Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 49303 

and would amend an existing regulatory 

provision regarding the correlation of 

quality control test methods. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 9, 2017. Comments 

postmarked after the close of the 

comment period will be stamped ‘‘late’’ 

and may or may not be considered by 

the Agency. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2017–0245, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: Document Control Office 

(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

For technical information contact: 

Erik Winchester, National Program 

Chemicals Division, Office of Pollution 

Prevention and Toxics, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; 

telephone number: (202) 564–6450; 

email address: winchester.erik@epa.gov. 

For general information contact: The 

TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 

South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 

14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 

1404; email address: TSCA–Hotline@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information about the proposed 

changes to the voluntary consensus 

standards and the correlation of quality 

control test methods, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. For the reasons set out in 

the preamble to that direct final action, 

this proposed rule would amend title 

40, chapter I, subchapter R, of the Code 

of Federal Regulations as provided in 

that direct final action. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 770 

Environmental protection, 

Formaldehyde, Incorporation by 

reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Third-party certification, 

Toxic substances, Wood. 

Dated: October 12, 2017. 

E. Scott Pruitt, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2017–23061 Filed 10–24–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 64 

[CG Docket Nos. 03–123 and 10–51; DA 17– 

980] 

Petition for Reconsideration of Action 

in Rulemaking Proceeding 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: A Petition for Reconsideration 

(Petition) has been filed in the 

Commission’s rulemaking proceeding 

by the Interstate Telecommunications 

Relay Service Advisory Council. 

DATES: Comments to the Petition must 

be filed on or before November 9, 2017. 

Reply Comments must be filed on or 

before November 20, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Scott, Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, email: 

Michael.Scott@fcc.gov; phone: (202) 

418–1264. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s 

document DA 17–980, released October 

6, 2017. The full text of the Petition is 

available for viewing and copying at the 

FCC Reference Information Center, 445 

12th Street SW., Room CY–A257, 

Washington, DC 20554 or may be 

accessed online via the Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System at: 

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/109211

32140710/Interstate%20TRS%20

Advisory%20Council%20PFR%209

.21.2017%20filed.pdf. The Commission 

will not send a Congressional Review 

Act (CRA) submission to Congress or the 

Government Accountability Office 

pursuant to the CRA, 5.U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A), because no rules are being 

adopted by the Commission. 

Subject: Telecommunications Relay 

Services and Speech-to-Speech Services 

for Individuals with Hearing and 

Speech Disabilities; Structure and 

Practices of the Video Relay Service 

Program, FCC 17–86, published at 82 FR 

39673, August 22, 2017 in CG Docket 

Nos. 03–123 and 10–51. This document 

is being published pursuant to 47 CFR 

1.429(e). See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) and 

1.429(f), (g). 

Number of Petitions Filed: 1. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Karen Peltz Strauss, 

Deputy Chief, Consumer and Governmental 

Affairs Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 2017–23146 Filed 10–24–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 170823804–7932–01] 

RIN 0648–BH17 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Individual Bluefin Quota Program; 

Accountability for Bluefin Tuna Catch 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments and notice of public hearing. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to modify the 

Atlantic highly migratory species (HMS) 

regulations to require vessels in the 

pelagic longline fishery to account for 

bycatch of bluefin tuna (bluefin) using 

Individual Bluefin Quota (IBQ) on a 

quarterly basis instead of before 

commencing any fishing trip with less 

than the minimum required IBQ balance 

or with quota debt. Specifically, vessels 

would be allowed to fish with an IBQ 

balance below the minimum amount 

currently required to depart on a fishing 

trip with pelagic longline gear, or with 

quota debt incurred by exceeding their 

IBQ balance, during a given calendar 

quarter; however, vessels would be 

required to reconcile quota debt and 

satisfy the minimum IBQ requirement 

prior to departing on a pelagic longline 

fishing trip in the subsequent calendar 

quarter. The action will further optimize 

fishing opportunity in the directed 

pelagic longline fishery for target 

species such as tuna and swordfish and 

improve the functionality of the IBQ 

Program and its accounting provisions, 

consistent with the objectives of 

Amendment 7 to the 2006 Consolidated 

HMS Fishery Management Plan (FMP). 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
49304 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before November 24, 

2017. NMFS will host an operatorassisted public hearing conference call 

and webinar on October 31, 2017, from 

2:00 to 4:00 p.m. EDT, providing an 

opportunity for individuals from all 

geographic areas to participate. See 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further 

details. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by 

‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2017–0119,’’ by either 

of the following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=

NOAA-NMFS-2017-0119, click the 

‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the 

required fields, and enter or attach your 

comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

Thomas Warren, Highly Migratory 

Species (HMS) Management Division, 

Office of Sustainable Fisheries (F/SF1), 

NMFS, 55 Great Republic Drive, 

Gloucester, MA 01930. 

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 generally will 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). 

The public hearing conference call 

information is phone number (888) 391– 

7048; participant passcode 8277768. 

Participants are strongly encouraged to 

log/dial in 15 minutes prior to the 

meeting. NMFS will show a brief 

presentation via webinar followed by 

public comment. To join the webinar, go 

to: https://noaaevents3.webex.com/

noaaevents3/onstage/g.php?

MTID=e54f7226a1f5760de0610e

7545c3e472e; meeting number: 990 093 

099; password: NOAA. Participants who 

have not used WebEx before will be 

prompted to download and run a plugin program that will enable them to 

view the webinar. 

