Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 67247 

specified position of the H-point can be 

achieved with a range of seat cushion 

inclination angles, adjust the seat 

inclination such that the most forward 

part of the seat cushion is at its lowest 

position with respect to the most 

rearward part. All tests specified by this 

standard are conducted with the 

ambient temperature between 18 

degrees C. and 28 degrees C. 

* * * * * 

S5.2.4.2 * * * 

(c) Determine if at least 125 mm of the 

cylinder can completely pass through 

the gap. If 125 mm or more of the 

cylinder can completely pass through 

the gap, the gap is not in compliance. 

S5.2.6 * * * 

(d) Reduce the load at the rate of 250 

± 50 N/minute until the load is 

completely removed. Maintain this 

condition for two minutes ± 5 seconds. 

* * * * * 

S5.2.7 * * * 

(a) Backset retention and 

displacement. For head restraints that 

move with respect to the seat when 

occupant loading is applied to the seat 

back, S5.2.7(a)(1) through (8) may be 

performed with the head restraint fixed 

in a position corresponding to the 

position when the seat is unoccupied. 

This fixation is applied to the 

member(s) that first transmit(s) the seat 

back loading from the occupant to the 

head restraint. 

* * * * * 

(5) Maintain the position of the back 

pan as established in S5.2.7(a)(4) of this 

section. Using a 165 ± 2 mm diameter 

spherical head form with a surface 

roughness of less than 1.6 μm, root 

mean square, establish the head form 

initial reference position by aligning the 

centerline of the head form 

perpendicular to the displaced torso 

reference line, on the seat centerline, 

and at a height 65 ± 3 mm below the top 

of the head restraint. Apply a posterior 

initial load that will produce a 37 ± 0.7 

Nm moment about the H-point. After 

maintaining this moment for 5.5 ± 0.5 

seconds, measure the posterior 

displacement of the head form during 

the application of the load. 

* * * * * 

(7) Reduce the load at the rate of 187 

± 37 Nm/minute until it is completely 

removed. Maintain this condition for 

two minutes ± 5 seconds. 

* * * * * 

S5.3 Procedures for dynamic 

performance. Demonstrate compliance 

with S4.3 of this section in accordance 

with S5.3.1 though S5.3.9 of this section 

with a 50th percentile male Hybrid III 

test dummy specified in 49 CFR part 

572 subpart E, fitted with sensors to 

measure head to torso rotation. The 

dummy with all sensors is to continue 

to meet all specifications in 49 CFR part 

572 subpart E. The restraint is 

positioned midway between the lowest 

and the highest position of adjustment, 

and at any position of backset. 

* * * * * 

S5.3.4 Seat Adjustment. The 

following seat adjustments specify 

conditions to be met concurrently and 

are not a sequential list of adjustments. 

At each outboard designated seating 

position, using any control that 

primarily moves the entire seat 

vertically, place the seat in the lowest 

position. Using any control that 

primarily moves the entire seat in the 

fore and aft directions, place the seat 

midway between the forwardmost and 

rearmost position. If an adjustment 

position does not exist midway between 

the forwardmost and rearmost positions, 

the closest adjustment position to the 

rear of the midpoint is used. Adjust the 

seat cushion and seat back as required 

by S5 of this section. If the seat back is 

adjustable, it is set at an inclination 

position closest to 25 degrees from the 

vertical, as measured by SAE J826 (July 

1995) manikin. If there is more than one 

inclination position closest to 25 

degrees from the vertical, set the seat 

back inclination to the position closest 

to and rearward of 25 degrees. If the 

head restraint is adjustable, adjust the 

top of the head restraint to a position 

midway between the lowest position of 

adjustment and the highest position of 

adjustment. If an adjustment position 

midway between the lowest and the 

highest position does not exist, adjust 

the head restraint to a position below 

and nearest to midway between the 

lowest position of adjustment and the 

highest position of adjustment. 

* * * * * 

Issued: October 28, 2010. 

David L. Strickland, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–27669 Filed 11–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 600 and 622 

[Docket No. 0907201152–0420–02] 

RIN 0648–AY05 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Regulatory 

Amendment to the Fishery 

Management Plan for the Reef Fish 

Fishery of Puerto Rico and the U.S. 

Virgin Islands 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule 

that implements a regulatory 

amendment to the Fishery Management 

Plan for the Reef Fish Fishery of Puerto 

Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (FMP) 

prepared by the Caribbean Fishery 

Management Council (Council). This 

rule modifies the Bajo de Sico seasonal 

closure from a 3-month closure to a 6- 

month closure, and prohibits fishing for 

and possession of Caribbean reef fish in 

or from the exclusive economic zone 

(EEZ) portion of Bajo de Sico during the 

closure. The final rule also prohibits 

anchoring in the EEZ portion of Bajo de 

Sico year-round. In addition to the 

measures contained in the regulatory 

amendment, this final rule also adds 

spear to the list of allowable gears in the 

commercial sector of the Caribbean reef 

fish fishery and revises the title of the 

FMP in the list of authorized fisheries 

and gear. The intended effect of this rule 

is to provide further protection for red 

hind spawning aggregations and large 

snappers and groupers, and better 

protect the essential fish habitat (EFH) 

where these species reside. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 2, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the regulatory 

amendment, the Environmental 

Assessment, the regulatory flexibility 

analysis, and the regulatory impact 

review (RIR) may be obtained from 

Britni Tokotch, Southeast Regional 

Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, 

St. Petersburg, FL 33701 or may be 

downloaded from the Southeast 

Regional Office Web site at http:// 

sero.nmfs.noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Britni Tokotch, 727–824–5305. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Caribbean reef fish fishery is managed 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
67248 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

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 MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens 

Act). 

On July 28, 2010, NMFS published a 

proposed rule for the Bajo de Sico 

regulatory amendment in the Federal 

Register and requested public comment 

(75 FR 44209). The rationale for the 

measures contained in this final rule are 

provided in the regulatory amendment 

and in the preamble to the proposed 

rule and are not repeated here. 

Comments and Responses 

During the comment period for the 

proposed rule, NMFS received one 

comment. This comment was from a 

Federal agency and expressed general 

support for the actions proposed in the 

rule. NMFS received no comments that 

addressed specific actions in the Bajo de 

Sico regulatory amendment or the 

proposed rule. 

Classification 

The Administrator, Southeast Region, 

NMFS, determined that the regulatory 

amendment is necessary for the 

conservation and management of the 

reef fish fishery and is consistent with 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other 

applicable laws. 

This final rule has been determined to 

be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

A final regulatory flexibility analysis 

(FRFA) was prepared. The FRFA 

incorporates the initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis (IRFA), a summary of 

the significant economic issues raised 

by public comments, NMFS responses 

to those comments, and a summary of 

the analyses completed to support the 

action. A copy of the full analysis is 

available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

A summary of the FRFA follows. 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides 

the statutory basis for this final rule. 

This final rule will not establish any 

new reporting, recordkeeping, or other 

compliance requirements. No 

duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting 

Federal rules have been identified. 

This final rule will modify the Bajo de 

Sico seasonal closure by extending it 

from a 3-month closure to a 6-month 

closure, and prohibit fishing for and 

possession of Caribbean reef fish in or 

from the EEZ portion of Bajo de Sico 

during the closure. This final rule will 

also prohibit anchoring by fishing 

vessels in the EEZ portion of Bajo de 

Sico year-round. This rule also makes 

minor revisions to the codified text, 

including adding spear to the list of 

allowable gears in the commercial sector 

of the reef fish fishery, and revising the 

title of the FMP in the list of authorized 

fisheries and gears in § 600.725. The 

purposes of this final rule are to provide 

further protection for red hind spawning 

aggregations and large snappers and 

groupers from directed fishing 

mortality, to achieve a more natural sex 

ratio, age, and size structure, and to 

better protect the EFH where these 

species reside. 

No significant issues associated with 

the economic analysis were raised 

through public comment on the 

proposed rule. A summary of the single 

comment received is provided in the 

previous section of this preamble. No 

changes were made in the final rule as 

a result of this comment. 

At present, Federal permits are not 

required to participate in Councilmanaged fisheries on Puerto Rico’s west 

coast, and, therefore, it is unknown how 

many fishermen or vessels participate in 

the Federal component of these 

fisheries. However, landings data from 

Puerto Rico’s trip ticket program 

indicate that 294 fishermen had 

commercial landings on Puerto Rico’s 

west coast in 2007. Some of these 

fishermen do not possess commercial 

fishing licenses, and the vessels used by 

these fishermen are not identified in the 

landings data. Preliminary fisherman 

Census data for 2008 indicate that 95 

percent of commercial fishermen own 

one vessel, and thus it is assumed for 

current purposes that each commercial 

fisherman represents a single 

commercial fishing vessel. Furthermore, 

all charter and headboat vessels used to 

fish for, take, retain, or possess Atlantic 

billfish, tunas, swordfish, or sharks 

must possess an Atlantic Highly 

Migratory Species (HMS) charter/ 

headboat permit. In 2008, eight charter 

vessels on Puerto Rico’s west coast held 

HMS charter/headboat permits. 

In Puerto Rico’s west coast fisheries, 

commercial fishing vessels average 20 ft 

(6.3 m) in length, but range between 12 

to 51 ft (3.8–15.9 m), with the vast 

majority being between 15 and 25 ft 

(4.7–7.8 m). These vessels have an 

average horsepower (HP) of 

approximately 77, though considerable 

variability exists within the fleet, even 

among vessels of comparable length. 

The age of these vessels is 

approximately 19 years on average. The 

majority of vessels are made of 

fiberglass (63 percent), though wood 

hulls and wood and fiberglass 

composite hulls are relatively common, 

accounting for 19 percent and 18 

percent of the fleet, respectively. On 

average, each vessel carries two 

individuals, the captain and one 

crewman. 

According to the 2008 fisherman 

Census, 72 percent of Puerto Rico’s west 

coast commercial fishermen possess 

some type of commercial fishing license 

while 28 percent do not. Of those 

fishermen who hold a commercial 

fishing license, the vast majority (78 

percent) possess a full-time license, 

while the others possess either a 

beginner’s license (18 percent) or a parttime license (4 percent). These 

fishermen are approximately 47 years 

old on average and have nearly 27 years 

of commercial fishing experience. Each 

fisherman supports approximately three 

dependents on average, which translates 

to an average household family size of 

four persons. Each fisherman spends an 

average of approximately 51 hours per 

week on commercial fishing related 

activities. These individuals are highly 

dependent on income from commercial 

fishing, which represents more than 85 

percent of their household income on 

average. More than half of these 

fishermen (54 percent) have less than a 

high school level of education, 35 

percent have a high school level of 

education, and 11 percent have some 

additional education beyond high 

school. 

As a result of non-reporting, reported 

landings and, thus, revenue for Puerto 

Rico’s commercial fisheries 

underestimate actual landings and 

revenue. Therefore, landings and 

revenue must be adjusted in order to 

generate more accurate estimates. Based 

on corrected landings estimates, average 

gross revenue per commercial fisherman 

was $5,431 and $9,168 in 2006 and 2007 

respectively, or $7,076 across both 

years. The maximum gross revenue for 

a single commercial fisherman in either 

year was approximately $138,000. 

Commercial fishermen are mainly 

dependent on revenue from spiny 

lobster, queen conch, and reef fish, 

particularly queen snapper and silk 

snapper. However, harvest of queen 

conch is prohibited in the EEZ around 

Puerto Rico and bottom-tending gear 

(e.g., fish traps, lobster traps, and 

bottom longline) is prohibited in Bajo de 

Sico. Scuba diving and bottom line are 

the predominant gears used by 

commercial fishermen. The bottom line 

fishery for reef fish is most relevant for 

the actions in this rule. 

In 2008, eight vessels on Puerto Rico’s 

west coast possessed HMS charter/ 

headboat permits. All eight charter 

vessels are made of fiberglass. The 

majority of the HMS charter vessels 

(seven) use rod and reel gear, while one 

vessel uses handline gear. Furthermore, 

these vessels average 27 ft (8.4 m) in 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 67249 

length and have 358 HP on average and 

thus are slightly longer and 

considerably more powerful on average 

than commercial fishing vessels. These 

vessels are approximately 8 years old on 

average and are thus typically much 

newer than commercial fishing vessels. 

Charter vessels also typically carry more 

individuals in terms of crew and 

passengers (approximately seven on 

average) than commercial vessels. 

Charter vessels most frequently target 

dolphin, blue marlin, wahoo, and 

yellowfin tuna. Charter fishermen have 

approximately 25 years of fishing 

experience on average. Charter vessels 

in Puerto Rico take approximately 190 

trips per year each, though recent 

survey data suggest that charter vessels 

on the west coast may average only 150– 

160 trips per year. These data also 

suggest that west coast charter vessels 

specialize in half-day trips rather than 

full-day trips, the latter of which was 

reported to cost $526 on average in 

2005. Annual landings and revenue data 

for west coast charter vessels are not 

presently available. However, the 

available information regarding number 

of trips per year and cost per trip 

indicates that these charter operations 

are similar to those in the Gulf of 

Mexico and South Atlantic regions. 

Therefore, it is assumed that these 

vessels’ maximum and average annual 

revenues are also similar to those 

operating in the Gulf of Mexico and 

South Atlantic regions. 

The Small Business Administration 

defines a small business in the 

commercial fishing industry as an entity 

that 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 annually (NAICS 

codes 114111, finfish fishing). For 

charter vessels, the other qualifiers 

apply and the annual receipts threshold 

is $7.0 million (NAICS code 713990, 

recreational industries). Based on the 

annual revenue and related information 

for the fisheries provided above, all 

vessels expected to be directly impacted 

by this final rule are determined, for the 

purpose of this analysis, to be small 

entities. 

The action to modify the Bajo de Sico 

closure is expected to directly benefit all 

eight charter vessels on Puerto Rico’s 

west coast by giving them access to Bajo 

de Sico’s HMS and pelagic resources 

during the 3 months (December, 

January, and February) the area is 

currently closed to all fishing. The 

magnitude of these economic benefits 

depends on the extent to which these 

vessels take additional trips to Bajo de 

Sico as opposed to reallocating current 

trips from other areas. An estimate of 

how many additional trips these charter 

vessels might take is not currently 

available. However, additional trips 

would be expected to result in higher 

revenue and thus higher profit. 

Conversely, 64 of the 294 (22 percent) 

commercial fishing vessels actively 

participating in Puerto Rico’s west coast 

fisheries in 2007 are expected to 

experience direct, adverse economic 

effects as a result of the action to modify 

the Bajo de Sico closure. Specifically, 

since these vessels will experience 

additional loss of access to Bajo de 

Sico’s fisheries resources, particularly 

reef fish, during the months of October, 

November, and March under this action, 

their landings, revenue, and, therefore, 

profit are expected to decrease. Based 

on an extrapolation of landings data 

from Puerto Rico’s trip ticket data, the 

64 directly affected vessels averaged 

approximately 6,400 lb (2,303 kg) in 

landings and $17,300 in gross revenue 

in 2007. Detailed cost data and, 

therefore, profit estimates are not 

currently available for these commercial 

vessels. Therefore, the reduction in 

profit arising from this action cannot be 

directly estimated for the directly 

affected vessels. 

However, surveys of the directly 

affected commercial fishermen indicate 

that these vessels are expected to 

experience a 48-percent reduction in 

landings and a 47-percent reduction in 

gross revenue, or approximately $8,130 

per vessel. Most of these losses are due 

to reductions in the harvest of reef fish, 

particularly deepwater snappers. 

However, the harvest of other species 

(e.g. baitfish) caught on trips that target 

reef fish are also expected to be 

foregone. Since these relatively small 

vessels will not be able to transit 

through Bajo de Sico with reef fish on 

board and may have to travel to more 

distant fishing grounds in order to 

harvest deepwater snappers, operating 

costs are expected to increase by 57 

percent. Further, the affected fishermen 

are expected to experience a 55-percent 

reduction in household income. Since 

the fisherman’s household income is 

generally indicative of net revenue or 

profit to the vessel, this figure 

represents the best available estimate of 

the expected percentage reduction in 

profit for these entities. 

On the other hand, since October and 

November are off-season for many 

commercial vessels due to poor weather 

and sea conditions, and given that the 

harvest of their primary target species, 

silk snapper, is already prohibited 

during these months, the reductions in 

landings, revenue, household income 

and, therefore, profit are likely 

overestimated. Furthermore, if they 

currently possess the proper gear, a few 

vessels may be able to partially mitigate 

these losses by reallocating some of 

their fishing effort out of the bottom line 

fishery for reef fish into the troll line 

fishery for HMS and pelagic species 

during the months that Bajo de Sico will 

be closed to fishing for Caribbean reef 

fish. 

The action to prohibit anchoring by 

fishing vessels in Bajo de Sico yearround is not expected to generate 

adverse economic impacts on the eight 

charter vessels because they use troll or 

handline gear and do not drop anchor 

when fishing. It is possible, though not 

likely, that a few of the commercial 

vessels expected to be affected by the 

action to modify the Bajo de Sico 

closure may experience additional 

minimal adverse economic effects as a 

result of the anchoring prohibition. 

Though it is not necessary for vessels 

using bottom line gear to drop anchor 

when fishing, such behavior may occur 

on occasion. Since dropping anchor in 

Bajo de Sico would no longer be 

permissible under the action, vessels 

would be required to move out of the 

area, and thereby expend additional 

fuel, if they want to drop anchor. The 

effects resulting from the occasional 

need for a few vessels to expend 

additional fuel would likely be 

imperceptible and, therefore, probably 

have no impact on these vessels’ 

profitability. 

The action to add spear to the list of 

allowable gears in the commercial sector 

of the reef fish fishery is not expected 

to generate any adverse economic effects 

on commercial reef fish vessels. This 

action is administrative in nature, the 

purpose of which is to correct an 

oversight with respect to the current list 

of allowable gears for the commercial 

reef fish fishery. Since spear is and has 

been an historically used gear in the 

commercial reef fish fishery, the 

Council intended for it to be included 

in the list of allowable gears. This action 

would formally legalize its use in the 

fishery but have no effect on its current 

or expected future use in the fishery and 

thus, in turn, have no effect on the 

operations of commercial reef fish 

vessels. 

The Council considered a number of 

alternatives to achieve their objectives 

and reduce potential adverse economic 

effects, where appropriate. The 

following is a discussion of these 

alternatives and the reason they were 

not chosen as the proposed action. An 

alternative may not be chosen for 

reasons unrelated to the expected 

economic effects of the alternative, such 

as not achieving the Council’s objectives 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
67250 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

and, as a result, the following 

information only discusses the expected 

economic effects of the alternative that 

was not chosen when the alternative 

would have achieved the Council’s 

objectives, would have been expected to 

result in reduced adverse economic 

effects relative to the proposed action, 

or was not chosen for some other 

reason. 

Four alternatives, including the status 

quo, were considered for the action to 

modify the Bajo de Sico seasonal 

closure. Three of the alternatives 

include multiple options that determine 

which species and specific activities are 

covered by the closure. The first 

alternative, the status quo, would not 

have modified the seasonal closure for 

Bajo de Sico or prohibited possession of 

reef fish onboard when transiting 

through the area during the closure. 

Further, the seasonal closure would 

have continued to apply to all fishing, 

including fishing for non-reef fish 

species such as HMS and pelagics. The 

status quo alternative is inconsistent 

with the Council’s objective of 

providing greater protection for 

spawning aggregations of reef fish in the 

area as well as for developed coral that 

provide essential habitat for these 

species. 

The second alternative, which would 

extend the seasonal closure by 3 months 

to the months of October, November, 

and March, had three options in 

addition to the action. The first option 

would have prohibited fishing for all 

species, including those not managed by 

the Council, during the closure. The 

second option would have prohibited 

fishing for and possession of all species, 

including those not managed by the 

Council, during the closure. The third 

option would have prohibited fishing 

for reef fish during the closure. The first 

two options were not selected because 

fishing for HMS and pelagic species 

using troll, rod and reel, and handline 

gear near the surface is not expected to 

result in the incidental harvest of reef 

fish or damage to coral. As such, 

prohibiting fishing for and possession of 

these species would generate 

unnecessary economic and social 

impacts on charter, private recreational, 

and commercial vessels. The third 

option was not selected because it 

would still allow transit through Bajo de 

Sico during the closure with reef fish 

onboard. Allowing possession of reef 

fish onboard would make enforcement 

of the closure more difficult and thereby 

less effective. 

The third alternative, which would 

extend the seasonal closure by 3 months 

to the months of March, April, and May, 

had four options. Although this 

alternative would close Bajo de Sico for 

6 months, and thereby generate 

comparable biological benefits in terms 

of protecting red hind spawning 

aggregations and larger individuals of 

snapper and grouper, as well as 

protecting well developed coral and 

sponge habitat (EFH), it would create 

greater adverse social and economic 

impacts on commercial vessels and 

associated onshore businesses because 

commercial fishing activity is 

considerably greater in March, April, 

and May than in October, November, 

and March. Thus, this alternative would 

result in lower net benefits to society. 

The fourth alternative, which would 

implement a year-round closure of Bajo 

de Sico, had four options. This 

alternative would have generated greater 

biological benefits with respect to 

protecting coral and reef fish 

populations. However, the additional 

benefits of a year-round closure to reef 

fish spawning aggregations were not 

believed to be significantly greater 

compared to a 6-month closure, and 

additional protections to coral habitat 

are being accomplished by the 

anchoring prohibition. Further, by 

completely prohibiting access to Bajo de 

Sico’s reef fish and, in effect, baitfish 

resources, this alternative would have 

generated much greater adverse social 

and economic impacts on commercial 

and charter vessels and associated 

onshore businesses. Given the rule’s 

objectives, the Council concluded these 

considerably larger social and economic 

costs outweighed the additional 

biological benefits and, thus, would 

have resulted in lower net benefits to 

society. 

Three alternatives, including the 

status quo, were considered for the 

action to prohibit anchoring in Bajo de 

Sico. The first alternative, the status 

quo, would not have implemented any 

restrictions on anchoring in Bajo de 

Sico. Anchoring is thought to cause 

substantial and long lasting damage to 

coral populations. Anchoring can also 

indirectly impact the long-term growth 

of coral populations. Coral populations 

are an essential part of the ecology of 

reef environments. If coral populations 

are decreased, reef fish populations 

could also be indirectly impacted by 

lack of essential habitat. Thus, this 

alternative is contrary to the Council’s 

objective of providing additional 

protections to important coral habitat. 

The second alternative would have 

prohibited anchoring for 6 months. 

Anchoring has a high probability of 

damaging essential coral reef 

populations. These coral populations 

are very vulnerable and slow growing, 

and even slight damage can require 

years of recovery. Anchoring during the 

open season could damage coral beyond 

recovery. Coral populations are an 

essential part of the ecology of reef 

environments. If coral populations are 

decreased, reef fish populations could 

also be indirectly impacted by lack of 

essential habitat. Thus, this alternative 

is contrary to the Council’s objective of 

providing additional protections to 

important coral habitat. 

Copies of the RIR and FRFA are 

available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

List of Subjects 

50 CFR Part 600 

Administrative practice and 

procedures, Confidential business 

information, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing 

vessels, Foreign relations, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Statistics. 

50 CFR Part 622 

Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Virgin Islands. 

Dated: October 28, 2010. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR parts 600 and 622 are 

amended as follows: 

PART 600—MAGNUSON-STEVENS 

ACT PROVISIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 600 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 561 and 16 U.S.C. 1801 

et seq. 

■ 2. In § 600.725, in paragraph (v), in the 

table under heading ‘‘V. Caribbean 

Fishery Management Council,’’ the 

heading for entry 2. is revised, and a 

new entry 2.D. is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 600.725 General prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(v) * * * 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 67251 

Fishery Authorized gear types 

* * * * * * * 

V. Caribbean Fishery Management Council.

* * * * * * * 

2. Caribbean Reef Fish Fishery (FMP).

* * * * * * * 

D. Other commercial fishery .............................................................................................................................. D. Spear. 

* * * * * * * 

PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE 

CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH 

ATLANTIC 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 622 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 4. In § 622.33, paragraph (a) 

introductory text is revised, paragraph 

(a)(2)(ii)(A) is removed and reserved, 

and paragraph (a)(8) is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 622.33 Caribbean EEZ seasonal and/or 

area closures. 

(a) Seasonal closures. In addition to 

the other restrictions specified in this 

paragraph (a), fishing with pots, traps, 

bottom longlines, gillnets or trammel 

nets is prohibited year-round in the 

closed areas specified in paragraphs 

(a)(1), (2), (3), and (8) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(8) Bajo de Sico closed area. (i) The 

Bajo de Sico closed area is bounded by 

rhumb lines connecting, in order the 

following points: 

Point A North lat. West long. 

A ........................... 18°15.7′ 67°26.4′ 

B ........................... 18°15.7′ 67°23.2′ 

C ........................... 18°12.7′ 67°23.2′ 

D ........................... 18°12.7′ 67°26.4′ 

A ........................... 18°15.7′ 67°26.4′ 

(ii) From October 1 through March 31, 

each year, no person may fish for or 

possess any Caribbean reef fish, as listed 

in Table 2 of Appendix A to part 622, 

in or from those parts of the Bajo de 

Sico closed area that are in the EEZ. The 

prohibition on possession does not 

apply to such Caribbean reef fish 

harvested and landed ashore prior to the 

closure. 

(iii) Anchoring, by fishing vessels, is 

prohibited year-round in those parts of 

the Bajo de Sico closed area that are in 

the EEZ. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–27661 Filed 11–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

RIN 0648–XZ95 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Inseason Action To Close the 

Commercial Blacknose Shark and NonBlacknose Small Coastal Shark 

Fisheries 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notification of fishery closure. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the 

commercial blacknose shark and nonblacknose small coastal shark (SCS) 

fisheries. This action is necessary 

because landings for the 2010 blacknose 

shark fishing season are projected to 

have reached at least 80 percent of the 

available quota. 

DATES: The commercial fisheries for 

blacknose shark and non-blacknose SCS 

are closed effective 11:30 p.m. local 

time November 2, 2010 until, and if, 

NMFS announces, via a notice in the 

Federal Register that additional quota is 

available and the season is reopened. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karyl Brewster-Geisz or Peter Cooper, 

301–713–2347; (fax) 301–713–1917. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Atlantic shark fisheries are managed 

under the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic 

Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery 

Management Plan (FMP), its 

amendments, and its implementing 

regulations found at 50 CFR part 635 

issued under authority of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act (16 

U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). 

Under § 635.5(b)(1), shark dealers are 

required to report to NMFS all sharks 

landed every two weeks. Dealer reports 

for fish received between the 1st and 

15th of any month must be received by 

NMFS by the 25th of that month. Dealer 

reports for fish received between the 

16th and the end of any month must be 

received by NMFS by the 10th of the 

following month. Under § 635.28(b)(3), 

when NMFS projects that fishing season 

landings for either blacknose shark or 

non-blacknose SCS quota have reached 

or are projected to reach 80 percent of 

the available quota within a given 

fishing season, NMFS will file for 

publication with the Office of the 

Federal Register a notice of closure for 

the entire SCS fishery, including both 

the blacknose and non-blacknose SCS 

fisheries, that will be effective no fewer 

than 5 days from the date of filing. From 

the effective date and time of the closure 

until NMFS announces, via a notice in 

the Federal Register, that additional 

quota is available and the season is 

reopened, the fishery for that species 

group is closed, even across fishing 

years. 

On June 1, 2010 (75 FR 30484), NMFS 

announced the final rule for 

Amendment 3 to the Consolidated 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

(HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP), 

which, among other things, established 

quotas and opening dates for the 2010 

blacknose shark and non-blacknose SCS 

fisheries. Both the blacknose shark and 

non-blacknose SCS fisheries opened on 

June 1, 2010, with base quotas of 19.9 

metric tons (mt) dressed weight (dw) 

(43,872 lb dw) and 221.6 mt dw 

(488,539 lb dw), respectively. Dealer 

reports recently received through the 

September 30, 2010, reporting period 

indicate that 13.4 mt dw or 68 percent 

of the available blacknose shark fishery 

quota has been landed, and that 89.1 mt 

dw or 40 percent of the available nonblacknose SCS fishery quota has been 

landed. Dealer reports received to date 

indicate that 20 percent of the blacknose 

shark quota was landed from the 

opening of the fishery on June 1, 2010, 

through June 30, 2010; 14.4 percent of 

the quota was landed in July; 13.6 

percent of the quota was landed in 

August; and 20 percent of the quota was 

landed in September. NMFS looked at 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES