Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod Allocations in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 5653-5674 [07-538]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Treaty to contact NMFS. Instead, NMFS
relied on a lengthy list created from
information provided by industry that
was not readily verifiable nor did it
indicate whether each vessel owner
actually wished to fish for albacore tuna
in Canada for any given year. The result
was that NMFS was not able to provide
the Canadian Government an updated
vessel list of vessels owners who
intended to fish for albacore tuna in
Canada for a particular fishing season.
With this proposed rule, NMFS would
amend 50 CFR 300.172 to state
explicitly that the vessel list is effective
for only one calender year and will be
recompiled beginning on January 1 of
each year. Additional vessels may be
added to the list throughout the year in
accordance with 50 CFR 300.172.
Classification
The Regional Administrator, NMFS
Southwest Region, determined that this
proposed rule is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, 16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order (E.O.)
12866.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration that this
proposed rule, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities as
follows:
A fishing vessel is considered a
‘‘small’’ business by the U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) if its
annual receipts are not in excess of $4.0
million (NAICS Code 114111). Because
all of the vessels fishing for HMS have
annual receipts below $4.0 million, they
would all be considered small
businesses under the SBA standards.
Therefore this rule will not create
disproportionate costs between small
and large vessels/businesses. Based on
historic interest and recent U.S.
participation in 2006, NMFS anticipates
that the rule could impact
approximately 100 vessels annually.
The revision of the methodology for
developing the list of vessels eligible to
fish for albacore tuna in Canadian
waters under the U.S. Canada Albacore
Tuna Treaty presents little burden to the
public. The submission of a request by
a vessel owner with the required
information as a result of this new
regulation is expected to present a
minimal burden. The public reporting
burden for requesting to be placed on
the list of vessels eligible to fish in
Canadian waters is estimated to average
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
0.08 hours per vessel or about 5 minutes
each, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
The only expected cost to a vessel
owner requesting to be on the eligible
list will be the cost associated with
contacting NMFS by mail, fax, phone, or
email. NMFS also does not anticipate a
drop in profitability based on this rule,
as it should not have a significant effect
on the fishermen’s ability to harvest
HMS. Therefore, the proposed action, if
implemented, will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Based on the analysis above, the Chief
Counsel for Regulation of the
Department of Commerce has
determined that there will not be a
significant economic impact to a
substantial number of these small
entities. As a result, a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required and
none has been prepared.
This proposed rule for revising the
methodology for developing the list of
vessels eligible to fish for albacore tuna
in Canadian waters under the U.S.
Canada Albacore Tuna Treaty presents
contains a collection-of-information
requirement subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) that has been
approved by OMB under control
number 0648–0492. Public reporting
burden for requesting to be placed on
the list of vessels eligible to fish in
Canadian waters is estimated to average
0.08 hours per vessel or about 5 minutes
each, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding this burden
estimate, or any other aspect of this data
collection, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, to NMFS (see
ADDRESSES) and by e-mail to
DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to
(202) 395–7285.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, nor shall any person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number.
Dated: February 1, 2007.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator For
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, NMFS proposes to amend
part 300 as follows:
PART 300—INTERNATIONAL
FISHERIES REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 300
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 401, Pub. L. 108–219, 118
Stat. 616 (16 U.S.C. 1821 note).
2. Section 300.172 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 300.172
Vessel list.
The ‘‘vessel list’’ is the list of U.S.
vessels that are authorized to fish under
the Treaty as amended in 2002. Only a
vessel on the list for at least 7 days may
engage in fishing in Canadian waters
under the Treaty as amended in 2002.
The owner of any U.S. vessel that
wishes to be eligible to fish for albacore
tuna under the Treaty as amended in
2002 must provide the Regional
Administrator or his designee with the
vessel name, the owner’s name and
address, phone number where the
owner can be reached, the U.S. Coast
Guard documentation number (or state
registration number if not documented),
and vessel operator (if different from the
owner) and his or her address and
phone number. On the date that NMFS
receives a request that includes all the
required information, NMFS will place
the vessel on the annual vessel list.
NMFS will notify fishermen by a
confirmation letter or email of the date
the vessel was placed on the list.
Because the vessel list will revert to zero
vessels on December 31 of each year, the
required information must be provided
in the manner specified on an annual
basis.
[FR Doc. E7–2045 Filed 2–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 300
Fisheries, High seas fishing,
International agreements, Permits,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5653
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5654
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
socioeconomic and community factors,
thus reducing the need for reallocations
during the fishing year (inseason). This
proposed rule also is necessary to
partially implement recent changes to
the Magnuson-Stevens Act that require
a total allocation of 10.7 percent of the
TAC of each directed fishery to the CDQ
Program starting January 1, 2008. This
action is intended to promote the goals
and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, the FMP, and other applicable
laws.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 061206324–6324–01; I.D.
112006I]
RIN 0648–AU48
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod
Allocations in the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a proposed rule
that would implement Amendment 85
to the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area
(FMP) and that would implement recent
changes to the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). If
approved, Amendment 85 would
modify the current allocations of Bering
Sea and Aleutian Islands management
area (BSAI) Pacific cod total allowable
catch (TAC) among various harvest
sectors and seasonal apportionments
thereof. This action also would establish
a hierarchy for reallocating projected
unharvested amounts of Pacific cod
from certain sectors to other sectors,
revise catcher/processor sector
definitions, modify the management of
Pacific cod incidental catch that occurs
in other groundfish fisheries, eliminate
the Pacific cod nonspecified reserve,
adjust the seasonal allowances of Pacific
cod, subdivide among sectors the
annual prohibited species catch (PSC)
limits currently apportioned to the
Pacific cod trawl and nontrawl fisheries,
and modify the sideboard restrictions
for American Fisheries Act (AFA)
catcher/processor (CP) vessels. In
addition, this proposed rule would
increase the percentage of the BSAI
Pacific cod TAC apportioned to the
Community Development Quota (CDQ)
Program. Amendment 85 is necessary to
reduce uncertainty about the availability
of yearly harvests within sectors caused
by reallocations, and to maintain
stability among sectors in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery. This would be
accomplished by establishing
allocations that more closely reflect
historical use by sector than do current
allocations while considering
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
Comments must be received no
later than March 26, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer.
Comments may be submitted by:
• Hand delivery: 709 West 9th Street,
Room 420A, Juneau, AK;
• E-mail: 0648–AU48–PRAMD85@noaa.gov. Include in the
subject line the following document
identifier: ‘‘Pacific cod RIN 0648
AU48.’’ E-mail comments, with or
without attachments, are limited to 5
megabytes;
• Fax: 907–586–7557;
• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802–1668; or
• Webform at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions at that site for
submitting comments.
Copies of Amendment 85 and the
Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA)
prepared for this action are available
from NMFS at the above address or from
the NMFS Alaska Region website at
https://www.fakr.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Becky Carls, 907–586–7228 or
becky.carls@noaa.gov.
DATES:
NMFS
manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone of the BSAI
under the FMP. The North Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council)
prepared the FMP under the authority of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C.
1801 et seq. Regulations governing U.S.
fisheries and implementing the FMP
appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679.
The Council has submitted
Amendment 85 for review by the
Secretary of Commerce, and a notice of
availability of the FMP amendment was
published in the Federal Register on
December 7, 2006, (71 FR 70943) with
comments on the FMP amendment
invited through February 5, 2007.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Background and Need for Action
NMFS uses TACs to manage the
harvest of groundfish species in the
BSAI as one management tool to ensure
sustainable fisheries. The FMP and its
implementing regulations require
NMFS, after consultation with the
Council, to annually specify the TAC for
each target species and for the ‘‘other
species’’ category governed by the FMP.
The Council develops TAC
recommendations based on the
acceptable biological catch (ABC) for
each stock of fish and other
socioeconomic factors. The ABC is
based on the status of the stock,
environmental conditions, and other
ecological factors.
The FMP requires a TAC to be less
than or equal to the ABC for each fish
stock. Between 1991 and 1994, between
1998 and 2001, and in 2005, the Pacific
cod TACs were set equal to their ABCs.
Thus, typically all the BSAI Pacific cod
that is available for harvest in a
particular fishing year is completely
allocated. The Pacific cod TAC
allocations and apportionments for 2006
and 2007 are listed in Table 5 of the
groundfish specifications published
March 3, 2006 (71 FR 10900), and may
be changed as necessary during any
fishing year pursuant to 50 CFR
679.20(a)(7)(ii) and 679.25(a). Final
2006 and 2007 harvest specifications
implemented a 2006 BSAI Pacific cod
TAC of 194,000 mt, which equaled the
2006 ABC for Pacific cod. Shortly after
publication, this TAC was adjusted
downward to 188,180 mt (71 FR 13777,
March 17, 2006) to accommodate a new
Pacific cod fishery in State of Alaska
waters in the Aleutian Islands and to
avoid exceeding the ABC.
The current regulations provide for
the overall TAC of BSAI Pacific cod,
after subtraction of reserves, to be
subdivided or allocated among eight
non-CDQ fishing industry sectors based
on the type of fishing gear used (50 CFR
679.20(a)(7)). Basically, these gear
sectors include trawl gear, fixed gear
(hook-and-line and pot), and jig gear.
These basic allocations are further
subdivided between catcher/processor
vessels (CPs) that process their catch
and catcher vessels (CVs) that catch fish
but do not process it. Most allocations
are further apportioned between
seasons. The purpose of these
allocations and apportionments is to
prevent one industry sector from
unfairly affecting the harvesting
opportunities of other sectors and to
ensure temporal dispersion of harvest to
protect Steller sea lions (SSLs).
Currently, the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC is fully distributed among the
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
following eight competing harvest
sectors: jig, fixed gear (pot and hookand-line gear) CVs less than 60 ft (18.3
m) length overall (hereafter, <60 ft
LOA), hook-and-line CVs greater than or
equal to 60 ft LOA (hereafter, ≥60 ft
LOA), hook-and-line CPs, pot CVs ≥60
ft LOA, pot CPs, trawl CPs, and trawl
CVs. Several FMP amendments,
implemented beginning in 1994, have
allocated Pacific cod among these
sectors. The previous and current
5655
allocations, and those proposed under
Amendment 85, are summarized in
Table 1. The amendments are described
in more detail below.
TABLE 1. PERCENT SECTOR ALLOCATIONS BY AMENDMENT AND YEAR IMPLEMENTED
Amend. 24
1994
Sector
Jig
Amend. 46
1997
Amend. 64
2000
Amend. 77
2004 (Current)
Proposed
Amend. 85
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.4
44.0
51.0
0.7
0.7
2.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
Hook-and-line CP
40.8
40.8
48.7
Pot CV ≥60 ft LOA
9.3
7.6
8.4
1.7
1.5
23.5
2.3
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft LOA
Hook-and-line CV ≥60 ft LOA
Pot CP
AFA trawl CP
54.0
23.5
23.5
Non-AFA trawl CP
13.4
Trawl CV
23.5
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
BSAI Pacific Cod Allocation History
In the early years of the fishery, BSAI
Pacific cod was an open access fishery
prosecuted primarily by trawl gear.
Under open access management, Pacific
cod was not allocated among competing
fishermen. As the market value of
Pacific cod increased with the removal
of foreign and joint venture fisheries in
1990, the domestic fixed gear sector
(including pot and hook-and-line gear)
began to increase its harvest of the TAC.
Hook-and-line CPs, in particular,
contributed to the growth of the fixed
gear sector’s use of Pacific cod TAC.
Any consideration of rationalizing the
Pacific cod fishery during the 1990s
through individual fishing quotas (IFQs)
or other market-based allocation
schemes was strongly opposed by the
fixed gear sector as its share of the
Pacific cod TAC was growing. At this
stage of the industry’s development,
sector allocations emerged as a policy
more acceptable to the Pacific cod fleet
than IFQs or similar rationalization
policies.
A sector allocation is based on the
principle that good fences make good
neighbors. The fence in this case is the
division of the TAC among competing
harvesting sectors. Each sector is
allocated its own portion of the TAC
that is protected from incursions by
other sectors. Federal regulations
require a sector to stop conducting
directed fishing for Pacific cod when its
allocation is exhausted, even if TAC
allocated to other sectors remains
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
23.5
unharvested. Although sector
allocations do not prevent a race-for-fish
by competing fishermen within a sector,
they do bring some short-term stability
and certainty to fishermen within the
sectors as compared to having no sector
allocations. This was the policy
rationale for the Council’s first
recommendation for sector allocations
of Pacific cod TAC in Amendment 24.
In 1994, NMFS began to allocate the
Pacific cod TAC with the
implementation of BSAI Amendment 24
to the FMP (59 FR 4009, January 28,
1994). The allocations roughly
represented the harvests of the trawl
and fixed gear sectors during 1991
through 1993. Although the 2.0 percent
jig sector allocation exceeded the
historical harvest by this sector, it was
intended to allow for growth in the
sector. Competition within the trawl
and fixed gear sectors eventually led to
the Council recommending, in
subsequent amendments, further
subdivisions of the allocations to these
sectors to provide the desired stability
within the subdivided sectors.
Amendment 46, implemented in 1997
(61 FR 59029, November 20, 1996),
further split the trawl allocation equally
between CVs and CPs. The action also
included specific authority for NMFS to
annually reallocate among the various
sectors, if necessary, any portion of the
Pacific cod allocations that were
projected to remain unused.
After Amendment 46 was
implemented, members of the fishing
industry asked the Council to further
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
23.5
22.1
allocate Pacific cod in the BSAI among
the various fixed gear sectors. The
Council developed Amendment 64
which further apportioned the 51
percent allocated to the fixed gear sector
into four new sectors (see Table 1).
NMFS approved Amendment 64 and it
was implemented September 1, 2000 (65
FR 51553, August 24, 2000). Because
Amendment 64 was scheduled to expire
at the end of 2003, Amendment 77 was
initiated to continue or modify the fixed
gear sectors’ allocations beyond 2003.
The current allocations are those that
were adopted by the Council and
approved by NMFS under Amendment
77 (68 FR 49416, August 18, 2003).
Amendment 77 continued the same
overall fixed gear sector allocations as
under Amendment 64, except for a new
apportionment between the pot gear CV
and CP sectors. Currently, hook-and-line
and pot CVs <60 ft LOA are allowed to
fish under the general hook-and-line CV
allocation and general pot CV
allocation, respectively, when these
fisheries are open. When these fisheries
are closed, the <60 ft LOA sector harvest
accrues to the <60 ft LOA hook-and-line
and pot CV allocation.
The harvest on which the percentage
allocations were based under
Amendments 64 and 77 in the fixed gear
sectors excluded the harvest of Pacific
cod that was reallocated from other gear
sectors. Except for the pot gear sector
split, the percentage allocations under
Amendment 77 closely represented the
harvests for fixed gear in this fishery
during 1995 through 1999, with an
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5656
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
additional allocation for CVs <60 ft
LOA, to allow for growth in the small
boat sector. The pot gear sector
allocations were based on harvests from
1998 through 2001.
While the Council was considering
adjustments to the Pacific cod
allocations to the non-CDQ sectors
under what became Amendment 64, the
Council adopted and NMFS approved
Amendment 39 in 1998 (63 FR 8356,
February 19, 1998). Under Amendment
39, a percentage of various groundfish
species including Pacific cod was
allocated to the CDQ Program. From
1998 onward, 7.5 percent of the BSAI
Pacific cod TAC was deducted for the
CDQ reserve. The remainder of the TAC
after the deduction for the CDQ reserve
is referred to as the non-CDQ TAC.
When the multispecies CDQ Program
was implemented in 1998, the non-CDQ
Pacific cod TAC was allocated in
accordance with the percentages
established by Amendment 46, and
since then as further modified by
Amendments 64 and 77.
History of Pacific Cod Reallocations
Under the existing allocations, one or
more sectors are typically unable to
harvest their annual allocation of the
Pacific cod TAC. Section 301(a)(1) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, also known as
National Standard 1, states,
‘‘Conservation and management
measures shall prevent overfishing
while achieving, on a continuing basis,
the optimum yield from each fishery for
the United States fishing industry.’’
Thus, to provide an opportunity for the
full harvest of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC, existing allocations of Pacific
cod that are projected to be unharvested
by some sectors are annually reallocated
by NMFS to other sectors. Current
regulations governing the reallocation of
BSAI Pacific cod are found at
§ 679.20(a)(7)(ii).
Since BSAI Pacific cod sector
allocations have been in effect, NMFS
has reallocated Pacific cod each year
from the trawl and jig sectors to fixed
gear sectors. In 2002 and in 2004,
reallocations also were made from the
pot gear sectors to the hook-and-line CP
sector. Reallocations within gear types
(e.g., trawl CPs to trawl CVs, or hookand-line CVs to hook-and-line CPs) have
occurred less frequently and in lower
amounts. As shown in Table 2, the
majority of reallocations, in terms of
metric tons, have been from the trawl
sectors to the hook-and-line CPs
between 2000 and 2004. The starting
point for this table is the year 2000
because that was the first year in which
the fixed gear allocation was split
among the hook-and-line CP, hook-andline CV, pot gear, and <60 ft LOA fixed
gear sectors.
TABLE 2. AVERAGE BSAI PACIFIC COD REALLOCATION BY SECTOR, 2000–2004
Sector
Initial allocation (mt)
Reallocation as percent of initial
allocation
Reallocation (mt)
Jig
3,715
-3,309
-89%
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft LOA
1,312
309
24%
283
120
42%
Hook-and-line CP
75,006
16,861
22%
Pot gear
17,244
-739
-4%
Trawl CP
43,649
-8,483
-19%
Trawl CV
43,649
-4,760
-11%
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Hook-and-line CV ≥60 ft LOA
Unused seasonal allowances specified
for the jig sector are reallocated during
each of its three seasons. All other gear
sector reallocations usually occur in the
fall because unused seasonal allowances
that remain unharvested earlier in the
year are rolled over to each sector’s
subsequent season. Typically,
reallocations from trawl to fixed gear
sectors occur in October and November,
and always during the trawl C season
(June 10 to November 1).
NMFS reallocates unused Pacific cod
allocations for a variety of reasons.
Reallocations from the jig sector are
primarily due to insufficient effort in
that sector in the BSAI. Several reasons
are commonly cited for trawl
reallocations including closure of the
directed trawl fisheries due to reaching
the halibut PSC allowance, relatively
high annual allocations in alternative
trawl fisheries such as pollock (for AFA
vessels), and high value alternative
trawl fisheries such as yellowfin sole,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
rock sole, and flathead sole (for nonAFA trawl CPs). Additionally, under
SSL mitigation measures which started
in 2001, the creation of a 20 percent
seasonal apportionment in the C season
for trawl gear led to trawl reallocations.
The trawl sectors’ inability to harvest
their total allocations resulted from the
increased difficulty in catching Pacific
cod with trawl gear later in the year
when those fish are less aggregated
(lower catch per unit effort). Prior to the
SSL mitigation measures, the trawl gear
sectors were allowed to harvest their
total Pacific cod allocation earlier in the
year.
The increased difficulty in harvesting
Pacific cod in the second half of the year
is not unique to the trawl sector. All
gear sectors have increased difficulty
harvesting Pacific cod later in the year
when those fish are less aggregated.
Also, weather is a significant factor for
the vessels in smaller CV sectors in the
fall season. The hook-and-line sectors
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
are limited by halibut bycatch in the
second half of the year. These sectors do
not have a halibut bycatch allowance
from June 10 to August 15 under the
annual harvest specifications which
effectively closes directed fishing for
Pacific cod during this period. The
amount of Pacific cod the fixed gear
sectors could harvest in the first half of
the year was reduced in 2001 as part of
the SSL protection measures. The hookand-line sector would prefer to harvest
its Pacific cod allocation earlier in the
year when its incidental take of seabirds
is lower.
In developing Amendment 85, the
Council determined that current
allocations do not correspond with
actual dependence and use by the
existing sectors, as demonstrated by the
need for annual reallocations.
Reallocations maintain a level of
uncertainty for some sectors regarding
the amount of Pacific cod available for
harvest. The Council expects that
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
uncertainty to decrease due to the
revisions to the Pacific cod non-CDQ
allocations under this proposed rule.
Amendment 85 History
Amendment 85 is the most recent
action by the Council in a long history
of actions to allocate BSAI Pacific cod
TAC among competing sectors as
described above and in Table 1. The
development of Amendment 85 began
in October 2002 when the Council
initiated discussions regarding the
allocation of certain BSAI groundfish
species to the non-AFA trawl CP sector.
In February 2003, the Council
considered a vastly expanded program
for this sector, known as Amendment
80, to establish a multispecies
cooperative intended to facilitate greater
retention improvements, allocate PSC,
and address a number of sector
allocation issues that would arise from
a stand-alone allocation and cooperative
(for the non-AFA trawl CP sector). In
April 2003, the Council further
expanded Amendment 80 to include
allocations of non-pollock species and
PSC to ten sectors operating in the BSAI
as a means to minimize potential
impacts on sectors that might arise from
any direct allocations and cooperatives
provided to the non-AFA trawl CP
sector alone.
Growing demand for Pacific cod, a
fully exploited fishery, and other
distributional concerns among sectors
led the Council to consider a separate
action to revise allocations of Pacific
cod among the many BSAI groundfish
sectors. After further consideration,
public testimony, and preliminary
analyses, the Council simplified
Amendment 80 in October 2004 to
provide allocations only to the non-AFA
trawl CP sector and removed allocation
of Pacific cod from that proposed
program. The intent of the Council was
to streamline Amendment 80 and shift
it back to its original intent, to provide
the non-AFA trawl CP sector with a tool
to reduce groundfish and PSC discards
and improve retention. The Council
then initiated a new plan amendment,
which became Amendment 85, to alter
the current BSAI Pacific cod allocations.
In December 2004, the Council
reviewed a discussion paper outlining
prior Council actions regarding BSAI
Pacific cod allocations, the relevant
problem statements associated with
these past actions, and potential
decision points related to structuring
new alternatives and options for
analysis. Upon review of the discussion
paper, the Council approved a problem
statement and a document outlining
draft components and options for the
new amendment. The problem
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
statement and suite of alternatives and
options have been revised several times
since that initial discussion. The
Council’s final problem statement
focuses on revising the BSAI Pacific cod
allocations to all sectors (trawl, jig,
hook-and-line, pot, and CDQ):
The BSAI Pacific cod fishery is fully
utilized and has been allocated among gear
groups and to sectors within gear groups. The
current allocations among trawl, jig, and
fixed gear were implemented in 1997
(Amendment 46) and the CDQ allocation was
implemented in 1998. These allocations are
overdue for review. Harvest patterns have
varied significantly among the sectors
resulting in annual inseason reallocations of
TAC. As a result, the current allocations do
not correspond with actual dependency and
use by sectors.
Participants in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery
who have made significant investments and
have a long-term dependence on the resource
need stability in the allocations to the trawl,
jig, fixed gear, and CDQ sectors. To reduce
uncertainty and provide stability, allocations
should be adjusted to better reflect historic
use by sector. The basis for determining
sector allocations will be catch history as
well as consideration of socio-economic and
community factors.
As other fisheries in the BSAI and GOA are
incrementally rationalized, historical
participants in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery
may be put at a disadvantage. Each sector in
the BSAI Pacific cod fishery currently has
different degrees of license requirements and
levels of participation. Allocations to the
sector level are a necessary step on the path
towards comprehensive rationalization.
Prompt action is needed to maintain stability
in the BSAI Pacific cod fisheries.
While the FMP does not have a sunset
provision nor regulatory requirement to
review or modify the sector allocations,
the Council’s motion on Amendment 46
included a provision to review the
overall gear sector allocations four years
after implementation. That review,
originally intended at the end of 2000,
occurred with Amendment 85.
Description of the Proposed Action
This amendment is intended by the
Council to modify the sector allocations
currently in place to better reflect actual
dependency and use by sector, in part
by basing the allocations on each
sector’s historical retained catch. One of
the fundamental issues identified in the
Council’s problem statement is the need
to revise the existing allocations to
better reflect actual historical catch by
sector, thus reducing the need for
frequent and significant reallocations of
quota toward the end of the year from
sectors that are unable or otherwise do
not intend to harvest their entire
allocation. Thus, the catch history on
which the proposed allocations were
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5657
partially based included Pacific cod that
was reallocated from one sector to
another due to the first sector’s
projected inability to harvest its entire
allocation by the end of the year. The
intent of the Council under Amendment
85 is to establish direct allocations for
each specified sector in the BSAI Pacific
cod fishery, in order to protect the
relative historical catch distribution
among those sectors.
However, there are noted exceptions
to basing the allocations solely on catch
history. The problem statement asserts
that in addition to catch history,
socioeconomic and community
concerns should be the basis for
determining sector allocations.
Amendment 85 would establish BSAI
Pacific cod allocations to the jig sector,
the <60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector, and
the CDQ sector that are based on
identified percentages of the TAC, and
not actual catch history. This action
would establish allocations to both the
jig sector and to the <60 ft LOA fixed
gear CV sector that are greater than
those sectors’ average catch histories.
The allocations to the small boat sectors
are intended by the Council to expand
entry-level, local opportunities in the
BSAI Pacific cod fishery. In general,
however, the Council’s proposed
allocations of Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC
are intended to formally institutionalize
the historical pattern of utilization of
this resource.
The Council also considered more
refined allocations to the BSAI Pacific
cod sectors, by evaluating the potential
for establishing separate and distinct
allocations for the non-AFA trawl CP
and AFA trawl CP sector and the nonAFA trawl CV and AFA trawl CV
sectors. The trawl CP sectors currently
have a combined BSAI Pacific cod
allocation of 23.5 percent of the nonCDQ BSAI Pacific cod TAC, as do the
trawl CV sectors. Thus, all trawl gear
combined currently receives 47 percent
of the non-CDQ BSAI Pacific cod TAC.
The Council adopted Amendment 85
in April 2006. If approved by the
Secretary of Commerce, Amendment 85
would modify the following provisions
in the FMP: (a) sector allocations of
BSAI Pacific cod TAC, (b) TAC
deductions for incidental catch
allowances of Pacific cod in other target
fisheries, (c) the groundfish reserve for
Pacific cod, (d) the Pacific cod
allocation to the CDQ Program, and (e)
the appendices of the FMP by adding a
new appendix that summarizes
applicable provisions of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2005 (Public Law 108–447). Because the
Amendment 85 sector allocations
cannot be implemented mid-year, the
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5658
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
final rule implementing Amendment 85,
if approved, would be effective the
following January 1st. Thus, the earliest
effective date for the rule implementing
Amendment 85 would be January 1,
2008.
This proposed rule would make the
following changes in regulations for the
management of the BSAI directed
Pacific cod fishery:
• Increase the percentage of the BSAI
Pacific cod TAC apportioned to the CDQ
Program.
• Revise the allocations of BSAI
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC among
various gear sectors.
• Modify the management of Pacific
cod incidental catch that occurs in other
groundfish fisheries.
• Eliminate the Pacific cod
nonspecified reserve.
• Establish a hierarchy for the
reallocation of projected unused sector
allocations to other sectors.
• Adjust the seasonal allowances of
Pacific cod to various sectors.
• Subdivide among sectors the annual
PSC limits apportioned to the Pacific
cod trawl and hook-and-line gear
fisheries.
• Modify the sideboard restrictions for
Pacific cod that are applied to the CP
vessels listed as eligible under the AFA.
• Revise the definition for AFA trawl
catcher/processor and add definitions
for hook-and-line catcher/processor,
non-AFA trawl catcher/processor, and
pot catcher/processor.
In developing Amendment 85, the
Council considered dividing the Pacific
cod TAC in the BSAI between the
Bering Sea (BS) and Aleutian Islands
(AI) subareas. At its April 2006 meeting,
the Council voted to remove this action
from Amendment 85 and initiate a new
analysis that would examine additional
alternative approaches to apportioning
sector allocations between the two
subareas. If conservation of the Pacific
cod resource requires separate TACs for
the BS and AI subareas before the
Council adopts and NMFS approves a
different approach to apportioning
Pacific cod sector allocations between
the two subareas, NMFS would apply
the same percentages of the sector
allocations to each subarea as in the
overall BSAI allocations in existence at
that time.
Recent Legislation Affecting the
Proposed Rule
On December 8, 2004, the President
signed into law the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law
108–447)(Act). With respect to fisheries
off Alaska, the Act establishes catcher
processor sector definitions for
participation in (1) the catcher processor
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
subsectors of the BSAI non-pollock
groundfish fisheries, and (2) the BSAI
Catcher Processor Capacity Reduction
Program. The following subsectors are
defined in section 219(a) of the Act:
AFA trawl catcher processor; non-AFA
trawl catcher processor; longline catcher
processor; and pot catcher processor.
Section 219(a) of the Act also defines
the ‘‘non-pollock groundfish fishery’’ as
target species of Atka mackerel, flathead
sole, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch,
rock sole, turbot, or yellowfin sole
harvested in the BSAI. Thus, the Act
provides the qualification criteria that
each participant in the CP subsectors
must meet in order to operate as a CP
in the BSAI non-pollock groundfish
fishery, or participate in the BSAI
Catcher Processor Capacity Reduction
Program, or both.
Because Amendment 85 would
allocate Pacific cod (a non-pollock
groundfish fishery under the Act) to CPs
operating in the BSAI, this proposed
rule includes new or revised definitions
for AFA trawl CP, hook-and-line CP,
non-AFA trawl CP, and pot CP,
consistent with the provisions of the
Act.
The Act includes numerous
provisions that are not related to the
management of groundfish and crab
fisheries off Alaska. Therefore, this
proposed rule includes in regulatory
text only those portions of the Act
related to eligibility in catcher processor
subsectors. The portions of the Act
authorizing and governing the
development of the BSAI Catcher
Processor Capacity Reduction Program
are not provided in the proposed rule.
On July 11, 2006, the President signed
into law the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2006 (Public Law
109–241), that, among other things,
completely revised the CDQ Program
statutory text at section 305(i)(1) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. Specifically,
section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I) required that
most of the allocations to the CDQ
Program, including Pacific cod, increase
from 7.5 percent of the TAC to a 10
percent directed fishing allocation upon
the establishment of certain types of
fishery management programs,
including sector allocations in a fishery.
Because Amendment 85, if approved,
would establish sector allocations in the
BSAI Pacific cod fishery, the proposed
FMP amendment language and the
proposed rule for Amendment 85
submitted to the Secretary by the
Council included provisions consistent
with the requirements of section
305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I). As noted earlier,
NMFS published the notice of
availability for Amendment 85 in the
Federal Register on December 7, 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
On January 12, 2007, the President
signed into law the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2006 (MagnusonStevens Reauthorization Act) (Public
Law 109–479) that, among other things,
amended section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I). This
section now requires that most of the
allocations to the CDQ Program,
including Pacific cod, increase to ‘‘a
total allocation (directed and nontarget
combined) of 10.7 percent effective
January 1, 2008.’’ Section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)
also states that the total allocations
under section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I) may not
be exceeded.
Because of the changes to the CDQ
Program allocations brought about by
the Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization
Act, NMFS determined that the
proposed rule for Amendment 85 as
originally submitted by the Council was
no longer consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. On January 17,
2006, NMFS notified the Council in
writing of the inconsistencies and
provided the Council with
recommendations on revisions that
would make the proposed rule
consistent with the new provisions of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Council
revised the proposed rule and submitted
it to NMFS for reevaluation on January
19, 2007. This proposed rule reflects the
revisions made by the Council in its
January 19, 2007, submission.
Additional information on the
proposed changes to the CDQ Program
follow.
Allocation of Pacific Cod to the CDQ
Program
The Western Alaska CDQ Program
was implemented in November 1992 as
part of the inshore/offshore allocations
of pollock in the BSAI. Originally, the
CDQ Program established a CDQ reserve
to which one half of the non-specific
reserve of 15 percent of the pollock TAC
was allocated. Hence, the original CDQ
reserve was 7.5 percent of the BSAI
pollock TAC. The CDQ Program has
since been amended several times and
now, in addition to pollock, the CDQ
reserve includes allocations of halibut,
crab, and most of the remaining
groundfish species in the BSAI,
including Pacific cod. The 7.5 percent
allocation of BSAI Pacific cod to the
CDQ reserve was established when the
multispecies CDQ reserves were
implemented in 1998. The current
percentages of TAC allocated to the
CDQ reserves are as follows: 10 percent
of pollock; 10 percent of crab species
(with the exception of Norton Sound red
king crab at 7.5 percent); 20 percent of
fixed gear sablefish; a range of 20
percent to 100 percent of halibut,
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
depending on the area; and 7.5 percent
of most groundfish species and species
groups, including Pacific cod. Pro-rata
shares of prohibited species are also
allocated to the prohibited species
quota, or PSQ, reserve. Under the
adjusted March 2006 Pacific cod TAC,
14,114 mt of Pacific cod, the equivalent
of 7.5 percent of the Pacific cod TAC,
was allocated to the CDQ reserve.
Six non-profit corporations, known as
CDQ groups, were formed by the 65
communities eligible to participate in
the CDQ Program to manage and
administer the CDQ allocations,
investments, and economic
development projects. Each of the six
CDQ groups is allocated an amount of
Pacific cod at the beginning of each year
that equals its proportional share of the
amount of Pacific cod allocated to the
CDQ reserve. Currently, all catch of
Pacific cod by any vessel fishing for
groundfish CDQ, and by any vessel ≥60
ft LOA fishing for halibut CDQ, accrues
against a CDQ group’s allocation of
Pacific cod. The CDQ groups are
prohibited by regulations at
§ 679.7(d)(5) from exceeding any of their
CDQ allocations. Therefore, reaching a
CDQ allocation for one species
constrains the ability of a CDQ group to
continue to fish for other groundfish
CDQ species, except for reaching the
CDQ allocation of pollock, because the
CDQ incidental catch of pollock is
deducted from the general pollock
incidental catch allowance.
When Amendment 85 was adopted in
April 2006, the Council recommended
that the Pacific cod CDQ reserve remain
at 7.5 percent, but recognized that
proposed Congressional legislation
could change this percentage. As
described above, the Magnuson-Stevens
Act now requires that 10.7 percent of
the annual Pacific cod TAC be allocated
to the CDQ reserve for directed and
nontarget fishing combined. The 10.7
percent Pacific cod allocation to the
CDQ reserve would be established
annually in the harvest specifications
process required under § 679.20(c).
Currently, the CDQ reserve is deducted
from the Pacific cod TAC before the
remaining Pacific cod TAC is allocated
to the other fishing sectors. As intended
by the Council, this would be continued
under Amendment 85.
Each CDQ group would decide how to
manage its CDQ fisheries and how to
allocate its portion of the Pacific cod
TAC among its vessels and target
fisheries. The CDQ groups must
continue to manage their fisheries
within the seasonal allowances
currently specified to comply with SSL
protection measures, as described in
more detail under ‘‘Seasonal
Allowances.’’ All catch of Pacific cod by
any vessel groundfish CDQ fishing, and
by any vessel ≥60 ft LOA halibut CDQ
fishing, will continue to accrue against
the CDQ group’s annual allocation of
Pacific cod and the CDQ groups will
continue to be prohibited from
5659
exceeding their annual allocations of
Pacific cod.
Non-CDQ Sector Allocations
Under Amendment 85, the Council
selected nine individual non-CDQ
sectors to receive separate BSAI Pacific
cod allocations. The allocations to the
identified sectors were selected using
catch history from 1995 through 2003
and other socioeconomic and
community considerations. The Council
concluded that the adopted allocations
better reflected actual dependency and
use by each sector, with specific
consideration to allow for additional
growth in the small boat, entry-level
sectors. The primary objective of the
Council in revising the BSAI Pacific cod
non-CDQ TAC allocations to each sector
was to reduce the level and frequency
of annual reallocations, and thus
enhance stability so each sector may
better plan its fishing year and operate
more efficiently.
This action proposes to allocate the
BSAI TAC of Pacific cod among the nine
non-CDQ sectors, after subtraction of the
CDQ reserve. The current and proposed
allocations of BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC compared to average harvest
share (average of each sector’s percent of
the total harvest each year, including
harvest of reallocated amounts of Pacific
cod) between 1995 and 2003 and
between 2000 and 2003 are presented in
Table 3.
TABLE 3. CURRENT AND PROPOSED ALLOCATIONS OF BSAI PACIFIC COD NON-CDQ TAC AND AVERAGE HARVEST SHARE
BY SECTOR (PERCENT)
Amend. 77
(Current)
Sectors
Average share of retained harvest 1995-2003
(average historic harvest)
Amend. 85
(Proposed)
Average share of retained harvest 2000-2003
(recent average harvest)
Jig
2.0
1.4
0.1
0.1
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft LOA
0.7
2.0
0.4
0.7
Hook-and-line CV ≥60 ft LOA
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.3
Hook-and-line CP
40.8
48.7
49.1
49.4
Pot CV ≥60 ft LOA
7.6
8.4
8.6
9.0
Pot CP
1.7
1.5
2.1
1.4
23.5
2.3
2.2
1.5
13.4
13.4
16.0
22.1
24.0
21.6
AFA trawl CP
Non AFA trawl CP
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Trawl CV
23.5
The average harvest shares from 1995
through 2003 shown in Table 3 were
calculated using weekly production
reports and Alaska Department of Fish
and Game fishtickets, and included
Pacific cod retained for fishmeal
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
production. Table 4 shows average
harvest share in 2004 to 2005 using data
from the NMFS catch accounting
database. The NMFS accounting
database, which uses observer estimates
of retained catch, included Pacific cod
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
destined for fishmeal production on CPs
≥125 feet (38.1 m) LOA with 100
percent observer coverage rather than
weekly production reports.
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5660
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4. AVERAGE SHARE (PERCENT)
OF RETAINED HARVEST 2004-2005
Sector
Average share
Jig
0.1
Hook-and-line/pot
CV <60 ft LOA
1.7
Hook-and-line CV
≥60 ft LOA
0.01
Hook-and-line CP
50.6
Pot CV ≥60 ft LOA
6.0
Pot CP
1.7
AFA trawl CP
2.2
17.7
Trawl CV
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Non-AFA trawl CP
20.0
While the two data sets in Tables 3
and 4 are not exactly comparable due to
the different data sources, the data in
Table 4 generally indicate that the
overall BSAI harvest shares by sector in
2004 to 2005 are within the range of
what occurred during 1995 to 2003,
with a few exceptions. The <60 ft LOA
fixed gear (pot and hook-and-line gear)
share of the BSAI Pacific cod harvest
increased in the past two years
compared to the 1995 to 2003 average,
likely due to additional quota
reallocated from the jig sector starting in
2004. Table 4 shows that this sector
harvested about 1.7 percent of the BSAI
Pacific cod harvest from 2004 to 2005,
compared to an average retained harvest
share of 0.4 percent during 1995 to
2003.
Another notable exception is the nonAFA trawl CP sector. This sector’s
average harvest share from 2004 to 2005
was 17.7 percent. While the harvest
share of this sector has not been less
than 15.3 percent since 2000, its much
lower harvest shares during 1995 to
1998 resulted in an overall harvest share
during 1995 to 2003 of 13.4 percent.
The ≥60 ft LOA pot CV sector’s share
of Pacific cod harvest decreased in the
past two years compared to all but one
year during 1995 - 2003. The pot CP
share, while greater in 2004 and 2005
(1.7 percent) than in 2002 and 2003 (1.0
percent), was still lower than the
average retained harvest share of 2.1
percent during 1995 to 2003.
All sectors, with the exception of the
<60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector and the
non-AFA trawl CP sector, had harvests
in 2004 and 2005 that fell within the
range of their respective catch shares
during 1995 to 2003. Thus, although the
data in Table 4 are not truly comparable
to the retained harvest data in Table 3
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
due to the use of a different data set,
they provide a general view of the
fishery in the two most recent years.
The Council based the proposed
allocations on historical catch as
adjusted by its decision to increase the
harvest opportunities for the fleets
delivering shoreside, which include
some of the small boat sectors.
Therefore, for the most part, proposed
changes in allocations represent changes
in a sector’s opportunity to harvest.
Before recommending this action, the
Council heard extensive public
testimony from members of each sector,
indicating their desire to maintain or
increase their allocations. In its
allocation decision, the Council
considered all of the harvest data
provided to it by Council staff and
comments received from the public.
For most sectors the allocations
recommended by the Council under
Amendment 85 more closely represent a
sector’s average harvest share over
several years, as opposed to one or two
recent years, than do the current
allocations, as shown in Table 3. The
allocations recommended by the
Council were within the range of
allocation options presented in the EA/
RIR/IRFA for Amendment 85 (see Table
8 below). The Council did not select a
specific series of years, but instead
selected direct allocation percentages.
The Council examined information on
retained harvest history from 1995 to
2005, and information on total catch,
which included Pacific cod that was
discarded. However, the Council chose
from a range of percentage allocations
that were based on retained legal
harvest of Pacific cod, not total catch.
Pacific cod is required to be retained
when the directed fishery is open. When
the directed Pacific cod fishery is
closed, Pacific cod must be retained up
to the maximum retainable amount
(MRA); the rest of the Pacific cod that
is caught must be discarded. For
example, about 1.2 percent of the total
Pacific cod harvest was discarded in
2004. It was not the Council’s intent to
‘‘reward’’ sectors that have high
discards of Pacific cod when the
directed fishery for Pacific cod is closed.
The proposed allocation to jig vessels
and the <60 ft LOA fixed gear CVs is
greater than those sectors’ catch
histories due to socioeconomic and
community considerations. The
proposed allocations to these two smallboat sectors are intended by the Council
to maintain and expand entry-level,
local opportunities in the BSAI Pacific
cod fishery. These fleets, primarily CVs,
typically are comprised of residents of
small, coastal communities near the
fishing grounds. Public comments
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
specifically supported allocations of 2.0
percent each to the jig sector and to the
<60 ft LOA fixed gear sector, which the
Council took into consideration in
making the allocations to these two
sectors.
The following paragraphs provide
additional information on the Council’s
recommended allocation of Pacific cod
to each non-CDQ sector.
Jig Gear Sector
The allocation to the jig sector of the
BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC would
be reduced from the current 2.0 percent
to a proposed allocation of 1.4 percent.
The jig sector’s average annual share of
the retained Pacific cod harvest from
1995 through 2003 (average historic
harvest) is only about 0.1 percent,
which represents about 5 percent of its
current total allocation. The jig sector’s
more recent average annual share of the
retained Pacific cod harvest, from 2000
through 2003 (recent average harvest),
also is about 0.1 percent. This same
trend continued in 2004 and 2005. As
a result of this low harvest percentage,
the unused jig sector allocation has been
reallocated to other sectors, usually late
in the fishing year. The Council
determined that, although the proposed
allocation is lower than this sector’s
current allocation, the proposed
allocation would still allow for growth
in this entry-level sector, while reducing
the amount of Pacific cod that may need
to be reallocated to other sectors. Any
reallocations that would occur would
first consider the other small boat sector
(<60 ft LOA fixed gear CVs).
The Council’s preferred alternative
designated the jig sector as ‘‘jig CV
sector.’’ The Council’s intent, however,
was that this sector include all vessels
using jig gear to harvest BSAI Pacific
cod, whether CVs or CPs, as is the case
under current regulations. While the jig
sector is typically comprised only of
CVs, one jig vessel has operated as a CP
in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. All
harvest by all jig vessels was included
in the jig sector harvest history
considered under the allocation
determination. Further, the jig sector
would continue to include CVs and CPs
given the small harvest, relative to their
allocation, of Pacific cod by vessels
using jig gear and the absence of
competition for available Pacific cod
between CVs and CPs.
Less Than 60 ft LOA Hook-and-line or
Pot CV Sector
Under the proposed rule, the
allocation to the <60 ft LOA fixed gear
CV sector of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC would increase from its
current amount of 0.7 percent to a
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
proposed allocation of 2.0 percent. This
sector’s average historic harvest is 0.4
percent, and its recent average harvest is
0.7 percent. The <60 ft LOA fixed gear
CV sector’s percent share of the overall
Pacific cod harvest has grown steadily
in recent years from 0.2 percent in 2000
to about 1.7 percent in 2004 and in
2005. This sector has harvested its
entire allocation of 0.7 percent for
several years, and started receiving
reallocations from the jig sector in 2004.
The Council chose to increase the
allocation to this small-boat sector to
encourage its increased growth.
Currently, the <60 ft LOA hook-andline CVs also fish from the general hookand-line CV sector allocation of 0.2
percent, and the <60 ft LOA pot CVs
also fish from the general pot CV sector
allocation of 8.4 percent until those
fisheries close. Under Amendment 85,
the <60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector
would fish only from its own proposed
direct allocation of 2.0 percent.
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Greater Than or Equal to 60 ft LOA
Hook-and-line CV Sector
The current allocation of 0.2 percent
of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC
to the ≥60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV
sector would not change under this
proposed rule. The ≥60 ft LOA hookand-line CV sector’s average historic
harvest is 0.1 percent, and its recent
average harvest is 0.3 percent. This
sector harvested 0.01 percent of the total
retained harvest in 2004 and in 2005.
The majority of the overall hook-andline CV allocation typically has been
harvested by the <60 ft LOA hook-andline CVs. However, as stated above, the
<60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV sector
would no longer fish from the general
hook-and-line CV sector allocation, but
would fish only from its proposed direct
allocation. The proposed allocation is
intended by the Council to represent the
historical retained catch of Pacific cod
by this sector. The Council also
considered socioeconomic and
community factors, such as the greater
benefit brought to Bering Sea coastal
communities by CVs, which deliver
shoreside, versus the CPs that provide a
smaller benefit to these coastal
communities.
Hook-and-line CP Sector
The proposed allocation to the hookand-line CP sector would increase the
current allocation from 40.8 percent to
48.7 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod
non-CDQ TAC. This sector’s average
historic harvest is 49.1 percent, and its
recent average harvest is 49.4 percent.
This sector harvested an average of 50.6
percent of the total retained harvest in
2004 and 2005. The Council chose to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
increase the hook-and-line CP sector’s
allocation to more closely reflect the
sector’s actual harvest including
reallocations. This sector’s average
retained catch has been nearly 50
percent of the total BSAI non-CDQ
Pacific cod harvest since 1995, due to its
harvest of Pacific cod that is reallocated
from other gear sectors toward the end
of the year. By moving this reallocated
amount into the sector’s initial
allocation, the sector is expected to be
able to plan its fishing year with more
certainty than is currently afforded, and
harvest more of its Pacific cod allocation
earlier in the second half of the fishing
year. The Council also expects this
sector to continue to benefit from
reallocations from other sectors, so their
total yearly catch should be close to
their average historic harvest.
Greater Than or Equal to 60 ft LOA Pot
CV Sector
The proposed allocation to the ≥60 ft
LOA pot CV sector would increase the
current allocation from 7.6 percent to
8.4 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC. The ≥60 ft LOA pot CV
sector’s average historic harvest is 8.6
percent, and its recent average harvest is
9.0 percent. This sector harvested an
average of 6.0 percent of the total
retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. In
the past, less than 1.0 percent of the
overall pot CV allocation has been
harvested by the <60 ft LOA pot CVs.
However, as stated above, the <60 ft
LOA pot CV sector would no longer fish
from the general pot CV sector
allocation, but would fish only from its
proposed direct allocation. The Council
chose to increase the ≥60 ft LOA pot CV
sector’s allocation to more closely
reflect the sector’s average historic
harvest of Pacific cod including
reallocations while considering
socioeconomic and community factors,
such as the greater benefit brought to
Bering Sea coastal communities by CVs,
which deliver shoreside, versus the CPs
that provide a smaller benefit to these
coastal communities. The Council also
considered public testimony that
supported an increase in the allocation
to this pot sector because its catch has
generally been increasing and its
bycatch rate is very low compared to
some other sectors.
Pot CP Sector
The pot CP sector is the only fixed
gear sector that would receive a
reduction in its BSAI Pacific cod
allocation, from the current level of 1.7
percent to a proposed allocation of 1.5
percent of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC. This sector’s average historic
harvest is 2.1 percent, and its recent
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5661
average harvest is 1.4 percent. This
sector harvested an average of 1.7
percent of the total retained harvest in
2004 and 2005. The number of vessels
participating in this sector has declined
over the past several years, from 13 in
1999, to 10 in 2000, 5 in 2001 and 2002,
3 in 2003 and 2004, and 2 in 2005.
Anecdotal evidence and public
testimony suggest that some vessels
have focused their efforts on the crab
fisheries in recent years, and some
vessels have not found it economically
viable to fish for Pacific cod. The
Council used this information in
combination with the data on the
historical retained catch of Pacific cod
by the pot CP sector in arriving at its
proposed allocation. The Council also
considered socioeconomic and
community factors, such as the greater
benefit brought to Bering Sea coastal
communities by CVs, which deliver
shoreside, versus the CPs that provide a
smaller benefit to these coastal
communities.
Trawl CP Sector
Under this proposed rule, the current
single trawl CP sector would be split
into AFA and non-AFA trawl CP
sectors. The combined trawl CP sector
currently has an allocation of 23.5
percent of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC, which would be reduced to
a total of 15.7 percent for the two trawl
CP sectors. The intent of the Council in
dividing the allocation between the two
sectors was that each trawl CP sector
would be better able to manage its own
exclusive Pacific cod allocation under
the cooperative systems either in place
(for the AFA CP sector) or proposed (for
the non-AFA trawl CP sector under
Amendment 80 discussed previously).
AFA trawl CP sector. The AFA trawl
CP sector’s proposed allocation is 2.3
percent of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC. This sector’s average historic
harvest, including Pacific cod retained
for fishmeal production, is 2.2 percent.
The AFA trawl CP sector’s recent
average harvest is 1.5 percent, and it
harvested an average of 2.2 percent of
the total retained harvest in 2004 and
2005. The AFA trawl CPs, unlike the
non-AFA trawl CPs, have meal plants
onboard. Thus, Pacific cod meal is a
primary product for only this sector.
The history of nine trawl CPs was
extinguished by section 209 of the AFA,
and it was excluded by the Council in
determining the proposed allocation to
the AFA trawl CP sector. The proposed
allocation is intended by the Council to
represent the historical retained catch of
Pacific cod by the AFA trawl CP sector
while considering socioeconomic and
community factors. Public testimony
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5662
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
concerning the directed fishery and
bycatch needs of this sector was also
considered by the Council.
About 44 percent of the Pacific cod
harvested by the AFA trawl CP sector is
taken incidentally when these vessels
are targeting BSAI pollock. Only one
AFA trawl CP vessel has targeted BSAI
Pacific cod in the recent past. All
sectors are required to retain all catch of
Pacific cod when the directed fishery is
open and up to the MRA when the
directed Pacific cod fishery is closed. To
maximize the opportunity for a directed
Pacific cod fishery and to minimize the
potential for an increase in discards of
Pacific cod if catch exceeds the MRA,
the Council determined that this sector
should receive an allocation of Pacific
cod that closely represents its average
historic harvest of Pacific cod.
Non-AFA trawl CP sector. The nonAFA trawl CP sector would receive an
allocation of 13.4 percent of the BSAI
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC under the
proposed rule, its average share of the
historic harvest, which is 13.4 percent.
This proposed allocation is less than its
recent average harvest share of 16.0
percent from 2000 through 2003, and
less than its average of 17.7 percent of
the total retained harvest in 2004 and
2005. The proposed allocation is
intended by the Council to represent the
historical retained catch of Pacific cod
by the non-AFA trawl CP sector while
considering socioeconomic and
community factors.
About 46 percent of the Pacific cod
harvested by the non-AFA trawl CP
sector is taken as incidental catch in
non-Pacific cod target fisheries,
primarily the flatfish fisheries. Concern
has been expressed by this sector that its
proposed allocation will be insufficient
to support its target fishery. NMFS
agrees that this sector may be
constrained in its ability to conduct a
directed fishery for Pacific cod in order
to have sufficient Pacific cod available
for incidental catch in its other fisheries.
Trawl CV Sector
The proposed allocation to the trawl
CV sector of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC would decrease the current
allocation of 23.5 percent to 22.1
percent. This proposed allocation is less
than this sector’s average historic
harvest of 24.0 percent. However, the
proposed allocation is more than the
trawl CV sector’s recent average harvest
of 21.6 percent, and more than its
average of 20.0 percent of the total
retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. The
proposed allocation is intended by the
Council to represent the historical
retained catch of Pacific cod by the
trawl CV sector while considering
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
socioeconomic and community factors.
In contrast to the trawl CP sectors, the
trawl CVs primarily harvest their Pacific
cod in the directed fishery, with only
6.9 percent taken as incidental catch in
other target fisheries.
The Council chose to maintain the
AFA and non-AFA trawl CVs as one
sector. Public testimony before the
Council advocated to not divide the
trawl CVs into AFA and non-AFA
sectors, as is proposed for the trawl CP
sector. The Council considered this
testimony in determining that
maintaining the combined trawl CV
allocation would allow the AFA trawl
CV sector to continue to operate under
its cooperative agreement and
coordinate prosecution of the Pacific
cod fishery with non-AFA trawl CV
fishery participants. This approach is
favored by AFA and non-AFA
participants until such time that more
restrictive eligibility criteria for
participation in the fishery are
implemented. The proposed rule does
not change the Pacific cod AFA trawl
CV sideboards and exemptions because
the Council determined that they should
remain to protect the Pacific cod harvest
share of the non-AFA trawl CVs and of
the AFA trawl CVs that are exempt from
the Pacific cod sideboard limitations.
Also, some members of the trawl CV
sector requested that the Council
maintain the AFA trawl CV sideboards
to avoid the necessity of renegotiating
their inter-cooperative agreement.
Incidental Catch Allowances for NonCDQ Sectors
Under existing regulations, NMFS sets
aside an amount of Pacific cod from
some sectors’ allocations as an
incidental catch allowance. The
incidental catch allowance is used by
those sectors when directed fishing for
groundfish other than Pacific cod.
Under this proposed rule, incidental
catch allowances would continue to be
based on an estimated amount of Pacific
cod that NMFS anticipates will be taken
as incidental catch in directed fisheries
for groundfish other than Pacific cod. As
is the current practice, under the
proposed rule, once a sector has
harvested an amount of Pacific cod
equal to the sector’s directed fishing
allowance, directed fishing for Pacific
cod by vessels in that sector would be
closed by NMFS.
Under Amendment 85, incidental
catch allowances would continue to be
set as they are currently for the fixed
gear sectors. An incidental catch
allowance for the fixed gear sectors
would be established annually by the
Regional Administrator during the
annual harvest specifications process,
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and typically has been 500 mt. This
fixed gear incidental catch allowance
would be deducted from the aggregate
portion of Pacific cod TAC annually
allocated to hook-and-line and pot gear
sectors before directed fishing
allowances are made to each sector.
Under Amendment 85, an incidental
catch allowance for each trawl sector
would be developed on an inseason
basis and would not be listed in the
annual specifications. The trawl sectors
currently do not have an incidental
catch allowance established at the
beginning of the year, as the fixed gear
sectors do. NMFS currently has the
regulatory authority to set directed
fishing allowances and incidental catch
allowances for Pacific cod within a
particular sector during the fishing year.
This system allows NMFS to close the
directed trawl fishery for Pacific cod but
allow other directed trawl fisheries to
continue fishing under the incidental
catch allowance. NMFS typically has
not put the Pacific cod trawl fishery on
bycatch status in the recent past,
because the trawl sectors are not
currently constrained by their Pacific
cod allocations. Also, the seasonal
apportionments to the trawl sectors
have ensured that a sufficient amount of
Pacific cod is left for incidental catch in
groundfish trawl fisheries other than
Pacific cod later in the year. Because of
the reductions in the Pacific cod trawl
sector allocations under Amendment 85,
the Council proposed that an incidental
catch allowance be established on an
inseason basis for each trawl sector
separately, rather than as a group, as the
fixed gear sectors are, so that no trawl
sector can erode another sector’s total
allocation, and to allow more flexibility
to adjust incidental catch needs for each
sector as these trawl fisheries change in
the future.
Elimination of Pacific Cod Nonspecified
Reserve
Currently, during the annual harvest
specifications process, 15 percent of the
BSAI TAC for each target species
(except pollock and the hook-and-line
and pot gear allocation for sablefish)
and for the other species category is
automatically placed in the
nonspecified reserve as required at
§ 679.20(b)(1). Half of the nonspecified
reserve (7.5 percent of TAC) for most
species is then apportioned to the
groundfish CDQ reserve. Historically,
the half remaining in the reserve for
Pacific cod, Atka mackerel, Pacific
ocean perch, and several rockfish
species is apportioned by NMFS to the
non-CDQ TAC for their respective
fisheries. This is done because the TAC
for these fisheries is already fully
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
harvested; that is, U.S. fishing vessels
have demonstrated the capacity to catch
the full TAC allocations. NMFS uses the
nonspecified reserve inseason to
supplement the non-CDQ TAC for some
species so that fishing operations can
continue, or to account for catch in
excess of allocated amounts.
Under this proposed rule, Pacific cod
would be exempt from having 15
percent of the TAC placed in the
nonspecified reserve. This deduction
from Pacific cod TAC would no longer
be needed under this proposed rule
because a direct allocation to the CDQ
reserve is specified. Additionally, the
Pacific cod TAC is fully allocated
among CDQ and non-CDQ harvesting
sectors, and is fully harvested.
Reallocations of Pacific Cod Among
Non-CDQ Sectors
During the last fishing season of the
year, NMFS considers whether one or
more non-CDQ sectors will be unlikely
to use its remaining BSAI Pacific cod
allocation. To obtain optimum yield
from the BSAI Pacific cod fishery,
NMFS reallocates these projected
unused allocations to other sectors. In
the case of the jig sector, reallocations
are made seasonally. NMFS considers
whether a particular sector is still
operating on the fishing grounds, and
thus capable of harvesting any quota
that is reallocated from another sector,
when making reallocation decisions.
Current regulations at § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)
outline the following system for
reallocating projected unused
allocations:
• Projected unused portions of a jig
sector seasonal allowance are
reallocated to the <60 ft LOA fixed gear
CV sector.
• Projected unused hook-and-line CV
sector and <60 ft LOA fixed gear sector
allocations are reallocated to the hookand-line CP sector.
• Projected unused trawl gear sector
allocations are considered for
reallocation to the other trawl gear
sector (e.g., trawl CV to trawl CP) prior
to being reallocated to another gear type
(e.g. trawl gear to fixed gear).
• Remaining projected unused trawl
allocations are reallocated 95 percent to
the hook-and-line CP sector; 4.1 percent
to the pot CV sector; and 0.9 percent to
the pot CP sector.
Although the intent of the Council
under Amendment 85 is to revise sector
allocations to better reflect actual catch
history and thus reduce the frequency
and amount of inseason reallocations,
the Council and the public noted that
some reallocations are likely to
continue. Under this proposed rule, if,
during a fishing year, the Regional
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
Administrator determines that a sector
would be unable to harvest the entire
amount of Pacific cod allocated to that
sector, NMFS would reallocate the
projected unused amount of Pacific cod
to other sectors. Reallocation decisions
would be based in part on the hierarchy
described below (in the sequence
described), but also would take into
account the capability of a sector to
harvest the reallocated amount of
Pacific cod. In general, under the
proposed changes, projected unused
allocations in any sector delivering
inshore, i.e., CV sectors, would be
reallocated primarily to other inshore
sectors before being reallocated to any
offshore, i.e., CP, sector, and,
secondarily, within a gear type before
being reallocated to another gear type.
Under this proposed rule, the
Regional Administrator would
reallocate any projected unharvested
amounts of Pacific cod TAC from any
CV sector, first to the jig sector or to the
<60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector, or to
both; then to the ≥60 ft LOA fixed gear
CV sectors; and then to the trawl CV
sector. Any jig, <60 ft LOA fixed gear,
or ≥60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV sector
allocation that is unlikely to be
harvested through this hierarchy would
be reallocated to the hook-and-line CP
sector. Any ≥60 ft LOA pot CV sector
allocation that is unlikely to be
harvested through this hierarchy will be
reallocated to the pot CP sector as
described below. Any trawl CV sector
allocation that is unlikely to be
harvested through this hierarchy will be
reallocated to the other trawl sectors as
described below.
For any trawl CP sector, the Regional
Administrator would reallocate any
projected unharvested amounts of its
Pacific cod TAC allocation to the other
trawl CP sector and/or the trawl CV
sector before unharvested amounts are
reallocated to certain fixed gear sectors.
Any reallocation to fixed gear sectors
would be proportional to the proposed
allocations for three fixed gear sectors as
follows: 83.1 percent to the hook-andline CP sector, 2.6 percent to the pot CP
sector, and 14.3 percent to the ≥60 ft
LOA pot CV sector.
Any projected unharvested amounts
of Pacific cod TAC allocated to the pot
CP sector or to the ≥60 ft LOA pot CV
sector would be reallocated by the
Regional Administrator to the other pot
gear sector before it would be
reallocated to the hook-and-line CP
sector. Current Federal regulations do
not explicitly mandate reallocation of
Pacific cod between pot gear sectors, but
do allow NMFS to reallocate unused pot
CP or ≥60 ft LOA pot CV allocations to
the other pot gear sector before it is
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5663
reallocated to other gear sectors. This
action proposes to make pot gear sector
reallocations explicit in regulation. This
approach is consistent with the way the
trawl sectors are addressed by the
Council in this proposed rule. That is,
Pacific cod would be reallocated within
the same gear type before being
reallocated to a different gear type.
Two primary differences exist
between the status quo and the
reallocation hierarchy proposed under
Amendment 85. The first difference is
that NMFS would be required to
consider reallocating within the inshore
sectors before reallocating projected
unused Pacific cod allocations from the
inshore to the offshore sectors. This
approach is consistent with the
Council’s decision to increase the
harvest opportunities for the fleets
delivering shoreside, which include
some of the small boat sectors. The
second difference is the relative
reduction in the hook-and-line CP
sector’s share of the trawl reallocations
compared to the status quo. The status
quo is based on each of the specified
fixed gear sector’s share of the actual
harvest of trawl reallocations between
1996 and 1998. However, under
Amendment 85, the Council chose to
base the reallocations on each specified
fixed gear sector’s share of the overall
BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC.
Changing the reallocations to be
proportional to the new fixed gear
allocations is consistent with the
problem statement, which states that
allocations should be adjusted to better
reflect historic use by sector. Because
the new fixed gear allocations are based
on catch history, with consideration for
socioeconomic and community factors,
basing reallocations on the same relative
allocation among the specified fixed
gear sectors is consistent with this
objective.
Note that, like the status quo, the
Council only intends that NMFS
consider the hierarchy proposed by this
rule when making reallocation
decisions. NMFS would take into
account the intent of the rollover
hierarchy, and the likelihood of a
sector’s capability to harvest reallocated
quota prior to making the reallocation.
The Council noted that it is important
that NMFS retain this flexibility to
determine how to reallocate projected
unused sector allocations in order to
avoid intermittent starting and stopping
of the fishery and to reduce the risk of
foregone harvest.
Seasonal Allowances
Under existing regulations, Pacific
cod allocations are further apportioned
by season for most gear sectors to
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5664
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
protect prey availability for Steller sea
lions (SSLs). Appendix A of the
November 2001 Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement on
SSL protection measures included the
biological opinion on the effects of the
pollock, Pacific cod, and Atka mackerel
fisheries on SSLs and their designated
critical habitat (2001 Biological
Opinion). The 2001 Biological Opinion
requires temporal dispersion of harvest
so that the overall BSAI Pacific cod
fishery is limited to seasonal
percentages of TAC of no more than 70
percent between January 1 and June 10,
and 30 percent between June 10 and
December 31.
Each sector’s allocation is currently
apportioned seasonally to meet this
requirement (§ 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A)).
Currently, the trawl sectors receive 37.6
percent of the non-CDQ TAC in the first
half of the year (28.2 percent in the A
season and 9.4 percent in the B season)
which is 80 percent of their allocations;
the fixed gear sectors receive 30.2
percent of the non-CDQ TAC in the first
half of the year (60 percent of their
allocations), and the jig sector receives
about 1.2 percent (about 60 percent of
its allocation). In total, about 69 percent
of the total non-CDQ BSAI Pacific cod
TAC is allowed to be harvested in the
first half of the year. The <60 ft LOA
fixed gear sector, which does not have
its Pacific cod allocation apportioned by
season, is excluded from this limitation
and this exclusion would be maintained
under Amendment 85 and this proposed
rule.
Because this proposed rule modifies
non-CDQ sector allocations to decrease
the amount of rollovers, if the same
seasonal allowances were maintained,
the fixed gear sectors could potentially
harvest more Pacific cod in the first half
of the year due to their overall increased
share of the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC.
Similarly, the trawl sectors would have
less of their Pacific cod allocation
available in the first half of the year.
However, the intent of the Council is to
reflect the current fishery, to the extent
possible, by maintaining each sector’s
current percentage of the non-CDQ TAC
allocated in the first half of the year
when fishing for Pacific cod is more
advantageous.
Therefore, to maintain the overall 70/
30 seasonal split for all gear types
combined and to maintain to the extent
possible the current percentage of the
Pacific cod TAC harvested in the first
half of the year by the non-CDQ sectors,
the proposed rule adjusts the seasonal
allowances for each sector in response
to the changes in sector allocations. The
Council intent for this approach is to
mirror the fishery as it is conducted
today, and as it was evaluated in the
2001 Biological Opinion.
As proposed by the Council, the
current percentage of the non-CDQ
Pacific cod TAC harvested in the A
season by trawl gear and by fixed gear
would be maintained. The overall trawl
allocation reduction would be applied
first to the trawl C season, and any
remaining reductions would be applied
to the trawl B season. The increase in
the overall fixed gear allocation would
be applied only to its B season.
Under this proposed rule, the jig
sector seasonal allowance would change
from 40–20–40 to 60–20–20. The jig
sector has not successfully harvested its
40 percent allowance in the C season.
Therefore, this change would allow for
more harvest in the first season.
Additionally, much of the jig sector’s C
season Pacific cod allocation is not
available for reallocation to the <60 ft
LOA fixed gear sector because this other
small boat sector is no longer on the
fishing grounds later in the year. Public
testimony from the jig sector and coastal
community representatives supported
the proposed change in the jig gear
seasonal allowance to 60–20–20. The
Council took this testimony into
consideration in making its decision to
change the seasonal allowance for the
jig sector to 60–20–20. Additionally,
with a 60 percent seasonal allowance in
the A season, the Council noted that any
reallocated amounts of Pacific cod from
the jig sector would roll over to the <60
ft LOA fixed gear sector when that small
boat sector is still on the fishing
grounds. This reallocation from the jig
sector is also intended by the Council to
help offset the proposed restriction that
would prohibit the <60 ft LOA fixed
gear sector from fishing off the
allocations for the ≥60 ft LOA pot CVs
and the ≥60 ft LOA hook-and-line CVs.
Currently, the Pacific cod CDQ
reserve is not apportioned by gear type.
Therefore, the Pacific cod CDQ reserve
cannot be apportioned seasonally by
gear type at the beginning of the fishing
year, as is done for the non-CDQ sectors.
These seasonal allowances, currently
specified at § 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A), apply
to both the CDQ and non-CDQ sectors.
The Council did not change the
approach for managing the seasonal
catch of Pacific cod CDQ under
Amendment 85 and the seasonal
allowances for the CDQ Program would
remain unchanged from the current
percentages in this proposed rule (see
Table 5). Because nearly all of the
Pacific cod CDQ allocation is harvested
with hook-and-line gear, the Council
further assumed the seasonal
apportionment of the Pacific cod CDQ
allocation would continue to be 60
percent in the A season and 40 percent
in the B season. Additionally, the
Magnuson-Stevens Act does not address
the issue of seasonal allowances for the
CDQ Program. Therefore, the proposed
rule maintains the current seasonal
allowances under the CDQ Program.
Under this proposed rule, the CDQ
groups must continue to manage their
fisheries to keep their catch of Pacific
cod within the seasonal allowances
specified for the gear types they use to
catch Pacific cod to comply with SSL
protection measures. The proposed rule
also would add a prohibition to
§ 679.7(d) to clarify that the CDQ groups
would be prohibited from exceeding the
seasonal allowances of Pacific cod that
are appropriate for the gear types that
they use to catch Pacific cod CDQ.
The proposed BSAI Pacific cod sector
allowances for each sector, including
CDQ, by season, as those seasons are
specified under § 679.23(e)(5), are listed
in Table 5.
TABLE 5. SEASONAL ALLOWANCES
A season
B season
C season
Gear type
A. 85
Current
A. 85
Current
A. 85
CDQ trawl
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Current
60%
60%
20%
20%
20%
20%
Non-CDQ trawl CV
70%
74%
10%
11%
20%
15%
Non-CDQ trawl CP
50%
75%
30%
25%
20%
0%
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5665
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5. SEASONAL ALLOWANCES—Continued
A season
B season
C season
Gear type
Current
A. 85
Current
A. 85
CDQ hook-and-line processors, hook-and-line ≥60 ft
LOA, pot gear vessels ≥60 ft LOA
60%
60%
40%
40%
no C season
Non-CDQ hook-and-line processors, hook-and-line
≥60 ft LOA, pot gear vessels ≥60 ft LOA
60%
51%
40%
49%
no C season
CDQ jig vessels
40%
40%
20%
20%
40%
40%
Non-CDQ jig vessels
40%
60%
20%
20%
40%
20%
All other nontrawl vessels
no seasonal allowance
no seasonal allowance
Current
no seasonal allowance
Total non-CDQ current percentage
1/1 - 6/10 = 69%
6/10 - 12/31 = 31%
Total non-CDQ proposed percentage
1/1 - 6/10 = 68%
6/10 - 12/31 = 32%
Total CDQ and non-CDQ proposed percentage
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
A. 85
1/1 - 6/10 = 67%
6/10 - 12/31 = 33%
To calculate the new seasonal
allowance in the A season for a nonCDQ sector, a simple ratio is used. A
sector’s seasonal percentage of the nonCDQ Pacific cod TAC is calculated by
multiplying the current allocation (CA)
by the current seasonal allowance
(CSA). For a sector’s seasonal
percentage of the non-CDQ Pacific cod
TAC to remain the same under
Amendment 85, CA multiplied by CSA
would equal the new allocation (NA)
multiplied by the new seasonal
allowance (NSA) (CA x CSA = NA x
NSA). Solving the equation for NSA
(which is unknown) yields NSA = (CA
x CSA)/NA.
The calculation of seasonal
allowances for the trawl CP sectors is
the most complicated, and is provided
as an example. The current allocation
for trawl CPs is 23.5 percent of the BSAI
non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC. Multiplying
the current allocation by the current A
season allowance to the trawl CPs of 50
percent, equals 11.8 percent. Dividing
11.8 percent by the combined new
allocation to the trawl CP sectors of 15.7
percent, yields a new A season
allowance of 75 percent for the trawl CP
sectors. The current seasonal
percentages for the trawl CP sectors of
the BSAI non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC is
11.8 percent in the A season, 7.1 percent
in the B season and 4.7 percent in the
C season. The overall allocation to the
trawl CP sectors would decrease by 7.8
percent of the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC
under the proposed rule. As proposed
by the Council, these decreases would
first be applied to the C season,
resulting in a zero percent allowance in
the C season, and then to the B season.
This would result in the remaining 25
percent of the overall allocation to the
trawl CP sectors being assigned to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
trawl B season. The 7.8 percent decrease
minus 4.7 percent from the C season
leaves 3.1 percent which is subtracted
from the B season allowance of 7.1
percent. The resulting 4.0 percent is
divided by the overall allocation of 15.7
percent which equals 25 percent.
Relative to current seasonal
apportionments, less of the BSAI Pacific
cod non-CDQ TAC would be allowed to
be harvested in the first half of the year
because of the proposed reductions in
the trawl CP and jig sector allocations.
This was determined by multiplying the
proposed allocations by the seasonal
allowances. The amount of the BSAI
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC that would be
allowed to be harvested in the first half
of the year (assuming the entire 2
percent allocation to the <60 ft LOA
fixed gear sector is harvested in the first
half of the year, to be the most
conservative) would be 68 percent,
which is less than the total current
seasonal allowance of 69 percent of the
TAC.
Using a CDQ reserve for Pacific cod
equal to 10.7 percent of the BSAI Pacific
cod TAC, and using the current CDQ
general seasonal allowances of 60 and
40 percent in the A and B seasons,
respectively, the maximum A season
harvest by all sectors (including the
total allocation to the <60 ft LOA fixed
gear sector allocation in the first half of
the year) would be equal to about 67
percent of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC.
This level is still below the SSL
seasonal harvest limit of 70 percent of
the TAC. Trawl gear is the only CDQ
gear type that does not have a 60/40
split. However, in 2005 the CDQ groups
harvested a total of 273 mt of Pacific cod
with trawl gear, which equals 0.1
percent of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC.
Therefore, the incidental catch of Pacific
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
cod by CDQ trawl vessels is expected to
have a negligible impact on the harvest
of Pacific cod by season under this
proposed rule.
Reallocation of Seasonal Allowances
Any unused portion of a seasonal
allowance of Pacific cod from any sector
other than the jig sector, would continue
to be reallocated to that sector’s
remaining seasons during the current
fishing year. The Regional
Administrator would continue to
reallocate any projected unused portion
of a seasonal allowance of Pacific cod
from the jig sector to the <60 ft LOA
fixed gear sector. Under this proposed
rule, a projected unused portion of the
seasonal allowance for the jig sector C
season would be reallocated on or about
September 1 of each year, if possible.
The intent of the Council under this
provision is to provide the last rollover
from the jig sector when the <60 ft LOA
fixed gear sector would still be on the
fishing grounds.
Prohibited Species Catch
Prohibited species catch (PSC)
regulations pertain to certain species
caught in the process of fishing for
groundfish that must be accounted for
but cannot be retained, except for
halibut and salmon retained under the
donation program at § 679.26.
Regulations at § 679.21 establish PSC
limits for Pacific halibut, three species
of crab, salmon, and herring in the BSAI
trawl groundfish fisheries, and a
separate Pacific halibut PSC limit for
nontrawl gear. These regulations also
establish allocations of each PSC limit
between the CDQ and non-CDQ
fisheries and a process for apportioning
PSC among non-CDQ fisheries. The
halibut PSC limit is set in regulation
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5666
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
and is not tied to population assessment
for the halibut resource. The limits for
the other PSC species are set to fluctuate
as resource abundance fluctuates. Crab
PSC limits are tied to PSC limitation
zones for red king, bairdi (Chionoecetes
bairdi), and opilio (C. opilio) crab,
whereas the PSC limits for the other
species are for the entire BSAI.
Initially, 7.5 percent of each PSC
limit, with the exception of herring, is
set aside for the CDQ Program with the
remainder of each PSC limit
apportioned among specified fisheries
as PSC allowances during the annual
harvest specifications process. These
PSC allowances are intended to
optimize total groundfish harvest under
established PSC limits, taking into
consideration the anticipated amounts
of incidental catch of prohibited species
in each fishery. Depending on the
prohibited species, reaching a PSC
allowance results in closure of an area
or a groundfish directed fishery, even if
some of the groundfish TAC for that
fishery remains unharvested.
Under this proposed action, the
Council recommended that the Pacific
cod trawl fishery crab and halibut
mortality PSC allowances be further
apportioned among the trawl sectors.
Similarly, the Pacific cod nontrawl
halibut PSC allowances would be
further apportioned between two hookand-line sectors. Pot and jig sectors
currently are exempt from halibut PSC
limits due to very low bycatch rates in
these sectors. The proposed rule would
not change the process for establishing
the annual PSC allowances to the CDQ
Program and to the overall Pacific cod
trawl and hook-and-line sectors as part
of the annual harvest specifications.
Trawl Sector Halibut and Crab PSC
Apportionments
Currently, the total amount of halibut
PSC mortality for trawl gear in the nonCDQ fisheries of 3,400 mt is
apportioned in the annual harvest
specifications process among the four
following fisheries: (1) Pacific cod, (2)
yellowfin sole, (3) rock sole/other
flatfish/flathead sole, and (4) pollock/
Atka mackerel/other fisheries. The
current process to apportion the halibut
PSC mortality for trawl gear among the
non-CDQ fisheries would continue
under the proposed action. Generally,
about 1,400 mt of halibut PSC mortality
is apportioned to the BSAI Pacific cod
trawl fishery, but this amount and
actual use can vary annually.
As stated previously, the crab PSC
limits fluctuate as resource abundance
fluctuates, and limits are set by zone.
The PSC limit (expressed in numbers of
crab) in 2006 for zone 1 red king crab
is 182,225 crab for all trawl fisheries,
with the Pacific cod trawl fisheries
being allocated 26,563 crab of that total.
The PSC limit in 2006 for zone 1 bairdi
crab is 906,500 crab for all BSAI trawl
fisheries, with the Pacific cod trawl
fisheries being allocated 183,112 crab of
that total. The 2006 PSC limit for zone
2 bairdi crab is 2,747,250 crab for all
BSAI trawl fisheries, with the Pacific
cod trawl fisheries being allocated a
relatively small proportion, 324,176
crab, of that total. The current PSC limit
for opilio within the C. opilio bycatch
limitation zone (COBLZ) is 4,494,569
crab for all BSAI trawl fisheries, with
the Pacific cod trawl fisheries being
allocated a relatively small proportion,
139,331 crab, of that total.
In recent years, the trawl CV and
trawl CP sectors’ directed Pacific cod
fisheries have closed most often due to
reaching the seasonal TAC, to avoid
exceeding the specified halibut PSC
mortality limit, or because a fishing
season has ended. Reaching a crab PSC
limit results in closure of a specific area
to directed fishing. Crab PSC typically
does not limit the BSAI Pacific cod
trawl fisheries, although occasional crab
PSC closures have occurred in the past.
The Council recommended that the
amount of halibut and crab PSC
mortality that would be apportioned to
each Pacific cod trawl sector under this
action be proportional to each sector’s
percentage of the Pacific cod harvested
in the Pacific cod target fishery from
1999 through 2003, including the
Pacific cod retained for meal
production. Accordingly, the annual
PSC allowance of halibut and crab
specified for the Pacific cod trawl
fishery category would be divided
among the trawl sectors as follows: 70.7
percent for trawl CVs; 4.4 percent for
AFA trawl CPs; and 24.9 percent for
non-AFA trawl CPs. Because the AFA
and non-AFA trawl CVs would share a
Pacific cod allocation, the Council
decided that this sector also would
receive combined PSC allowances of
halibut and crab mortality.
Halibut PSC mortality is attributed to
a fishery based upon what the target
fishery is. A significant amount of
Pacific cod is taken incidentally in trawl
fisheries for species other than Pacific
cod. However, the halibut PSC mortality
associated with that incidental Pacific
cod harvest is attributed to a fishery
other than the Pacific cod trawl fishery.
The Council’s intent for the proposed
PSC apportionments among the trawl
gear sectors that target Pacific cod was
to allow each sector to better plan its
operations by being able to manage its
PSC use during the fishing year without
its PSC being eroded by another sector.
However, based on the directed Pacific
cod trawl fishery’s historical halibut and
crab PSC use, the proposed percentage
of the total halibut and crab PSC
allowances to the Pacific cod trawl CV
sector would increase
disproportionately relative to the trawl
CP sectors as a whole. This is because
both trawl CP sectors caught a relatively
high percentage of their Pacific cod
while targeting on species other than
Pacific cod. The trawl CV sector caught
6.9 percent of its Pacific cod in other
fisheries, while the non-AFA CP sector
caught 45.9 percent of its Pacific cod in
other trawl fisheries, and the AFA CP
sector caught 44.2 percent of its Pacific
cod in other trawl fisheries. The Council
noted that the halibut and crab PSC
allowances for the trawl fisheries that
harvest Pacific cod incidentally would
be apportioned under other trawl
fishery categories based on the target
groundfish species.
Table 6 projects the amount of halibut
and crab PSC mortality that would be
apportioned to each trawl sector under
Amendment 85 using the 2006 PSC
apportionments. Table 7 shows each
sector’s average historical use in the
directed Pacific cod fishery from 1995–
2003 for halibut and from 1995–2002 for
crab. Under the proposed rule, each
sector would be limited to using its PSC
allowances in its directed Pacific cod
fishery.
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
TABLE 6. PROJECTED PACIFIC COD TRAWL PSC ALLOWANCES FOR EACH TRAWL SECTOR UNDER AMENDMENT 85 USING
2006 TOTAL PACIFIC COD TRAWL FISHERY GROUP PSC APPORTIONMENTS
Halibut PSC allowance
(mt halibut mortality)
Sector
AFA Trawl CP
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Red king crab
PSC allowance
(# of crab)
63
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
1,169
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Opilio PSC allowance
(# of crab)
Zone 1 bairdi PSC
allowance
(# of crab)
Zone 2 bairdi PSC
allowance
(# of crab)
6,131
8,057
14,264
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
5667
TABLE 6. PROJECTED PACIFIC COD TRAWL PSC ALLOWANCES FOR EACH TRAWL SECTOR UNDER AMENDMENT 85 USING
2006 TOTAL PACIFIC COD TRAWL FISHERY GROUP PSC APPORTIONMENTS—Continued
Halibut PSC allowance
(mt halibut mortality)
Sector
Non-AFA Trawl CP
Red king crab
PSC allowance
(# of crab)
Opilio PSC allowance
(# of crab)
Zone 1 bairdi PSC
allowance
(# of crab)
Zone 2 bairdi PSC
allowance
(# of crab)
357
6,614
34,693
45,595
80,720
Trawl CV
1,014
18,780
98,507
129,460
229,192
Total 2006 PSC for Pacific cod trawl
fishery
1,434
26,563
139,331
183,112
324,176
TABLE 7. PACIFIC COD TRAWL PSC AVERAGE ANNUAL MORTALITY FOR EACH TRAWL SECTOR FROM 1995-2003 FOR
HALIBUT AND FROM 1995-2002 FOR CRAB
Sector
Red king crab
(# of crab)
Halibut (mt)
AFA Trawl CP
Opilio
(# of crab)
Zone 1 bairdi
(# of crab)
Zone 2 bairdi
(# of crab)
21
166
189
469
1,685
Non-AFA Trawl CP
459
4,730
34,645
72,391
25,546
Trawl CV
737
1,114
6,768
59,810
19,376
1,216
6,010
41,602
132,670
46,607
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Total
During its deliberation on adoption of
Amendment 85, the Council understood
and acknowledged that the potential
impact of the percentage of Zone 1
bairdi crab PSC mortality apportioned to
the non-AFA trawl CP sector could be
constraining compared to historic use,
but chose not to modify its decision.
The Council determined that the
amount of Zone 1 bairdi crab that would
be apportioned to the non-AFA trawl CP
sector would fall within the range of
what this sector has caught historically.
NMFS is concerned that the Council’s
recommendation for Amendment 85
would provide substantially less halibut
and Zone 1 bairdi crab PSC mortality to
support the non-AFA trawl CP sector
Pacific cod fishery than this sector has
used historically, and only about the
average amount of opilio crab PSC
mortality. Thus, the proposed PSC
apportionments could limit this sector’s
directed fishery for Pacific cod. The
non-AFA trawl CP sector is concerned
that it may already have its directed
fishery limited by its proposed Pacific
cod allocation under Amendment 85
which is less than its more recent
history. Similarly, NMFS is concerned
that the trawl CV sector would have
greater PSC allowances than it has used
historically and that such increases in
PSC would not be needed to support
this sector’s proposed allocation of
Pacific cod, which is less than its
average historical catch. NMFS also is
concerned that setting individual PSC
sector percentage allowances in
regulations is more constraining to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
trawl sector than the more flexible
method used to distribute halibut PSC
mortality among the nontrawl gear
sectors during the annual harvest
specifications process.
NMFS is seeking public comment
regarding whether to continue with the
status quo method of distributing the
PSC allowance among the Pacific cod
trawl sectors during the annual harvest
specifications process, or to set
individual PSC allowances for each
trawl sector as proposed under
Amendment 85 and this rule. NMFS
notes that the Council has developed a
separate amendment to the FMP,
Amendment 80, to further restructure
the trawl PSC apportionments among
fishery categories. Amendment 80
would allocate specified groundfish
species and PSC to the non-AFA trawl
CP sector. That proposed action would
supercede the trawl PSC allocations
under Amendment 85, but has yet to be
forwarded to the Secretary for review
and approval.
Nontrawl Sector Halibut PSC
Apportionment
The total amount of nontrawl halibut
PSC for the non-CDQ fisheries currently
is 833 mt of mortality. This amount is
typically apportioned between the
Pacific cod hook-and-line fishery and
other nontrawl fisheries during the
annual harvest specifications process.
Generally, 775 mt is apportioned to the
hook-and-line Pacific cod fishery and 58
mt to other nontrawl groundfish
fisheries (primarily the Greenland turbot
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
target fishery). Between 1995 and 2003,
the halibut mortality in the hook-andline CP fishery averaged 684.9 mt per
year, and the hook-and-line CV averaged
5.9 mt per year, for a total of about 691
mt per year. This proposed rule would
not change the total amount of halibut
PSC mortality allocated to the hook-andline Pacific cod sectors.
Currently, the annual Pacific cod
hook-and-line halibut PSC allowance is
apportioned among three seasons: 320
mt (January 1 to June 10); 0 mt (June 10
to August 15); and 455 mt (August 15
to December 31). If a seasonal allowance
of halibut PSC mortality is reached,
directed fishing for BSAI Pacific cod by
all vessels using hook-and-line gear is
closed for the remainder of the season.
A seasonal halibut PSC allowance in the
second season has not been specified in
recent years because halibut bycatch
rates during that season are relatively
high. Thus, a hook-and-line directed
fishery for Pacific cod has not operated
in the summer months.
The hook-and-line CP sector generally
supports not providing a halibut PSC
limit in the second season, because
fishing when the halibut bycatch rates
are high could risk closing the directed
Pacific cod fishery prior to the
allocation being fully harvested.
However, the hook-and-line CV sector,
which also is constrained by the same
PSC limit, is comprised of smaller
vessels with slower catch rates and a
relatively small Pacific cod allocation
compared to the hook-and-line CP
sector. While the PSC limit has not been
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5668
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
constraining to these sectors in the
recent past, the Council is of the
opinion that the hook-and-line CV
sector might benefit from a halibut PSC
limit separate from the hook-and-line
CP sector, and potentially, the ability to
fish for Pacific cod in the summer
months when the weather is more
favorable for smaller vessels. This
would be consistent with the Council’s
concept of establishing separate Pacific
cod allocations and separate PSC limits
for each trawl and nontrawl sector, such
that no sector can impede another
sector’s Pacific cod fishery.
Therefore, this proposed rule would
divide the halibut PSC allowance
annually specified for the hook-and-line
Pacific cod fishery between two fishery
sectors: the hook-and-line CP sector and
the hook-and-line CV sector (CVs ≥60 ft
LOA and CVs <60 ft LOA combined).
The nontrawl halibut PSC allowance
apportioned to these fishery sectors
would be established annually during
the harvest specifications process. The
apportionment would be based on each
sector’s proportional share of the
anticipated bycatch mortality of halibut
during a fishing year, and the need to
optimize the amount of total groundfish
harvested under the nontrawl halibut
PSC mortality limit.
The Council’s recommendation was to
not fix the amount of halibut PSC
apportioned to the hook-and-line BSAI
Pacific cod fishery categories in
regulation, but to continue making that
determination in the annual harvest
specifications process. The Council
deliberations on this issue indicated
that a halibut PSC allowance of 10 mt
to the Pacific cod hook-and-line CV
sector might be a starting point to guide
the specifications process in this
determination. The Council’s intent was
to allow NMFS flexibility to adjust these
amounts if necessary in the future,
rather than fix the amounts in Federal
regulations. Under this action, NMFS
could provide varying amounts of
halibut PSC by season to each sector,
tailoring PSC limits to suit the needs
and timing of each sector.
Pacific Cod and PSC Sideboard Limits
for AFA Sectors
Sideboards are harvesting and
processing restrictions that were placed
on AFA CVs and AFA CPs operating in
the BSAI pollock fishery. The basis for
the sideboard limits is described in
detail in the final rule implementing the
AFA that was published December 30,
2002 (67 FR 79692). To protect the
interests of other fishermen and
processors that did not benefit directly
from the AFA, these sideboards restrict
the ability of AFA vessels to participate
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
in directed fisheries for non-pollock
groundfish species. For Pacific cod,
these sideboards are based on the total
amount of Pacific cod retained by the
different AFA vessel sectors as a
percentage of the non-CDQ TAC in
1997. Currently, the AFA trawl CP
sector has a sideboard limit of 6.1
percent of the non-CDQ Pacific cod
TAC, and the non-exempt AFA trawl CV
sector (see the AFA final rule for an
explanation of the non-exempt vessels)
has a sideboard limit of 20.2 percent of
the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC.
This action proposes to remove
§ 679.64(a)(1)(ii) that specifies the
sideboard limits of BSAI Pacific cod for
the AFA trawl CPs. The establishment
of a separate Pacific cod allocation to
this sector under § 679.20(a)(7) negates
the need for the BSAI Pacific cod
sideboard which protects the historic
share of the non-AFA trawl CP sector
from being eroded by the AFA CP
vessels. For the same reason, BSAI
Pacific cod would be added to the list
of exceptions to the groundfish species
or species groups for which sideboard
harvest limits would be calculated for
AFA listed CPs in the introductory text
under § 679.64(a)(1).
The halibut and crab PSC sideboard
limits for both AFA sectors would be
maintained as set out in § 679.64(a) and
(b). These PSC sideboard limits would
continue to be managed through
directed fishing closures in the
groundfish fisheries for which the PSC
sideboard limit applies. The PSC
sideboards for the AFA trawl CP sector
would not be increased by this proposed
rule, but a portion of the PSC sideboards
would be set aside as an allocation for
use in this sector’s Pacific cod directed
fishery. To continue protection of the
non-AFA CVs, the Council proposed
under Amendment 85 to continue the
Pacific cod sideboards and the halibut
and crab PSC sideboards for AFA CVs.
Other Revisions
Four definitions for CPs would be
modified or added to the regulations in
accordance with the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, as noted
earlier. This proposed rule includes a
revised definition for AFA trawl CP and
new definitions for hook-and-line CP,
non-AFA trawl CP, and pot CP,
consistent with the provisions of the
Act. The proposed definition for hookand-line CP is substantively consistent
with the Act’s definition for longline CP
subsector.
The definition for ‘‘CDQ reserve’’
would be revised to change and update
terms and to generalize the cross
reference. Under current regulations,
‘‘CDQ reserve’’ is defined ‘‘as a
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
percentage of each groundfish TAC
apportioned under § 679.20(b)(1)(iii), a
percentage of a catch limit for halibut,
or a percentage of a guideline harvest
level for crab that has been set aside for
purposes of the CDQ Program.’’ The
proposed definition would change the
term ‘‘percentage,’’ where it appears, to
‘‘amount’’ to more accurately reflect that
the term ‘‘CDQ reserve’’ is used
elsewhere in 50 CFR part 679 to refer to
the annual amounts of the allocations to
the CDQ Program by weight for
groundfish and halibut, and by numbers
for crab. The term ‘‘guideline harvest
level’’ for crab would be replaced with
the term ‘‘TAC’’ to be consistent with
the term used for annual crab quotas in
50 CFR part 680. The cross reference
would be generalized because this is an
overall definition of CDQ Program
apportionments for various species
allocated to the program. Regulations at
§ 679.20(b)(1)(iii) discuss the
establishment of the CDQ reserve from
the nonspecified reserve. Amendment
85 would remove Pacific cod from this
process and direct that Pacific cod CDQ
be allocated directly from the Pacific
cod TAC, similar to the way that pollock
and sablefish are allocated to the CDQ
reserve. Thus, the paragraph cited is no
longer an applicable reference for the
CDQ reserve for pollock, sablefish, or
Pacific cod. Stepping back the reference
citation in the current definition from
‘‘§ 679.20(b)(1)(iii)’’ to the more general
level of ‘‘§ 679.20’’ would include all
the paragraphs that allocate groundfish
to the CDQ reserve.
The prohibition at § 679.7(d)(5) would
be revised to remove the term ‘‘crab
PSQ.’’ The red king, bairdi, and opilio
crab PSQs are managed with area
closures under the prohibitions at
§ 679.7(d)(6), (d)(7), and (d)(8) and
should not also have been included in
the prohibition at § 679.7(d)(5).
The introductory text of § 679.20
would be revised to clarify that this
section applies to vessels engaged in
directed fishing for groundfish in the
Gulf of Alaska (GOA) or the BSAI.
Current text ambiguously states ‘‘GOA
and BSAI,’’ which could be interpreted
as meaning that the sections applies
only to vessels that fish in both areas.
However, vessels directed fishing for
groundfish in either ‘‘the GOA or the
BSAI’’ are affected by the regulations in
this section.
The information in § 679.21(e)(1)(i)
and (e)(2)(ii), concerning the reserves in
the BSAI for the CDQ Program, would
be moved to § 679.21(e)(3)(i)(A) and
(e)(4)(i)(A) respectively. This regulatory
text would be moved from the
paragraphs allocating PSC by species, to
the more appropriate location under the
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
paragraphs making PSC apportionments
to the various fishery categories. The
regulatory text from § 679.21(e)(2)(i)
would become the new regulatory text
for § 679.21(e)(2).
This proposed rule would correct a
typographical error in newly
redesignated § 679.21(e)(1)(i), which
references red king crab, by revising the
reference from § 679.21(e)(1)(iii), which
applies to tanner crab, to the newly
redesignated § 679.21(e)(1)(i), which
applies to red king crab.
The proposed rule would revise the
heading of the newly redesignated
paragraph at § 679.21(e)(2)(vi) from
‘‘Chinook salmon’’ to ‘‘BS Chinook
salmon.’’ This revision would clarify
that only BS Chinook salmon is the
subject of this paragraph and would
better correlate with the heading of the
newly redesignated paragraph at
§ 679.21(e)(2)(viii) that is ‘‘AI Chinook
salmon.’’
For purposes of apportioning the
hook-and-line halibut PSC limit among
sectors, definitions would be added for
the new Pacific cod hook-and-line
fishery categories at § 679.21(e)(4)(ii)(A)
and (e)(4)(ii)(B). ‘‘Nontrawl fishery
categories’’ would be revised to replace
‘‘Pacific cod hook-and-line fishery’’
with ‘‘Pacific cod hook-and-line catcher
vessel fishery’’ and ‘‘Pacific cod hookand-line catcher/processor fishery’’ to
complement the previously noted
division of this category. The
regulations at § 679.21(e)(4)(ii)(C)
through (e)(4)(ii)(E) would be
unchanged except for their
redesignations due to adding a category
for the Pacific cod hook-and-line CP
fishery. The introductory text at
§ 679.21(e)(4)(ii) would remain
unchanged.
In § 679.23, paragraphs (e)(6) and
(e)(7), applicable through December 31,
2002, would be removed because they
are no longer in effect.
This proposed rule would correct a
typographical error at § 679.32(b), which
references the halibut PSC limit for
vessels using pot or jig gear, by revising
the reference in the paragraph from
§ 679.21(e)(5), which applies to seasonal
apportionments of bycatch allowances,
to § 679.21(e)(4), which applies to
nontrawl halibut PSC apportionment.
This proposed rule would correct a
typographical error at § 679.50(c)(1)(iii),
which references the chum salmon
savings area, by revising the reference in
the paragraph from § 679.21(e)(7)(vi),
which applies to Pacific herring, to
§ 679.21(e)(7)(vii), which applies to
chum salmon.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
Classification
At this time, NMFS has not
determined that the FMP amendment
that this rule would implement is
consistent with the national standards
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other
applicable laws. NMFS, in making that
determination, will take into account
the data, views, and comments received
during the comment period.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
An IRFA was prepared, as required by
section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the
economic impact this proposed rule, if
adopted, would have on small entities.
A description of the action, the reasons
why it is being considered, and a
statement of the objectives of, and the
legal basis for, this action are contained
at the beginning of this section in the
preamble and in the SUMMARY section
of the preamble. A summary of the
analysis follows. A copy of this analysis
is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES).
The directly regulated entities are the
commercial fishing entities operating
vessels that participate in the BSAI
Pacific cod directed fisheries and the six
CDQ groups. Of the 310 vessels
participating in 2003, 169 vessels are
estimated to be small entities directly
regulated by the proposed action, as
detailed below.
For purposes of an IRFA, the Small
Business Administration (SBA) has
established that a business involved in
fish harvesting is a small business if it
is independently owned and operated
and not dominant in its field of
operation (including its affiliates) and if
it has combined annual gross receipts
not in excess of $4.0 million for all its
affiliated operations worldwide. A
seafood processor is a small business if
it is independently owned and operated,
not dominant in its field of operation,
and employs 500 or fewer persons on a
full-time, part-time, temporary, or other
basis, at all its affiliated operations
worldwide.
Because the SBA does not have a size
criterion for businesses that are
involved in both the harvesting and
processing of seafood products, NMFS
has in the past applied and continues to
apply SBA’s fish harvesting criterion for
these businesses because CPs are first
and foremost fish harvesting businesses.
Therefore, a business involved in both
the harvesting and processing of seafood
products is a small business if it meets
the $4.0 million criterion for fish
harvesting operations. NMFS currently
is reviewing its small entity size
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5669
classification for all CPs in the United
States. However, until new guidance is
adopted, NMFS will continue to use the
annual receipts standard for CPs. NMFS
plans to issue new guidance in the near
future.
This IRFA used the most recent year
of data available to conduct this analysis
(2003). As stated previously, the
commercial entities directly regulated
by the proposed action are divided into
nine sectors for the purpose of (nonCDQ) BSAI Pacific cod allocations, and
the CDQ allocation is considered a
separate sector. A description of the
participants in, and the eligibility
requirements for, each non-CDQ sector
is provided in detail above, as is a
description of the CDQ sector.
Vessels that were considered large
entities, for purposes of the IRFA, were
those with individual annual gross
receipts greater than $4.0 million, or
those affiliated under owners of
multiple vessels, contractual
relationships, and/or affiliated through
fishing cooperative membership (e.g.,
AFA) that, when combined with
earnings from all such affiliated
operations, had aggregate annual gross
revenues greater than $4.0 million.
Insufficient documentation of multiple
and joint-ownership structures,
contractual affiliations, interlocking
agreements, etc., among vessels in the
various fleets of interest, herein, exist
with which to confidently estimate the
number of directly regulated small (and
large) entities. Recognizing this, the
IRFA is understood to likely
overestimate the actual number of
directly regulated small entities subject
to this action.
The majority of the CVs in all gear
sectors can be considered small entities
under a conservative application of the
existing threshold criterion. In 2003,
only the AFA trawl CVs were
considered large entities, as they are
known to be party to a harvest
cooperative system. The remaining 138
CVs of all gear types appear to meet the
criterion for a small entity, as applied by
evaluating the 2003 gross revenue data
on a per vessel basis. However, as just
noted, little is known about the
ownership structure of the vessels in the
fleets. Thus, based on the best available
data, the following vessels appear to
meet the application of the criterion
above for a small entity in 2003: 25
hook-and-line and pot CVs <60 ft LOA;
22 non-AFA trawl CVs; 15 jig CVs; 6
hook-and-line CVs ≥60 ft LOA; and 70
pot CVs ≥60 ft LOA.
In the CP sector, the available data
indicate that fewer than half meet the
threshold for a small entity, as applied
by evaluating the 2003 gross revenue on
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5670
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
a per vessel basis. Thirty-one of the 81
participating vessels in 2003 had gross
receipts not in excess of $4.0 million.
Again, because little is known about the
ownership structure of the vessels in the
fleets, it is likely that the IRFA
overestimates the number of small
entities. Thus, based on the best
available data, the following vessels
meet the application of the criterion
above for a small entity in 2003: 24
hook-and-line CPs; 4 non-AFA trawl
CPs; and 3 pot CPs. In sum, of the 310
vessels participating in 2003, 169
vessels are estimated as small entities
directly regulated by the proposed
action.
The six CDQ groups participating in
the CDQ Program are not-for-profit
entities that are not dominant in the
overall BSAI fishing industry. Thus, the
six CDQ groups directly regulated by the
proposed action would be considered
small entities or ‘‘small organizations’’
under the RFA. Thus, under a
conservative application of the SBA
criterion and the best available data, the
total number of small entities directly
regulated by the proposed action is
estimated as 175.
Within this universe of small entities
impacts may accrue differentially; i.e.,
some small entities could be negatively
affected and others positively affected.
Therefore, the Council deliberately
sought to provide considerable
accommodation for the smallest of the
small entities under this amendment.
Thus, while the proposed action is
distributional in nature, the overall
impact to the smallest of the small
entities is expected to be positive.
This regulation does not impose new
record keeping or reporting
requirements on the directly regulated
small entities.
This proposed action does not
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other
Federal rules.
The IRFA analyzed the ‘‘no action’’
alternative (Alternative 1) and the
proposed action (Alternative 2). Each of
these alternatives was comprised of the
same set of eight components, or issues.
Alternative 1 would continue the
following: (1) the current overall gear
allocations in the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery that were established under
Amendment 46 in 1997; (2) the current
CDQ allocation of 7.5 percent of the
BSAI Pacific cod TAC; and (3) the
current apportionment of the fixed gear
portion of the BSAI Pacific cod nonCDQ TAC established under
Amendment 77 in 2004. Alternative 1
also would continue shared halibut and
crab PSC allowances to the BSAI Pacific
cod trawl fishery category, which would
mean that halibut and crab PSC harvest
by each trawl sector would accrue to the
same PSC allowance. Similarly,
Alternative 1 would continue a shared
halibut PSC allowance to the BSAI
hook-and-line Pacific cod fishery
category.
Before the Council made its decisions
for Amendment 85, thus forming the
proposed action, it considered several
options under each of the eight
components. These many options are
analyzed in the RIR. The combination of
these options resulted in the evaluation
of a multitude of potential alternatives.
For example, Table 8 provides a
summary of the component concerning
sector allocations, including the range of
potential allocations to each non–CDQ
sector considered by the Council, the
current sector allocations, and the
selections made under the preferred
alternative.
TABLE 8. PERCENT NON-CDQ SECTOR ALLOCATIONS BY ALTERNATIVE
Current
(alternative 1)
Sectors
Range of allocations Council considered
Proposed action
(alternative 2)
Jig
2.0
0.1 - 2.0
1.4
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft LOA
0.7
0.1 - 2.0
2.0
Hook-and-line CV ≥60 ft LOA
0.2
0.1 - 0.4
0.2
40.8
45.8 - 50.3
48.7
Pot CV ≥60 ft (18.3 m) LOA
7.6
7.3 - 9.2
8.4
Pot CP
1.7
1.4 - 2.3
1.5
23.5 (AFA CP sector subject to
6.1% sideboard)
0.9 - 3.7
2.3
12.7 - 16.2
13.4
17.8 - 24.4
22.1
Hook-and-line CP
AFA trawl CP
Non AFA trawl CP
AFA trawl CV
23.5 (non-exempt AFA CV sector subject to 20.2% sideboard)
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Non-AFA trawl CV
0.5 - 3.1
Amendment 85 is thus one derivation
of many possible options, reflecting an
effort to balance the economic and
social objectives for the action against
the potential burden placed on directly
regulated entities (especially those
which are ‘‘small’’). One option was
selected under each of the eight
components to comprise its final
preferred alternative. The preferred
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
alternative is described in detail in the
RIR.
Several measures are included in the
proposed rule that would reduce
impacts on small entities. A specific
means to facilitate economic
opportunity and stability for small
entities participating in the Pacific cod
fisheries would be to establish BSAI
Pacific cod allocations for the smallest
of the small entities (jig vessels and the
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
<60 ft LOA hook-and-line and pot CVs)
that represent a net increase over their
actual catch history. This would provide
for potential growth in those sectors. On
average during 1995 to 2003, the
combined harvest history by these
sectors was about 0.5 percent of the
retained BSAI Pacific cod harvest.
However, in recent years it appears that
the <60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector has
increased its participation in the BSAI
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Pacific cod fishery and could benefit
from additional quota, if it were made
available. This specific accommodation
for small entities is included in the
proposed rule.
The BSAI Pacific cod fisheries are
currently managed through a complex
series of permits, gear and area
endorsements, and licenses. Many are
predicated on historical participation
and/or performance thresholds (e.g.,
meeting or exceeding a specific
threshold landing in a specific series of
seasons, etc.). Many of these
requirements result in extremely high
entry costs and physical barriers for
small vessels and entry level operations.
To relieve these burdens and obstacles
to participation, an important means of
accommodating small entities can be
‘‘exemptions’’ from, for example,
requirements to acquire some specific
permits, and/or meeting historical catch
and participation thresholds, extended
to particularly vulnerable or
disproportionately burdened classes of
smaller vessels.
Recognizing the opportunity to
facilitate and sustain small entity
participation, the Council incorporated
a number of exemptions for small
entities in the action. The proposed rule
would maintain the current reallocation
process whereby any unused jig quota is
first considered for reallocation to the
<60 ft LOA fixed gear sector before
being reallocated to any other sector.
The proposed rule also would change
the jig sector seasonal allowance such
that 20 percent more of the jig allocation
is allowed to be harvested in the first
half of the year. Thus, more Pacific cod
may potentially be harvested by the <60
ft LOA fixed gear sector earlier in the
year, when the weather is preferable for
this small boat sector. The proposed
rule also would specify that the third
trimester of the jig allocation, if it is to
be reallocated, should be available to
the <60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector on
or about September 1. The intent of this
provision is to reallocate quota between
the small boat CV sectors as early in the
year as possible, in order for these
sectors to have an opportunity to
harvest the quota under better weather
conditions.
The proposed action also would
increase the BSAI Pacific cod allocation
to the CDQ Program. The proposed rule
would increase the Pacific cod CDQ
allocation from 7.5 percent of the Pacific
cod TAC to 10.7 percent, as mandated
by the recent amendments to the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. Similar to the
status quo, this allocation would fund
all of the directed and nontarget catch
of Pacific cod taken in the CDQ
fisheries.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
A tradeoff would exist in terms of
impacts on the small entities in the nonCDQ sectors whose allocations would be
reduced (proportionally by 3.2 percent)
by the increase to the CDQ Program.
However, the proposed action
represents a positive effect on the six
small entities that comprise the CDQ
groups in terms of potential revenues
resulting from an increased allocation.
This increase in royalty payments is
estimated as approximately $1.1
million. Nonetheless, efforts to
minimize the burden on the smallest of
small entities, as discussed above, by
exempting them from the most onerous
permit and recency requirements, and
by allocating Pacific cod TAC amounts
in excess of their recent Pacific cod
harvest levels, reflects a sincere effort to
address the needs of these small
entities.
In sum, many vessels in each sector
directly regulated by the proposed
action are small entities. Because this
action is principally designed to
reapportion access to the cod resource
among current user groups, by
definition, it represents tradeoffs (i.e.,
some small entities could be negatively
affected, while others are positively
affected). In addition, the six CDQ
groups would receive an increased
allocation under the proposed action.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and
reporting requirements.
Dated: February 1, 2007.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 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.; 1540(f);
1801 et seq.; 1851 note; 3631 et seq.
2. In § 679.2, remove the definition for
‘‘AFA catcher/processor’’, revise the
definition for ‘‘CDQ reserve’’, and add
definitions for ‘‘AFA trawl catcher/
processor’’, ‘‘Hook-and-line catcher/
processor’’, ‘‘Non-AFA trawl catcher/
processor’’, and ‘‘Pot catcher/processor’’
in alphabetical order to read as follows:
§ 679.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
AFA trawl catcher/processor means:
(1) For purposes of BS pollock and all
BSAI groundfish fisheries other than
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5671
Atka mackerel, flathead sole, Greenland
turbot, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch,
rock sole, and yellowfin sole, a catcher/
processor that is permitted to harvest BS
pollock under § 679.4(l)(2).
(2) For purposes of BSAI Atka
mackerel, flathead sole, Greenland
turbot, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch,
rock sole, and yellowfin sole, a catcher/
processor that is permitted to harvest BS
pollock and that is listed under
§ 679.4(l)(2)(i).
*
*
*
*
*
CDQ reserve means the amount of
each groundfish TAC apportioned under
§ 679.20, the amount of each catch limit
for halibut, or the amount of TAC for
crab that has been set aside for purposes
of the CDQ Program.
*
*
*
*
*
Hook-and-line catcher/processor
means a catcher/processor vessel that is
named on a valid LLP license that is
noninterim and transferable, or that is
interim and subsequently becomes
noninterim and transferable, and that is
endorsed for Bering Sea or Aleutian
Islands catcher/processor fishing
activity, catcher/processor, Pacific cod,
and hook-and-line gear.
*
*
*
*
*
Non-AFA trawl catcher/processor
means, for purposes of BSAI Atka
mackerel, flathead sole, Greenland
turbot, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch,
rock sole, and yellowfin sole, a catcher/
processor vessel using trawl gear and
that:
(1) Is not an AFA trawl catcher/
processor listed under § 679.4(l)(2)(i);
(2) Is named on a valid LLP license
that is endorsed for Bering Sea or
Aleutian Islands trawl catcher/processor
fishing activity; and
(3) Was used to harvest with trawl
gear in the BSAI and process not less
than a total of 150 mt of Atka mackerel,
flathead sole, Greenland turbot, Pacific
cod, Pacific ocean perch, rock sole, or
yellowfin sole between January 1, 1997,
and December 31, 2002.
*
*
*
*
*
Pot catcher/processor means a
catcher/processor vessel that is named
on a valid LLP license that is
noninterim and transferable, or that is
interim and subsequently becomes
noninterim and transferable, and that is
endorsed for Bering Sea or Aleutian
Islands catcher/processor fishing
activity, catcher/processor, Pacific cod,
and pot gear.
*
*
*
*
*
3. In § 679.7, revise paragraph (d)(5)
and add paragraph (d)(25) to read as
follows:
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5672
§ 679.7
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Prohibitions
Sector
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(5) For a CDQ group, exceed a CDQ
or a halibut PSQ.
*
*
*
*
*
(25) For a CDQ group, exceed a
seasonal allowance of Pacific cod under
§ 679.20(a)(7)(i)(B).
*
*
*
*
*
4. In § 679.20, remove paragraph
(b)(1)(iv) and revise the section’s
introductory text and paragraph (a)(7) to
read as follows:
% Allocation
*
§ 679.20
This section applies to vessels
engaged in directed fishing for
groundfish in the GOA or the BSAI.
(a) * * *
(7) Pacific cod TAC, BSAI—(i) CDQ
reserve and seasonal allowances. (A) A
total of 10.7 percent of the annual
Pacific cod TAC will be allocated to the
CDQ Program in the annual harvest
specifications required under paragraph
(c) of this section. The Pacific cod CDQ
allocation will be deducted from the
annual Pacific cod TAC before
allocations to the non-CDQ sectors are
made under paragraph (a)(7)(ii) of this
section.
(B) The BSAI Pacific cod CDQ gear
allowances by season, as those seasons
are specified under § 679.23(e)(5), are as
follows:
A season
B season
C season
(1) Trawl
60%
20%
20%
(2) Hook-andline CP and
hook-and-line
CV ≥60 ft (18.3
m) LOA
60%
40%
no C
season
(3) Jig
40%
20%
40%
(4) All other
non-trawl gear
no
seasonal
allowance
no
seasonal
allowance
no
seasonal
allowance
(ii) Non-CDQ allocations—(A) Sector
allocations. The remainder of the BSAI
Pacific cod TAC after subtraction of the
CDQ reserve for Pacific cod will be
allocated to non-CDQ sectors as follows:
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Sector
% Allocation
(1) Jig vessels
1.4
(2) Hook-and-line/pot
CV <60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA
2.0
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
0.2
(4) Hook-and-line CP
48.7
Jkt 211001
(5) Pot CV ≥60 ft
(18.3 m) LOA
8.4
(6) Pot CP
1.5
(7) AFA trawl CP
2.3
(8) Non-AFA trawl
CP
13.4
(9) Trawl CV
General limitations.
Gear Type
(3) Hook-and-line CV
≥60 ft (18.3 m) LOA
22.1
(B) Incidental catch allowance.
During the annual harvest specifications
process set forth at paragraph (c) of this
section, the Regional Administrator will
specify an amount of Pacific cod that
NMFS estimates will be taken as
incidental catch in directed fisheries for
groundfish other than Pacific cod by the
hook-and-line and pot gear sectors. This
amount will be the incidental catch
allowance and will be deducted from
the aggregate portion of Pacific cod TAC
annually allocated to the hook-and-line
and pot gear sectors before the
allocations under paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(A)
of this section are made to these sectors.
(iii) Reallocation among non-CDQ
sectors. If, during a fishing year, the
Regional Administrator determines that
a non-CDQ sector will be unable to
harvest the entire amount of Pacific cod
allocated to that sector under paragraph
(a)(7)(ii)(A) of this section, the Regional
Administrator will reallocate the
projected unused amount of Pacific cod
to other sectors through notification in
the Federal Register. Any reallocation
decision by the Regional Administrator
will take into account the capability of
a sector to harvest the reallocated
amount of Pacific cod, and the following
reallocation hierarchy:
(A) Catcher vessel sectors. The
Regional Administrator will reallocate
projected unharvested amounts of
Pacific cod TAC from a catcher vessel
sector as follows: first to the jig sector,
or to the less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA
hook-and-line or pot catcher vessel
sector, or to both of these sectors;
second, to the greater than or equal to
60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hook-and-line or to
the greater than or equal to 60 ft (18.3
m) LOA pot catcher vessel sectors; and
third to the trawl catcher vessel sector.
If the Regional Administrator
determines that a projected unharvested
amount from the jig sector allocation,
the less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hookand-line or pot catcher vessel sector
allocation, or the greater than or equal
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hook-and-line
catcher vessel sector allocation is
unlikely to be harvested through this
hierarchy, the Regional Administrator
will reallocate that amount to the hookand-line catcher/processor sector. If the
Regional Administrator determines that
a projected unharvested amount from a
greater than or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA pot catcher vessel sector allocation
is unlikely to be harvested through this
hierarchy, the Regional Administrator
will reallocate that amount to the pot
catcher/processor sector in accordance
with the hierarchy set forth in paragraph
(a)(7)(iii)(C) of this section. If the
Regional Administrator determines that
a projected unharvested amount from a
trawl catcher vessel sector allocation is
unlikely to be harvested through this
hierarchy, the Regional Administrator
will reallocate that amount to the other
trawl sectors in accordance with the
hierarchy set forth in paragraph
(a)(7)(iii)(B) of this section.
(B) Trawl catcher/processor sectors.
The Regional Administrator will
reallocate any projected unharvested
amounts of Pacific cod TAC from a
trawl sector (trawl catcher vessel, AFA
trawl catcher/processor, and non-AFA
trawl catcher/processor sectors) to other
trawl sectors before unharvested
amounts are reallocated and
apportioned to specified gear sectors as
follows:
(1) 83.1 percent to the hook-and-line
catcher/processor sector,
(2) 2.6 percent to the pot catcher/
processor sector, and
(3) 14.3 percent to the greater than or
equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA pot catcher
vessel sector.
(C) Pot gear sectors. The Regional
Administrator will reallocate any
projected unharvested amounts of
Pacific cod TAC from the pot catcher/
processor sector to the greater than or
equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA pot catcher
vessel sector, and from the greater than
or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA pot
catcher vessel sector to the pot catcher/
processor sector before reallocating it to
the hook-and-line catcher/processor
sector.
(iv) Non-CDQ seasonal allowances—
(A) Seasonal allowances by sector. The
BSAI Pacific cod sector allowances are
apportioned by season, as those seasons
are specified at § 679.23(e)(5), as
follows:
Seasonal Allowances
Sector
(1) Trawl
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
A season
B season
C season
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Seasonal Allowances
Sector
A season
B season
C season
(i) Trawl CV
74 %
11 %
15 %
(ii) Trawl CP
75 %
25 %
0%
(2) Hook-andline CP, hookand-line CV
≥60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA, and pot
gear vessels
≥60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA
51 %
49 %
no C
season
(3) Jig vessels
60 %
20 %
20 %
(4) All other
nontrawl vessels
no
seasonal
allowance
no
seasonal
allowance
no
seasonal
allowance
(B) Unused seasonal allowances. Any
unused portion of a seasonal allowance
of Pacific cod from any sector except the
jig sector will be reallocated to that
sector’s next season during the current
fishing year unless the Regional
Administrator makes a determination
under paragraph (a)(7)(iii) of this section
that the sector will be unable to harvest
its allocation.
(C) Jig sector. The Regional
Administrator will reallocate any
projected unused portion of a seasonal
allowance of Pacific cod for the jig
sector under this section to the less than
60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hook-and-line or pot
catcher vessel sector. The Regional
Administrator will reallocate the
projected unused portion of the jig
sector’s C season allowance on or about
September 1 of each year.
*
*
*
*
*
5. Section 679.21 is amended by:
A. Removing paragraph (e)(1)(i).
B. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)
through (e)(1)(ix) as (e)(1)(i) through
(e)(1)(viii), respectively.
C. Adding paragraph (e)(3)(vi).
D. Revising paragraphs (e)(2), (e)(3)(i),
(e)(3)(v), and (e)(4).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
§ 679.21 Prohibited species bycatch
management.
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(2) Nontrawl gear, halibut. The PSC
limit of halibut caught while conducting
any nontrawl fishery for groundfish in
the BSAI during any fishing year is the
amount of halibut equivalent to 900 mt
of halibut mortality.
(3) * * *
(i) General. (A) An amount equivalent
to 7.5 percent of each PSC limit set forth
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (iv) and
paragraphs (e)(1)(vi) through (e)(1)(viii)
of this section is allocated to the
groundfish CDQ Program as PSQ
reserve. The PSQ reserve is not
apportioned by gear or fishery.
(B) NMFS, after consultation with the
Council and after subtraction of the PSQ
reserve, will apportion each PSC limit
set forth in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through
(vii) of this section into bycatch
allowances for the fishery categories
defined in paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of this
section, based on each category’s
proportional share of the anticipated
incidental catch during a fishing year of
prohibited species for which a PSC limit
is specified and the need to optimize the
amount of total groundfish harvested
under established PSC limits.
*
*
*
*
*
(v) PSC apportionment to Pacific cod
trawl fisheries. The apportionment of
the PSC allowance of halibut and crab
to the Pacific cod trawl fishery category
under paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of this section
will be divided among the trawl sectors
established at § 679.20(a)(7)(ii), as
follows: 70.7 percent for the trawl
catcher vessel sector; 4.4 percent for the
AFA trawl catcher/processor sector; and
24.9 percent for the non-AFA trawl
catcher/processor sector.
(vi) AFA prohibited species catch
limitations. Halibut and crab PSC limits
for the AFA trawl catcher/processor
sector and the AFA trawl catcher vessel
sector will be established according to
the procedures and formulas set out in
paragraph (e)(3)(v) of this section and in
§ 679.64(a) and (b) and managed
through directed fishing closures for the
AFA trawl catcher/processor sector and
the AFA trawl catcher vessel sector in
the groundfish fisheries for which the
PSC limit applies.
(4) Halibut apportionment to nontrawl
fishery categories—(i) General. (A) An
amount equivalent to 7.5 percent of the
nontrawl gear halibut PSC limit set forth
in paragraph (e)(2) of this section is
allocated to the groundfish CDQ
Program as PSQ reserve. The PSQ
reserve is not apportioned by gear or
fishery.
(B) NMFS, after consultation with the
Council and after subtraction of the PSQ
reserve, will apportion the halibut PSC
limit for nontrawl gear set forth under
paragraph (e)(2) of this section into
bycatch allowances for the nontrawl
fishery categories defined under
paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section.
(C) Apportionment of the nontrawl
halibut PSC limit among the nontrawl
fishery categories will be based on each
category’s proportional share of the
anticipated bycatch mortality of halibut
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5673
during a fishing year and the need to
optimize the amount of total groundfish
harvested under the nontrawl halibut
PSC limit.
(D) The sum of all bycatch allowances
of any prohibited species will equal its
PSC limit.
(ii) Nontrawl fishery categories. For
purposes of apportioning the nontrawl
halibut PSC limit among fisheries, the
following fishery categories are
specified and defined in terms of roundweight equivalents of those BSAI
groundfish species for which a TAC has
been specified under § 679.20.
(A) Pacific cod hook-and-line catcher
vessel fishery. Catcher vessels fishing
with hook-and-line gear during any
weekly reporting period that results in
a retained catch of Pacific cod that is
greater than the retained amount of any
other groundfish species.
(B) Pacific cod hook-and-line catcher/
processor fishery. Catcher/processors
fishing with hook-and-line gear during
any weekly reporting period that results
in a retained catch of Pacific cod that is
greater than the retained amount of any
other groundfish species.
(C) Sablefish hook-and-line fishery.
Fishing with hook-and-line gear during
any weekly reporting period that results
in a retained catch of sablefish that is
greater than the retained amount of any
other groundfish species.
(D) Groundfish jig gear fishery.
Fishing with jig gear during any weekly
reporting period that results in a
retained catch of groundfish.
(E) Groundfish pot gear fishery.
Fishing with pot gear under restrictions
set forth in § 679.24(b) during any
weekly reporting period that results in
a retained catch of groundfish.
(F) Other nontrawl fisheries. Fishing
for groundfish with nontrawl gear
during any weekly reporting period that
results in a retained catch of groundfish
and does not qualify as a Pacific cod
hook-and-line catcher vessel fishery, a
Pacific cod hook-and-line catcher/
processor fishery, a sablefish hook-andline fishery, a jig gear fishery, or a
groundfish pot gear fishery as defined
under this paragraph (e)(4)(ii).
*
*
*
*
*
§ 679.23
[Amended]
6. In § 679.23, remove paragraphs
(e)(6) and (e)(7).
7. Section 679.64 is amended by:
A. Removing paragraph (a)(1)
introductory text.
B. Redesignating paragraph (a)(1)(i) as
paragraph (a)(1) introductory text.
C. Redesignating paragraph (a)(2)
introductory text as paragraph (a)(1)(i).
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
5674
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules
D. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(2)(i)
and (ii) as paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A) and(B),
respectively.
E. Redesignating paragraph (a)(3)
introductory text as paragraph (a)(1)(ii).
F. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(3)(i)
through (iii) as paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(A)
through (C), respectively.
G. Redesignating paragraph (a)(4)
introductory text as paragraph (a)(1)(iii).
H. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(4)(i)
and (ii) as paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(A) and
(B), respectively.
I. Redesignating paragraph (a)(5) as
paragraph (a)(2).
J. Redesignating paragraph (a)(6) as
paragraph (a)(3).
K. Revising newly redesignated
paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text and
(a)(3).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
§ 679.64 Harvesting sideboards limits in
other fisheries.
(a) * * *
(1) How will groundfish sideboard
limits for AFA listed catcher/processors
be calculated? Except for Aleutian
Islands pollock and BSAI Pacific cod,
the Regional Administrator will
establish annual AFA catcher/processor
harvest limits for each groundfish
species or species group in which a TAC
is specified for an area or subarea of the
BSAI as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
(3) How will AFA catcher/processor
sideboard limits be managed? The
Regional Administrator will manage
Paragraph(s)
groundfish harvest limits and PSC
bycatch limits for AFA catcher/
processors through directed fishing
closures in fisheries established under
paragraph (a)(1) of this section in
accordance with the procedures set out
in §§ 679.20(d)(1)(iv) and
679.21(e)(3)(vi).
*
*
*
*
*
§§ 679.20, 679.21, 679.31, 679.32, 679.50,
and 679.64 [Amended]
8. In the table below, for each of the
paragraphs shown under the
‘‘Paragraph’’ column, remove the phrase
indicated under the ‘‘Remove’’ column
and replace it with the phrase indicated
under the ‘‘Add’’ column for the
number of times indicated in the
‘‘Frequency’’ column.
Remove
Add
Frequency
§ 679.20(b)(1)(i)
except pollock and the
except pollock, Pacific cod, and the
2
Newly redesignated § 679.21(e)(1)(i) introductory text
paragraphs (e)(1)(iii)(A) through
paragraphs (e)(1)(i)(A) through
1
Newly redesignated § 679.21(e)(1)(ii) introductory text
paragraphs (e)(1)(iii)(A) and
paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)(A) and
1
Paragraph heading of newly redesignated § 679.21(e)(1)(vi)
Chinook salmon
BS Chinook salmon
1
§ 679.21(e)(3)(ii)(B)(2)
paragraph (e)(1)(ii) of
paragraph (e)(1)(i) of
1
§ 679.21(e)(7)(viii) introductory text
paragraphs (e)(1)(vii) and (e)(1)(ix) of
paragraphs (e)(1)(vi) and (e)(1)(viii) of
1
§ 679.21(e)(7)(viii)(A) introductory text
paragraph (e)(1)(vii) of
paragraph (e)(1)(vi) of
1
§ 679.21(e)(7)(viii)(B) introductory text
paragraph (e)(1)(ix) of
paragraph (e)(1)(viii) of
1
§ 679.31(c)
(See § 679.20(b)(1)(iii))
(See § 679.20(a)(7)(i) and (b)(1)(iii))
1
§ 679.31(e)
(See § 679.21(e)(1)(i) and (e)(2)(ii)).
(See § 679.21(e)(3)(i)(A) and (e)(4)(i)(A).
1
§ 679.32(b)
under § 679.21(e)(5) in
under § 679.21(e)(4) in
1
§ 679.50(c)(1)(iii)
under § 679.21(e)(7)(vi), or
under § 679.21(e)(7)(vii), or
1
Newly redesignated § 679.64(a)(1)(i)(B)
paragraph (a)(2)(i) of
paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) of
1
Newly redesignated § 679.64(a)(1)(iii)(A)
paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) through (a)(3) of
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(ii) of
1
Newly redesignated § 679.64(a)(1)(iii)(B)
paragraph (a)(4)(i) of
paragraph (a)(1)(iii)(A) of
1
§ 679.64(b)(5)
and (e)(3)(v).
and (e)(3)(vi).
1
[FR Doc. 07–538 Filed 2–2–07; 2:22 pm]
erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\07FEP1.SGM
07FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 7, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5653-5674]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-538]
[[Page 5654]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 061206324-6324-01; I.D. 112006I]
RIN 0648-AU48
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod
Allocations in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a proposed rule that would implement Amendment 85
to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) and that would implement recent
changes to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act). If approved, Amendment 85 would modify the
current allocations of Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area
(BSAI) Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) among various harvest
sectors and seasonal apportionments thereof. This action also would
establish a hierarchy for reallocating projected unharvested amounts of
Pacific cod from certain sectors to other sectors, revise catcher/
processor sector definitions, modify the management of Pacific cod
incidental catch that occurs in other groundfish fisheries, eliminate
the Pacific cod nonspecified reserve, adjust the seasonal allowances of
Pacific cod, subdivide among sectors the annual prohibited species
catch (PSC) limits currently apportioned to the Pacific cod trawl and
nontrawl fisheries, and modify the sideboard restrictions for American
Fisheries Act (AFA) catcher/processor (CP) vessels. In addition, this
proposed rule would increase the percentage of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC
apportioned to the Community Development Quota (CDQ) Program. Amendment
85 is necessary to reduce uncertainty about the availability of yearly
harvests within sectors caused by reallocations, and to maintain
stability among sectors in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. This would be
accomplished by establishing allocations that more closely reflect
historical use by sector than do current allocations while considering
socioeconomic and community factors, thus reducing the need for
reallocations during the fishing year (inseason). This proposed rule
also is necessary to partially implement recent changes to the
Magnuson-Stevens Act that require a total allocation of 10.7 percent of
the TAC of each directed fishery to the CDQ Program starting January 1,
2008. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the FMP, and other applicable laws.
DATES: Comments must be received no later than March 26, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS,
Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer. Comments may be submitted by:
Hand delivery: 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK;
E-mail: 0648-AU48-PR-AMD85@noaa.gov. Include in the
subject line the following document identifier: ``Pacific cod RIN 0648
AU48.'' E-mail comments, with or without attachments, are limited to 5
megabytes;
Fax: 907-586-7557;
Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668; or
Webform at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at that site for
submitting comments.
Copies of Amendment 85 and the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA)
prepared for this action are available from NMFS at the above address
or from the NMFS Alaska Region website at https://www.fakr.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Carls, 907-586-7228 or
becky.carls@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone of the BSAI under the FMP. The North Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and implementing the FMP appear at
50 CFR parts 600 and 679.
The Council has submitted Amendment 85 for review by the Secretary
of Commerce, and a notice of availability of the FMP amendment was
published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2006, (71 FR 70943)
with comments on the FMP amendment invited through February 5, 2007.
Background and Need for Action
NMFS uses TACs to manage the harvest of groundfish species in the
BSAI as one management tool to ensure sustainable fisheries. The FMP
and its implementing regulations require NMFS, after consultation with
the Council, to annually specify the TAC for each target species and
for the ``other species'' category governed by the FMP. The Council
develops TAC recommendations based on the acceptable biological catch
(ABC) for each stock of fish and other socioeconomic factors. The ABC
is based on the status of the stock, environmental conditions, and
other ecological factors.
The FMP requires a TAC to be less than or equal to the ABC for each
fish stock. Between 1991 and 1994, between 1998 and 2001, and in 2005,
the Pacific cod TACs were set equal to their ABCs. Thus, typically all
the BSAI Pacific cod that is available for harvest in a particular
fishing year is completely allocated. The Pacific cod TAC allocations
and apportionments for 2006 and 2007 are listed in Table 5 of the
groundfish specifications published March 3, 2006 (71 FR 10900), and
may be changed as necessary during any fishing year pursuant to 50 CFR
679.20(a)(7)(ii) and 679.25(a). Final 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications implemented a 2006 BSAI Pacific cod TAC of 194,000 mt,
which equaled the 2006 ABC for Pacific cod. Shortly after publication,
this TAC was adjusted downward to 188,180 mt (71 FR 13777, March 17,
2006) to accommodate a new Pacific cod fishery in State of Alaska
waters in the Aleutian Islands and to avoid exceeding the ABC.
The current regulations provide for the overall TAC of BSAI Pacific
cod, after subtraction of reserves, to be subdivided or allocated among
eight non-CDQ fishing industry sectors based on the type of fishing
gear used (50 CFR 679.20(a)(7)). Basically, these gear sectors include
trawl gear, fixed gear (hook-and-line and pot), and jig gear. These
basic allocations are further subdivided between catcher/processor
vessels (CPs) that process their catch and catcher vessels (CVs) that
catch fish but do not process it. Most allocations are further
apportioned between seasons. The purpose of these allocations and
apportionments is to prevent one industry sector from unfairly
affecting the harvesting opportunities of other sectors and to ensure
temporal dispersion of harvest to protect Steller sea lions (SSLs).
Currently, the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC is fully distributed
among the
[[Page 5655]]
following eight competing harvest sectors: jig, fixed gear (pot and
hook-and-line gear) CVs less than 60 ft (18.3 m) length overall
(hereafter, <60 ft LOA), hook-and-line CVs greater than or equal to 60
ft LOA (hereafter, [gteqt]60 ft LOA), hook-and-line CPs, pot CVs
[gteqt]60 ft LOA, pot CPs, trawl CPs, and trawl CVs. Several FMP
amendments, implemented beginning in 1994, have allocated Pacific cod
among these sectors. The previous and current allocations, and those
proposed under Amendment 85, are summarized in Table 1. The amendments
are described in more detail below.
Table 1. Percent sector allocations by amendment and year implemented
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amend. 24 Amend. 46 Amend. 64 Amend. 77 2004 Proposed
Sector 1994 1997 2000 (Current) Amend. 85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft LOA 44.0 51.0 0.7 0.7 2.0
------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA ............. ............. 0.2 0.2 0.2
------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP ............. ............. 40.8 40.8 48.7
------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA ............. ............. 9.3 7.6 8.4
------------------------------------ --------------------------------
Pot CP ............. ............. ............ 1.7 1.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CP 54.0 23.5 23.5 23.5 2.3
------------------------------------ ---------------
Non-AFA trawl CP ............. ............. ............ ............... 13.4
------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV ............. 23.5 23.5 23.5 22.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BSAI Pacific Cod Allocation History
In the early years of the fishery, BSAI Pacific cod was an open
access fishery prosecuted primarily by trawl gear. Under open access
management, Pacific cod was not allocated among competing fishermen. As
the market value of Pacific cod increased with the removal of foreign
and joint venture fisheries in 1990, the domestic fixed gear sector
(including pot and hook-and-line gear) began to increase its harvest of
the TAC. Hook-and-line CPs, in particular, contributed to the growth of
the fixed gear sector's use of Pacific cod TAC. Any consideration of
rationalizing the Pacific cod fishery during the 1990s through
individual fishing quotas (IFQs) or other market-based allocation
schemes was strongly opposed by the fixed gear sector as its share of
the Pacific cod TAC was growing. At this stage of the industry's
development, sector allocations emerged as a policy more acceptable to
the Pacific cod fleet than IFQs or similar rationalization policies.
A sector allocation is based on the principle that good fences make
good neighbors. The fence in this case is the division of the TAC among
competing harvesting sectors. Each sector is allocated its own portion
of the TAC that is protected from incursions by other sectors. Federal
regulations require a sector to stop conducting directed fishing for
Pacific cod when its allocation is exhausted, even if TAC allocated to
other sectors remains unharvested. Although sector allocations do not
prevent a race-for-fish by competing fishermen within a sector, they do
bring some short-term stability and certainty to fishermen within the
sectors as compared to having no sector allocations. This was the
policy rationale for the Council's first recommendation for sector
allocations of Pacific cod TAC in Amendment 24.
In 1994, NMFS began to allocate the Pacific cod TAC with the
implementation of BSAI Amendment 24 to the FMP (59 FR 4009, January 28,
1994). The allocations roughly represented the harvests of the trawl
and fixed gear sectors during 1991 through 1993. Although the 2.0
percent jig sector allocation exceeded the historical harvest by this
sector, it was intended to allow for growth in the sector. Competition
within the trawl and fixed gear sectors eventually led to the Council
recommending, in subsequent amendments, further subdivisions of the
allocations to these sectors to provide the desired stability within
the subdivided sectors.
Amendment 46, implemented in 1997 (61 FR 59029, November 20, 1996),
further split the trawl allocation equally between CVs and CPs. The
action also included specific authority for NMFS to annually reallocate
among the various sectors, if necessary, any portion of the Pacific cod
allocations that were projected to remain unused.
After Amendment 46 was implemented, members of the fishing industry
asked the Council to further allocate Pacific cod in the BSAI among the
various fixed gear sectors. The Council developed Amendment 64 which
further apportioned the 51 percent allocated to the fixed gear sector
into four new sectors (see Table 1). NMFS approved Amendment 64 and it
was implemented September 1, 2000 (65 FR 51553, August 24, 2000).
Because Amendment 64 was scheduled to expire at the end of 2003,
Amendment 77 was initiated to continue or modify the fixed gear
sectors' allocations beyond 2003.
The current allocations are those that were adopted by the Council
and approved by NMFS under Amendment 77 (68 FR 49416, August 18, 2003).
Amendment 77 continued the same overall fixed gear sector allocations
as under Amendment 64, except for a new apportionment between the pot
gear CV and CP sectors. Currently, hook-and-line and pot CVs <60 ft LOA
are allowed to fish under the general hook-and-line CV allocation and
general pot CV allocation, respectively, when these fisheries are open.
When these fisheries are closed, the <60 ft LOA sector harvest accrues
to the <60 ft LOA hook-and-line and pot CV allocation.
The harvest on which the percentage allocations were based under
Amendments 64 and 77 in the fixed gear sectors excluded the harvest of
Pacific cod that was reallocated from other gear sectors. Except for
the pot gear sector split, the percentage allocations under Amendment
77 closely represented the harvests for fixed gear in this fishery
during 1995 through 1999, with an
[[Page 5656]]
additional allocation for CVs <60 ft LOA, to allow for growth in the
small boat sector. The pot gear sector allocations were based on
harvests from 1998 through 2001.
While the Council was considering adjustments to the Pacific cod
allocations to the non-CDQ sectors under what became Amendment 64, the
Council adopted and NMFS approved Amendment 39 in 1998 (63 FR 8356,
February 19, 1998). Under Amendment 39, a percentage of various
groundfish species including Pacific cod was allocated to the CDQ
Program. From 1998 onward, 7.5 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC was
deducted for the CDQ reserve. The remainder of the TAC after the
deduction for the CDQ reserve is referred to as the non-CDQ TAC. When
the multispecies CDQ Program was implemented in 1998, the non-CDQ
Pacific cod TAC was allocated in accordance with the percentages
established by Amendment 46, and since then as further modified by
Amendments 64 and 77.
History of Pacific Cod Reallocations
Under the existing allocations, one or more sectors are typically
unable to harvest their annual allocation of the Pacific cod TAC.
Section 301(a)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, also known as National
Standard 1, states, ``Conservation and management measures shall
prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum
yield from each fishery for the United States fishing industry.'' Thus,
to provide an opportunity for the full harvest of the BSAI Pacific cod
non-CDQ TAC, existing allocations of Pacific cod that are projected to
be unharvested by some sectors are annually reallocated by NMFS to
other sectors. Current regulations governing the reallocation of BSAI
Pacific cod are found at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(ii).
Since BSAI Pacific cod sector allocations have been in effect, NMFS
has reallocated Pacific cod each year from the trawl and jig sectors to
fixed gear sectors. In 2002 and in 2004, reallocations also were made
from the pot gear sectors to the hook-and-line CP sector. Reallocations
within gear types (e.g., trawl CPs to trawl CVs, or hook-and-line CVs
to hook-and-line CPs) have occurred less frequently and in lower
amounts. As shown in Table 2, the majority of reallocations, in terms
of metric tons, have been from the trawl sectors to the hook-and-line
CPs between 2000 and 2004. The starting point for this table is the
year 2000 because that was the first year in which the fixed gear
allocation was split among the hook-and-line CP, hook-and-line CV, pot
gear, and <60 ft LOA fixed gear sectors.
Table 2. Average BSAI Pacific cod reallocation by sector, 2000-2004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reallocation as percent
Sector Initial allocation (mt) Reallocation (mt) of initial allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 3,715 -3,309 -89%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft LOA 1,312 309 24%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 283 120 42%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP 75,006 16,861 22%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot gear 17,244 -739 -4%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CP 43,649 -8,483 -19%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 43,649 -4,760 -11%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused seasonal allowances specified for the jig sector are
reallocated during each of its three seasons. All other gear sector
reallocations usually occur in the fall because unused seasonal
allowances that remain unharvested earlier in the year are rolled over
to each sector's subsequent season. Typically, reallocations from trawl
to fixed gear sectors occur in October and November, and always during
the trawl C season (June 10 to November 1).
NMFS reallocates unused Pacific cod allocations for a variety of
reasons. Reallocations from the jig sector are primarily due to
insufficient effort in that sector in the BSAI. Several reasons are
commonly cited for trawl reallocations including closure of the
directed trawl fisheries due to reaching the halibut PSC allowance,
relatively high annual allocations in alternative trawl fisheries such
as pollock (for AFA vessels), and high value alternative trawl
fisheries such as yellowfin sole, rock sole, and flathead sole (for
non-AFA trawl CPs). Additionally, under SSL mitigation measures which
started in 2001, the creation of a 20 percent seasonal apportionment in
the C season for trawl gear led to trawl reallocations. The trawl
sectors' inability to harvest their total allocations resulted from the
increased difficulty in catching Pacific cod with trawl gear later in
the year when those fish are less aggregated (lower catch per unit
effort). Prior to the SSL mitigation measures, the trawl gear sectors
were allowed to harvest their total Pacific cod allocation earlier in
the year.
The increased difficulty in harvesting Pacific cod in the second
half of the year is not unique to the trawl sector. All gear sectors
have increased difficulty harvesting Pacific cod later in the year when
those fish are less aggregated. Also, weather is a significant factor
for the vessels in smaller CV sectors in the fall season. The hook-and-
line sectors are limited by halibut bycatch in the second half of the
year. These sectors do not have a halibut bycatch allowance from June
10 to August 15 under the annual harvest specifications which
effectively closes directed fishing for Pacific cod during this period.
The amount of Pacific cod the fixed gear sectors could harvest in the
first half of the year was reduced in 2001 as part of the SSL
protection measures. The hook-and-line sector would prefer to harvest
its Pacific cod allocation earlier in the year when its incidental take
of seabirds is lower.
In developing Amendment 85, the Council determined that current
allocations do not correspond with actual dependence and use by the
existing sectors, as demonstrated by the need for annual reallocations.
Reallocations maintain a level of uncertainty for some sectors
regarding the amount of Pacific cod available for harvest. The Council
expects that
[[Page 5657]]
uncertainty to decrease due to the revisions to the Pacific cod non-CDQ
allocations under this proposed rule.
Amendment 85 History
Amendment 85 is the most recent action by the Council in a long
history of actions to allocate BSAI Pacific cod TAC among competing
sectors as described above and in Table 1. The development of Amendment
85 began in October 2002 when the Council initiated discussions
regarding the allocation of certain BSAI groundfish species to the non-
AFA trawl CP sector. In February 2003, the Council considered a vastly
expanded program for this sector, known as Amendment 80, to establish a
multispecies cooperative intended to facilitate greater retention
improvements, allocate PSC, and address a number of sector allocation
issues that would arise from a stand-alone allocation and cooperative
(for the non-AFA trawl CP sector). In April 2003, the Council further
expanded Amendment 80 to include allocations of non-pollock species and
PSC to ten sectors operating in the BSAI as a means to minimize
potential impacts on sectors that might arise from any direct
allocations and cooperatives provided to the non-AFA trawl CP sector
alone.
Growing demand for Pacific cod, a fully exploited fishery, and
other distributional concerns among sectors led the Council to consider
a separate action to revise allocations of Pacific cod among the many
BSAI groundfish sectors. After further consideration, public testimony,
and preliminary analyses, the Council simplified Amendment 80 in
October 2004 to provide allocations only to the non-AFA trawl CP sector
and removed allocation of Pacific cod from that proposed program. The
intent of the Council was to streamline Amendment 80 and shift it back
to its original intent, to provide the non-AFA trawl CP sector with a
tool to reduce groundfish and PSC discards and improve retention. The
Council then initiated a new plan amendment, which became Amendment 85,
to alter the current BSAI Pacific cod allocations.
In December 2004, the Council reviewed a discussion paper outlining
prior Council actions regarding BSAI Pacific cod allocations, the
relevant problem statements associated with these past actions, and
potential decision points related to structuring new alternatives and
options for analysis. Upon review of the discussion paper, the Council
approved a problem statement and a document outlining draft components
and options for the new amendment. The problem statement and suite of
alternatives and options have been revised several times since that
initial discussion. The Council's final problem statement focuses on
revising the BSAI Pacific cod allocations to all sectors (trawl, jig,
hook-and-line, pot, and CDQ):
The BSAI Pacific cod fishery is fully utilized and has been
allocated among gear groups and to sectors within gear groups. The
current allocations among trawl, jig, and fixed gear were
implemented in 1997 (Amendment 46) and the CDQ allocation was
implemented in 1998. These allocations are overdue for review.
Harvest patterns have varied significantly among the sectors
resulting in annual inseason reallocations of TAC. As a result, the
current allocations do not correspond with actual dependency and use
by sectors.
Participants in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery who have made
significant investments and have a long-term dependence on the
resource need stability in the allocations to the trawl, jig, fixed
gear, and CDQ sectors. To reduce uncertainty and provide stability,
allocations should be adjusted to better reflect historic use by
sector. The basis for determining sector allocations will be catch
history as well as consideration of socio-economic and community
factors.
As other fisheries in the BSAI and GOA are incrementally
rationalized, historical participants in the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery may be put at a disadvantage. Each sector in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery currently has different degrees of license
requirements and levels of participation. Allocations to the sector
level are a necessary step on the path towards comprehensive
rationalization. Prompt action is needed to maintain stability in
the BSAI Pacific cod fisheries.
While the FMP does not have a sunset provision nor regulatory
requirement to review or modify the sector allocations, the Council's
motion on Amendment 46 included a provision to review the overall gear
sector allocations four years after implementation. That review,
originally intended at the end of 2000, occurred with Amendment 85.
Description of the Proposed Action
This amendment is intended by the Council to modify the sector
allocations currently in place to better reflect actual dependency and
use by sector, in part by basing the allocations on each sector's
historical retained catch. One of the fundamental issues identified in
the Council's problem statement is the need to revise the existing
allocations to better reflect actual historical catch by sector, thus
reducing the need for frequent and significant reallocations of quota
toward the end of the year from sectors that are unable or otherwise do
not intend to harvest their entire allocation. Thus, the catch history
on which the proposed allocations were partially based included Pacific
cod that was reallocated from one sector to another due to the first
sector's projected inability to harvest its entire allocation by the
end of the year. The intent of the Council under Amendment 85 is to
establish direct allocations for each specified sector in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery, in order to protect the relative historical catch
distribution among those sectors.
However, there are noted exceptions to basing the allocations
solely on catch history. The problem statement asserts that in addition
to catch history, socioeconomic and community concerns should be the
basis for determining sector allocations. Amendment 85 would establish
BSAI Pacific cod allocations to the jig sector, the <60 ft LOA fixed
gear CV sector, and the CDQ sector that are based on identified
percentages of the TAC, and not actual catch history. This action would
establish allocations to both the jig sector and to the <60 ft LOA
fixed gear CV sector that are greater than those sectors' average catch
histories. The allocations to the small boat sectors are intended by
the Council to expand entry-level, local opportunities in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery. In general, however, the Council's proposed
allocations of Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC are intended to formally
institutionalize the historical pattern of utilization of this
resource.
The Council also considered more refined allocations to the BSAI
Pacific cod sectors, by evaluating the potential for establishing
separate and distinct allocations for the non-AFA trawl CP and AFA
trawl CP sector and the non-AFA trawl CV and AFA trawl CV sectors. The
trawl CP sectors currently have a combined BSAI Pacific cod allocation
of 23.5 percent of the non-CDQ BSAI Pacific cod TAC, as do the trawl CV
sectors. Thus, all trawl gear combined currently receives 47 percent of
the non-CDQ BSAI Pacific cod TAC.
The Council adopted Amendment 85 in April 2006. If approved by the
Secretary of Commerce, Amendment 85 would modify the following
provisions in the FMP: (a) sector allocations of BSAI Pacific cod TAC,
(b) TAC deductions for incidental catch allowances of Pacific cod in
other target fisheries, (c) the groundfish reserve for Pacific cod, (d)
the Pacific cod allocation to the CDQ Program, and (e) the appendices
of the FMP by adding a new appendix that summarizes applicable
provisions of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005 (Public Law
108-447). Because the Amendment 85 sector allocations cannot be
implemented mid-year, the
[[Page 5658]]
final rule implementing Amendment 85, if approved, would be effective
the following January 1st. Thus, the earliest effective date for the
rule implementing Amendment 85 would be January 1, 2008.
This proposed rule would make the following changes in regulations
for the management of the BSAI directed Pacific cod fishery:
Increase the percentage of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC
apportioned to the CDQ Program.
Revise the allocations of BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC
among various gear sectors.
Modify the management of Pacific cod incidental catch that
occurs in other groundfish fisheries.
Eliminate the Pacific cod nonspecified reserve.
Establish a hierarchy for the reallocation of projected
unused sector allocations to other sectors.
Adjust the seasonal allowances of Pacific cod to various
sectors.
Subdivide among sectors the annual PSC limits apportioned
to the Pacific cod trawl and hook-and-line gear fisheries.
Modify the sideboard restrictions for Pacific cod that are
applied to the CP vessels listed as eligible under the AFA.
Revise the definition for AFA trawl catcher/processor and
add definitions for hook-and-line catcher/processor, non-AFA trawl
catcher/processor, and pot catcher/processor.
In developing Amendment 85, the Council considered dividing the
Pacific cod TAC in the BSAI between the Bering Sea (BS) and Aleutian
Islands (AI) subareas. At its April 2006 meeting, the Council voted to
remove this action from Amendment 85 and initiate a new analysis that
would examine additional alternative approaches to apportioning sector
allocations between the two subareas. If conservation of the Pacific
cod resource requires separate TACs for the BS and AI subareas before
the Council adopts and NMFS approves a different approach to
apportioning Pacific cod sector allocations between the two subareas,
NMFS would apply the same percentages of the sector allocations to each
subarea as in the overall BSAI allocations in existence at that time.
Recent Legislation Affecting the Proposed Rule
On December 8, 2004, the President signed into law the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-447)(Act). With respect to
fisheries off Alaska, the Act establishes catcher processor sector
definitions for participation in (1) the catcher processor subsectors
of the BSAI non-pollock groundfish fisheries, and (2) the BSAI Catcher
Processor Capacity Reduction Program. The following subsectors are
defined in section 219(a) of the Act: AFA trawl catcher processor; non-
AFA trawl catcher processor; longline catcher processor; and pot
catcher processor.
Section 219(a) of the Act also defines the ``non-pollock groundfish
fishery'' as target species of Atka mackerel, flathead sole, Pacific
cod, Pacific ocean perch, rock sole, turbot, or yellowfin sole
harvested in the BSAI. Thus, the Act provides the qualification
criteria that each participant in the CP subsectors must meet in order
to operate as a CP in the BSAI non-pollock groundfish fishery, or
participate in the BSAI Catcher Processor Capacity Reduction Program,
or both.
Because Amendment 85 would allocate Pacific cod (a non-pollock
groundfish fishery under the Act) to CPs operating in the BSAI, this
proposed rule includes new or revised definitions for AFA trawl CP,
hook-and-line CP, non-AFA trawl CP, and pot CP, consistent with the
provisions of the Act.
The Act includes numerous provisions that are not related to the
management of groundfish and crab fisheries off Alaska. Therefore, this
proposed rule includes in regulatory text only those portions of the
Act related to eligibility in catcher processor subsectors. The
portions of the Act authorizing and governing the development of the
BSAI Catcher Processor Capacity Reduction Program are not provided in
the proposed rule.
On July 11, 2006, the President signed into law the Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-241), that, among
other things, completely revised the CDQ Program statutory text at
section 305(i)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Specifically, section
305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I) required that most of the allocations to the CDQ
Program, including Pacific cod, increase from 7.5 percent of the TAC to
a 10 percent directed fishing allocation upon the establishment of
certain types of fishery management programs, including sector
allocations in a fishery. Because Amendment 85, if approved, would
establish sector allocations in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery, the
proposed FMP amendment language and the proposed rule for Amendment 85
submitted to the Secretary by the Council included provisions
consistent with the requirements of section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I). As
noted earlier, NMFS published the notice of availability for Amendment
85 in the Federal Register on December 7, 2006.
On January 12, 2007, the President signed into law the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006
(Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act) (Public Law 109-479) that, among
other things, amended section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I). This section now
requires that most of the allocations to the CDQ Program, including
Pacific cod, increase to ``a total allocation (directed and nontarget
combined) of 10.7 percent effective January 1, 2008.'' Section
305(i)(1)(B)(ii) also states that the total allocations under section
305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I) may not be exceeded.
Because of the changes to the CDQ Program allocations brought about
by the Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act, NMFS determined that the
proposed rule for Amendment 85 as originally submitted by the Council
was no longer consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act. On January 17,
2006, NMFS notified the Council in writing of the inconsistencies and
provided the Council with recommendations on revisions that would make
the proposed rule consistent with the new provisions of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act. The Council revised the proposed rule and submitted it to
NMFS for reevaluation on January 19, 2007. This proposed rule reflects
the revisions made by the Council in its January 19, 2007, submission.
Additional information on the proposed changes to the CDQ Program
follow.
Allocation of Pacific Cod to the CDQ Program
The Western Alaska CDQ Program was implemented in November 1992 as
part of the inshore/offshore allocations of pollock in the BSAI.
Originally, the CDQ Program established a CDQ reserve to which one half
of the non-specific reserve of 15 percent of the pollock TAC was
allocated. Hence, the original CDQ reserve was 7.5 percent of the BSAI
pollock TAC. The CDQ Program has since been amended several times and
now, in addition to pollock, the CDQ reserve includes allocations of
halibut, crab, and most of the remaining groundfish species in the
BSAI, including Pacific cod. The 7.5 percent allocation of BSAI Pacific
cod to the CDQ reserve was established when the multispecies CDQ
reserves were implemented in 1998. The current percentages of TAC
allocated to the CDQ reserves are as follows: 10 percent of pollock; 10
percent of crab species (with the exception of Norton Sound red king
crab at 7.5 percent); 20 percent of fixed gear sablefish; a range of 20
percent to 100 percent of halibut,
[[Page 5659]]
depending on the area; and 7.5 percent of most groundfish species and
species groups, including Pacific cod. Pro-rata shares of prohibited
species are also allocated to the prohibited species quota, or PSQ,
reserve. Under the adjusted March 2006 Pacific cod TAC, 14,114 mt of
Pacific cod, the equivalent of 7.5 percent of the Pacific cod TAC, was
allocated to the CDQ reserve.
Six non-profit corporations, known as CDQ groups, were formed by
the 65 communities eligible to participate in the CDQ Program to manage
and administer the CDQ allocations, investments, and economic
development projects. Each of the six CDQ groups is allocated an amount
of Pacific cod at the beginning of each year that equals its
proportional share of the amount of Pacific cod allocated to the CDQ
reserve. Currently, all catch of Pacific cod by any vessel fishing for
groundfish CDQ, and by any vessel [gteqt]60 ft LOA fishing for halibut
CDQ, accrues against a CDQ group's allocation of Pacific cod. The CDQ
groups are prohibited by regulations at Sec. 679.7(d)(5) from
exceeding any of their CDQ allocations. Therefore, reaching a CDQ
allocation for one species constrains the ability of a CDQ group to
continue to fish for other groundfish CDQ species, except for reaching
the CDQ allocation of pollock, because the CDQ incidental catch of
pollock is deducted from the general pollock incidental catch
allowance.
When Amendment 85 was adopted in April 2006, the Council
recommended that the Pacific cod CDQ reserve remain at 7.5 percent, but
recognized that proposed Congressional legislation could change this
percentage. As described above, the Magnuson-Stevens Act now requires
that 10.7 percent of the annual Pacific cod TAC be allocated to the CDQ
reserve for directed and nontarget fishing combined. The 10.7 percent
Pacific cod allocation to the CDQ reserve would be established annually
in the harvest specifications process required under Sec. 679.20(c).
Currently, the CDQ reserve is deducted from the Pacific cod TAC before
the remaining Pacific cod TAC is allocated to the other fishing
sectors. As intended by the Council, this would be continued under
Amendment 85.
Each CDQ group would decide how to manage its CDQ fisheries and how
to allocate its portion of the Pacific cod TAC among its vessels and
target fisheries. The CDQ groups must continue to manage their
fisheries within the seasonal allowances currently specified to comply
with SSL protection measures, as described in more detail under
``Seasonal Allowances.'' All catch of Pacific cod by any vessel
groundfish CDQ fishing, and by any vessel [gteqt]60 ft LOA halibut CDQ
fishing, will continue to accrue against the CDQ group's annual
allocation of Pacific cod and the CDQ groups will continue to be
prohibited from exceeding their annual allocations of Pacific cod.
Non-CDQ Sector Allocations
Under Amendment 85, the Council selected nine individual non-CDQ
sectors to receive separate BSAI Pacific cod allocations. The
allocations to the identified sectors were selected using catch history
from 1995 through 2003 and other socioeconomic and community
considerations. The Council concluded that the adopted allocations
better reflected actual dependency and use by each sector, with
specific consideration to allow for additional growth in the small
boat, entry-level sectors. The primary objective of the Council in
revising the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC allocations to each sector
was to reduce the level and frequency of annual reallocations, and thus
enhance stability so each sector may better plan its fishing year and
operate more efficiently.
This action proposes to allocate the BSAI TAC of Pacific cod among
the nine non-CDQ sectors, after subtraction of the CDQ reserve. The
current and proposed allocations of BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC
compared to average harvest share (average of each sector's percent of
the total harvest each year, including harvest of reallocated amounts
of Pacific cod) between 1995 and 2003 and between 2000 and 2003 are
presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Current and proposed allocations of BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ
TAC and average harvest share by sector (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Average
share of share of
retained retained
harvest harvest
Sectors Amend. 77 Amend. 85 1995- 2000-
(Current) (Proposed) 2003 2003
(average (recent
historic average
harvest) harvest)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 2.0 1.4 0.1 0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft 0.7 2.0 0.4 0.7
LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3
LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP 40.8 48.7 49.1 49.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 7.6 8.4 8.6 9.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CP 1.7 1.5 2.1 1.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CP 23.5 2.3 2.2 1.5
------------------------------ -------------------------------
Non AFA trawl CP ......... 13.4 13.4 16.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 23.5 22.1 24.0 21.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average harvest shares from 1995 through 2003 shown in Table 3
were calculated using weekly production reports and Alaska Department
of Fish and Game fishtickets, and included Pacific cod retained for
fishmeal production. Table 4 shows average harvest share in 2004 to
2005 using data from the NMFS catch accounting database. The NMFS
accounting database, which uses observer estimates of retained catch,
included Pacific cod destined for fishmeal production on CPs [gteqt]125
feet (38.1 m) LOA with 100 percent observer coverage rather than weekly
production reports.
[[Page 5660]]
Table 4. Average share (percent) of retained harvest 2004-2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector Average share
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV <60 ft LOA 1.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP 50.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 6.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CP 1.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CP 2.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-AFA trawl CP 17.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 20.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the two data sets in Tables 3 and 4 are not exactly
comparable due to the different data sources, the data in Table 4
generally indicate that the overall BSAI harvest shares by sector in
2004 to 2005 are within the range of what occurred during 1995 to 2003,
with a few exceptions. The <60 ft LOA fixed gear (pot and hook-and-line
gear) share of the BSAI Pacific cod harvest increased in the past two
years compared to the 1995 to 2003 average, likely due to additional
quota reallocated from the jig sector starting in 2004. Table 4 shows
that this sector harvested about 1.7 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod
harvest from 2004 to 2005, compared to an average retained harvest
share of 0.4 percent during 1995 to 2003.
Another notable exception is the non-AFA trawl CP sector. This
sector's average harvest share from 2004 to 2005 was 17.7 percent.
While the harvest share of this sector has not been less than 15.3
percent since 2000, its much lower harvest shares during 1995 to 1998
resulted in an overall harvest share during 1995 to 2003 of 13.4
percent.
The [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector's share of Pacific cod harvest
decreased in the past two years compared to all but one year during
1995 [dash] 2003. The pot CP share, while greater in 2004 and 2005 (1.7
percent) than in 2002 and 2003 (1.0 percent), was still lower than the
average retained harvest share of 2.1 percent during 1995 to 2003.
All sectors, with the exception of the <60 ft LOA fixed gear CV
sector and the non-AFA trawl CP sector, had harvests in 2004 and 2005
that fell within the range of their respective catch shares during 1995
to 2003. Thus, although the data in Table 4 are not truly comparable to
the retained harvest data in Table 3 due to the use of a different data
set, they provide a general view of the fishery in the two most recent
years.
The Council based the proposed allocations on historical catch as
adjusted by its decision to increase the harvest opportunities for the
fleets delivering shoreside, which include some of the small boat
sectors. Therefore, for the most part, proposed changes in allocations
represent changes in a sector's opportunity to harvest. Before
recommending this action, the Council heard extensive public testimony
from members of each sector, indicating their desire to maintain or
increase their allocations. In its allocation decision, the Council
considered all of the harvest data provided to it by Council staff and
comments received from the public.
For most sectors the allocations recommended by the Council under
Amendment 85 more closely represent a sector's average harvest share
over several years, as opposed to one or two recent years, than do the
current allocations, as shown in Table 3. The allocations recommended
by the Council were within the range of allocation options presented in
the EA/RIR/IRFA for Amendment 85 (see Table 8 below). The Council did
not select a specific series of years, but instead selected direct
allocation percentages.
The Council examined information on retained harvest history from
1995 to 2005, and information on total catch, which included Pacific
cod that was discarded. However, the Council chose from a range of
percentage allocations that were based on retained legal harvest of
Pacific cod, not total catch. Pacific cod is required to be retained
when the directed fishery is open. When the directed Pacific cod
fishery is closed, Pacific cod must be retained up to the maximum
retainable amount (MRA); the rest of the Pacific cod that is caught
must be discarded. For example, about 1.2 percent of the total Pacific
cod harvest was discarded in 2004. It was not the Council's intent to
``reward'' sectors that have high discards of Pacific cod when the
directed fishery for Pacific cod is closed.
The proposed allocation to jig vessels and the <60 ft LOA fixed
gear CVs is greater than those sectors' catch histories due to
socioeconomic and community considerations. The proposed allocations to
these two small-boat sectors are intended by the Council to maintain
and expand entry-level, local opportunities in the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery. These fleets, primarily CVs, typically are comprised of
residents of small, coastal communities near the fishing grounds.
Public comments specifically supported allocations of 2.0 percent each
to the jig sector and to the <60 ft LOA fixed gear sector, which the
Council took into consideration in making the allocations to these two
sectors.
The following paragraphs provide additional information on the
Council's recommended allocation of Pacific cod to each non-CDQ sector.
Jig Gear Sector
The allocation to the jig sector of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ
TAC would be reduced from the current 2.0 percent to a proposed
allocation of 1.4 percent. The jig sector's average annual share of the
retained Pacific cod harvest from 1995 through 2003 (average historic
harvest) is only about 0.1 percent, which represents about 5 percent of
its current total allocation. The jig sector's more recent average
annual share of the retained Pacific cod harvest, from 2000 through
2003 (recent average harvest), also is about 0.1 percent. This same
trend continued in 2004 and 2005. As a result of this low harvest
percentage, the unused jig sector allocation has been reallocated to
other sectors, usually late in the fishing year. The Council determined
that, although the proposed allocation is lower than this sector's
current allocation, the proposed allocation would still allow for
growth in this entry-level sector, while reducing the amount of Pacific
cod that may need to be reallocated to other sectors. Any reallocations
that would occur would first consider the other small boat sector (<60
ft LOA fixed gear CVs).
The Council's preferred alternative designated the jig sector as
``jig CV sector.'' The Council's intent, however, was that this sector
include all vessels using jig gear to harvest BSAI Pacific cod, whether
CVs or CPs, as is the case under current regulations. While the jig
sector is typically comprised only of CVs, one jig vessel has operated
as a CP in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. All harvest by all jig vessels
was included in the jig sector harvest history considered under the
allocation determination. Further, the jig sector would continue to
include CVs and CPs given the small harvest, relative to their
allocation, of Pacific cod by vessels using jig gear and the absence of
competition for available Pacific cod between CVs and CPs.
Less Than 60 ft LOA Hook-and-line or Pot CV Sector
Under the proposed rule, the allocation to the <60 ft LOA fixed
gear CV sector of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC would increase from
its current amount of 0.7 percent to a
[[Page 5661]]
proposed allocation of 2.0 percent. This sector's average historic
harvest is 0.4 percent, and its recent average harvest is 0.7 percent.
The <60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector's percent share of the overall
Pacific cod harvest has grown steadily in recent years from 0.2 percent
in 2000 to about 1.7 percent in 2004 and in 2005. This sector has
harvested its entire allocation of 0.7 percent for several years, and
started receiving reallocations from the jig sector in 2004. The
Council chose to increase the allocation to this small-boat sector to
encourage its increased growth.
Currently, the <60 ft LOA hook-and-line CVs also fish from the
general hook-and-line CV sector allocation of 0.2 percent, and the <60
ft LOA pot CVs also fish from the general pot CV sector allocation of
8.4 percent until those fisheries close. Under Amendment 85, the <60 ft
LOA fixed gear CV sector would fish only from its own proposed direct
allocation of 2.0 percent.
Greater Than or Equal to 60 ft LOA Hook-and-line CV Sector
The current allocation of 0.2 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod non-
CDQ TAC to the [gteqt]60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV sector would not
change under this proposed rule. The [gteqt]60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV
sector's average historic harvest is 0.1 percent, and its recent
average harvest is 0.3 percent. This sector harvested 0.01 percent of
the total retained harvest in 2004 and in 2005. The majority of the
overall hook-and-line CV allocation typically has been harvested by the
<60 ft LOA hook-and-line CVs. However, as stated above, the <60 ft LOA
hook-and-line CV sector would no longer fish from the general hook-and-
line CV sector allocation, but would fish only from its proposed direct
allocation. The proposed allocation is intended by the Council to
represent the historical retained catch of Pacific cod by this sector.
The Council also considered socioeconomic and community factors, such
as the greater benefit brought to Bering Sea coastal communities by
CVs, which deliver shoreside, versus the CPs that provide a smaller
benefit to these coastal communities.
Hook-and-line CP Sector
The proposed allocation to the hook-and-line CP sector would
increase the current allocation from 40.8 percent to 48.7 percent of
the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. This sector's average historic
harvest is 49.1 percent, and its recent average harvest is 49.4
percent. This sector harvested an average of 50.6 percent of the total
retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. The Council chose to increase the
hook-and-line CP sector's allocation to more closely reflect the
sector's actual harvest including reallocations. This sector's average
retained catch has been nearly 50 percent of the total BSAI non-CDQ
Pacific cod harvest since 1995, due to its harvest of Pacific cod that
is reallocated from other gear sectors toward the end of the year. By
moving this reallocated amount into the sector's initial allocation,
the sector is expected to be able to plan its fishing year with more
certainty than is currently afforded, and harvest more of its Pacific
cod allocation earlier in the second half of the fishing year. The
Council also expects this sector to continue to benefit from
reallocations from other sectors, so their total yearly catch should be
close to their average historic harvest.
Greater Than or Equal to 60 ft LOA Pot CV Sector
The proposed allocation to the [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector would
increase the current allocation from 7.6 percent to 8.4 percent of the
BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. The [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector's
average historic harvest is 8.6 percent, and its recent average harvest
is 9.0 percent. This sector harvested an average of 6.0 percent of the
total retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. In the past, less than 1.0
percent of the overall pot CV allocation has been harvested by the <60
ft LOA pot CVs. However, as stated above, the <60 ft LOA pot CV sector
would no longer fish from the general pot CV sector allocation, but
would fish only from its proposed direct allocation. The Council chose
to increase the [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector's allocation to more
closely reflect the sector's average historic harvest of Pacific cod
including reallocations while considering socioeconomic and community
factors, such as the greater benefit brought to Bering Sea coastal
communities by CVs, which deliver shoreside, versus the CPs that
provide a smaller benefit to these coastal communities. The Council
also considered public testimony that supported an increase in the
allocation to this pot sector because its catch has generally been
increasing and its bycatch rate is very low compared to some other
sectors.
Pot CP Sector
The pot CP sector is the only fixed gear sector that would receive
a reduction in its BSAI Pacific cod allocation, from the current level
of 1.7 percent to a proposed allocation of 1.5 percent of the BSAI
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. This sector's average historic harvest is 2.1
percent, and its recent average harvest is 1.4 percent. This sector
harvested an average of 1.7 percent of the total retained harvest in
2004 and 2005. The number of vessels participating in this sector has
declined over the past several years, from 13 in 1999, to 10 in 2000, 5
in 2001 and 2002, 3 in 2003 and 2004, and 2 in 2005. Anecdotal evidence
and public testimony suggest that some vessels have focused their
efforts on the crab fisheries in recent years, and some vessels have
not found it economically viable to fish for Pacific cod. The Council
used this information in combination with the data on the historical
retained catch of Pacific cod by the pot CP sector in arriving at its
proposed allocation. The Council also considered socioeconomic and
community factors, such as the greater benefit brought to Bering Sea
coastal communities by CVs, which deliver shoreside, versus the CPs
that provide a smaller benefit to these coastal communities.
Trawl CP Sector
Under this proposed rule, the current single trawl CP sector would
be split into AFA and non-AFA trawl CP sectors. The combined trawl CP
sector currently has an allocation of 23.5 percent of the BSAI Pacific
cod non-CDQ TAC, which would be reduced to a total of 15.7 percent for
the two trawl CP sectors. The intent of the Council in dividing the
allocation between the two sectors was that each trawl CP sector would
be better able to manage its own exclusive Pacific cod allocation under
the cooperative systems either in place (for the AFA CP sector) or
proposed (for the non-AFA trawl CP sector under Amendment 80 discussed
previously).
AFA trawl CP sector. The AFA trawl CP sector's proposed allocation
is 2.3 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. This sector's
average historic harvest, including Pacific cod retained for fishmeal
production, is 2.2 percent. The AFA trawl CP sector's recent average
harvest is 1.5 percent, and it harvested an average of 2.2 percent of
the total retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. The AFA trawl CPs, unlike
the non-AFA trawl CPs, have meal plants onboard. Thus, Pacific cod meal
is a primary product for only this sector. The history of nine trawl
CPs was extinguished by section 209 of the AFA, and it was excluded by
the Council in determining the proposed allocation to the AFA trawl CP
sector. The proposed allocation is intended by the Council to represent
the historical retained catch of Pacific cod by the AFA trawl CP sector
while considering socioeconomic and community factors. Public testimony
[[Page 5662]]
concerning the directed fishery and bycatch needs of this sector was
also considered by the Council.
About 44 percent of the Pacific cod harvested by the AFA trawl CP
sector is taken incidentally when these vessels are targeting BSAI
pollock. Only one AFA trawl CP vessel has targeted BSAI Pacific cod in
the recent past. All sectors are required to retain all catch of
Pacific cod when the directed fishery is open and up to the MRA when
the directed Pacific cod fishery is closed. To maximize the opportunity
for a directed Pacific cod fishery and to minimize the potential for an
increase in discards of Pacific cod if catch exceeds the MRA, the
Council determined that this sector should receive an allocation of
Pacific cod that closely represents its average historic harvest of
Pacific cod.
Non-AFA trawl CP sector. The non-AFA trawl CP sector would receive
an allocation of 13.4 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC under
the proposed rule, its average share of the historic harvest, which is
13.4 percent. This proposed allocation is less than its recent average
harvest share of 16.0 percent from 2000 through 2003, and less than its
average of 17.7 percent of the total retained harvest in 2004 and 2005.
The proposed allocation is intended by the Council to represent the
historical retained catch of Pacific cod by the non-AFA trawl CP sector
while considering socioeconomic and community factors.
About 46 percent of the Pacific cod harvested by the non-AFA trawl
CP sector is taken as incidental catch in non-Pacific cod target
fisheries, primarily the flatfish fisheries. Concern has been expressed
by this sector that its proposed allocation will be insufficient to
support its target fishery. NMFS agrees that this sector may be
constrained in its ability to conduct a directed fishery for Pacific
cod in order to have sufficient Pacific cod available for incidental
catch in its other fisheries.
Trawl CV Sector
The proposed allocation to the trawl CV sector of the BSAI Pacific
cod non-CDQ TAC would decrease the current allocation of 23.5 percent
to 22.1 percent. This proposed allocation is less than this sector's
average historic harvest of 24.0 percent. However, the proposed
allocation is more than the trawl CV sector's recent average harvest of
21.6 percent, and more than its average of 20.0 percent of the total
retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. The proposed allocation is intended
by the Council to represent the historical retained catch of Pacific
cod by the trawl CV sector while considering socioeconomic and
community factors. In contrast to the trawl CP sectors, the trawl CVs
primarily harvest their Pacific cod in the directed fishery, with only
6.9 percent taken as incidental catch in other target fisheries.
The Council chose to maintain the AFA and non-AFA trawl CVs as one
sector. Public testimony before the Council advocated to not divide the
trawl CVs into AFA and non-AFA sectors, as is proposed for the trawl CP
sector. The Council considered this testimony in determining that
maintaining the combined trawl CV allocation would allow the AFA trawl
CV sector to continue to operate under its cooperative agreement and
coordinate prosecution of the Pacific cod fishery with non-AFA trawl CV
fishery participants. This approach is favored by AFA and non-AFA
participants until such time that more restrictive eligibility criteria
for participation in the fishery are implemented. The proposed rule
does not change the Pacific cod AFA trawl CV sideboards and exemptions
because the Council determined that they should remain to protect the
Pacific cod harvest share of the non-AFA trawl CVs and of the AFA trawl
CVs that are exempt from the Pacific cod sideboard limitations. Also,
some members of the trawl CV sector requested that the Council maintain
the AFA trawl CV sideboards to avoid the necessity of renegotiating
their inter-cooperative agreement.
Incidental Catch Allowances for Non-CDQ Sectors
Under existing regulations, NMFS sets aside an amount of Pacific
cod from some sectors' allocations as an incidental catch allowance.
The incidental catch allowance is used by those sectors when directed
fishing for groundfish other than Pacific cod. Under this proposed
rule, incidental catch allowances would continue to be based on an
estimated amount of Pacific cod that NMFS anticipates will be taken as
incidental catch in directed fisheries for groundfish other than
Pacific cod. As is the current practice, under the proposed rule, once
a sector has harvested an amount of Pacific cod equal to the sector's
directed fishing allowance, directed fishing for Pacific cod by vessels
in th