Supporting documents, including the 

Regulatory Impact Review and Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, may be 

downloaded from the HMS Web site at 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/. These 

documents also are available by 

contacting Thomas Warren at the 

mailing address specified above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Warren, 978–281–9260; or 

Carrie Soltanoff, 301–427–8503. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulations implemented under the 

authority of the Atlantic Tunas 

Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et 

seq.) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 

et seq.) governing the harvest of BFT by 

persons and vessels subject to U.S. 

jurisdiction are found at 50 CFR part 

635. Section 635.27 subdivides the U.S. 

BFT quota recommended by the 

International Commission for the 

Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) 

among the various domestic fishing 

categories, per the allocations 

established in the 2006 Consolidated 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

Fishery Management Plan (2006 

Consolidated HMS FMP) (71 FR 58058, 

October 2, 2006), as amended by 

Amendment 7 to the 2006 Consolidated 

HMS FMP (Amendment 7) (79 FR 

71510, December 2, 2014), and in 

accordance with implementing 

regulations. The current baseline U.S. 

BFT quota and subquotas were 

established and analyzed in the BFT 

quota final rule (80 FR 52198, August 

28, 2015). NMFS is required under 

ATCA and the Magnuson-Stevens Act to 

provide U.S. fishing vessels with a 

reasonable opportunity to harvest the 

ICCAT-recommended quota. 

Background 

Bluefin fishing is managed 

domestically through a quota system (on 

a calendar-year basis), in conjunction 

with other management measures 

including permitting, reporting, gear 

restrictions, minimum fish sizes, closed 

areas, trip limits, and catch shares. 

NMFS implements the ICCAT U.S. 

quota recommendation, and divides the 

quota among U.S. fishing categories (i.e., 

the General, Angling, Harpoon, Purse 

Seine, Longline, and Trap categories) 

and the Reserve category on an annual 

basis. Vessels fishing with pelagic 

longline gear, which catch bluefin 

incidentally while fishing for target 

species (primarily swordfish and 

yellowfin tuna), hold limited access 

Atlantic Tunas Longline permits and 

utilize Longline category quota. 

Through Amendment 7, NMFS 

established the IBQ Program, a catch 

share program that identified 136 permit 

holders as IBQ share recipients based on 

specified criteria, including historical 

target species landings and the bluefin 

catch-to-target species ratios from 2006 

through 2012. The objectives of the IBQ 

Program include limiting the amount of 

BFT landings and dead discards in the 

pelagic longline fishery; providing 

strong incentives for the vessel owner 

and operator to avoid bluefin 

interactions and thus reduce bluefin 

dead discards; and balancing the 

objective of limiting bluefin landings 

and dead discards with the objective of 

optimizing fishing opportunities and 

maintaining profitability. 

IBQ share recipients receive an 

annual allocation of the Longline 

category quota based on the percentage 

share they received through 

Amendment 7 but only if their permit 

is associated with a vessel in the subject 

year (i.e., only ‘‘qualified IBQ share 

recipients’’ receive annual allocations). 

Permit holders that did not receive IBQ 

shares through Amendment 7 may still 

fish, but they are required to lease IBQ. 

Leasing occurs through the IBQ 

electronic system. Through rulemaking, 

NMFS modified the regulations to 

optimize quota transferred inseason by 

authorizing distribution of quota only to 

permitted Atlantic Tunas Longline 

vessels with recent fishing activity (81 

FR 95903; December 29, 2016). Every 

vessel must have a minimum amount of 

quota allocation to fish (described 

below), whether obtained through their 

shares or by leasing, and every vessel 

must individually account for its bluefin 

landings and dead discards through the 

IBQ electronic system. 

Delayed effective dates for some of the 

regulations implemented through 

Amendment 7 assisted in the transition 

to measures adopted in Amendment 7, 

which substantially increased 

individual vessel accountability for 

bluefin bycatch (landings and dead 

discards) in the Longline fishery. During 

2015, the first year of implementation of 

the IBQ Program, a pelagic longline 

vessel that had insufficient IBQ to 

account for its landings and dead 

discards (i.e., went into ‘‘quota debt’’) 

was allowed to continue to fish, 

however any additional landings and 

dead discards continued to accrue, and 

the cumulative quota debt needed to be 

accounted for no later than December 

31, 2015. A vessel that did not resolve 

its quota debt by December 31, would 

retain the quota debt into 2016, and its 

quota debt would be deducted from its 

annual IBQ allocation (allocated January 

1 to shareholders associated with 

permitted vessels). In contrast, as of 

January 1, 2016, a vessel fishing with 

pelagic longline gear onboard must have 

a minimum IBQ allocation to embark on 

a trip. A minimum allocation required 

to fish is 0.25 mt (551 lb) whole weight 

(ww) for a trip in the Gulf of Mexico and 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 49305 

0.125 mt ww (276 lb ww) for a trip in 

the Atlantic. Pelagic longline vessels 

may lease IBQ allocation from other 

such vessels or from Purse Seine fishery 

participants in the IBQ Program to 

obtain sufficient allocation for their 

trips or to account for quota debt. 

The IBQ Program has been operating 

since its implementation (both in 2015 

under annual accountability and in 

2016 and 2017 under trip-level 

accountability). Pelagic longline vessel 

owners have been accounting for bluefin 

catch using the IBQ Program and leasing 

quota among themselves (and from 

Purse Seine fishery participants) as 

needed in order to fully account for 

bluefin catch using IBQ. Notably, 

estimates of 2015 and 2016 dead 

discards of bluefin (17.1 mt and 22.6 mt, 

respectively) by the pelagic longline 

fishery indicate substantial reductions 

of greater than 50 percent compared to 

the pre-2015 levels (159.6 mt on average 

for 2006 through 2014). However, since 

implementation, pelagic longline fishery 

participants have consistently requested 

additional flexibility due to the 

constraints and costs associated with 

the accounting and leasing requirements 

of the IBQ Program, which affects 

profitability of target species catch 

(primarily swordfish and yellowfin 

tuna) and causes uncertainty in a vessel 

owner’s short-term and long-term plans. 

Vessel owners stated that their ability to 

account for bluefin using allocated IBQ 

or IBQ leased at an affordable price is 

key to the success of the IBQ Program. 

A vessel that has below the minimum 

amount of IBQ to fish or is in quota debt 

is uncertain about their ability to depart 

on a subsequent fishing trip. 

Specifically, vessels have been 

concerned that the IBQ Program, 

including the trip-level accountability 

requirements, could negatively impact 

vessel operations and finances given the 

timing restrictions, lease pricing of IBQ, 

the distribution of quota among permit 

holders as implemented by Amendment 

7, and the behavior of some permit 

holders who, for example, do not appear 

to be actively fishing nor engaged in any 

leasing activities. They also say that the 

expense of leasing IBQ allocation when 

needed can impact other operational 

costs such as crew pay. If availability of 

IBQ is limited, or costs are prohibitive, 

the operational impacts increase. IBQ 

Program data generally reflect that, for 

leasing transactions that occurred, sales 

revenue received per pound 

approximated the cost per pound of 

leasing IBQ. However, IBQ Program 

participants (which include any permit 

holder or vessel that leases quota to 

facilitate pelagic longline operations) 

and potential lessees have 

communicated that there were instances 

where the cost at which lessors were 

willing to lease their IBQ was 

prohibitive and leasing did not occur 

and this information would not be 

reflected in NMFS data. Furthermore, 

expanded opportunities to fish with 

pelagic longline gear within the 

available swordfish quota are contingent 

on access to additional quota to account 

for bluefin bycatch and discards. 

Longline fishery participants requested 

that NMFS take further steps to provide 

more flexibility regarding timing for 

vessel owners to lease IBQ needed to 

cover bluefin catch. 

Therefore, pelagic longline fishery 

participants consistently requested 

additional flexibility in the regulations 

due to the dynamics and costs 

associated with leasing IBQ described 

above, which can affect profitability of 

target species catch, increase 

uncertainty, and negatively affect the 

ability to plan their business. Such 

effects may be compounded by the 

impacts of other constraints associated 

with Amendment 7, including 

additional gear restricted areas and VMS 

and electronic monitoring requirements, 

as well as non-Amendment 7 related 

constraints (e.g., market demands etc.). 

In light of these challenges facing the 

fishery, as well as the Amendment 7 

objectives which include ‘‘minimizing 

constraints on fishing for target 

species,’’ as well as ‘‘optimizing fishing 

opportunities and maintaining 

profitability,’’ NMFS has utilized its 

authority to transfer quota inseason to 

the Longline category (80 FR 45098; July 

29, 2015; 81 FR 19; January 4, 2106; 82 

FR 12296; March 2, 2017) to foster 

conditions in which vessel owners 

become more willing to lease IBQ, 

optimize fishing opportunity, and 

reduce uncertainty in the fishery. 

During its May 2017 Advisory Panel 

Meeting, pelagic longline vessel owners 

acknowledged the effectiveness of 

NMFS’ actions in support of the IBQ 

Program objectives, but reiterated the 

need for additional flexibility and 

offered suggestions for high priority 

regulatory changes to achieve such 

flexibility. 

NMFS received requests, among other 

suggestions about the IBQ Program and 

management of the pelagic longline 

fishery, to allow more time for vessel 

owners to resolve quota debt and 

achieve a minimum balance of IBQ, 

rather than require vessels to have a 

minimum balance of IBQ as a 

prerequisite of every longline trip. In 

light of past fishery dynamics under the 

IBQ Program and public input regarding 

the need for additional flexibility, this 

rule proposes to modify the 

accountability provisions of the IBQ 

Program as a reasonable means to 

provide some additional flexibility for 

individual vessel owners, while 

achieving a balance among the IBQ 

Program objectives. 

The pelagic longline fishery is a 

diverse fishing fleet, with a variety of 

vessel sizes and types of operations 

distributed from the waters off Nova 

Scotia to the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean, 

and South America. Timing of fishing 

trips are typically based on the 

availability of target species, weather, 

moon phase, markets, crew and bait 

availability, and other factors. Quarterly 

accountability may achieve a better 

balance between minimizing constraints 

on fishing for target species and 

ensuring accountability for incidental 

bluefin catch, due to the fact that it 

allows a vessel owner to determine the 

timing of lease transactions or level of 

quota debt they are comfortable 

maintaining over a longer period. 

Alleviation of the timing constraint 

associated with trip-level accountability 

would provide additional flexibility. A 

vessel owner may need flexibility to pay 

costs associated with fishing (fuel, bait, 

ice, labor, repairs, etc.), including the 

cost of leasing IBQ, on a timeline unique 

to their operation and finances. The 

opportunity to fish with a low IBQ 

balance or with quota debt may enable 

a vessel owner to continue to obtain 

revenue during the time period when 

they are looking for quota to lease and 

accommodate different types of fishing 

operations and financial obligations. 

Quarterly accountability would require 

vessel owners to resolve quota debt and 

obtain the minimum amount of IBQ 

prior to fishing for the first time in a 

subsequent calendar quarter. 

Request for Comments 

NMFS solicits comments on this 

proposed rule through November 24, 

2017. See instructions in ADDRESSES

section. 

Public Hearing Conference Call 

NMFS will hold a public hearing 

conference call and webinar on October 

31, 2017, from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. EDT, to 

allow for an additional opportunity for 

interested members of the public from 

all geographic areas to submit verbal 

comments on the proposed rule. 

The public is reminded that NMFS 

expects participants at public hearings 

and on conference calls to conduct 

themselves appropriately. At the 

beginning of the conference call, a 

representative of NMFS will explain the 

ground rules (all comments are to be 

directed to the agency on the proposed 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
49306 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

action; attendees will be called to give 

their comments in the order in which 

they registered to speak; each attendee 

will have an equal amount of time to 

speak; and attendees should not 

interrupt one another). The NMFS 

representative will attempt to structure 

the meeting so that all attending 

members of the public will be able to 

comment, if they so choose, regardless 

of the controversial nature of the subject 

matter. If attendees do not respect the 

ground rules, they will be asked to leave 

the conference call. 

Classification 

The NMFS Assistant Administrator 

has determined that the proposed rule is 

consistent with the 2006 Consolidated 

HMS FMP and its amendments, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, ATCA, 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. 

This action has been preliminarily 

determined to be categorically excluded 

from the requirement to prepare an 

environmental assessment in 

accordance with NOAA Administrative 

Order (NAO) 216–6A, subject to further 

consideration after public comment. 

This action may appropriately be 

categorically excluded from the 

requirement to prepare either an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement in 

accordance with CE A1 of the 

Companion Manual for NAO 216–6A for 

an action that is a technical correction 

or a change to a fishery management 

action or regulation, which does not 

result in a substantial change in any of 

the following: Fishing location, timing, 

effort, authorized gear types, access to 

fishery resources or harvest levels. By 

somewhat altering the timing of the 

accounting for bluefin tuna by 

individual pelagic longline vessels, the 

changes in the proposed action could 

also be expected to alter some fishing 

timing, and this is the intent of the 

additional flexibility offered by the 

changes proposed in the action. We 

expect this to result in some minor 

alterations in fishing trip timing by 

individual vessel owners. Timing would 

not, however, be altered in a way that 

would constitute a substantial change. 

In practice, this action would give some 

individual vessels flexibility to alter the 

timing of some of their fishing trips 

within a three-month period. Given the 

size of the fleet and the number of 

fishing trips taken, such minor 

variations in individual fishing trips 

would not result in substantial changes 

to fishing timing overall. Moreover, the 

level of fishing remains capped by the 

U.S. bluefin tuna quota; the timing of 

the fishing is substantively managed by 

the various subquota categories, 

inseason actions (e.g., regarding 

retention limits) and seasons. Any 

minor modifications in individual 

vessel practice will not increase or 

decrease the quota nor the fishing 

mortality associated with that quota or 

have any other environmental effects. 

The annual U.S. bluefin tuna quota and 

subquota allocations to the Longline 

category would not be affected by this 

action. A final determination will be 

made prior to publication of the final 

rule for this action. 

NMFS has prepared a Regulatory 

Impact Review (RIR) and an Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), 

which present and analyze anticipated 

social and economic impacts of the 

alternatives contained in this proposed 

rule. The list of alternatives and their 

analyses are provided in the draft RIR 

and are not repeated here in their 

entirety. A copy of the draft RIR 

prepared for this proposed rule is 

available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

An IRFA was prepared, as required by 

section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (RFA, 5 U.S.C. 603 et seq.), and is 

included below. The IRFA describes the 

economic impact this proposed rule, if 

adopted, would have on small entities. 

A description of the action, why it is 

being considered, and the legal basis for 

this action are contained in the SUMMARY

section of the preamble. 

The goal of the RFA is to analyze the 

economic burden of federal regulations 

on small entities. To that end, the RFA 

directs federal agencies to assess 

whether the proposed regulation is 

likely to result in significant economic 

impacts to a substantial number of small 

entities, and identify and analyze any 

significant alternatives to the proposed 

rule that accomplish the objectives of 

applicable statutes and minimizes any 

significant effects on small entities. 

Description of the Reasons Why Action 

Is Being Considered 

In compliance with section 603(b)(1) 

of the RFA, the purpose of this proposed 

rulemaking is, consistent with the 2006 

Consolidated HMS FMP objectives, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), and other 

applicable law, to require vessels in the 

pelagic longline fishery to account for 

bycatch of bluefin tuna using IBQ on a 

quarterly basis instead of before 

commencing any fishing trip while in 

quota debt or with less than the 

minimum required IBQ balance. 

Current regulations require permitted 

Atlantic Tunas Longline vessels to 

possess a minimum amount of IBQ to 

depart on a fishing trip with pelagic 

longline gear and account for bluefin 

tuna catch (fish retained or discarded 

dead) using IBQ (0.25 mt for a trip in the 

Gulf of Mexico and 0.125 mt for a trip 

in the Atlantic). At the end of a trip on 

which bluefin tuna are caught, a vessel’s 

IBQ balance is reduced by the amount 

caught. If the trip catch exceeds the 

vessel’s available quota, the vessel will 

incur quota debt (i.e., exceeding its 

available IBQ balance). In this case, the 

regulations currently require the vessel 

to obtain additional IBQ through leasing 

to resolve that quota debt and to acquire 

the minimum IBQ amount before 

departing on a subsequent trip using 

pelagic longline gear. Thus, a pelagic 

longline vessel owner who takes 

consecutive trips must account for 

bluefin tuna catch in almost real time, 

effectively creating a system of ‘‘triplevel accountability’’ for those vessels. 

This action would modify these rules 

to require vessels to resolve quota debt 

on a quarterly basis (i.e., they must 

balance the debt and obtain the 

minimum amount required to depart on 

a fishing trip before going on a trip in 

the next quarter). Vessels would be 

allowed to fish with a low IBQ balance 

or with quota debt during a calendar 

quarter. Vessels would still be required 

to report bluefin tuna catch at the end 

of each trip (and account for it with 

IBQ), but this regulatory change would 

provide the flexibility to fish even if the 

vessel has less than the minimum 

amount of IBQ, including quota debt, 

until the first fishing trip in each 

calendar quarter. For example, under 

the new measure, if a vessel has a low 

balance or quota debt in January 2018, 

the vessel would be allowed to fish 

without first resolving that low balance 

or quota debt through March 31, 2018. 

In order to depart on a pelagic longline 

fishing trip in the following quarter, 

starting April 1, 2018, that vessel would 

need to lease additional IBQ resolve the 

quota debt and acquire the minimum 

amount of IBQ required to fish. 

The rule would provide flexibility for 

two important operational business 

decisions made by vessel owners: 

decisions regarding quota balance and 

quota debt (subject to full accounting 

quarterly) and decisions regarding the 

timing and price at which they lease 

additional quota. Importantly, this 

regulatory change would maintain 

vessel accountability for bluefin tuna 

catch and the associated incentives for 

vessel operators to minimize catch of 

bluefin tuna. By changing the timing of 

the accountability, however, the 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 49307 

proposed rule would provide some 

additional flexibility in vessel 

operations and thus provide vessel 

owners more of a reasonable 

opportunity to catch available quota for 

target species (i.e., swordfish and 

yellowfin tuna). 

Statement of the Objectives of, and 

Legal Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

In compliance with section 603(b)(2) 

of the RFA, the objective of this 

proposed rulemaking is to provide 

additional flexibility regarding the 

timing of accounting for bluefin tuna in 

the IBQ Program in a manner that 

maintains accountability for bluefin 

tuna and a strong incentive for pelagic 

longline vessels to avoid interactions 

with bluefin tuna, while minimizing 

constraints on fishing for target species 

and, to the greatest extent possible, the 

socioeconomic impacts on affected 

fisheries. 

The legal basis for this proposed rule 

stems from the dual authority of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act and the Atlantic 

Tunas Convention Act (ATCA). Under 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS must, 

consistent with ten National Standards, 

manage fisheries to maintain optimum 

yield (OY) by rebuilding overfished 

fisheries and preventing overfishing. 

Under ATCA, NMFS is authorized to 

promulgate regulations as may be 

necessary and appropriate to carry out 

binding recommendations of ICCAT. 

Additionally, any management 

measures must be consistent with other 

domestic laws including the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), and the Coastal Zone 

Management Act (CZMA). 

Description and Estimate of the Number 

of Small Entities To Which the Proposed 

Rule Would Apply 

Section 603(b)(3) of the RFA requires 

agencies to provide an estimate of the 

number of small entities to which the 

rule would apply. The Small Business 

Administration (SBA) has established 

size criteria for all major industry 

sectors in the United States, including 

fish harvesters. Provision is made under 

SBA’s regulations for an agency to 

develop its own industry-specific size 

standards after consultation with the 

SBA Office of Advocacy and an 

opportunity for public comment (see 13 

CFR 121.903(c)). Under this provision, 

NMFS may establish size standards that 

differ from those established by the SBA 

Office of Size Standards, but only for 

use by NMFS and only for the purpose 

of conducting an analysis of economic 

effects in fulfillment of the agency’s 

obligations under the RFA. To utilize 

this provision, NMFS must publish such 

size standards in the Federal Register 

(FR), which NMFS did on December 29, 

2015 (80 FR 81194, December 29, 2015). 

In this final rule effective on July 1, 

2016, NMFS established a small 

business size standard of $11 million in 

annual gross receipts for all businesses 

in the commercial fishing industry 

(NAICS 11411) for RFA compliance 

purposes. NMFS considers all HMS 

Atlantic Tunas Longline permit holders 

(280 as of October 2016) to be small 

entities because these vessels have 

reported annual gross receipts of less 

than $11 million for commercial fishing. 

The average annual gross revenue per 

active pelagic longline vessel was 

estimated to be $187,000 based on the 

170 active vessels between 2006 and 

2012 that produced an estimated $31.8 

million in revenue annually. The 

maximum annual revenue for any 

pelagic longline vessel between 2006 

and 2015 was $1.9 million, well below 

the NMFS small business size threshold 

of $11 million in gross receipts for 

commercial fishing. Therefore, NMFS 

considers all Atlantic Tunas Longline 

permit holders to be small entities. 

NMFS has determined that this 

proposed rule would apply to the small 

businesses associated with the 136 

Atlantic Tunas Longline permits with 

IBQ shares and the additional permitted 

Atlantic Tunas Longline vessels that 

fish with quota leased through the IBQ 

Program. NMFS has determined that 

this action would not likely directly 

affect any small organizations or small 

government jurisdictions defined under 

the RFA. 

Description of the Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements of the Proposed Rule, 

Including an Estimate of the Classes of 

Small Entities Which Would Be Subject 

to the Requirements of the Report or 

Record 

Section 603(b)(4) of the RFA requires 

agencies to describe any new reporting, 

record-keeping and other compliance 

requirements. This proposed rule does 

not contain any new collection of 

information, reporting, or recordkeeping requirements but only modifies 

existing requirements. 

Identification of All Relevant Federal 

Rules Which May Duplicate, Overlap, or 

Conflict With the Proposed Rule 

Under section 603(b)(5) of the RFA, 

agencies must identify, to the extent 

practicable, relevant Federal rules 

which duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with the proposed action. Fishermen, 

dealers, and managers in these fisheries 

must comply with a number of 

international agreements, domestic 

laws, and other FMPs. These include, 

but are not limited to, the MagnusonStevens Act, ATCA, High Seas Fishing 

Compliance Act, MMPA, ESA, NEPA, 

Paperwork Reduction Act, and CZMA. 

This proposed action has been 

determined not to duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with any of these statutes or 

Federal rules. 

Description of Any Significant 

Alternatives to the Proposed Rule That 

Accomplish the Stated Objectives of the 

Applicable Statutes and That Minimize 

Any Significant Economic Impact of the 

Proposed Rule on Small Entities 

One of the requirements of an IRFA is 

to describe any significant alternatives 

to the proposed rule which accomplish 

the stated objectives of applicable 

statutes and which minimize any 

significant economic impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities. The 

analysis shall discuss significant 

alternatives such as: 

1. Establishment of differing 

compliance or reporting requirements or 

timetables that take into account the 

resources available to small entities; 

2. Clarification, consolidation, or 

simplification of compliance and 

reporting requirements under the rule 

for such small entities; 

3. Use of performance rather than 

design standards; and 

4. Exemptions from coverage of the 

rule, or any part thereof, for small 

entities. 

These categories of alternatives are 

described at 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)–(4)). 

NMFS examined each of these 

categories of alternatives. Regarding the 

first and fourth categories, NMFS cannot 

establish differing compliance or 

reporting requirements for small entities 

or exempt small entities from coverage 

of the rule or parts of it because all of 

the businesses impacted by this rule are 

considered small entities and thus the 

requirements are already designed for 

small entities. NMFS examined 

alternatives that fall under the second 

category, which requires agencies to 

consider whether they can clarify, 

consolidate, or simplify compliance and 

reporting requirements under the 

proposed rule for small entities. The 

quarterly and annual accountability 

alternatives in the proposed rule would 

reduce the burden of complying with 

the existing trip level accountability 

requirement and thus would fall into 

this category of alternatives by 

simplifying compliance and reporting 

requirements for small entities. The IBQ 

Program was designed to adhere to 

performance standards, the third 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
49308 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

category above; modifications to the 

regulations implementing the IBQ 

Program simply make adjustments to 

the administration of those underlying 

performance standards. Thus, NMFS 

has considered the significant 

alternatives to the proposed rule and 

focused on simplifying compliance and 

reporting requirements associated with 

IBQ accountability in order to minimize 

any significant economic impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities. 

NMFS analyzed several different 

alternatives in this proposed 

rulemaking, and the rationale that 

NMFS used to determine the alternative 

for achieving the desired objectives is 

described below. 

The first alternative is the ‘‘no action’’ 

(status quo) alternative. The second 

alternative, the preferred alternative, 

would adjust the Atlantic HMS 

regulations to require the pelagic 

longline fishery to account for bycatch 

of bluefin tuna using IBQ on a quarterly 

basis instead of before embarking on a 

trip after incurring quota debt. The third 

alternative would adjust the Atlantic 

HMS regulations to require the pelagic 

longline fishery to account for bycatch 

of bluefin tuna using IBQ on an annual 

basis instead of before embarking on a 

trip after incurring quota debt. The 

economic impacts of these three 

alternatives are detailed below. Under 

all three alternatives, a vessel’s IBQ 

balance would be reduced to account for 

bluefin tuna discarded dead or retained 

immediately after the catch is reported 

in the IBQ system. The difference 

among the alternatives is the timing of 

when quota debt or a low balance of IBQ 

precludes fishing and must be resolved 

prior to departing on a subsequent trip 

using pelagic longline gear (trip level, 

quarterly, or annually). 

Under the ‘‘no action’’ alternative, 

NMFS would maintain the current 

regulations regarding accounting for 

bluefin tuna catch and prerequisites for 

departing on a fishing trip with pelagic 

longline gear on board. Current 

regulations require permitted Atlantic 

Tunas Longline vessel owners (or vessel 

operators, where applicable) to possess 

a minimum amount of IBQ to depart on 

a fishing trip with pelagic longline gear 

and account for bluefin tuna caught 

(retained or discarded dead) using IBQ 

at the end of the trip. Therefore, at the 

end of a trip on which bluefin tuna are 

caught, a vessel owner’s balance of IBQ 

would be reduced, possibly below the 

minimum amount needed for a 

subsequent trip, or the vessel owner 

may incur quota debt by exceeding their 

IBQ balance. In either of these cases, the 

vessel owner must obtain additional 

IBQ through leasing in order to satisfy 

the minimum requirement (and resolve 

any quota debt they may have) prior to 

departing on another trip using pelagic 

longline gear. The net effect of these 

rules is that a pelagic longline vessel 

owner that takes multiple sequential 

trips must account for bluefin tuna in 

real-time, which NMFS refers to as 

‘‘trip-level accountability.’’ 

This approach was implemented by 

Amendment 7, but effectiveness was 

delayed until January 1, 2016, in 

contrast to most of the other 

Amendment 7 measures that were 

effective on January 1, 2015. During 

2016, there were 1,025 pelagic longline 

trips by 85 vessels, which deployed 

6,885 sets and 5,217,547 hooks. During 

2016, there were 81 IBQ lease 

transactions with a total of 141,183 lb 

IBQ leased and an average price of $ 

2.52 per pound (weighted average). 

There were a total of 17 vessels that 

incurred quota debt at some time during 

the year, with a total amount of 40,237 

lb of debt incurred and resolved. Mean 

revenue per trip during 2016 based on 

logbook, dealer, and weigh out data was 

$ 24,707. 

During 2016, pelagic longline vessel 

owners successfully accounted for 

bluefin tuna catch using the IBQ 

Program and leasing quota among 

themselves (and from Purse Seine 

fishery participants) as needed in order 

to fully account for bluefin tuna catch 

using IBQ. However, since 

implementation, pelagic longline fishery 

participants have consistently requested 

some additional flexibility due to the 

costs associated with leasing IBQ, which 

can affect profitability of target species 

catch, as well as the concern that vessel 

owners appear to be unwilling to lease 

IBQ at certain times, uncertainties 

regarding the availability of IBQ to 

lease, and the impacts of other 

constraints associated with Amendment 

7, including additional gear restricted 

areas and VMS and electronic 

monitoring requirements. The ability of 

vessel owners to account for bluefin 

tuna using allocated quota or IBQ leased 

at an affordable price is key to the 

success of the IBQ Program. A trend that 

may in part reflect the uncertainties and 

constraints associated with trip-level 

accountability is the lower amount of 

fishing effort in 2016 compared to 2015 

(despite the active IBQ leasing market in 

2016). For example, the number of trips, 

active vessels, longline sets and hooks 

fished were all lower in 2016 than they 

were in 2015. The No Action alternative 

would not, however, provide the timing 

flexibility benefits that could facilitate 

better operational and economic 

decisions and options for individual 

vessel owners who need to lease IBQ, 

and NMFS therefore does not prefer the 

no action alternative. 

Under the second alternative 

(preferred), NMFS would adjust the 

Atlantic HMS regulations to require the 

pelagic longline fishery to account for 

bycatch of bluefin tuna using IBQ on a 

quarterly basis instead of before 

commencing any fishing trip while in 

quota debt or with less than the 

minimum required IBQ balance. The 

preferred alternative would provide 

flexibility for two important operational 

business decisions made by vessel 

owners. First, decisions regarding quota 

balance and quota debt (subject to full 

accounting quarterly); and second, 

decisions regarding the timing and price 

at which they lease additional quota. It 

is likely that the vessels would take 

advantage of increased operational 

flexibility as a result of removal of the 

constraints associated with the trip-level 

accountability. Specifically, operational 

flexibility associated with the preferred 

alternative may enable vessels to fish at 

more optimal times and avoid delay in 

the timing of a trip due to a low IBQ 

balance and issues related to availability 

of quota to lease; lease IBQ at a lower 

price by providing the flexibility for a 

vessel owner to ‘shop around’; reduce 

uncertainty in the IBQ market such that 

vessels are willing to plan and 

undertake fishing trips they previously 

may not have; and improve their cash 

flow by allowing fishing while in quota 

debt (i.e., accrual of revenue with which 

to lease additional IBQ). In 2016, each 

additional trip earned vessels on 

average $24,707 in revenue. 

NMFS used the available data on the 

IBQ lease markets to estimate the 

potential reduction in transaction costs 

(mainly labor costs) associated with 

moving from trip-level accountability to 

quarterly accountability. There were 33 

vessels that leased quota in 2016 and 

they were involved in 81 transactions. 

On average, that is almost 2.5 

transactions per vessel that entered the 

IBQ lease market. Under the quarterly 

accountability requirement of 

Alternative 2, these vessels might be 

able to reduce their number of lease 

transactions to one lease per quarter, 

which would reduce business costs and 

have economic and operational benefits. 

Based on data from 2016 and the firsthalf of 2017, quarterly accountability 

could lead to 51 fewer lease transactions 

if vessel owners reduced their number 

of lease transaction to one per quarter 

under this alternative. Each lease 

transaction costs vessel owners 

additional labor time to search for 

available IBQ, contact potential lessors, 

negotiate prices, and complete the 

transactions. NMFS estimates that could 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 49309 

involve approximately four hours per 

transaction. Using the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics mean hourly wage rate for 

first-line supervisors of farming, fishing 

and forestry workers of $23 per hour in 

2016 (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/ 

oes451011.htm), NMFS estimates the 

value of the time involved in these 

additional 51 leases to be approximately 

worth $4,692 (51 transactions × 4 hours 

× $23/hr). Since this amount is based on 

six quarters, the annual estimated 

savings in the time associated with 

these leases is approximately $3,128 per 

year ($4,692/1.5 years). Given that 33 

vessels were involved in leasing in 

2016, the per vessel savings per year 

would be approximately $95 per vessel. 

Although it is not possible to 

precisely quantify the economic impacts 

of the preferred alternative, the no 

action alternative with trip-level 

accountability (i.e., the regulations 

implemented in 2016) and the third 

alternative with annual accountability 

(i.e., the regulations implemented in 

2015) may be informative about the 

likely impacts of the proposed 

alternatives. The amount of flexibility to 

account for bluefin tuna catch afforded 

by the proposed alternative is likely 

somewhere in between the two other 

alternatives: Trip-level accountability 

(no action alternative) and annual 

accountability (third alternative). 

Under the third alternative, there 

would be no minimum amount of IBQ 

required to fish and vessels would only 

be required to account for their catch at 

the end of the year. The third alternative 

is the same as the IBQ accounting 

regulations that were in effect during 

2015. During 2015, there were 1,124 

pelagic longline trips, by 104 vessels, 

which deployed 7,769 sets and 

5,549,451 hooks. During 2015, there 

were 49 IBQ lease transactions from 24 

distinct vessels with a total of 126,407 

lb IBQ leased, and an average price of 

$3.46 per pound (weighted average). 

There were a total of 16 vessels that 

incurred quota debt, with a total amount 

of 42,746 lb. The mean revenue per trip 

during 2015 based on dealer data was 

$17,603 (not including bluefin tuna or 

dolphin revenue). Although it is 

possible to glean some insights from 

data from 2015 as the basis for 

evaluating potential economic impacts 

of the third alternative, the fishing 

behavior of the pelagic longline fleet 

during 2015, the first year of 

Amendment 7 regulations, was likely 

heavily influenced by the newness of 

the regulations and the relatively high 

amount of uncertainty in 2015. 

There were approximately 2.0 lease 

transactions per vessel in 2015 versus 

2.5 leases per vessel in 2016. Assuming 

the 33 vessels that leased in 2016 only 

leased 2 times per year under annual 

accountability, the number of leases 

would be reduced from 81 to 66, a 

reduction of 15 transactions. This 

reduction in 15 transactions taking 

approximately 4 hours of an owner’s 

time would be worth $1,380 in labor 

costs per year (15 × 4 hours × $23/hr). 

Given the 33 vessels that leased in 2016, 

the per vessel cost savings would be 

approximately $42 per vessel per year. 

Alternatively, if vessel owners could 

reduce the number of leases to one per 

year, the number of lease transactions 

could be reduced down to 33 

transactions based on 2016 lease 

activity. This would result in 48 fewer 

transactions, and would result in a 

savings of up to $4,416 per year for the 

whole fleet or $134 per vessel that 

leased. However, based on the 2015 IBQ 

lease data under annual accountability 

that year, it is unlikely that the number 

of lease transactions would be reduced 

by this much. It is likely that there 

would be more leasing activity 

associated with this alternative than 

occurred during 2015, since 2015 was 

the initial implementation of the IBQ 

Program and participants were just 

learning how the IBQ lease market 

worked and which IBQ Program 

participants were interested in leasing 

IBQ, as well as a lower average price per 

pound for leased IBQ. 

There is uncertainty as to the full 

impact of moving from trip-level 

accountability to annual accountability. 

Annual accountability might cause 

vessel owners to wait until December to 

try to lease quota. Quota available for 

lease in December might become scarcer 

and this holiday period might cause 

fewer IBQ shareholders to participate in 

the market. This increased scarcity of 

IBQ available for lease and the tight end 

of the year timeframe might result in 

spikes in the price for IBQ, thus driving 

up costs and potentially leaving some 

vessel owners unable to resolve their 

quota debt at the last minute as the year 

ends. NMFS prefers to incrementally 

move to quarterly accountability under 

Alternative 2 to avoid some of the risks 

associated with Alternative 3. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635 

Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, 

Foreign relations, Imports, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Treaties. 

Dated: October 19, 2017. 

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 635 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY 

MIGRATORY SPECIES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 635 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 

1801 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 635.15, revise paragraphs (b)(3), 

(b)(4)(i) and (ii), (b)(5)(i) and (ii), and 

(b)(8)(i), to read as follows: 

§ 635.15 Individual bluefin tuna quotas. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Minimum IBQ allocation. For 

purposes of this paragraph (b), calendar 

year quarters start on January 1, April 1, 

July 1, and October 1. 

(i) First fishing trip in a calendar year 

quarter. Before departing on the first 

fishing trip in a calendar year quarter, 

a vessel with an eligible Atlantic Tunas 

Longline category permit that fishes 

with or has pelagic longline gear 

onboard must have the minimum IBQ 

allocation for either the Gulf of Mexico 

or Atlantic, depending on fishing 

location. The minimum IBQ allocation 

for a vessel fishing in the Gulf of 

Mexico, or departing for a fishing trip in 

the Gulf of Mexico, is 0.25 mt ww (551 

lb ww). The minimum IBQ allocation 

for a vessel fishing in the Atlantic or 

departing for a fishing trip in the 

Atlantic is 0.125 mt ww (276 lb ww). A 

vessel owner or operator may not 

declare into or depart on the first fishing 

trip in a calendar year quarter with 

pelagic longline gear onboard unless it 

has the relevant required minimum IBQ 

allocation for the region in which the 

fishing activity will occur. 

(ii) Subsequent fishing trips in a 

calendar year quarter. Subsequent to the 

first fishing trip in a calendar year 

quarter, a vessel owner or operator may 

declare into or depart on other fishing 

trips with pelagic longline gear onboard 

with less than the minimum IBQ 

allocation, but only within that same 

calendar year quarter. 

(4) Accounting for bluefin tuna 

caught. (i) With the exception of vessels 

fishing in the NED, in compliance with 

the requirements of paragraph (b)(8) of 

this section, all bluefin tuna catch (dead 

discards and landings) must be 

deducted from the vessel’s IBQ 

allocation at the end of each pelagic 

longline trip. 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
49310 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 25, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) If the amount of bluefin tuna catch 

on a particular trip exceeds the amount 

of the vessel’s IBQ allocation or results 

in an IBQ balance less than the 

minimum amount described in 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the 

vessel may continue to fish, complete 

the trip, and depart on subsequent trips 

within the same calendar year quarter. 

The vessel must resolve any quota debt 

(see paragraph (b)(5) of this section) 

before declaring into or departing on a 

fishing trip with pelagic longline gear 

onboard in a subsequent calendar year 

quarter by acquiring adequate IBQ 

allocation to resolve the debt and 

acquire the needed minimum allocation 

through leasing, as described in 

paragraph (c) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(5) * * * 

(i) Quarter level quota debt. A vessel 

with quota debt incurred in a given 

calendar year quarter cannot depart on 

a trip with pelagic longline gear onboard 

in a subsequent calendar year quarter 

until the vessel leases and applies 

allocation for the appropriate region (see 

paragraph (c) of this section) to settle 

the quota debt such that the vessel has 

the minimum quota allocation required 

to fish (see paragraph (b)(3) of this 

section) as a result of additional 

allocation (see paragraph (f) of this 

section). For example, a vessel with 

quota debt incurred during January 

through March may not depart on a trip 

with pelagic longline gear onboard 

during April through June (or 

subsequent quarters) until the quota 

debt has been resolved such that the 

vessel has the minimum quota 

allocation required to fish. 

(ii) Annual level quota debt. If, by the 

end of the fishing year, a permit holder 

does not have adequate allocation to 

settle its vessel’s quota debt through 

leasing or additional allocation (see 

paragraphs (c) and (f) of this section), 

the vessel’s allocation will be reduced 

in the amount equal to the quota debt 

in the subsequent year or years until the 

quota debt is fully accounted for. A 

vessel may not depart on any pelagic 

longline trips if it has outstanding quota 

debt from a previous fishing year. 

* * * * * 

(8) * * * 

(i) When NED bluefin quota is 

available. Permitted vessels fishing with 

pelagic longline gear may fish in the 

NED, and any bluefin catch will count 

toward the ICCAT-allocated separate 

NED quota until the NED quota has been 

filled. Permitted vessels fishing in the 

NED must still fish in accordance with 

the minimum IBQ allocation 

requirements, specified under paragraph 

(b)(3) of this section to depart on a trip 

using pelagic longline gear. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 635.71, revise paragraphs 

(b)(48) and (b)(56) to read as follows: 

§ 635.71 Prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(48) Depart on a fishing trip or deploy 

or fish with any fishing gear from a 

vessel with a pelagic longline on board 

without accounting for bluefin caught as 

specified in § 635.15(b)(4). 

* * * * * 

(56) Fish with or have pelagic 

longline gear on board if any quota debt 

associated with the permit from a 

preceding calendar year quarter has not 

been settled as specified at 

§ 635.15(b)(5)(i). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–23131 Filed 10–24–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS