Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries; Amendment 11, 69502-69505 [05-22729]
Download as PDF
69502
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules
E.O. 12866 requires agencies to
regulate in the ‘‘most cost-effective
manner,’’ to make a ‘‘reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs,’’
and to develop regulations that ‘‘impose
the least burden on society.’’ We
therefore request comments, including
specific data if possible, concerning the
costs and benefits of incorporating
requirements for the storage of
explosives and other high-hazard
materials during transportation into the
HMR.
H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation
assigns a regulation identifier number
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in
the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center publishes the Unified
Agenda in April and October of each
year. The RIN number contained in the
heading of this document may be used
to cross-reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.
I. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form for all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comments (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477) of you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November
10, 2005, under authority delegated in 49
CFR part 106.
Robert McGuire,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous
Materials Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–22751 Filed 11–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 051028280–5280–01; I.D.
102105A]
RIN 0648–AT11
Fisheries Off West Coast States and in
the Western Pacific; Coastal Pelagic
Species Fisheries; Amendment 11
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:36 Nov 15, 2005
Jkt 208001
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed
rule to implement Amendment 11 to the
Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) which would
change the framework for the annual
apportionment of the Pacific sardine
harvest guideline along the U.S. Pacific
coast. The purpose of the proposed rule
is to achieve optimal utilization of the
Pacific sardine resource and equitable
allocation of the harvest opportunity for
Pacific sardine.
DATES: Comments must be received by
December 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this proposed rule identified by I.D.
102105A by any of the following
methods:
• E-mail: 0648–AT11.SWR@noaa.gov.
Include I.D. 102105A in the subject line
of the message.
• Federal e-Rulemaking portal:https://
www.regulations.gov Follow the
instruction for submitting comments.
• Fax: (562) 980–4047.
• Mail: Rodney R. McInnis, Regional
Administrator, Southwest Region,
NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard,
Suite 4200, Long Beach, California
90802.
For copies of Amendment 11 entitled
Allocation of the Pacific Sardine
Harvest Guideline Amendment 11 to the
Coastal Pelagic Species fishery
Management Plan, and the
accompanying environmental
assessment/initial regulatory flexibility
analysis/regulatory impact review (EA/
IRFA/RIR) may be obtained at the
address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joshua Lindsay, Southwest Region,
NMFS, (562) 980–4034.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pacific
sardines are managed pursuant to the
CPS FMP, which was implemented by
regulations published at 64 FR 69893,
December 15, 1999. According to the
original allocation scheme in the CPS
FMP, the annual harvest guideline for
Pacific sardine was allocated two-thirds
south of Pt. Piedras Blancas, California
(35° 40′ N. lat.) (a point south of
Monterey, California, which included
the fishery in Southern California) and
one-third north (included fisheries in
Monterey, California, Oregon, and
Washington), beginning annually on
January 1. On October 1, the harvest
guideline remaining in each subarea
was added together, then divided
equally between the two areas.
In 2002, the northern allocation was
reached before October 1, which
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
required closure of the fishery while
significant amounts of Pacific sardine
remained unharvested in the south (67
FR 58733, September 18, 2002). Rough
ocean conditions in the Pacific
Northwest beginning in October makes
fishing for Pacific sardine with a purse
seine gear difficult or impossible. Thus,
even if the harvest of Pacific sardine
were provided to fisheries in the Pacific
Northwest after October 1, it would not
likely be obtained because the rough
ocean conditions along the coast during
that time would preclude fishing for
Pacific sardine. Because the Pacific
sardine fisheries off Oregon and
Washington would be virtually over by
October, the Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council)
requested an emergency rule to make
the required allocation in 2002 earlier
than October 1, to avoid losses in jobs
and revenue. An emergency rule was
implemented on September 26, 2002 (67
FR 60601), that reallocated the harvest
guideline and reopened the fishery.
The CPS FMP established a limited
entry fishery south of Pt. Arena,
California (39° N. lat.), which was a
point north of San Francisco, California.
An open access fishery existed north of
Pt. Arena, California made up of Pacific
sardine fisheries off Northern California,
Oregon, and Washington.
When the CPS FMP was implemented
no Pacific sardine fishery in Oregon and
Washington existed. The Council
adopted the allocation procedure
included in the CPS FMP to protect the
Monterey, California fishery (in the
northern subarea or Subarea A) from the
possibility of the fishery in Southern
California (in the southern subarea or
Subarea B) catching the entire harvest
guideline before Pacific sardine became
available in Monterey. As a result of the
FMP’s allocation procedure, a fishing
pattern developed whereby Pacific
sardine was caught by the Southern
California fleet at the beginning of the
year, by the Pacific Northwest fleet in
the summer, and by the Monterey fleet
in the fall. The fishing pattern led to the
possibility that the fishery in the
northern subarea might preempt the
fishery in the southern subarea. If
Pacific sardine remained unharvested in
either subarea following the reallocation
on October 1, the FMP did not provide
a procedure to make further
reallocations to any subarea to increase
the likelihood of achieving optimum
yield (OY) in the Pacific sardine fishery.
The Council recognized that a process
with more flexibility for making
allocation decisions was needed.
Therefore, the Council considered
amending the framework process for
implementing the CPS FMP found at 50
E:\FR\FM\16NOP1.SGM
16NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules
CFR 660.517. At its November 2002
meeting in Foster City, CA, the Council
adopted a set of management
alternatives to address the allocation
issue and directed its Coastal Pelagic
Species Management Team (Team) to
analyze these alternatives. The primary
goal was to avoid closing any sector of
the Pacific sardine fishery while a
portion of the harvest guideline remain
unharvested.
At its meeting in Vancouver,
Washington, on April 10, 2003, the
Council received reports from the CPS
Advisory Subpanel (Subpanel), Team,
and public comments, and adopted an
interim allocation framework that: (1)
changed the definition of subarea A and
subarea B by moving the geographic
boundary between the two areas from
Pt. Piedras Blancas at 35° 40′ 00″ N. lat.
to Pt. Arena at 39° 00′ 00″ N. lat., (2)
moved the date when Pacific sardine
that remain unharvested are reallocated
to Subarea A and Subarea B from
October 1 to September 1, (3) changed
the percentage of the unharvested
Pacific sardine that is reallocated to
Subarea A and Subarea B from 50
percent to both subareas to 20 percent
to Subarea A and 80 percent to Subarea
B, and (4) reallocated all unharvested
Pacific sardine that remained on
December 1 coastwide. This procedure
was proposed to be in effect for 2003
and 2004, and for 2005 if the 2005
harvest guideline is at least 90 percent
of the 2003 harvest guideline.
Using the best available information,
the interim allocation framework was
developed to address concerns for the
short-term until NMFS and the Council
had sufficient time to develop a more
comprehensive, longer-term allocation
framework. In order to achieve optimal
utilization and equitable allocation
between the different sectors of the
Pacific sardine fishery, the Council
tasked the Subpanel to develop an
initial range of allocation alternatives
for a longer-term allocation framework.
The Subpanel adopted a range of
alternatives for the allocation of Pacific
sardine at their meetings in August and
September 2004. At the November 2004
meeting the Council reviewed the range
of alternatives, and with some
modification and additions, forwarded
nine alternatives to the Team for
preliminary analysis. When adopting a
range of alternatives for long-term
allocation in April 2005, the Council
expressed an interest in having the
flexibility to revisit the proposed action
in the near-term as the Pacific sardine
resource and the fisheries and markets
that rely on it are dynamic and difficult
to predict.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:36 Nov 15, 2005
Jkt 208001
At the April 2005 Council meeting the
Council adopted seven of the nine
alternatives and sent those to the Team
for further analysis. Below is a summary
of the seven forwarded alternatives
given to the Team for analysis including
both a no action alternative and a status
quo alternative. If the Council chose to
take no action, the allocation framework
would revert to original FMP (64 FR
69888, December 15, 1999) formula that
was in place before the regulatory
amendment (69 FR 8572, February 25,
2003) was implemented in 2003. Under
status quo the Council would have
chosen to take action to extend the
interim allocation. The order of
alternatives does not indicate rank or
priority. All alternatives (except No
Action) used Point Arena, California
(39° N. lat.) as the dividing line between
the allocation subareas. In order to
present the alternatives in a clear and
comparable fashion the descriptions
bullet the fishing season, the initial
allocation, and reallocations made at
different points during the fishing
season.
No Action: FMP Allocation Framework
The allocation subareas are divided at
Point Piedras Blancas, California (35°
40′ N. lat.).
Season: January 1 – December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33
percent of the harvest guideline is
allocated to the Subarea A (north, which
includes Monterey) and 66 percent to
the Subarea B (Southern California).
Reallocation: On October 1, remaining
unharvested portion of the harvest
guideline is pooled and reallocated 50
percent to Subarea A (north) and 50
percent to Subarea B (south).
Status Quo: Interim Allocation
Framework
Season: January 1 – December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33
percent of the harvest guideline is
allocated to the Subarea A (north) and
66 percent to Subarea B (south).
Reallocation: On September 1, 20
percent of the remaining unharvested
portion of the harvest guideline is
reallocated to the Subarea A (north) and
80 percent to Subarea B (south).
Second reallocation: On December 1,
the remaining unharvested portion of
the harvest guideline is reallocated
coastwide.
Alternative 1: Coastwide Allocation In
Two Periods
Season: January 1 – December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 50
percent of the harvest guideline is
allocated coastwide.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69503
Reallocation: On July 1, the remaining
harvest guideline (50 percent plus any
unharvested portion from the initial
allocation) is allocated coastwide.
Alternative 2: Rejected by the Council
Alternative 3: Coastwide Allocation In
Three Periods
Season: January 1 – December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 40
percent of the harvest guideline is
allocated coastwide.
Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of
the harvest guideline (plus any
unharvested portion from the initial
allocation) is allocated coastwide.
Second reallocation: On October 1, 20
percent of the harvest guideline (plus
any unharvested portion from the first
reallocation) is reallocated coastwide.
Alternative 4: Allocation Formula
Depends on the Size of the Harvest
Guideline
Season: January 1 – December 31
(a) The coastwide harvest guideline is
greater than 100,000 mt:
Initial allocation: On January 1, 40
percent of the coastwide harvest
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A
(north) and 60 percent to the Subarea B
(south).
Reallocation: On September 1, the
remaining unharvested portion of the
harvest guideline is pooled and
allocated coastwide.
(b) The coastwide harvest guideline is
less than 100,000 mt:
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33
percent of the coastwide harvest
guideline is allocated to Subarea A
(north) and 66 percent to the Subarea B
(south).
Reallocation: On September 1, the
remaining unharvested portion of the
coastwide harvest guideline is pooled
and 20 percent is allocated to Subarea
A (north) and 80 percent to the Subarea
B (south).
Second reallocation: On November 1,
any remaining unharvested portion of
the harvest guideline is again pooled
and reallocated coastwide.
Alternative 5: Rejected by the Council
Alternative 6: Transfer of Unused
Allocations Between Subareas
Season: January 1 – December 31
Initial allocation (for 2006 only): On
January 1, 40 percent of the harvest
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A
(north) and 60 percent to the Subarea B
(south).
Reallocation: On September 1, the
remaining harvest guideline is pooled
and allocated coastwide.
Transfer Rules For Computing
Subsequent-Year Allocations After the
E:\FR\FM\16NOP1.SGM
16NOP1
69504
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules
initial year (2006) these rules dictate the
allocations to each subarea in each
subsequent year:
Rule 1: The transfer of a portion of the
harvest guideline from one subarea to
the other, for the purpose of
recomputing allocation percentages for
the next year, occurs if the portion of a
subarea’s allocation remaining uncaught
at the end of the year is greater than the
transfer limits described in Rule 2.
Rule 2: If the harvest guideline is
greater than 100,000 mt, the transfer
amount will be equal to 10 percent of
the coastwide harvest guideline for that
year. When the coastwide harvest
guideline is 100,000 mt or less, the
transfer amount will be 5,000 mt.
Rule 3: The transfer amount is applied
to the current-year allocation for each
subarea. The resulting numerical values
are then converted to percentages of the
current-year coastwide harvest
guideline and used to determine the
initial allocation for the following year.
Rule 4: No subarea may initially be
allocated more than 75 percent of the
coastwide harvest guideline.
Rule 5: The September 1 coastwide
reallocation always applies.
Alternative 7: Equal Reallocation
Season: January 1 – December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33
percent of the harvest guideline is
allocated to the Subarea A (north) and
66 percent to the Subarea B (south).
Reallocation: On September 1,
remaining harvest guideline is pooled
and 50 percent of the harvest guideline
is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and
50 percent to the Subarea B (south).
Second Reallocation: On November 1,
any remaining unharvested portion of
the harvest guideline is again pooled
and reallocated coastwide.
At the June 2005 Council meeting in
Foster City, CA, the Council adopted a
preferred option for the allocation of
Pacific sardine that creates a seasonal,
coastwide allocation scheme. This
preferred alternative is a modified
version of Alternative 3, which provides
the following allocation formula for the
non-tribal share of the harvest guideline:
Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods
Season: January 1 – December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 35
percent of the harvest guideline is
allocated coastwide.
Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of
the harvest guideline (plus any
unharvested portion from the initial
allocation) is allocated coastwide.
Second reallocation: On September
15, 25 percent of the harvest guideline
(plus any unharvested portion from the
first reallocation) is reallocated
coastwide.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:36 Nov 15, 2005
Jkt 208001
The Council also recommended a
review of the allocation formula in
2008.
Classification
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
At this time, NMFS has not
determined that Amendment 11 that
this proposed rule would implement is
consistent with the national standards
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act and
other applicable laws. NMFS, in making
that determination, will take into
account the data, views, and comments
received during the comment period.
An IRFA was prepared that describes
the economic impact this proposed rule,
if adopted, would have on small
entities. The IRFA is available from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of
the IRFA follows:
A description of the action, why it is
being considered, and the legal basis for
this action are contained in the SUMMARY
and in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
sections of this proposed rule. This
proposed rule does not duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with other Federal
rules. There are no reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance
requirements of the proposed rule.
Approximately 104 vessels were
permitted to operate in the Pacific
sardine fisheries off the U.S. West Coast
in 2004; 63 vessels were permitted in
the Federal CPS limited entry fishery off
California (south of 39° N. lat.), while 41
vessels were permitted in Oregon and
Washington’s state Pacific sardine
fisheries. All of these vessels would be
considered small businesses under the
Small Business Administration
standards since the vessels do not have
annual receipts in excess of $3.5
million. Therefore, NMFS does not
anticipate any disproportionate
economic impacts resulting between
small and large vessels under the
proposed action. Additionally, this
proposed action is not likely to
significantly affect (both positive and
negative effects) these small entities.
The purpose of the action is to achieve
optimal utilization of the available
harvest by all entities through an
equitable coastwide allocation.
Therefore vessels in all regions should
have an equal opportunity to the
resource.
The fleet as it exists in present day is
not likely to change over the 2005–2009
period because vessels from California
could fish in the U.S. Exclusive
Economic Zone off Oregon and
Washington without a respective state
issued limited entry permit, but would
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
have to land their catches in California.
Given the current technology and
operational aspects of the Pacific
sardine fishery this would not be
practicable. Therefore, NMFS believes
that these 63 and 41 vessels will
comprise the respective southern and
northern subarea fleets in the future.
Under the preferred long-term allocation
alternative, Pacific sardine landings for
CPS for the entire West Coast were
projected to increase: (1) 19,674 mt from
the status quo over the 2005–2009
period, with a corresponding increase in
ex-vessel revenues of $3,076,891, under
a 136,000–mt harvest guideline, and a
10 percent annual growth rate in
landings for all fishery sectors over the
2005–2009 period (defined as base
case); (2) no change in total landings,
but an increase of $1,514,553 in exvessel revenues under a 72,000 mt
harvest guideline, and a 10- percent
annual growth rate in landings for all
Pacific sardine fishery sectors over the
2005–2009 period (defined as low
harvest guideline case or); and, (3) no
change in total landings or in total exvessel revenues under a 200,000 mt
harvest guideline, and a 10–percent
annual growth rate in landings for all
fishery sectors over the 2005–2009
period (defined as high harvest
guideline case).
NMFS anticipates a 10 percent annual
growth rate per year based on input
from the Pacific sardine industry
members as to what the Pacific sardine
market could accommodate. For the
preferred alternative, Pacific sardine
landings in the northern subarea sardine
fishery were estimated to be 28,141 mt
greater than the status quo with exvessel revenues increasing by $3.8
million under the base case; a 34,592–
mt increase in landings and an increase
of $4.7 million in ex-vessel revenue
under the low harvest guideline case;
and a no increase in landings or in exvessel revenue under the high harvest
guideline case. Landings in the southern
subarea Pacific sardine fishery would
decrease by 8,467–mt and ex-vessel
revenues would decrease by $743,181
relative to the status quo under the base
case; a decrease of 26,011 mt in landings
and $3.2 million in ex-vessel revenues
under the low harvest guideline case;
and, no changes under the high harvest
guideline case.
For the 63 CPS limited entry vessels
that would be eligible to participate in
the southern subarea Pacific sardine
fishery, the 8,467 mt loss in landings
over the period under the base case,
preferred alternative, represents a
potential decrease in ex-vessel revenues
of $11,797 per vessel from the status
quo alternative, which would be 2.6
E:\FR\FM\16NOP1.SGM
16NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules
percent loss in each vessel’s projected
revenues. For the preferred alternative
under the low harvest guideline case,
vessels in the southern subarea fishery
stand to lose $50,497 each, a 15.3–
percent decrease from the status quo,
and under the high harvest guideline
case there would be no change in vessel
earnings from the status quo. These
estimates may understate the actual
earnings impacts per vessel since only
61 vessels participated in the southern
subarea fishery during 2004.
For the 41 vessels that could
participate in the northern subarea
fishery each would stand to gain
$93,173 in ex-vessel revenues over the
period under the base case, preferred
alternative, a 10.6–percent increase from
the status quo alternative. For the
preferred alternative under the low
harvest guideline case, vessels in the
northern subarea fishery gain $114,533
each, a 26.4–percent increase from the
status quo, and under the high harvest
guideline case there would be no change
from the status quo. These estimates
may understate the actual earnings
impacts per vessel since only 34 vessels
recorded landings in the northern
subarea fishery during 2004.
The Council considered six
alternatives to the preferred alternative
in addition to the status quo alternative.
All alternatives resulted in ex-vessel
revenue gains of various magnitudes for
the fishery as a whole except the ‘‘No
Action’’ alternative in all cases, and
alternative 4.b under the low harvest
guideline case. Although the proposed
alternative did not yield the greatest
overall gain, with the least negative
impacts to individual vessels from any
one region, it was deemed most
equitable by industry members when
considered relative to the full range of
conservation and management
objectives constituting optimum yield
under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Administrative practice and
procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries,
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives,
Indians, Northern Mariana Islands,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR part 660 as follows:
12:36 Nov 15, 2005
Jkt 208001
1. The authority citation for part 660
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In § 660.502, the definition for
‘‘Initial annual harvest guideline’’ is
added, in alphabetical order, to read as
follows:
§ 660.502
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
Initial harvest guideline means a
specified numerical harvest objective set
at the beginning of the fishing season.
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 660.509 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 660.509
Closure of directed fishery.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) When the annual harvest guideline
for either Pacific sardine or Pacific
mackerel is reached, the directed fishery
for Pacific sardine or Pacific mackerel
shall be closed until the beginning of
the next fishing season as stated in
§ 660.510 (a) and (b). The Regional
Administrator shall announce in the
Federal Register the date of closure of
the directed fishery for Pacific sardine
or Pacific mackerel. Upon such closure,
Pacific mackerel may be harvested
incidental to the directed fishery for
Pacific sardine to the extent permitted
by the annual harvest guideline. The
Regional Administrator shall announce
in the Federal Register the amount of
the incidental trip limit, if any, that was
recommended by the Council and
approved by NMFS.
(b) When the allocation and
reallocation levels for Pacific sardine in
§ 660.511 (f)-(h) are reached, the Pacific
sardine fishery shall be closed until
either it re-opens per the allocation
scheme in § 660.511 (g) and (h) or the
beginning of the next fishing season as
stated in § 660.510 (a). The Regional
Administrator shall announce in the
Federal Register the date of the closure
of the directed fishery for Pacific
sardine.
4. In § 660.511 paragraph (f) is
revised, and paragraphs (g), and (h) are
added to read as follows:
§ 660.511
Catch restrictions.
*
*
*
*
(f) On January 1, 35 percent of the
initial harvest guideline for Pacific
sardine is allocated coastwide within
the fishery management area.
(g) On July 1, 40 percent of the initial
harvest guideline for Pacific sardine
plus the remaining unharvested portion
of the January 1 allocation in (f) is
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
allocated coastwide within the fishery
management area.
(h) On September 15, 25 percent of
the initial harvest guideline for Pacific
sardine plus the remaining unharvested
portion of the July 1 allocation is
allocated coastwide within the fishery
management area.
[FR Doc. 05–22729 Filed 11–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
*
*
Dated: November 9, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST
COAST STATES AND IN THE
WESTERN PACIFIC
69505
Sfmt 4702
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[I.D. 110805A]
RIN 0648–AT92
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Total Allowable Catch
Amounts for ‘‘Other Species’’ in the
Groundfish Fisheries of the Gulf of
Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) has
submitted Amendment 69 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska (FMP). If approved,
Amendment 69 would amend the
manner in which the total allowable
catch (TAC) for the ‘‘other species’’
complex is annually determined in the
Gulf of Alaska (GOA). As part of the
annual harvest specifications, the
Council would recommend a TAC
amount for the ‘‘other species’’ complex
at a level less than or equal to 5 percent
of the sum of the TACs for the
remaining groundfish species and
complexes in the GOA. This action
would allow conservation and
management of species within the
‘‘other species’’ category and 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. Comments from
the public are welcome.
DATES: Comments on the amendment
must be received on or before January
17, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue
Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn:
E:\FR\FM\16NOP1.SGM
16NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 16, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69502-69505]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22729]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 051028280-5280-01; I.D. 102105A]
RIN 0648-AT11
Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific;
Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries; Amendment 11
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed rule to implement Amendment 11 to
the Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) which
would change the framework for the annual apportionment of the Pacific
sardine harvest guideline along the U.S. Pacific coast. The purpose of
the proposed rule is to achieve optimal utilization of the Pacific
sardine resource and equitable allocation of the harvest opportunity
for Pacific sardine.
DATES: Comments must be received by December 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this proposed rule identified by
I.D. 102105A by any of the following methods:
E-mail: 0648-AT11.SWR@noaa.gov. Include I.D. 102105A in
the subject line of the message.
Federal e-Rulemaking portal:https://www.regulations.gov
Follow the instruction for submitting comments.
Fax: (562) 980-4047.
Mail: Rodney R. McInnis, Regional Administrator, Southwest
Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach,
California 90802.
For copies of Amendment 11 entitled Allocation of the Pacific
Sardine Harvest Guideline Amendment 11 to the Coastal Pelagic Species
fishery Management Plan, and the accompanying environmental assessment/
initial regulatory flexibility analysis/regulatory impact review (EA/
IRFA/RIR) may be obtained at the address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua Lindsay, Southwest Region,
NMFS, (562) 980-4034.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pacific sardines are managed pursuant to the
CPS FMP, which was implemented by regulations published at 64 FR 69893,
December 15, 1999. According to the original allocation scheme in the
CPS FMP, the annual harvest guideline for Pacific sardine was allocated
two-thirds south of Pt. Piedras Blancas, California (35[deg] 40' N.
lat.) (a point south of Monterey, California, which included the
fishery in Southern California) and one-third north (included fisheries
in Monterey, California, Oregon, and Washington), beginning annually on
January 1. On October 1, the harvest guideline remaining in each
subarea was added together, then divided equally between the two areas.
In 2002, the northern allocation was reached before October 1,
which required closure of the fishery while significant amounts of
Pacific sardine remained unharvested in the south (67 FR 58733,
September 18, 2002). Rough ocean conditions in the Pacific Northwest
beginning in October makes fishing for Pacific sardine with a purse
seine gear difficult or impossible. Thus, even if the harvest of
Pacific sardine were provided to fisheries in the Pacific Northwest
after October 1, it would not likely be obtained because the rough
ocean conditions along the coast during that time would preclude
fishing for Pacific sardine. Because the Pacific sardine fisheries off
Oregon and Washington would be virtually over by October, the Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council) requested an emergency rule to
make the required allocation in 2002 earlier than October 1, to avoid
losses in jobs and revenue. An emergency rule was implemented on
September 26, 2002 (67 FR 60601), that reallocated the harvest
guideline and reopened the fishery.
The CPS FMP established a limited entry fishery south of Pt. Arena,
California (39[deg] N. lat.), which was a point north of San Francisco,
California. An open access fishery existed north of Pt. Arena,
California made up of Pacific sardine fisheries off Northern
California, Oregon, and Washington.
When the CPS FMP was implemented no Pacific sardine fishery in
Oregon and Washington existed. The Council adopted the allocation
procedure included in the CPS FMP to protect the Monterey, California
fishery (in the northern subarea or Subarea A) from the possibility of
the fishery in Southern California (in the southern subarea or Subarea
B) catching the entire harvest guideline before Pacific sardine became
available in Monterey. As a result of the FMP's allocation procedure, a
fishing pattern developed whereby Pacific sardine was caught by the
Southern California fleet at the beginning of the year, by the Pacific
Northwest fleet in the summer, and by the Monterey fleet in the fall.
The fishing pattern led to the possibility that the fishery in the
northern subarea might preempt the fishery in the southern subarea. If
Pacific sardine remained unharvested in either subarea following the
reallocation on October 1, the FMP did not provide a procedure to make
further reallocations to any subarea to increase the likelihood of
achieving optimum yield (OY) in the Pacific sardine fishery.
The Council recognized that a process with more flexibility for
making allocation decisions was needed. Therefore, the Council
considered amending the framework process for implementing the CPS FMP
found at 50
[[Page 69503]]
CFR 660.517. At its November 2002 meeting in Foster City, CA, the
Council adopted a set of management alternatives to address the
allocation issue and directed its Coastal Pelagic Species Management
Team (Team) to analyze these alternatives. The primary goal was to
avoid closing any sector of the Pacific sardine fishery while a portion
of the harvest guideline remain unharvested.
At its meeting in Vancouver, Washington, on April 10, 2003, the
Council received reports from the CPS Advisory Subpanel (Subpanel),
Team, and public comments, and adopted an interim allocation framework
that: (1) changed the definition of subarea A and subarea B by moving
the geographic boundary between the two areas from Pt. Piedras Blancas
at 35[deg] 40' 00'' N. lat. to Pt. Arena at 39[deg] 00' 00'' N. lat.,
(2) moved the date when Pacific sardine that remain unharvested are
reallocated to Subarea A and Subarea B from October 1 to September 1,
(3) changed the percentage of the unharvested Pacific sardine that is
reallocated to Subarea A and Subarea B from 50 percent to both subareas
to 20 percent to Subarea A and 80 percent to Subarea B, and (4)
reallocated all unharvested Pacific sardine that remained on December 1
coastwide. This procedure was proposed to be in effect for 2003 and
2004, and for 2005 if the 2005 harvest guideline is at least 90 percent
of the 2003 harvest guideline.
Using the best available information, the interim allocation
framework was developed to address concerns for the short-term until
NMFS and the Council had sufficient time to develop a more
comprehensive, longer-term allocation framework. In order to achieve
optimal utilization and equitable allocation between the different
sectors of the Pacific sardine fishery, the Council tasked the Subpanel
to develop an initial range of allocation alternatives for a longer-
term allocation framework. The Subpanel adopted a range of alternatives
for the allocation of Pacific sardine at their meetings in August and
September 2004. At the November 2004 meeting the Council reviewed the
range of alternatives, and with some modification and additions,
forwarded nine alternatives to the Team for preliminary analysis. When
adopting a range of alternatives for long-term allocation in April
2005, the Council expressed an interest in having the flexibility to
revisit the proposed action in the near-term as the Pacific sardine
resource and the fisheries and markets that rely on it are dynamic and
difficult to predict.
At the April 2005 Council meeting the Council adopted seven of the
nine alternatives and sent those to the Team for further analysis.
Below is a summary of the seven forwarded alternatives given to the
Team for analysis including both a no action alternative and a status
quo alternative. If the Council chose to take no action, the allocation
framework would revert to original FMP (64 FR 69888, December 15, 1999)
formula that was in place before the regulatory amendment (69 FR 8572,
February 25, 2003) was implemented in 2003. Under status quo the
Council would have chosen to take action to extend the interim
allocation. The order of alternatives does not indicate rank or
priority. All alternatives (except No Action) used Point Arena,
California (39[deg] N. lat.) as the dividing line between the
allocation subareas. In order to present the alternatives in a clear
and comparable fashion the descriptions bullet the fishing season, the
initial allocation, and reallocations made at different points during
the fishing season.
No Action: FMP Allocation Framework
The allocation subareas are divided at Point Piedras Blancas,
California (35[deg] 40' N. lat.).
Season: January 1 - December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north, which includes
Monterey) and 66 percent to the Subarea B (Southern California).
Reallocation: On October 1, remaining unharvested portion of the
harvest guideline is pooled and reallocated 50 percent to Subarea A
(north) and 50 percent to Subarea B (south).
Status Quo: Interim Allocation Framework
Season: January 1 - December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to
Subarea B (south).
Reallocation: On September 1, 20 percent of the remaining
unharvested portion of the harvest guideline is reallocated to the
Subarea A (north) and 80 percent to Subarea B (south).
Second reallocation: On December 1, the remaining unharvested
portion of the harvest guideline is reallocated coastwide.
Alternative 1: Coastwide Allocation In Two Periods
Season: January 1 - December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 50 percent of the harvest
guideline is allocated coastwide.
Reallocation: On July 1, the remaining harvest guideline (50
percent plus any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is
allocated coastwide.
Alternative 2: Rejected by the Council
Alternative 3: Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods
Season: January 1 - December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 percent of the harvest
guideline is allocated coastwide.
Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline (plus
any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is allocated
coastwide.
Second reallocation: On October 1, 20 percent of the harvest
guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the first reallocation) is
reallocated coastwide.
Alternative 4: Allocation Formula Depends on the Size of the Harvest
Guideline
Season: January 1 - December 31
(a) The coastwide harvest guideline is greater than 100,000 mt:
Initial allocation: On January 1, 40 percent of the coastwide
harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 60 percent
to the Subarea B (south).
Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining unharvested portion of
the harvest guideline is pooled and allocated coastwide.
(b) The coastwide harvest guideline is less than 100,000 mt:
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the coastwide
harvest guideline is allocated to Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to
the Subarea B (south).
Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining unharvested portion of
the coastwide harvest guideline is pooled and 20 percent is allocated
to Subarea A (north) and 80 percent to the Subarea B (south).
Second reallocation: On November 1, any remaining unharvested
portion of the harvest guideline is again pooled and reallocated
coastwide.
Alternative 5: Rejected by the Council
Alternative 6: Transfer of Unused Allocations Between Subareas
Season: January 1 - December 31
Initial allocation (for 2006 only): On January 1, 40 percent of the
harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 60 percent
to the Subarea B (south).
Reallocation: On September 1, the remaining harvest guideline is
pooled and allocated coastwide.
Transfer Rules For Computing Subsequent-Year Allocations After the
[[Page 69504]]
initial year (2006) these rules dictate the allocations to each subarea
in each subsequent year:
Rule 1: The transfer of a portion of the harvest guideline from one
subarea to the other, for the purpose of recomputing allocation
percentages for the next year, occurs if the portion of a subarea's
allocation remaining uncaught at the end of the year is greater than
the transfer limits described in Rule 2.
Rule 2: If the harvest guideline is greater than 100,000 mt, the
transfer amount will be equal to 10 percent of the coastwide harvest
guideline for that year. When the coastwide harvest guideline is
100,000 mt or less, the transfer amount will be 5,000 mt.
Rule 3: The transfer amount is applied to the current-year
allocation for each subarea. The resulting numerical values are then
converted to percentages of the current-year coastwide harvest
guideline and used to determine the initial allocation for the
following year.
Rule 4: No subarea may initially be allocated more than 75 percent
of the coastwide harvest guideline.
Rule 5: The September 1 coastwide reallocation always applies.
Alternative 7: Equal Reallocation
Season: January 1 - December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 33 percent of the harvest
guideline is allocated to the Subarea A (north) and 66 percent to the
Subarea B (south).
Reallocation: On September 1, remaining harvest guideline is pooled
and 50 percent of the harvest guideline is allocated to the Subarea A
(north) and 50 percent to the Subarea B (south).
Second Reallocation: On November 1, any remaining unharvested
portion of the harvest guideline is again pooled and reallocated
coastwide.
At the June 2005 Council meeting in Foster City, CA, the Council
adopted a preferred option for the allocation of Pacific sardine that
creates a seasonal, coastwide allocation scheme. This preferred
alternative is a modified version of Alternative 3, which provides the
following allocation formula for the non-tribal share of the harvest
guideline:
Coastwide Allocation In Three Periods
Season: January 1 - December 31
Initial allocation: On January 1, 35 percent of the harvest
guideline is allocated coastwide.
Reallocation: On July 1, 40 percent of the harvest guideline (plus
any unharvested portion from the initial allocation) is allocated
coastwide.
Second reallocation: On September 15, 25 percent of the harvest
guideline (plus any unharvested portion from the first reallocation) is
reallocated coastwide.
The Council also recommended a review of the allocation formula in
2008.
Classification
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866.
At this time, NMFS has not determined that Amendment 11 that this
proposed rule would implement is consistent with the national standards
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and
other applicable laws. NMFS, in making that determination, will take
into account the data, views, and comments received during the comment
period.
An IRFA was prepared that describes the economic impact this
proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. The IRFA is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the IRFA follows:
A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the
legal basis for this action are contained in the SUMMARY and in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION sections of this proposed rule. This proposed
rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules.
There are no reporting, record-keeping, or other compliance
requirements of the proposed rule.
Approximately 104 vessels were permitted to operate in the Pacific
sardine fisheries off the U.S. West Coast in 2004; 63 vessels were
permitted in the Federal CPS limited entry fishery off California
(south of 39[deg] N. lat.), while 41 vessels were permitted in Oregon
and Washington's state Pacific sardine fisheries. All of these vessels
would be considered small businesses under the Small Business
Administration standards since the vessels do not have annual receipts
in excess of $3.5 million. Therefore, NMFS does not anticipate any
disproportionate economic impacts resulting between small and large
vessels under the proposed action. Additionally, this proposed action
is not likely to significantly affect (both positive and negative
effects) these small entities. The purpose of the action is to achieve
optimal utilization of the available harvest by all entities through an
equitable coastwide allocation. Therefore vessels in all regions should
have an equal opportunity to the resource.
The fleet as it exists in present day is not likely to change over
the 2005-2009 period because vessels from California could fish in the
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone off Oregon and Washington without a
respective state issued limited entry permit, but would have to land
their catches in California. Given the current technology and
operational aspects of the Pacific sardine fishery this would not be
practicable. Therefore, NMFS believes that these 63 and 41 vessels will
comprise the respective southern and northern subarea fleets in the
future. Under the preferred long-term allocation alternative, Pacific
sardine landings for CPS for the entire West Coast were projected to
increase: (1) 19,674 mt from the status quo over the 2005-2009 period,
with a corresponding increase in ex-vessel revenues of $3,076,891,
under a 136,000-mt harvest guideline, and a 10 percent annual growth
rate in landings for all fishery sectors over the 2005-2009 period
(defined as base case); (2) no change in total landings, but an
increase of $1,514,553 in ex-vessel revenues under a 72,000 mt harvest
guideline, and a 10- percent annual growth rate in landings for all
Pacific sardine fishery sectors over the 2005-2009 period (defined as
low harvest guideline case or); and, (3) no change in total landings or
in total ex-vessel revenues under a 200,000 mt harvest guideline, and a
10-percent annual growth rate in landings for all fishery sectors over
the 2005-2009 period (defined as high harvest guideline case).
NMFS anticipates a 10 percent annual growth rate per year based on
input from the Pacific sardine industry members as to what the Pacific
sardine market could accommodate. For the preferred alternative,
Pacific sardine landings in the northern subarea sardine fishery were
estimated to be 28,141 mt greater than the status quo with ex-vessel
revenues increasing by $3.8 million under the base case; a 34,592-mt
increase in landings and an increase of $4.7 million in ex-vessel
revenue under the low harvest guideline case; and a no increase in
landings or in ex-vessel revenue under the high harvest guideline case.
Landings in the southern subarea Pacific sardine fishery would decrease
by 8,467-mt and ex-vessel revenues would decrease by $743,181 relative
to the status quo under the base case; a decrease of 26,011 mt in
landings and $3.2 million in ex-vessel revenues under the low harvest
guideline case; and, no changes under the high harvest guideline case.
For the 63 CPS limited entry vessels that would be eligible to
participate in the southern subarea Pacific sardine fishery, the 8,467
mt loss in landings over the period under the base case, preferred
alternative, represents a potential decrease in ex-vessel revenues of
$11,797 per vessel from the status quo alternative, which would be 2.6
[[Page 69505]]
percent loss in each vessel's projected revenues. For the preferred
alternative under the low harvest guideline case, vessels in the
southern subarea fishery stand to lose $50,497 each, a 15.3-percent
decrease from the status quo, and under the high harvest guideline case
there would be no change in vessel earnings from the status quo. These
estimates may understate the actual earnings impacts per vessel since
only 61 vessels participated in the southern subarea fishery during
2004.
For the 41 vessels that could participate in the northern subarea
fishery each would stand to gain $93,173 in ex-vessel revenues over the
period under the base case, preferred alternative, a 10.6-percent
increase from the status quo alternative. For the preferred alternative
under the low harvest guideline case, vessels in the northern subarea
fishery gain $114,533 each, a 26.4-percent increase from the status
quo, and under the high harvest guideline case there would be no change
from the status quo. These estimates may understate the actual earnings
impacts per vessel since only 34 vessels recorded landings in the
northern subarea fishery during 2004.
The Council considered six alternatives to the preferred
alternative in addition to the status quo alternative. All alternatives
resulted in ex-vessel revenue gains of various magnitudes for the
fishery as a whole except the ``No Action'' alternative in all cases,
and alternative 4.b under the low harvest guideline case. Although the
proposed alternative did not yield the greatest overall gain, with the
least negative impacts to individual vessels from any one region, it
was deemed most equitable by industry members when considered relative
to the full range of conservation and management objectives
constituting optimum yield under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries,
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives, Indians, Northern Mariana Islands,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 9, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR part 660 as follows:
PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES AND IN THE WESTERN
PACIFIC
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 660.502, the definition for ``Initial annual harvest
guideline'' is added, in alphabetical order, to read as follows:
Sec. 660.502 Definitions.
* * * * *
Initial harvest guideline means a specified numerical harvest
objective set at the beginning of the fishing season.
* * * * *
3. Section 660.509 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 660.509 Closure of directed fishery.
* * * * *
(a) When the annual harvest guideline for either Pacific sardine or
Pacific mackerel is reached, the directed fishery for Pacific sardine
or Pacific mackerel shall be closed until the beginning of the next
fishing season as stated in Sec. 660.510 (a) and (b). The Regional
Administrator shall announce in the Federal Register the date of
closure of the directed fishery for Pacific sardine or Pacific
mackerel. Upon such closure, Pacific mackerel may be harvested
incidental to the directed fishery for Pacific sardine to the extent
permitted by the annual harvest guideline. The Regional Administrator
shall announce in the Federal Register the amount of the incidental
trip limit, if any, that was recommended by the Council and approved by
NMFS.
(b) When the allocation and reallocation levels for Pacific sardine
in Sec. 660.511 (f)-(h) are reached, the Pacific sardine fishery shall
be closed until either it re-opens per the allocation scheme in Sec.
660.511 (g) and (h) or the beginning of the next fishing season as
stated in Sec. 660.510 (a). The Regional Administrator shall announce
in the Federal Register the date of the closure of the directed fishery
for Pacific sardine.
4. In Sec. 660.511 paragraph (f) is revised, and paragraphs (g),
and (h) are added to read as follows:
Sec. 660.511 Catch restrictions.
* * * * *
(f) On January 1, 35 percent of the initial harvest guideline for
Pacific sardine is allocated coastwide within the fishery management
area.
(g) On July 1, 40 percent of the initial harvest guideline for
Pacific sardine plus the remaining unharvested portion of the January 1
allocation in (f) is allocated coastwide within the fishery management
area.
(h) On September 15, 25 percent of the initial harvest guideline
for Pacific sardine plus the remaining unharvested portion of the July
1 allocation is allocated coastwide within the fishery management area.
[FR Doc. 05-22729 Filed 11-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S