A) The letter of authorization must be

carried on board the vessel during the

period of participation;

(B) Fish harvested or possessed by the

vessel may not be sold or intended for

trade, barter or sale, regardless of where

the fish are caught;

(C) The vessel has no gear other than

rod and reel or handline gear on board;

and

(D) For the Gulf of Maine charter/

party closed area exemption only, the

vessel may not use any multispecies

DAS during the period of participation.

[FR Doc. 00–9533 Filed 4–19–00; 11:47 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F