Proposed Rule RIN 0648-AU80

64214

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 211 / Wednesday, November 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules

Dated: October 26, 2006.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 06–9008 Filed 10–27–06; 2:36 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
RIN 0648–AU80
[Docket No.061016268–6268–01; I.D.
100506E]

Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Regulatory Amendment to
Modify Recordkeeping and Reporting
and Observer Requirements
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.

sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES

AGENCY:

SUMMARY: Upon a request received by
the New England Fishery Management
Council (Council), NMFS proposes
measures to modify the existing
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for federally permitted
seafood dealers/processors, and the
observer requirements for participating
hagfish vessels. The Council has
determined that the modifications are
necessary to gather additional
information on the unique aspects of the
hagfish fishery and its interaction with
other federally managed fisheries. The
information collected from fishery
participants (dealers/processors and
vessels) would help the Council to
determine the need for, and potentially
develop , a hagfish Fishery Management
Plan (FMP).
DATES: Written comments must be
received no later than 5 p.m. eastern
standard time, on December 1, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• E-mail: HagfishIC@noaa.gov.
Include in the subject line the following
identifier: ‘‘Comments on Hagfish
Information Collection Program.’’
• Federal e-Rulemaking portal: http://
www.regulations.gov.
• Mail: Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional
Administrator, NMFS, Northeast
Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside
of the envelope: ‘‘Comments on Hagfish
Information Collection Program.’’
• Fax: (978) 281–9135.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

22:01 Oct 31, 2006

Jkt 211001

Copies of the Regulatory Impact
Review (RIR) and other supporting
documents are available from Patricia A.
Kurkul, Regional Administrator, NMFS,
Northeast Regional Office, One
Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this proposed
rule may be submitted to the Northeast
Regional Office at the above address and
by email to
DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov, or by fax
to (202) 395 7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bonnie Van Pelt, Fishery Policy
Analyst, (978) 281–9244.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A request for an information
collection on hagfish under the
provisions of section 402(a) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) was received
by the Council on October 3, 2006. The
request is based on the need to improve
upon the quality and quantity of
information available on the hagfish
resource and its fishery operations to
enable the Council to determine the
potential need to develop future
management measures for hagfish under
an FMP. Without this information
collection on hagfish, future
management measures may not capture
accurately the geographic and seasonal
aspects of the fishery, which reflect
overseas demand, and ensure that the
resource may be sustained in future
years. This collection of information
(with changes, as appropriate) may be
extended through the development and
implementation of a Hagfish FMP.
NMFS has made a preliminary
determination that the Council’s need
for a collection of information program
on hagfish is valid and justified, and is
proposing to implement this request
through the publication of this rule as
required by section 402(a) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Atlantic
hagfish (Myxine glutinosa) fishery in
New England (hagfish fishery) was
developed in the early 1990s, with the
first reported landings of around 1
million lb (454 mt) in 1993. Korean
buyers quickly recognized that a fishery
in the New England area could provide
the high-quality hagfish skins used in
making leather, as well as hagfish meat
for human consumption. Reported
hagfish landings quadrupled during the
first 4 years of the fishery (1993–1996),
exceeding the highest reported landings
in other North American hagfish

PO 00000

Frm 00047

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

fisheries (including British Columbia,
Oregon, Washington, California, and
Nova Scotia) by 1994.
Today the hagfish fishery relies on
revenues from the export of whole
frozen hagfish product overseas,
primarily to South Korea, for meat
consumption. The hagfish fishery
prosecuted off the coast of Gloucester,
MA, has changed from an inshore
fishery comprised of small vessels to an
offshore fishery that consists of large
vessels. According to reports from a
workshop that was held to identify the
challenges in collecting information on
this fishery, the reason for this change
in the way the fishery is being
conducted is that the fishery has
experienced localized depletion in
nearshore waters, necessitating
movement of fishing effort to areas not
historically fished for hagfish.
Dealer/Processor Permitting and
Reporting Requirements
To meet the Council’s request for
information, this proposed rule would
require all seafood dealers who intend
to purchase hagfish caught in or from
the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to
be permitted under § 648.6, and to
submit, on a weekly basis, an electronic
dealer report containing the required
trip-level information for each purchase
of hagfish made from fishing vessels as
per the regulations at § 648.7. Hagfish
dealers would be required to obtain an
initial dealer permit upon
implementation of the hagfish
information collection requirements and
to renew the permit annually thereafter.
Reports furnished by permitted dealers
would help determine the level of
discards and discard mortality of
hagfish culled at sea in response to
rejection by the dealer in port. In
addition, the collection of purchase
reports would help to verify landings
reported in Vessel Trip Reports (VTRs)
for those vessels that have VTR
requirements, and for those that do not,
the dealers would be required to report
vessel identifiers. It is unlikely that
additional dealers would join the
fishery because the fishery is driven by
a narrowly focused export market
(South Korea only), which is currently
in equilibrium with supply. However,
this permitting and reporting
requirement would also enable the
identification of any new vessel and/or
dealer entrants into the fishery.
Dealer/Processor Reports
All federally permitted seafood
dealers subject to this proposed rule
would be required to complete all
sections of the Annual Processed
Products Report (§ 648.7). The report

E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM

01NOP1

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 211 / Wednesday, November 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules
could be used by the Council in
developing an FMP, to estimate
processing capacity, and to forecast and
subsequently measure the potential
economic impact of fishery management
regulations on fish and shellfish
supplies. Employment data collected
through the report could also be used to
analyze the seasonality of the fishery.

sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES

Observer Requirement
Under the hagfish information
collection program, any vessel owner/
operator that fishes for, catches, or lands
hagfish, or intends to fish for, catch, or
land hagfish in or from the EEZ would
be required to carry an observer when
requested by the Regional Administrator
(RA) in accordance with § 648.11.
Consistent with current observer
regulations, hagfish vessel owners/
operators would be required to call to
arrange deployment of NMFS-approved
observers on their vessels and to ensure
adequate space for the observer aboard
their vessels, once requested to carry an
observer by the RA. Observer coverage,
however, is funded by NMFS. (at no
cost to them), once requested to carry an
observer by the RA These requests
would be made for the purpose of
monitoring fishing activities, collecting
biological data, and complying with the
information collection program
requirements. Observers are particularly
important because of the high discard
rates that have been reported to occur in
the hagfish fishery at sea due to
rejection of hagfish at the docks and
because the proportion of the catch that
is rejected by the dealer and later
discarded at sea is not currently
measured.
The hagfish observer coverage
objectives will focus on the collection of
basic fleet information and observations
of fishing behavior, including, but not
limited to, the distribution of fishing
effort, number of hauls per trip, area/
depth fished, trip length, soak time,
discard rates of hagfish or other species,
gear type/configuration, and gear
deployment methodology.
Understanding and quantifying the
likelihood of marine mammal and sea
turtle entanglements that may occur in
hagfish gear in the areas fished is also
an important observer program
objective. There have been two large
whale entanglements documented in the
hagfish fishery: one in 1997 involving
entanglement of a finback whale, and
one in 2002 involving a humpback
whale. In addition, the configuration of
hagfish gear is similar enough to lobster
gear that it is believed to pose the same
or similar entanglement threat to large
whales.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

22:01 Oct 31, 2006

Jkt 211001

NMFS looked at two alternatives to
the proposed action; i.e., the no action
alternative and an alternative that
requires that only dealer permits/
reporting be implemented (Alternative
2). Alternative 2 would include the
requirement for dealers to obtain
Federal dealer permits to purchase
hagfish and to report their hagfish
purchases, but it would not include the
requirement for observer coverage on
board participating vessels. The hagfish
fishery is included in the Category II
listing for Mixed Pot/Trap Fisheries as
per the 2005 List of Fisheries under the
Marine Mammal Protection Act. This
alternative was not selected because of
the importance of observer coverage for
the hagfish fishery. Observer coverage
could help NMFS gather information on
the high discard rates that have been
reported in the hagfish fishery because
of rejection of hagfish at the docks due
to size or quality, and because the
proportion of catch that is rejected by
the dealer and later discarded at sea is
not currently measured. Observer
coverage would also be important
because the hagfish fishery is included
in the Category II listing for Mixed Pot/
Trap Fisheries as per the 2006 List of
Fisheries under the Marine Mammal
Protection Act. Category II fisheries are
those commercial fisheries determined
by the Assistant Administrator to have
occasional incidental mortality and
serious injury of marine mammals.
Therefore, understanding and
quantifying the likelihood of marine
mammal and sea turtle entanglements
that may occur in hagfish gear in the
areas fished is a necessary and integral
part of the hagfish collection of
information program.
Under the no action alternative, the
Council would not have the basic
fishery information they need to
develop an FMP for this fishery.
Increased knowledge of this fishery may
also help managers and scientists
understand the factors that have
contributed to this species’ localized
depletion. Localized depletion if left to
continue could lead to increased
economic impacts, as well as overall
depletion of the species. Therefore, the
no action alternative would not achieve
the objectives of the collection of
information program and was not
considered a viable alternative.
Classification
E.O. 12866
This proposed rule is not significant
under Executive Order 12866. NMFS
prepared an RIR that describes the
impact this proposed rule, if adopted,

PO 00000

Frm 00048

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

64215

would have on hagfish fishery
participants.
Certification Under § 605 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration that this
proposed rule, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The basis and purpose of this proposed
rule is described in the preamble to this
document and is not repeated here. It is
estimated that five vessels and two
dealers, all of which are considered to
be small businesses under the relevant
Small Business Administration
definition of a small entity (North
American Industry Classification
SystemAICS code 114111, finfish
fishing, with annual receipts not in
excess of $4.0 million), would be
impacted by this proposed rule. Since
all hagfish vessels are considered small
entities, there would be no
disproportionate economic impact
between small and large vessels
resulting from this proposed
rulemaking. In addition, there would be
no disproportionate economic impacts
among vessels resulting from different
vessel length, gear type, or location of
homeport, because the proposed action
applies to all participants in the hagfish
fishery.
NMFS has determined that this
proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small business
entities because: (1) most dealers are
already subject to the requirements of
electronic reporting, so the additional
electronic reporting requirements will
not impose significant additional
burden on them, and all dealers would
likely find electronic reporting
economically beneficial to them, as the
information entered into the system can
be used for multiple business purposes;
(2) for those dealers not already subject
to the requirements for electronic dealer
reporting, such reporting represents a
minute portionelectronic dealer
reporting would only represent a minute
portion of the firms’ overall cost of
doing business (or less than 1 percent of
average annual revenues at an estimated
average annual startup cost per dealer of
$116, for the first year, and $652, per
dealer, thereafter for yearly operating
costs)due to the small size of this fishery
compared to other Northeast fisheries
(approximately 5 participating vessels);
and (3) the direct and indirect costs to
dealers/processors and vessels
associated with completing the Annual
Processed Products Rreport and

E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM

01NOP1

64216

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 211 / Wednesday, November 1, 2006 / Proposed Rules

complying with the observer
requirements are minimal (less than $50
annually), due to the fact that processor
reports are mailed with postage-paid
envelopes and observer coverage is
funded at 100 percent by NMFS (vessel
owners are responsible for calling to
arrange for observers and to ensure
adequate space for observers on their
vessels). Based on the above analysis,
this proposed rule is not expected to
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of vessels or dealers.
As a result, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis was not required for
this action and none was prepared.

sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES

Collection-of-Information Requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains four
collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA). These requirements have
been submitted to OMB for approval.
The public’s reporting burden for the
collection-of-information requirements
includes the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection-of-information
requirements.
The new and revised reporting
requirements and the estimated time for
a response are as follows: 2 minutes to
request an observer; 4 minutes for a
dealer purchase report; 15 minutes and
5 minutes for initial dealer permit
application/renewal application,
respectively; and 30 minutes for the
Annual Processed Products Report.
Public comment is sought regarding:
whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
the accuracy of the burden estimate;
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information,
including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Send comments
on these or any other aspects of the
collection of information to NMFS and
to OMB (see ADDRESSES).
Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, no person is required to respond
to nor shall any person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA unless that
collection-of-information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

22:01 Oct 31, 2006

Jkt 211001

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 26, 2006.
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 648 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE
NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

tilefish, or Atlantic deep-sea red crab; or
a moratorium permit for summer
flounder; to carry a NMFS-approved sea
sampler/observer. Also, any vessel or
vessel owner/operator that fishes for,
catches or lands hagfish, or intends to
fish for, catch, or land hagfish in or from
the exclusive economic zone must carry
a NMFS-approved sea sampler/observer
when requested by the RA in
accordance with the requirements of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–18391 Filed 10–31–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

2. In § 648.2, a new definition for
Atlantic hagfish is added, in
alphabetical order, to read as follows:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration

§ 648.2

50 CFR Part 660

Definitions.

*

*
*
*
*
Atlantic hagfish means Myxine
glutinosa.
*
*
*
*
*
3. In § 648.6, paragraph (a)(1) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 648.6

Dealer/processor permits.

(a) * * * (1) All dealers of NE
multispecies, monkfish, skates, Atlantic
herring, Atlantic sea scallop, Atlantic
deep-sea red crab, spiny dogfish,
summer flounder, Atlantic surf clam,
ocean quahog, Atlantic mackerel, squid,
butterfish, scup, bluefish, tilefish, and
black sea bass; Atlantic surf clam and
ocean quahog processors; Atlantic
hagfish dealers and/or processors, and
Atlantic herring processors or dealers,
as described in § 648.2; must have been
issued under this section, and have in
their possession, a valid permit or
permits for these species.
*
*
*
*
*
4. In § 648.7, paragraph (a)(3)(iv) is
added to read as follows:
§ 648.7 Recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.

(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) Atlantic hagfish processors must
complete and submit all sections of the
Annual Processed Products Report.
*
*
*
*
*
5. In § 648.11, paragraph (a) is revised
to read as follows:
§ 648.11 At-sea sea sampler/observer
coverage.

(a) The Regional Administrator may
request any vessel holding a permit for
Atlantic sea scallops, NE multispecies,
monkfish, skates, Atlantic mackerel,
squid, butterfish, scup, black sea bass,
bluefish, spiny dogfish, Atlantic herring,

PO 00000

Frm 00049

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

[Docket No. 061024277–6277–01; I.D.
101206C]
RIN 0648–AU94

Fisheries Off West Coast States;
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery;
Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking to Establish a Control
Date
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for comments.
AGENCY:

SUMMARY: NMFS and the Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) are
beginning to develop a groundfish
fishery management plan (FMP)
amendment and management measures
to reduce harvest capacity in the open
access portion of the Pacific Coast
groundfish fishery in Federal waters off
Washington, Oregon, and California.
This document announces a control
date for the open access portion of
September 13, 2006, and is intended to
discourage new entrants into this
fishery and increased fishing effort
based on economic speculation while
the Council determines whether and
how access should be controlled. The
announcement is intended to promote
awareness of potential eligibility criteria
for future access to the open access
portion of the Pacific Coast groundfish
fishery. Vessels entering the fisheries
after September 13, 2006, may be
subject to restrictions different from
those that apply to vessels in the fishery
prior to September 13, 2006. If catch
history is used as a basis for future
participation or allocation, it is likely

E:\FR\FM\01NOP1.SGM

01NOP1