[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 22 (Wednesday, February 3, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5619-5626]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01891]



[[Page 5619]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 665

[Docket No. 150625552-6043-02]
RIN 0648-BF22


Pacific Island Pelagic Fisheries; Exemption for Large U.S. 
Longline Vessels To Fish in Portions of the American Samoa Large Vessel 
Prohibited Area

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this final rule, NMFS allows large federally permitted U.S. 
longline vessels to fish in certain areas of the Large Vessel 
Prohibited Area (LVPA). NMFS will continue to prohibit fishing in the 
LVPA by large purse seine vessels. The fishing requirements for the 
Rose Atoll Marine National Monument remain unchanged. The intent of the 
rule is to improve the viability of the American Samoa longline fishery 
and achieve optimum yield from the fishery while preventing 
overfishing, in accordance with National Standard 1.

DATES: Effective January 29, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) 
prepared a regulatory amendment that provides background information on 
this final rule. The regulatory amendment, identified as NOAA-NMFS-
2015-0080, includes an environmental assessment and regulatory impact 
review, and is available from www.regulations.gov or the Council, 1164 
Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, tel 808-522-8220, fax 808-
522-8226, www.wpcouncil.org.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jarad Makaiau, NMFS PIRO Sustainable 
Fisheries, 808-725-5176.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The American Samoa large vessel prohibited 
area (LVPA) extends seaward approximately 30-50 nm around the various 
islands of American Samoa (see 50 CFR 665.806(b)). Federal regulations 
restrict vessels 50 ft and longer from fishing for pelagic management 
unit species within the LVPA. The Council and NMFS established the LVPA 
in 2002 to prevent the potential for gear conflicts and catch 
competition between large and small fishing vessels. You may read more 
about the LVPA in the 2001 proposed rule (66 FR 39475, July 31, 2001) 
and 2002 final rule (67 FR 4369, January 30, 2002).
    Since 2002, the American Samoa pelagic fisheries have changed such 
that the conditions that led the Council and NMFS to establish the LVPA 
are no longer present. The LVPA may be unnecessarily reducing the 
efficiency of the larger American Samoa longline vessels by displacing 
the fleet from a part of their historical fishing grounds.
    To address the current fishery conditions, the Council recommended 
that NMFS allow federally permitted U.S. longline vessels 50 ft and 
longer to fish in portions of the LVPA. Specifically, this action 
allows large U.S. vessels that hold a Federal American Samoa longline 
limited entry permit to fish within the LVPA seaward of 12 nm around 
Swains Island, Tutuila, and the Manua Islands. NMFS will continue to 
prohibit fishing in the LVPA by large purse seine vessels. The fishing 
requirements for the Rose Atoll Marine National Monument also remain 
unchanged.
    This action allows fishing in an additional 16,817 nm\2\ of Federal 
waters, allowing large longline vessels to distribute fishing effort 
over a larger area. This may reduce catch competition among the larger 
vessels and promote economic efficiency by reducing transit costs. This 
action is intended to improve the efficiency and economic viability of 
the American Samoa longline fleet, while ensuring that fishing by the 
longline and small vessel fleets remains sustainable on an ongoing 
basis. NMFS will continue to prohibit fishing by large longline vessels 
within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) from 3-12 nm around the 
islands, thus maintaining non-competitive fishing opportunities for the 
small-vessel longline fleet. You may find additional background 
information on this action in the preamble to the proposed rule 
published on August 25, 2015 (80 FR 51527).
    The Council and NMFS will annually review the effects of this final 
rule on catch rates, small vessel participation, and sustainable 
fisheries development initiatives. Any future changes would be subject 
to additional environmental review and opportunity for public review 
and comment.

Comments and Responses

    On August 25, 2015, NMFS published the proposed rule and draft 
environmental assessment (EA) for public comment (80 FR 51527). The 
comment period ended September 24, 2015. NMFS received comments from 
over 270 individuals, commercial and recreational fishermen, 
businesses, Territorial government offices (including the Governor of 
American Samoa and the American Samoa Department of Marine and Wildlife 
Resources), Federal agencies, and non-governmental organizations. NMFS 
responds to these comments below.

Comments on the Proposed Rule

    Comment 1: One commenter requested that NMFS extend the public 
comment period until after the Western Pacific Fishery Management 
Council's October 20-22, 2015, meeting in American Samoa.
    Response: Under Section 304(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), NMFS is 
required to make regulations proposed through the Council process 
available for public review and comment for a period of 15 to 60 days. 
NMFS is satisfied that the public comment period of 30 days for this 
action provided the public with adequate notice and opportunity to be 
heard. In addition to this public comment period, NMFS and the Council 
also provided several other opportunities for public input prior to 
publication of the proposed rule through the Council process. 
Specifically, the Council provided public input opportunities at its 
159th Council meeting held in Guam in March 2014, and at a public 
hearing in American Samoa in May 2014 (79 FR 22100, April 21, 2014). 
The Council also provided an opportunity for public input at its 160th 
Council meeting held in Honolulu in June 2014. At that meeting, the 
Council deferred action on the issue to hold additional public 
meetings, in January 2015, with representatives of the American Samoa 
government, Swains Island, Tutuila, Manua Islands, and American Samoa 
fishermen. At its 162nd Council meeting held in Honolulu in March 2015, 
the Council considered prior public input, provided another opportunity 
for public input, and made its final recommendation to NMFS as 
described in the proposed rule and implemented by this final rule. 
Thus, NMFS is satisfied that three full Council meetings, the January 
15, 2015, public meetings, and the 30-day public comment period on the 
proposed rule provided the public with adequate notice and opportunity 
to be heard, and that granting an extension to the public comment 
period until after the Council's October 2015 meeting would yield no 
new comment or information not previously received.
    Comment 2: Several commenters said that the American Samoa longline

[[Page 5620]]

fishery provides food, jobs and supports local businesses and is 
important to the American Samoan economy.
    Response: NMFS agrees that the American Samoa longline fishery is 
important to the American Samoa economy. According to information 
presented in the EA, the fishery contributed between $7.2 million and 
$13.7 million to the American Samoa economy between 2003 and 2013. The 
primary source of the fishery's economic contributions to the territory 
was from sales of fish to the two canneries in Pago Pago. Although 
estimates are not currently available, the fishing activity also 
supports the American Samoa economy by providing wages for captains, 
crew members and income for the vessel owners. Moreover, the 
preparations for each trip include the purchase of supplies, including 
fuel, food for crew, and other items, which are bought locally. 
Additionally, each vessel requires a variety of local services 
including but not limited to, electrical engineering, hydraulics, 
engine maintenance, and vessel repair, all of which contribute to the 
local economy.
    Comment 3: Several commenters said that the large longline vessels 
are all vessels of the United States and should have the same right to 
fish in American Samoa waters as the small alia vessels.
    Response: NMFS agrees that all federally permitted American Samoa 
longline vessels are vessels of the United States. Furthermore, NMFS 
believes that all fishing sectors should be treated equally, unless 
there is a legitimate conservation and management need to treat them 
differently. Here, NMFS is approving an action that exempts large 
longline vessels from an area that is currently restricted to them, but 
open to other fishing vessels, because the conditions that originally 
led to the restriction for the large longline vessels no longer exists. 
Specifically, NMFS and the Council established the LPVA in 2002 to 
separate small longline vessels from large longline and purse seine 
vessels, and reduce the potential for gear conflict and catch 
competition between small and large vessels. At that time, the American 
Samoa longline fishery consisted of about 40 small alia (small fishing 
catamarans less than 50 ft long) and 25 large conventional mono-hull 
longline vessels. However, since 2006, fewer than three alia have been 
operating on a regular basis; and of these, only one was active in 2013 
and 2014.
    As described in the EA, fewer than 50 other small commercial and 
recreational vessels fish for yellowfin and skipjack tunas and 
billfishes in nearshore waters and on offshore banks around American 
Samoa. Therefore, even accounting for the potential for competition 
with pelagic troll and recreational vessels, the conditions that led to 
the establishment of the LVPA in 2002 no longer support the full extent 
(30-50 nm) of the original prohibited area for longlining.
    While the LVPA may benefit a few small alia vessels and these other 
fishing sectors, the LVPA may be further reducing the fishing 
efficiency of large longline vessels in combination with reduced catch 
per unit of effort (CPUE), lower sale price of fish, and increasing 
operational costs.
    This action would allow large longline vessels in American Samoa to 
fish within the LVPA to as close as 12 nm of shore around Tutuila, 
Aunuu, the Manua Islands, and Swains. Waters from the shoreline to 12 
nm around these islands, and within the Rose Atoll Marine National 
Monument, will remain closed to large longline vessels. This would 
continue to afford all other vessels and fishing sectors adequate 
spatial separation from the large vessel longline fleet and minimize 
the potential for catch competition and potential for gear 
interactions. This exemption applies only to large longline vessels of 
the United States that hold an American Samoa limited entry longline 
permit under 50 CFR 665.801.
    Comment 4: Several commenters said they work and earn wages on 
longline vessels to support their families.
    Response: Comment noted. See response to Comment 2.
    Comment 5: Several commenters said the LVPA closure areas have been 
under-utilized by the alia longline fleet for more than 10 years.
    Response: See response to Comment 3.
    Comment 6: Several commenters noted that because fuel prices are 
now at an all-time low, reducing the cost of trips, including fuel cost 
is no longer a justification for this action.
    Response: NMFS is approving an action to exempt large longline 
vessels from a portion of the existing LVPA because the conditions that 
led to the establishment of the closure are no longer present or 
necessary to prevent gear conflict and catch competition. Additionally, 
this action could improve efficiency in fishing activities by large 
longline vessels. While fuel price may currently be lower than in the 
past, it is subject to fluctuation due to multiple global and economic 
factors. Further, the success of longline fishing depends on being able 
to follow the fish, especially if they are abundant within the LVPA or 
pass into the LVPA. Because cost of fuel continues to be the principal 
expense for longline fishing, this action could improve trip profits by 
lowering fuel costs as large longline vessels could fish closer to port 
than currently allowed.
    Comment 7: Several commenters noted that fuel prices fluctuate and 
allowing the large longline vessels to fish closer to home would result 
in a small cost savings in fuel.
    Response: See response to Comment 6.
    Comment 8: Several commenters said that the action would improve 
safety at sea for small fishing vessels because large vessels would now 
be in the vicinity to assist small vessels that get into trouble.
    Response: Comment noted.
    Comment 9: Several commenters said that there are higher catches 
and better catch rates of pelagic fish by recreational sectors in 
American Samoa compared to neighboring countries that do not have a 
LVPA and, therefore, opposed the action.
    Response: Within the national waters of neighboring South Pacific 
countries, NMFS has no available information on the catch rates of 
pelagic species other than by longline and purse seine vessels. The 
available information for these fisheries indicates that catch rates 
for albacore have declined across most of the South Pacific, and the 
poor economic conditions faced by the American Samoa fleet were also 
experienced by most of the other longline fishing nations in the South 
Pacific. Through this action, NMFS expects that longline vessels will 
have the opportunity to improve catch rates that have been steadily 
declining, and to achieve optimum yield, while still maintaining a 
reduced area closure to protect the needs of other fishery 
participants, including recreational fishers.
    Comment 10: Several commenters said that under the action, longline 
vessels would destroy coral reef ecosystem resources and breeding 
grounds for other fish species.
    Response: While the commenter did not specify how longline vessels 
would destroy such marine resources, NMFS assumes that the commenter 
was referring to the potential for entanglement on coral reefs. NMFS 
notes that longline fishing in American Samoa does not occur over coral 
reefs, but rather much farther offshore and at depths (100-400 m) well 
below the photic zone where most coral reefs occur. Waters from the 
shoreline to 12 nm from shore will remain closed to large longline 
vessels, and there is little, if any, coral reef habitat beyond 12 nm.

[[Page 5621]]

In addition, longliners actively avoid shallow coral reef habitat, 
including fish breeding grounds, in order to prevent gear loss through 
entanglement with the bottom substrate. The American Samoa longline 
fishery does not target nor incidentally catch coral reef fish species.
    Comment 11: Several commenters said that longline fishing has 
dramatically reduced fish populations around American Samoa and that 
this action would result in overfishing and deplete fish stocks.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. While the commenters did not identify the 
fish populations that have been reduced or would become subject to 
overfishing because of the action, the American Samoa longline fishery 
primarily targets albacore. The most recent stock assessment summarized 
in the EA indicates that this population is not subject to overfishing 
and is not overfished. Additionally, stock assessments for most species 
incidentally harvested in the fishery, including yellowfin, skipjack, 
and billfish indicate that these species are also not subject to 
overfishing or overfished. Bigeye tuna is incidentally harvested, and 
is subject to overfishing. Nevertheless, because tunas, billfish, and 
other species caught by the American Samoa longline fishery are 
comprised of larger highly migratory populations, NMFS does not expect 
this action to contribute to overfishing or localized depletion of 
these stocks. See also response to Comment 12.
    Comment 12: Several commenters said that there are no data to 
support claims that the action would result in overfishing or have a 
detrimental effect on alia longline vessels or recreational sport 
fishing vessels.
    Response: NMFS does not expect this action to result in overfishing 
of any pelagic species nor have a detrimental effect on alia longliners 
or sport fishing vessels. Skipjack and yellowfin together comprise 
about 95 percent of the troll catch, the primary fishing method of 
sport fishing vessels. Furthermore, catch rates of these two species 
show no signs of decline over a 30-yr period, which encompasses the 
period of expansion of the American Samoa longline fleet. South Pacific 
albacore, the primary target of both alia and large longline vessels, 
is not subject to overfishing and is not overfished. Similarly, 
skipjack and yellowfin are not subject to overfishing nor overfished, 
and NMFS does not expect this action to result in a change in the 
status of these species. Bigeye tuna in the western and central Pacific 
Ocean, which is incidentally harvested in the American Samoa fishery, 
is currently subject to overfishing, but is not overfished, and is 
managed under conservation and management measures adopted by the 
Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, and implemented by 
NMFS. The American Samoa longline fishery annually landed fewer than 
200 mt of bigeye tuna since 2005 with 85 mt landed in 2013.
    Comment 13: Several commenters said that the action would result in 
a higher risk for oil spills and marine debris, but did not explain 
why.
    Response: Based on available information presented in the EA, NMFS 
does not expect a change in the level of risk for oil spills or marine 
debris through this action. Allowing large longline vessels to fish 
within a portion of the LVPA will not lead to an increase in the number 
of vessels participating in the fishery or change vessel operations in 
a manner that would lead to greater discharge of oil or fuel into ocean 
waters. Further, the action does not present any greater danger of 
longline vessels grounding, or habitat damage compared to the status 
quo because there are no areas in the EEZ seaward of 12 nm shallow 
enough for a vessel to run aground.
    Comment 14: One commenter felt that the action would endanger the 
survival of newly born humpback whale calves through entanglement and 
drowning.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. Humpback whale calving and mother and 
calf pairs occur in shallow coastal waters within 12 nm, which would 
remain closed to large longline vessels. Beyond 12 nm, the movement of 
longline vessels will not change the amount of fishing effort or vessel 
operations and would not elevate the risk of entanglement. There have 
been no recorded or observed interactions with humpback whales in the 
American Samoa longline fishery.
    Comment 15: Several commenters expressed the concern that public 
submissions on the action provided incorrect and/or misleading 
information regarding the regulatory protections for sea turtles and 
marine mammals in the action area, as well as impacts to these species 
by the American Samoa longline fishery. The commenters noted that NMFS 
has implemented regulations to protect marine resources, and they 
supported the action.
    Response: Comment noted.
    Comment 16: One commenter said that the action could affect the 
composition and character of the marine environment around American 
Samoa, including marine populations protected by the National Marine 
Sanctuary of America Samoa.
    Response: While the commenter did not specify how the action would 
affect the composition and character of the marine environment, 
longline fishing by large longline vessels has been occurring since the 
mid-1990s within the area where the LVPA now exists. NMFS has no 
observed or reported information indicating that longline fishing from 
large longline vessels has resulted in negative impacts to the 
composition and character of the marine environment around American 
Samoa, either before or after the establishment of the LVPA in 2002. 
Because the action would continue to prohibit longline fishing by large 
vessels from occurring within 12 nm of American Samoa, NMFS does not 
expect the action would result in such changes.
    The American Samoa longline fishery does not operate within the 
boundaries of the National Marine Sanctuary of America Samoa, which 
extends from the shoreline out to a distance of approximately 3 nm. The 
American Samoa longline fleet targets highly migratory pelagic species 
such as albacore at considerable distances from the shoreline seaward 
of the outer-boundary of the American Samoa sanctuary. Because the 
action continues to prohibit longline fishing by large vessels from 
occurring within 12 nm of American Samoa and within the Sanctuary, NMFS 
does not expect the action would affect marine populations protected by 
the sanctuary.
    Comment 17: Several commenters said that although there are only a 
few active alia longline vessels, the action would make it even more 
difficult for small alia vessels to re-enter the fishery because they 
would not be able to compete economically with the large longline 
vessels.
    Response: Alia fishing vessels operated for years before and after 
the arrival of large longline vessels in American Samoa in the 1990s. 
Based on information available, NMFS believes the reduced participation 
of the small alia vessels in the fishery was driven primarily by low 
catch rates of albacore experienced across the South Pacific region 
combined with high economic and other operating costs. See EA section 
3.1.4.1.
    The Council has been working with the American Samoa government on 
several fishery development initiatives, including the design of a new 
multi-purpose alia fishing vessel and training in fresh fish handling 
for local and export markets. Smaller, alia-type vessels are likely 
better suited to conduct fresh fish operations targeting yellowfin and 
bigeye tunas and, as such, would minimize the potential economic

[[Page 5622]]

competition with larger longline vessels targeting albacore. Data 
indicates that gear competition between large longline and alia vessels 
has not been a contributing factor to the decline of alia vessels. 
Accordingly, NMFS has no reason to believe that the action will 
adversely affect reentry of fishery participants into the alia fishery. 
See also response to Comments 3 and 24.
    Comment 18: Several commenters expressed concern that the action 
would be detrimental to the recreational fishery and the growing 
sportfish tourism industry in American Samoa.
    Response: NMFS has no information to suggest that the action would 
adversely affect other fishery participants. NMFS and the Council 
established the LPVA in 2002 to separate small longline vessels from 
large longline and purse seine vessels, and reduce the potential for 
gear conflict and catch competition. At that time, the American Samoa 
longline fishery consisted of about 40 small alia and 25 large 
conventional mono-hull longline vessels. Since then, there has been an 
increase in participation by the recreational and sport fishing 
fisheries, which target species such as skipjack tuna, yellowfin tuna, 
mahimahi, wahoo and billfish. These species are only a minor component 
of the catch by American Samoa longline vessels. Information in the EA 
does not indicate longline fisheries are negatively affecting troll 
CPUE. Specifically the data showed that increased longline catches of 
skipjack and yellowfin are coincident with higher CPUEs of the same two 
species in the troll fishery. This suggests that the CPUEs for both 
fisheries are dependent on regional availability of skipjack and 
yellowfin tuna. Similar studies from other parts of the region and 
referenced in the EA showed no evidence of interactions and catch 
competition between troll and longline vessels. See also response to 
Comment 9.
    Sport fishing vessels generally operate within 12 nm from shore and 
in offshore areas around banks and seamounts, which longline vessels 
actively avoid to reduce the potential for longline gear tangling on 
bottom substrates. Furthermore, sport fishing and subsistence fishing 
beyond 12 nm from shore does not occur at sufficient frequency or 
concentration to justify the continued restriction of large longline 
vessels out to the full 50 nm to control the potential for gear 
conflict or catch competition. Although NMFS allows recreational and 
non-commercial fishing within the Rose Atoll Marine National Monument 
beyond 12 nm with a federal permit, all commercial fishing, including 
longline fishing is prohibited throughout the monument out to a 
distance of approximately 50 nm around the atoll.
    Comment 19: Several commenters thought that the action would affect 
the ability of recreational and subsistence fishermen to catch fish and 
feed their families.
    Response: The commenters did not explain how the proposed action 
would affect their ability to catch fish. There is a wide variety of 
reef fish, deep bottomfish, and various pelagic species that will 
remain accessible exclusively for all fishermen with vessels smaller 
than 50 ft. NMFS does not expect the action would negatively impact the 
ability of these fishing sectors to catch fish for recreation or 
subsistence, as large longline vessels would continue to be prohibited 
from fishing within 12 nm around American Samoa.
    Comment 20: Several commenters thought that allowing large longline 
vessels to fish on the banks and seamounts within the LVPA including 
South Bank, East Bank, Two Percent Bank, South East Bank, and North 
East Bank would deplete fish stocks and result in damage to bottom 
habitat.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. See responses to Comments 10 and 11.
    Comment 21: Several commenters said that existing federal 
regulations require American Samoa longline vessels to deploy all hooks 
below 100 m in depth to minimize interaction with sea turtles. Because 
of this existing gear regulation, longliners will avoid shallow banks 
and seamounts used by small vessels to minimize potential for gear 
loss.
    Response: NMFS agrees. Federal regulations governing the American 
Samoa longline fishery at 50 CFR part 665 Subpart F require all 
longline hooks to be set at least 100 m deep. This is accomplished by 
requiring a minimum float line length of 30 m, together with a minimum 
of 70 m of blank mainline (no hooks) between each float line and the 
first branch line in either direction along the mainline. Both small 
and large longline vessels actively avoid bottom substrates to prevent 
gear entanglement and loss. See also response to Comment 10.
    Comment 22: Several commenters said that albacore and other tuna 
species caught by the American Samoa longline fleet are highly 
migratory species and do not remain within the confines of the existing 
LVPA or the proposed exempted area and, therefore, there are no data to 
support public comments saying the longline fishery is detrimental to 
alia and sport fishing fleet.
    Response: NMFS agrees. Not only do these pelagic species have an 
extensive migratory range, there are seasonal abundance trends that 
influence the catchability of these species throughout the year. This 
affects both large and small longliners. See also responses to Comments 
11 and 18.
    Comment 23: Several commenters felt that the action would result in 
gear conflicts between large longline vessels and small longline, 
troll, and recreational fishing vessels because NMFS and the Council 
underestimated the number of small vessels currently operating within 
the LVPA.
    Response: A purpose in establishing the LVPA in 2002 was to 
separate small longline vessels from large longline and purse seine 
vessels to reduce the potential for gear conflict and catch 
competition. NMFS believes that the information presented by the 
Council and in the EA indicates that the conditions for the 
conservation and management need in establishing the LVPA no longer 
exist to the degree that requires its continuation. NMFS, moreover, 
believes that the 12 nm prohibition applied to large longline vessels 
provides adequate separation between small fishing vessels from the 
large longline and purse seine vessels, while still allowing for 
optimum yield for all fishing sectors.
    Furthermore, the frequency and concentration of small alia longline 
vessels and small non-longline vessels fishing seaward of 12 nm is 
lower than that of the large longline vessels. Many of these small 
vessels are recreational and do not operate on a daily basis. The EA 
discusses the potential impacts of fishery participants, including 
impacts to the small vessel fleets and indicates this action will 
continue to provide for sufficient spatial separation between small and 
large vessels. The Council and NMFS used the best available information 
provided by the American Samoa Department of Marine and Wildlife 
Resources (DMWR) creel survey to estimate the number of vessels 
operating in the LVPA. See also response to Comment 18.
    Comment 24: One commenter noted that two large local U.S. 
longliners already have permission to fish in the LVPA, and so there is 
nothing new about larger longline vessels fishing in the area.
    Response: Comment noted. As part of the establishment of the LVPA 
regulations, NMFS exempted two individuals and their vessels from the 
LVPA restrictions on the basis that these individuals had made at least 
one landing of pelagic management unit species (MUS) with those vessels 
in the

[[Page 5623]]

LVPA area on or prior to November 13, 1997. See 50 CFR 665.818. NMFS 
has no information that the activity of these two vessels has created 
gear conflicts or affected the catches of smaller vessels within the 
LVPA.
    Comment 25: Several commenters thought that the action would 
negatively affect the American Samoan Government's plan to build a 
fleet of 40 ft super alia intended to increase local indigenous Samoan 
participation in fishing in the LVPA.
    Response: Based on information provided in comments submitted by 
the Government of American Samoa, the government has received a 
technical assistance grant from the U.S. Department of the Interior for 
the development of a prototype-fishing vessel called a super alia. 
Because the vessel has yet to be designed, constructed, or tested, and 
because additional capital would be required to build a fleet of these 
super alia envisioned under the Government's plan, NMFS cannot predict 
what changes, if any, may occur in the commercial fisheries because of 
this grant. However, the Council and NMFS are prepared to work with the 
Government of American Samoa to address potential regulatory and other 
impediments to sustainable fisheries development initiatives, once a 
super alia fleet is fully developed and the Government of American 
Samoa's alia program is implemented.
    Comment 26: Several commenters said that a super alia fishing fleet 
is not realistic because fishermen will run into the same problems the 
previous alia fleet experienced, including high operation costs for 
longline gear, fuel, and bait.
    Response: Comment noted. See responses to Comments 17 and 25.
    Comment 27: Several commenters noted that in the Deed of Cession 
with the chiefs of the islands of Tutuila, Aunuu, and Manua Islands, 
the United States promised to protect the lands, preserve the 
traditions, customs, language and culture, Samoan way of life, and the 
waters surrounding the islands, and that all the science and 
environmental analysis should not supersede the rights of the people of 
these islands.
    Response: NMFS' decision to approve the Council's recommendation to 
modify the LVPA is consistent with its authority under the Magnuson-
Stevens Act to manage fishery resources in the U.S. EEZ. This action 
relieves an area restriction that applied to certain large commercial 
fishing operators within a portion of the US EEZ (generally 12 to 50 nm 
from shore), based on NMFS' determination that the restriction no 
longer serves the conservation and management purposes for which it was 
developed. Importantly, this action preserves full access to these 
waters by smaller vessels, including alias, sport fishers, and 
artisanal fishing vessels, throughout the EEZ, as authorized under the 
existing American Samoa Archipelagic Fishery Ecosystem Plan and 
implementing regulations. Further, this action does not alter the 
authority of American Samoa to manage its coastal fisheries to the 
extent authorized under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1856.
    NMFS took particular care to ensure that the views of American 
Samoa stakeholders, including fishermen, fishing communities, and the 
American Samoa government, were solicited and taken into account 
throughout the development of this action. Consistent with the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Council and NMFS provided a number of 
opportunities for American Samoa's participation during all material 
phases of the development of this measure, including Council meetings 
to discuss the amendment, the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) 
process, and public meetings held in American Samoa (see response to 
Comment 1).
    Comment 28: One commenter expressed support for the purse seine 
fleet.
    Response: Comment noted. This action does not change the existing 
prohibitions against purse seine fishing in the LVPA.
    Comment 29: One commenter felt that the action is based on 
incomplete data because the Council based its decision solely on the 
decrease of the alia longline fishing activities, and did not consider 
fishing activities by troll and bottomfish vessels.
    Response: NMFS disagrees that the Council did not consider troll 
and bottomfish vessels. The EA contains detailed description of fishing 
sectors of American Samoa, including catch and effort by the troll and 
bottomfish fisheries, and other small boat fisheries. See response to 
Comment 23.
    Comment 30: One commenter said the Council did not adequately 
consult with stakeholders prior to recommending the proposed action at 
its 162nd meeting in March 2015.
    Response: See response to Comment 1.
    Comment 31: One commenter thought that the proposed action ignores 
the fact that there are significant fishing activities in the exemption 
areas, especially in the vicinity near the banks.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The EA identifies the types of fisheries 
that occur within the LVPA around American Samoa, including the alia 
longline fishery, troll and bottomfish fishery, and recreational 
fisheries. The EA also describes the number of vessels in each fishery, 
and provides catch and effort information and fishing location, where 
data is available. Moreover, the EA also provides an estimate of troll 
catch from the offshore banks as a percentage of total troll catch of 
American Samoa and analyzes the effects of the action on those fishing 
sectors.
    Comment 32: One commenter felt that NOAA should increase the 
collection of information about seabirds and other protected species, 
by expanding current observer coverage as this fishery expands in size 
and area.
    Response: NMFS strives to maintain an annual observer coverage rate 
of at least 20 percent in the American Samoa longline fishery, and has 
steadily increased observer coverage from approximately 6 percent in 
2006 to nearly 20 percent in 2014. In some years, NMFS has been able to 
cover over 33 percent of all longline trips in the American Samoa 
longline fishery. However, NMFS' ability to increase and maintain 
observer coverage greater than 20 percent will be subject to available 
funding. NMFS also notes that the fishery may not increase in the total 
number of vessels because the number of available fishing permits is 
limited.
    Comment 33: One commenter thought that, although the action would 
not alter fishing activities within the Rose Atoll Marine National 
Monument, the change may result in greater likelihood and frequency of 
derelict fishing gear washing ashore and recommends NMFS include 
measures to minimize derelict fishing gear.
    Response: NMFS is unaware of any instances where such an event has 
occurred. Based on information provided in the USFWS Rose Atoll 
National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan (May 2014), 
the most significant derelict fishing gear is from the grounding of a 
Taiwanese vessel, which occurred in 1993, over 20 years ago. The plan 
also notes that observations of other forms of marine debris at Rose 
Atoll are rare, and do not constitute a significant visual presence in 
the atoll. NMFS does not expect this action to change the amount of 
fishing effort or other vessel operations, and is unlikely to increase 
frequency of derelict gear. For these reasons, NMFS is satisfied that 
additional measures to minimize derelict fishing gear from American 
Samoa longline fisheries are unnecessary at this time.

[[Page 5624]]

Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment

    Comment 34: One commenter said that NMFS should not open a 
currently closed area without a full environmental impact statement and 
additional sea turtle mitigation measures, including increased observer 
coverage and hard interaction limits.
    Response: Based on the analysis presented in the EA, NMFS has 
determined that the proposed action would not result in significant 
impacts affecting the quality of the human environment and, therefore, 
does not warrant the preparation of an environmental impact statement. 
The analysis presented in the EA incorporates the best available 
scientific and commercial information on the fishery and its impacts on 
the environment, including sea turtles. Specifically, along with other 
relevant information, the EA considers the analysis from an October 30, 
2015, biological opinion (2015 BiOp) that NMFS developed as part of a 
formal consultation under the Endangered Species Act. (See also 
responses to Comments 35-37).
    Although participation and effort in the American Samoa longline 
fishery has varied and declined in recent years, NMFS expects that the 
level of participation, in terms of fleet-wide sets and hooks deployed, 
likely will return to historic levels. For this reason, the analysis in 
the 2015 BiOp anticipated the American Samoa longline fishery operating 
up to the level seen in 2007 when 29 vessels deployed 5,920 sets and 
approximately 17,554,000 hooks, and evaluated the potential 
environmental effects of the fishery operating at these levels. 
Additionally, NMFS anticipates the continued placement of observers on 
approximately 20 percent of all longline trips.
    In the 2015 BiOp, NMFS concluded that the continued operation of 
the American Samoa longline fishery under existing federal regulations, 
and effort levels expected under the proposed action, is not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of any ESA-listed species, including 
sea turtles. NMFS based this conclusion on a thorough assessment of the 
effects of the action, together with the environmental baseline and the 
cumulative effects. The EA analysis considered the information 
presented in the 2015 BiOp and found that the expected level of fishery 
interactions under the proposed action would not result in significant 
population level effects for any ESA-listed species or their habitats, 
including sea turtles.
    Comment 35: One commenter said that, based on its calculations from 
information contained in the draft EA, the American Samoa longline 
fishery has killed approximately three adult female leatherback sea 
turtles each year for four years.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with the commenter's conclusion about 
leatherback mortality in the action. At the time that NMFS published 
the proposed rule, the agency was undergoing consultation pursuant to 
Section 7 of the ESA for the American Samoa pelagic longline fishery. 
As part of the consultation process, NMFS prepared a memorandum dated 
May 8, 2015, (amended July 21, 2015) under the authority of sections 
7(a)(2) and 7(d) of the ESA for the proposed continued operation of the 
fishery while consultation was ongoing. The draft EA incorporated 
information on the estimated leatherback take from this memorandum, and 
projected that, by the completion of consultation in October 2015, the 
longline fishery could be expected to interact with 27 leatherbacks, 
the equivalent of one adult nesting female mortality every 1.566 years. 
Since publication of the proposed rule, NMFS completed the 2015 BiOp, 
which considered all relevant commercial and scientific information 
available on sea turtles, and which supersedes the information in the 
May 8, 2015 memorandum as amended on July 21, 2015. NMFS' final EA 
considers the information found in the 2015 BiOp.
    In the 2015 BiOp, NMFS estimated anticipated future interactions 
between the fishery and leatherbacks sea turtles. NMFS used previous, 
observed interactions and anticipated effort in the fishery to predict 
the future level of take. NMFS then used a discounting methodology to 
analyze the impact of this level of take on the leatherback population.
    NMFS based the interaction estimates in the BiOp on a random sample 
of longline trips on which scientific observers are deployed. Relying 
on Table 7 of the 2015 BiOp, NMFS estimates 36 total leatherback 
interactions between 2011 and mid-2015 (based on eight observed 
interactions). NMFS used these interactions to calculate an average 
rate of interaction. That was then multiplied by the anticipated annual 
effort in the fishery to determine that 23 leatherback interactions are 
anticipated annually. NMFS then applied a leatherback mortality rate of 
70.6, based on observed mortalities, injuries, and applying the NMFS 
post-hooking mortality criteria (Ryder et al. 2006).
    Accordingly, NMFS anticipates 23 interactions to result in 16.28 
(23 x 0.76 = 16.28) leatherback sea turtle mortalities. However, many 
of these interactions occur with juvenile sea turtles that already 
experience low survival rates even in the absence of fishing. 
Therefore, NMFS must apply a discount to the expected rate of annual 
interactions in order to estimate the risk that the proposed action 
would pose to the western Pacific leatherback sea turtle population.
    NMFS first estimated the number of adult females or adult nester 
equivalents (ANE) harmed through injury or death related to the 
fishery. The American Samoa longline fishery interacts with male and 
female leatherback sea turtles, and they are predominantly juveniles 
(Van Houtan 2015). To estimate the number of adult females that could 
potentially be killed by 23 interactions, two adjustments were applied 
to the calculation above: (1) The proportion of females in the adult 
population (using a ratio of 65 percent females to 35 percent males); 
and (2) the adult equivalent represented by each juvenile interaction. 
The adult equivalent was determined using the discounting method (Van 
Houtan 2013, 2015). This discounting method summarized in the 2015 BiOp 
incorporates an exact demographic match to the observed interactions, 
and relies on length measurements by fishery observers of bycaught 
turtles, and conversion of these recorded lengths to ages. Therefore, 
of the estimated 16.28 leatherback sea turtle mortalities, NMFS 
estimates 10.58 would be females (16.28 x 0.65 = 10.58). Applying the 
adult equivalent discounting method (Van Houtan 2013, 2015), NMFS 
estimates 23 leatherback interactions would result in the mortality of 
0.55 adult females annually, or one adult female mortality every 1.8 
years from a nesting population of 2,739 females (Van Houtan 2015). 
This represents less than 0.0002, or 0.02 percent of the nesting 
population in the region. NMFS considers this level of impact to the 
population to be negligible, and it will not adversely affect the 
species' ability to survive, successfully reproduce, and recover.
    NMFS believes that the commenter made several assumptions in the 
calculations that led to a flawed conclusion on sea turtle mortality. 
The commenter assumed, for instance, an observer coverage rate of 20 
percent over the four-year period, and then apparently multiplied the 
observed number of injured and killed since 2010

[[Page 5625]]

by a factor of five. The commenter incorrectly applied the NMFS post-
hooking mortality criteria of 70.6 percent (Ryder et al. 2006) to the 
expanded number of injured turtles.
    The mortality rate is an average rate where mortality is 100 
percent and injuries are assessed at a rate between 0 and 100 percent, 
based on the observed hooking or entanglement injuries and using the 
NMFS post-hooking mortality criteria (Ryder et al. 2006). Therefore, 
the mortality rate of 70.6 percent already accounts for all observed 
mortalities. Thus, applying this rate to the expanded, injured turtle 
count is an incorrect use of the mortality rate. Furthermore, the 
mortality rate of 70.6 percent is a conservative mortality rate because 
NMFS did not separate out the larger turtles from the younger, smaller 
turtles that have a much higher mortality rate. The five smaller 
turtles were boarded dead (a mortality rate of 100 percent) and the 
three larger turtles that were not boarded had a mortality rate of 21.7 
percent. When using these individual mortality rates in the ANE 
calculation, the ANE is 0.33 rather than 0.55. While NMFS provided 
exact measurements for two turtles, it is incorrect to assume the other 
turtles were adults. In fact, the fishery predominantly interacts with 
juvenile turtles; of the eight observed interactions with leatherbacks 
in this fishery, five were juveniles and three were adults.
    NMFS, therefore, believes that the data and analysis contained in 
the 2015 BiOp and EA are the best available science on which to base 
determinations of the impact by the fishery to protected marine 
species.
    Comment 36: One commenter said that the draft EA does not 
adequately discuss the impacts to endangered leatherback sea turtles 
from the fishery and its expansion into the LVPA.
    Response: The analysis presented in the final EA incorporates the 
best available scientific and commercial information on the fishery and 
considers the 2015 BiOp, which NMFS developed as part of a formal 
consultation under the Endangered Species Act. The analysis in the 2015 
BiOp indicates that under the proposed action the fishery could 
potentially interact with 23 leatherback sea turtles each year. Genetic 
analysis of three leatherback turtles caught incidentally in the 
American Samoa longline fishery indicate that they are from the Western 
Pacific genetic stock, which is comprised of nesting populations in 
Papua-Barat, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands.
    Based on the analysis in the 2015 BiOp, NMFS estimates the longline 
fishery would cause 0.55 adult female mortalities annually. This is the 
equivalent of one adult female mortality every 1.8 years from a nesting 
population of 2,739 females in the Western Pacific population. (Van 
Houtan 2015). This represents less than 0.0002 (0.02 percent) of the 
nesting population in the region. In the 2015 BiOp, NMFS concluded that 
this anticipated level of interactions and associated adult female 
mortalities under the proposed action is not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of leatherback sea turtle populations. The analysis 
in the EA further indicates that 0.55 adult female mortalities annually 
or 1.65 adult female mortalities over a 3-yr period is not likely to 
pose an appreciable risk or result in significant impacts to 
leatherback sea turtle populations in the Western Pacific region.
    Comment 37: One commenter said that the draft EA failed to assess 
adequately the proposed action and several upcoming actions all of 
which will increase risk of interactions with sea turtles. First, the 
proposed action will allow large longline vessels into pelagic habitat 
around American Samoa most likely occupied by leatherback sea turtles. 
Second, the proposed rule will increase fishing effort as measured by 
area of the activity and by hooks deployed. Finally, the proposed 
action's risk of increasing interactions must be considered with the 
Council approved amendments that create a shallow-set longline fishery 
by eliminating the depth requirement for hooks and increasing the 
swordfish retention trip limit.
    Response: As discussed in response to comment 34, the final EA 
considers analysis presented in the 2015 BiOp, which estimates 
population level impacts to sea turtle populations resulting from the 
proposed action and in anticipation of increased fishing effort in 
coastal areas. After analyzing the proposed action, including the 
environmental baselines and cumulative effects, and its impact on 
protected species, NMFS concluded in the 2015 BiOp that the action is 
not expected to cause an appreciable reduction in the likelihood of 
both the survival and recovery of leatherback sea turtles in the wild, 
or other protected species in the action area. The final EA includes 
this information. In addition to impacts on protected resources, the 
final EA also analyzed whether the action would significantly affect 
the human and natural environment. Based on the analysis, NMFS 
determined that the impacts of the action were not significant (see 
Section 4 of the final EA). NMFS has no information to believe that the 
partial reopening of an area currently closed to longlining will result 
in unacceptable impacts to sea turtles or other protected species.
    The targeting of swordfish generally requires deployment of hooks 
shallower than 100 meters. However, as described in the draft EA, 
current federal regulations require all hooks set by the fishery to be 
set deeper than 100 meters in order to minimize the risk of sea turtle 
interaction. Thus, current federal regulations prohibit American Samoa 
longline vessels from targeting swordfish with hooks set shallower than 
100 meters in the American Samoa EEZ.
    NMFS notes that the Council has taken action to recommend creating 
a shallow-set longline fishery in American Samoa. The Council, however, 
has not yet developed an amendment or associated environmental impact 
analyses describing such a fishery. Should the Council propose that 
action as an amendment, NMFS would conduct all necessary analyses to 
determine whether the action complies with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and 
all applicable laws. At this time, however, NMFS is satisfied that the 
final EA adequately assesses the cumulative impact of the Council 
action and all reasonably foreseeable actions.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    In this final rule, NMFS made minor housekeeping changes in the 
tables of boundary coordinates in Sec.  665.818(b). In the proposed 
rule, NMFS had labeled the points for each coordinate with simple 
numbers. Using the same numbers for each table could lead to confusion 
among fishermen and enforcement officials, so in this final rule, NMFS 
added prefixes for boundary point labels that are different for each 
island or island group. Specifically, the Tutuila coordinates carry the 
prefix ``TU-,'' the Manua coordinates carry the prefix ``MA-,'' and the 
Swains coordinates carry the prefix ``SW-.''
    Also in the proposed rule, in the table of boundary coordinates for 
Swain's Island at Sec.  665.818(b)(3), NMFS only listed degrees and 
minutes in defining the latitude and longitude for each coordinate, and 
inadvertently omitted the seconds. In this final rule, NMFS corrects 
that omission by including degrees, minutes, and seconds for each 
boundary coordinate.
    The final rule also corrects the first instance of the coordinate 
for MA point 1. The proposed rule listed the W. long. coordinate as 
169[deg]53'7''. The final rule

[[Page 5626]]

corrects the seconds so that the W. long. coordinate is now 
169[deg]53'37''.
    This final rule also clarifies that the datum used to define the 
boundary coordinates in Sec.  665.818(b) is the World Geodetic System 
1984 (WGS84).

Classification

    The Regional Administrator, Pacific Islands Region, NMFS, has 
determined that this final rule is necessary for the conservation and 
management of the pelagic fisheries of American Samoa, and that it is 
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce 
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration during the proposed rule stage that this action would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. NMFS published the factual basis for the certification in the 
proposed rule and does not repeat it here. NMFS received no comments on 
this certification; as a result, a regulatory flexibility analysis is 
not required, and none has been prepared.
    Because this rule relieves a restriction by increasing the 
geographical area where fishing is allowed, it is not subject to the 
30-day delayed effectiveness provision of the APA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(1). Since 2002, NMFS has prohibited pelagic longline fishing by 
large U.S. vessels in the LVPA, which extended seaward approximately 
30-50 nm around the various islands of American Samoa. At that time, 
the Council and NMFS intended the LVPA to prevent gear conflicts and 
catch competition between large and small fishing vessels. Since 2002, 
however, the conditions that led to the establishment of the LVPA in 
2002 no longer support the full extent (30-50 nm) of the original 
prohibited area for longlining. The LVPA may be unnecessarily reducing 
the efficiency of the larger vessels by displacing them from a part of 
their historical fishing grounds. This action will allow large vessels 
to fish within the LVPA to as close as 12 nm around the islands. The 
action adds about 16,817 nm\2\ of Federal waters that are accessible to 
these vessels. By allowing access to some of the previously restricted 
area, the action will improve the efficiency and economic viability of 
the American Samoa longline fleet.
    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 665

    Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries, 
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian natives, Northern Mariana Islands, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: January 28, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR part 
665 as follows:

PART 665--FISHERIES IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC

0
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 665 continues to read as 
follows:

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


0
2. Revise Sec.  665.818 to read as follows:


Sec.  665.818  Exemptions for American Samoa large vessel prohibited 
areas.

    (a) Exemption for historical participation. (1) An exemption will 
be issued to a person who currently owns a large vessel to use that 
vessel to fish for western Pacific pelagic MUS in the American Samoa 
large vessel prohibited areas, if the person seeking the exemption had 
been the owner of that vessel when it was registered for use with a 
Western Pacific general longline permit, and has made at least one 
landing of western Pacific pelagic MUS in American Samoa on or prior to 
November 13, 1997.
    (2) A landing of western Pacific pelagic MUS for the purpose of 
this paragraph must have been properly recorded on a NMFS Western 
Pacific Federal daily longline form that was submitted to NMFS, as 
required in Sec.  665.14.
    (3) An exemption is valid only for a vessel that was registered for 
use with a Western Pacific general longline permit and landed western 
Pacific pelagic MUS in American Samoa on or prior to November 13, 1997, 
or for a replacement vessel of equal or smaller LOA than the vessel 
that was initially registered for use with a Western Pacific general 
longline permit on or prior to November 13, 1997.
    (4) An exemption is valid only for the vessel for which it is 
registered. An exemption not registered for use with a particular 
vessel may not be used.
    (5) An exemption may not be transferred to another person.
    (6) If more than one person, e.g., a partnership or corporation, 
owned a large vessel when it was registered for use with a Western 
Pacific general longline permit and made at least one landing of 
western Pacific pelagic MUS in American Samoa on or prior to November 
13, 1997, an exemption issued under this section will be issued to only 
one person.
    (b) Exemption for vessel size. Except as otherwise prohibited in 
subpart I of this part, a vessel of any size that is registered for use 
with a valid American Samoa longline limited access permit is 
authorized to fish for western Pacific pelagic MUS within the American 
Samoa large vessel prohibited areas as defined in Sec.  665.806(b), 
except that no large vessel as defined in Sec.  665.12 may be used to 
fish for western Pacific pelagic MUS in the portions of the American 
Samoa large vessel prohibited areas, as follows:
    (1) EEZ waters around Tutuila Island enclosed by straight lines 
connecting the following coordinates (the datum for these coordinates 
is World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84)):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Point                     S. lat.            W. long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TU-1............................  14[deg]01'42''      171[deg]02'36''
TU-2............................  14[deg]01'42''      170[deg]20'22''
TU-3............................  14[deg]34'31''      170[deg]20'22''
TU-4............................  14[deg]34'31''      171[deg]03'10''
TU-5............................  14[deg]02'47''      171[deg]03'10''
TU-1............................  14[deg]01'42''      171[deg]02'36''
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) EEZ waters around the Manua Islands enclosed by straight lines 
connecting the following coordinates (WGS84):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Point                     S. lat.            W. long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MA-1............................  13[deg]57'16''      169[deg]53'37''
MA-2............................  13[deg]57'16''      169[deg]12'45''
MA-3............................  14[deg]28'28''      169[deg]12'45''
MA-4............................  14[deg]28'28''      169[deg]53'37''
MA-1............................  13[deg]57'16''      169[deg]53'37''
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) EEZ waters around Swains Island enclosed by straight lines 
connecting the following coordinates (WGS84):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Point                     S. lat.            W. long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SW-1............................  10[deg]50'42''      171[deg]17'42''
SW-2............................  10[deg]50'42''      170[deg]51'39''
SW-3............................  11[deg]16'08''      170[deg]51'39''
SW-4............................  11[deg]16'08''      171[deg]17'42''
SW-1............................  10[deg]50'42''      171[deg]17'42''
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-01891 Filed 1-29-16; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P