12898 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices

financial contribution that gives rise to briefs.6 Pursuant to 19 CFR Application of Adverse Inferences a benefit to the recipient, and that the 351.309(d)(2), rebuttal briefs must be VI. Subsidies Valuation Information subsidy is specific.4 For a full limited to issues raised in the case VII. Benchmarks and Discount Rates description of the methodology briefs. Parties who submit arguments are VIII. Analysis of Programs IX. Recommendation underlying our conclusions, see the requested to submit with the argument: Preliminary Decision Memorandum. (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief [FR Doc. 2020–04511 Filed 3–4–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Preliminary Results of Review summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.7 In accordance with 19 CFR 351.525, Interested parties who wish to request we calculated individual subsidy rates a hearing must do so within 30 days of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE for Goodluck and TII. For the period publication of these preliminary results September 25, 2017 through December National Oceanic and Atmospheric by submitting a written request to the Administration 31, 2018, we preliminarily determine Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and that the following net subsidy rates Compliance using Enforcement and [Docket No. 200226–0065; RTID 0648– exist: Compliance’s ACCESS system.8 XR088] Requests should contain the party’s 2017 2018 name, address, and telephone number, Endangered and Threatened Species; subsidy subsidy Determination on the Designation of Company rate rate the number of participants, whether any (percent (percent participant is a foreign national, and a Critical Habitat for Oceanic Whitetip ad valorem) ad valorem) list of the issues to be discussed. If a Shark request for a hearing is made, Commerce Goodluck India AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Limited ...... 5.86 5.21 will inform parties of the scheduled Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Tube Invest- date of the hearing which will be held Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), ments of India at the U.S. Department of Commerce, Commerce. Ltd ...... 4.27 5.17 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, ACTION: Notice. Washington, DC 20230, at a time and Assessment Rate date to be determined.9 Issues addressed SUMMARY: We, NMFS, have determined during the hearing will be limited to that a designation of critical habitat Consistent with section 751(a)(2)(C) of 10 under the Endangered Species Act the Act, upon issuance of the final those raised in the briefs. Parties (ESA) for the oceanic whitetip shark results, Commerce shall determine, and should confirm by telephone the date, (Carcharhinus longimanus) is not Customs and Border Protection (CBP) time, and location of the hearing two prudent at this time. Based on a shall assess, countervailing duties on all days before the scheduled date. comprehensive review of the best appropriate entries covered by this Parties are reminded that all briefs scientific data available, we find there review. We intend to issue instructions and hearing requests must be filed are no identifiable physical or biological to CBP 15 days after publication of the electronically using ACCESS and features that are essential to the final results of this review. received successfully in their entirety by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. conservation of the oceanic whitetip Cash Deposit Rate Unless the deadline is extended shark within areas under U.S. Pursuant to section 751(a)(1) of the pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the jurisdiction. We also find that there are Act, Commerce intends to instruct CBP Act, Commerce intends to issue the final no areas outside of the geographical area to collect cash deposits of estimated results of this administrative review, occupied by the species under U.S. countervailing duties in the amount including the results of our analysis of jurisdiction that are essential to its indicated above with regard to the issues raised by the parties in their conservation. As such, we find there are shipments of subject merchandise comments, within 120 days after no areas within the jurisdiction of the entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, publication of these preliminary results. United States that meet the definition of critical habitat for the oceanic whitetip for consumption on or after the date of Notification to Interested Parties publication of the final results of this shark. review. These cash deposit instructions, This administrative review and notice DATES: This finding is made on March when imposed, shall remain in effect are in accordance with sections 5, 2020. until further notice. 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the CFR 351.213. determination, list of references, and Disclosure and Public Comment Dated: February 28, 2020. supporting documents prepared for this We will disclose to parties to this Jeffrey I. Kessler, action are available from the NMFS proceeding the calculations performed Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Office of Protected Resources website at in reaching the preliminary results Compliance. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/ within five days of the date of oceanic-whitetip-shark. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in publication of these preliminary FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 5 the Preliminary Decision Memorandum results. Interested parties may submit Adrienne Lohe, NMFS, Office of written comments (case briefs) within I. Summary Protected Resources, (301) 427–8403. 30 days of publication of the II. Background SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: preliminary results and rebuttal III. Scope of the Order comments (rebuttal briefs) within five IV. Period of Review Background V. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and days after the time limit for filing case On January 30, 2018, we published a

6 final rule to list the oceanic whitetip 4 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii) and 351.309(d)(1). 7 shark (Carcharhinus longimanus) as a regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and 351.309(d)(2). of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of 8 See 19 CFR 351.310(c). threatened species under the ESA (83 the Act regarding specificity. 9 See 19 CFR 351.310. FR 4153). Section 4(b)(6)(C) of the ESA 5 See 19 CFR 351.224(b). 10 See 19 CFR 351.310(c). requires the Secretary of Commerce

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices 12899

(Secretary) to designate critical habitat Oceanic Whitetip Shark Biology and of North Florida, unpublished data). concurrently with making a Status Litter sizes range from 1 to 14 (average determination to list a species as The following discussion of the life of 6), and there is a positive correlation threatened or endangered unless it is history and status of the oceanic between female size and number of not determinable at that time, in which whitetip shark is based on the best pups per litter, with larger sharks case the Secretary may extend the scientific data available, including the producing more offspring (Backus et al. deadline for this designation by 1 year. ‘‘Endangered Species Act Status Review 1956; Strasburg 1958; Bass et al. 1973). In terms of movement, the oceanic In our proposal to list the species as Report: Oceanic Whitetip Shark whitetip shark is considered to be a threatened (81 FR 96304, Dec. 29, 2016), (Carcharhinus longimanus)’’ (Young et highly migratory species, with several we requested relevant information from al. 2017). satellite tracking studies measuring long interested persons to help us identify The oceanic whitetip shark is a large, distance movements of up to 4,285 km and describe the physical and biological pelagic species of shark, described (Musyl et al. 2011) and over 6,000 km features essential to the conservation of historically as one of the most abundant in the open ocean (Filmalter et al. 2012). the oceanic whitetip shark, and assess shark species in tropical waters Although the species is considered the economic impacts of designating worldwide (Mather and Day 1954; highly migratory and capable of making critical habitat for the species. We Backus et al. 1956; Compagno 1984). long distance movements, data from solicited input from the public, other The oceanic whitetip shark belongs to pop-off satellite archival tags provides governmental agencies, the scientific the family Carcharhinidae and is a community, industry, environmental evidence that this species also exhibits member of the genus Carcharhinus, a high degree of philopatry in some groups, and any other interested parties which includes other pelagic species of on features and areas that may meet the locations (e.g., Cat Island, Bahamas and sharks, such as the silky shark (C. Northeast Brazil) (Howey-Jordan et al. definition of critical habitat for the falciformis) and dusky shark (C. oceanic whitetip shark within U.S. 2013; Tolotti et al. 2015). Overall, obscuras). oceanic whitetip sharks are highly waters. However, at the time of listing, The oceanic whitetip shark is globally and based on comments provided and mobile and can travel great distances in distributed and can be found in all the open ocean (Filmalter et al. 2012), the best available scientific information, ocean basins in epipelagic tropical and we concluded that critical habitat was with excursion estimates of several subtropical waters. The species can be thousand kilometers demonstrated in not determinable because: (1) Sufficient found offshore, along the edges of information was not available to assess multiple studies. However, information continental shelves, or around oceanic on potential migratory corridors and the impacts of designation; and (2) islands in deep water (Backus et al. sufficient information was not available seasonality is lacking. 1956; Strasburg 1958; Compagno 1984; As discussed in the proposed rule (81 regarding the physical and biological Bonfil et al. 2008) and appears to be FR 96304, December 29, 2016) and final features essential to conservation. We thermally sensitive, exhibiting a strong rule (83 FR 4153, January 30, 2018) to again requested interested persons to preference for the surface mixed layer in list the oceanic whitetip shark, the most submit relevant information related to ° warm waters above 20 C (Bass et al. significant threat to the species is the identification of critical habitat and 1973; Bonfil et al. 2008). Several overutilization for commercial essential physical or biological features archival satellite tagging studies from purposes. Although oceanic whitetip for this species, as well as economic or various regions of the species’ range sharks are not necessarily a targeted other relevant impacts of designation of indicate that oceanic whitetip sharks species, they are caught as bycatch in a critical habitat for the oceanic whitetip spend most of their time at depths of number of fisheries throughout their shark. Though we did not receive any less than 200 m (above the thermocline) range, and are most susceptible to information relevant to the designation (Musyl et al. 2011; Carlson and Gulak industrial longline fisheries. Oceanic of critical habitat in response to this 2012; Howey-Jordan et al. 2013; Tolotti whitetip shark fins are also prevalent in request, we used the best available et al. 2017). The oceanic whitetip is the international fin trade, which has scientific data to evaluate whether generally thought to be a long-lived likely contributed to the significant critical habitat could be identified for species, ranging from 12 to 18 years in declines of the species throughout its the oceanic whitetip shark. As the North Pacific and Western and range. Given the relatively low discussed below, we still find that there Central Pacific, respectively (Joung et al. reproductive output and overall are no identifiable physical or biological 2016; D’Alberto et al. 2017), and 13 to productivity of the oceanic whitetip features that are essential to the 19 years in the South Atlantic (Seki et shark, it is inherently vulnerable to conservation of the oceanic whitetip al. 1998; Lessa et al. 1999; Rodrigues et threats that would deplete its shark within areas under U.S. al. 2015), with relatively low abundance, with a low likelihood of jurisdiction, or unoccupied areas under reproductive output. recovery. Therefore, while there is U.S. jurisdiction that are essential to the Similar to other carcharhinid species, considerable uncertainty regarding the conservation of the species. Therefore, the oceanic whitetip shark is viviparous current abundance of oceanic whitetip at this time we find no areas within U.S. (i.e., gives birth to live young) with sharks throughout its entire range, the jurisdiction that meet the definition of placental embryonic development. best available information indicates that critical habitat for the oceanic whitetip Reproductive periodicity is thought to the species is likely to become an shark. be biennial, with individuals giving endangered species within the This finding describes information on birth on alternate years after a 10–12 foreseeable future due to overutilization. the biology, distribution, and habitat use month gestation period (Backus et al. of the oceanic whitetip shark and the 1956; Seki et al. 1998; Tambourgi et al. Critical Habitat Identification and methods used to identify areas that may 2013). However, recent unpublished Designation meet the definition of critical habitat. In data obtained via ultrasonography of Critical habitat is defined by section this determination, we focus on pregnant females over multiple years 3 of the ESA as (i) the specific areas information directly relevant to the suggests that at least for a proportion of within the geographical area occupied designation of critical habitat for the population, reproduction could be by the species, at the time it is listed, oceanic whitetip sharks. annual (James Gelsleichter, University on which are found those physical or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 12900 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices

biological features (I) essential to the Atlantic EEZ (NMFS 2017). Essential Observer data of the West Coast-based conservation of the species and (II) fish habitat (EFH; defined under the U.S. fisheries further confirm this which may require special management MSA as those waters and substrate finding, with oceanic whitetip sharks considerations or protection; and (ii) necessary to fish for spawning, not observed in the catches. For specific areas outside the geographical breeding, feeding or growth to maturity example, in the California/Oregon drift area occupied by the species at the time (16 U.S.C. 1802(10))), has been gillnet fishery, which operates off the it is listed upon a determination by the designated for the oceanic whitetip U.S. Pacific coast from the U.S./Mexican Secretary that such areas are essential shark in waters greater than 200 m in border to waters off of Oregon, observers for the conservation of the species. This depth from offshore of the North recorded zero oceanic whitetip sharks in definition provides a step-wise Carolina/Virginia border to the Blake 8,698 sets conducted over the past 25 approach to identifying areas that may Plateau, which is a broad, relatively flat years (from 1990–2015; Young et al. qualify as critical habitat for the oceanic portion of the upper continental slope 2017). We have no other information to whitetip shark: (1) Determine the that extends from the coast of North suggest that oceanic whitetip sharks geographical area occupied by the Carolina to central Florida. Essential regularly occupy the waters of southern species at the time of listing; (2) identify fish habitat was not designated north of California or elsewhere along the U.S. physical or biological habitat features Virginia (NMFS 2017). Designated EFH West Coast. Based on the best available essential to the conservation of the in the Gulf of Mexico includes offshore data, the distribution of the species species; (3) delineate specific areas habitats of the northern Gulf of Mexico appears to be concentrated in areas within the geographical area occupied at the Alabama/Florida border (e.g., the farther south in foreign waters or the by the species on which are found the Mississippi plume shows high high seas. For example, fisheries data physical or biological features; (4) occurrence of juveniles and adults) to from the eastern Pacific tuna purse seine determine whether the features in a offshore habitats of the western Gulf of fishery shows catches of oceanic specific area may require special Mexico south of eastern Texas. whitetip are concentrated in the area management considerations or Additionally, the entire U.S. Caribbean between 10° North and 10° South, protection; and (5) determine whether (waters of Puerto Rico and the U.S. despite sets in more northerly waters any unoccupied areas are essential for Virgin Islands) is considered to be EFH (Hall and Roman 2013). Other fisheries conservation. Our evaluation and for the oceanic whitetip shark (NMFS data confirm the presence of oceanic conclusions as we worked through this 2017). These designations were based whitetip sharks in waters off of Costa step-wise process are described in detail on high encounters of the species in Rica, Ecuador and Peru (Arauz 2017; in the following sections. fisheries observer data from the U.S. Martinez-Ortiz et al. 2015; Gonzalez- pelagic longline fishery as well as recent Pestana et al. 2014). Although areas of Geographical Area Occupied by the movement data from archival satellite southern California seem to be outside Species tags (NMFS 2017), which confirms the of the core tropical distribution of The ‘‘geographical area occupied by historical and current presence of oceanic whitetip sharks and are used the species’’ is defined in our oceanic whitetip sharks in these waters. only during rare weather events that regulations as an area that may generally Areas of high occurrence are also off the cause warm water incursions, we still be delineated around species’ east coast of Florida, Charleston Bump consider this area to be part of the occurrences, as determined by the off the southeast United States, and species’ range. However, given the Secretary (i.e., range). Such areas may between Florida, Cuba and the Yucatan extremely limited data and seemingly include those areas used throughout all Peninsula (J. Carlson, unpublished limited use of this part of their range, or part of the species’ life cycle, even if analysis, 2019). However, while we can we are unable to identify any features of not used on a regular basis (e.g., confirm that the geographical areas the area that are essential to the migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, occupied by the oceanic whitetip conservation of the oceanic whitetip and habitats used periodically, but not include U.S. waters, there is no shark. solely by vagrant individuals). (50 CFR information regarding the specific Western and Central Pacific 424.02). Further, our regulations at 50 habitat use of oceanic whitetip sharks in CFR 424.12(g) state that the Secretary any of these areas (J. Carlson, NMFS The range of oceanic whitetip sharks will not designate critical habitat within Southeast Fisheries Science Center pers. in the Western and Central Pacific is foreign countries or in other areas comm. to C. Young, NMFS OPR, 2017), broad, occurring throughout the region outside of the jurisdiction of the United and nurseries and pupping grounds between 30° N to 35° S, with catches of States. As such, we cannot designate have not been identified in U.S. waters the species most frequently occurring in critical habitat for the oceanic whitetip (NMFS 2017; CITES 2013). the central North Pacific south of 20° N outside of U.S. waters and will focus the latitude and some individuals occurring following discussion on the U.S. Eastern Pacific in more northerly locations (Clarke jurisdictions where the oceanic whitetip In the eastern Pacific, the oceanic 2011; Clarke et al. 2011a). This range shark is known to occur. whitetip shark reportedly occurs from encompasses U.S. waters of Hawaii, southern California to Peru, including Guam, American Samoa, Northwest Atlantic and Caribbean the Gulf of California and Clipperton Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana The geographic range of the oceanic Island (Compagno 1984). While its Islands (CNMI), and the Pacific Remote whitetip shark in the Northwest Atlantic eastern Pacific range reportedly extends Island Areas. Fisheries data from a and Caribbean is reportedly very broad, as far north as southern California, this number of sources confirm the occurring from Maine to Florida on the is likely due to warm water incursions occurrence of the oceanic whitetip shark East Coast, in the Gulf of Mexico and in that allow the species to venture into in all of these waters under U.S. U.S. Territorial waters within the waters far beyond its normal range jurisdiction (Brodziak et al. 2013; Clarke Caribbean (U.S. Virgin Islands and (Compagno 1984). Ebert et al. (2017) et al. 2011a; Clarke et al. 2011b; Lawson Puerto Rico) (Compagno 1984). notes that oceanic whitetip sharks are 2011; Walsh and Clarke 2011). As such, However, the NMFS Northeast Fisheries ‘‘rare’’ in southern California waters, we conclude that waters under the Science Center (NEFSC) describes this usually observed around the Channel aforementioned U.S. jurisdictions species as ‘‘uncommon’’ in the U.S. Islands during warm water years. throughout the Western and Central

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices 12901

Pacific are geographical areas occupied population ecology and vital rates in the region. Additionally, results by the species, though we are unable to indicate that the species is recovered in showed spatiotemporal variation in identify any features of the area that are accordance with the definition of feeding habits of the species, with short- essential to the conservation of the recovery in 50 CFR 402.02. Important term (i.e., near Cat Island) diets oceanic whitetip shark. factors related to population ecology comprised mostly of larger pelagic In summary, based on the information and vital rates include population size teleosts, and long-term diets (>1 year) above, we consider the geographical and trends, range, distribution, age comprised mostly of squid, teleosts, and areas occupied by the oceanic whitetip structure, gender ratios, age-specific small foraging fish (Madigan et al. shark in the Atlantic at the time of survival, age-specific reproduction, and 2015). However, although site fidelity to listing to include waters under U.S. lifetime reproductive success. Based on Cat Island has been demonstrated via jurisdiction off the U.S. East Coast, Gulf the available knowledge of oceanic satellite tracking data (Howey-Jordan et of Mexico, U.S. Virgin Islands, and whitetip shark population ecology and al. 2013) the reasons driving this site Puerto Rico. We consider the life history, we have identified four fidelity (e.g., foraging, navigation, geographical areas occupied by the biological behaviors that are critical to pupping, mating, etc.) are unknown at oceanic whitetip shark in the Pacific to the goal of increasing survival and this time. See The Physical and include waters under U.S. jurisdiction population growth: (1) Foraging, (2) Biological Features of Migratory Habitat off southern California, Hawaii, pupping, (3) breeding, and (4) That Are Essential to the Conservation American Samoa, Guam, CNMI, and the migration. In the following section, we of the Species section below for more Pacific Remote Island Areas. evaluate whether there are physical and information. Based on the foregoing Physical or Biological Features biological features of the habitat areas information, the oceanic whitetip shark Essential for Conservation known or thought to be used for these appears to be an opportunistic predator behaviors that are essential to the that is not limited in its foraging Within the geographical area species’ conservation because they habitats and feeds on whatever prey is occupied by an endangered or facilitate or are intimately tied to these available. threatened species at the time of listing, behaviors and, hence, support the life- critical habitat consists of specific areas Aside from the observations described history needs of the species. Because above, there is no information regarding upon which are found those physical or these behaviors are essential to the established foraging grounds for the biological features essential to the species’ conservation, facilitating or oceanic whitetip shark. Recent tracking conservation of the species and that may protecting each one is considered a key studies from the Bahamas, Brazil, and require special management conservation objective for any critical the Indian Ocean have revealed considerations or protection. The ESA habitat designation for this species. does not specifically define physical or complex vertical movements in the biological features; however, court Physical and Biological Features of species and diel behavior changes decisions and joint NMFS–USFWS Foraging Habitat That Are Essential to (Papastamatiou et al. 2018; Tolotti et al. regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 provide the Conservation of the Species 2017; Howey et al. 2016). Based on guidance on how physical or biological Oceanic whitetip sharks are top-level tracking data from the Bahamas, oceanic features are expressed. Specifically, predators in pelagic ecosystems and whitetip sharks regularly exhibit ≥ these regulations state that the physical feed primarily on pelagic teleosts (bony mesopelagic excursions (defined as 5 and biological features are those that are fish) and cephalopods (mostly squids), consecutive depth records below the essential to support the life-history but are also known to consume sea 200 m isobaths), particularly during needs of the species, including but not birds, marine mammals, other sharks dusk periods that may be related to limited to, water characteristics, soil and rays, molluscs, crustaceans, large foraging (Howey et al. 2016). Tolotti et type, geological features, sites, prey, sportfish, and even garbage (Madigan et al. (2017) noted that deep dives below vegetation, symbiotic species, or other al. 2015; Bonfil et al. 2008; Corte´s 1999; 150 m were rare, but the variation seen features. A feature may be a single Backus et al. 1956). Based on the in the shark’s vertical movement habitat characteristic, or a more species’ diet, the oceanic whitetip shark patterns could be linked to prey complex combination of habitat has a high trophic level, scoring 4.2 out distribution as well. Papastamatiou et characteristics. Features may include of a maximum 5.0 (Corte´s 1999). al. (2018) further reaffirms this habitat characteristics that support Although typically solitary, oceanic possibility with evidence from oceanic ephemeral or dynamic habitat whitetip sharks have been observed whitetip sharks outfitted with cameras. conditions. Features may also be aggregating around food sources (Bonfil Potential prey (mackerel, scad and expressed in terms relating to principles et al. 2008). Historically, oceanic squid) were observed during dives (as of conservation biology, such as patch whitetip sharks were described as pests opposed to when individuals were in size, distribution distances, and to pelagic longline fisheries for tuna, as shallow water) and at the apex of the connectivity. (50 CFR 424.02). the sharks would persistently follow dive when bursts of speed were Section 3 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. boats and cause significant damage to common (Papastamatiou et al. 2018). 1532(3)) defines the terms ‘‘conserve,’’ the catches (Compagno 1984). Oceanic Squid and other cephalopods are likely ‘‘conserving,’’ and ‘‘conservation’’ to whitetips have also been observed an important prey species for the mean: To use and the use of all methods scavenging off dead marine mammal oceanic whitetip shark; Cortes (1999) and procedures which are necessary to carcasses off South Africa (Bass et al. and Madigan et al. (2015) both reported bring any endangered species or 1973) and feeding opportunistically on that cephalopods comprise threatened species to the point at which recreationally caught sportfish in the approximately 44 percent of the oceanic the measures provided pursuant to this Bahamas (Madigan et al. 2015). In fact, whitetip shark’s regular diet. chapter are no longer necessary. For Madigan et al. (2015) suggested that Additionally, oceanic whitetip sharks oceanic whitetip sharks, we consider abundance and availability of large have been associated with short-finned conservation to include the use of all pelagic teleosts in waters off Cat Island, pilot whales (Globicephala methods and procedures necessary to Bahamas might be a possible macrorhynchus) of which squid is a bring oceanic whitetip sharks to the mechanism driving site-fidelity and main prey source (Bester, n.d.). point at which factors related to aggregation of oceanic whitetip sharks Although the reason for this behavior is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 12902 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices

unknown, it is thought to be prey- specific areas within waters under U.S. (Valde´s et al. 2016) and observations of related, as pilot whales are extremely jurisdiction with physical or biological very small juveniles in the waters off efficient at locating food sources features related to foraging that are Haiti (Jamie Aquino, Haiti Ocean (Migura and Meadows 2002). The diel essential to the conservation of the Project, pers. comm. to C. Young, NMFS vertical migrations of oceanic whitetip species. OPR, 2019) may indicate potential sharks are similar to and may overlap Physical and Biological Features of pupping/nursery areas in these regions. with the diel vertical migrations and/or Pupping Habitat That Are Essential to However, these areas are outside U.S. distribution of many species of the Conservation of the Species jurisdiction and cannot be designated as mesopelagic and bathypelagic squids critical habitat for the species. In (see original reference in Howey et al. Because the oceanic whitetip shark is addition, while the available 2016). As such, it is possible these a pelagic species that spends most of its information suggests that there are mesopelagic excursions represent a time offshore in the open ocean several regions outside U.S. jurisdiction foraging strategy for seeking out prey, (Compagno 1984) and is one of the few with potential pupping grounds, there is such as squid. Although the species of species that may complete its entire life insufficient information to identify the squid consumed by oceanic whitetips cycle in open water, there is limited essential physical or biological features information regarding the species’ life are unknown, many species have a wide for pupping grounds. Within U.S. history and biology. Studies from the geographic distribution, moving waters, an area of pelagic waters over Northwest Atlantic and Indian Ocean throughout the deep waters of the the continental shelf running along the estimate that oceanic whitetip sharks ocean, and, therefore, it is difficult to southeastern coast of the United States link these prey species to any ‘‘specific’’ give birth from late spring to summer (Backus et al. 1956; Bass et al. 1973, has been described as a potential areas within the oceanic geographic nursery area based solely on areas occupied. Additionally, there was Compagno 1984; Bonfil et al. 2008). Based on ultrasonography, Gelsleichter observations of young oceanic whitetip no site-specific correlation with the sharks offshore in this general area mesopelagic dives undertaken by (unpublished) suggests pupping occurs in the Bahamas in May and June. In (NMFS 2017). In determining the oceanic whitetips tagged in the revised EFH designation for the oceanic Bahamas. Individuals not only made contrast, Seki et al. (1998) found no apparent parturition period in the North whitetip shark, which was based on consistent dives year-round near the fisheries observer and archival satellite aggregation site in the Bahamas, but also Pacific, as embryos were observed in almost every month in which data was tagging data (NMFS 2017), high during migrations (Howey et al. 2016). collected. In the Southwest Atlantic, encounters of YOY seem to occur over Clear temporal or spatial patterns of oceanic whitetips likely give birth in the the continental shelf from North vertical movements could also not be latter half of the year, potentially from Carolina to Florida, and in other pockets identified in individuals tagged in September to November (Tambourgi et in the central Gulf of Mexico and north Brazil or the Indian Ocean, as behaviors al. 2013) although Amorim (1998) found of the U.S. Virgin Islands (J. Carlson, alternated regularly and there was no full-term embryos from July to NMFS SEFSC, pers. comm. to C. Young, evident pattern across the time series of November, which may indicate a NMFS OPR, 2019). High juvenile the study (Tolotti et al. 2017). Overall, relatively extended pupping period for encounters seem to occur in similar although it is hypothesized that these this species, as was observed in the areas along the U.S. East Coast, with mesopelagic excursions are for purposes North Pacific by Seki et al. (1998) another area of occurrence to the north of foraging, this theory has not been (Tambourgi et al. 2013). Additionally, of Puerto Rico and moderate usage of confirmed. recent conflicting results regarding the waters north and south of the U.S. Overall, the best available information species’ reproductive periodicity (i.e., Virgin Islands (J. Carlson, NMFS SEFSC, indicates that oceanic whitetip sharks whether oceanic whitetip sharks give pers. comm. to C. Young, NMFS OPR, are opportunistic feeders and may birth annually or biannually), may 2019). Although these areas could exhibit behavioral plasticity when indicate the possibility of non-specific represent nursery grounds for the encountering different prey types pupping seasons for this species (Clarke oceanic whitetip shark, oceanic whitetip (Papastamatiou et al. 2018). The species et al. 2015). Clarke et al. (2015) notes sharks have not been observed pupping does not appear to be associated with that pregnant females are often found in these areas and more importantly, we any specific foraging grounds, adapting close to shore, particularly around are unable to determine the physical or to its present habitat by feeding on oceanic Caribbean Islands, which biological features that are essential for whatever prey are available and even suggests that females may come close to pupping. Using the nursery area scavenging on whale carcasses when shore to pup. However, the specific identification criteria proposed by available. There does not appear to be locations of pupping grounds and Heupel et al. (2007) and validated by a specific prey species that is required nurseries have not been identified for Froeschke et al. (2010), areas described to be present in a habitat for successful the oceanic whitetip shark, and habitat above meet the first criteria (newborn or foraging to occur, nor are there any requisites of these areas, such as YOY sharks are more commonly specific habitat characteristics that temperature, depth, and substrate, are encountered in the area than in other appear to be intimately tied with unknown. areas), though data regarding the second feeding behavior. As such, we are To date, neither pupping grounds nor two criteria (newborn or YOY sharks unable to identify any particular nursery areas have been identified have a tendency to remain or return for physical or biological features of areas definitively in the Atlantic for the extended periods; the area or habitat is that facilitate successful foraging. oceanic whitetip shark. Only repeatedly used across years, whereas Further, no oceanic whitetip sharks generalized descriptions of ‘‘potential’’ others are not) are insufficient for a have been observed foraging in the pupping and nursery areas are available, complete analysis. Further, in the EFH geographic areas under U.S. based largely on observations of young designation for oceanic whitetip sharks jurisdiction, aside from opportunistic of the year (YOY) and juvenile sharks in in the Atlantic, insufficient information depredation on the catch of pelagic fisheries catch data. For example, prevented any differentiation between longline fisheries. For the foregoing observations of YOY oceanic whitetips EFH areas for neonate/juvenile and reasons, it is not possible to identify any in fisheries catches off Northwest Cuba adult size classes, resulting in a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices 12903

combined EFH designation for all size would be necessary to facilitate thus be essential to the conservation of classes (NMFS 2017). This emphasizes successful pupping behavior for the the species. the lack of information regarding any species. In the U.S. western Pacific, including potential pupping and nursery habitat Overall, while some waters under Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, and for the species in U.S. waters of the U.S. jurisdiction may overlap with CNMI, EFH for adult and juvenile Atlantic. general areas identified as potential oceanic whitetip sharks is broadly As described previously, oceanic pupping or nursery grounds for the defined as the water column down to a whitetip sharks in the Western and species, the descriptions of these areas depth of 1,000 m from the shoreline to Central Pacific are distributed are fairly vague (e.g., pelagic waters over the outer limit of the EEZ (WPFMC throughout the region from 30° N and continental shelves, oceanic areas, etc.) 2009). Thus, similar to EFH in the 30° S, but are concentrated in warm and are based solely on high encounters Atlantic, EFH in the Pacific is equatorial waters between 10° N and 10° with various size classes of the species. designated the same for all size classes S. Although limited information We have no other information to specify in this region. It should also be noted suggests there are some areas that may the locations of these areas within U.S. that this is a generic EFH designation for serve as potential pupping grounds, waters or identify any physical or all pelagic species, and not specific to descriptions are fairly general and biological features within these areas the oceanic whitetip shark. A tagging study in Hawaiian waters, whether these areas occur in waters that are essential to support the life- conducted from March 2001 through under U.S. jurisdiction is uncertain. history needs of the oceanic whitetip shark. As such, we cannot identify any November 2006, involved the capture Records of pregnant females and specific essential features that define and tagging of both mature males and newborns are concentrated between the pupping habitat for the oceanic whitetip females in the general vicinity that has equator and 20° N, and between 170° E ° shark in U.S. waters. been identified as a potential pupping to 140 W, with higher concentrations in ground (i.e., the area between 150° W the central part of this distribution just The Physical and Biological Features of ° ° ° and 180 W and just above 10 N; Bonfil north of 10 N (Bonfil et al. 2008; CITES Breeding Habitat That Are Essential to et al. 2008). However, only 11 of the 16 2013). This area is a large swath of the Conservation of the Species tagged sharks were measured and only ocean that partially overlaps the EEZs of Little information exists on the four were likely mature (3 males and 1 Hawaii and several of the U.S. Pacific reproductive ecology of the oceanic female), with the remaining likely Remote Island Areas (Johnston Atoll, whitetip shark, as mating behavior is immature juveniles. Adults of both Palmyra, Jarvis Island, Howland & Baker rarely observed in the wild and has not sexes have also been caught in the Islands, and potentially Wake Island). been formally documented. Important pelagic longline fishery operating in the Seki et al. (1998) observed small areas for mating are also unknown for Hawaiian EEZ and in the neonates (<60 cm precaudal length) in oceanic whitetip sharks and information ° ° Papahanaumokuakea Marine National a narrow band between 10 N and 20 N, regarding their reproductive periodicity Monument. Based on an assessment of including waters south of Hawaii, and and specific mating seasons is limited. interactions with the Hawaii pelagic concluded that there is an oceanic To identify potential sites as mating longline fishery from 2004–2018, adults whitetip nursery ground in the ‘‘oceanic grounds, we looked for the presence of of both sexes occur in Hawaiian waters, region’’ of the North Pacific. Bonfil et al. both mature females and males. Aside and the majority of interactions occur (2008) reaffirmed that newborn oceanic from one established aggregation on the north side of the Hawaiian whitetips occur mainly in a narrow strip location in foreign waters (Cat Island, Islands in a linear band stretching in the central Pacific slightly north of Bahamas), which may be due to southeast to northwest within the limits ° 10 N. This, coupled with higher availability of food as opposed to of the EEZ, both inside and outside of concentrations of pregnant females, reproductive purposes (Madigan et al. the Papahanaumokuakea Marine suggest a pupping ground for oceanic 2015), there are no known aggregation National Monument (NMFS 2019). One whitetip may exist in the central Pacific sites of mature oceanic whitetip sharks. area of high occurrence of interactions between 150° W and 180° W and just In examining fisheries observer data and is on the south-westernmost portion of above 10° N, but a more refined tagging data for revising the EFH the EEZ, within the limits of the definition of the area is not possible due designation for the oceanic whitetip Monument (NMFS 2019). Adults of both to incomplete sampling (Bonfil et al. shark (NMFS 2017), high encounters of sexes have also been caught off Kona, 2008). More recent analyses of fisheries oceanic whitetip adults have been Hawaii (M. Hutchinson, NMFS Pacific catch data determined that juveniles observed in pockets along the U.S. East Islands Fisheries Science Center, pers. tend to occur in waters near the equator Coast from South Carolina to Florida in comm. to Chelsey Young, NMFS OPR, to the west, just north of the waters greater than 200 m, with 2017). Other analyses of fisheries catch northeastern islands of Papua New potential hotspots off the eastern central data from across the Western and Guinea and the Solomon Islands (Clarke coast of Florida and in the Gulf of Central Pacific indicate that adults 2011; Clarke et al. 2011a). As in the Mexico south of Louisiana and Texas (J. appear to predominate more to the Atlantic areas, though YOY oceanic Carlson, NMFS SEFSC, pers. comm. to southwest near the identified center of whitetip sharks have been more C. Young, NMFS OPR, 2019). Based on abundance (10° S, 190° E; refer to Figure commonly encountered in these areas, this limited information, we can 3 in Clarke 2011) and may overlap with there is insufficient data to apply cautiously confirm that male and female waters of American Samoa. However, Heupel et al.’s (2007) second and third adult oceanic whitetip sharks co-occupy while adults of both sexes likely co- criteria for identifying pupping areas in waters under U.S. jurisdiction in the occur in waters under U.S. jurisdiction the Pacific. Other than generalized Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. in both Hawaii and American Samoa, descriptions of potential nursery area Nonetheless, we have no evidence to we have no additional information to locations, which are based on fisheries confirm that these individuals are confirm that these areas represent encounters of neonates, juveniles, and mating in these waters, nor can we mating grounds for the species, or pregnant females, there is inadequate identify any physical or biological identify the physical and biological information to identify any physical or features that would facilitate successful features that would be necessary for biological features of these areas that breeding in these geographical areas and mating to occur in these areas.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 12904 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices

Overall, the areas where oceanic movement patterns within a single established (Bass et al. 1973). As such, whitetip shark mating occurs remain demographic group, mature oceanic we cannot identify any specific essential unknown. Additionally, there has not whitetip females tagged were not features that define migratory habitat for been any systematic evaluation of the uniform in their movement patterns in oceanic whitetip sharks. particular physical or biological features the months after they were tagged Unoccupied Areas that facilitate successful mating (Howey-Jordan et al. 2013). Some behavior. As such, we cannot identify individuals remained within the Section 3(5)(A)(ii) of the ESA defines physical or biological features of Bahamas’ EEZ for their entire track critical habitat to include specific areas breeding habitat that are essential to the while others made long-distance outside the geographical area occupied conservation of the species. movements outside of the EEZ (Howey- by a threatened or endangered species at Jordan et al. 2013). This may be the time it is listed if the areas are The Physical and Biological Features of attributed to the oceanic whitetip’s determined by the Secretary to be Migratory Habitat That Are Essential to presumed biennial reproduction cycle essential for the conservation of the the Conservation of the Species (Backus et al. 1956; Seki et al. 1998), species. Regulations at 50 CFR Although small and large-scale resulting in differences between 424.12(b)(2) address designation of migratory movements have been individuals in particular stages of the unoccupied area as critical habitat and observed for the oceanic whitetip shark, reproductive cycle; thus, variation in the regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(g) state information regarding movement individual movements may correspond that critical habitat shall not be patterns or possible migration paths is to migrations by gravid and non-gravid designated within foreign countries or fairly limited (Bonfil et al. 2008). During females to disjunct pupping and mating in other areas outside of United States longline fishing surveys in the Central areas (Howey-Jordan et al. 2013). jurisdiction. Pacific Ocean, Strasburg (1958) noted However, this has yet to be confirmed, Because we are unable to identify any that oceanic whitetip sharks did not and more information is needed to physical or biological features of exhibit any specific migratory pattern. determine why these sharks are moving oceanic whitetip shark habitat that are Since then, several tagging studies have to particular locations (e.g., northern essential to the conservation of the been conducted on oceanic whitetip Lesser Antilles, northern Bahamas, and species, we cannot identify any sharks to determine horizontal and north of the Windward Passage). unoccupied habitat that contains such vertical movement patterns of the Moreover, none of these locations are features. Furthermore, due to the species, confirming the species’ strong within U.S. waters. limited understanding of habitat use by thermal preference for temperatures In Hawaiian waters, tagging data from the oceanic whitetip shark, we cannot above 20 °C, highly migratory nature, 13 oceanic whitetip sharks revealed a identify any unoccupied areas that have and site fidelity to certain locations complex pattern, where nine a reasonable certainty of contributing to (Tolotti et al. 2017; Howey et al. 2016; individuals showed a meandering the conservation of the species or are Tolotti et al. 2015; Howey-Jordan et al. swimming behavior and three essential to the conservation of the 2013; Carlson and Gulak 2012; Musyl et individuals made more straight-line species. al. 2011). movements (Musyl et al. 2011). The Critical Habitat Determination In the Atlantic, limited tagging data three individuals that made more from the NMFS Cooperative Tagging straight-line movements were all males, Given the best available information Program (Kohler et al. 1998; NMFS whereas the sharks that followed the and the above analysis of this unpublished data) from eight oceanic meandering swimming pattern and information, we find that there are no whitetip sharks do not elucidate any remained relatively close to the tagging identifiable occupied areas under the migratory paths or corridors for the area were a mix of both males and jurisdiction of the United States that oceanic whitetip shark. The tagging data females (Musyl et al. 2011). Aside from contain physical or biological features largely reveal the movements of some confirming the epipelagic niche these that are essential to the conservation of juveniles from the northeastern Gulf of sharks occupy and their strong thermal the species or unoccupied areas that are Mexico to the East Coast of Florida, preference of temperatures above 20 °C, essential to the conservation of the from the Mid-Atlantic Bight to southern there were no obvious reasons species. Thus, we conclude there are no Cuba, from the Lesser Antilles west into underpinning the movements specific areas within the oceanic the central Caribbean Sea, from east to undertaken by the tagged individuals. whitetip shark’s respective range and west along the equatorial Atlantic, and Although the available information under U.S. jurisdiction that meet the from southern Brazil to farther offshore suggests that these sharks do undergo definition of critical habitat; and in a northeasterly direction (Bonfil et al. short and long-distance migrations, the therefore, we have determined that a 2008). Only one adult of unknown sex space or migratory corridor used by critical habitat designation for oceanic was both tagged and recaptured near Cat oceanic whitetip sharks during these whitetip sharks is not prudent. Island, Bahamas (NMFS unpublished migrations remains unknown. In Although we have made this ‘‘not data). In another tagging study at Cat addition, the migratory tracking studies prudent’’ determination, the areas Island, 11 mature oceanic whitetip that have been conducted in waters occupied by oceanic whitetip sharks sharks (10 females, 1 male) were tagged under U.S. jurisdiction have not under U.S. jurisdiction will continue to in May of 2011. After remaining within elucidated any information on any be subject to conservation actions 500 km of the tagging site for potential migratory corridors or habitats implemented under section 7(a)(1) of approximately 30 days, individuals that may exist within waters under U.S. the ESA, as well as consultations dispersed across a vast area of the jurisdiction for the oceanic whitetip pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA western North Atlantic and to several shark. Until such time that the for Federal activities that may affect the different locations, with many of the movements and migrations of the oceanic whitetip shark, as determined sharks returning to the Bahamas species throughout its life cycle are on the basis of the best available approximately 150 days later (Howey- better understood, the importance of information at the time of the action. Jordan et al. 2013). However, unlike physical features (e.g., salinity and Through the consultation process, we other pelagic animals in the North temperature) to the oceanic whitetip will continue to assess effects of Federal Atlantic that exhibit more uniform shark’s distribution cannot be clearly actions on the species and its habitat.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 44 / Thursday, March 5, 2020 / Notices 12905

Additionally, we remain committed to References NOAA–NMFS–2020–0022, by any of the promoting the recovery of the oceanic A complete list of all references cited following methods: • Electronic Submissions: Submit all whitetip shark through both domestic herein is available upon request (see FOR electronic public comments via the and international efforts. As noted in FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). the proposed and final rules (81 FR Federal e-Rulemaking Portal 96304, December 29, 2016; 83 FR 4153, Authority: The authority for this action is www.regulations.gov. To submit January 30, 2018, respectively), the most the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). significant threat to the oceanic whitetip first click the ‘‘submit a comment’’ icon, shark is overutilization by commercial Dated: February 28, 2020. then enter NOAA–NMFS–2020–0022 in fisheries, primarily in areas outside of Samuel D. Rauch III, the keyword search. Locate in the U.S. jurisdiction. Oceanic whitetip Deputy Assistant Administrator for resulting list the document you wish to sharks are caught as bycatch in a Regulatory Programs, National Marine comment on and click on the ‘‘Submit number of fisheries throughout their Fisheries Service. a Comment’’ icon to the right of that range, and they are still a prevalent [FR Doc. 2020–04481 Filed 3–4–20; 8:45 am] line. species in the international fin trade BILLING CODE 3510–22–P • Mail or Hand-Delivery: Address despite retention prohibitions in tuna comments to Robert Markle, NMFS, Regional Fisheries Management West Coast Region, 1201 NE Lloyd Organizations and a Convention on DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232. International Trade in Endangered Instructions: Comments must be Species of Wild Fauna and Flora National Oceanic and Atmospheric submitted by one of the above methods (CITES) Appendix II listing. Therefore, Administration to ensure that we can receive, efforts to address overutilization of the document, and consider them. [RTID 0648–XA049] species through regulatory measures Comments sent by any other method, appear inadequate (Young et al. 2017). Endangered and Threatened Species; sent to any other address or individual, Thus, recovery of the oceanic whitetip Initiation of 5-Year Reviews for or received after the end of the comment shark is highly dependent upon Eulachon, Yelloweye Rockfish, period may not be considered. All international conservation efforts. To Bocaccio, and Green Sturgeon comments received are a part of the address this, we have developed a public record and will generally be recovery plan outline that provides our AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries posted for public viewing on preliminary strategy for the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and www.regulations.gov without change. conservation of the oceanic whitetip Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), All personal identifying information shark. This outline can be found on our Commerce. (e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted website at: https:// ACTION: Notice of initiation of 5-year voluntarily by the sender will be www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/ reviews; request for information. publicly accessible. Do not submit oceanic-whitetip-shark#resources and confidential business information, or provides an interim recovery action SUMMARY: We, NMFS, are announcing 5- otherwise sensitive or protected plan as well as preliminary steps we year reviews of four species listed under information. We request that all will take towards the development of a the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of information be accompanied by: (1) full recovery plan. We also conducted 1973, as amended. The four distinct Supporting documentation such as two recovery planning workshops: One population segments (DPSs) included in maps, bibliographic references, or in Honolulu, Hawaii (April 23–24, 2019) this notice are the southern DPS of reprints of pertinent publications; and that focused on the Indo-Pacific portion eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus), the (2) the submitter’s name, address, and of the species’ range, and one in Miami, Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPSs of any association, institution, or business Florida (November 13–14, 2019) that yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes that the person represents. We will focused on the Atlantic/Caribbean ruberrimus) and bocaccio (S. accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ portion of the species’ range. These paucispinis), and the southern DPS of A’’ in the required fields if you wish to workshops brought together numerous green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris). remain anonymous). Please note that experts and various stakeholders to The purpose of these reviews is to submissions without supporting collect information, facts, and ensure the accuracy of the listing information—those merely stating perspectives on how to recover the classifications of these threatened and support for or opposition to the action oceanic whitetip shark. Input received endangered species. The 5-year reviews under consideration—will be noted but from these workshops, including ideas will be based on the best scientific and not used in making any listing and recommendations regarding commercial data available at the time of determinations because such comments recovery criteria and actions, will help the reviews; therefore, we are requesting do not represent actual scientific or inform the development of the that interested parties submit any new commercial data. forthcoming recovery plan for the relevant information on these DPSs that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob species. has become available since the original Markle at the above address, by phone We will continue to work towards the listing determinations or since the at (503) 230–5419, or by email at conservation and recovery of oceanic species’ status was last updated. Based [email protected]. whitetip sharks, both on a domestic and on the results of these 5-year reviews, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section global level, including with our we will make the requisite 4(c)(2)(A) of the ESA requires that we international partners and within determinations under the ESA. conduct a review of listed species at regional fisheries management DATES: To allow us adequate time to least once every five years. On the basis organizations and other international conduct these reviews, we must receive of such reviews, we determine under bodies to promote the adoption of your information no later than June 3, section 4(c)(2)(B) whether a species conservation and management measures 2020. should be delisted or reclassified from for the threatened oceanic whitetip ADDRESSES: You may submit endangered to threatened or from shark. information document, identified by threatened to endangered.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM 05MRN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES