Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
The National Marine Fisheries Service issued a rule in 2019 requiring skimmer-trawl vessels at least 40 feet long to use turtle-excluder devices, which allow sea turtles to escape from shrimp nets. The rule replaced tow-time restrictions for those vessels after the agency developed new device configurations, gathered evidence of low compliance with tow-time limits, and assessed sea-turtle captures and post-interaction mortality.
The Louisiana Shrimp Association and three people active in the shrimping industry challenged the rule under the Administrative Procedure Act. They argued that the agency inadequately explained a change in policy, disregarded the industry’s reliance interests, and failed to consider scientific data, a requested Louisiana exemption, and public comments. The district court granted summary judgment to the federal defendants and denied the plaintiffs’ cross-motion.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit affirmed. It held that the agency reasonably explained the rule and supported its principal conclusions with substantial evidence, including studies showing that newer turtle-excluder devices reduced bycatch, observer data concerning turtle captures and deaths, evidence of widespread noncompliance with tow-time restrictions, and research on delayed mortality following capture.
The court also held that the agency adequately considered the rule’s economic effects and any asserted reliance interests. The agency evaluated alternatives, acknowledged costs and reduced shrimp harvests, solicited public input, and narrowed the final rule so that it affected fewer fishers while retaining expected conservation benefits. Louisiana did not submit its asserted bycatch data or request a geographic exemption until after the rule was issued, and the agency sufficiently addressed the relevant public comments in the rulemaking record.
Key Takeaways
- NMFS had substantial evidence for requiring turtle-excluder devices on skimmer-trawl vessels at least 40 feet long.
- The agency’s economic analysis, consideration of alternatives, and narrowing of the proposed rule adequately accounted for industry costs and asserted reliance interests.
- An agency generally need not consider data or an exemption request that was not presented during the rulemaking process, and judicial review ordinarily remains confined to the administrative record.
Why It Matters
The decision leaves the 2019 turtle-excluder-device requirement in place for larger skimmer trawlers and reinforces the deference courts give agencies on technical scientific judgments supported by the administrative record.
It also underscores the importance of submitting data, proposed alternatives, and exemption requests during notice-and-comment proceedings. Regulated parties may have difficulty attacking a final rule based on material that was not timely placed before the agency.