Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; License Limitation Program for the Scallop Fishery, 19409-19411 [05-7448]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
49 WL. Since Hermitage is located
within 320 kilometers (200 miles) of the
U.S-Canadian border, concurrence of
the Canadian government has been
requested. In addition, this allotment is
short-spaced to vacant Channel 280C1
in Woodstock, Ontario, and we have
requested Canadian concurrence of
Channel 280A at Hermitage,
Pennsylvania, as a specially-negotiated,
short-spaced allotment. In accordance
with the provisions of Section 1.420(i)
of the Commission’s Rules, we will
accept competing expressions of interest
for the use of Channel 280A at
Hermitage, Pennsylvania, or require
Petitioner to demonstrate the existence
of an equivalent class channel for the
use of other interested parties.
Provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to
this proceeding.
Members of the public should note
that from the time a Notice of Proposed
Rule Making is issued until the matter
is no longer subject to Commission
consideration or court review, all ex
parte contacts are prohibited in
Commission proceedings, such as this
one, which involve channel allotments.
See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules
governing permissible ex parte contacts.
For information regarding proper filing
procedures for comments, see 47 CFR
1.415 and 1.420.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio, Radio broadcasting.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
part 73 as follows:
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES
1. The authority citation for Part 73
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.
§ 73.202
[Amended]
2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM
Allotments under Nevada, is amended
by removing Channel 233C1 at Caliente,
and adding Moapa, Channel 233C.
3. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM
Allotments under Pennsylvania, is
amended by removing Channel 280A at
Mercer, and adding Hermitage, Channel
280A.
Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 05–7081 Filed 4–12–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:00 Apr 12, 2005
Jkt 205001
19409
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gretchen Harrington, phone: 907–586–
7228 or e-mail:
gretchen.harrington@noaa.gov.
50 CFR Part 679
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[Docket No. 050325082–5082–01; I.D.
031705E]
RIN 0648–AS90
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; License Limitation
Program for the Scallop Fishery
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to
implement Amendment 10 to the
Fishery Management Plan for the
Scallop Fishery off Alaska (FMP), which
would modify the gear endorsements
under the license limitation program
(LLP) for the scallop fishery. This action
is necessary to allow increased
participation by LLP license holders in
the scallop fisheries off Alaska. This
action is intended to promote the goals
and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the FMP,
and other applicable laws.
DATES: Written comments on the
proposed rule must be received on or
before May 31, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue
Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn:
Lori Durall. Comments may be
submitted by:
• E-mail: Scallop10–PR–0648–
AS90@noaa.gov. Include in the subject
line of the e-mail the following
document identifier: Scallop 10 PR. Email comments, with or without
attachments, are limited to 5 megabytes.
• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802.
• Hand Delivery to the Federal
Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room
420A, Juneau, AK.
• Facsimile: 907–586–7557.
• Webform at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions at that site for submitting
comments.
Copies of Amendment 10 to the
Scallop FMP, and the Environmental
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for the
amendment are available from NMFS at
the mailing address specified above.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council) prepared the FMP under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Under the FMP, management of all
aspects of the scallop fishery, except
limited access, is delegated to the State
of Alaska (State). Federal regulations
governing the scallop fishery appear at
50 CFR parts 600 and 679. State
regulations governing the scallop fishery
appear in the Alaska Administrative
Code (AAC) at 5 AAC Chapter 38-Miscellaneous Shellfish.
State regulations establish guideline
harvest levels (GHL) for different scallop
registration areas, fishing seasons, open
and closed fishing areas, observer
coverage requirements, bycatch limits,
gear restrictions, and measures to limit
processing efficiency (including a ban
on the use of mechanical shucking
machines and a limitation on crew size).
The gear regulations limit vessels to
using no more than two 15 ft (4.5 m)
dredges, except in State Scallop
Registration Area H (Cook Inlet) where
vessels are limited to using a single 6 ft
(1.8 m) scallop dredge.
The Council has submitted
Amendment 10 for Secretarial review,
and a Notice of Availability of the
amendment was published on March
24, 2005, with comments on the FMP
amendment invited through May 23,
2005 (70 FR 15063). Comments may
address the FMP amendment, this
proposed rule, or both, but must be
received by May 23, 2005, to be
considered in the approval/disapproval
decision on the FMP amendment.
Beginning in 2001, NMFS has
required a Federal scallop LLP license
on board any vessel deployed in the
scallop fisheries in Federal waters off
Alaska. The LLP was implemented
through approval of Amendment 4 to
the FMP by the Secretary on June 8,
2000, and the final rule implementing
Amendment 4 was published December
14, 2000 (65 FR 78110). The LLP was
established to limit harvesting capacity
in the Federal scallop fishery off Alaska.
NMFS issued a total of nine LLP
licenses. Licenses were issued to
holders of either Federal or State
moratorium permits who used their
permits to make legal landings of
scallops in each of any two calendar
years during the period beginning
January 1, 1996, through October 9,
1998. The licenses authorize their
holders to catch and retain scallops in
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
19410
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
all waters off Alaska that are open for
scallop fishing.
Two licenses were based on the legal
landings of scallops harvested only from
Cook Inlet during the qualifying period
and therefore have a gear restriction
endorsement that limits allowable gear
to a single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge when
fishing for scallops in any area. The
other seven licenses, based on the legal
landings of scallops harvested from
areas outside Cook Inlet during the
qualifying period, have no gear
restriction endorsement, but are limited
to two 15–ft (4.5 m) dredges under
existing state regulations. The purpose
of the gear restriction endorsement was
to prevent expansion in overall fishing
capacity by not allowing relatively small
operations in Cook Inlet to increase
their fishing capacity.
Subsequent to LLP implementation,
the Council has found that the gear
restriction endorsement may create a
disproportionate economic hardship for
those LLP license holders restricted to 6
ft (1.8 m) dredges when they fish in
Federal waters, especially in light of the
State’s observer requirements and their
associated costs. In February 2004, the
Council developed a problem statement
and four alternatives for analysis of
modifying or eliminating the gear
restriction for the two licenses affected
by the gear restriction.
In October 2004, the Council voted
unanimously to recommend to the
Secretary Amendment 10 to change the
single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge restriction
endorsement in the scallop LLP to two
dredges with a combined width of no
more than 20 ft (6.1 m) restriction
endorsement. This change would allow
the two LLP license holders with the
current gear endorsement to fish in
Federal waters outside Cook Inlet with
larger dredges. The Council
recommended this change because it
found that it is not economically viable
for vessels to operate outside Cook Inlet
with the existing gear restrictions.
The Council also recognized that
economic conditions of the scallop fleet
had changed since the LLP was
approved. The change resulted from the
formation of a harvesting cooperative by
a majority of the LLP holders. The
harvesting cooperative provides
harvesting efficiency to participants
without an increase in fishing capacity.
Efficiency gains are realized when
harvesting cooperative participants
retire excess fishing capacity while
being assured that the entry of
additional capacity is prevented by the
LLP. Without the LLP, a harvesting
cooperative was unlikely because any
efficiency gains through cooperation
could be easily eroded by unrestricted
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:00 Apr 12, 2005
Jkt 205001
entry of new vessels to the fishery.
Hence, concern about the expansion of
overall fishing capacity no longer exists
with the combined effects of the LLP
and harvesting cooperatives.
In discussing the difference among
the alternatives, the Council noted that
allowing two vessels the ability to use
two 10–ft dredges would give them a
much greater ability to cover the costs
of carrying an observer in Federal
waters outside Cook Inlet. Public
testimony by a vessel owner with a
restricted license indicated that the use
of larger dredges would allow the vessel
to adequately cover its operational costs
with the additional costs for an observer
in statewide waters. The Council
discussed the issue of increasing
capacity in the fishery by this proposed
action, but acknowledged that licenses
already are limited by vessel length, and
the two vessels impacted by this
proposed action are among the smallest
in the fishery. The Council
acknowledged that these vessels, by
their size, are precluded from fishing in
inclement weather and thus are limited
in their harvesting ability. The fishery
currently is prosecuted in a slower
manner than before 2000, due to the
combination of the LLP and the
harvesting cooperative in the fishery.
The Council discussed the relative
impacts of increasing harvesting ability
on the two licences which are not part
of this harvesting cooperative. Due to
the small size of the vessels used by the
license holders, however, this change is
not expected to impact the operation of
the harvesting cooperative.
Therefore, the Council concluded that
while these two vessels could increase
their capacity, they would not increase
overall fishing effort to the extent that
it would interfere with the total fleet’s
ability to operate at a sustainable and
economically viable level. Amendment
10 would provide the two vessels with
a larger share of the total catch which
would offset their observer costs and
enhance their economic viability.
Classification
At this time, NMFS has not
determined that this proposed rule is
consistent with the national standards
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other
applicable laws. In making that
determination, NMFS will take into
account the data, views, and comments
received during the comment period
(see DATES).
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
The Council prepared an EA/RIR/
IRFA for Amendment 10, which
describes the management background,
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the purpose and need for action, the
management alternatives, and the socioeconomic impacts of the alternatives. It
estimates the total number of small
entities affected by this action, and
analyzes the economic impact on those
small entities as required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The IRFA
describes the economic impacts this
proposed rule, if adopted, would have
on small entities. A summary of the
IRFA follows.
For purposes of the IRFA, the two LLP
license holders, which currently are
subject to the single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge
gear restriction, are the only small
entities (i.e., each having annual gross
receipts of less than $3.5 million)
directly regulated by the proposed rule.
The LLP impacted the two small
entities that fished exclusively inside of
Cook Inlet during the qualifying period
by limiting the size of dredge either
vessel could operate to a single 6 ft (1.8
m) dredge. The remaining seven LLP
license holders may operate up to the
State-authorized gear limit of two 15 ft
dredges (4.5 m). The Council
recommended Amendment 10 because
it found that it is not economically
viable for the two LLP license holders
to operate outside Cook Inlet (as
authorized by authority of the LLP
license) with the existing 6 ft (1.8 m)
dredge gear restrictions. The Council
determined that, given existing observer
requirements and their associated costs,
the single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge restriction
created a disproportionate economic
hardship when fishing in Federal waters
outside Cook Inlet.
The Council considered the following
four alternatives that could reduce
impacts on small entities.
Alternative 1: This alternative would
retain status quo and maintain the
current 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge restriction
endorsement on two LLP licenses. This
alternative was rejected because it
would not solve the problem of
disproportionate hardship being
experienced by two LLP license holders
that are restricted to using a single 6 ft.
(1.8 m) dredge when fishing in Federal
waters outside of Cook Inlet while other
LLP license holders are limited to two
15 ft. (4.5 m) dredges.
Alternative 2: This alternative would
modify the 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge
restriction endorsement to allow vessels
with the current endorsement to fish in
Federal waters outside Cook Inlet with
two dredges with a combined width of
no more than 16 ft. This alternative was
rejected because it did not provide
enough relief to the two LLP license
holders currently limited to using a
single 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge in Federal
waters outside of Cook Inlet. This
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
alternative would allow slightly more
than half of the fishing capacity of other
scallop fishing operations outside of
Cook Inlet.
Alternative 3: This alternative is the
preferred alternative. It would modify
the current 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge
restriction to allow vessels with the
current endorsement to fish in Federal
waters outside Cook Inlet with two
dredges with a combined width of no
more than 20 ft (6.1 m). This alternative
appeared to ideally balance the
Council’s original concern of limiting
fishing capacity for scallops while
allowing the two LLP license holders
that are restricted to using a single 6 ft.
(1.8 m) dredge to expand their
production of scallops sufficiently to
cover their costs and allow them to
become competitive with other scallop
fishing operations.
Alternative 4: This alternative would
eliminate the current 6–ft. (1.8 m)
dredge restriction endorsement on the
two LLP licenses. This alternative
would allow the two LLP license
holders that are restricted to using a
single 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge to expand
their capacity to be equal to the current
limit of two 15 ft. (4.5 m) dredges. This
alternative was rejected because it is
unnecessarily liberal.
As proposed, Amendment 10 would
change the single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge
restriction endorsement in the LLP to a
restriction endorsement of two dredges
with a combined width of no more than
20 feet (6.1 m). This change would
allow the two LLP license holders with
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:40 Apr 12, 2005
Jkt 205001
the current gear restriction endorsement
the opportunity to fish in Federal
waters, outside Cook Inlet, with larger
gear. The Council also concluded that,
because of changes to the fleet after the
LLP was implemented, these two
vessels could increase their capacity by
using larger dredges without increasing
fishing overall effort to the extent that
it would interfere with the total fleet’s
ability to operate at a sustainable and
economically viable level. Amendment
10 has the potential to provide these
two vessels with an opportunity to
capture a larger share of the total catch,
thus allowing them to offset observer
costs and enhance their income.
Because of the maximum vessel length
imposed on these vessels by the LLP
license, neither operation has the
potential to significantly impact the
catch shares of the other operations in
the fishery, so instability in the sector is
not a serious concern associated with
the proposed action. The most probable
outcomes of implementing the preferred
alternative would be some relatively
modest redistribution of earnings to the
two LLP license holders currently
affected by the single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge
restriction.
No known Federal rules duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with the proposed
rule.
This proposed rule would impose no
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements on affected vessels.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
19411
Dated: April 7, 2005.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For reasons set out in the preamble,
50 CFR part 679 is proposed to be
amended as follows:
PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
1. The authority citation for part 679
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et
seq., and 3631 et seq.
2. In § 679.4, paragraph (g)(3)(ii) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 679.4
Permits.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) The gear specified on a scallop
license will be restricted to two dredges
with a combined width of no more than
20 feet (6.1 m) in all areas if the eligible
applicant was a moratorium permit
holder with a Scallop Registration Area
H (Cook Inlet) endorsement and did not
make a legal landing of scallops caught
outside Area H during the qualification
period specified in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)
of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–7448 Filed 4–12–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 13, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19409-19411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-7448]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 050325082-5082-01; I.D. 031705E]
RIN 0648-AS90
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; License
Limitation Program for the Scallop Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 10 to the
Fishery Management Plan for the Scallop Fishery off Alaska (FMP), which
would modify the gear endorsements under the license limitation program
(LLP) for the scallop fishery. This action is necessary to allow
increased participation by LLP license holders in the scallop fisheries
off Alaska. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act), the FMP, and other applicable laws.
DATES: Written comments on the proposed rule must be received on or
before May 31, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS,
Attn: Lori Durall. Comments may be submitted by:
E-mail: Scallop10-PR-0648-AS90@noaa.gov. Include in the
subject line of the e-mail the following document identifier: Scallop
10 PR. E-mail comments, with or without attachments, are limited to 5
megabytes.
Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802.
Hand Delivery to the Federal Building: 709 West 9th
Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK.
Facsimile: 907-586-7557.
Webform at the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at that site for
submitting comments.
Copies of Amendment 10 to the Scallop FMP, and the Environmental
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for the amendment are available from
NMFS at the mailing address specified above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Harrington, phone: 907-586-
7228 or e-mail: gretchen.harrington@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council) prepared the FMP under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. Under the FMP, management of all aspects of the scallop fishery,
except limited access, is delegated to the State of Alaska (State).
Federal regulations governing the scallop fishery appear at 50 CFR
parts 600 and 679. State regulations governing the scallop fishery
appear in the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) at 5 AAC Chapter 38--
Miscellaneous Shellfish.
State regulations establish guideline harvest levels (GHL) for
different scallop registration areas, fishing seasons, open and closed
fishing areas, observer coverage requirements, bycatch limits, gear
restrictions, and measures to limit processing efficiency (including a
ban on the use of mechanical shucking machines and a limitation on crew
size). The gear regulations limit vessels to using no more than two 15
ft (4.5 m) dredges, except in State Scallop Registration Area H (Cook
Inlet) where vessels are limited to using a single 6 ft (1.8 m) scallop
dredge.
The Council has submitted Amendment 10 for Secretarial review, and
a Notice of Availability of the amendment was published on March 24,
2005, with comments on the FMP amendment invited through May 23, 2005
(70 FR 15063). Comments may address the FMP amendment, this proposed
rule, or both, but must be received by May 23, 2005, to be considered
in the approval/disapproval decision on the FMP amendment.
Beginning in 2001, NMFS has required a Federal scallop LLP license
on board any vessel deployed in the scallop fisheries in Federal waters
off Alaska. The LLP was implemented through approval of Amendment 4 to
the FMP by the Secretary on June 8, 2000, and the final rule
implementing Amendment 4 was published December 14, 2000 (65 FR 78110).
The LLP was established to limit harvesting capacity in the Federal
scallop fishery off Alaska. NMFS issued a total of nine LLP licenses.
Licenses were issued to holders of either Federal or State moratorium
permits who used their permits to make legal landings of scallops in
each of any two calendar years during the period beginning January 1,
1996, through October 9, 1998. The licenses authorize their holders to
catch and retain scallops in
[[Page 19410]]
all waters off Alaska that are open for scallop fishing.
Two licenses were based on the legal landings of scallops harvested
only from Cook Inlet during the qualifying period and therefore have a
gear restriction endorsement that limits allowable gear to a single 6
ft (1.8 m) dredge when fishing for scallops in any area. The other
seven licenses, based on the legal landings of scallops harvested from
areas outside Cook Inlet during the qualifying period, have no gear
restriction endorsement, but are limited to two 15-ft (4.5 m) dredges
under existing state regulations. The purpose of the gear restriction
endorsement was to prevent expansion in overall fishing capacity by not
allowing relatively small operations in Cook Inlet to increase their
fishing capacity.
Subsequent to LLP implementation, the Council has found that the
gear restriction endorsement may create a disproportionate economic
hardship for those LLP license holders restricted to 6 ft (1.8 m)
dredges when they fish in Federal waters, especially in light of the
State's observer requirements and their associated costs. In February
2004, the Council developed a problem statement and four alternatives
for analysis of modifying or eliminating the gear restriction for the
two licenses affected by the gear restriction.
In October 2004, the Council voted unanimously to recommend to the
Secretary Amendment 10 to change the single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge
restriction endorsement in the scallop LLP to two dredges with a
combined width of no more than 20 ft (6.1 m) restriction endorsement.
This change would allow the two LLP license holders with the current
gear endorsement to fish in Federal waters outside Cook Inlet with
larger dredges. The Council recommended this change because it found
that it is not economically viable for vessels to operate outside Cook
Inlet with the existing gear restrictions.
The Council also recognized that economic conditions of the scallop
fleet had changed since the LLP was approved. The change resulted from
the formation of a harvesting cooperative by a majority of the LLP
holders. The harvesting cooperative provides harvesting efficiency to
participants without an increase in fishing capacity. Efficiency gains
are realized when harvesting cooperative participants retire excess
fishing capacity while being assured that the entry of additional
capacity is prevented by the LLP. Without the LLP, a harvesting
cooperative was unlikely because any efficiency gains through
cooperation could be easily eroded by unrestricted entry of new vessels
to the fishery. Hence, concern about the expansion of overall fishing
capacity no longer exists with the combined effects of the LLP and
harvesting cooperatives.
In discussing the difference among the alternatives, the Council
noted that allowing two vessels the ability to use two 10-ft dredges
would give them a much greater ability to cover the costs of carrying
an observer in Federal waters outside Cook Inlet. Public testimony by a
vessel owner with a restricted license indicated that the use of larger
dredges would allow the vessel to adequately cover its operational
costs with the additional costs for an observer in statewide waters.
The Council discussed the issue of increasing capacity in the fishery
by this proposed action, but acknowledged that licenses already are
limited by vessel length, and the two vessels impacted by this proposed
action are among the smallest in the fishery. The Council acknowledged
that these vessels, by their size, are precluded from fishing in
inclement weather and thus are limited in their harvesting ability. The
fishery currently is prosecuted in a slower manner than before 2000,
due to the combination of the LLP and the harvesting cooperative in the
fishery. The Council discussed the relative impacts of increasing
harvesting ability on the two licences which are not part of this
harvesting cooperative. Due to the small size of the vessels used by
the license holders, however, this change is not expected to impact the
operation of the harvesting cooperative.
Therefore, the Council concluded that while these two vessels could
increase their capacity, they would not increase overall fishing effort
to the extent that it would interfere with the total fleet's ability to
operate at a sustainable and economically viable level. Amendment 10
would provide the two vessels with a larger share of the total catch
which would offset their observer costs and enhance their economic
viability.
Classification
At this time, NMFS has not determined that this proposed rule is
consistent with the national standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and
other applicable laws. In making that determination, NMFS will take
into account the data, views, and comments received during the comment
period (see DATES).
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
The Council prepared an EA/RIR/IRFA for Amendment 10, which
describes the management background, the purpose and need for action,
the management alternatives, and the socio-economic impacts of the
alternatives. It estimates the total number of small entities affected
by this action, and analyzes the economic impact on those small
entities as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The IRFA
describes the economic impacts this proposed rule, if adopted, would
have on small entities. A summary of the IRFA follows.
For purposes of the IRFA, the two LLP license holders, which
currently are subject to the single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge gear
restriction, are the only small entities (i.e., each having annual
gross receipts of less than $3.5 million) directly regulated by the
proposed rule.
The LLP impacted the two small entities that fished exclusively
inside of Cook Inlet during the qualifying period by limiting the size
of dredge either vessel could operate to a single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge.
The remaining seven LLP license holders may operate up to the State-
authorized gear limit of two 15 ft dredges (4.5 m). The Council
recommended Amendment 10 because it found that it is not economically
viable for the two LLP license holders to operate outside Cook Inlet
(as authorized by authority of the LLP license) with the existing 6 ft
(1.8 m) dredge gear restrictions. The Council determined that, given
existing observer requirements and their associated costs, the single 6
ft (1.8 m) dredge restriction created a disproportionate economic
hardship when fishing in Federal waters outside Cook Inlet.
The Council considered the following four alternatives that could
reduce impacts on small entities.
Alternative 1: This alternative would retain status quo and
maintain the current 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge restriction endorsement on
two LLP licenses. This alternative was rejected because it would not
solve the problem of disproportionate hardship being experienced by two
LLP license holders that are restricted to using a single 6 ft. (1.8 m)
dredge when fishing in Federal waters outside of Cook Inlet while other
LLP license holders are limited to two 15 ft. (4.5 m) dredges.
Alternative 2: This alternative would modify the 6 ft. (1.8 m)
dredge restriction endorsement to allow vessels with the current
endorsement to fish in Federal waters outside Cook Inlet with two
dredges with a combined width of no more than 16 ft. This alternative
was rejected because it did not provide enough relief to the two LLP
license holders currently limited to using a single 6 ft. (1.8 m)
dredge in Federal waters outside of Cook Inlet. This
[[Page 19411]]
alternative would allow slightly more than half of the fishing capacity
of other scallop fishing operations outside of Cook Inlet.
Alternative 3: This alternative is the preferred alternative. It
would modify the current 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge restriction to allow
vessels with the current endorsement to fish in Federal waters outside
Cook Inlet with two dredges with a combined width of no more than 20 ft
(6.1 m). This alternative appeared to ideally balance the Council's
original concern of limiting fishing capacity for scallops while
allowing the two LLP license holders that are restricted to using a
single 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge to expand their production of scallops
sufficiently to cover their costs and allow them to become competitive
with other scallop fishing operations.
Alternative 4: This alternative would eliminate the current 6-ft.
(1.8 m) dredge restriction endorsement on the two LLP licenses. This
alternative would allow the two LLP license holders that are restricted
to using a single 6 ft. (1.8 m) dredge to expand their capacity to be
equal to the current limit of two 15 ft. (4.5 m) dredges. This
alternative was rejected because it is unnecessarily liberal.
As proposed, Amendment 10 would change the single 6 ft (1.8 m)
dredge restriction endorsement in the LLP to a restriction endorsement
of two dredges with a combined width of no more than 20 feet (6.1 m).
This change would allow the two LLP license holders with the current
gear restriction endorsement the opportunity to fish in Federal waters,
outside Cook Inlet, with larger gear. The Council also concluded that,
because of changes to the fleet after the LLP was implemented, these
two vessels could increase their capacity by using larger dredges
without increasing fishing overall effort to the extent that it would
interfere with the total fleet's ability to operate at a sustainable
and economically viable level. Amendment 10 has the potential to
provide these two vessels with an opportunity to capture a larger share
of the total catch, thus allowing them to offset observer costs and
enhance their income. Because of the maximum vessel length imposed on
these vessels by the LLP license, neither operation has the potential
to significantly impact the catch shares of the other operations in the
fishery, so instability in the sector is not a serious concern
associated with the proposed action. The most probable outcomes of
implementing the preferred alternative would be some relatively modest
redistribution of earnings to the two LLP license holders currently
affected by the single 6 ft (1.8 m) dredge restriction.
No known Federal rules duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule.
This proposed rule would impose no recordkeeping and reporting
requirements on affected vessels.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 7, 2005.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
1. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et seq., and 3631 et seq.
2. In Sec. 679.4, paragraph (g)(3)(ii) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 679.4 Permits.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) The gear specified on a scallop license will be restricted to
two dredges with a combined width of no more than 20 feet (6.1 m) in
all areas if the eligible applicant was a moratorium permit holder with
a Scallop Registration Area H (Cook Inlet) endorsement and did not make
a legal landing of scallops caught outside Area H during the
qualification period specified in paragraph (g)(2)(iii) of this
section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-7448 Filed 4-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S