Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 67359 

* * * * * 

Dated: November 4, 2014. 

Stephen Guertin, 

Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26893 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 300 

[Docket No. 140131088–4913–02] 

RIN 0648–BD94 

International Fisheries; Western and 

Central Pacific Fisheries for Highly 

Migratory Species; Fishing Effort 

Limits in Purse Seine Fisheries for 

2014 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues regulations 

under authority of the Western and 

Central Pacific Fisheries Convention 

Implementation Act (WCPFC 

Implementation Act) to revise the 2014 

limit on fishing effort by U.S. purse 

seine vessels in the U.S. exclusive 

economic zone (U.S. EEZ) and on the 

high seas between the latitudes of 20° N. 

and 20° S. in the area of application of 

the Convention on the Conservation and 

Management of Highly Migratory Fish 

Stocks in the Western and Central 

Pacific Ocean (Convention). The total 

limit for 2014 is revised from 2,588 

fishing days to 1,828 fishing days. This 

action is necessary for the United States 

to implement provisions of a 

conservation and management measure 

(CMM) adopted by the Commission for 

the Conservation and Management of 

Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the 

Western and Central Pacific Ocean 

(Commission) and to satisfy the 

obligations of the United States under 

the Convention, to which it is a 

Contracting Party. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 

15, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting 

documents prepared for this final rule, 

including the regulatory impact review 

(RIR) and the Supplemental Information 

Report prepared for National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

purposes, as well as the proposed rule, 

are available via the Federal eRulemaking Portal, at 

www.regulations.gov (search for Docket 

ID NOAA–NMFS–2014–0081). Those 

documents, and the small entity 

compliance guide prepared for this final 

rule, are also available from NMFS at 

the following address: Michael D. 

Tosatto, Regional Administrator, NMFS, 

Pacific Islands Regional Office (PIRO), 

1845 Wasp Blvd., Building 176, 

Honolulu, HI 96818. The initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) 

and final regulatory flexibility analysis 

(FRFA) prepared under the authority of 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) are 

included in the proposed rule and this 

final rule, respectively. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Graham, NMFS PIRO, 808–725–5032. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On July 25, 2014, NMFS published a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register 

(79 FR 43373) to revise regulations at 50 

CFR part 300, subpart O, to implement 

a decision of the Commission. The 

proposed rule was open for public 

comment through August 25, 2014. This final rule is issued under the 

authority of the WCPFC Implementation 

Act (16 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.), which 

authorizes the Secretary of Commerce, 

in consultation with the Secretary of 

State and the Secretary of the 

Department in which the United States 

Coast Guard is operating (currently the 

Department of Homeland Security), to 

promulgate such regulations as may be 

necessary to carry out the obligations of 

the United States under the Convention, 

including the decisions of the 

Commission. The authority to 

promulgate regulations has been 

delegated to NMFS. This final rule implements for U.S. 

fishing vessels some of the purse seinerelated provisions of the Commission’s 

Conservation and Management Measure 

(CMM) 2013–01, ‘‘Conservation and 

Management Measure for Bigeye, 

Yellowfin and Skipjack Tuna in the 

Western and Central Pacific Ocean.’’ 

The preamble to the proposed rule 

includes detailed background 

information, including on the 

Convention and the Commission, the 

provisions of CMM 2013–01 being 

implemented in this rule, and the bases 

for the proposed regulations, which is 

not repeated here. 

New Requirements 

This final rule revises the existing 

limit on the number of fishing days that 

may be used by U.S. purse seine vessels 

in 2014 in an area called the Effort Limit 

Area for Purse Seine (ELAPS). The 

ELAPS includes all areas of the high 

seas and U.S. EEZ within the 

Convention Area between the latitudes 

of 20° North and 20° South (but not the 

U.S. territorial sea). The limit is revised 

from 2,588 fishing days to 1,828 fishing 

days. 

Once NMFS determines during 2014 

that, based on available information, the 

limit is expected to be reached by a 

specific future date, NMFS will issue a 

notice in the Federal Register 

announcing the closure of the U.S. 

purse seine fishery in the ELAPS 

starting on that specific future date. 

Upon any closure, it will be prohibited 

to use a U.S. purse seine vessel to fish 

in the ELAPS through the end of the 

calendar year. NMFS will publish the 

notice at least seven calendar days 

before the effective date of the closure 

to provide fishermen advance notice of 

the closure. 

Comments and Responses 

NMFS received three sets of 

comments on the proposed rule and 

supporting documents. The comments 

are summarized below, followed by 

responses from NMFS. 

Comment 1: I support this rule to 

reduce fishing days in order to conserve 

our fish stocks. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges the 

comment. 

Comment 2: I fail to see how the 

proposed rule would protect the stock 

with the Asian and Pacific Island 

countries continuing to add boats to 

their Pacific Ocean fleets while the 

United States plays into their hands and 

continues to strangle-hold our fleet. 

Soon, all fish sold in the U.S. market 

will be sourced from foreign vessels, 

which are less-than-ideal role models. 

These areas are highly regulated, as 

U.S. boats must be U.S.-built and have 

a fisheries endorsement to fish in these 

areas; and that is less than one third of 

the U.S. fleet. My boat is U.S.-built but 

cannot fish in U.S. waters. But instead 

of our government helping me to gain 

access, it just adds more unnecessary 

regulations. 

There are countries that continue to 

add boats and to fish on fish aggregating 

devices even during the closure while 

not living up to their responsibilities 

that are already in place. 

I propose to postpone implementing 

the limit until a long-term solution is 

agreed and implemented by all in the 

Commission, as this is not a permanent 

solution. These areas are not in danger 

from U.S. boats. However, the U.S. boats 

are the eyes and ears, and have in the 

past found and reported illegal, 

unreported, and unregulated fishing in 

the U.S. EEZ. The U.S. boats do not 

receive any reimbursement for time or 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
67360 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

fuel for this reporting, but it is the right 

thing to do. 

While areas continue to be closed off, 

we are only hurting the stocks as we are 

allowing the Pacific Island Parties to 

focus international fishing efforts into 

their exclusive economic zones for 

purely economic reasons, rather than 

focusing on efforts to truly conserve, by 

limiting vessels. Remember these are 

highly migratory species. I compare the 

focusing of effort to sunlight: Normally, 

it will not hurt you, but if you focus 

sunlight through a magnifying glass, it 

will burn; this is what is being done by 

driving effort into smaller areas. 

Postpone this proposed rule, or better, 

cancel it, as these areas are already 

regulated by the United States. The 

problem can be addressed and solved on 

the international level rather than 

strangle-holding our fleet while others 

continue to add boats, skirt regulations, 

and worst of all, not even enforce what 

is already in place. 

Support the U.S. fleet and the stock 

and push for vessel limits on all fleets, 

as the catch phrase ‘‘domestic fleet’’ is 

simply Asian boats that are flagged in 

the islands. Work with the U.S. fleet 

instead of against it; we are the highest 

regulated fleet in the world, and we are 

ahead of the curve, as we have already 

dropped our fishing efforts (numbers of 

boats) in the 1980s when the U.S. Tuna 

Treaty (Treaty on Fisheries between the 

Governments of Certain Pacific Island 

States and the Government of the 

United States of America, also known as 

the South Pacific Tuna Treaty, or SPTT) 

was signed, well ahead of other fleets 

that are continuing to add effort. 

Let’s be logical and work together and 

protect the stock and our food source. 

Response: NMFS recognizes that if the 

United States imposes Commissionmandated requirements on its vessels, 

such as limits on fishing effort, and 

other members of the Commission do 

not do the same—despite being required 

to do so under the Convention—for their 

vessels, U.S. fishing vessels can be put 

at a competitive disadvantage relative to 

the fishing vessels of other members. If 

that disadvantage is severe enough, U.S. 

vessels could supply less product than 

they formerly did, resulting in shifts in 

the sources of fish sold in U.S. and other 

markets. NMFS also recognizes that if 

other Commission members fail to fully 

implement the decisions of the 

Commission, such as the provisions of 

CMM 2013–01, those decisions are less 

likely to achieve their fish stock 

conservation objectives. However, in 

order to satisfy the obligations of the 

United States as a party to the 

Convention and member of the 

Commission, NMFS is required to 

implement the Commission-mandated 

fishing effort limits for U.S. purse seine 

vessels. Accordingly, the commenter’s 

proposal to postpone or cancel 

implementation would not satisfy U.S. 

obligations under the Convention. 

NMFS is proceeding with 

implementation through this final rule. 

NMFS also notes that the United States, 

as a member of the Commission, is 

contributing to and has prioritized the 

development of the Commission’s 

compliance monitoring scheme, with 

the aim of improving compliance with 

Commission decisions by all its 

members. 

Comment 3: The American Tunaboat 

Association (ATA) is composed of the 

owners of all U.S.-flag purse seine 

vessels fishing in the western Pacific 

Ocean. There will be a direct and 

significant impact on the U.S. fleet 

should this proposed rule be finalized 

as written. 

The proposed reduction in allowable 

fishing days in the ELAPS from 2,588 to 

1,828 would be a substantial loss of 

fishing opportunities for U.S. vessels at 

a time of great uncertainty regarding 

fishing access under the SPTT. The 

ATA understands that there may be 

little flexibility in implementing the 

Commission measure establishing a 

fishing day limit on the high seas, but 

we note that there is flexibility for the 

U.S. EEZs. Therefore, in combining the 

two areas as the ELAPS, a level higher 

than 1,828 fishing days is justified. 

The ELAPS limits are not based on 

science relative to the conservation of 

the tuna stocks. The science provider to 

the Commission has not recommended, 

as a conservation measure, limits on 

catches of tunas on the high seas, or in 

any particular economic zones. This is 

an important point, because that truth 

provides the United States with more 

flexibility in the manner in which it 

regulates the U.S. fleet. For example, the 

United States could establish a larger 

number for allowable catches in the U.S. 

EEZ based on using certain past high 

years as base years. Given the variability 

in the availability of highly migratory 

stocks in different areas during different 

years, and the relevance of the fishing 

strategies that are employed in any 

given year, such an approach would not 

be unreasonable. 

The ATA urges NMFS to develop 

such an alternative approach and 

provide for a larger ELAPS limit than 

1,828 fishing days. We also believe that, 

if all fishing by purse seine vessels is 

prohibited in these remote island areas 

as a result of an expansion of the Pacific 

marine monuments, as is being 

contemplated by the Administration (an 

action strongly opposed by ATA), the 

consequent lost fishing opportunities 

should be compensated for by allowing 

more fishing on the same stocks 

elsewhere; that is, on the high seas. 

From a science or conservation point of 

view, there would be no detriment to 

the tuna stocks from such an approach. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges that 

the proposed rule could have direct 

economic impacts on participants in the 

U.S. purse seine fleet in the western and 

central Pacific Ocean (WCPO). As 

described in the RIR and IRFA prepared 

for this action, the impacts could be 

minor or substantial, depending on such 

factors as the length of the closure of the 

ELAPS in the event the limit is reached, 

whether the EEZs of the FFA members 

remain available for fishing during such 

a closure, and oceanic conditions. 

This rule implements certain 

provisions of CMM 2013–01, which 

directs coastal members like the United 

States to ‘‘establish effort limits, or 

equivalent catch limits for purse seine 

fisheries within their EEZs that reflect 

the geographical distributions of 

skipjack, yellowfin, and bigeye tunas, 

and are consistent with the objectives 

for those species’’ (excerpt from 

paragraph 23 of CMM 2013–01). CMM 

2013–01 further requires, ‘‘Those coastal 

States that have already notified limits 

to the Commission shall restrict purse 

seine effort and/or catch within their 

EEZs in accordance with those limits’’ 

(excerpt from paragraph 23 of CMM 

2013–01). Because the United States has 

previously notified the Commission of 

its purse seine effort limits for the U.S. 

EEZ since the limits were first 

established in 2009 (in a final rule 

published August 4, 2009; 74 FR 38544), 

the United States is obligated to 

continue to apply the same limits for the 

U.S. EEZ. Thus, CMM 2013–01 does not 

change the applicable purse seine 

fishing effort limit for the U.S. EEZ, and 

for that reason NMFS does not agree 

that there is flexibility in the limit for 

the U.S. EEZ or that a limit for the 

ELAPS of more than 1,828 fishing days 

is justified in this rule to implement 

provisions of CMM 2013–01. 

Finally, on September 25, 2014, 

President Obama issued Proclamation 

9173 extending the boundaries of the 

Pacific Remote Islands Marine National 

Monument around Jarvis Island, Wake 

Island, and Johnston Atoll to the outer 

limit of the U.S. EEZ. Under the 

Proclamation, commercial fishing is 

prohibited in the expansion area. NMFS 

acknowledges that the prohibition of 

commercial fishing within the 

expansion area will limit the fishing 

grounds available to U.S. purse seine 

vessels; however, we note that the 

expansion area represents a small 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 67361 

fraction of the U.S. purse seine fleet’s 

typical fishing grounds in the WCPO. 

Changes From the Proposed Rule 

No changes from the proposed rule 

have been made in this final rule. 

Classification 

The Administrator, Pacific Islands 

Region, NMFS, has determined that this 

final rule is consistent with the WCPFC 

Implementation Act and other 

applicable laws. 

Executive Order 12866 

This final rule has been determined to 

be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

A FRFA was prepared. The FRFA 

incorporates the IRFA prepared for the 

proposed rule. The analysis in the IRFA 

is not repeated here in its entirety. 

A description of the action, why it is 

being considered, and the legal basis for 

this action are contained in the 

preamble of the proposed rule and in 

the SUMMARY and SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION sections of this final rule, 

above. The analysis follows. 

Significant Issues Raised by Public 

Comments in Response to the IRFA 

NMFS did not receive any comments 

on the IRFA itself, but two sets of 

comments could pertain to small 

entities. See Comments 2 and 3 on the 

proposed rule, and NMFS’ responses, 

above. 

Description of Small Entities to Which 

the Rule Will Apply 

Small entities include ‘‘small 

businesses,’’ ‘‘small organizations,’’ and 

‘‘small governmental jurisdictions.’’ The 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

has established size standards for all 

major industry sectors in the United 

States, including commercial finfish 

harvesters (NAICS code 114111). A 

business primarily involved in finfish 

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 $20.5 million 

for all its affiliated operations 

worldwide. 

This final rule will apply to owners 

and operators of U.S. purse seine vessels 

used for fishing in the Convention Area. 

The number of affected vessels is the 

number licensed under the Treaty on 

Fisheries between the Governments of 

Certain Pacific Island States and the 

Government of the United States of 

America (South Pacific Tuna Treaty, or 

SPTT). The current number of licensed 

vessels is 40, the maximum number of 

licenses available under the SPTT 

(excluding joint-venture licenses, of 

which there are five available under the 

SPTT, none of which have ever been 

applied for or issued). 

Based on (limited) available financial 

information about the affected fishing 

vessels and the SBA’s small entity size 

standards for commercial finfish 

harvesters, and using individual vessels 

as proxies for individual businesses, 

NMFS believes that all the affected fish 

harvesting businesses are small entities. 

As stated above, there are currently 40 

purse seine vessels in the affected purse 

seine fishery. Neither gross receipts nor 

ex-vessel price information specific to 

the 40 vessels are available to NMFS. 

Average annual receipts for each of the 

40 vessels during the last 3 years for 

which reasonably complete data are 

available (2010–2012) were estimated as 

follows: The vessel’s reported retained 

catches of skipjack tuna, yellowfin tuna, 

and bigeye tuna in each year were each 

multiplied by an indicative Asia-Pacific 

regional cannery price for that species 

and year (developed by the Pacific 

Islands Forum Fisheries Agency and 

available at https://www.ffa.int/node/

425#attachments); the products were 

summed across species for each year; 

and the sums were averaged across the 

3 years. The estimated average annual 

receipts for each of the 40 vessels were 

less than the $20.5 million threshold 

used to classify businesses as small 

entities under the SBA size standard for 

finfish harvesting businesses. 

Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other 

Compliance Requirements 

The final rule will not establish any 

new reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements within the meaning of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act. The classes 

of small entities subject to the 

requirements and the types of 

professional skills necessary to fulfill 

each of the requirements are described 

in the IRFA. 

Disproportionate Impacts 

There would be no disproportionate 

economic impacts between small and 

large entities operating purse seine 

vessels as a result of this final rule. 

Furthermore, there would be no 

disproportionate economic impacts 

based on vessel size, gear, or homeport. 

Steps Taken To Minimize the 

Significant Economic Impacts on Small 

Entities 

In previous rulemakings to establish 

or revise U.S. purse seine fishing effort 

limits in the ELAPS in accordance with 

Commission decisions, NMFS 

considered a number of alternatives. 

The alternatives included different time 

scales for the limits (e.g., single-year 

versus multiple-year limits); whether 

separate limits or a combined limit 

would be established in the U.S. EEZ 

and high seas portions of the ELAPS; 

whether the limit(s) would be allocated 

to individual vessels; and different 

magnitudes of the limit(s). 

The first category of alternatives, time 

scales, is not relevant here because the 

objective is to implement the required 

fishing effort limit for 2014 only. 

The second category of alternatives— 

whether or not to break up the ELAPS 

limit into separate limits for the U.S. 

EEZ and the high seas portions of the 

ELAPS—would provide less operational 

flexibility for affected purse seine 

vessels, and thus be more constraining 

and costly than the proposed limit. It is 

rejected for that reason. 

The third category of alternatives, 

allocating the limit among individual 

vessels, would likely alleviate any 

adverse impacts of a race-to-fish that 

might occur as a result of establishing 

the competitive fishing effort limits as 

in the proposed rule. As described in 

the IRFA, those potential impacts 

include lower prices for landed product, 

as well as risks to performance and 

safety stemming from fishing during 

sub-optimal times. Those impacts, 

however, are expected to be minor. 

Furthermore, developing the necessary 

allocation criteria and procedures 

would be a substantial and lengthy 

process that probably could not be 

completed in time to implement this 

limit for 2014. For these reasons, this 

alternative is rejected. 

Regarding the fourth category of 

alternatives (the magnitude of the 

limits), NMFS considered, for the 2013 

rule that established the 2013 ELAPS 

limit and existing 2014 ELAPS limit, 

both smaller and larger limits for the 

ELAPS. Smaller limits, being more 

constraining and costly to affected 

fishing businesses, are not considered 

further here. With respect to larger 

limits, in the 2013 rule, NMFS 

considered an alternative that would be 

based in part on the fleet’s greatest 

annual level of fishing effort in the U.S. 

EEZ (on an average per-vessel basis, 

then expanded to a 40-vesselequivalent) during the 1997–2010 time 

period. For this rule, NMFS considered 

an alternative using the same approach 

considered in the 2013 rule. Using that 

approach, the limit in the U.S. EEZ 

would be 1,655 fishing days, and when 

combined with the high seas limit of 

1,270 fishing days, the total ELAPS limit 

would be 2,925 fishing days. Because 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
67362 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

this alternative limit is greater and thus 

less constraining than a limit of 1,828 

fishing days (as well as the existing 

limit of 2,588 fishing days), the costs of 

complying with this alternative would 

be less than or equal to those of the 

proposed limit of 1,828 fishing days. 

This alternative is rejected because it 

would depart from the way that the 

effort limits established for the period 

2009–2013 were determined. The 

approach used in formulating the limit 

in this final rule is the same as that used 

to establish ELAPS limits in the 2009 

rule, the 2011 rule, and the 2013 rule, 

and affected entities have been exposed 

to the impacts of those limits for the 

past 5 years. Furthermore, as explained 

in NMFS’ response to Comment 3, 

above, CMM 2013–01 does not all allow 

for higher purse seine effort limits in the 

U.S. EEZ than those already notified to 

the Commission. 

The alternative of taking no action at 

all, which would leave the existing 2014 

ELAPS limit of 2,588 fishing days in 

place, is rejected because it would fail 

to accomplish the objective of the 

WCPFC Implementation Act or satisfy 

the obligations of the United States as a 

Contracting Party to the Convention. 

Small Entity Compliance Guide 

Section 212 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 states that, for each rule or group 

of related rules for which an agency is 

required to prepare a FRFA, the agency 

shall publish one or more guides to 

assist small entities in complying with 

the rule, and shall designate such 

publications as ‘‘small entity 

compliance guides.’’ The agency shall 

explain the actions a small entity is 

required to take to comply with a rule 

or group of rules. As part of this 

rulemaking process, a small entity 

compliance guide has been prepared. 

The guide will be sent to permit and 

license holders in the affected fisheries. 

The guide and this final rule will also 

be available at www.fpir.noaa.gov and 

by request from NMFS PIRO (see 

ADDRESSES). 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 300 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, 

Marine resources, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Treaties. 

Dated: November 6, 2014. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR part 300 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 300—INTERNATIONAL 

FISHERIES REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 50 CFR 

part 300, subpart O, continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 300.223, paragraph (a)(1) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 300.223 Purse seine fishing restrictions. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(1) For calendar year 2014 there is a 

limit of 1,828 fishing days. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–26830 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 141002822–4933–01] 

RIN 0648–BE56 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

Provisions; Fisheries of the 

Northeastern United States; Northeast 

Groundfish Fishery; Fishing Year 2014; 

Emergency Gulf of Maine Cod 

Management Measures 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; interim action; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: This temporary rule 

implements commercial and 

recreational fishery management 

measure changes for Gulf of Maine cod 

protection in response to a recent 

updated assessment of the status of this 

severely depleted stock. The measures 

of this interim rule are necessary to 

reduce fishing mortality on GOM cod 

and to provide additional stock and 

spawning protection. The intended 

effect of these interim measures are to 

decrease fishing year 2014 catch so that 

overfishing is reduced and protect the 

stock until more permanent measures 

can be developed by the New England 

Fishery Management Council (Council). 

DATES: Effective November 13, 2014, 

until May 12, 2015. Comments must be 

received by December 13, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by NOAA–NMFS–2014–0125, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Electronic submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014- 

0125, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

John K. Bullard, Regional 

Administrator, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, 55 Great Republic 

Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the 

outside of the envelope, ‘‘Comments on 

the GOM Cod Interim Action.’’ 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

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

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ 

A’’ in the required fields if you wish to 

remain anonymous). Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF 

file formats only. 

Copies of an environmental 

assessment (EA) prepared by the Greater 

Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office 

(GARFO) and Northeast Fisheries 

Science Center (Center) for this 

rulemaking are available from John K. 

Bullard, Regional Administrator, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 55 

Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 

01930. The EA is also accessible via the 

Internet at www.nero.noaa.gov/sfd/

sfdmulti.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Ruccio, Fishery Policy Analyst, 

phone: 978–281–9104. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Interim Measures 

At the request of the Council, and in 

response to a recent updated assessment 

of Gulf of Maine (GOM) cod indicating 

that this stock is at a historically low 

abundance level, NMFS, on behalf of 

the Secretary of Commerce, is taking 

interim action to implement GOM cod 

fishing mortality reductions and other 

management measures designed to 

reduce overfishing, protect aggregations 

and spawning, and keep GOM cod on a 

rebuilding trajectory. These actions are 

being implemented as interim measures 

under the authority provided in section 

305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES