63780 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Recommended Practices 2nd Edition, 

2007, and what the results have been. 

F.5 Are there statistics available on 

the extent to which hazardous liquid 

pipeline operators apply the CEPA 

practices? 

F.6 Are there statistics available that 

compare the number of SCC indications 

detected and SCC-related failures, 

between operators applying the CEPA 

practices and those applying other SCC 

standards or practices? 

F.7 Do the CEPA practices address 

the full lifecycle concerns associated 

with SCC? 

F.8 Are there additional industry 

practices that address SCC? 

The Effectiveness of SCC Detection 

Tools and Methods: 

F.9 Are there statistics available on 

the extent to which various tools and 

methods can accurately detect and 

determine the severity of SCC? 

F.10 Are tools or methods available 

to accurately detect and determine the 

severity of SCC when it is associated 

with longitudinal pipe seams? 

F.11 Should PHMSA require that 

operators perform a critical analysis of 

all factors that influence SCC to 

determine if SCC is a credible threat for 

each pipeline segment? What 

experience-based indications have 

proven reliable in determining whether 

SCC could be present? 

F.12 Should PHMSA require an 

integrity assessment using methods 

capable of detecting SCC whenever a 

credible threat of SCC is identified? 

F.13 Should PHMSA require a 

periodic analysis of the effectiveness of 

operator corrosion management 

programs, which integrate information 

about cathodic protection, coating 

anomalies, in-line inspection data, 

corrosion coupon data, corrosion 

inhibitor usage, analysis of corrosion 

products, environmental and soil data, 

and any other pertinent information 

related to corrosion management? 

F.14 What further action should be 

taken to address corrosion issues? 

F.15 If commenters suggest 

modification to the existing regulatory 

requirements, PHMSA requests that 

commenters be as specific as possible. 

In addition, PHMSA requests 

commenters to provide information and 

supporting data related to: 

• The potential costs of modifying the 

existing regulatory requirements. 

• The potential quantifiable safety 

and societal benefits of modifying the 

existing regulatory requirements. 

• The potential impacts on small 

businesses of modifying the existing 

regulatory requirements. 

• The potential environmental 

impacts of modifying the existing 

regulatory requirements. 

III. Regulatory Notices 

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

E.O. 12866 requires agencies to 

regulate in the ‘‘most cost-effective 

manner,’’ to make a ‘‘reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs,’’ 

and to develop regulations that ‘‘impose 

the least burden on society.’’ We 

therefore request comments, including 

specific data if possible, concerning the 

costs and benefits of revising the 

pipeline safety regulations to 

accommodate any of the changes 

suggested in this advance notice. 

B. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 requires 

agencies to assure meaningful and 

timely input by state and local officials 

in the development of regulatory 

policies that may have a substantial, 

direct effect on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. PHMSA is 

inviting comments on the effect a 

possible rulemaking adopting any of the 

amendments discussed in this 

document may have on the relationship 

between national government and the 

states. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), we must 

consider whether a proposed rule would 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

‘‘Small entities’’ include small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

that are independently owned and 

operated and are not dominant in their 

fields, and governmental jurisdictions 

with populations under 50,000. If your 

business or organization is a small 

entity and if adoption of any of the 

amendments discussed in this ANPRM 

could have a significant economic 

impact on your operations, please 

submit a comment to explain how and 

to what extent your business or 

organization could be affected. 

D. National Environmental Policy Act 

The National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires Federal 

agencies to consider the consequences 

of Federal actions and that they prepare 

a detailed statement analyzing if the 

action significantly affects the quality of 

the human environment. Interested 

parties are invited to address the 

potential environmental impacts of this 

ANPRM. We are particularly interested 

in comments about compliance 

measures that would provide greater 

benefit to the human environment or on 

alternative actions the agency could take 

that would provide beneficial impacts. 

E. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175 requires 

agencies to assure meaningful and 

timely input from Indian tribal 

government representatives in the 

development of rules that ‘‘significantly 

or uniquely affect’’ Indian communities 

and that impose ‘‘substantial and direct 

compliance costs’’ on such 

communities. We invite Indian tribal 

governments to provide comments on 

any aspect of this ANPRM that may 

affect Indian communities. 

F. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under 5 CFR Part 1320, PHMSA 

analyzes any paperwork burdens if any 

information collection will be required 

by a rulemaking. We invite comment on 

the need for any collection of 

information and paperwork burdens, if 

any. 

G. Privacy Act Statement 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received in response 

to any of our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). DOT’s complete Privacy 

Act Statement was published in the 

Federal Register on April 11, 2000 (65 

FR 19477). 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.; 49 CFR 

1.53. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 8, 

2010. 

Jeffrey D. Wiese, 

Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26006 Filed 10–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 622 

[Docket No. 100803319–0475–01] 

RIN 0648–BA04 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish 

Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Red 

Grouper Management Measures 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 63781 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed 

rule that would implement actions 

identified in a regulatory amendment to 

the Fishery Management Plan for the 

Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of 

Mexico (FMP) prepared by the Gulf of 

Mexico Fishery Management Council 

(Council). This proposed rule would 

reduce the commercial quota for red 

grouper and, thus, the combined 

commercial quota for shallow water 

grouper (SWG) species, and require 

vessels with valid commercial Gulf of 

Mexico (Gulf) reef fish permits to mark 

their buoy gear with the official vessel 

number. This rule also proposes minor 

revisions to codified text, including a 

revised definition of buoy gear, recodification of the commercial and 

recreational quotas for greater 

amberjack, revision of the recreational 

accountability measure for greater 

amberjack, and removal of outdated 

language for the red snapper individual 

fishing quota (IFQ) program. The 

intended effect of this proposed rule is 

to help prevent overfishing of red 

grouper while achieving optimum yield 

(OY) by reducing red grouper harvest 

consistent with the findings of the 

recent stock assessment for this species, 

and to implement technical corrections 

to the regulations. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before November 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the proposed rule identified by 

0648–BA04 by any of the following 

methods: 

• Electronic submissions: Submit 

electronic comments via the Federal 

e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Peter Hood, Southeast 

Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th 

Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. 

Instructions: No comments will be 

posted for public viewing until after the 

comment period has closed. All 

comments received are a part of the 

public record and will generally be 

posted to http://www.regulations.gov 

without change. All Personal Identifying 

Information (for example, name, 

address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by 

the commenter may be publicly 

accessible. Do not submit Confidential 

Business Information or otherwise 

sensitive or protected information. 

To submit comments through the 

Federal e-rulemaking portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov, enter ‘‘NOAA– 

NMFS–2010–0161’’ in the keyword 

search, then check the box labeled 

‘‘Select to find documents accepting 

comments or submissions,’’ then select 

‘‘Send a comment or submission.’’ 

NMFS will accept anonymous 

comments (enter N/A in the required 

field if you wish to remain anonymous). 

You may submit attachments to 

electronic comments in Microsoft Word, 

Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file 

formats only. 

Comments received through means 

not specified in this rule will not be 

considered. 

Copies of the regulatory amendment, 

which includes an environmental 

assessment and a regulatory impact 

review, may be obtained from the Gulf 

of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 

2203 North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, 

Tampa, FL 33607; telephone 813–348– 

1630; fax 813–348–1711; e-mail 

gulfcouncil@gulfcouncil.org; or may be 

downloaded from the Council’s Web 

site at http://www.gulfcouncil.org/. 

Comments regarding the burden-hour 

estimates or other aspects of the 

collection-of-information requirements 

contained in this proposed rule may be 

submitted in writing to Rich 

Malinowski, Southeast Regional Office, 

NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. 

Petersburg, FL 33701; and OMB, by email at OIRASubmission@omb.eop.gov, 

or by fax to 202–395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter Hood, 727–824–5305. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef 

fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico is 

managed under the FMP. The FMP was 

prepared by the Council and is 

implemented through regulations at 50 

CFR part 622 under the authority of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act). 

Background 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires 

NMFS and regional fishery management 

councils to prevent overfishing and 

achieve, on a continuing basis, the OY 

from Federally managed fish stocks. 

These mandates are intended to ensure 

fishery resources are managed for the 

greatest overall benefit to the nation, 

particularly with respect to providing 

food production and recreational 

opportunities, and protecting marine 

ecosystems. To further this goal, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act requires fishery 

managers to end overfishing of stocks 

while achieving OY from the fishery, 

and to minimize bycatch and bycatch 

mortality to the extent practicable. 

Status of Stock 

Red grouper were declared overfished 

and placed under a rebuilding plan in 

2004. A 2007 stock assessment 

determined that overfishing had ended 

and stock biomass had increased to OY. 

The 2007 assessment showed the stock 

was rebuilt and was close to its OY 

spawning stock biomass level. With this 

update in stock status, new regulations 

were implemented in 2009 (74 FR 

17603), that increased the commercial 

red grouper quota from 5.31 million lb 

(2.41 million kg) to 5.75 million lb (2.61 

million kg) and increased the red 

grouper recreational bag limit from 1 

fish to 2 fish (within a 4-fish grouper 

aggregate bag limit). In the same 

amendment that established these 

regulations (Amendment 30B to the 

FMP), the Council set red grouper catch 

limits and catch targets. The catch limit 

was set at the equilibrium (i.e., longterm average) maximum sustainable 

yield (MSY) or the yield for the current 

year corresponding to the fishing 

mortality at MSY (FMSY). The catch 

target was set at the equilibrium OY or 

the yield for the current year 

corresponding to the fishing mortality at 

OY (FOY). 

The objective of the 2009 Southeast 

Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) 

update assessment for Gulf red grouper 

was to update the 2007 SEDAR 12 red 

grouper assessment. The 2009 SEDAR 

update assessment indicated that the 

stock continues to be neither overfished 

nor undergoing overfishing. However, 

this update assessment indicated the 

stock had declined since 2005. A large 

part of the decline was attributed to an 

episodic mortality event in 2005 (most 

likely associated with red tide) that 

resulted in an approximate 20 percent 

mortality of the red grouper stock, in 

addition to mortalities resulting from 

fishing and other natural causes. The 

hurricanes that impacted the Gulf region 

in 2005 are not considered to have 

contributed to this decline. 

A SEDAR update assessment for Gulf 

gag was also conducted in 2009. Recent 

discussions of how the update 

assessment treated commercial and 

recreational discards prompted the 

Council to revisit the size distribution of 

gag recreational discards and the 

magnitude of gag commercial discards 

at its August 2010 meeting. Concerns 

regarding gag discards became apparent 

because of a discrepancy that resulted 

from the discard sizes for headboats, 

which were assigned using headboat 

observer data, and the discard sizes for 

the private and charter boats, which 

were assigned using a combination of 

the Mote Marine Laboratory tagging data 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
63782 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

and four fishery-dependent data 

sources. A consequence of this 

assignment was that the imputed size 

distribution for the private/charter fleets 

during the most recent 4 years was 

unexpectedly narrow and close to the 

recreational minimum size limit; 

however, gag discards from headboat 

observer data were not truncated, i.e., 

observer discard samples were 

distributed across a wider 

representation of gag size classes. 

Therefore, the Council requested the 

assessment review panel reexamine the 

update assessment given these 

discrepancies in the discard 

information. In contrast, red grouper 

recreational discard sizes for all 

recreational vessels were assigned using 

headboat observer data and the imputed 

size distribution was not as truncated, 

which results in a much less substantial 

impact on the outcome of the 

assessment. Because the same concerns 

were not triggered for red grouper, the 

Council did not make a similar request 

to reexamine the red grouper 

assessment. However, the Council did 

recognize the effects discard estimation 

could have on the assessment and, 

therefore, requested the NMFS 

Southeast Fisheries Science Center 

review observer discard information to 

determine the magnitude of these effects 

on red grouper. 

Red Grouper Total Allowable Catch 

(TAC) 

The current red grouper TAC of 7.57 

million lb (3.43 million kg), 

implemented in 2009 through 

Amendment 30B to the FMP, must be 

reduced to prevent overfishing of red 

grouper. As a result of the findings of 

the 2009 stock assessment update, the 

Council’s Scientific and Statistical 

Committee (SSC) recommended an 

acceptable biological catch (ABC) level 

of 6.31 million lb (2.86 million kg). This 

amount is equal to 85 percent of the 

yield at FMSY, which is expected to 

result in a less than 50-percent (15- to 

45-percent) probability of overfishing. 

To reduce this probability of overfishing 

even further, the Council set the TAC at 

the yield associated with FOY, which is 

consistent with the method used to set 

TAC in Amendment 30B to the FMP. 

Therefore, a reduced red grouper TAC of 

5.68 million lb (2.58 million kg), which 

is the yield associated with FOY, is 

contained in the regulatory amendment. 

Allocation 

The recreational and commercial 

allocations for red grouper are proposed 

to remain consistent with those 

established in Amendment 30B to the 

FMP. Therefore, 76 percent of the TAC 

would be allocated to the commercial 

sector and 24 percent of the TAC would 

be allocated to the recreational sector. 

Management Measures Contained in 

This Proposed Rule 

The regulatory amendment would set 

TAC for 2011 and subsequent fishing 

years at the yield associated with FOY of 

5.68 million lb (2.58 million kg). Based 

on the current commercial and 

recreational allocations, the proposed 

TAC would be implemented by setting 

the commercial quota for Gulf red 

grouper at 4.32 million lb (1.96 million 

kg). The decrease in the red grouper 

quota by 1.43 million lb (0.65 million 

kg) would therefore decrease the 

combined SWG quota by 1.43 million lb 

(0.65 million kg) to 6.22 million lb (2.82 

million kg). This reduced SWG quota 

would also be implemented through this 

rule. 

Management measures for the 

recreational sector would remain the 

same. The current 2-fish bag limit 

would allow red grouper to stay within 

the annual target catch of 1.36 million 

lb (0.62 million kg). Preliminary 

estimates of 2009 recreational landings 

remain consistent with recent years at 

0.98 million lb (0.44 million kg), which 

is lower than the 2011 catch target. 

Assuming recreational effort does not 

substantially increase in 2011, current 

regulations should be adequate to 

maintain the harvest at or below the 

annual target catch. 

Buoy Gear Marking Requirement and 

Revised Definition 

NMFS proposes requiring buoy gear 

used or possessed in the Gulf EEZ to be 

marked with the official vessel number 

(U.S. Coast Guard documentation 

number or State registration number) 

and proposes revising the definition of 

buoy gear, as defined in § 622.2, through 

this rulemaking. Buoy gear is listed as 

an authorized gear in the hook-and-line 

component of the Gulf reef fish fishery 

under the Allowable Gear Rule 

(§ 600.725, 64 FR 67511). 

In 1990, through Amendment 1 to the 

Gulf Reef Fish FMP, the Council 

established and NMFS implemented, in 

§ 622.34(c), a longline and buoy gear 

boundary, shoreward of which the 

directed harvest of reef fish with 

longlines and buoy gear was prohibited. 

After this boundary was established, the 

use of buoy gear was reduced 

significantly. Many reef fish bottom 

longline vessels began using modified 

versions of traditional buoy gear to 

continue fishing in areas where bottom 

longlines were prohibited through 

emergency regulations initiated May 1, 

2009 (74 FR 20229) and revised October 

21, 2009 (74 FR 53889). Subsequently, 

reef fish vessels that did not qualify for 

a bottom longline endorsement through 

the regulations implementing 

Amendment 31 to the Gulf Reef Fish 

FMP (75 FR 21512, April 26, 2010) are 

converting to buoy gear to continue 

fishing for reef fish in the eastern Gulf. 

Buoy gear for use in the Gulf reef fish 

fishery is legally defined in § 622.2 as 

fishing gear consisting of a float and one 

or more weighted lines suspended there 

from, generally long enough to reach the 

bottom. A hook or hooks (usually 6–10) 

are on the lines at or near the end. The 

float and line(s) drift freely and are 

retrieved periodically to remove catch 

and re-bait hooks. 

NMFS has determined the established 

definition of buoy gear is ambiguous 

and does not adequately define the type 

of gear traditionally used, which limits 

the enforceability of restrictions on this 

gear type. Under the current definition, 

there can be any number of lines 

suspended from a float, and although 

the number of hooks is recommended to 

be 6–10, there is no real restriction on 

the number of hooks that can be fished 

per float. Therefore, NMFS is proposing 

to modify its definition of buoy gear. 

The proposed definition is more 

specific, which would reduce regulatory 

confusion among fishery participants 

and would improve enforcement 

requirements as this gear type becomes 

more commonly used by the 

commercial reef fish sector. 

Re-Codification of the Quotas for 

Greater Amberjack 

On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35335), 

NMFS published a temporary rule to 

implement accountability measures for 

commercial and recreational greater 

amberjack in the Gulf for the 2010 

fishing year. In the course of this 

rulemaking, NMFS inadvertently 

removed the commercial and recreation 

quotas for greater amberjack for 2011 

and subsequent fishing years. This rule 

proposes to re-codify those quotas as 

specified in § 622.42(a)(1)(v). 

Revision to the Recreational 

Accountability Measures for Greater 

Amberjack 

This rule proposes to revise the 

recreational accountability measure for 

greater amberjack by clarifying that if 

recreational landings exceed the quota, 

at or near the beginning of the following 

fishing year, the quota for that following 

fishing year will be reduced by the 

amount of the overage in the prior 

fishing year. This clarification is an 

addition to the current accountability 

measure which states that the length of 

the recreational fishing season will be 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 63783 

reduced by the amount necessary to 

recover the overage from the prior 

fishing year. 

Removal of Outdated Language for the 

Red Snapper IFQ Program 

On November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67447), 

NMFS published a final rule to 

implement Amendment 26 to the FMP, 

which established the red snapper IFQ 

program. During the rulemaking, two 

paragraphs of codified text, 

§ 622.42(a)(1)(i)(A) and (B), were 

inadvertently not removed from the 

regulations. This rule proposes to 

remove this outdated language. 

These additional measures are 

unrelated to the actions contained in the 

red grouper regulatory amendment. 

Classification 

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

Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS 

Assistant Administrator has determined 

that this proposed rule is consistent 

with the regulatory amendment, other 

provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, and other applicable law, subject to 

further consideration after public 

comment. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

NMFS prepared an IRFA, as required 

by section 603 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, for this proposed rule. 

The IRFA describes the economic 

impact that this proposed rule, if 

adopted, would have on small entities. 

A description of the action, why it is 

being considered, and the objectives of, 

and legal basis for this action are 

contained at the beginning of this 

section in the preamble and in the 

SUMMARY section of the preamble. A 

copy of the full analysis is available 

from the Council (see ADDRESSES). A 

summary of the IRFA follows. 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides 

the statutory basis for the proposed rule. 

The proposed rule would reduce the red 

grouper commercial quota from 5.75 

million lb (2.53 million kg) to 4.32 

million lb (1.96 million kg), and thus 

the combined SWG commercial quota 

from 7.65 million lb (3.47 million kg) as 

specified in § 622.42(a)(1)(iii)(A) for 

2011 and subsequent fishing years to 

6.22 million lb (2.82 million kg) for 

2011 and subsequent fishing years, and 

require vessels with valid commercial 

Gulf reef fish permits to mark their buoy 

gear with the official vessel number. 

This rule also proposes minor revisions 

to the codified text, including a revised 

definition of buoy gear, re-codification 

of the commercial and recreational 

quotas for greater amberjack, revision of 

the recreational accountability measure 

for greater amberjack, and removal of 

outdated language for the red snapper 

IFQ program. The purpose of this 

proposed rule is to help prevent 

overfishing of red grouper while 

achieving OY by reducing red grouper 

harvest consistent with the findings of 

the recent stock assessment for this 

species. 

No duplicative, overlapping, or 

conflicting Federal rules have been 

identified. 

This proposed rule is expected to 

directly affect commercial harvesting 

operations. The Small Business 

Administration (SBA) has established 

size criteria for all major industry 

sectors in the U.S. including fish 

harvesters. A business involved in fish 

harvesting is classified as a small 

business if it is independently owned 

and operated, is not dominant in its 

field of operation (including its 

affiliates), and has combined annual 

receipts not in excess of $4.0 million 

(NAICS code 114111, finfish fishing) for 

all its affiliated operations worldwide. 

This proposed rule is expected to 

directly affect commercial fishing 

vessels whose owners possess 

commercial Gulf reef fish permits or red 

grouper fishing quota shares. As of 

August 10, 2010, 951 entities possessed 

a valid or renewable Gulf reef fish 

permit. These 951 entities are expected 

to be directly affected by the proposed 

action to require vessels to mark their 

buoy gear with their official vessel 

number. 

As of October 1, 2009, 970 entities 

owned a valid commercial Gulf reef fish 

permit and thus were eligible for initial 

shares and allocation in the grouper and 

tilefish IFQ program. Of these 970 

entities, 908 entities initially received 

shares and allocation of grouper or 

tilefish, and 815 entities specifically 

received red grouper shares and an 

initial allocation of the commercial 

sector’s red grouper quota in 2010. 

These 815 entities are expected to be 

directly affected by the proposed action 

to reduce the red grouper commercial 

quota. 

Of the 815 entities that initially 

received red grouper shares, 191 were 

not commercially fishing in 2008 or 

2009 and thus had no commercial 

fishing revenue during these years. On 

average, these 191 entities received an 

initial allocation of 6,459 lb (2,936 kg) 

of red grouper in 2010. Eight of these 

191 entities also received a bottom 

longline endorsement in 2010. These 8 

entities received a much higher initial 

allocation of red grouper in 2010, with 

an average of approximately 44,000 lb 

(20,000 kg). 

The other 624 entities that initially 

received red grouper shares and 

allocations in 2010 were active in 

commercial fisheries in 2008 or 2009. 

The maximum annual commercial 

fishing revenue in 2008 or 2009 by an 

individual vessel with a commercial 

Gulf reef fish permit or red grouper 

fishing quota shares was approximately 

$606,000 (2008 dollars). Based on this 

value, all commercial fishing vessels 

expected to be directly affected by this 

proposed rule are determined for the 

purpose of this analysis to be small 

business entities. 

Of the 624 commercial fishing vessels 

with commercial landings in 2008 or 

2009, 126 vessels did not have any red 

grouper landings in 2008 or 2009. Their 

average annual gross revenue in these 2 

years was approximately $55,800 (2008 

dollars). The vast majority of these 

vessels’ commercial fishing revenue is 

from a combination of landings of 

snapper, mackerel, dolphin, and wahoo. 

However, as described in the regulatory 

amendment, in 2009, they did become 

relatively more dependent on landings 

of highly migratory species (HMS) 

species and relatively less dependent on 

landings of deep-water grouper species. 

On average, in 2010, these vessels 

received an initial allocation of 2,524 lb 

(1,147) of red grouper quota. Five of 

these vessels also received a bottom 

longline endorsement in 2010. 

The remaining 498 commercially 

active fishing vessels did have landings 

of red grouper in 2008 or 2009. Their 

average annual gross revenue from 

commercial fishing was approximately 

$66,000 (2008 dollars) between the two 

years. On average, these vessels had 

9,425 lb (4,284 kg) and 6,734 lb (3,061 

kg) of red grouper landings in 2008 and 

2009 respectively, or 8,053 lb (3,660 kg) 

between the 2 years. Red grouper 

landings accounted for approximately 

35 percent of these vessels’ annual 

average gross revenue, and thus they are 

relatively dependent on revenue from 

red grouper landings. These vessels’ 

average initial red grouper allocation in 

2010 was 8,404 lb (3,820 kg). Therefore, 

on average, their 2008 and 2009 red 

grouper landings are very near their 

2010 red grouper allocation, though 

their red grouper landings differed 

considerably between 2008 and 2009. 

Of these 498 vessels, 49 vessels also 

received a bottom longline endorsement 

in 2010. These particular vessels’ 

average annual revenue was 

approximately $156,000 (2008 dollars) 

in 2008 and 2009. Revenue from red 

grouper landings decreased from 

approximately $104,000 to $65,000 in 

2009. Nonetheless, these vessels remain 

highly dependent on revenue from red 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
63784 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

grouper landings, which averaged 

approximately 36,000 lb (13,364 kg) in 

2008 and 23,000 lb (10,455 kg) in 2009. 

Their average initial 2010 allocation of 

red grouper was approximately 42,000 

lb (19,091 kg) and thus their recent 

year’s harvest has been within that 2010 

average allocation, particularly in 2009. 

The proposed rule would not alter 

existing reporting or record keeping 

requirements but would alter certain 

compliance requirements. Specifically, 

vessels with valid commercial Gulf reef 

fish permits would be required to mark 

their buoy gear with their official vessel 

number. The most significant burden 

imposed by this requirement is the time 

needed to mark the gear. Under the 

proposed definition of buoy gear, the 

maximum number of buoys per vessel is 

expected to be 20. The time required to 

mark each buoy is estimated to be 

approximately 20 minutes. Thus, the 

annual time burden per vessel is 

approximately 6.67 hours. According to 

the most recent data from the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics (BLS), the average 

nominal wage for fishers and fishing 

related workers is $12.79, or $12.74 in 

2008 dollars. This value is used as a 

monetary estimate of the opportunity 

cost of time on a per hour basis. Thus, 

the annual opportunity cost per vessel 

resulting from this requirement is 

estimated to be approximately $85. For 

the 951 vessels with valid or renewable 

commercial Gulf reef fish permits, the 

annual opportunity cost is estimated to 

be $80,812. Since opportunity costs 

impose no direct financial costs, this 

increase in opportunity costs is not 

expected to reduce profit for these 

vessels. 

The 191 entities with red grouper 

shares that did not participate in 

commercial fishing in 2008 or 2009 

have no commercial fishing revenue and 

did not earn profit from commercial 

fishing in those 2 years. Under the 

proposed action to decrease the red 

grouper commercial quota, allocation of 

red grouper in 2011 would be reduced, 

on average, by approximately 1,608 lb 

(731 kg). Using the 2008 average price 

of $2.85 per lb, this loss in allocation 

could potentially represent an annual 

loss of nearly $4,600 in gross revenue 

per entity. For the eight entities with red 

grouper shares that also possess longline 

endorsements, the average annual 

allocation of red grouper would be 

reduced by nearly 11,000 lb (5,000 kg). 

Thus, the potential loss in gross 

revenue, estimated to be nearly $31,400, 

could be much higher. However, in 

general, this potential loss in gross 

revenue could only reduce profit if 

these entities not only become active in 

commercial fishing, but specifically 

intend to harvest red grouper in 2011 

and at a level above their reduced 

allocation. It is important to note that 

the commercial sector has not harvested 

the commercial red grouper quota since 

the 2006 fishing year. Alternatively, 

these potential losses in gross revenue 

could be due to these entities’ inability 

to sell the allocations they are losing 

under the proposed action, though this 

possibility presumes that a demand for 

these allocations exists. Regardless, the 

significance of this potential loss in 

gross revenue to these 191 entities 

cannot be evaluated given the lack of 

information on potential gross revenue 

and profit from commercial fishing in 

general and specifically for red grouper. 

Profit estimates are not currently 

available for the 126 entities with red 

grouper shares that participated in 

commercial fisheries other than red 

grouper. However, since these vessels 

did not have any red grouper landings, 

none of their gross revenue and thus 

none of their profit were the result of 

red grouper harvests. Under the 

proposed action to decrease the red 

grouper commercial quota, the average 

allocation of red grouper in 2011 would 

be reduced by approximately 629 lb 

(286 kg). Using the 2008 average price 

of $2.85 per pound, this loss in 

allocation could potentially represent an 

annual loss of nearly $1,800 in gross 

revenue per entity. However, this 

potential loss in gross revenue could 

only lead to a loss in profit if these 

entities intend to become active in the 

red grouper component of the Gulf reef 

fish fishery in 2011 and at a level above 

their reduced allocation. Thus, for 

example, assuming these vessels intend 

to harvest red grouper in 2011 at a level 

equivalent to their 2010 allocation, and 

this harvest was in addition to, rather 

than in place of, their recent commercial 

fishing activities, the reduction in 

allocation could lead to a maximum loss 

of approximately three percent in gross 

revenue which could in turn reduce 

profit. Alternatively, losses in gross 

revenue could be due to these entities’ 

inability to sell the allocations being lost 

under the proposed action, though this 

possibility presumes that a demand for 

the allocations exists. 

Profit estimates are not currently 

available for the 498 entities with red 

grouper shares that participated in the 

commercial red grouper sector of the 

Gulf reef fish fishery in 2008 or 2009. 

Under the proposed action to decrease 

the red grouper quota, these vessels’ red 

grouper allocations would be reduced 

by approximately 2,092 lb (951 kg) on 

average. As these vessels have been 

harvesting at levels near their 2010 

allocation in recent years on average, 

this reduction in red grouper allocation 

is likely to lead to a future reduction in 

red grouper landings and therefore gross 

revenue. Using the average 2008 price of 

$2.85 per pound, it is estimated that 

these vessels could lose nearly $6,000, 

or approximately 9 percent, in average 

annual gross revenue. A loss in gross 

revenue of this magnitude would likely 

lead to a reduction in profit. 

However, for the 49 vessels with red 

grouper shares that were active in the 

red grouper component of the Gulf reef 

fish fishery and also received a bottom 

longline endorsement in 2010, their 

allocation of red grouper in 2011 would 

decrease by approximately 10,400 lb 

(4,727 kg) under the proposed action. 

For these particular vessels, the loss in 

red grouper landings could range from 

zero to the full amount of the decrease 

in allocation, though the latter is 

unlikely given new regulations 

restricting the use of longline gear. Even 

if these vessels intended to harvest red 

grouper in 2011 at levels comparable to 

2008, prior to the implementation of 

regulations restricting the use of 

longline gear, they would only lose 

approximately 4,600 lb (2,091 kg) in red 

grouper landings rather than the full 

amount of their reduced allocation. This 

loss in landings is estimated to be 

valued at approximately $13,000 in 

gross revenue, or 8 percent of their 

average annual gross revenue. Such a 

loss in gross revenue would likely 

reduce their profit. However, if they 

intend to harvest at levels comparable to 

2009, then their reduced allocation 

would still be above their intended 

landings. Therefore, the reduction in 

allocation would not lead to a reduction 

in landings from what they would have 

otherwise been and thus gross revenue 

and profit would also not be reduced. 

Two alternatives, including the status 

quo, were considered for the action to 

reduce the red grouper commercial 

quota to 4.32 million lb (1.96 million 

kg). The first alternative, the status quo, 

would have maintained the red grouper 

commercial quota at the current level of 

5.75 million lb (2.61 million kg). This 

alternative is not consistent with the 

goals and objectives of the Council’s 

plan to manage red grouper to achieve 

the mandates of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. Specifically, this alternative would 

be inconsistent with current National 

Standard 1 guidance because the 

associated TAC of 7.57 million lb (3.43 

million kg) would be above the ABC of 

6.31 million lb (2.86 million kg) 

recommended by the Council’s SSC. 

The second alternative would have 

would set the red grouper commercial 

quota at 4.80 million lb (2.18 million 

kg). This amount is equal to 85 percent 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 200 / Monday, October 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 63785 

of the yield at FMSY, which the SSC 

considered sufficient to reduce the 

probability that overfishing might occur 

in 2011. However, this alternative is 

inconsistent with the method 

established by the Council in 

Amendment 30B where the annual 

catch target would be based on the yield 

associated with FOY. 

One alternative, the status quo, was 

considered for the action to require 

vessels with valid commercial Gulf reef 

fish permits to mark their buoy gear 

with the official vessel number. The 

Council and NMFS have determined 

that the current definition of buoy gear 

is ambiguous. This ambiguity has led to 

problems with monitoring and 

enforcement of buoy gear regulations 

and thus a clearer definition of this gear 

type is being proposed. By not requiring 

the marking of buoy gear, this 

alternative would not improve the 

monitoring and enforcement of buoy 

gear regulations since law enforcement 

personnel would not be able to 

determine which vessel deployed the 

gear if the gear is left unattended. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of law, no person is required to respond 

to, nor shall a 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 Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) control number. 

This proposed rule contains a 

collection-of-information requirement 

subject to the PRA applicable to vessels 

in the Gulf reef fish fishery, namely, a 

requirement to mark buoy gear with the 

official vessel number (U.S. Coast Guard 

documentation number or State 

registration number). 

This requirement has been submitted 

to OMB for approval. The public 

reporting burden for this collection-ofinformation is estimated to average 20 

minutes per buoy. This estimate of the 

public reporting burden includes the 

time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data 

needed, and completing and reviewing 

the collection-of-information. 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 collectionof-information, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

technology. Send comments regarding 

the burden estimate or any other aspect 

of the collection-of-information 

requirement, including suggestions for 

reducing the burden, to NMFS and to 

OMB (see ADDRESSES). 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622 

Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Virgin Islands. 

Dated: October 12, 2010. 

John Oliver, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Operations, National Marine Fisheries 

Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE 

CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH 

ATLANTIC 

1. The authority citation for part 622 

continues to read as follows: 

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

2. In § 622.2, the definition of ‘‘buoy 

gear’’ is revised to read as follows: 

§ 622.2 Definitions and acronyms. 

* * * * * 

Buoy gear means fishing gear that 

fishes vertically in the water column 

that consists of a single drop line 

suspended from a float, from which no 

more than 10 hooks can be connected 

between the buoy and the terminal end, 

and the terminal end contains a weight 

that is no more than 10 lb (4.5 kg). The 

drop line can be rope (hemp, manila, 

cotton or other natural fibers; nylon, 

polypropylene, spectra or other 

synthetic material) or monofilament, but 

must not be cable or wire. The gear is 

free-floating and not connected to other 

gear or the vessel. The drop line must 

be no greater than 2 times the depth of 

the water being fished. All hooks must 

be attached to the drop line no more 

than 30 ft (9.1 m) from the weighted 

terminal end. These hooks may be 

attached directly to the drop line; 

attached as snoods (defined as an 

offshoot line that is directly spliced, tied 

or otherwise connected to the drop 

line), where each snood has a single 

terminal hook; or as gangions (defined 

as an offshoot line connected to the 

drop line with some type of detachable 

clip), where each gangion has a single 

terminal hook. 

* * * * * 

3. In § 622.6, paragraph (b)(3) is added 

to read as follows: 

§ 622.6 Vessel and gear identification. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Buoy gear. In the Gulf EEZ, if buoy 

gear is used or possessed, each buoy 

must display the official number of the 

vessel. 

4. In § 622.42, the first sentence of the 

introductory text is revised; paragraphs 

(a)(1)(i)(A) and (B) are removed; 

paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(A) and (C) are 

revised; and paragraphs (a)(1)(v) and 

(a)(2)(ii) are added to read as follows: 

§ 622.42 Quotas. 

Quotas apply for the fishing year for 

each species or species group, unless 

accountability measures are 

implemented during the fishing year 

pursuant to § 622.49, due to a quota 

overage occurring the previous year, in 

which case a reduced quota will be 

specified through notification in the 

Federal Register. * * * 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) * * * 

(A) SWG combined—6.22 million lb 

(2.82 million kg). 

* * * * * 

(C) Red grouper—4.32 million lb (1.96 

million kg). 

* * * * * 

(v) Greater amberjack—503,000 lb 

(228,157 kg), round weight. 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) Recreational quota for greater 

amberjack. The recreational quota for 

greater amberjack is 1,368,000 lb 

(620,514 kg), round weight. 

* * * * * 

5. In § 622.49, the second sentence of 

paragraph (a)(1)(ii) is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 622.49 Accountability measures. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) * * * In addition, if despite such 

closure, recreational landings exceed 

the quota, the AA will file a notification 

with the Office of the Federal Register, 

at or near the beginning of the following 

fishing year, to reduce the quota for that 

following year by the amount of the 

overage in the prior fishing year, and to 

reduce the length of the recreational 

fishing season for the following fishing 

year by the amount necessary to recover 

the overage from the prior fishing year. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–26197 Filed 10–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS