Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Catch Sharing Plan for Guided Sport and Commercial Fisheries in Alaska, 44156-44198 [2011-18321]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
44156
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Parts 300 and 679
[Docket No. 101027534–0559–01]
RIN 0648–BA37
Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Catch
Sharing Plan for Guided Sport and
Commercial Fisheries in Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS proposes regulations
that would implement a catch sharing
plan for the guided sport and
commercial fisheries for Pacific halibut
in waters of International Pacific
Halibut Commission (IPHC) Regulatory
Areas 2C (Southeast Alaska) and 3A
(Central Gulf of Alaska). If approved,
this catch sharing plan will change the
annual process of allocating halibut
between the guided sport and
commercial fisheries in Area 2C and
Area 3A, establish allocations for each
sector, and specify harvest restrictions
for guided sport anglers that are
intended to limit harvest to the annual
guided sport fishery catch limit. In order
to provide flexibility for individual
commercial and guided sport fishery
participants, the proposed catch sharing
plan also will authorize annual transfers
of commercial halibut quota to charter
halibut permit holders for harvest in the
guided sport fishery. This action is
necessary to achieve the halibut fishery
management goals of the North Pacific
Fishery Management Council.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by September 6, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Glenn
Merrill, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Sebastian. You may submit
comments identified by 0648–BA37 by
any one of the following methods:
• Electronic submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at
https://www.regulations.gov.
• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802–1668.
• Fax: 907–586–7557.
• Hand delivery: 709 West 9th Street,
Room 420A, Juneau, AK.
All comments received are a part of
the public record and will generally be
posted to https://www.regulations.gov
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit confidential business
information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter N/
A in the required fields if you wish to
remain anonymous). Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or
Adobe portable document file (pdf)
formats only.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this proposed
rule may be submitted to NMFS at the
above address and by e-mail to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax
to 202–395–7285.
Electronic copies of the
Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis prepared for this
action are available from https://
www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS
Alaska Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. The
Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis for the charter
halibut limited access program is
available from the NMFS Alaska Region
Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachel Baker, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Management of the Halibut Fisheries
II. History of Management in the Guided
Sport Halibut Fisheries
III. Proposed Catch Sharing Plan (CSP) for
Area 2C and Area 3A
IV. CSP Allocation Between the Commercial
and Guided Sport Halibut Fisheries
A. Annual Combined Catch Limit
B. Annual Commercial Fishery and Guided
Sport Fishery Catch Limits
C. Guided Sport Target Harvest Range
V. CSP Restrictions
A. Default CSP Restrictions
B. Projections of Guided Sport Harvest
C. Determination of Annual CSP
Restrictions
D. Other Restrictions under the CSP
VI. Guided Angler Fish (GAF)
A. Eligibility Requirements to Transfer
Between IFQ and GAF
B. Process to Complete a Transfer Between
IFQ and GAF
C. GAF Transfer Restrictions
D. GAF Reporting Requirements
VII. Cost Recovery for GAF
VIII. Technical Regulatory Changes
IX. Classification
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
I. Management of the Halibut Fisheries
The IPHC and NMFS manage fishing
for Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus
stenolepis) through regulations
established under authority of the
Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982
(Halibut Act). The IPHC adopts
regulations governing the Pacific halibut
fishery under the Convention between
the United States and Canada for the
Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of
the North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea
(Convention), signed at Ottawa, Ontario,
on March 2, 1953, as amended by a
Protocol Amending the Convention
(signed at Washington, DC, on March
29, 1979). Regulations developed by the
IPHC are subject to acceptance by the
Secretary of State with concurrence
from the Secretary of Commerce. After
acceptance by the Secretary of State and
the Secretary of Commerce, NMFS
publishes the IPHC regulations in the
Federal Register as annual management
measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62.
The most recent IPHC regulations were
published March 16, 2011, at 76 FR
14300. IPHC regulations affecting sport
fishing for halibut and vessels in the
guided sport (charter) fishery in Areas
2C and 3A may be found in sections 3,
25, and 28 (76 FR 14300, March 16,
2011).
The Halibut Act, at Sections 773c(a)
and (b), provides the Secretary of
Commerce with general responsibility to
carry out the Convention and the
Halibut Act. In adopting regulations that
may be necessary to carry out the
purposes and objectives of the
Convention and the Halibut Act, the
Secretary of Commerce is directed to
consult with the Secretary of the
department in which the U.S. Coast
Guard is operating.
The Halibut Act, at section 773c(c),
also provides the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) with
authority to develop regulations,
including limited access regulations,
that are in addition to, and not in
conflict with, approved IPHC
regulations. Regulations developed by
the Council may be implemented by
NMFS only after approval by the
Secretary of Commerce. The Council has
exercised this authority in the
development of subsistence halibut
fishery management measures, codified
at 50 CFR 300.65, and the limited access
program for charter vessels in the
guided sport fishery, codified at 50 CFR
300.67. The Council also developed the
Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program
for the commercial halibut and sablefish
fisheries, codified at 50 CFR part 679,
under the authority of section 773 of the
Halibut Act and section 303(b) of the
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(MSA) (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
The harvest of halibut in Alaska
occurs in three basic fisheries—the
commercial, sport, and subsistence
fisheries. The IPHC annually determines
the amount of halibut that may be
removed from the resource on an areaby-area basis in all areas of Convention
waters without causing biological
conservation problems. The IPHC
develops catch limits for the
commercial sector in waters in and off
Alaska. The IPHC estimates the
exploitable biomass of halibut using a
combination of harvest data from the
commercial, sport, and subsistence
fisheries, and information collected
during scientific surveys and sampling
of bycatch in other fisheries. The IPHC
calculates the amount of total allowable
harvest in a given area by multiplying
a harvest rate by the estimate of
exploitable biomass. Referred to as the
Total Constant Exploitation Yield (CEY),
this target level represents the total
removals for that area in the coming
year. The Total CEY is expressed in net
pounds, which is defined as the weight
of halibut from which the gills, entrails,
head, and ice and slime have been
removed. The IPHC subtracts estimates
of halibut removals and mortality from
sources other than the directed
commercial halibut fishery, including
sport, subsistence, bycatch in nonhalibut commercial fisheries, and
halibut wastage, or discarded halibut
that are smaller than the minimum legal
commercial size limit of 32 inches, or
81.3 centimeters (cm), and halibut killed
or lost on abandoned commercial
halibut fishing gear, from the Total CEY.
The remaining CEY is called the Fishery
CEY. The Fishery CEY provides the
basis for the IPHC’s determination of
catch limits for the directed commercial
fixed gear halibut fishery. The IPHC
considers staff recommendations,
harvest policy, and stakeholder input
when it determines commercial catch
limits.
Pursuant to Article III of the
Convention, the IPHC must develop and
maintain halibut stocks to levels that
will permit the optimum yield for the
halibut fisheries. The IPHC meets this
objective by including all sources of
fishing mortality within the Total CEY
and by establishing the commercial
fixed gear catch limits only after
subtracting halibut removals from other
non-halibut commercial fisheries and
non-commercial uses. Although most of
the non-commercial uses of halibut have
been relatively stable, growth in the
guided sport fishery in recent years has
resulted in this fishery harvesting a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
larger amount of halibut than it did in
earlier years. Because the IPHC subtracts
this increased non-commercial halibut
fishery removal from the Total CEY, the
amount of halibut available for the
commercial halibut fishery decreased.
II. History of Management in the
Guided Sport Halibut Fisheries
Until 2007, only regulations
developed by the IPHC governed guided
sport fisheries for halibut. The IPHC
first adopted halibut sport fishing rules
in 1973 to provide consistency and
uniformity in halibut sport fishing
regulations in all regulatory areas. At
that time, the IPHC established that the
sport fishing season for halibut would
occur from March 1 through October 31.
From 1984 through 1997, the IPHC
required guided sport vessels to have
IPHC licenses. Finally, the IPHC limited
the number of halibut that charter vessel
anglers could retain by imposing a daily
bag limit. Since the initial limit of a
three fish bag limit in 1973, the IPHC
has adjusted the bag limit two times.
The bag limit has varied between a limit
of one, two, and three fish per angler per
day. The bag limit under IPHC
regulations for the 2011 guided sport
fishery in Area 3A is two fish of any size
per day unless more restrictive bag
limits apply in Federal regulations.
Currently, Federal regulations at 50 CFR
300.65 impose a more restrictive bag
limit on the guided sport fishery of one
halibut with a maximum length of 37
inches in Area 2C.
In 1997, the Council adopted separate
guideline harvest levels (GHL) for Area
2C and Area 3A. Although the Council
had a policy that guided sport halibut
fisheries should not exceed the GHL, the
Council did not recommend measures to
constrain this fishery should it exceed
the GHL. The proposed and final rules
implementing the current GHLs were
published in the Federal Register in
2002 and 2003 respectively (67 FR 3867,
January 2, 2002; 68 FR 47256, August 8,
2003). These regulations are codified at
50 CFR 300.65.
The GHLs represent a pre-season
specification of acceptable annual
halibut harvests in the guided sport
fisheries in Areas 2C and 3A. To
accommodate some growth in the
guided sport sector, while
approximating historical levels, the
Council recommended the GHLs based
on 125 percent of the average 1995
through 1999 guided sport halibut
harvest in each area. For Area 2C the
maximum was set at 1,432,000 pounds
(lbs), or 649.5 metric tons (mt) net
weight, and in Area 3A the maximum
GHL was set at 3,650,000 lbs (1,655.6
mt) net weight. The Council
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44157
recommended a system of step-wise
adjustments to accommodate decreases
and subsequent increases in abundance.
The Council recommended this system
of GHL adjustments to provide a
relatively predictable and stable harvest
target for guided halibut sport sector
notwithstanding a lack of measures to
constrain the guided sport halibut
fishery. A more detailed description of
GHL management and the Council’s
rationale behind such management can
be found in the proposed and final rules
implementing that action (67 FR 3867,
January 2, 2002; 68 FR 47256, August 8,
2003).
To ensure that the halibut stocks
would continue to develop to a level
that would permit optimum yield in the
halibut fisheries, the IPHC and Council
have recommended, and the Secretary
of Commerce has adopted, a number of
regulatory measures in Area 2C to limit
guided sport halibut harvest to within
the GHL. The primary regulatory
measures included: (1) Effective in 2007
and 2008, maintaining a two-fish daily
bag limit provided that at least one of
the harvested halibut had a head-on
length of no more than 32 inches (81.3
cm) (72 FR 30714, June 4, 2007); and (2)
effective in 2009, a one-fish daily bag
limit that superseded the June 4, 2007,
two-fish with maximum size rule, a
prohibition on harvest by the charter
vessel guide and crew, and a line limit
equal to the number of charter vessel
anglers onboard, not to exceed six lines
(74 FR 21194, May 6, 2009).
Members of the charter halibut sector
challenged the May 6, 2009, final rule
in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Columbia (Van Valin v. Locke, 671 F.
Supp 2d 1 D.D.C 2009). Plaintiffs argued
that the rule violated the Halibut Act
and the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA). The court granted summary
judgment in favor of the Secretary of
Commerce and upheld the May 6, 2009,
final rule. The one halibut per day bag
limit for charter vessel anglers remains
in effect for Area 2C.
In addition, as a response to concerns
that that growth in the charter vessel
sector was overcrowding productive
halibut grounds, the Council
recommended, and the Secretary of
Commerce adopted, a limited access
program to provide stability for the
guided sport halibut fishery and
decrease the need for regulatory
adjustments affecting charter vessel
anglers. NMFS published a final rule
implementing the charter halibut
limited access program on January 5,
2010 (75 FR 554). Under the program,
NMFS initially issued permits to those
businesses that historically and recently
participated in the guided sport fishery.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44158
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
The Area 2C guided sport harvest has
exceeded its GHL every year since 2004
notwithstanding the foregoing
management measures designed to
control sport halibut harvest in this
area. During 2004 through 2007, the
GHL was 1,432,000 lbs (649.5 mt).
During that time period, guided sport
harvests were approximately 1,750,000
lbs (793.8 mt) in 2004, 1,952,000 lbs
(885.4 mt) in 2005, 1,804,000 lbs (818.3
mt) in 2006, and 1,918,000 lbs (870.0
mt) in 2007. In 2008, the GHL was
931,000 lbs (422.3 mt) and guided sport
harvests was approximately 1,999,000
lbs (906.7 mt). In 2009 the GHL was
788,000 lbs (357.4 mt) and the guided
sport harvest was approximately
1,245,000 lbs (564.7 mt). In 2010, the
GHL was 788,000 lbs (357.4 mt). The
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G) provided the IPHC with a
preliminary estimate of the guided sport
harvest in 2010 of 46,816 fish yielding
1,279,000 lbs (580.1 mt) (November 1,
2010, letter from ADF&G to the IPHC).
The Total CEY for 2011 is 5,390,000
lbs (2,445.0 mt) in Area 2C. The
corresponding GHL is 788,000 lbs (357.4
mt) in Area 2C. Because NMFS imposed
no additional charter restrictions in
2011, the IPHC believed that charter
harvest was likely to exceed the GHL
and result in total harvest exceeding the
total CEY. As such, the IPHC
recommended and the Secretary of
State, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of Commerce, accepted a daily
bag limit for charter vessel anglers in
Area 2C of one halibut with a maximum
length of 37 inches (94.0 cm) per day
(76 FR 14300, March 16, 2011). The
IPHC recommended this additional
management measure in the Area 2C
charter fishery to limit guided sport
halibut harvest to the GHL and achieve
the IPHC’s overall conservation
objective for Area 2C.
III. Proposed Catch Sharing Plan (CSP)
for Area 2C and Area 3A
In October 2008, the Council adopted
a motion to recommend the CSP to the
Secretary of Commerce. The motion is
available at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/
current_issues/halibut_issues/
HalibutCSPmotion1008.pdf. The
Council intended the CSP to be a
comprehensive management program
for the guided sport halibut fisheries in
Area 2C and Area 3A. If approved, the
proposed regulations would (1)
establish sector allocations of a
combined catch limit to the commercial
and guided sport halibut fisheries in
Area 2C and in Area 3A, (2) implement
harvest restrictions (CSP restrictions) for
charter vessel anglers in each area that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
would be intended to limit guided sport
harvest to within the target harvest
range around that sector’s catch limit for
that area, and (3) authorize transfers of
commercial halibut IFQ as guided
angler fish (GAF) to charter halibut
permit holders for harvest by charter
vessel anglers in the guided sport
halibut fishery. GAF would offer charter
vessel anglers in Area 2C or Area 3A an
opportunity to harvest halibut in
addition to, or instead of, the halibut
harvested under the CSP restriction, up
to the harvest limits in place for
unguided sport anglers in that area.
Because GAF would be a use of halibut
IFQ, GAF harvested by charter vessel
anglers would not be included in
estimates of guided sport harvest under
the CSP.
The CSP allocations would replace
the GHL with a percentage allocation of
the combined catch limit to the guided
sport fishery. The combined catch limit
would be determined by the IPHC each
year prior to the fishing season. The CSP
also would establish non-discretionary
CSP restrictions for charter vessel
anglers prior to the fishing season based
on projected harvests and guided sport
catch limits for that year. Under the
GHL, restrictions for charter vessel
anglers in Area 2C were implemented
by separate NMFS rulemaking after the
GHL was exceeded. The pre-season
specification of the CSP restrictions is
intended to limit guided sport harvest to
the target before an overage occurs, as
opposed to the retroactive GHL
approach that implements corrective
action after the overages have occurred.
The pre-season specification of CSP
restrictions is consistent with the
Council’s objective to maintain the
guided sport season length in effect in
recent years (February 1 through
December 31) with no inseason changes
to harvest restrictions. The Council
developed this objective based on
public testimony from charter vessel
operators indicating that inseason
changes to harvest restrictions would be
disruptive to guided sport operators and
anglers. Many charter vessel anglers
typically book fishing trips with
operators well in advance of the trip
date with an expectation that the
harvest restrictions that are effective at
the beginning of the fishing season will
be in place throughout that season.
Management changes to bag or size
limits for charter vessel anglers within
a fishing season may cause considerable
inconvenience for guided sport anglers
and operators if anglers decide to
postpone or cancel their guided sport
fishing trip due to the bag or size limit
change. The potential for inseason
management changes also could result
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
in fewer anglers planning guided sport
fishing trips in Alaska, which could
have a significant adverse economic
impact on charter vessel operators by
reducing revenue.
The Council recommended, and
NMFS agrees, that the annual CSP catch
limits for the commercial and charter
sectors and the CSP restrictions for
charter vessel anglers should be
determined and implemented by a
predictable and standardized
methodology as part of the IPHC’s
annual recommendations for halibut
fishery conservation and management.
This proposed rule would establish
procedures for determining the sector
catch limits and CSP restrictions for
each area in order to provide a
systematic method for limiting projected
charter harvest to the target harvest
range determined by the CSP. NMFS
proposes that the annual CSP catch
limits for the commercial and charter
sectors and the CSP restrictions for
charter vessel anglers be implemented
as IPHC annual management measures.
If the proposed CSP is approved, NMFS
would include the CSP sector catch
limits and CSP restrictions in the IPHC
annual management measures
published in the Federal Register each
year, as specified by regulations at 50
CFR 300.62.
These annual management measures
are effective until superseded by
regulations, which typically result when
the Secretary of State and the Secretary
of Commerce accept the regulatory
recommendations made by the IPHC at
its next January annual meeting. In
recent years, this schedule for
implementing IPHC regulations has
affected the February 1 season opening
date for halibut sport fisheries in
Alaska. The effective date of the annual
management measures has typically
been around March 1. Thus, the
February 1 opening of the sport season
was regulated by the previous year’s
annual management measures, which
had not yet been superseded by the
most recent IPHC-recommended
regulations. This situation likely would
continue under the CSP unless the IPHC
recommends a change to the February 1
opening for the sport fishing season.
However, implementation of the annual
management measures in March likely
does not impact the guided sport fishery
because there has historically been little
or no halibut harvest in this fishery in
February.
Except for authorizing commercial
halibut quota share (QS) holders to
transfer IFQ as GAF to charter halibut
permit holders, the Council did not
intend for the CSP to change the
management of the commercial longline
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
halibut fisheries in Area 2C and Area
3A. The directed commercial halibut
fisheries in Area 2C and Area 3A are
managed under the IFQ program
pursuant to regulations at 50 CFR 679
subparts A through E. The proposed
rule would amend these regulations to
authorize transfers between IFQ and
GAF and establish the requirements for
using GAF.
IV. CSP Allocation Between the
Commercial and Guided Sport Halibut
Fisheries
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
A. Annual Combined Catch Limit
The CSP would (1) change the current
process for specifying annual
commercial catch limits for the
commercial halibut fisheries in Area 2C
and Area 3A, and (2) establish a process
for specifying annual guided sport catch
limits in Area 2C and Area 3A. The
process for specifying annual guided
sport catch limits under the CSP would
replace the GHL for the guided sport
fisheries in Area 2C and Area 3A. The
IPHC currently specifies annual catch
limits only for the directed commercial
halibut fisheries, and Federal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
regulations determine the GHL for the
guided sport halibut fisheries based on
the Total CEY in Area 2C and Area 3A
determined by the IPHC. Under the
proposed CSP, the IPHC would specify
an annual combined catch limit for Area
2C and for Area 3A at its annual
meeting, which has typically taken
place in January. Each area’s annual
combined catch limit in net pounds
would be the total allowable halibut
harvest for the directed commercial
halibut fishery plus the total allowable
halibut harvest for the guided sport
halibut fishery under the CSP.
NMFS anticipates that the IPHC
process for determining the annual
combined catch limit would be similar
to its current process for determining
annual commercial catch limits. The
IPHC would continue to estimate the
exploitable biomass of halibut using a
combination of harvest data from the
commercial, sport, and subsistence
fisheries, and information collected
during scientific surveys and sampling
of bycatch in other fisheries. The IPHC
would calculate the Total CEY, or the
target level for total removals (in net
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44159
pounds) for that area in the coming year,
by multiplying the target harvest rate by
the estimate of exploitable biomass.
With the exception of guided sport
removals, the IPHC would subtract
estimates of all non-commercial
removals from the Total CEY. The
remaining CEY, after the removals are
subtracted, would be the combined
commercial and guided sport fishery
CEY and would provide the basis for the
IPHC’s determination of the annual
combined catch limit for Areas 2C and
3A. The IPHC would continue to
consider the combined commercial and
guided sport fishery CEY, staff
recommendations, harvest policy, and
stakeholder input, when it specifies the
Area 2C and Area 3A annual combined
catch limits in net pounds. The IPHC
process for determining annual
combined catch limits under the
proposed CSP is presented in Figure 5.
Figure 5. IPHC Process for Setting
Annual Combined Catch Limits for Area
2C and Area 3A Under the Proposed
CSP
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44160
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Under the CSP, the IPHC would
divide the annual combined catch limits
into separate annual catch limits for the
commercial and guided sport fisheries.
The CSP allocates a fixed percentage of
the annual combined catch limit to the
guided sport and commercial fisheries.
The fixed percentage allocation to each
sector varies with halibut abundance.
The IPHC would multiply the CSP
allocation percentages for each area by
the annual combined catch limit to
calculate the commercial and guided
sport catch limits in net pounds. At
moderate to low levels of halibut
abundance, the CSP could provide the
guided sport sector with a smaller
poundage catch limit than it would have
received under the GHL program.
Conversely, at higher levels of
abundance, the CSP could provide the
guided sport sector with a larger
poundage catch limit than it would have
received under the GHL program. The
Council intended the CSP sector
allocations to balance the needs of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
guided sport and commercial sectors at
all levels of halibut abundance.
Although the CSP allocation method
is a significant change from the current
allocation method under the GHL,
NMFS believes that the allocation under
the CSP provides a more equitable
management response to changes in
Total CEY. For example, the Area 2C
GHL was 788,000 lbs in 2009. The Area
2C Total CEY declined by
approximately 16 percent from 2009 to
2010, but this decline did not trigger a
change in the GHL, which remained at
788,000 lbs in 2010. The burden of a
lower exploitable biomass in Area 2C
was borne entirely by the commercial
sector in 2010. Conversely, when
halibut exploitable biomass increases,
the GHL does not allow the guided sport
sector to fully benefit from this increase.
For example, the Area 3A Total CEY
increased by approximately 11 percent
from 2006 to 2007, but this increase did
not trigger a change in the GHL, which
was at the maximum level of 3,650,000
lbs in 2006 and 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
The Council considered establishing
fixed poundage allocations to the
guided sport sector as implemented
under the GHL program. However, the
Council determined that use of a
combined catch limit under the CSP
would allow the IPHC to establish a
clear allocation between the guided
sport and commercial halibut sectors.
Allocating each sector a percentage of
the combined catch limit would be a
simple calculation and would be
transparent and comprehensible to each
user group. This approach is equitable
for halibut fishery management because
both the commercial and guided sport
sector allocations adjust directly with
changes in halibut exploitable biomass.
Thus, both the guided sport and
commercial sectors would share in the
benefits and costs of managing the
resource for long-term sustainability
under a combined catch limit.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
EP22JY11.000</GPH>
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
B. Annual Commercial Fishery and
Guided Sport Fishery Catch Limits
The Council considered historical
catch information when determining the
recommended CSP allocation
percentages for the commercial and
guided sport sectors. The Council
reviewed average guided sport harvest
estimates for individual years and for
different combinations of years ranging
from 1999 through 2005. The Council
recommended two sets of CSP
allocation percentages for the
commercial and guided sport sectors in
Area 2C and in Area 3A. At catch limit
levels of 5,000,000 lbs (2,267.9 mt) and
less in Area 2C and 10,000,000 lbs
(4,535.9 mt) and less in Area 3A, the
CSP would allocate a higher percentage
of the combined catch limit to the
guided sport sector than it would
receive under combined catch limits
above these levels. The Council
recommended, and NMFS proposes,
higher guided sport allocation
percentages at relatively low abundance
levels of halibut to ameliorate the effects
of replacing the GHL stair-step
benchmark in pounds with a CSP
allocation percentage that varies directly
with the annual combined catch limit.
When the IPHC sets an annual
combined catch limit of less than
5,000,000 lbs (2,267.9 mt) in Area 2C,
the commercial fishery allocation would
be 82.7 percent and the guided sport
fishery allocation would be 17.3 percent
of the annual combined catch limit.
This proposed guided sport fishery
allocation percentage was calculated as
125 percent of average guided sport
harvest in Area 2C from 2001 through
2005 divided by combined guided sport
and commercial halibut harvests from
2001 through 2005. The proposed
allocation of 17.3 percent was the
largest percentage allocation considered
by the Council for Area 2C.
When the IPHC sets the annual
combined catch limit at 5,000,000 lbs
(2,267.9 mt) or more in Area 2C, the
commercial fishery allocation would be
84.9 percent and the guided sport
fishery allocation would be 15.1 percent
of the Area 2C annual combined catch
44161
limit. This proposed guided sport CSP
allocation percentage was calculated as
the 2005 guided sport harvest estimates
divided by the combined 2005 guided
sport and commercial harvests in Area
2C. The Council considered smaller
percentage allocations to the guided
sport sector, including the current GHL
formula, which is 125 percent of the
average 1995 through 1999 guided sport
harvest divided by the 1995 through
1999 combined guided sport and
commercial harvests in Area 2C.
However, because guided sport harvests
in Area 2C have exceeded the GHL since
it was implemented in 2004, the
Council determined, and NMFS agrees,
that 2005 guided sport harvest would be
a more appropriate basis for
determining the guided sport allocation
percentages under the CSP. The guided
sport harvest in 2005 was the second
highest halibut harvest estimated since
1999. Table 1 presents the Area 2C
commercial and guided sport fishery
percentage allocations under the
proposed CSP.
TABLE 1—AREA 2C CSP ALLOCATIONS TO THE COMMERCIAL AND GUIDED SPORT FISHERIES AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE
ANNUAL COMBINED CATCH LIMIT
If the Area 2C annual combined catch limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ......................................................................................................
then the CSP
allocation to the commercial fishery
as a percentage
of the annual
combined catch
limit is:
4,999,999 lbs
82.7%
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
the Area 2C percentage allocation at low
abundance levels.
When the IPHC sets Area 3A annual
combined catch limit at 10,000,000 lbs
(4,535.9 mt) or more, the commercial
fishery allocation would be 86 percent
and the guided sport fishery allocation
would be 14 percent of the Area 3A
annual combined catch limit. The
proposed guided sport CSP percentage
allocation for Area 3A at annual
combined catch limits of 10,000,000 lbs
(4,535.9 mt) and greater was calculated
using the GHL formula of 125 percent of
the 1995 through 1999 average guided
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
17.3%
84.9%
5,000,000 lbs or greater ..................................................................................................................
For Area 3A annual combined catch
limits of less than 10,000,000 lbs
(4,535.9 mt), the commercial fishery
allocation would be 84.6 percent and
the guided sport fishery allocation
would be 15.4 percent of the Area 3A
annual combined catch limit. The
Council’s recommended CSP guided
sport percentage allocations for annual
combined catch limits of less than
10,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt) in Area 3A
is based on a calculation of 125 percent
of the average guided sport harvest from
2001 through 2005, which is the same
formula the Council recommended for
then the CSP
allocation to the
guided sport
fishery as a
percentage of the
annual combined
catch limit is:
15.1%
sport harvest estimates in Area 3A. The
Council determined that the GHL
formula was appropriate for the Area 3A
CSP percentage allocation because the
annual average guided sport harvest
from 2004 through 2007 exceeded the
GHL by less than three percent. NMFS
agrees that the GHL formula likely
continues to be an appropriate
allocation target because the Area 3A
guided sport fishery harvest did not
exceed the GHL in 2008 and 2009. Table
2 presents the Area 3A commercial and
guided sport fishery percentage
allocations under the proposed CSP.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44162
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—AREA 3A CSP ALLOCATIONS TO THE COMMERCIAL AND GUIDED SPORT FISHERIES AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE
ANNUAL COMBINED CATCH LIMIT
If the Area 3A annual combined catch limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ......................................................................................................
then the CSP
allocation to the
commercial fishery
as a percentage
of the annual
combined catch limit
is:
9,999,999 lbs
84.6%
multiplying 6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt)
by 15.1 percent, which equals 981,500
lbs (445.2 mt).
NMFS would publish the catch limits
for the guided sport and commercial
fisheries in the Federal Register as part
of the IPHC annual management
measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62.
C. Guided Sport Target Harvest Range
The Council recognized, and NMFS
agrees, that managing guided sport
harvest is imprecise and, therefore,
guided sport harvest in Area 2C and 3A
15.4%
86.0%
10,000,000 lbs or greater ................................................................................................................
The CSP would apportion the annual
combined catch limits for Area 2C and
Area 3A between the commercial
fishery and the guided sport fishery. For
example, if the IPHC were to
recommend an annual combined catch
limit of 6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) for
Area 2C, the annual commercial catch
limit for Area 2C would be calculated by
multiplying 6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt)
by 84.9 percent, which equals 5,518,000
lbs (2,502.9 mt). The guided sport catch
limit for Area 2C would be calculated by
then the CSP
allocation to the
guided sport
fishery as a
percentage of the
annual combined
catch limit is:
14.0%
under the CSP can be expected to vary
above and below the guided sport catch
limit. To account for this imprecision,
NMFS proposes that the CSP should
restrict guided sport harvest to within a
guided sport target harvest range
corresponding with plus or minus 3.5
percentage points of the guided sport
allocation percentage for that year.
Tables 3 and 4 present the method for
calculating the guided sport target
harvest ranges for Area 2C and Area 3A
under the proposed CSP.
TABLE 3—GUIDED SPORT TARGET HARVEST RANGE FOR AREA 2C
If the Area 2C annual combined catch limit for halibut
in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ..............................................................
4,999,999 lbs
5,000,000 lbs or greater ..........................................................................
then the CSP
percentage
allocation to the guided sport fishery is:
and the lowest value
of the target harvest
range is calculated by
multiplying the annual
combined catch limit
by
and the highest value
of the target harvest
range is calculated by
multiplying the annual
combined catch limit
by
17.3%
13.8%
20.8%
15.1%
11.6%
18.6%
TABLE 4—GUIDED SPORT TARGET HARVEST RANGE FOR AREA 3A
If the Area 3A annual combined catch limit for halibut
in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ..............................................................
9,999,999 lbs
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
10,000,000 lbs or greater ........................................................................
Using the previous example of an
annual combined catch limit of
6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) for Area 2C,
the guided sport allocation of 15.1
percent, and the guided sport catch
limit of 981,500 lbs (445.2 mt), NMFS
intends the proposed CSP restrictions to
limit guided sport harvest to between
15.1 percent minus 3.5 percentage
points, or 11.6 percent, and 15.1 percent
plus 3.5 percentage points, or 18.6
percent, of the annual combined catch
limit. Thus, the CSP restrictions for
Area 2C under this example would be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
then the CSP
percentage allocation
to the guided sport
fishery is:
and the lowest value
of the target harvest
range is calculated by
multiplying the annual
combined catch limit
by
and the highest value
of the target harvest
range is calculated by
multiplying the annual
combined catch limit
by
15.4%
11.9%
18.9%
14.0%
10.5%
17.5%
intended to limit guided sport fishery
harvest to between 754,000 lbs (342.0
mt) and 1,209,000 lbs (548.4 mt). The
lowest value of the target harvest range
would be calculated by multiplying the
annual combined catch limit by 11.6
percent (6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) ×
11.6 percent = 754,000 lbs (342.0 mt)).
The highest value of the target harvest
range would be calculated by
multiplying the annual combined catch
limit by 18.6 percent (6,500,000 lbs
(2,948.4 mt) × 18.6 percent = 1,209,000
lbs (548.4 mt)). The annual guided sport
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
catch limit, 981,500 lbs (445.2 mt) in
this example, is the midpoint of the
guided sport target harvest range
specified by the CSP. The CSP
restriction applied each year could vary,
based on the annual combined catch
limit as established by the IPHC and
projected guided sport harvest
estimates.
NMFS recognizes that guided sport
halibut removals may exceed the guided
sport catch limit in some years, and
removals may be under the catch limit
in other years, similar to variations in
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
guided sport harvest under the GHL
program. However, the Council
anticipated, and NMFS agrees, that over
time, halibut harvests in the guided
sport sector under the CSP would
balance out around the guided sport
catch limits to ensure that conservation
and management objectives are
achieved. Conservation of the halibut
resource would be ensured because the
IPHC would continue to account for all
removals when determining the annual
combined catch limit under the CSP.
IPHC stock assessments would continue
to account for guided sport harvests that
exceed the sector’s catch limit.
Operationally, overages would result in
a corresponding decrease in the
combined guided sport and commercial
catch limit in the following year.
Underages would accrue to the benefit
of the halibut biomass and all user
groups and could result in a
corresponding increase in the combined
catch limit in the following year. The
Council determined, and NMFS agrees,
that halibut fishery management under
the CSP would more likely limit the
guided sport halibut fishery to its catch
limit over time than the GHL program
because the annual, non-discretionary
CSP restrictions on guided sport harvest
would restrict projected harvest at
varying levels of annual combined catch
limits. This annual implementation of
the CSP also would be more timely and
responsive to changes in halibut
abundance because the restrictions on
guided sport harvest are determined
prior to the season. The GHL program
relies on the implementation of harvest
restrictions after a GHL overage takes
place. Additionally, the Council, IPHC,
and NMFS would continue to assess
effectiveness of the CSP in halibut
fisheries management. The Council and
NMFS anticipate that as the CSP is
implemented over time, the Council and
its SSC would review the CSP. The SSC
is the Council’s primary scientific
advisory body. As such, it provides the
Council, NMFS, and the public with
scientific and technical reviews of
regulatory amendment analyses, stock
assessments, and research and data
needs for fisheries management in
Alaska.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
V. CSP Restrictions
Under the CSP, the annual combined
catch limit and projected guided sport
harvest for Area 2C and Area 3A would
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
trigger the CSP restrictions, or the
harvest limit regulations governing
anglers in the guided sport fishery in
each area. The CSP restrictions are
designed to limit guided sport fishery
harvests in Area 2C and Area 3A within
the guided sport target harvest range.
The CSP restrictions for charter vessel
anglers are daily bag limits of one or two
halibut, which may be implemented
with or without restrictions on the
maximum size of halibut retained under
the daily bag limit. The CSP would
require default CSP restrictions when
the guided sport sector is projected to
harvest within its allocated range, more
stringent restrictions when the guided
sport sector is projected to exceed its
target harvest range, and in some
circumstances, less stringent restrictions
when the guided sport sector is
projected to be below its target harvest
range.
At its annual meeting in January, the
IPHC would specify the Area 2C and
Area 3A annual combined catch limits
and divide the combined catch limits
into separate annual commercial and
guided sport catch limits. The IPHC
would use guided sport harvest
projections and the appropriate CSP
management tier to determine the CSP
restrictions that would be in place for
the guided sport fishery in Area 2C and
Area 3A for the upcoming year. If the
Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Commerce accept the IPHC
recommendations, NMFS will publish
the Area 2C and Area 3A annual
commercial and guided sport catch
limits and the CSP restrictions in the
Federal Register as annual management
measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62.
A. Default CSP Restrictions
The Council recommended, and
NMFS agrees, that CSP restrictions for
each area be based on an area’s annual
combined catch limit for that year. CSP
restrictions contain four levels, or tiers,
based on annual combined catch limits
for each Area 2C and Area 3A. Each tier
contains associated CSP restrictions. For
Area 2C, the tiers of annual combined
catch limits are: (1) Between 0 lbs (0 mt)
and 4,999,999 lbs (2,267.9 mt); (2)
between 5,000,000 lbs (2,267.9 mt) and
8,999,999 lbs (4,082.3 mt); (3) between
9,000,000 lbs (4,082.3 mt) and
13,999,999 lbs (6,350.3 mt); and (4)
14,000,000 lbs (6,350.3 mt) and greater.
For Area 3A, the tiers of annual
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44163
combined catch limits are: (1) between
0 lbs (0 mt) and 9,999,999 lbs (4,535.9
mt); (2) between 10,000,000 lbs (4,535.9
mt) and 19,999,999 lbs (4,535.9 mt); (3)
between 20,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt) and
26,999,999 lbs (12,246.9 mt); and (4)
27,000,000 lbs (12,246.9 mt) and greater.
Following the IPHC’s specification of
the annual combined catch limit for
each area, NMFS would implement the
default CSP restrictions for charter
vessel anglers in Area 2C and Area 3A
unless the projected guided sport
harvest was estimated to be outside of
the guided sport target harvest range.
The Council recommended, and
NMFS agrees, that daily bag limits
alone, or in combination with a
maximum size limit, are appropriate
CSP restrictions to limit guided sport
harvest. The Council recommended a
default CSP restriction limiting charter
vessel anglers to two fish of any size
each day at relatively high levels of
halibut abundance, which the Council
specified as 14,000,000 lbs (6,350.3 mt)
or greater in Area 2C, and 27,000,000 lbs
(12,246.9 mt) or greater in Area 3A (tier
4). At these levels of abundance, annual
combined catch limits would be
relatively higher and guided sport
anglers would not require more
stringent CSP restrictions to maintain
harvest within the guided sport target
harvest range. As halibut abundance
levels and annual combined catch limits
decrease, CSP restrictions would be
more stringent, further limiting guided
sport harvest at those lower tiers. The
Council recommended that at the next
lower tier, tier 3, the default CSP
restriction should be a daily limit of two
halibut, but at least one halibut must
have a head-on length of no more than
32 inches (81.3 cm). If, however, a
charter vessel angler retains only one
halibut in a calendar day, that halibut
could be of any length. The Council
recommended the most restrictive
default CSP restriction, a daily limit of
one halibut, apply to tiers 1 and 2 for
each area. The Council determined, and
NMFS agrees, that this conservative
default CSP restriction should be in
place at the relatively low levels of
abundance reflected in tiers 1 and 2 to
promote the development of halibut
stocks levels supporting optimum yield.
Table 5 presents the default CSP
restrictions for Area 2C tiers and Table
6 presents the default CSP restrictions
for Area 3A tiers.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44164
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTIONS FOR AREA 2C
If the Area 2C annual
combined catch limit for
halibut in net pounds (lbs)
is:
and . . .
then the default CSP restriction is that the number of halibut
caught and retained per calendar day by each charter vessel
angler is limited to no more than:
Tier 1 .....................
between 0 lbs
4,999,999 lbs
one halibut of any size.
Tier 2 .....................
between 5,000,000 lbs
8,999,999 lbs
one halibut of any size.
Tier 3 .....................
between 9,000,000 lbs
13,999,999 lbs
two halibut, but at least one halibut must have a head-on length
of no more than 32 inches (81.3 cm). If a charter vessel angler retains only one halibut in a calendar day, that halibut
may be of any length.
Tier 4 .....................
14,000,000 lbs and greater
Tier
two halibut of any size.
TABLE 6—DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTIONS FOR AREA 3A
If the Area 3A annual
combined catch limit for
halibut in net pounds
(lbs) is:
and . . .
then the default CSP restriction is that the number of halibut caught and retained
per calendar day by each charter vessel angler is limited to no more than:
Tier 1 ................
between 0 lbs
9,999,999 lbs
one halibut of any size.
Tier 2 ................
between 10,000,000 lbs
19,999,999 lbs
one halibut of any size.
Tier 3 ................
between 20,000,000 lbs
26,999,999 lbs
two halibut, but at least one halibut must have a head-on length of no more than
32 inches (81.3 cm). If a charter vessel angler retains only one halibut in a calendar day, that halibut may be of any length.
Tier 4 ................
27,000,000 lbs and greater
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Tier
NMFS provides the following
example to illustrate the CSP tiered
system of harvest restrictions. An IPHC
annual combined catch limit of
6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) in Area 2C
would correspond with tier 2. The tier
2 default CSP restriction would limit
each charter vessel angler to retaining
no more than one halibut of any size per
calendar day. An IPHC annual
combined catch limit of 25,000,000 lbs
(11,339.8 mt) in Area 3A would
correspond with tier 3. The tier 3
default CSP restriction would limit each
charter vessel angler to retaining no
more than two halibut per calendar day,
but at least one halibut must have a
head-on length of no more than 32
inches (81.3 cm). Note that although the
default CSP restrictions are the same for
Area 2C and Area 3A tiers, the IPHC
annual combined catch limits may differ
between Area 2C and Area 3A.
Therefore, it is possible that charter
vessel anglers in Area 2C would be
subject to a different CSP restriction
than charter vessel anglers in Area 3A
in any particular year.
B. Projections of Guided Sport Harvest
Projections of guided sport harvest in
Area 2C and Area 3A are an integral
component of the CSP. Each year, the
IPHC would use annual projections of
total guided sport halibut harvest in net
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
two halibut of any size.
pounds for Area 2C and Area 3A for the
upcoming year to determine whether
anglers in the guided sport fishery are
likely to harvest an amount of halibut
outside of the management tier default
target harvest range.
In January 2009, ADF&G staff
prepared an analysis to assess the
feasibility of projecting guided sport
halibut harvest under the CSP. The
Council’s SSC reviewed the reports and
provided its recommendations to the
Council in February 2009. The ADF&G
analysis can be found at: https://
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/
current_issues/halibut_issues/
HarvestProjectionsDisc709.pdf. As
detailed in that analysis, at least one,
and possibly two, projections of guided
sport halibut harvest for the upcoming
year would be required for the CSP for
both Area 2C and Area 3A.
Each year, the IPHC would specify the
annual combined catch limit and, based
on ADF&G harvest estimates, project
guided sport harvest in net pounds for
the upcoming year. The harvest
projection would assume that charter
vessel anglers would be subject to the
default CSP restriction for the
appropriate management tier. For
example, to determine the total guided
sport halibut harvest projection in net
pounds under the management tier
default CSP restriction, the IPHC would
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
forecast the number of fish that would
be harvested by charter vessel anglers
and an average net weight of halibut
harvested by charter vessel anglers. The
product of the number of fish and the
average net weight is the projection of
guided sport halibut harvest in net
pounds. If the projection under the
default CSP restriction is below the
guided sport target harvest range, the
IPHC would prepare a second projection
assuming a less stringent CSP
restriction. If the projection under the
default CSP restriction is above the
guided sport target harvest range, the
IPHC would implement a more stringent
CSP restriction.
The IPHC will base its projections in
large part on ADF&G analyses of guided
sport harvest. ADF&G has used a variety
of methods to project guided sport
harvest in the past. For the CSP
projections of guided sport halibut
harvest, the IPHC will build on
ADF&G’s previous experience
estimating guided sport halibut harvest
prior to and under the CSP. The IPHC
will use the best information available
to develop harvest projections,
including data from the ADF&G
statewide harvest survey of sport
anglers, ADF&G statewide saltwater
charter logbooks, ADF&G dockside
surveys, IPHC longline survey data, and
any other information that improves the
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
accuracy of the projections. The IPHC
will develop the projections to account
for year-to-year changes to the CSP
restrictions in effect for charter vessel
anglers as well as normal year-to-year
variability in harvest due to changes in
fishing effort or catchability of halibut.
C. Determination of Annual CSP
Restrictions
The annual CSP restrictions in effect
in each area will be determined by using
(1) the appropriate management tier
associated with the IPHC’s
recommended annual combined catch
limit, and (2) the projected guided sport
harvest of halibut for each area under
the default CSP restriction, expressed as
a percentage of the annual combined
catch limit for each area. The Council
and NMFS anticipate that the default
CSP restrictions would limit projected
guided sport harvest to within the
guided sport target harvest range for
each area. However, in the event that
projected guided sport harvest is above
the management tier target harvest
range, the CSP triggers more stringent
CSP restrictions. In the event that the
projected guided sport harvest is below
the management tier target harvest
range, the CSP may trigger relaxed CSP
restrictions. Thus, there are up to three
possible CSP restrictions for each tier,
depending on whether projected guided
sport harvest under the default CSP
restriction is less than, within, or above
the guided sport target harvest range.
Determination of Annual CSP
Restrictions if Projected Guided Sport
Harvest Is Within the Target Harvest
Range
If the projected guided sport fishery
harvest under the default CSP
restriction is within the guided sport
target harvest range, charter vessel
anglers would be subject to the default
CSP restriction for the year. For
example, if the IPHC recommended an
Area 2C annual combined catch limit of
9,500,000 lbs (4,309.1 mt), the IPHC
would implement the default CSP
restriction, which limits charter vessel
44165
anglers to retaining two halibut per day
and one halibut must be less than 32
inches (81.3 cm). The target range
around the 15.1 percent guided sport
allocation would have a low value of
11.6 percent and a high value of 18.6
percent (see Table 3). This allocation
range would correspond to a target
harvest range from 1,102,000 lbs (499.9
mt) to 1,767,000 lbs (801.5 mt). If
projected guided sport harvest under the
default CSP restriction were greater than
or equal to 1,102,000 lbs (499.9 mt) and
less than or equal to 1,767,000 lbs (801.5
mt), the CSP would limit charter vessel
anglers to the default CSP restriction,
which is retaining no more than two
halibut per day and one halibut must be
less than 32 inches (81.3 cm). Table 7
provides NMFS’ proposed process for
determining Area 2C annual CSP
restrictions if projected guided sport
harvest under the default CSP
restriction is within the guided sport
target harvest range.
TABLE 7—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST IS WITHIN
THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE UNDER THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION
then the annual CSP restriction in
effect is that the number of halibut
caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more than:
If the Area 2C annual
combined catch limit
for halibut in net
pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
If the projected guided sport harvest
using the default CSP restriction is:
Tier 1 .........................
between 0 lbs
4,999,999 lbs
greater than or equal to 13.8% and
less than or equal to 20.8% of the
annual combined catch limit.
one halibut of any size.
Tier 2 .........................
between 5,000,000 lbs
8,999,999 lbs
greater than or equal to 11.6% and
less than or equal to 18.6% of the
annual combined catch limit.
one halibut of any size.
Tier 3 .........................
between 9,000,000 lbs
13,999,999 lbs
greater than or equal to 11.6% and
less than or equal to 18.6% of the
annual combined catch limit.
two halibut, but at least one halibut
must have a head-on length of no
more than 32 inches (81.3 cm). If
a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day,
that halibut may be of any length.
Tier 4 .........................
14,000,000 lbs and greater
greater than or equal to 11.6% and
less than or equal to 18.6% of the
annual combined catch limit.
two halibut of any size.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Tier
If the IPHC recommended an Area 3A
annual combined catch limit of
28,000,000 lbs (12,700.6 mt), the default
CSP restriction would be a daily limit of
two halibut of any size. The target range
around the 14.0 percent guided sport
allocation would have a low value of
10.5 percent and a high value of 17.5
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
percent (see Table 4). If projected
guided sport harvest in Area 3A under
the default CSP restriction represented
an allocation greater than or equal to
10.5 percent and less than or equal to
17.5 percent, the CSP would limit
charter vessel anglers to the default CSP
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
restriction, which is retaining two
halibut of any size per day.
Table 8 provides NMFS’ proposed
process for determining Area 3A annual
CSP restrictions if projected guided
sport harvest under the default CSP
restriction is within the guided sport
target harvest range.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44166
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 8.—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST IS WITHIN
THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE UNDER THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION
then the annual CSP restriction in
effect is that the number of halibut
caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more than:
If the Area 3A annual
combined catch limit for
halibut in net pounds
(lbs) is:
and . . .
If the projected guided sport harvest
using the default CSP restriction is:
Tier 1 .........................
between 0 lbs
9,999,999 lbs
greater than or equal to 11.9% and
less than or equal to 18.9% of the
annual combined catch limit.
one halibut of any size.
Tier 2 .........................
between 10,000,000 lbs
19,999,999 lbs
greater than or equal to 10.5% and
less than or equal to 17.5% of the
annual combined catch limit.
one halibut of any size.
Tier 3 .........................
between 20,000,000 lbs
26,999,999 lbs
greater than or equal to 10.5% and
less than or equal to 17.5% of the
annual combined catch limit.
two halibut, but at least one halibut
must have a head-on length of no
more than 32 inches (81.3 cm). If
a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar
day, that halibut may be of any
length.
Tier 4 .........................
27,000,000 lbs and greater
greater than or equal to 10.5% and
less than or equal to 17.5% of the
annual combined catch limit.
two halibut of any size.
Tier
Determination of Annual CSP
Restrictions if Projected Guided Sport
Harvest is Below the Target Harvest
Range
If the projected guided sport fishery
harvest under the default CSP
restriction is less than the lowest value
of the target harvest range, the CSP
specifies that charter vessel anglers
could be subject to the next less
stringent CSP restriction, that is, the
default CSP restriction under the next
higher management tier. For example, if
the annual combined catch limit is
26,000,000 lbs for Area 3A, tier 3 is the
effective tier (see Table 6) and the
default CSP restriction would limit
charter vessel anglers to retaining two
halibut per day, and one halibut must be
32 inches (81.3 cm) or less. If projected
guided sport harvest under this default
CSP restriction as a percentage of the
annual combined catch limit was less
than 10.5 percent (see Table 4), then the
IPHC would complete a second
projection using the default CSP for tier
4, which limits charter vessel anglers to
retaining two halibut per day of any
size.
If projected guided sport harvest
under the tier 4 projection is less than
17.5 percent of the annual combined
catch limit for Area 3A, which is the
highest value of the guided sport target
harvest range for annual combined catch
limits of 10,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt) and
greater (see Table 4), then the tier 4
default CSP restriction would apply,
limiting charter vessel anglers in Area
3A to retaining two halibut per day of
any size. If, however, projected harvest
under the tier 4 default CSP restriction
was greater than 17.5 percent (see Table
4), the tier 3 default CSP restriction
would apply, limiting charter vessel
anglers in Area 3A to retaining two
halibut per day, one of which must be
32 inches (81.3 cm) or less.
Table 9 describes NMFS’ proposed
process for determining Area 2C annual
CSP restrictions if projected guided
sport harvest under the default CSP
restriction is below the guided sport
target harvest range under each tier.
TABLE 9—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST UNDER
THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION IS BELOW THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Tier
Tier 1 .........
VerDate Mar<15>2010
and the projected
guided sport harvest using the default CSP restriction is:
If the Area 2C annual
combined catch limit
for halibut in net
pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs
4,999,999 lbs
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
then the next higher tier default CSP
restriction is that
the number of halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more
than:
If projected guided
sport harvest vessel using the next
higher tier default
CSP restriction is:
then the annual
CSP restriction in
effect is that the
number of halibut
caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more
than:
less than 13.8% of
the annual combined catch limit.
one halibut of any
size..
N/A ........................
one halibut of any
size.
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
44167
TABLE 9—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST UNDER
THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION IS BELOW THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE—Continued
and the projected
guided sport harvest using the default CSP restriction is:
Tier
If the Area 2C annual
combined catch limit
for halibut in net
pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
Tier 2 .........
between 5,000,000 lbs
8,999,999 lbs
Tier 4 .........
between 9,000,000 lbs
13,999,999 lbs
14,000,000 lbs and greater
less than 11.6% of
the annual combined catch limit.
less than 11.6% of
the annual combined catch limit.
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a
head-on length of
no more than 32
inches (81.3 cm).
If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut
in a calendar
day, that halibut
may be of any
length.
If projected guided
sport harvest vessel using the next
higher tier default
CSP restriction is:
then the annual
CSP restriction in
effect is that the
number of halibut
caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more
than:
two halibut of any
size..
N/A ........................
less than or equal
to 18.6% of the
annual combined
catch limit.
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a
head-on length of
no more than 32
inches (81.3 cm).
If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut
in a calendar
day, that halibut
may be of any
length.
greater than or
equal to 18.6%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
Tier 3 .........
less than 11.6% of
the annual combined catch limit.
then the next higher tier default CSP
restriction is that
the number of halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more
than:
one halibut of any
size.
less than or equal
to 18.6% of the
annual combined
catch limit.
greater than or
equal to 18.6%
of the annual
combined catch
limit..
two halibut of any
size.
N/A ........................
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a
head-on length of
no more than 32
inches (81.3 cm).
If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut
in a calendar
day, that halibut
may be of any
length.
two halibut of any
size.
N/A = not applicable.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Table 10 describes NMFS’ proposed
process for determining the Area 3A
annual CSP restrictions if projected
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
guided sport harvest under the default
CSP restriction is below the guided
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
sport target harvest range under each
tier.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44168
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 10—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST UNDER
THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION IS BELOW THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE
and the projected
guided sport harvest using the default CSP restriction is:
then the next higher tier default CSP
restriction is that
the number of halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more
than:
If projected guided
sport harvest using
the next higher tier
default CSP restriction is:
then the annual
CSP restriction in
effect is that the
number of halibut
caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is
limited to no more
than:
If the Area 3A annual
combined catch limit for
halibut in net pounds
(lbs) is:
and . . .
Tier 1 .........
between 0 lbs
9,999,999 lbs
less than 11.9% of
the annual combined catch limit.
one halibut of any
size.
N/A ........................
one halibut of any
size
Tier 2 .........
between 10,000,000 lbs
19,999,999 lbs
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a
head-on length
of no more than
32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter
vessel angler retains only one
halibut in a calendar day, that
halibut may be of
any length.
less than or equal
to 17.5% of the
annual combined
catch limit.
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a
head-on length
of no more than
32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter
vessel angler retains only one
halibut in a calendar day, that
halibut may be of
any length
greater than or
equal to 17.5%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
one halibut of any
size
less than or equal
to 17.5% of the
annual combined
catch limit.
two halibut of any
size.
greater than or
equal to 17.5%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a
head-on length
of no more than
32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter
vessel angler retains only one
halibut in a calendar day, that
halibut may be of
any length
N/A ........................
two halibut of any
size.
Tier
Tier 3 .........
Tier 4 .........
between 20,000,000 lbs
26,999,999 lbs
27,000,000 lbs and greater
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
two halibut of any
size.
N/A ........................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
N/A = not applicable.
Exceptions to the method for
determining the CSP restrictions exist
for tiers 1 and 4. Where the projected
guided sport harvest is less than the
lowest value of the target harvest range
in tier 1, a second projection would be
unnecessary because the default CSP of
the next higher tier, tier 2, is also one
halibut of any size per day. Because the
least restrictive CSP restriction under
tier 1 is one halibut of any size per day,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
this CSP restriction would apply if
projected guided sport harvest is less
than or equal to the highest value of the
target harvest range under the default
CSP tier.
Where the projected guided sport
harvest under tier 4 is less than the
lowest value of the target harvest range,
a second projection would be
unnecessary because tier 4 is the highest
tier and the default CSP restriction of
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
two fish of any size per day is the least
restrictive CSP restriction authorized
under the CSP. Thus, the tier 4 CSP
restriction of two fish of any size per
day would apply if projected guided
sport harvest is less than the highest
value of the target harvest range under
the default CSP tier. If projected guided
sport harvest is greater than the highest
value of the target harvest range under
the default CSP tier, the CSP restriction
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
would be determined as discussed in
the next section.
Determination of Annual CSP
Restrictions if Projected Guided Sport
Harvest Is Above the Target Harvest
Range
If the projected guided sport fishery
harvest under the default CSP
restriction is greater than the highest
value of the target harvest range, the
CSP specifies that charter vessel anglers
would be subject to the next more
stringent CSP restriction, that is, the
default CSP restriction under the next
lower management tier. For example, in
tier 4, the default CSP restriction limits
charter vessel anglers to two fish of any
size per day. If projected guided sport
harvest under the tier 4 default CSP
restriction is greater than the largest
value of the target harvest range, then
the tier 3 default CSP restriction would
apply. In both Area 2C and Area 3A, the
tier 3 default CSP restriction limits
charter vessel anglers to retaining two
halibut per day, one of which must be
32 inches (81.3 cm) or less. Similarly, in
tier 3, if projected guided sport harvest
under the tier 3 default CSP restriction
is greater than the largest value of the
target harvest range, then the tier 2
default CSP restriction would apply.
In both Area 2C and Area 3A, the tier
2 default CSP restriction limits charter
vessel anglers to retaining one halibut of
any size per day. However, the tier 1
and 2 default CSP restriction is the most
restrictive guided sport harvest
restriction under the CSP. If the
44169
projected guided sport harvest under the
default CSP restriction is greater than
the largest value of the target harvest
range in tier 1 or tier 2, the Council
specified that a maximum length limit
would be placed on the one halibut that
could be retained per day by charter
vessel anglers in that area. The addition
of the length limit to the one halibut
daily bag limit is intended to further
restrict guided sport harvest to be equal
to or below the annual guided sport
catch limit for the appropriate
management tier.
Tables 11 and 12 describe NMFS’
proposed process for determining Area
2C and Area 3A annual CSP restrictions
if projected guided sport harvest under
the default CSP restriction is above the
target harvest range under each tier.
TABLE 11—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST UNDER
THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION IS ABOVE THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE
If the Area 2C annual
combined catch limit
for halibut in net
pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
If the projected guided
sport harvest using the default CSP restriction is:
then the annual CSP restriction in effect is that the
number of halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is limited to no
more than:
Tier 1 ...............
between 0 lbs
4,999,999 lbs
greater than 20.8% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
one halibut of a maximum length to restrict guided
sport harvest to be equal to or below 17.3% of the
annual combined catch limit.
Tier 2 ...............
between 5,000,000 lbs
8,999,999 lbs
greater than 18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
one halibut of a maximum length to restrict guided
sport harvest to be equal to or below 15.1% of the
annual combined catch limit.
Tier 3 ...............
between 9,000,000 lbs
13,999,999 lbs
greater than 18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
one halibut of any size.
Tier 4 ...............
14,000,000 lbs and greater
greater than 18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
two halibut, but at least one halibut must have a
head-on length of no more than 32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter vessel angler retains only one halibut in a calendar day, that halibut may be of any
length.
Tier
TABLE 12—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST UNDER
THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION IS ABOVE THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE
If the Area 3A annual
combined catch limit
for halibut in net
pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
Tier 1 ...............
between 0 lbs
Tier 2 ...............
Tier 3 ...............
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Tier
VerDate Mar<15>2010
If the projected guided
sport using the default
CSP restriction is:
then the annual CSP restriction in effect is that the
number of halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is limited to no
more than:
10,999,999 lbs
greater than 18.9% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
one halibut of a maximum length to restrict guided
sport harvest to be equal to or below 15.4% of the
annual combined catch limit
between 10,000,000
lbs
19,999,999 lbs
greater than 17.5% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
one halibut of a maximum length to restrict guided
sport harvest to be equal to or below 14.0% of the
annual combined catch limit
between 20,000,000
lbs
26,999,999 lbs
greater than 17.5% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
one halibut of any size.
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44170
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 12—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A ANNUAL CSP RESTRICTIONS IF PROJECTED GUIDED SPORT HARVEST UNDER
THE DEFAULT CSP RESTRICTION IS ABOVE THE TARGET HARVEST RANGE—Continued
If the Area 3A annual
combined catch limit
for halibut in net
pounds (lbs) is:
Tier
Tier 4 ...............
27,000,000 lbs and greater
If the projected guided
sport using the default
CSP restriction is:
then the annual CSP restriction in effect is that the
number of halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler is limited to no
more than:
greater than 17.5% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
and . . .
two halibut, but at least one halibut must have a
head-on length of no more than 32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter vessel angler retains only one halibut in a calendar day, that halibut may be of any
length
the Council’s SSC outlining two
methods for projecting the average net
weight of all halibut harvested by
charter vessel anglers. The analyst’s
paper can be found at: https://
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/
current_issues/halibut_issues/
HalibutCSPdisc709.pdf. The Council’s
SSC reviewed the paper and provided
its recommendations to the analyst in
February 2009.
The annual guided sport catch limit
(C) is the product of the guided sport
sector allocation percentage specified in
the CSP and the annual combined catch
limit in pounds net weight established
by the IPHC and expressed as equation
1:
where:
CCL = Annual combined catch limit in
pounds net weight established by the
IPHC for Area 2C and Area 3A, and
Pmax = Maximum percentage of the annual
guided sport catch limit that is allocated
to the guided sport sector, expressed as
a proportion.
(2,721.6 mt) × 0.151 = 906,000 lbs (410.9
mt).
For purposes of harvest estimation,
ADF&G currently breaks each IPHC area
into several subareas. ADF&G produces
estimates of the number of fish
harvested for each subarea, and then
combines these estimates with size data
from ADF&G creel surveys conducted at
sites within the subareas. During creel
surveys, ADF&G measures the length of
harvested halibut and calculates a
predicted weight for each fish in the
sample using the IPHC length-weight
relationship equation. ADF&G
calculates average weight as the average
of the predicted weights for each
individual fish. The numbers of halibut
of various sizes (size distribution)
harvested by charter anglers vary by
subarea. Because the magnitude of
harvest also varies by area, ADF&G
cannot simply combine creel survey
data on the size of harvested halibut
from all subareas to estimate total
removals. Instead, ADF&G calculates
guided sport halibut removals (Rp) by
subarea and sums them to obtain total
removals as expressed in equation 2:
This is the general form of the
equation currently used for estimating
guided sport removals. Variants of this
general equation could be used to
estimate the maximum length limit
under the CSP, depending on the
method selected to calculate the
maximum length limit.
The supplemental analysis prepared
for the Council’s SSC in January 2009
noted that there are a number of
methods that could be used to calculate
a maximum length limit to restrict the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
For example, for an annual combined
catch limit of 6,000,000 lbs (2,721.6 mt)
in Area 2C, the guided sport sector
allocation is 15.1 percent. The catch
limit for the guided sport sector would
therefore be calculated as 6,000,000 lbs
where:
HSp = The estimated or projected number of
halibut harvested by charter vessel
anglers in each subarea S, and
WSp = The estimated or projected average net
weight in pounds of halibut harvested by
charter vessel anglers in each subarea S.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Ep22JY11.002</GPH>
is the greatest value of the guided sport
target harvest range (see Table 4), the
CSP would limit charter vessel anglers
to retaining one halibut of a maximum
length per day to limit projected guided
sport harvest equal to or below 14.0
percent of the annual combined catch
limit. This would keep the annual
guided sport harvest within its
allocation in Area 3A (see Table 4).
The Council did not specify what the
maximum length limit would be under
tier 1 or tier 2 in its motion
recommending the CSP. The Council
contracted an analyst to prepare a
supplemental analysis on the process
for selecting a maximum length limit to
manage guided sport halibut harvest in
times of low abundance. In January
2009, the analyst presented a paper to
Ep22JY11.001</GPH>
For example, if the Area 2C annual
combined catch limit is 4,500,000 lbs
(2,041.2 mt) and projected guided sport
harvest as a percentage of the annual
combined catch limit exceeds 20.8
percent, which is the greatest value of
the guided sport target harvest range
(see Table 3), then charter vessel anglers
would be limited to retaining one
halibut of a maximum length per day to
limit guided sport harvest equal to or
below 17.3 percent of the annual
combined catch limit. This would keep
the annual guided sport harvest within
its allocation in Area 2C (see Table 1).
If the Area 3A annual combined catch
limit is 14,000,000 lbs (6,350.3 mt) and
projected guided sport harvest as a
percentage of the annual combined
catch limit exceeds 17.5 percent, which
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
44171
calculations for a range of maximum
length limits, the IPHC would adopt the
largest size limit Lin in whole inches that
results in a projected guided sport
removal (Rp) that is less than or equal to
the annual guided sport catch limit (C).
Method B assumes that every halibut
harvested and retained by charter vessel
anglers would be precisely equal in
length to the maximum length limit.
Because all fish are assumed to be the
same length, there would be no
differences in the projected size
distributions between subareas of each
regulatory area. The IPHC would use the
average weight that, when multiplied by
the projected number of fish harvested
in the entire IPHC regulatory area,
would result in the annual guided sport
catch limit (C) for that area as expressed
in equation 3:
change upon imposition of a maximum
length limit.
Method A assumes that upon
imposition of a maximum length limit
the average weight of halibut harvested
by charter anglers will equal the average
weight of those fish that were equal to
or less than the maximum length limit
in a recent year in which anglers were
allowed to harvest fish of at least that
length. Use of size data from a recent
year assumes that the size distribution
of charter harvest from the recent year’s
sample is the best available data to
describe the size distribution in the
coming year in the absence of a size
limit.
To project harvest using Method A,
the IPHC would use ADF&G’s
calculation of the projected average
weight (wSp) for each subarea using
length data from only those halibut
sampled in the recent year that were
equal to or less than the prospective
maximum length limit. Using equation
2, these projections of average weight
would then be combined with harvest
estimates for each subarea (HSp) to
obtain a projected guided sport removal
under each prospective length limit. For
example, to evaluate guided sport
removals resulting from a size limit of
40 inches (101.6 cm), the average weight
of only those harvested halibut that
were equal to or less than 40 inches
(101.6 cm) in length in the sample from
the most recent year would be
calculated. After repeating the
The CSP would then use the IPHC
length-weight relationship equation to
solve for the maximum length limit Lin
corresponding with the average weight
wp. The current IPHC length-weight
equation relates net weight in pounds
(W) to length in centimeters (Lcm) and
expressed in equation 4:
To obtain the maximum length limit
under Method B, the CSP would
substitute equation 4 for wp in equation
3, solve for Lcm, then convert and round
down to the nearest whole inch, which
would be the maximum length limit in
effect (Lin). If the IPHC were to modify
this length-weight relationship equation
or its parameters, the CSP would use the
revised equation recommended by the
IPHC.
For example, if the annual combined
catch limit (CCL) was set by the IPHC
for Area 2C at 6,000,000 lbs (2,721.6
mt), the guided sport allocation would
be 15.1 percent, and the guided sport
catch limit would be 906,000 lbs (410.9
mt) (equation 1). If projected guided
sport harvest for the coming year (Hp)
was 50,000 halibut, then the average net
weight (wp) could not exceed 18.1 lbs,
or 8.2 kilograms (kg) (equation 3). The
length that results in a predicted average
net weight of 18.1 lbs (8.2 kg) is 95.7
cm, or 37.7 inches (equation 4). The
maximum length limit would therefore
be rounded down to the nearest whole
inch and set at 37 inches (95.7 cm).
In January 2011, the IPHC used
Method B when it recommended a
maximum length limit for the 2011
fishery for charter vessel anglers
harvesting halibut in Area 2C. The
Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Commerce approved the IPHC’s
recommendation (76 FR 14300, March
16, 2011) and charter vessel anglers in
Area 2C are limited to catching and
retaining one halibut per calendar day
that is no longer than 37 inches.
Following the IPHC’s recommendation,
guided sport sector stakeholders
commented to NMFS that the IPHC’s
use of Method B was too conservative
because it assumes that all charter
vessel anglers would be able to harvest
precisely a halibut of the maximum size
limit. This likely would not occur and
some anglers will harvest halibut
smaller than the maximum size limit.
The guided sport sector stakeholders
suggested that it might be possible to
use a less conservative methodology
than Method B that would result in a
relatively larger maximum length limit
while limiting guided sport harvest to
target levels.
In response to requests from guided
sport sector stakeholders, ADF&G used
an alternative method to calculate the
maximum size limit. This additional
method, referred to as Method C in this
proposed rule, combines the
assumptions used in Methods A and B
to produce an intermediate result. Like
Method A, Method C would be used to
calculate a maximum length limit using
data from a previous year in which the
guided sport fishery was not
constrained by a length limit, or a year
in which a less constraining (higher)
maximum length limit was in place to
manage the guided sport fishery under
its allocation.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
EP22JY11.004</GPH>
where:
Hp = The estimated or projected number of
halibut harvested in Area 2C or Area 3A,
and
wp = The average net weight in pounds of all
halibut harvested by charter vessel
anglers in Area 2C or Area 3A.
EP22JY11.003</GPH>
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
total pounds of halibut harvested in the
guided sport sector equal to or below
the guided sport catch limit. The analyst
assumed, and NMFS concurs, that the
maximum length limit would be
calculated as the length limit that would
allow anglers to retain the largest
halibut possible while limiting total
guided sport harvest to a level equal to
or below the annual guided sport catch
limit.
The IPHC would base its maximum
length limit calculation in large part on
ADF&G analyses and projections of
guided sport harvest. The IPHC would
use a projection of HSp, the number of
halibut that will be harvested by charter
vessel anglers in each subarea and an
annual projection of total guided sport
halibut harvest for Area 2C and Area
3A. The CSP would use the projection
of guided sport harvest in net pounds
for the upcoming year, assuming that
charter vessel anglers would be subject
to the default CSP restriction for the
appropriate management tier. The CSP
would specify the method for
calculating the greatest maximum length
limit in whole inches (Lin) that produces
a projection of guided sport removals
(Rp) that does not exceed the annual
guided sport catch limit (C).
The analyst developed two methods
for calculating the length limit Lin for
presentation to the Council’s SSC in
January 2009. The methods differ in
their assumptions about how the size
distribution of harvested halibut might
44172
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
The average weight of the remaining
portion of the harvest would be
assumed to be equal to the average
weight of halibut of length Lin, predicted
from the IPHC length-weight
relationship (equation 4). Guided sport
removals would be calculated for
prospective length limits using equation
2, with the average weight for each
subarea wSp calculated as follows:
guided sport fishery under the
maximum length limit. Method A and
Method C assume that at least a portion
of the halibut caught in the guided sport
fishery in a future year will have the
same average weight as halibut
harvested in a previous year. If the CSP
uses Method A or Method C and charter
vessel anglers are able to increase the
average size of halibut caught and
retained under the maximum length
limit relative to the previous year’s
harvest, calculation of the maximum
length limit using the previous year’s
average size will result in
underestimated guided sport harvest.
This underestimated harvest will result
in a calculated maximum length limit
that is larger than the length limit that
would be implemented under the larger
average size of halibut. This relatively
larger maximum length limit could
result in the guided sport sector
exceeding its catch limit. Conversely, if
the average size of halibut caught and
retained under the maximum length
limit is lower than the average from the
previous year’s harvest, the maximum
length limit calculated under Method A
or Method C will result in overestimated
guided sport harvest and a calculated
maximum length limit that is smaller
than the length limit that would be
implemented under the smaller average
size of halibut. Guided sport harvest
may not reach the sector allocation
under this relatively smaller maximum
length limit.
Anglers may have the ability to
increase the average size of halibut
caught and retained under the
maximum length limit by high-grading,
or releasing smaller fish in order to
retain larger fish. However, the ability of
anglers to high-grade also depends on
the availability of larger fish, which
could change with natural variations in
halibut stock composition, movements
of fish, and the ability of the fleet to find
or access areas where those fish are.
Variability was observed in estimated
average weights in the Area 2C guided
halibut fishery even before bag limit
changes were first enacted in 2007.
Variability can be caused by a number
of factors, including bias and sampling
error in the collection of size data
through creel surveys. It is not yet
possible to accurately predict the
amount or effect of high-grading based
on average weight data. It is reasonable
to assume, however, that imposition of
a maximum length limit or a decrease in
the maximum length limit may provide
more incentive for anglers to retain the
largest fish possible, and the assumption
used in Method A that all halibut
retained by guided sport anglers will be
of the average size fish previously
caught in the fishery may not be
realistic.
On the other hand, Method B assumes
that all halibut harvested in the guided
sport fishery would be equal to the
maximum length limit when anglers are
limited to retaining one halibut that is
no larger than a maximum length limit.
Method B would likely overestimate
guided sport harvest, however, because
it is highly unlikely that all anglers
would be able to catch and retain
halibut that are precisely equal to the
maximum length limit. Some anglers
will undoubtedly retain halibut that are
smaller than the maximum length limit,
and guided sport harvest in net pounds
will not always reach the projected
guided sport harvest used to determine
the maximum length limit under
Method B. The overestimation of
average weight using Method B would
increase as the maximum length limit
increases. The maximum length limit
calculated under Method B would result
in the most biologically conservative
outcome among the three methods
because it would result in a smaller
maximum length limit than the limits
that would result from using Methods A
and C.
Method C assumes that a portion of
the halibut harvested by guided sport
anglers under the maximum length limit
will be the average size previously
The IPHC would then select the
largest size limit Lin in whole inches that
results in a projected charter removal
(Rp) that is less than or equal to the
annual guided sport catch limit (C).
For example, if calculating the
average weight corresponding with a 40
inch (101.6 cm) maximum length limit,
the CSP would use, for each subarea, the
proportion of fish in the previous year’s
sample that were less than or equal to
40 inches (101.6 cm) in length, and the
average weight of only those fish.
Suppose that 70 percent of the fish in
a subarea were less than or equal to 40
inches (101.6 cm) in length and those
halibut had an average net weight of
13.0 lbs (5.9 kg). The remaining 30
percent of the harvested fish would be
assumed to have an average net weight
of 22.0 lbs (10 kg) (from equation 4). In
this example, the average weight for this
subarea would be calculated as (0.70 ×
13.0) + (0.30 × 22.0) = 15.7 lbs (7.1 kg).
Each of the methods for calculating
the maximum length limit requires the
use of specific assumptions for
determining an average weight of
halibut harvested in the guided sport
fishery when anglers are limited to
retaining one halibut that is no larger
than the maximum length limit. The
projected average weights determined
by using these assumptions likely will
not precisely equal the actual average
weight of halibut harvested in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
EP22JY11.005</GPH>
year’s harvest that was larger than the
prospective maximum length limit will
be exactly equal to the length limit in
the coming year.
The Method C calculations would
proceed as follows. For each prospective
maximum length limit Lin, the CSP
would use the proportion of the halibut
in the previous year harvest sample that
were less than or equal to the size limit,
and the average weight of those fish.
where:
pUL = the proportion of halibut in the
previous year’s creel survey sample from
subarea S that were less than or equal in
length to the prospective length limit Lin,
wUL = the average weight of halibut in the
previous year’s creel survey sample from
subarea S that were less than or equal in
length to the prospective length limit Lin,
pOL = the proportion of halibut in the
previous year’s creel survey sample from
subarea S that were greater in length than the
prospective length limit Lin,
wOL = the average weight of halibut of
prospective length limit Lin, predicted from
the IPHC length-weight relationship equation
(equation 4), and
pUL + pOL = 1.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Method C assumes that under a size
limit in the coming year, (a) the
proportion of the harvested halibut that
will be smaller than the prospective
maximum length limit will equal the
proportion that were under that length
in the previous year, (b) the average
weight of fish smaller than the
prospective maximum length limit will
remain unchanged from the previous
year, and (c) the portion of the previous
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
caught in the fishery, similar to Method
A. As described for Method A, this
could result in underestimated harvest
for that portion of the halibut harvest if
anglers are able to high-grade and
increase the average weight of halibut
harvested relative to the previous year.
However, Method C uses the most
biologically conservative Method B
assumption for the remaining portion of
halibut harvested in the previous year’s
fishery. Method C assumes that the
portion of harvested halibut that were
larger than the maximum length limit in
the previous year would be equal to the
maximum length limit for purposes of
projecting guided sport harvest under
the maximum length limit. As described
for Method B, this could result in
overestimated harvest for that portion of
the halibut harvest. The net effect is that
using both assumptions in Method C
may balance the effects of Methods A
and B. Method C will result in
maximum length limits and projected
guided sport harvests that are between
those calculated using Methods A and
B. Method C is likely to be less
biologically conservative than Method
B. Method C is likely to be more
biologically conservative than Method
A, especially when the daily bag limit
is changed from one halibut of any size
to one halibut with a maximum length
limit, because anglers are presumed to
already be high-grading under a one
halibut of any size daily bag limit.
The consequences of projection errors
vary by methods also. In January 2009,
the Council’s SSC noted that Method A
would be expected to produce the least
impact on the guided sport industry but
the most impact on the halibut resource.
Underestimated guided sport harvest
due to changes in angler behavior under
Method A could result in actual guided
sport harvest exceeding the guided sport
catch limit. While Method B uses a
conservative approach by assuming that
all charter vessel anglers will high-grade
to the maximum length limit, it
increases the likelihood that guided
sport harvest will not reach the sector’s
catch limit because not all anglers will
be able to high-grade to the maximum
length limit. The SSC noted that the
biologically conservative assumption
used under Method B could result in an
undesirable economic loss to the guided
sport industry and a loss of opportunity
to charter vessel anglers because the
maximum length limit would be smaller
than limits calculated using less
biologically conservative assumptions.
Method C balances the impacts of
Method A and B on the halibut stock
and guided sport fishery participants
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
because it applies the assumptions used
in both Method A and Method B.
The SSC suggested that the CSP could
use an iterative approach to calculating
maximum length limits for a few years
in order to accommodate new
information on angler behavior under
maximum length limit restrictions.
However, this suggestion is inconsistent
with the Council’s intent that the CSP
would establish non-discretionary CSP
restrictions for charter vessel anglers
prior to the fishing season.
NMFS proposes that the CSP could
use Methods A, B, or C to set maximum
length limits when guided sport harvest
is being constrained under the CSP
management tier 1 or tier 2. This would
include scenarios in which a bag limit
of one halibut of any size per day is
already in place and a maximum length
limit is enacted for the first time, or a
maximum length limit is in place but
needs to be reduced because of a decline
in the annual combined catch limit.
However, neither Method A nor Method
C would likely be appropriate for use in
the situation where a maximum length
limit has been in place for several years
but needs to be increased due to an
increase in the annual combined catch
limit. These methods would require
modification since there would not be
recent information with which to
predict the catch of fish in the gap
between the original size limit and the
new size limit. Method B could be
applied to the proportion of the fish that
were greater than the original size limit
in these situations. If Method B were
applied to all fish in year following a
size limit produced using Methods A or
C, use of the more conservative Method
B could result in a decrease in the size
limit even though the annual combined
catch limit increased.
NMFS believes that conservation of
the halibut resource should be a priority
under the CSP. Although the
assumption used in Method B that all
halibut harvested would be of the
maximum length may result in the
guided sport sector harvesting less than
its catch limit, NMFS believes this
assumption maximizes the effectiveness
of size limits in constraining guided
sport halibut harvests at low levels of
abundance. While NMFS intends for the
CSP to accommodate the guided sport
industry’s need for predictability and
stability, it believes that conservation of
the halibut resource should be a priority
under the CSP and is consistent with
the purpose of the Convention. As such,
NMFS proposes to use Method B, the
most biologically conservative method,
under the CSP. This proposal is
consistent with a December 2007
Council statement in which it
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44173
acknowledged that guided sport harvest
may not precisely meet the sector
allocation under the CSP. The Council
statement of its management objectives
for the CSP can be found at: https://
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/
current_issues/halibut_issues/
Halibutmotion1207_rev.pdf. NMFS is
requesting comments on the use of the
proposed Methods A, B, or C, or on
other potential methods, to establish
maximum length limits under the CSP.
NMFS specifically requests input on the
underlying assumptions for each
method and the resulting impacts on the
halibut resource, participants in the
guided sport fisheries, and other halibut
user groups.
D. Other Restrictions Under the CSP
The proposed rule would prohibit a
person from possessing on board a
vessel halibut that are disfigured in a
manner that prevents the determination
of the number of halibut harvested by
each person on board the vessel.
However, NMFS proposes that under
the CSP, charter vessel anglers may cut
each retained halibut into no more than
two ventral pieces, two dorsal pieces,
and two cheek pieces, with the skin on
all pieces. This restriction is intended to
enable charter vessel anglers to fillet
halibut on board a vessel while
maintaining enforcement agents’ ability
to verify angler compliance with CSP
daily bag and possession limits by
limiting the total number and type of
halibut pieces each person may possess
on board a vessel.
Beginning in 1997, the IPHC annual
management measures implemented a
prohibition in all waters of Alaska on
filleting, mutilating, or otherwise
disfiguring halibut in any manner that
prevented the determination of the
number of halibut caught, possessed, or
landed. In 2007, the IPHC limited this
prohibition to apply only on board the
vessel on which the halibut were caught
and retained. The 2007 annual
management measures clarified that the
prohibition would not apply once
halibut was landed or offloaded from
the vessel on which it was retained. The
IPHC implemented this change to
facilitate the processing of sport-caught
halibut in Alaska for personal use.
The 2008 annual management
measures modified the allowable
condition of sport-caught halibut in a
person’s possession in waters in and off
Alaska to add the exception that each
halibut on board a vessel may be cut
into no more than two ventral, two
dorsal pieces, and two cheeks, with the
skin on all pieces. The IPHC clarified,
and NMFS agrees, that the restriction to
cut halibut into identifiable dorsal,
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
44174
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
ventral and cheek pieces improves
identification of the number of retained
halibut that are sport-caught in Alaska
by facilitating enforcement of bag and
possession limits. NMFS proposes to
include these regulations in the Area 2C
and Area 3A CSP proposed rule because
they are necessary to implement and
enforce the CSP restrictions in these
areas. This inclusion will facilitate
enforcement of CSP restrictions if the
IPHC changes its recommended
requirements for the allowable
condition of sport-caught halibut in a
person’s possession in waters in and off
Alaska in the future.
The restriction on cutting each
retained halibut into no more than two
ventral pieces, two dorsal pieces, and
two cheek pieces, with the skin on all
pieces would apply each year under the
CSP. In years where the CSP restriction
includes a maximum length limit,
NMFS proposes that each charter vessel
angler also must retain the intact carcass
(a carcass with the head attached to the
tail) of the filleted halibut subject to the
maximum length limit until all halibut
fillets are offloaded from the vessel. As
discussed in the ‘‘CSP Restrictions’’
section of this preamble, two CSP
restrictions limit charter vessel anglers
to retaining halibut of a maximum
length. The first CSP restriction limits
charter vessel anglers to retaining two
halibut, one of which must be less than
32 inches, per day. The second CSP
restriction limits charter vessel anglers
to retaining one halibut of a maximum
length limit per day. When either of
these CSP restrictions is in effect, each
charter vessel angler must retain the
intact carcass of a filleted halibut
subject to the size limit until all fillets
are offloaded from the vessel. An intact
carcass is required because enforcement
officers cannot otherwise determine the
head-on length of a halibut filleted at
sea.
NMFS implemented the carcass
retention requirement for charter vessel
anglers in Area 2C in 2007 and 2008
when it limited the charter vessel
anglers to retaining two halibut of any
size per day, one of which had to be less
than 32 inches (81.3 cm). The 2011
IPHC annual management measures also
implemented the carcass retention
requirement for Area 2C charter vessel
anglers to facilitate enforcement of the
37 inch maximum length limit in effect
for the 2011 fishing season.
Prior to development of this proposed
rule for the CSP, NMFS published a
final rule on May 6, 2009 (74 FR 21194),
to implement along with other
restrictions a prohibition on operator,
guide, and crew retention of halibut in
Area 2C. The proposed CSP would not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
modify this prohibition on retention of
halibut in Area 2C and would
implement the same prohibition in Area
3A. As noted in the EA/RIR/IRFA
prepared for the CSP (see ADDRESSES),
NMFS estimates that prohibiting
retention of halibut by operators, guides,
and crew reduces guided sport harvest
by approximately 4.3 percent to 4.7
percent in Area 2C, and approximately
10.4 percent in Area 3A. The
prohibition on retention of halibut by
the operator, guide, and crew of a
charter vessel is consistent with one of
the CSP objectives, which is to limit
guided sport halibut harvest to within
the guided sport target harvest range.
The proposed rule would prohibit
individuals who hold both a charter
halibut permit and commercial halibut
IFQ from fishing for commercial and
guided sport halibut on the same vessel
during the same day in Area 2C and
Area 3A. NMFS implements this
provision to facilitate enforcement, as
different regulations would apply to
guided sport-caught and commerciallycaught halibut. This provision would
not prevent an individual who holds
both a charter halibut permit and
commercial halibut IFQ from
conducting guided sport operations and
commercial operations on separate boats
on the same day.
The proposed rule also would
prohibit individuals who hold both a
charter halibut permit and a Subsistence
Halibut Registration Certificate from
using both permits to harvest halibut on
the same vessel during the same day in
Area 2C and Area 3A. NMFS agrees
with the Council that this prohibition is
necessary to allow enforcement officials
and samplers to classify harvest among
the guided sport, subsistence, and
commercial fisheries. Allowing multiple
types of trips on a vessel in the same
day could create uncertainty regarding
how to classify retained halibut.
Enforcement of provisions prohibiting
individuals from fishing for commercial
and guided sport halibut or for
subsistence and guided sport halibut on
the same vessel during the same day in
Area 2C and Area 3A, would require
charter vessel operators to indicate the
date of a charter vessel fishing trip in
the ADF&G charter logbook and all of
the required fields in the charter
logbook must be completed before the
halibut are offloaded. These
requirements will enable enforcement
agents to determine whether that vessel
was used on a charter vessel fishing trip
that day. If the charter logbook is
properly and accurately completed and
indicates that charter activity occurred
on the vessel during a particular day on
which halibut were retained, an
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
enforcement agent would consider the
retained halibut caught in the guided
sport fishery.
VI. Guided Angler Fish (GAF)
The proposed CSP regulations would
authorize supplemental, individual
transfers of commercial halibut IFQ as
guided angler fish (GAF) to charter
halibut permit holders for harvest by
charter vessel anglers in the guided
sport halibut fishery. GAF would offer
charter vessel anglers in Area 2C or Area
3A an opportunity to harvest halibut in
addition to, or instead of, the halibut
harvested under the CSP restriction, up
to the harvest limits in place for
unguided sport anglers in that area.
Transfers between commercial halibut
IFQ and GAF would be effective for the
current fishing season only, so transfers
of IFQ to GAF would not be a
permanent transfer of halibut IFQ from
the commercial sector to the guided
sport sector. This market-based aspect of
the CSP allows the guided sport halibut
sector to increase its halibut harvest
beyond the area guided sport catch limit
specified in the annual management
measures up to limits imposed the
unguided sport halibut fishery. In
addition, this aspect of the CSP creates
a system wherein the guided sport
halibut sector compensates the
commercial halibut sector for decreases
in commercial halibut IFQ harvest.
Through the CSP GAF transfer
program, qualified charter halibut
permit holders in Area 2C and Area 3A
may offer anglers on board their vessel
the opportunity to retain up to two
halibut of any size per day when the
CSP restriction limits charter vessel
anglers to a halibut harvest limit that is
more restrictive than two halibut of any
size per day. Charter vessel anglers may
retain GAF to supplement halibut
retained under the CSP restriction.
However, charter vessel anglers
retaining GAF may not exceed the
harvest restriction in place for unguided
sport anglers in that area. In other
words, a charter vessel angler may
retain as GAF a halibut that exceeds the
daily bag limit and length restrictions
triggered by the CSP only to the extent
that the angler’s halibut retained under
the CSP restriction plus halibut retained
as GAF do not exceed daily bag limit
and length restrictions imposed on
unguided anglers. For example, the
daily halibut retention limit for
unguided sport anglers in Area 2C and
Area 3A is currently two halibut of any
size per calendar day. Assuming this
same unguided sport angler retention
limit, charter vessel anglers would only
retain GAF when the CSP restriction for
that area limits guided sport anglers to
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
retaining less than two fish of any size
per calendar day. The Council
recommended this restriction on GAF
use to maintain parity between guided
and unguided sport halibut retention
limits.
Table 13 presents the potential uses of
GAF by charter vessel anglers in Area
2C and Area 3A under the proposed
44175
CSP restrictions, assuming that
unguided sport anglers are limited to
retaining two halibut of any size per
calendar day.
TABLE 13—OPTIONS FOR GAF HARVEST UNDER CSP RESTRICTIONS
If the CSP restriction is:
and the harvest limit for unguided sport anglers is:
then each charter vessel angler could use
GAF to retain:
one halibut of a maximum length ......................
two halibut of any size .....................................
EITHER: one halibut less than or equal to the
maximum length under the CSP restriction
plus one GAF halibut of any size; OR two
GAF halibut of any size.
one halibut of any size ......................................
two halibut of any size .....................................
one halibut of any size under the CSP restriction plus one GAF halibut of any size.
two halibut, but at least one halibut must have
a head-on length of no more than 32 inches
(81.3 cm). If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day, that halibut may be of any length.
two halibut of any size .....................................
one halibut greater than 32 inches in length
under the CSP restriction plus one GAF
greater than 32 inches.
two halibut of any size .......................................
two halibut of any size .....................................
N/A
IFQ to GAF than they would receive
from harvesting the IFQ themselves.
An IFQ holder is eligible to transfer
halibut quota shares if such person
holds at least one unit of halibut QS and
has received an annual IFQ permit
authorizing harvest of IFQ in either the
Area 2C and Area 3A commercial
halibut fishery. A charter halibut permit
holder is eligible to receive IFQ as GAF
if such a person holds one or more
charter halibut permits in the
management area that corresponds to
the IFQ permit area from which the IFQ
would be transferred.
Holders of military charter halibut
permits would also be eligible to receive
IFQ as GAF. Military charter halibut
permits are issued to U.S. Military
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
programs in Alaska that offer guided
sport halibut fishing to service members
in Area 2C or Area 3A. To operate a
charter vessel, the U.S. Military Morale,
Welfare, and Recreation program would
need to obtain a military charter halibut
permit by application to NMFS or could
purchase a charter halibut permit on the
commercial market.
Community Quota Entities holding
community charter halibut permits are
also eligible to receive IFQ as GAF.
Regulations at 50 CFR 300.67(k)(2) list
the communities that are eligible to
receive community charter halibut
permits from NMFS. In addition to
community charter halibut permits, a
Community Quota Entity may acquire
non-community charter halibut permits
by transfer. The final rule implementing
the charter halibut limited access
program describes community charter
halibut permits and the application and
eligibility requirements for Community
Quota Entities to receive community
charter halibut permits (75 FR 554,
January 5, 2010).
There are several ways in which a
Community Quota Entity in Area 2C or
Area 3A that is eligible to receive
community charter halibut permits and
hold charter halibut permits could be a
party to a GAF transaction. Community
Quota Entities could receive a transfer
of GAF for use on a community charter
halibut permit or charter halibut permit
that it holds. Community Quota Entities
that are eligible to hold community
charter halibut permits and charter
halibut permits also are authorized to
hold IFQ under the IFQ program by
Amendment 66 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska (69 FR 23681, April 30,
2004). Amendment 66 authorized
Community Quota Entities to receive
transferred halibut or sablefish QS on
behalf of the community it represents
and to lease the resulting IFQ to
fishermen who are residents of that
community. Thus, a Community Quota
Entity holding IFQ would be eligible to
transfer the IFQ as GAF to a holder of
a charter halibut permit, community
charter halibut permit, or military
charter halibut permit.
Regulations implementing the CSP
would detail the requirements for a
valid transfer of halibut IFQ to GAF.
Both parties would complete and
submit an application to NMFS to
transfer halibut in net pounds between
IFQ and GAF. NMFS would approve the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
N/A = not applicable.
The Council recommended including
GAF in the Area 2C and Area 3A CSP
to provide operating flexibility for
participants in the commercial and
guided sport halibut fisheries. The
Council and NMFS determined that the
GAF program could provide increased
fishing opportunities in the guided sport
fishery for those anglers desiring such
an opportunity. The GAF program also
would provide commercial halibut QS
holders with greater flexibility when
developing their annual harvest
strategy. Persons holding halibut QS for
an area have harvesting privileges for an
amount of halibut that is derived
annually from their QS holdings in that
area and authorized on their IFQ permit.
NMFS determines each person’s amount
of halibut IFQ (in net pounds) from the
number of halibut QS units held, the
total number of halibut QS units issued
for that specific regulatory area, and the
area’s total allowable catch allocation
for halibut IFQ and Community
Development Quota fisheries (if
applicable) in a particular year to
determine the specific amount of
halibut IFQ (in net pounds). As
discussed above in the ‘‘Annual
Commercial Fishery and Guided Sport
Fishery Catch Limits’’ section, under the
CSP, the IPHC determines the annual
combined catch limit which then
triggers the commercial catch limit (see
Table 1 and Table 2). The opportunity
for annual transfers of IFQ to GAF could
provide some halibut IFQ holders with
greater economic benefits than
harvesting the IFQ themselves if they
receive more revenue from transferring
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
44176
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
transfer provided that application is
complete, both parties are eligible to
transfer, and there are no other
administrative reasons to disapprove the
transfer.
NMFS would convert the number of
GAF to be transferred to the charter
halibut permit holder’s GAF account
into net pounds to be debited from the
IFQ holder’s account. To determine the
number of net pounds to be debited
from the IFQ account, NMFS would
multiply the number of GAF to be
transferred by the conversion factor for
that year. The conversion factor for the
current fishing year would be the
ADF&G estimate of the average net
weight calculated from all halibut
harvested in the guided sport fishery
during the preceding fishing year in that
IPHC regulatory area. NMFS would post
the conversion factors for Area 2C and
Area 3A for the current fishing year on
the NMFS Alaska Region Home Page at
https://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov as
soon as the average net weight estimates
for Area 2C and Area 3A are available.
NMFS anticipates it would post the
conversion factor for the current fishing
year in January each year.
Upon completion of the transfer
between IFQ and GAF, NMFS would
issue a GAF permit to the holder of a
charter halibut permit, community
charter halibut permit, or military
charter halibut permit. The GAF permit
would be assigned to the charter halibut
permit specified by the holder at the
time of application. The GAF permit
holder could offer GAF for harvest by
charter vessel anglers on board the
vessel on which the operator’s GAF
permit and the assigned charter halibut
permit are used.
The charter halibut permit holder
holding a GAF permit (GAF permit
holder) and charter vessel angler would
need to agree on any fees for harvesting
the GAF. Depending on the structure of
the payment, total costs to the GAF
permit holder, charter vessel anglers or
both could increase. While the marketbased nature of IFQ to GAF transfers
makes it likely that the cost of obtaining
GAF would be borne by the charter
vessel anglers using GAF, charter vessel
anglers who want the opportunity to
retain more halibut than permitted
under the CSP restriction would have
the opportunity to do so using GAF.
GAF permit holders would be
required to hold a sufficient number of
GAF for charter vessel anglers to retain
halibut in excess of the CSP restriction
and up to limits in place for the
unguided sport halibut fishery for that
area at the time any excess halibut are
retained. The GAF permit holder also
would be required to have the GAF
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
permit and the assigned charter halibut
permit on board the vessel on which
charter vessel anglers retain GAF, and to
present the permits if requested by an
authorized enforcement officer. GAF
permit holders that do not hold
sufficient GAF to cover retained halibut
by charter vessel anglers in excess of the
CSP restriction may not allow anglers to
retain those halibut. By midnight on the
day on which GAF were retained, the
GAF permit holder would be required to
electronically report the total number of
GAF retained under his or her GAF
permit. NMFS would deduct this
number of GAF from the GAF permit
holder’s account of unused GAF. NMFS
proposes to require the GAF permit
holder to complete a GAF electronic
report by midnight on the day GAF were
retained to maintain as close to realtime accounting of GAF balances as
possible. Unharvested GAF could be
returned to the IFQ permit holder from
which it derived at any time during the
fishing year if the GAF permit holder
wishes to do so and the IFQ holder
agrees to the return. The IFQ permit
holder could then harvest the converted
net pounds of halibut in the commercial
fishery. Once the GAF were returned to
the IFQ holder, it would not be available
for harvest in the guided sport fishery
unless the IFQ permit holder engaged in
another transfer of IFQ to GAF. To
approve and execute these returns of
unharvested GAF to the IFQ permit
holder, NMFS would need timely
information on the harvest of GAF via
electronic reporting by GAF permit
holders.
The CSP regulations would also
specify a mandatory GAF return date of
15 days prior to the end of the
commercial halibut fishing season. The
end of the commercial halibut fishing
season would be specified in the IPHC
annual management measures
published by NMFS in the Federal
Register each year. On this date GAF
would no longer be authorized for use
in the guided sport fishery. NMFS
would return any remaining
unharvested GAF to the IFQ holder from
which it was derived. NMFS would not
approve voluntary returns of GAF to
IFQ after the mandatory GAF return
date. NMFS recognizes that some GAF
permit holders likely would have a
balance of unharvested GAF at the end
of the guided sport fishing season. The
Council recommended and NMFS
agrees that NMFS should return unused
GAF 15 days prior to the end of the
commercial halibut fishing season.
Although the guided sport halibut
fishery has typically been open from
February 1 through December 31 in
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
recent years, most fishing in the guided
sport fishery occurs from May through
August. ADF&G data for 2006 indicate
that less than 1 percent of guided sport
halibut harvest occurred after
September 30, in either Area 2C or Area
3A. The commercial halibut fishing
season typically opens in March and
closes in mid-November. Based on this
information, NMFS believes that NMFS
should return remaining unused GAF to
the IFQ permit holder 15 days prior to
the end of the commercial halibut
fishing season because it would not
significantly affect charter vessel
business operations in aggregate.
Further, this timeline would provide the
IFQ holder with an opportunity to
harvest the IFQ before the end of the
commercial fishing season for that year.
The IFQ holder also may choose to
count the IFQ returned from GAF
toward an underage for his or her
halibut IFQ account for the next fishing
year, as specified in regulations at
§ 679.40(e). On or as soon as possible
after the mandatory GAF return date,
NMFS would convert GAF in number(s)
of fish to IFQ in net pounds using the
conversion factor for that year and
return the converted IFQ to the IFQ
holder’s account.
The proposed rule would establish
the following four elements for
implementation of the GAF transfer
program: (a) Eligibility criteria for
halibut QS/IFQ holders and charter
halibut permit holders to transfer
between IFQ and GAF; (b) a process to
complete a transfer between halibut IFQ
and GAF; (c) GAF transfer limits; and
(d) additional reporting requirements for
guided sport operators whose clients
retain GAF. Each of these elements is
discussed in more detail below.
A. Eligibility Requirements To Transfer
Between IFQ and GAF
NMFS will approve an application for
transfer of IFQ and GAF between an
eligible IFQ holder and an eligible
holder of a charter halibut permit,
community charter halibut permit, or
military charter halibut permit if NMFS
determines that (1) the transfer would
not cause the IFQ holder or the GAF
holder to exceed use limits specified for
GAF at § 300.65 and halibut IFQ at
§ 679.42 (see ‘‘GAF Transfer
Restrictions’’ section below); (2) there
are no fines, civil penalties, sanctions,
or other payments due and owing, or
outstanding permit sanctions, resulting
from Federal fishery violations
involving either person or permit; and
(3) other pertinent information
requested on the application has been
supplied.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
NMFS would need to make additional
determinations to approve a transfer
between IFQ and GAF for a Community
Quota Entity. In addition to the
requirements listed above, NMFS would
approve the transfer upon making a
determination that: (1) the Community
Quota Entity applying to transfer IFQ to
GAF is eligible to hold and receive IFQ
on behalf of a eligible community in
Area 2C or Area 3A, as specified in 50
CFR 300.67(k)(2); (2) the Community
Quota Entity applying to receive GAF
from an Area 2C or Area 3A IFQ holder
holds one or more community charter
halibut permits or charter halibut
permits for the corresponding area; and
(3) the Community Quota Entity
applying to transfer between IFQ and
GAF has submitted a complete annual
report(s) to NMFS as required by
§ 679.5(l)(8).
See the ‘‘GAF Transfer Restrictions’’
section for further discussion on the
proposed regulations governing
transfers between IFQ and GAF for
Community Quota Entities.
B. Process To Complete a Transfer
Between IFQ and GAF
The IFQ holder and the charter
halibut permit holder receiving GAF
would be required to complete and sign
an application for transfer between IFQ
(either IFQ to GAF or GAF to IFQ) prior
to the automatic GAF return date.
Application forms would be available
on the NMFS, Alaska Region, Web site
at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/.
Applications could be submitted by
mail, hand delivery, or facsimile.
Electronic submissions other than
facsimile would not be acceptable
because NMFS would require the
original signature of the IFQ holder and
the charter halibut permit holder. The
applicants also would need to attest
under penalty of perjury that legal
requirements were met and all
statements on the application are true,
correct, and complete. The automatic
return of GAF by NMFS on or around
the automatic GAF return date each year
would not require either party to
complete a transfer application, and
NMFS would not approve an
application for transfer between IFQ and
GAF after the automatic GAF return
date.
Conversion Between IFQ and GAF.
NMFS would issue GAF in numbers of
halibut. NMFS CSP regulations would
require that for each GAF transferred
from an IFQ holder to a charter halibut
permit holder’s GAF account, the
equivalent number of net pounds of
halibut rounded to the nearest net
pound (in whole numbers, not
decimals) would be removed from an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
IFQ holder’s IFQ account. Conversely,
CSP regulations would require that for
each GAF returned from a charter
halibut permit holder’s GAF account,
the equivalent number of net pounds of
halibut IFQ rounded to the nearest net
pound would be returned to the IFQ
holder’s account. NMFS would use the
average net weight of a halibut landed
in the guided sport fishery in each area
(2C or 3A) during the previous year, as
determined by ADF&G, to convert GAF
to equivalent net pounds of halibut IFQ
rounded up to the nearest net pound.
The same average net weight would be
used for all conversions of IFQ to GAF
and returns of GAF to IFQ in one year.
A request for transfer from IFQ to
GAF would be made in numbers of fish,
or the number of GAF to be transferred
to the GAF permit holder. For example,
if NMFS approved a transfer of 5 GAF
and the conversion factor was 20.7 lbs
(9.4 kg), then 104 lbs (47.2 kg) of IFQ
would be debited from the IFQ holder’s
account (5 GAF × 20.7 lbs (9.4 kg) =
103.5 lbs (46.9 kg) and rounded to 104
lbs (46.9 kg)). NMFS would round up
the conversion calculation (103.5 lbs
(46.9 kg)) to the nearest pound (104 lbs
(46.9 kg)) and debit that amount from
the IFQ holder’s account. NMFS
accounts only for net pounds in whole
numbers without decimals in the IFQ
program and proposes to continue
accounting in whole numbers of net
pounds for transfers between IFQ and
GAF.
A voluntary request for return of GAF
to IFQ and the automatic return of GAF
also would require NMFS to convert
unharvested GAF to net pounds of IFQ.
To calculate the number of net pounds
of halibut IFQ returned to the IFQ
holder, NMFS would multiply the
unharvested number of GAF by the
conversion factor and round up to the
nearest pound. In the example used
above, if the parties agreed to a
voluntary return of 2 GAF to the IFQ
holder, NMFS would return 42 lbs (19.1
kg) to the IFQ holder’s account (2 GAF
× 20.7 lbs (9.4 kg) = 41.4 lbs (18.8 kg)
and rounded to 42 lbs (19.1 kg)). NMFS
would make the same conversion
calculation for automatic returns of
unharvested GAF to IFQ.
GAF Permit. On approval of an
application for transfer between IFQ and
GAF, NMFS would issue a GAF permit
to the charter halibut permit holder
receiving GAF. A GAF permit would
authorize the GAF permit holder to offer
GAF to charter vessel anglers and allow
charter vessel anglers to retain halibut
in excess of the CSP restriction, up to
limits on GAF use in regulations at
§ 300.65(c). GAF could be retained
under a GAF permit only if, at the time
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44177
the GAF are retained, the GAF permit
holder’s account contains at least the
number of retained GAF. All GAF
permits would expire at 11:59 p.m. on
the day prior to the automatic GAF
return date. GAF could not be retained
by charter vessel anglers after the
expiration of GAF permits.
NMFS would issue a revised GAF
permit to the GAF permit holder each
time during the year that it approved a
transfer between IFQ and GAF for that
GAF permit. Each GAF permit would be
assigned to only one charter halibut
permit, community charter halibut
permit, or military charter halibut
permit in Area 2C or Area 3A. Charter
halibut permit holders requesting GAF
would be required to specify the charter
halibut permit to which the GAF permit
would be assigned on the application
for transfer between IFQ and GAF. The
assignment between a GAF permit and
a charter halibut permit, community
charter halibut permit, or military
charter halibut permit could not be
changed during that year. If charter
vessel anglers retain GAF, the GAF
permit and the assigned charter halibut
permit, community charter halibut
permit, or military charter halibut
permit would need to be on board the
vessel on which the GAF halibut are
retained, and available for inspection by
an authorized enforcement officer.
C. GAF Transfer Restrictions
The Council recommended and
NMFS proposes restrictions on the
amount of IFQ that an IFQ holder could
transfer as GAF and on the number of
GAF that could be assigned to one GAF
permit. The restrictions on transfers
between IFQ and GAF are intended to
prevent a particular individual,
corporation, or other entity from
acquiring an excessive share of halibut
fishing privileges as IFQ or GAF. The
proposed rule would implement the
Council’s recommendations for three
GAF transfer restrictions. First, IFQ
holders would be limited to transferring
up to 1,500 lbs (680.4 kg) or 10 percent,
whichever is greater, of their annual
halibut IFQ for use as GAF. Second, no
more than a total of 400 GAF would be
assigned during one year to a GAF
permit assigned to a charter halibut
permit that is endorsed for six or fewer
anglers. Third, no more than a total of
600 GAF would be assigned during one
year to a GAF permit assigned to a
charter halibut permit endorsed for
more than six anglers.
Commercial halibut IFQ regulations at
§ 679.42(f)(1)(i) and (ii) also include QS
use limits that are intended to prevent
a particular individual, corporation, or
other entity from acquiring an excessive
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
44178
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
share of commercial halibut fishing
privileges. NMFS determines individual
and collective interest in halibut fishing
privileges by summing QS used by that
person and a portion of any QS used by
an entity in which that person has an
interest. NMFS considers the person’s
portion of the QS used by the entity
equal to the share of interest the person
has in that entity. For example, if an
individual uses 50,000 units of Area 2C
halibut QS and has a 5 percent interest
in a company that uses 750,000 units of
Area 2C halibut QS, the amount of Area
2C halibut QS that person would be
considered to use for purposes of the
limits at § 679.42(f)(1)(i) and (ii) is
50,000 units (his personal holdings)
plus 37,500 units (5 percent interest for
the 750,000 units in the company using
Area 2C halibut QS). This individual’s
use of 87,500 units would not exceed
the Area 2C QS use limit of 599,799
units.
For purposes of administering the QS
use limits at § 679.42(f)(1)(i) and (ii),
NMFS proposes to include the QS
equivalent of IFQ transferred to GAF in
the calculation of a person’s QS use.
Using the example above, if the QS
holder transferred the equivalent of 100
lbs (45.4 kg) of IFQ as GAF to a charter
halibut permit holder, NMFS would
continue to include the QS equivalent of
the IFQ transferred to GAF in the
calculation of that person’s QS use for
purposes of the QS use limits at
§ 679.42(f)(1)(i) and (ii). NMFS proposes
this approach because it considers a
transfer of IFQ to GAF a use of halibut
QS. A transfer of IFQ to GAF would be
voluntary, and the halibut QS holder
likely would receive a benefit from the
transfer according to the terms of the
transfer agreement with the charter
halibut permit holder receiving GAF.
Furthermore, it is possible under the
proposed CSP for a person to use
halibut QS issued as IFQ and transferred
to GAF in the commercial halibut
fishery before the end of the fishing
season if the IFQ was transferred to
GAF, not harvested in the guided sport
fishery, and returned to the QS holder.
The proposed CSP specifies that any
unused GAF derived from IFQ issued to
the QS holder (1) may be voluntarily
returned to the QS holder at any time
during the fishing season prior to the
mandatory GAF return date, and (2)
would automatically be returned by
NMFS to the QS holder on or as soon
as possible after the mandatory GAF
return date.
The proposed rule also would
prohibit GAF, once transferred to a
charter halibut permit holder, from
being transferred to another charter
halibut permit, community charter
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
halibut permit, or military charter
halibut permit holder. This requirement
would prevent a charter halibut permit
holder from receiving GAF by transfer
with the intention of transferring the
GAF to another charter halibut permit
holder for compensation. The Council
and NMFS generally recommend
management provisions that encourage
holders of harvest privileges to actively
participate in the fishery for which they
hold the privilege rather than receiving
financial benefits from another person
who pays to use those harvest
privileges. The Council’s
recommendation and NMFS’ proposal
to prohibit GAF permit holders from
transferring GAF to another charter
halibut permit holder is consistent with
this policy objective to require a charter
halibut permit holder who receives GAF
by transfer to utilize GAF in conjunction
with their charter halibut permit.
Community Quota Entities and GAF
Under the proposed rule, a
Community Quota Entity holding
halibut IFQ in Area 2C or Area 3A
would be authorized to transfer that IFQ
as GAF. However, the Council
recommended that transfers between
IFQ and GAF for Community Quota
Entities be exempt from GAF transfer
restrictions in certain circumstances.
The Regulatory Impact Review prepared
for the CSP (see ADDRESSES) provided a
general statement about the Council’s
intent for transfers between IFQ and
GAF for Community Quota Entities
(CQE):
A CQE is allowed to lease 100 percent of
the halibut they hold to eligible residents in
their communities. This means a CQE may
convert 100 percent of its annual IFQ to GAF
for use on its halibut community harvest
permit, may lease 100 percent of its IFQ out
as GAF to another CQE, may lease 100
percent of its IFQ to community residents
(subject to current holding limitations), or
may lease GAF to its own community
residents that hold community charter
halibut permits.
NMFS agrees that Community Quota
Entity transfers between IFQ and GAF
should be exempt from GAF transfer
restrictions in the instances described in
the Regulatory Impact Review. Although
the Council used the term ‘‘eligible
community resident’’ in recommending
exemptions to the GAF transfer
restrictions for Community Quota
Entities under the CSP, this term is not
directly applicable to the charter halibut
limited access program because
businesses are expected to hold charter
halibut permits. Although a business
could be composed of an individual, it
is possible for a business to be a
partnership, corporation, or other legal
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
entity. Therefore, NMFS is proposing
that ‘‘eligible community resident,’’ for
purposes of exempting from GAF
transfer restrictions transfers of IFQ to
GAF from a Community Quota Entity to
an eligible community resident, means
that the charter halibut permit holder
receiving GAF from the Community
Quota Entity must operate their
business out of the community. Current
regulations at 50 CFR 300.67(k)(5)
require that every charter vessel fishing
trip authorized by a community charter
halibut permit must begin or end within
the boundaries of the community
represented by the Community Quota
Entity holding the permit. The
regulations do not require that an
eligible community resident of the
Community Quota Entity community
use the community charter halibut
permit.
NMFS proposes to apply the same
requirement for using community
charter halibut permits to the definition
of eligible community resident for
purposes of IFQ to GAF transfers
involving Community Quota Entities.
The proposed rule would revise the
definition of eligible community
resident for purposes of IFQ to GAF
transfers under the Area 2C and Area 3A
CSP. A person (either an individual or
a non-individual entity) holding a
charter halibut permit would need to
either begin or end a charter vessel
fishing trip authorized by their charter
halibut permit within the boundaries of
the community represented by the
Community Quota Entity to qualify as
an eligible community resident of that
Community Quota Entity for purposes
of IFQ to GAF transfers. If a Community
Quota Entity transfers IFQ as GAF to an
eligible community resident, the
transfer would not be subject to the IFQ
to GAF transfer restrictions.
Under the proposed rule, transfers
between IFQ and GAF would be exempt
from GAF transfer restrictions if a
Community Quota Entity transfers IFQ
as GAF to (1) itself for use with a charter
halibut permit or a community charter
halibut permit it holds; (2) a business
operating out of the Community Quota
Entity community that holds a charter
halibut permit; or (3) another
Community Quota Entity for use with a
charter halibut permit or a community
charter halibut permit held by the
Community Quota Entity receiving
GAF. All other transfers between IFQ
and GAF by Community Quota Entities
would be subject to the GAF transfer
restrictions. NMFS believes that
exempting Community Quota Entities
from GAF transfer restrictions in these
circumstances would provide a
Community Quota Entity with more
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
flexibility in determining how to utilize
its holdings of IFQ, community charter
halibut permits, or charter halibut
permits. These exemption provisions
allow the Community Quota Entity to
determine how to use halibut fishery
privileges to maximize benefits for the
Community Quota Entity community
and its residents.
Although transfers between IFQ and
GAF for Community Quota Entities
would be exempt from GAF transfer
restrictions in the circumstances
described above, all transfers of IFQ to
GAF in which the IFQ is held by a
Community Quota Entity would be
limited by an existing halibut IFQ
regulation at § 679.42(f)(6). This
regulation specifies that ‘‘[n]o
individual that receives IFQ derived
from halibut QS held by a Community
Quota Entity may hold, individually or
collectively, more than 50,000 lbs (22.7
mt) of IFQ halibut derived from any
halibut QS source.’’ As described above,
NMFS determines individual and
collective ownership interest by
summing IFQ held or used by that
person and a portion of any IFQ held or
used by an entity in which that person
has an interest. NMFS considers the
person’s portion of the IFQ held or used
by the entity equal to the share of
interest the person has in that entity.
For example, if an individual holds or
uses 100 lbs (45.4 kg) of IFQ and has a
5 percent interest in a company that
holds or uses 100 lbs (45.4 kg) of IFQ
that was derived from halibut QS held
by a Community Quota Entity, the
amount of IFQ that person would be
considered to hold for the IFQ limit
calculation at § 679.42(f)(6) is 100 lbs
(45.4 kg) (his personal holdings) plus 5
lbs (2.3 kg) (5 percent interest for the
100 lbs (45.4 kg) in the company
holding IFQ). This individual’s holdings
of 105 lbs (47.6 kg) would not exceed
the IFQ limit of 50,000 lbs (45.4 kg) for
purposes of § 679.42(f)(6).
The Council recommended, and this
rule proposes, to include GAF derived
from halibut IFQ held by a Community
Quota Entity in this individual and
collective IFQ holding limit. Hence, the
proposed rule would limit an individual
receiving either IFQ or GAF derived
from IFQ held by a Community Quota
Entity to holding individually or
collectively, no more than 50,000 lbs
(45.4 kg) of halibut IFQ and GAF
derived from the IFQ, combined. Thus,
for an individual that holds GAF
derived from IFQ held by a Community
Quota Entity, IFQ derived from QS held
by a Community Quota Entity, or both,
NMFS would calculate that individual’s
total halibut IFQ and GAF holdings by
(1) multiplying the total number of GAF
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
held individually and collectively by
the conversion factor for that year (see
‘‘Conversion Between IFQ and GAF’’
section above) to determine the
equivalent number of halibut net
pounds held, and (2) adding the
equivalent number of halibut net
pounds held to the total number of IFQ
equivalent pounds held individually
and collectively by that person.
D. GAF Reporting Requirements
The proposed rule would implement
new recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for GAF in ADF&G charter
logbooks, in addition to charter logbook
reporting requirements currently
specified at § 300.65(d). The draft
regulations also would require GAF
permit holders to separately report
retained GAF by midnight on the day
the GAF were retained using a NMFSapproved electronic GAF reporting
system.
The ADF&G charter logbook is the
primary reporting requirement for
operators in the guided sport fisheries
for all species harvested in saltwater in
Areas 2C and 3A. The ADF&G
developed the charter logbook program
in 1998 to provide information on actual
participation and harvest by individual
vessels and businesses in guided sport
fisheries for halibut as well as other
state-managed species. The charter
logbook data are compiled to show
where fishing occurs, the extent of
participation, and the species and the
numbers of fish caught and retained by
individual anglers. This information is
essential for regulation and management
of the guided sport halibut fisheries in
Area 2C and Area 3A. Since 1998, the
charter logbook design has undergone
annual revision, driven primarily by
changes or improvements in the
collection of fisheries data. In recent
years, ADF&G has added charter
logbook reporting requirements to
accommodate information required to
implement and enforce Federal guided
sport halibut regulations, such as the
Area 2C one-halibut per day bag limit
and the charter halibut limited access
program.
The proposed rule for the CSP would
continue to require the ADF&G charter
logbook as the primary reporting
method for operators in the guided sport
halibut fishery.
The proposed rule would require the
person to whom ADF&G issued a
charter logbook to retain and make
available for inspection by authorized
enforcement personnel completed
original charter logbooks for a period of
two years following the charter vessel
fishing trip. This requirement would be
necessary for enforcement of CSP
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44179
restrictions and GAF reporting
requirements.
For each charter vessel fishing trip on
which charter vessel anglers retain GAF,
charter vessel guides would be required
to report in the charter logbook sheet
completed for a charter vessel fishing
trip (1) the GAF permit number under
which the GAF were retained, and (2)
the number of GAF retained by each
charter vessel angler during the trip. For
charter vessel fishing trips completed on
a single day, charter vessel guides
would be required by Federal
regulations to complete these fields in
the charter logbook before any halibut
are offloaded and/or charter vessel
anglers disembark from the vessel. For
multi-day charter vessel fishing trips,
charter vessel guides would be required
to complete the GAF reporting
requirements in a charter logbook on
board the vessel by the end of each day
of the trip. These charter logbook
reporting requirements would facilitate
GAF recordkeeping and enforcement of
charter vessel angler daily bag and
possession limits during a charter vessel
fishing trip. NMFS also would use the
GAF charter logbook reporting fields to
verify information reported in the
electronic GAF reporting system.
NMFS would use the electronic GAF
reporting system to manage GAF
accounts. Real-time reporting of GAF
landings, and other GAF account and
permit information is essential to
support participant access to current
account balances for account
management and regulatory compliance,
and for monitoring of account transfers
and GAF landings history. Management
personnel need real-time account
information to manage permit accounts,
conduct transfers, and assess fees.
Enforcement personnel need real-time
account information to monitor transfers
between IFQ and GAF and monitor
compliance with authorized GAF
harvests and other program rules.
In the commercial IFQ program,
regulations at 50 CFR 679.5(e) require
that Registered Buyers report fisheries
landings electronically using a secure,
password-protected Internet-based
system approved by NMFS. The final
steps of the electronic IFQ reporting
process generate a time-stamped receipt
displaying landings data. Commercial
Registered Buyers must print, and along
with the individual IFQ fisherman, must
sign copies of the receipt, which must
be maintained and made available for a
specified time period for inspection by
authorized Agency personnel. Printing
of this receipt indicates the report
sequence is complete and the IFQ
account(s) has been properly debited.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
44180
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Under the CSP GAF program, NMFS
would also require secure electronic
reporting. Multiple technologies may be
needed to provide essential services to
a GAF fleet that would be widely
distributed throughout remote locations
in Area 2C and Area 3A. NMFS is
proposing an Internet-based reporting
system for the GAF electronic reporting
program because that is likely to be the
most efficient and convenient method
for charter operators to report GAF
given the prevalence of Internet use
among the general public.
Although real-time data are necessary
for accurate account management, the
amount and type of data required for
inseason GAF account management are
relatively small and simple relative to
that required for charter logbooks. GAF
permit holders would be required to
complete the GAF electronic report
before midnight of each day on which
a charter vessel angler retained GAF
using their GAF permit even if the GAF
permit holder is operating a multi-day
charter vessel fishing trip.
The GAF permit holder would be
required to record the following
information in the GAF electronic
reporting system: (1) ADF&G charter
logbook number in which GAF were
recorded; (2) Vessel identification
number (State of Alaska issued boat
registration number or U.S. Coast Guard
documentation number) for the vessel
on which GAF were retained; (3) GAF
permit number used to retain GAF; (4)
ADF&G Sport Fishing Guide license
number held by the charter vessel guide
who certified the ADF&G charter
logbook sheet on which GAF were
recorded; and (5) Total number of GAF
caught and retained under the GAF
permit number.
Charter vessel operators using a GAF
permit assigned to a community charter
halibut permit for a charter vessel
fishing trip on which GAF were retained
also would be required to report the
community or port where the charter
vessel fishing trip begins and ends.
Upon receipt of the daily electronic
GAF report from a GAF permit holder,
NMFS would respond with a
confirmation number as evidence that
the harvest report was received by
NMFS and the GAF account was
properly debited. The GAF permit
holder would be required to enter the
confirmation number in the charter
logbook used on the vessel on the day
the GAF were retained and recorded in
the charter logbook. This record of
confirmation number would allow
cross-reference of the charter logbook
data elements and the electronic GAF
report by management and enforcement
staff.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
The Council also recommended, and
NMFS proposes, that GAF permit
holders would be required to allow
ADF&G and IPHC scientific sampling
personnel access to landed halibut on
private property owned by the GAF
permit holder. This provision is
intended to facilitate monitoring of
guided sport halibut harvest and the
collection of scientific information from
halibut harvested in the guided sport
fishery. Current ADF&G guided sport
halibut sampling programs collect size
data from the sport halibut fishery,
mainly at public access sites, with some
exceptions in Area 2C. At this time, it
is unknown whether the current public
access ADF&G sampling sites would
provide adequate or representative
samples of halibut harvested in the
guided sport fishery and landed at other
locations, such as lodges in remote
areas. The proposed access
requirements to halibut landing
locations on private property could
provide additional scientific data by
providing additional samples of halibut
retained in the guided sport fisheries in
Area 2C and Area 3A. Persons who do
not wish to have ADF&G and IPHC
samplers on their property have the
option to not allow GAF to be landed on
their property. The Council’s motion is
specific to GAF, and persons that do not
allow GAF to be landed on their
property are not required to allow
scientific sampling personnel access to
their property. However, if at any time
private property owners allow GAF to
be landed on their property, they would
be subject to the access requirements.
The Council also recommended that
GAF permit holders landing GAF on
their private property be required to
allow enforcement personnel access to
the point of landing. The Council
recognized, and NMFS agrees, that
enforcing the CSP restrictions and GAF
use restrictions would require
enforcement staff to track the retention
of halibut by all charter vessel anglers
in the guided sport fishery, including
anglers landing halibut on private
property. However, section 773i of the
Halibut Act provides enforcement staff
with this authorization and additional
regulations are not necessary for the
CSP. Section 773i(b) of the Halibut Act
states that any authorized officer may, at
reasonable times enter, and search or
inspect, shoreside facilities in which
fish taken subject to the Convention or
the Halibut Act are processed, packed or
held. NMFS notes that this
authorization applies to shoreside
facilities in any IPHC regulatory area in
which halibut are taken. Additionally,
the authorization applies to shoreside
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
facilities to which all halibut are landed
or taken and is not specific to GAF
halibut. An authorized officer means
any officer authorized by (1) the
Secretary of Commerce, including any
special agent or fisheries enforcement
officer of NMFS, (2) the Secretary of the
department in which the United States
Coast Guard is operating, or (3) the head
of any Federal or State agency which
has entered into an agreement with the
Secretary of Commerce or the
Commandant of the United States Coast
Guard to enforce the provisions of any
statute administered by the Secretary of
Commerce, including the Halibut Act.
VII. Cost Recovery for GAF
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(MSA) at section 304 (d)(2)(A) requires
that cost recovery fees be collected for
the costs of managing and enforcing
limited access privilege programs. This
includes programs such as the
commercial halibut IFQ program, under
which a dedicated allocation is
provided to IFQ permit holders. Fees
owed are a percentage, not to exceed
three percent, of the ex-vessel value of
fish landed and debited from IFQ
permits. Each year, NMFS sends fee
statements to IFQ holders whose annual
IFQ was used; and those holders must
remit fees by January 31 of the following
year. The fee percentage has rarely
exceeded two percent of the ex-vessel
value of sablefish and halibut landings.
NMFS does not expect allocation of
additional funds to support the GAF
program other than those derived from
IFQ cost recovery fees. Therefore, under
the proposed rule, the commercial IFQ
holder would be responsible for all cost
recovery fees on IFQ equivalent pounds
harvested for their IFQ permit(s) and
also for net pounds transferred and
harvested as GAF which originated from
their IFQ account(s). NMFS will levy
IFQ cost recovery fees on all net pounds
of halibut harvested as IFQ in the
commercial fishery and as GAF in the
guided sport fishery.
The IFQ permit holders who transfer
IFQ to GAF would owe cost recovery
fees for those GAF retained in the
guided sport fishery. Fees for
unharvested GAF converted back to IFQ
equivalent pounds and harvested as
commercial IFQ pounds would be
assessed fees as commercial landings
with value estimated as specified in
current regulations at § 679.45. IFQ
holders might share these costs with
GAF users through contractual
agreements. IFQ and GAF that are not
harvested during the year would not be
subject to the cost recovery fee. Fish
harvested in excess of the amount
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
authorized by a GAF permit, or in
excess of allowed IFQ permit overages,
would not result in cost recovery fees
owed because such overages would be
handled as enforcement actions.
NMFS establishes commercial cost
recovery fee assessments in November
each year. To determine cost recovery
fee liabilities for IFQ holders, NMFS
uses data reported by Registered Buyers
to compute annual standard ex-vessel
IFQ prices by month and port (or, if
confidential, by port group). NMFS
publishes these standard prices in the
Federal Register each year. NMFS
published the 2010 standard ex-vessel
IFQ prices in the Federal Register on
December 10, 2010 (75 FR 76957).
NMFS uses the standard prices to
compute the total annual value of the
IFQ fisheries. NMFS determines the fee
percentage by dividing actual total
management and enforcement costs by
total IFQ fishery value. Only those
halibut and sablefish holders who had
landings on their permits owe cost
recovery fees. Fees owed by an IFQ
holder are the computed annual fee
percentage multiplied by the value of
their IFQ landings.
NMFS would also apply the standard
ex-vessel values computed for
commercial IFQ harvests to harvest of
GAF fish. The proposed regulations
specify that the IFQ permit holder may
not challenge the standard ex-vessel
value applied to GAF landings by
NMFS.
Only ‘‘incremental’’ costs, those
incurred as a result of IFQ management
that includes a GAF component, are
assessable as cost recovery fees. Under
the proposed rule, NMFS would
determine the cost recovery liability for
IFQ permit holders based on the value
of all landed IFQ and GAF derived from
his or her IFQ permits. NMFS would
convert landings of GAF in Area 2C or
Area 3A to IFQ equivalent pounds as
specified in the ‘‘Conversion Between
IFQ and GAF’’ section above, and
multiply the IFQ equivalent pounds by
the standard ex-vessel value computed
for that area to determine the value of
IFQ landed as GAF. The value of IFQ
landed as GAF as based on NMFS’
standard prices would be added to the
value of the IFQ permit holder’s landed
IFQ, and the sum would be multiplied
by the IFQ fee percentage to estimate the
person’s IFQ fee liability.
VIII. Technical Regulatory Changes
This action proposes three technical
changes to the regulations. The first
proposed change would clarify the
regulations to describe the current
process by which the IPHC Area 4 catch
sharing plan is promulgated. The Area
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
4 catch sharing plan was codified in
Federal regulations at § 300.65(b) in
1998. The Area 4 catch sharing plan
allocates the Area 4 commercial catch
limit among Areas 4C, 4D, and 4E. Each
year, the Area 4 catch sharing plan
subarea allocations are applied to the
Area 4 commercial catch limit
recommended by the IPHC and
published in the final rule
implementing the annual management
measures. The proposed regulatory
change would clarify the description of
this process in § 300.65(b).
The second proposed technical
change would update instructions in
regulations at § 679.5(l)(7) for Registered
Buyers to complete and submit the
Registered Buyer Ex-vessel Value and
Volume Report form. Registered Buyers
submit this form to NMFS to report exvessel IFQ prices by month and port.
NMFS uses data reported by Registered
Buyers to compute annual standard exvessel IFQ prices to determine cost
recovery fee liabilities for IFQ holders.
The third proposed technical change
would revise regulations at
§ 679.45(a)(4) to update instructions for
IFQ permit holders for submitting cost
recovery fee payments to NMFS. NMFS
proposes to update the fee payment
form and instructions to incorporate
GAF in the calculation of an IFQ permit
holder’s cost recovery fee liability.
IX. Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator
has determined that this proposed rule
is necessary for the conservation and
management of the halibut fishery and
that it is consistent with the Halibut Act
and other applicable law, subject to
further consideration after public
comment.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
This proposed rule also complies with
the Secretary of Commerce’s authority
under the Halibut Act to implement
management measures for the halibut
fishery.
An initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IRFA) was prepared as
required by section 603 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The IRFA
describes the economic impact this
proposed rule, if adopted, would have
on small entities. A description of the
action, why it is being considered, and
the legal basis for this action may be
found at the beginning of this preamble.
A summary of the IRFA follows. Copies
of the IRFA are available from the
Council or NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The action would establish a CSP for
the commercial and guided sport
halibut fisheries in Area 2C and Area
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44181
3A. In addition to establishing
allocations to each sector, the Council’s
preferred alternative (Alternative 3)
would establish a new management
system for the guided sport halibut
fishery in these areas. Beginning
February 1, 2011, operators of vessels
with charter vessel anglers on board
were required to have on board the
vessel a valid charter halibut permit
issued by NMFS. Therefore, the
universe of regulated entities for the
proposed CSP would be the holders of
one or more charter halibut permits in
Area 2C and Area 3A. NMFS estimates
that 229 businesses were issued charter
halibut permits in Area 2C and 291
businesses were issued charter halibut
permits in Area 3A. However, most
charter halibut permits are transferable.
A charter halibut permit holder may
transfer a transferable permit, subject to
NMFS approval, to a qualified person at
any time. Thus, the exact number of
businesses that would be regulated by
the proposed CSP cannot be determined
at this time.
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) specifies that for marinas and
charter or party vessels, a small business
is one with annual receipts less than
$6.0 million. The largest of these charter
vessel operations, which are lodges,
may be considered large entities under
SBA standards, but that cannot be
confirmed because NMFS does not
collect economic data on lodges. Thus,
all charter vessel operations regulated
by the proposed CSP would likely be
considered small entities, based on SBA
criteria, because they would be expected
to have gross revenues of less than $6.0
million on an annual basis.
Regulations that directly regulate
entities representing small, remote
communities in Areas 2C and 3A are
included in this action. These
regulations would authorize community
quota entities holding community
charter halibut permits or charter
halibut permits to transfer or receive
commercial halibut IFQ as GAF as
proposed under the CSP. GAF would
offer charter vessel anglers in Area 2C
or Area 3A an opportunity to harvest
halibut in addition to the halibut
harvested under the CSP restriction, up
to the harvest limits in place for
unguided sport anglers in that area.
Under the preferred alternative, 18 Area
2C communities are eligible to each
receive up to 4 halibut community
charter halibut permits; 14 Area 3A
communities are eligible to each receive
up to 7 halibut community charter
halibut permits. Note that eligibility for
community charter halibut permits is
conditioned on the fact that the
community must be represented by a
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
44182
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
non-profit community quota entity
approved by NMFS. Thus, the number
of eligible community entities that
would be authorized by the proposed
action to engage in GAF transfers is a
maximum estimate. All of these eligible
communities would be considered small
entities under the SBA definitions.
This action would impose new
recordkeeping requirements.
Applications to transfer between IFQ
and GAF would be required to be
submitted to and approved by NMFS for
each transfer from IFQ to GAF and for
each transfer from GAF to IFQ prior to
the automatic GAF return date for that
year. The application would require
information about the IFQ permit holder
and the charter halibut permit holder,
including each permit holder’s contact
information and the IFQ permit account
from which halibut pounds are to be
transferred and the GAF account to
which GAF are to be transferred. NMFS
would require additional information
only when the structure of the business
holding the IFQ or charter halibut
permit changes. NMFS also may require
some additional information, depending
on how well the current ADF&G charter
logbooks meet management and
enforcement needs and the level of
access NMFS has to those data. In
addition, community quota entities
eligible to receive community charter
halibut permits would be required to
submit information to NMFS (1) on the
application for a transfer between IFQ
and GAF, and (2) regarding the
Community Quota Entity’s activity in an
annual report by January 31 of the
following year. The proposed
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements would not likely represent
a ‘‘significant’’ economic burden on the
small entities operating in this fishery.
NMFS has not identified other
Federal rules that may duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with the proposed
rule.
An IRFA is required to describe
significant alternatives to the proposed
rule that accomplish the stated
objectives of the Halibut Act and other
applicable statutes and that would
minimize any significant economic
impact of the proposed rule on small
entities.
The status quo alternative specifies
the GHL as a target amount of halibut
that anglers in the guided sport fishery
can harvest in Area 2C and Area 3A.
However, guided sport harvests that
exceed the GHL can have a de facto
allocation effect of reducing the amount
of halibut that may be harvested by the
commercial fishery. Additionally,
guided sport halibut fishery harvests
beyond the GHL also can undermine
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
overall harvest strategy goals established
by the IPHC for the halibut resource.
The primary objective of the proposed
action is to implement a management
program for the Area 2C and Area 3A
guided sport and commercial halibut
fisheries that establishes a clear
allocation to each sector and
implements management measures that
are intended to limit halibut harvest in
the guided sport fisheries to within the
guided sport target harvest range.
The Council considered one
alternative to the status quo (Alternative
2) in addition to the preferred
alternative (Alternative 3) for the
proposed CSP. The Council selected
Alternative 3 from the elements and
options considered under Alternative 2,
along with program elements that
resulted from Council discussion,
additional staff research, and public
testimony. The Council determined that
Alternative 3 would meet its objective to
establish a catch sharing plan for the
commercial and guided sport sectors by
managing the guided sport halibut
fishery to ensure that harvests stay
within the sector’s allocated range. The
Council also considered the guided
sport sector’s need to have a stable inseason regulatory environment.
Management of the guided sport sector
under Alternative 3 is intended to
ensure that it is given advance notice
and predictability with respect to
application of management tools (e.g.,
bag limits, size restrictions) and season
length. Alternative 3 would implement
annual management measures for the
guided sport sector that are specified
prior to the beginning of the fishing
season. NMFS agrees that the annual
implementation of the CSP under
Alternative 3 likely would be timely and
responsive to changes in halibut
abundance while providing the guided
sport sector with advance notice of the
effective guided sport fishery
management measures.
Alternative 2 included three options
for establishing an allocation between
the guided sport and commercial
halibut sectors in Area 2C and Area 3A.
These options included allocating (1)
fixed percentage of the annual
combined catch limit to each sector; (2)
a fixed number of pounds to the guided
sport sector; and (3) a fixed number of
pounds in addition to a specified
percentage of the annual combined
catch limit to the guided sport sector.
After considering average guided sport
harvest estimates for individual years
and for different combinations of years
from 1995 through 2005 in the
Alternative 2 options, the Council
recommended implementing a fixed
percentage of the annual combined
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
catch limit to each sector in Alternative
3 for the proposed CSP. The Council
determined that a fixed percentage
allocation best met its objectives with
the least impact to affected entities.
Additionally, a fixed percentage
allocation would be equitable because
both the commercial and guided sport
sectors would be on an equal footing
concerning the impacts and effects of
accounting for other removals and
applying IPHC harvest policy. Thus,
both the guided sport and commercial
sectors would share in the benefits and
costs of managing the resource for longterm sustainability under a combined
catch limit.
Alternative 2 included eight options
for limiting guided sport harvest to the
sector’s catch limit under the CSP. The
Council recommended limiting CSP
restrictions to daily bag limits and daily
bag limits in combination with a
maximum size limit. The Council
elected not to recommend trip limits or
season closures as CSP restrictions
because it aimed to provide
predictability and stability for the
guided sport sector to the extent
practicable under the CSP. Additionally,
daily bag limits and maximum size
limits impact all charter vessel anglers
equally, so the impact of the CSP
restriction would not fall
disproportionately on specific types of
charter vessel operations.
This proposed rule contains
collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA). These requirements have
been submitted to OMB for approval.
The collections are listed below by OMB
control number.
OMB Control No. 0648–0398
Public reporting burden per response
is estimated to average 2 hours for IFQ
Fee Submission Form; 2 hours for IFQ
Registered Buyer Ex-Vessel Volume and
Value Report.
OMB Control No. 0648–0575
Public reporting burden per response
is estimated to average 4 minutes for
ADF&G Logbook Entry for vessel guide
and submittal; 1 minute for ADF&G
Logbook Entry for anglers and signature;
and 4 minutes for Data Entry in GAF
electronic reporting system.
OMB Control No. 0648–0592
Public reporting burden per response
is estimated to average 15 minutes for
an Application for Transfer Between
IFQ and GAF; and 15 minutes for an
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
and GAF by a Community Quota Entity
(CQE).
OMB Control No. 0648–0272
The IFQ Permit is mentioned in this
proposed rule; however, the public
reporting burden for the IFQ permit in
this collection-of-information is not
directly affected by this proposed rule.
Public reporting burden includes the
time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information.
Public comment is sought regarding:
Whether this proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
the accuracy of the burden estimate;
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information,
including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this proposed
rule may be submitted to NMFS at the
above address, and by e-mail to
OIRA_Submission@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 Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), unless that
collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
This proposed rule is consistent with
Executive Order 12962 as amended
September 26, 2008, which required
Federal agencies to ensure that
recreational fishing is managed as a
sustainable activity and is consistent
with existing law.
List of Subjects
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
50 CFR Part 300
Administrative practice and
procedure, Antarctica, Canada, Exports,
Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Imports,
Indians, Labeling, Marine resources,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Russian Federation,
Transportation, Treaties, Wildlife.
50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
Dated: July 14, 2011.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR parts 300 and 679 as follows:
50 CFR Chapter III
44183
Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ), for
purposes of this subpart, means the
annual catch limit of halibut that may
be harvested by a person who is
lawfully allocated a harvest privilege for
a specific portion of the annual
commercial catch limit of halibut.
*
*
*
*
*
3. In § 300.65, revise paragraphs (b),
(c), and (d) to read as follows:
PART 300—INTERNATIONAL
FISHERIES REGULATIONS
§ 300.65 Catch sharing plan and domestic
management measures in waters in and off
Alaska.
Subpart E—Pacific Halibut Fisheries
*
1. The authority citation for part 300,
subpart E, continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773–773k.
2. In § 300.61:
a. Remove the definition for
‘‘Guideline Harvest Level (GHL)’’;
b. Revise the definition for
‘‘Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ)’’; and
c. Add definitions for ‘‘Annual
combined catch limit’’, ‘‘Annual
commercial catch limit’’, ‘‘Annual
guided sport catch limit’’, ‘‘Guided
Angler Fish (GAF)’’, ‘‘GAF permit’’, and
‘‘GAF permit holder’’ to read as follows:
§ 300.61
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Annual combined catch limit, for
purposes of commercial and sport
fishing in Area 2C and in Area 3A,
means the annual total allowable
halibut harvest by persons fishing IFQ
and by charter vessel anglers.
Annual commercial catch limit, for
purposes of commercial fishing in
waters in and off Alaska, means the
annual total allowable halibut harvest
by persons fishing IFQ halibut, CDQ
halibut, and GAF.
Annual guided sport catch limit, for
purposes of sport fishing in Area 2C and
in Area 3A, means the annual total
allowable halibut harvest by charter
vessel anglers, except GAF harvested by
charter vessel anglers, as determined in
§ 300.65(c)(4).
*
*
*
*
*
Guided Angler Fish (GAF) means
halibut transferred annually from an
Area 2C or Area 3A IFQ permit holder
to a GAF permit that is issued to a
person holding a charter halibut permit,
community charter halibut permit, or
military charter halibut permit for the
corresponding area.
GAF permit means an annual permit
issued by the National Marine Fisheries
Service pursuant to § 300.65(c)(6)(iii).
GAF permit holder means the person
identified as the GAF permit holder on
a GAF permit.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
*
(b) The catch sharing plan for
Commission regulatory area 4 allocates
the annual commercial catch limit
among Areas 4C, 4D, and 4E and will be
promulgated by the Commission as
annual management measures and
published in the Federal Register as
required in § 300.62.
(c) Catch sharing plan (CSP) for Area
2C and Area 3A—(1) General. The Area
2C and Area 3A catch sharing plan:
(i) Allocates the annual combined
catch limit for Area 2C and Area 3A
between the annual commercial catch
limit and the annual guided sport catch
limit for the halibut commercial fishing
and sport fishing seasons, pursuant to
paragraphs (c)(3) and (4) of this section;
(ii) Establishes CSP restrictions for
charter vessel anglers in Area 2C and in
Area 3A at specified annual combined
catch limit levels, pursuant to paragraph
(c)(5) of this section; and
(iii) Authorizes the use of Area 2C and
Area 3A halibut IFQ as guided angler
fish (GAF) for harvest by charter vessel
anglers in the corresponding area,
pursuant to paragraph (c)(6) of this
section.
(2) Implementation. The Area 2C and
Area 3A CSP annual catch limits and
CSP restrictions for charter vessel
anglers are promulgated by the
Commission as annual management
measures and published by NMFS in
the Federal Register as required in
§ 300.62.
(3) Annual commercial catch limits—
(i) The Area 2C and Area 3A annual
commercial catch limits are determined
pursuant to Tables 1 and 2 of this
subpart E, promulgated by the
Commission as annual management
measures, and published in the Federal
Register as required in § 300.62.
(ii) Commercial fishing in Area 2C
and Area 3A is governed by the
Commission’s annual management
measures and by regulations at 50 CFR
part 679, subparts A, B, D, and E.
(4) Annual guided sport catch limits—
(i) The Area 2C and Area 3A annual
guided sport catch limits are determined
pursuant to Tables 3 and 4 of this
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(3) Substitute W for wp and solve for
Lcm:
(6) Guided Angler Fish (GAF). This
paragraph (§ 300.65(c)(6)) governs the
transfer of Area 2C and Area 3A halibut
individual fishing quota (IFQ) to guided
angler fish (GAF), the issuance of GAF
permits, and GAF use.
(i) General—(A) GAF is derived from
halibut IFQ that is transferred from an
Area 2C or Area 3A IFQ permit account
held by a person who also holds quota
share (QS), as defined in § 679.2 of this
title, to a GAF permit account held by
a GAF permit holder in the same
regulatory area.
(B) A GAF permit authorizes a charter
vessel angler to retain GAF on board a
vessel in the area specified on a GAF
permit:
(1) During the sport halibut fishing
season promulgated by the
Commission’s annual management
measures and published in the Federal
Register as required in § 300.62, and
(2) Subject to the GAF use restrictions
at paragraphs (c)(6)(iv)(A) through (I) of
this section.
(C) On or after 15 days prior to the
closing of the commercial halibut
fishing season each year, NMFS will
return unharvested GAF to the IFQ
permit account from which the GAF
were derived, subject to paragraph
(c)(6)(ii) of this section and underage
provisions at § 679.40(e) of this title.
(ii) Transfer Between IFQ and GAF—
(A) General. A transfer between IFQ and
GAF means any transaction in which
halibut IFQ passes between an IFQ
permit holder and a GAF permit holder
as:
(1) A transfer of IFQ to GAF, in which
halibut IFQ equivalent pounds, as
defined in § 679.2 of this title, are
transferred from an Area 2C or Area 3A
IFQ permit account, converted to
number(s) of GAF as specified in
paragraph (c)(6)(ii)(F) of this section,
and assigned to a GAF permit account
in the same management area;
(2) A transfer of GAF to IFQ, in which
GAF in number(s) of fish are transferred
from a GAF permit account in Area 2C
or Area 3A, converted to IFQ equivalent
pounds as specified in paragraph
(c)(6)(ii)(F) of this section, and assigned
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
EP22JY11.009</GPH>
(4) Multiply Lcm by 0.39 and round
down to the nearest whole inch and
solve for Lin:
EP22JY11.008</GPH>
(5) Lcm= Maximum allowable length in
centimeters of one halibut caught and
retained per calendar day by each
charter vessel angler in Area 2C or Area
3A calculated from the currently
effective Commission equation to
convert halibut length to weight (W).
(6) Lin= Maximum allowable length in
whole inches (no fractions of an inch)
of one halibut caught and retained per
calendar day by each charter vessel
angler in Area 2C or Area 3A, as
determined in paragraphs
(c)(5)(iii)(C)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(C) As determined by Tables 5 and 6
of this subpart E, each charter vessel
angler in Area 2C or Area 3A is limited
to catching and retaining one halibut
per calendar day with a maximum headon length of Lin. Lin is the length limit
calculated and rounded down to the
nearest whole inch as follows:
(1) Calculate the average weight (wp)
of projected charter vessel anglers’
harvest of halibut in numbers of fish
(Hp) that results in the annual guided
sport catch limit (C):
(2)
EP22JY11.007</GPH>
as determined in paragraph (c)(5)(iii)(C)
of this section.
(2) If the projected charter vessel
anglers’ harvest of halibut under the
default CSP restriction as a percentage
of the annual combined catch limit for
an area is less than or equal to the
largest value of the target harvest range
around the guided sport catch limit for
that area, as determined by Column 6 in
Tables 5 and 6 of this subpart E, then
the CSP restriction is that the number of
halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel angler in that
area is limited to no more than one
halibut of any size.
(B) For purposes of this section
(§ 300.65(c)(5)(iii)), the following terms
are defined as:
(1) C = Annual guided sport catch
limit in pounds for Area 2C or Area 3A
as determined in paragraph (c)(4) of this
section.
(2) Hp= Projected charter vessel
anglers’ harvest of halibut in numbers of
fish for Area 2C or Area 3A.
(3) wp= Average net weight in pounds
of all halibut harvested in Area 2C or
Area 3A.
(4) W = Currently effective
Commission equation to convert halibut
length to weight under a length limit
assuming that all charter vessel anglers
in the respective area retain halibut of
the maximum head-on length Lcm and
expressed as:
EP22JY11.006</GPH>
subpart E, promulgated by the
Commission as annual management
measures, and published in the Federal
Register as required in § 300.62.
(ii) Sport fishing by charter vessel
anglers in Area 2C and Area 3A is
governed by the Commission’s annual
management measures and by
regulations at 50 CFR part 300, subparts
A and E.
(5) CSP restrictions for charter vessel
anglers in Area 2C and Area 3A—(i)
General. CSP restrictions for charter
vessel anglers in Area 2C and Area 3A
are determined annually in accordance
with this section (§ 300.65(c)(5)). NMFS
recommends CSP restrictions to the
Commission as annual management
measures, and publishes the annual
management measures in the Federal
Register as required in § 300.62.
(ii) The CSP restrictions in Area 2C
and Area 3A are determined annually
using:
(A) The annual combined catch limit
for each area determined by the
Commission, and
(B) The projected charter vessel
anglers’ harvest of halibut for each area.
The projected charter vessel anglers’
harvest of halibut for each area is:
(1) Prepared based on the appropriate
CSP restriction for Area 2C and Area
3A, as determined by Tables 5 and 6 of
this subpart E; and
(2) Expressed as a percentage of the
annual combined catch limit for each
area.
(iii) CSP restrictions. The CSP
restrictions for charter vessel anglers in
Area 2C and Area 3A are determined
annually by Tables 5 through 8 of this
subpart E.
(A) Maximum length limit under onehalibut daily bag limit. If the default
CSP restriction for charter vessel anglers
in Area 2C or Area 3A, as determined
by Column 3 in Tables 5 and 6 of this
subpart E, limits the number of halibut
that may be caught and retained per
calendar day by each charter vessel
angler to no more than one, the CSP
restriction for that area also may include
a maximum length limit, to be
determined as follows:
(1) If the projected charter vessel
anglers’ harvest of halibut under the
default CSP restriction as a percentage
of the annual combined catch limit for
an area is greater than the largest value
of the target harvest range around the
guided sport catch limit for that area, as
determined by Column 6 in Tables 5
and 6 of this subpart E, then the CSP
restriction in effect is that the number
of halibut caught and retained per
calendar day by each charter vessel
angler in that area is limited to no more
than one halibut of a maximum length,
EP22JY11.010</GPH>
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
44184
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
to the same IFQ permit account from
which the GAF were derived; or
(3) The return of unharvested GAF by
NMFS to the IFQ permit account from
which it was derived, on or after 15
days prior to the closing of the
commercial halibut fishing season.
(B) Transfer procedure—(1)
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
and GAF. A transfer between IFQ and
GAF before 15 days prior to the closing
of the commercial halibut fishing season
requires Regional Administrator review
and approval of a complete Application
for Transfer Between IFQ and GAF.
Both the transferor and the transferee
are required to complete and sign the
application. The Regional Administrator
shall provide an Application for
Transfer Between IFQ and GAF on the
NMFS Alaska Region Web site at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/ram/
default.htm. An Application for
Transfer Between IFQ and GAF is not
required for the return of unharvested
GAF by NMFS to the IFQ permit
account from which it was derived, on
or after 15 days prior to the closing of
the commercial halibut fishing season
for that year.
(2) Application timing. The Regional
Administrator will not approve an
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
and GAF before annual IFQ is issued for
each year or after the automatic GAF
return date, which is 15 days prior to
the end of the commercial halibut
fishing season for that year.
(3) Notification of decision on
application—(i) Persons who submit an
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
and GAF to the Regional Administrator
for approval will receive notification of
the Regional Administrator’s decision to
approve or disapprove the application.
(ii) NMFS will provide the reason(s)
for disapproval of an Application for
Transfer Between IFQ and GAF by mail
posted on the date of that decision.
(iii) Disapproval of an Application for
Transfer Between IFQ and GAF may be
appealed pursuant to § 679.43 of this
title.
(iv) The Regional Administrator will
not approve a transfer between IFQ and
GAF on an interim basis if an applicant
appeals a disapproval of an Application
for Transfer Between IFQ and GAF
pursuant to § 679.43 of this title.
(4) IFQ and GAF accounts—(i) IFQ
and GAF accounts affected by either a
Regional Administrator approved
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
and GAF or a return of unharvested
GAF to IFQ by NMFS on or after 15 days
prior to the closing of the commercial
halibut fishing season will change on
the date of approval or return. Any
necessary permits will be sent with the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
notification of the Regional
Administrator’s decision on the
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
and GAF.
(ii) On approval of an Application for
Transfer Between IFQ and GAF for an
initial transfer from IFQ to GAF, NMFS
will establish new GAF accounts for
GAF applicants account and issue the
resulting new GAF and IFQ permits. If
a GAF account already exists from a
previous transfer from the same IFQ
account in the corresponding
management area in that year, NMFS
will modify the GAF recipient’s GAF
account and the IFQ transferor’s permit
account and issue modified GAF and
IFQ permits upon approval of an
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
and GAF.
(iii) On or after 15 days prior to the
closing of the commercial halibut
fishing season, NMFS will convert
unharvested GAF from a GAF permit
account back into IFQ equivalent
pounds as specified in paragraph
(c)(6)(ii)(F)(2) of this section, return the
resulting IFQ equivalent pounds to the
IFQ permit account from which the GAF
were derived, and close the GAF permit
account to voluntary transfers for that
year, unless prevented by regulations at
15 CFR part 904.
(C) Complete application. Applicants
must submit a completed Application
for Transfer Between IFQ and GAF to
the Regional Administrator as instructed
on the application. NMFS will notify
applicants with incomplete applications
of the specific information necessary to
complete the application.
(D) Application for Transfer Between
IFQ and GAF approval criteria. An
Application for Transfer Between IFQ
and GAF will not be approved until the
Regional Administrator has determined
that:
(1) The person applying to transfer
IFQ to GAF or receive IFQ from a
transfer of GAF to IFQ:
(i) Possesses halibut quota share (QS),
as defined in § 679.2 of this title, in Area
2C or Area 3A; and
(ii) Has been issued an annual IFQ
Permit for Area 2C or Area 3A, as
defined in § 679.4(d)(1) of this title,
resulting from that halibut QS.
(2) The person applying to receive or
transfer GAF possesses a valid charter
halibut permit, community charter
halibut permit, or military charter
halibut permit in the Commission
management area (2C or 3A) that
corresponds to the IFQ permit area from
or to which the IFQ will be transferred.
(3) The person applying to receive
GAF or IFQ currently exists at the time
of approval of the transfer.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44185
(4) Other pertinent information
requested on the Application for
Transfer Between IFQ and GAF has
been supplied to the satisfaction of the
Regional Administrator.
(5) For a transfer of IFQ to GAF:
(i) The person applying to transfer IFQ
must hold at least one unit of halibut QS
in either Area 2C and Area 3A, must
have received an annual IFQ permit
authorizing harvest of IFQ in the
commercial fishery in IFQ permit the
Commission regulatory area
corresponding to the person’s QS
holding, and must have an IFQ permit
account with an IFQ amount equal to or
greater than amount of IFQ to be
transferred;
(ii) The transfer between IFQ and GAF
must not cause the GAF permit issued
to the GAF permit holder to exceed the
GAF use limits in paragraphs
(c)(6)(iv)(F)(1) and (2) of this section;
(iii) The transfer must not cause the
person applying to transfer IFQ to
exceed the GAF use limit in paragraph
(c)(6)(iv)(F)(3) of this section; and
(iv) There must be no fines, civil
penalties, sanctions, or other payments
due and owing, or outstanding permit
sanctions, resulting from Federal fishery
violations involving either person or
permit.
(6) For a transfer of GAF to IFQ,
unharvested GAF will be transferred to
the IFQ permit account from which it
derived.
(7) If a Community Quota Entity
(CQE), as defined in § 679.2 of this title,
is applying for a transfer between IFQ
and GAF, the Application for Transfer
Between IFQ and GAF by a CQE will
not be approved until the Regional
Administrator has determined that:
(i) The CQE applying to transfer IFQ
to GAF is eligible to hold IFQ on behalf
of the eligible community in Area 2C or
Area 3A designated in Table 21 to 50
CFR part 679;
(ii) The CQE applying to transfer IFQ
to GAF has received notification of
approval of eligibility to receive IFQ for
that community as described in
paragraph § 679.41(d)(1) of this title;
(iii) The CQE applying to receive GAF
from an Area 2C or Area 3A IFQ permit
holder holds one or more charter halibut
permits or community charter halibut
permits for the corresponding area; and
(iv) The CQE applying to transfer
between IFQ and GAF has submitted a
complete annual report(s) as required by
§ 679.5(l)(8) of this title.
(E) Transfer due to court order,
operation of law, or as part of a security
agreement. NMFS may return GAF to
the IFQ permit account from which it
derived pursuant to a court order,
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
44186
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
operation of law, or a security
agreement.
(F) Conversion between IFQ and
GAF—(1) General. Conversion between
net pounds (whole number, no decimal
points) of halibut IFQ and number(s) of
GAF (whole number, no decimal points)
for Area 2C and Area 3A will use Alaska
Department of Fish and Game’s
estimated average net weight of all
halibut harvested by charter vessel
anglers in Area 2C or Area 3A during
the previous year.
(2) Conversion calculation. The net
pounds of IFQ transferred to or from an
IFQ permit holder (holder i) in Area 2C
or Area 3A (area a) will be equal to the
number(s) of GAF transferred to or from
the GAF account of a GAF permit holder
(holder g) in the corresponding area
(area a), multiplied by the ADF&G
estimated average net weight of all
halibut harvested by charter vessel
anglers for that area (area a) during the
previous year. NMFS will round up to
the nearest whole number (no decimals)
when transferring IFQ to GAF and when
transferring GAF to IFQ. Expressed
algebraically, the conversion formula is:
IFQ net poundsia = (GAFga × average net
weighta).
(3) The total number of net pounds
converted from unharvested GAF and
transferred to the IFQ permit holder’s
account from which it derived cannot
exceed the total number of net pounds
NMFS transferred from the IFQ permit
holder’s account to the GAF permit
holder’s account for that area in the
current year.
(iii) Guided Angler Fish (GAF)
permit—(A) General. (1) A GAF permit
authorizes a charter vessel angler to
catch and retain GAF in that area,
subject to the limits in paragraphs
(c)(6)(iv)(A) through (I) of this section,
during a charter vessel fishing trip
authorized by the charter halibut
permit, community charter halibut
permit, or military charter halibut
permit that is assigned to the GAF
permit.
(2) A GAF permit authorizes a charter
vessel angler to catch and retain GAF in
that area from the time of permit
issuance until any of the following
occurs:
(i) The amount of GAF in the GAF
permit holder’s account is zero;
(ii) The permit expires at 11:59 pm on
the day prior to the automatic GAF
return date. The automatic GAF return
date is 15 days prior to the end of the
commercial halibut fishing season for
that year, Alaska local time;
(iii) NMFS replaces the GAF permit
with a modified GAF permit following
a NMFS-approved transfer; or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
(iv) The GAF permit is revoked or
suspended under 15 CFR part 904.
(3) A GAF permit is issued for use in
a Commission area (2C or 3A) to the
person who holds a valid charter halibut
permit, community charter halibut
permit, or military charter halibut
permit in the corresponding
Commission area. Regulations governing
issuance, transfer, and use of charter
halibut permits are located in § 300.67.
(4) A GAF permit is assigned to only
one charter halibut permit, community
charter halibut permit, or military
charter halibut permit held by the GAF
permit holder in the corresponding
Commission area (2C or 3A).
(5) A legible copy of a GAF permit
and the assigned charter halibut permit,
community charter halibut permit, or
military charter halibut permit
appropriate for the Commission area (2C
or 3A) must be carried on board the
vessel used to harvest GAF at all times
that such fish are retained on board and
must be presented for inspection on
request of any authorized officer.
(6) No person may alter, erase,
mutilate, or forge a GAF permit or
document issued under this section
(§ 300.65(c)(6)(iii)). Any such permit or
document that has been intentionally
altered, erased, mutilated, or forged is
invalid.
(7) GAF permit holders must allow an
employee of the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game or the Commission to
enter any area of custody (i.e., any
vessel, building, vehicle, live car,
pound, pier, or dock facility where fish
might be found) subject to such person’s
control, for the purpose of scientific
data collection.
(B) Issuance. The Regional
Administrator will issue GAF permits
upon approval of an Application to
Transfer Between IFQ and GAF.
(C) Transfer. GAF authorized by a
GAF permit under this section
(§ 300.65(c)(6)(iii)) are not transferable
to another GAF permit, except as
provided under paragraph (c)(6)(ii) of
this section.
(iv) GAF use restrictions—(A) A
charter vessel angler may harvest GAF
only on board a vessel on which the
operator has on board a valid GAF
permit and the valid charter halibut
permit, community charter halibut
permit, or military charter halibut
permit assigned to the GAF permit for
the area of harvest.
(B) The total number of GAF on board
a vessel cannot exceed the number of
unharvested GAF in the GAF permit
holder’s GAF account at the time of
harvest.
(C) The total number of halibut
retained by a charter vessel angler
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
harvesting GAF cannot exceed the sport
fishing daily bag limit in effect for
unguided sport anglers at the time of
harvest as promulgated by the
Commission’s annual management
measures and published in the Federal
Register as required in § 300.62.
(D) Retained GAF are not subject to
the maximum length limit implemented
by the CSP restriction implemented
pursuant to paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of this
section, if applicable.
(E) Each charter vessel angler
retaining GAF must comply with the
halibut possession requirements as
promulgated by the Commission’s
annual management measures and
published in the Federal Register as
required in § 300.62.
(F) Except as provided in paragraph
(c)(6)(iv)(I) of this section, during the
halibut sport fishing season
promulgated by the Commission’s
annual management measures and
published in the Federal Register as
required in § 300.62, no more than:
(1) 400 GAF may be assigned to a GAF
permit that is assigned to a charter
halibut permit or community charter
halibut permit endorsed for six (6) or
fewer charter vessel anglers,
(2) 600 GAF may be assigned to a GAF
permit issued that is assigned to a
charter halibut permit endorsed for
more than six (6) charter vessel anglers;
and
(3) 1,500 pounds or ten (10) percent,
whichever is greater, of the start year
fishable IFQ pounds for an IFQ permit,
may be transferred from IFQ to GAF.
Start year fishable pounds is the sum of
IFQ equivalent pounds, as defined in
§ 679.2 of this title, for an area, derived
from QS held, plus or minus
adjustments pursuant to § 679.40(d) and
(e) of this title.
(G) For a person who transfers IFQ to
GAF, the halibut QS equivalent, issued
as net pounds of halibut IFQ and
transferred to GAF, is included in the
computation of halibut QS and use caps
in § 679.42(f)(1)(i) and (ii) of this title.
(H) A person receiving GAF from a
CQE is subject to § 679.42(f)(6) of this
title. For a person who receives GAF
from a CQE, the net poundage
equivalent of all halibut IFQ received as
GAF is included in the computation of
that person’s IFQ halibut holdings in
§ 679.42(f)(6) of this title.
(I) Restrictions on GAF use for CQEs.
The GAF use restrictions in paragraph
(c)(6)(iv)(F) of this section do not apply
if:
(1) A CQE transfers IFQ as GAF to a
CQE holding one or more charter
halibut permits or community charter
halibut permits; or
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(2) A CQE transfers IFQ as GAF to an
eligible community resident of that CQE
community, as defined for purposes of
the Area 2C and Area 3A Catch Sharing
Plan in § 679.2 of this title, holding one
or more charter halibut permits.
(d) Charter vessels in Area 2C and
Area 3A—(1) General requirements—
(i) Logbook submission. For a charter
vessel fishing trip during which halibut
were caught and retained on or after the
first Monday in April and on or before
December 31, Alaska Department of
Fish and Game (ADF&G) Saltwater
Sport Fishing Charter Trip Logbook data
sheets must be submitted to the ADF&G
and postmarked or received no later
than 14 calendar days after the Monday
of the fishing week (as defined in 50
CFR 300.61) in which the halibut were
caught and retained. Logbook sheets for
a charter vessel fishing trip during
which halibut were caught and retained
on January 1 through the first Sunday in
April, must be submitted to the ADF&G
and postmarked or received no later
than the second Monday in April.
(ii) The charter vessel guide is
responsible for complying with the
reporting requirements of this paragraph
(d). The person to whom the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game issues the
Saltwater Sport Fishing Charter Trip
Logbook is responsible for ensuring that
the charter vessel guide complies with
the reporting requirements of this
paragraph (d).
(2) Retention and inspection of
logbook. The person to whom the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
issues the Saltwater Sport Fishing
Charter Trip Logbook is required to:
(i) Retain the logbook for 2 years after
the end of the fishing year for which the
logbook was issued, and
(ii) Make the logbook available for
inspection upon the request of an
authorized officer.
(3) Charter vessel guide and crew
restriction in Area 2C and Area 3A. A
charter vessel guide, charter vessel
operator, or crew member in Area 2C or
in Area 3A on a vessel with charter
vessel anglers on board that are catching
and retaining halibut must not catch
and retain halibut during a charter
vessel fishing trip.
(4) Recordkeeping and reporting
requirements in Area 2C and Area 3A—
(i) General requirements. Each charter
vessel angler and charter vessel guide
on board a vessel in Area 2C or in Area
3A must comply with the following
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements (see paragraphs (d)(4)(i)
and (ii) of this section), except as
specified in paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(C), by
the end of the day or by the end of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
charter vessel fishing trip, whichever
comes first:
(ii) Logbook reporting requirements—
(A) Charter vessel angler signature
requirement. Each charter vessel angler
who retains halibut caught in Area 2C
or in Area 3A must acknowledge that
his or her information and the number
of halibut retained (kept) are recorded
correctly by signing the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game Saltwater
Sport Fishing Charter Trip Logbook data
sheet on the line that corresponds to the
angler’s information.
(B) Charter vessel guide requirements.
If halibut were caught and retained in
Area 2C or in Area 3A, the charter
vessel guide must record the following
information (see paragraphs
(d)(4)(ii)(B)(1) through (10) of this
section) in the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game Saltwater Sport Fishing
Charter Trip Logbook:
(1) Guide license number. The Alaska
Department of Fish and Game sport
fishing guide license number held by
the charter vessel guide who certified
the logbook data sheet.
(2) Date. Month and day for each
charter vessel fishing trip taken. A
separate logbook data sheet is required
for each charter vessel fishing trip if two
or more trips were taken on the same
day. A separate logbook data sheet is
required for each calendar day that
halibut are caught and retained during
a multi-day trip.
(3) Charter halibut permit (CHP)
number. The NMFS CHP number(s)
authorizing charter vessel anglers on
board the vessel to catch and retain
halibut.
(4) Guided Angler Fish (GAF) permit
number. The NMFS GAF permit
number(s) authorizing charter vessel
anglers on board the vessel to harvest
GAF.
(5) Statistical area. The primary
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
six-digit statistical area code in which
halibut were caught and retained.
(6) Angler sport fishing license
number and printed name. Before a
charter vessel fishing trip begins, record
for each charter vessel angler the Alaska
Sport Fishing License number for the
current year, resident permanent license
number, or disabled veteran license
number, and print the name of each
paying and nonpaying charter vessel
angler on board that will fish for
halibut. Record the name of each angler
not required to have an Alaska Sport
Fishing License or its equivalent.
(7) Number of halibut retained. For
each charter vessel angler, record the
total number of halibut caught and
retained.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44187
(8) Number of GAF retained. For each
charter vessel angler, record the total
number of GAF retained.
(9) Signature. Acknowledge that the
recorded information is correct by
signing the logbook data sheet.
(10) Angler signature. The charter
vessel guide is responsible for ensuring
that charter vessel anglers comply with
the signature requirements at paragraph
(d)(4)(ii)(A) of this section.
(C) GAF electronic reporting
confirmation number. The GAF permit
holder is responsible for ensuring that
by 2359 hours on the day GAF were
retained, the confirmation number
issued for a properly reported GAF
landings report, as described in
paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of this section, is
entered on the logbook sheet on which
those GAF were recorded.
(iii) GAF reporting requirements—(A)
General—(1) In addition to the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements in paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and
(ii) of this section, a GAF permit holder
must use the NMFS-approved electronic
reporting system on the Alaska Region
Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/ to submit a
GAF landings report.
(2) A GAF permit holder must submit
a GAF landings report by 2359 hours for
each day on which a charter vessel
angler retained GAF authorized by the
GAF permit held by that permit holder.
(3) If a GAF permit holder is unable
to submit a GAF landings report due to
hardware, software, or Internet failure
for a period longer than the required
reporting time, or a correction must be
made to information already submitted,
the GAF permit holder must contact
OLE, Juneau, AK, at 800–304–4846
(Select Option 1).
(B) Electronic Reporting of GAF. A
GAF permit holder must obtain, at his
or her own expense, the technology that
they will use for submitting GAF
landing reports to the NMFS-approved
reporting system for GAF landings.
(C) NMFS-Approved Electronic
Reporting System. The GAF permit
holder agrees to the following terms (see
paragraphs (d)(4)(iii)(C)(1) through (3) of
this section):
(1) To use any NMFS online service
or reporting system only for authorized
purposes;
(2) To safeguard the NMFS Person
Identification Number and password to
prevent their use by unauthorized
persons; and
(3) To accept the responsibility of and
acknowledge compliance with § 300.4(a)
and (b), § 300.65(d), and § 300.66(p) and
(q).
(D) Information entered for each GAF
caught and retained. The GAF permit
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44188
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
holder must enter the following
information for each GAF retained
under the authorization of the permit
holder’s GAF permit into the NMFSapproved electronic reporting system
(see paragraphs (d)(4)(iii)(D)(1) through
(7) of this section) for each day on
which a charter vessel angler retained
GAF:
(1) Logbook number from the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game Saltwater
Charter Logbook.
(2) Vessel identification number for
vessel on which GAF were caught and
retained:
(i) State of Alaska issued boat
registration (AK number), or
(ii) U.S. Coast Guard documentation
number.
(3) GAF permit number under which
GAF were caught and retained.
(4) Alaska Department of Fish and
Game sport fishing guide license
number held by the charter vessel guide
who certified the logbook data sheet.
(5) Number of GAF caught and
retained under the GAF permit holder’s
permit number.
(6) Community charter halibut permit
only: Community or Port where charter
vessel fishing trip began (charter vessel
anglers boarded the vessel).
(7) Community charter halibut permit
only: Community or Port where charter
vessel fishing trip ended (charter vessel
anglers or fish were offloaded from the
vessel).
(E) Properly reported landing—(1) All
GAF harvested on board a vessel must
be debited from the GAF permit holder’s
account under which the GAF were
retained.
(2) A GAF landing confirmation
number issued by the NMFS-approved
electronic reporting system and
recorded on the logbook sheet used to
record the retained GAF, as required in
paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(C) of this section,
constitutes confirmation that the GAF
permit holder’s GAF landing is properly
reported and the GAF permit holder’s
account is properly debited.
*
*
*
*
*
4. In § 300.66:
a. Redesignate paragraphs (i) through
(v) as paragraphs (j) through (w),
respectively;
b. Revise paragraph (h) introductory
text and newly redesignated paragraphs
(s), (t), (u), and (v); and
c. Add paragraphs (i), (x), (y), and (z)
to read as follows:
§ 300.66
Prohibitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Conduct subsistence fishing for
halibut while commercial fishing or
sport fishing for halibut, as defined in
§ 300.61, from the same vessel on the
same calendar day, except that persons
authorized to conduct subsistence
fishing under § 300.65(g), and who land
their total annual harvest of halibut:
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Conduct commercial and sport
fishing for halibut, as defined in
§ 300.61, from the same vessel on the
same calendar day.
*
*
*
*
*
(s) Be an operator of a vessel in Area
2C or Area 3A with one or more charter
vessel anglers on board that are catching
and retaining halibut without an
original valid charter halibut permit for
the regulatory area in which the vessel
is operating.
(t) Be an operator of a vessel in Area
2C or Area 3A with more charter vessel
anglers on board catching and retaining
halibut than the total angler
endorsement number specified on the
charter halibut permit or permits on
board the vessel.
(u) Be an operator of a vessel in Area
2C or Area 3A with more charter vessel
anglers on board catching and retaining
halibut than the angler endorsement
number specified on the community
charter halibut permit or permits on
board the vessel.
(v) Be an operator of a vessel on
which one or more charter vessel
anglers on board are catching and
retaining halibut in Area 2C and Area
3A during one charter vessel fishing
trip.
*
*
*
*
*
(x) Be an operator of a vessel in Area
2C or Area 3A with one or more charter
vessel anglers on board that are
exceeding the daily bag limits specified
in § 300.65(c)(5).
(y) Be an operator of a vessel in Area
2C or Area 3A with one or more charter
vessel anglers on board that possess
halibut that has been mutilated or
otherwise disfigured in a manner that
prevents the determination of size or
number of fish, except that each halibut
may be cut into no more than two
ventral pieces, two dorsal pieces, and
two cheek pieces, with skin on all
pieces.
(z) Be an operator of a vessel in Area
2C or Area 3A with one or more charter
vessel anglers on board that possess
halibut that are required to have a headon length of no more than the maximum
length specified under § 300.65(c)(5)
and are cut into more than one piece
without possessing the entire carcass,
with the head and tail connected as a
single piece.
5. In § 300.67:
a. Redesignate paragraphs (i)(2)(v) and
(i)(2)(vi) as paragraphs (i)(2)(vi) and
(i)(2)(vii), respectively; and
b. Add paragraph (i)(2)(v) to read as
follows:
§ 300.67 Charter halibut limited access
program.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(2) * * *
(v) The charter halibut permit is not
assigned to a GAF permit for which the
GAF account contains unharvested
GAF, pursuant to § 300.65
(c)(6)(iii)(A)(3) and (4);
*
*
*
*
*
6. Add Tables 1 through 8 to subpart
E of Part 300 to read as follows:
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C ANNUAL COMMERCIAL CATCH LIMIT
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
If the Area 2C annual combined catch limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ...............................................................................................................................................
4,999,999 lbs
5,000,000 lbs and greater
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
then the Area 2C
annual commercial
catch limit in net
pounds is equal to the
annual combined
catch limit multiplied
by:
82.7%
84.9%
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44189
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A ANNUAL COMMERCIAL CATCH LIMIT
If the Area 3A annual combined catch limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ...............................................................................................................................................
9,999,999 lbs
10,000,000 lbs and greater
then the Area 3A
annual commercial
catch limit in net
pounds is equal to the
annual combined
catch limit multiplied
by:
84.6%
86.0%
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C ANNUAL GUIDED SPORT CATCH LIMIT
If the Area 2C annual combined catch limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ...............................................................................................................................................
4,999,999 lbs
5,000,000 lbs and greater
then the Area 2C
annual guided sport
catch limit in net
pounds is equal to the
annual combined
catch limit multiplied
by:
17.3%
15.1%
TABLE 4 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A ANNUAL GUIDED SPORT CATCH LIMIT
If the Area 3A annual combined catch limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) is:
and . . .
between 0 lbs ...............................................................................................................................................
9,999,999 lbs
10,000,000 lbs and greater
then the Area 3A
annual guided sport
catch limit in net
pounds is equal to the
annual combined
catch limit multiplied
by:
15.4%
14.0%
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS
(Column 2)
and:
(Column 3)
then the default CSP
restriction is
that the
number of
halibut
caught and
retained per
calendar day
by each
charter vessel angler is
limited to no
more than:
(Column 4)
Under the default
CSP restriction (table
5, column 3), the
projected harvest by
charter vessel anglers
as a percentage of
the annual combined
catch limit is intended
to be between:
(Column 5)
and:
(Column 6)
If the projected
harvest by
charter vessel anglers
using the
default CSP
restriction
(table 5, column 3) is:
(Column 7)
then the annual CSP
restriction in effect is
that the number of
halibut caught and retained per calendar
day by each charter
vessel angler is:
0 lbs .................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(Column 1)
If the Area 2C
annual combined catch
limit for halibut in net
pounds (lbs)
is between:
4,999,999 lbs
one halibut of
any size.
13.8%
20.8%
less than
13.8% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
greater than or
equal to
13.8% and
less than or
equal to
20.8% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
limited to no more than
one halibut of any
size.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
limited to no more than
one halibut of any
size.
44190
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS—
Continued
greater than
20.8% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
9,000,000 lbs ...
8,999,999 lbs
13,999,999 lbs
one halibut of
any size.
11.6%
two halibut,
but at least
one halibut
must have a
head-on
length of no
more than
32 inches
(81.3 cm). If
a charter
vessel angler retains
only one
halibut in a
calendar
day, that
halibut may
be of any
length.
18.6%
11.6%
18.6%
less than
11.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
greater than or
equal to
11.6% and
less than or
equal to
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
greater than
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
determined in Table 7
of this subpart E.
less than
11.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
determined in Table 7
of this subpart E.
greater than or
equal to
11.6% and
less than or
equal to
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
5,000,000 lbs ...
limited to no more than
one halibut with a
head-on length of no
more than Lin as determined in
§ 300.65(c)(5)(iii)(C).
limited to no more than
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a head-on
length of no more
than 32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a
calendar day, that
halibut may be of any
length.
limited to no more than
one halibut of any
size.
greater than
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
14,000,000 lbs and greater
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
two halibut of
any size.
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
11.6%
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
18.6%
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
less than
11.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
22JYP3
limited to no more than
one halibut of any
size.
limited to no more than
one halibut with a
head-on length of no
more than Lin as determined in
§ 300.65(c)(5)(iii)(C).
limited to no more than
two halibut of any
size.
44191
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS—
Continued
greater than or
equal to
11.6% and
less than or
equal to
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
greater than
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
limited to no more than
two halibut of any
size.
limited to no more than
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a head-on
length of no more
than 32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a
calendar day, that
halibut may be of any
length.
TABLE 6 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS
(Column 3)
(Column 4)
(Column 5)
(Column 6)
(Column 7)
If the Area 3A annual combined
catch limit for
halibut in net
pounds (lbs) is
between:
(Column 1)
and:
(Column 2)
then the default
CSP restriction
is that the number of halibut
caught and retained per calendar day by
each charter
vessel angler is
limited to no
more than:
Under the default
CSP restriction (table
6, column 3), the
projected harvest by
charter vessel anglers
as a percentage of
the annual combined
catch limit is intended
to be between:
and:
If the projected
harvest by charter vessel anglers using the
default CSP restriction (table 6,
column 3) is:
then the annual CSP restriction in effect is that the
number of halibut caught
and retained per calendar
day by each charter vessel
angler is:
0 lbs .......................
9,999,999 lbs
one halibut of any
size.
11.9%
18.9%
less than 11.9% of
the annual combined catch limit.
greater than or
equal to 11.9%
and less than or
equal to 18.9%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
greater than 18.9%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
limited to no more than one
halibut of any size.
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
greater than or
equal to 10.5%
and less than or
equal to 17.5%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
greater than 17.5%
determined in Table 8 of this
subpart E.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
10,000,000 lbs .......
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19,999,999 lbs
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
one halibut of any
size.
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
10.5%
Fmt 4701
17.5%
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
limited to no more than one
halibut of any size.
limited to no more than one
halibut with a head-on
length of no more than Lin
as determined in
§ 300.65(c)(5)(iii)(C).
limited to no more than one
halibut of any size.
limited to no more than one
halibut with a head-on
length of no more than Lin
as determined in
§ 300.65(c)(5)(iii)(C).
44192
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS—
Continued
20,000,000 lbs .......
26,999,999 lbs
two halibut, but at
least one halibut
must have a
head-on length
of no more than
32 inches (81.3
cm). If a charter
vessel angler retains only one
halibut in a calendar day, that
halibut may be
of any length.
10.5%
17.5%
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
determined in Table 8 of this
subpart E.
greater than or
equal to 10.5%
and less than or
equal to 17.5%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
limited to no more than two
halibut, but at least one halibut must have a head-on
length of no more than 32
inches (81.3 cm). If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day, that halibut may
be of any length.
limited to no more than one
halibut of any size.
greater than 17.5%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
27,000,000 lbs and greater ....................
two halibut of any
size.
10.5%
17.5%.
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
greater than or
equal to 10.5%
and less than or
equal to 17.5%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
greater than 17.5%
of the annual
combined catch
limit.
limited to no more than two
halibut of any size.
limited to no more than two
halibut of any size.
limited to no more than two
halibut, but at least one halibut must have a head-on
length of no more than 32
inches (81.3 cm). If a charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day, that halibut may
be of any length.
TABLE 7 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS IF A
SECOND PROJECTION IS NEEDED
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(Column 1)
If the Area 2C
annual combined catch
limit for halibut
in net pounds
(lbs) is between:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
(Column 2)
and:
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
(Column 3)
and the projected
harvest by charter
vessel anglers
using the default
CSP restriction
(table 5, column
3) is:
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
(Column 4)
then the second
default CSP
restriction is
that the number of halibut
caught and
retained per
calendar day
by each charter vessel angler is limited
to no more
than:
Frm 00038
(Column 5)
Under the second
default CSP restriction
(table 7, column 4),
the projected harvest
by charter vessel
anglers as a
percentage of the
annual combined
catch limit is intended
to be between:
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(Column 6)
and:
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
(Column 7)
If the projected
harvest by
charter vessel
anglers using
the second
default CSP
restriction
(table 7, column 4) is:
(Column 8)
then the annual
CSP restriction in effect
is that the
number of
halibut caught
and retained
per calendar
day by each
charter vessel
angler is:
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
44193
TABLE 7 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 2C CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS IF A
SECOND PROJECTION IS NEEDED—Continued
5,000,000 lbs ....
8,999,999 lbs
less than 11.6% of
the annual combined catch limit.
two halibut, but
at least one
halibut must
have a headon length of
no more than
32 inches
(81.3 cm). If a
charter vessel
angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day,
that halibut
may be of
any length.
11.6%
18.6%
less than or
equal to
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
greater than
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
9,000,000 lbs ....
13,999,999 lbs
less than 11.6% of
the annual combined catch limit.
two halibut of
any size.
11.6%
18.6%
less than or
equal to
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
greater than
18.6% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
two halibut, but
at least one
halibut must
have a headon length of
no more than
32 inches
(81.3 cm). If a
charter vessel
angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day,
that halibut
may be of
any length.
one halibut of
any size.
two halibut of
any size.
two halibut, but
at least one
halibut must
have a headon length of
no more than
32 inches
(81.3 cm). If a
charter vessel
angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day,
that halibut
may be of
any length.
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS IF A
SECOND PROJECTION IS NEEDED
(Column 2)
and:
(Column 3)
and the projected
harvest by charter
vessel anglers using
the default CSP
restriction (table 6,
column 4) is:
(Column 4)
then the second
default CSP
restriction is that
the number of
halibut caught
and retained per
calendar day by
each charter
vessel angler is
limited to no
more than:
(Column 5)
Under the second
default CSP restriction
(table 8, column 4),
the projected harvest
by charter vessel
anglers as a
percentage of the
annual combined
catch limit is intended
to be between:
(Column 6)
and:
(Column 7)
If the projected
harvest by
charter vessel
anglers using
the second
default CSP
restriction (table
8, column 4) is:
(Column 8)
then the annual
CSP restriction
in effect is that
the number of
halibut caught
and retained per
calendar day by
each charter
vessel angler is:
10,000,000 lbs ..
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(Column 1)
If the Area 3A
annual combined catch
limit for halibut
in net pounds
(lbs) is between:
19,999,999 lbs
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
two halibut, but
at least one
halibut must
have a headon length of
no more than
32 inches
(81.3 cm). If a
charter vessel
angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day,
that halibut
may be of
any length.
10.5%
17.5%
less than or
equal to
17.5% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
two halibut, but
at least one
halibut must
have a headon length of
no more than
32 inches
(81.3 cm). If a
charter vessel
angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day,
that halibut
may be of
any length.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44194
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART E OF PART 300—DETERMINATION OF AREA 3A CHARTER VESSEL ANGLER CSP RESTRICTIONS IF A
SECOND PROJECTION IS NEEDED—Continued
greater than
17.5% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
20,000,000 lbs ..
26,999,999 lbs
less than 10.5% of
the annual combined catch limit.
50 CFR Chapter VI
PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
7. The authority citation for part 679
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et
seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108–447.
8. In § 679.2, revise the definitions of
‘‘Eligible community resident’’, ‘‘IFQ
equivalent pound(s)’’, ‘‘IFQ fee
liability’’, and ‘‘IFQ standard ex-vessel
value’’ to read as follows:
§ 679.2
Definitions.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
*
*
*
*
*
Eligible community resident means:
(1) For purposes of the IFQ Program,
any individual who:
(i) Is a citizen of the United States;
(ii) Has maintained a domicile in a
rural community listed in Table 21 to
this part for the 12 consecutive months
immediately preceding the time when
the assertion of residence is made, and
who is not claiming residency in
another community, state, territory, or
country, except that residents of the
Village of Seldovia shall be considered
to be eligible community residents of
the City of Seldovia for the purposes of
eligibility to lease IFQ from a CQE; and
(iii) Is an IFQ crew member.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:34 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
two halibut of
any size.
10.5%
(2) For purposes of the Area 2C and
Area 3A catch sharing plan (CSP) in
§ 300.65(c) of this title, means any
individual or non-individual entity
who:
(i) Holds a charter halibut permit as
defined in § 300.61 of this title;
(ii) Has been approved by the
Regional Administrator to receive GAF,
as defined in § 300.61 of this title, from
a CQE in a transfer between IFQ and
GAF pursuant to § 300.65(c)(6)(ii) of this
title; and
(iii) Begins or ends every charter
vessel fishing trip, as defined in
§ 300.61 of this title, authorized by the
charter halibut permit issued to that
person, and on which halibut are
retained, at a location(s) within the
boundaries of the community
represented by the CQE from which the
GAF were received. The geographic
boundaries of the eligible community
will be those defined by the United
States Census Bureau.
*
*
*
*
*
IFQ equivalent pound(s) means the
weight amount, recorded in pounds and
calculated as round weight for sablefish
and headed and gutted weight for
halibut for an IFQ landing or for
estimation of the fee liability of halibut
landed as guided angler fish (GAF), as
defined in § 300.61 of this title. Landed
GAF are converted to IFQ equivalent
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
less than or
equal to
17.5% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
greater than
17.5% of the
annual combined catch
limit.
17.5%
one halibut of
any size.
two halibut of
any size.
two halibut, but
at least one
halibut must
have a headon length of
no more than
32 inches
(81.3 cm). If a
charter vessel
angler retains
only one halibut in a calendar day,
that halibut
may be of
any length.
pounds as specified in § 300.65(c) of
this title.
IFQ fee liability means that amount of
money for IFQ cost recovery, in U.S.
dollars, owed to NMFS by an IFQ
permit holder as determined by
multiplying the appropriate standard
ex-vessel value or, for non-GAF
landings, the actual ex-vessel value of
his or her IFQ halibut or IFQ sablefish
landing(s), by the appropriate IFQ fee
percentage and the appropriate standard
ex-vessel value of landed GAF derived
from his or her IFQ by the appropriate
IFQ fee percentage.
*
*
*
*
*
IFQ standard ex-vessel value means
the total U.S. dollar amount of IFQ
halibut or IFQ sablefish landings as
calculated by multiplying the number of
landed IFQ equivalent pounds plus
landed GAF in IFQ equivalent pounds
by the appropriate IFQ standard price
determined by the Regional
Administrator.
*
*
*
*
*
9. In § 679.4:
a. Add paragraph (a)(1)(xv); and
b. Revise paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 679.4
Permits.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44195
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Permit is in effect from issue date
through the end of:
If program permit or card type is:
*
*
*
*
(xv) Permits for guided sport halibut fishery:
(A) Charter halibut permit ............................................................................
(B) Community charter halibut permit ..........................................................
(C) Military charter halibut permit ................................................................
(D) Guided Angler Fish (GAF) permit ..........................................................
(2) Permit and logbook required by
participant and fishery. For the various
types of permits issued, refer to § 679.5
for recordkeeping and reporting
requirements. For subsistence and GAF
permits, refer to § 300.65 of this title for
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
10. In § 679.5, revise paragraph (l)(7)
to read as follows:
§ 679.5
(R&R).
Recordkeeping and reporting
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
*
*
*
*
*
(l) * * *
(7) IFQ cost recovery program—(i) IFQ
Registered Buyer Ex-vessel Value and
Volume Report—(A) Requirement. An
IFQ Registered Buyer that also operates
as a shoreside processor and receives
and purchases IFQ landings of sablefish
or halibut must submit annually to
NMFS a complete IFQ Registered Buyer
Ex-vessel Value and Volume Report as
described in this paragraph (l) and as
provided by NMFS for each reporting
period, as described at paragraph
(1)(7)(i)(E), in which the Registered
Buyer receives IFQ fish.
(B) Due date. A complete IFQ
Registered Buyer Ex-vessel Value and
Volume Report must be postmarked or
received by the Regional Administrator
by October 15 following the reporting
period in which the IFQ Registered
Buyer receives the IFQ fish.
(C) Completed application. NMFS
will process a Registered Buyer Exvessel Value and Volume Report
provided that a paper or electronic
report is completed by the Registered
Buyer, with all applicable fields
accurately filled in, and all required
additional documentation is attached.
(1) Certification, Electronic submittal.
NMFS ID and password of the IFQ
Registered Buyer; or
(2) Certification, Non-electronic
submittal. Printed name and signature
of the individual submitting the
Registered Buyer Ex-vessel Value and
Volume Report on behalf of the
Registered Buyer, and date of signature.
(D) Submission address. The
Registered Buyer must complete a
Registered Buyer Ex-vessel Value and
Volume Report and submit by mail to:
Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:34 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
*
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
*
Indefinite ..............................................
Indefinite ..............................................
Indefinite ..............................................
Until expiration date shown on permit
Attn: RAM Program, P.O. Box 21668,
Juneau, AK 99802–1668; by FAX to:
(907) 586–7354; or electronically at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. Report
forms are available on the NMFS Alaska
Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov, or by
contacting NMFS at 800–304–4846,
Option 2.
(E) Reporting period. The reporting
period of the Registered Buyer Ex-vessel
Value and Volume Report shall extend
from October 1 through September 30 of
the following year, inclusive.
(ii) IFQ permit holder Fee Submission
Form—(A) Applicability. An IFQ permit
holder who holds an IFQ permit against
which a landing was made must submit
to NMFS a complete IFQ permit holder
Fee Submission Form provided by
NMFS.
(B) Due date and submittal. A
complete IFQ permit holder Fee
Submission Form must be postmarked
or received by the Regional
Administrator not later than January 31
following the calendar year in which
any IFQ landing was made.
(C) Completed application. NMFS
will process an IFQ Fee Submission
Form provided that a paper or electronic
form is completed by the permit holder,
with all applicable fields accurately
filled in, and all required additional
documentation is attached.
(D) IFQ landing summary and
estimated fee liability. NMFS will
provide to an IFQ permit holder an IFQ
Landing Summary and Estimated Fee
Liability page as required by
§ 679.45(a)(2). The IFQ permit holder
must either accept the accuracy of the
NMFS estimated fee liability associated
with his or her IFQ landings for each
IFQ permit, or calculate a revised IFQ
fee liability in accordance with
paragraph (l)(7)(ii)(C)(2)(i) of this
section. The IFQ permit holder may
calculate a revised fee liability for all or
part of his or her IFQ landings.
(E) Revised fee liability calculation.
To calculate a revised fee liability, an
IFQ permit holder must multiply the
IFQ percentage in effect by either the
IFQ actual ex-vessel value or the IFQ
standard ex-vessel of the IFQ landing. If
parts of the landing have different
values, the permit holder must apply
Sfmt 4702
For more information,
see . . .
*
§ 300.67
§ 300.67
§ 300.67
§ 300.65
of
of
of
of
this
this
this
this
title.
title.
title.
title.
the appropriate values to the different
parts of the landings.
(F) Documentation. If NMFS requests
in writing that a permit holder submit
documentation establishing the factual
basis for a revised IFQ fee liability, the
permit holder must submit adequate
documentation by the 30th day after the
date of such request. Examples of such
documentation regarding initial sales
transactions of IFQ landings include
valid fish tickets, sales receipts, or
check stubs that clearly identify the IFQ
landing amount, species, date, time, and
ex-vessel value or price.
(G) Reporting Period. The reporting
period of the IFQ Fee Submission Form
shall extend from January 1 to December
31 of the year prior to the January 31
due date.
*
*
*
*
*
11. In § 679.40, revise the
introductory text and paragraph (c)(1) to
read as follows:
§ 679.40
Sablefish and halibut QS.
The Regional Administrator shall
annually divide the annual commercial
fishing catch limit of halibut as defined
in § 300.61 of this title and published in
the Federal Register pursuant to
§ 300.62 of this title, among qualified
halibut quota share holders. The
Regional Administrator shall annually
divide the TAC of sablefish that is
apportioned to the fixed gear fishery
pursuant to § 679.20, minus the CDQ
reserve, among qualified sablefish quota
share holders.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Calculation of annual IFQ
allocation—(1) General—(i) The annual
allocation of halibut IFQ to any person
(person p) in any IFQ regulatory area
(area a) will be equal to the product of
the annual commercial catch limit as
defined in § 300.61 of this title, after
adjustment for purposes of the Western
Alaska CDQ Program, and that person’s
QS divided by the QS pool for that area.
Overage adjustments will be subtracted
from a person’s IFQ pursuant to
paragraph (d) of this section; underage
adjustments will be added to a person’s
IFQ pursuant to paragraph (e) of this
section. Expressed algebraically, the
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44196
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
annual halibut IFQ allocation formula is
as follows:
IFQpa = [(annual commercial catch
limita) × (QSpa/QS poola)] ¥ overage
adjustment of IFQpa + underage
adjustment of IFQpa.
(ii) The annual allocation of sablefish
IFQ to any person (person p) in any IFQ
regulatory area (area a) will be equal to
the product of the TAC of sablefish by
fixed gear for that area (after adjustment
for purposes of the Western Alaska CDQ
Program) and that person’s QS divided
by the QS pool for that area. Overage
adjustments will be subtracted from a
person’s IFQ pursuant to paragraph (d)
of this section; underage adjustments
will be added to a person’s IFQ
pursuant to paragraph (e) of this section.
Expressed algebraically, the annual IFQ
allocation formula is as follows:
IFQpa = [(fixed gear TACa¥ CDQ
reservea) × (QSpa/QS poola)] ¥
overage adjustment of IFQpa +
underage adjustment of IFQpa.
*
*
*
*
*
12. In § 679.41, add paragraph (a)(3) to
read as follows:
§ 679.41
Transfer of quota shares and IFQ.
(a) * * *
(3) A transfer between IFQ and guided
angler fish (GAF), as defined in § 300.61
of this title, is governed by regulations
in § 300.65(c) of this title.
*
*
*
*
*
13. In § 679.42 revise paragraphs
(f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), and (f)(6) to read as
follows:
§ 679.42
Limitations on use of QS and IFQ.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) IFQ regulatory Area 2C. 599,799
units of halibut QS, including halibut
QS issued as IFQ and transferred to
GAF, as defined in § 300.61 of this title.
(ii) IFQ regulatory area 2C, 3A, and
3B. 1,502,823 units of halibut QS,
including halibut QS issued as IFQ and
transferred to GAF, as defined in
§ 300.61 of this title.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) No individual that receives IFQ
derived from halibut QS held by a CQE,
including GAF as defined in § 300.61 of
this title, may hold, individually or
collectively, more than 50,000 pounds
(22.7 mt) of IFQ halibut, including IFQ
halibut received as GAF, derived from
any halibut QS source.
*
*
*
*
*
14. In § 679.45:
a. Remove and reserve paragraph (c);
and
b. Revise paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2),
(a)(3), (a)(4)(i), (a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iii), (b),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
(d)(2) heading, (d)(2)(i)(A), (d)(2)(i)(B),
(d)(2)(i)(C), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(3)(i), (d)(4), (e),
and (f) to read as follows:
§ 679.45
IFQ cost recovery program.
(a) * * *
(1) Responsibility. An IFQ permit
holder is responsible for cost recovery
fees for landings of his or her IFQ
halibut and sablefish, including any
halibut landed as guided angler fish
(GAF), as defined in § 300.61 of this
title, derived from his or her IFQ
accounts. An IFQ permit holder must
comply with the requirements of this
section.
(2) IFQ Fee Liability Determination—
(i) General. IFQ fee liability means a
cost recovery liability based on the
value of all landed IFQ and GAF
derived from his or her IFQ permit(s).
(A) Each year, the Regional
Administrator will issue each IFQ
permit holder a summary of his or her
IFQ equivalent pounds landed as IFQ
and GAF as part of the IFQ Landing and
Estimated Fee Liability page described
at § 679.5(l)(7)(ii)(C)(2).
(B) The summary will include
information on IFQ and GAF landings
and an estimated IFQ fee liability using
the IFQ standard ex-vessel value for IFQ
and GAF landings. For fee purposes:
(1) Landings of GAF in IPHC
Regulatory Area 2C or Area 3A are
converted to IFQ equivalent pounds and
assessed at the Area 2C or Area 3A IFQ
standard ex-vessel value.
(2) GAF that is returned to the IFQ
permit holder’s account pursuant to
§ 300.65(c) of this title, and
subsequently landed as IFQ during the
IFQ fishing year, is included in the IFQ
fee liability and subject to fee
assessment as IFQ equivalent pounds.
(C) The IFQ permit holder must either
accept NMFS’ estimate of the IFQ fee
liability or revise NMFS’ estimate of the
IFQ fee liability using the Fee
Submission Form described at
§ 679.5(l)(7)(ii), except that the standard
ex-vessel value used to determine the
fee liability for GAF is not subject to
challenge. If the IFQ permit holder
revises NMFS’ estimate of his or her IFQ
fee liability, NMFS may request in
writing that the permit holder submit
documentation establishing the factual
basis for the revised calculation. If the
IFQ permit holder fails to provide
adequate documentation on or by the
30th day after the date of such request,
NMFS will determine the IFQ permit
holder’s IFQ fee liability based on
standard ex-vessel values.
(ii) Value assigned to GAF. The IFQ
fee liability is computed from all net
pounds allocated to the IFQ permit
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
holder that are landed, including IFQ
landed as GAF.
(A) NMFS will determine the IFQ
equivalent pounds of GAF landed in
Area 2C or Area 3A that are derived
from the IFQ permit holder’s account.
(B) The IFQ equivalent pounds of
GAF landed in Area 2C or Area 3A are
multiplied by the standard ex-vessel
value computed for that area to
determine the value of IFQ landed as
GAF.
(iii) The value of IFQ landed as GAF
is added to the value of the IFQ permit
holder’s landed IFQ, and the sum is
multiplied by the annual IFQ fee
percentage to estimate the IFQ permit
holder’s IFQ fee liability.
(3) Fee Collection. An IFQ permit
holder with IFQ and/or GAF landings is
responsible for self-collecting his or her
own fee during the calendar year in
which the IFQ fish and/or GAF is
landed.
(4) * * *
(i) Payment due date. An IFQ permit
holder must submit his or her IFQ fee
liability payment(s) to NMFS at the
address provided at paragraph (a)(4)(iii)
of this section not later than January 31
of the year following the calendar year
in which the IFQ and/or GAF landings
were made.
(ii) Payment recipient. Make payment
payable to IFQ Fee Coordinator, OMI.
(iii) Payment address. Mail payment
and related documents to:
Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS,
Attn: IFQ Fee Coordinator, Office of
Operations, Management and
Information (OMI), P.O. Box 21668,
Juneau, AK 99802 1668; submit by fax
to (907) 586–7354; or submit
electronically through the NMFS Alaska
Region Home Page at https://
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. If paying
by credit card, ensure that all requested
card information is provided.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) IFQ ex-vessel value determination
and use—(1) General. An IFQ permit
holder must use either the IFQ actual
ex-vessel value or the IFQ standard exvessel value when determining the IFQ
fee liability based on ex-vessel value,
except that landed GAF are assessed at
the standard values derived by NMFS.
An IFQ permit holder must base all IFQ
fee liability calculations on the ex-vessel
value that correlates to the landed IFQ
in IFQ equivalent pounds.
(2) IFQ actual ex-vessel value. An IFQ
permit holder that uses actual ex-vessel
value, as defined in § 679.2, to
determine IFQ fee liability for landed
IFQ must document actual ex-vessel
value for each IFQ permit. The actual
ex-vessel value cannot be used to assign
value to halibut landed as GAF.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(3) IFQ standard ex-vessel value—(i)
Use of standard price. An IFQ permit
holder that uses standard ex-vessel
value to determine the IFQ fee liability,
as part of a revised IFQ fee liability
submission, must use the corresponding
standard price(s) as published in the
Federal Register.
(ii) All landed GAF must be valued
using the standard ex-vessel value for
the year and for the management area of
harvest—Area 2C or Area 3A.
(iii) Duty to publish list. Each year the
Regional Administrator will publish a
list of IFQ standard prices in the
Federal Register during the last quarter
of the calendar year. The IFQ standard
prices will be described in U.S. dollars
per IFQ equivalent pound, for IFQ
halibut and sablefish landings made
during the current calendar year.
(iv) Effective duration. The IFQ
standard prices will remain in effect
until revised by the Regional
Administrator by notification in the
Federal Register based upon new
information of the type set forth in this
section. IFQ standard prices published
in the Federal Register by NMFS shall
apply to all landings made in the same
calendar year as the IFQ standard price
publication and shall replace any IFQ
standard prices previously provided by
NMFS that may have been in effect for
that same calendar year.
(v) Determination. NMFS will apply
the standard price, aggregated to
management Area 2C or Area 3A, to
GAF landings. NMFS will calculate the
IFQ standard prices to reflect, as closely
as possible by month and port or portgroup, the variations in the actual exvessel values of IFQ halibut and IFQ
sablefish landings based on information
provided in the IFQ Registered Buyer
Ex-Vessel Value and Volume Report as
described in § 679.5(l)(7)(i). The
Regional Administrator will base IFQ
standard prices on the following types
of information:
(A) Landed net pounds by IFQ
species, port-group, and month;
(B) Total ex-vessel value by IFQ
species, port-group, and month; and
(C) Price adjustments, including IFQ
retro-payments.
(c) [Reserved]
(d) * * *
(2) Calculating the fee percentage.
* * *
(i) * * *
(A) The IFQ and GAF landings to
which the IFQ fee will apply;
(B) The ex-vessel value of that landed
IFQ and GAF; and
(C) The costs directly related to the
management and enforcement of the
IFQ program, which include GAF costs.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
(ii) Methodology. NMFS must use the
following equation to determine the fee
percentage:
100 × (DPC/V)
where:
‘‘DPC’’ is the direct program costs for the IFQ
fishery for the previous fiscal year, and
‘‘V’’ is the ex-vessel value determined for IFQ
landed as commercial catch or as GAF
subject to the IFQ fee liability for the
current year.
(3) * * *
(i) General. During or before the last
quarter of each calendar year, NMFS
shall publish the IFQ fee percentage in
the Federal Register. NMFS shall base
any IFQ fee liability calculations on the
factors and methodology in paragraph
(d)(2) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Applicable percentage. The IFQ
permit holder must use the IFQ fee
percentage in effect for the year in
which the IFQ and GAF landings are
made to calculate his or her fee liability
for such landed IFQ and GAF. The IFQ
permit holder must use the IFQ fee
percentage in effect at the time an IFQ
retro-payment is received by the IFQ
permit holder to calculate his or her IFQ
fee liability for the IFQ retro-payment.
(e) Non-payment of fee. (1) If an IFQ
permit holder does not submit a
complete Fee Submission Form and
corresponding payment by the due date
described in § 679.45(a)(4), the Regional
Administrator will:
(i) Send IAD. Send an IAD to the IFQ
permit holder stating that the IFQ
permit holder’s estimated fee liability,
as calculated by the Regional
Administrator and sent to the IFQ
permit holder pursuant to § 679.45(a)(2),
is the amount of IFQ fee liability due
from the IFQ permit holder. An IFQ
permit holder who receives an IAD may
appeal the IAD, as described in
paragraph (h) of this section.
(ii) Disapprove transfer. Disapprove
any transfer of GAF, IFQ, or QS to or
from the IFQ permit holder in
accordance with § 300.65(c) of this title
and § 679.41(c), until the IFQ fee
liability is reconciled, except that NMFS
may return unused GAF to the IFQ
permit account from which it was
derived on or after the automatic GAF
return date.
(2) Upon final agency action
determining that an IFQ permit holder
has not paid his or her IFQ fee liability,
as described in paragraph (f) of this
section, any IFQ fishing permit held by
the IFQ permit holder is not valid until
all IFQ fee liabilities are paid.
(3) If payment is not received on or
before the 30th day after the final
agency action, the matter will be
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
44197
referred to the appropriate authorities
for purposes of collection.
(f) Underpayment of IFQ fee. (1)
When an IFQ permit holder has
incurred a fee liability and made a
timely payment to NMFS of an amount
less than the NMFS estimated IFQ fee
liability, the Regional Administrator
will review the IFQ Fee Submission
Form and related documentation
submitted by the IFQ permit holder. If
the Regional Administrator determines
that the IFQ permit holder has not paid
a sufficient amount, the Regional
Administrator will:
(i) Disapprove transfer. Disapprove
any transfer of GAF, IFQ, or QS to or
from the IFQ permit holder in
accordance with § 300.65(c) of this title
and § 679.41(c), until the IFQ fee
liability is reconciled, except that NMFS
may return unused GAF to the IFQ
permit account from which it was
derived on or after the automatic GAF
return date.
(ii) Notify permit holder. Notify the
IFQ permit holder by letter that an
insufficient amount has been paid and
that the IFQ permit holder has 30 days
from the date of the letter to either pay
the amount determined to be due or
provide additional documentation to
prove that the amount paid was the
correct amount.
(2) After the expiration of the 30-day
period, the Regional Administrator will
evaluate any additional documentation
submitted by an IFQ permit holder in
support of his or her payment. If the
Regional Administrator determines that
the additional documentation does not
meet the IFQ permit holder’s burden of
proving his or her payment is correct,
the Regional Administrator will send
the permit holder an IAD indicating that
the permit holder did not meet the
burden of proof to change the IFQ fee
liability as calculated by the Regional
Administrator based upon the IFQ
standard ex-vessel value. The IAD will
set out the facts and indicate the
deficiencies in the documentation
submitted by the permit holder. An IFQ
permit holder who receives an IAD may
appeal the IAD, as described in
paragraph (h) of this section.
(3) If the permit holder fails to file an
appeal of the IAD pursuant to § 679.43,
the IAD will become the final agency
action.
(4) If the IAD is appealed and the final
agency action is a determination that
additional sums are due from the IFQ
permit holder, the IFQ permit holder
must pay any IFQ fee amount
determined to be due not later than 30
days from the issuance of the final
agency action.
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
44198
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(5) Upon final agency action
determining that an IFQ permit holder
has not paid his or her IFQ fee liability,
any IFQ fishing permit held by the IFQ
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:09 Jul 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
permit holder is not valid until all IFQ
fee liabilities are paid.
(6) If payment is not received on or
before the 30th day after the final
agency action, the matter will be
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
referred to the appropriate authorities
for purposes of collection.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–18321 Filed 7–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\22JYP3.SGM
22JYP3
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44156-44198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18321]
[[Page 44155]]
Vol. 76
Friday,
No. 141
July 22, 2011
Part III
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Parts 300 and 679
Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Catch Sharing Plan for Guided Sport and
Commercial Fisheries in Alaska; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 141 / Friday, July 22, 2011 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 44156]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 300 and 679
[Docket No. 101027534-0559-01]
RIN 0648-BA37
Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Catch Sharing Plan for Guided Sport
and Commercial Fisheries in Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations that would implement a catch sharing
plan for the guided sport and commercial fisheries for Pacific halibut
in waters of International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) Regulatory
Areas 2C (Southeast Alaska) and 3A (Central Gulf of Alaska). If
approved, this catch sharing plan will change the annual process of
allocating halibut between the guided sport and commercial fisheries in
Area 2C and Area 3A, establish allocations for each sector, and specify
harvest restrictions for guided sport anglers that are intended to
limit harvest to the annual guided sport fishery catch limit. In order
to provide flexibility for individual commercial and guided sport
fishery participants, the proposed catch sharing plan also will
authorize annual transfers of commercial halibut quota to charter
halibut permit holders for harvest in the guided sport fishery. This
action is necessary to achieve the halibut fishery management goals of
the North Pacific Fishery Management Council.
DATES: Written comments must be received by September 6, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS,
Attn: Ellen Sebastian. You may submit comments identified by 0648-BA37
by any one of the following methods:
Electronic submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at https://www.regulations.gov.
Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.
Fax: 907-586-7557.
Hand delivery: 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK.
All comments received are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://www.regulations.gov without change. All
personal identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit
confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected
information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the
required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel,
WordPerfect, or Adobe portable document file (pdf) formats only.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
proposed rule may be submitted to NMFS at the above address and by e-
mail to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to 202-395-7285.
Electronic copies of the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact
Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis prepared for this action
are available from https://www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS Alaska
Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. The Environmental
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis for the charter halibut limited access program is available
from the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel Baker, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Management of the Halibut Fisheries
II. History of Management in the Guided Sport Halibut Fisheries
III. Proposed Catch Sharing Plan (CSP) for Area 2C and Area 3A
IV. CSP Allocation Between the Commercial and Guided Sport Halibut
Fisheries
A. Annual Combined Catch Limit
B. Annual Commercial Fishery and Guided Sport Fishery Catch
Limits
C. Guided Sport Target Harvest Range
V. CSP Restrictions
A. Default CSP Restrictions
B. Projections of Guided Sport Harvest
C. Determination of Annual CSP Restrictions
D. Other Restrictions under the CSP
VI. Guided Angler Fish (GAF)
A. Eligibility Requirements to Transfer Between IFQ and GAF
B. Process to Complete a Transfer Between IFQ and GAF
C. GAF Transfer Restrictions
D. GAF Reporting Requirements
VII. Cost Recovery for GAF
VIII. Technical Regulatory Changes
IX. Classification
I. Management of the Halibut Fisheries
The IPHC and NMFS manage fishing for Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus
stenolepis) through regulations established under authority of the
Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act). The IPHC adopts
regulations governing the Pacific halibut fishery under the Convention
between the United States and Canada for the Preservation of the
Halibut Fishery of the North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea (Convention),
signed at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 2, 1953, as amended by a Protocol
Amending the Convention (signed at Washington, DC, on March 29, 1979).
Regulations developed by the IPHC are subject to acceptance by the
Secretary of State with concurrence from the Secretary of Commerce.
After acceptance by the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Commerce, NMFS publishes the IPHC regulations in the Federal Register
as annual management measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62. The most
recent IPHC regulations were published March 16, 2011, at 76 FR 14300.
IPHC regulations affecting sport fishing for halibut and vessels in the
guided sport (charter) fishery in Areas 2C and 3A may be found in
sections 3, 25, and 28 (76 FR 14300, March 16, 2011).
The Halibut Act, at Sections 773c(a) and (b), provides the
Secretary of Commerce with general responsibility to carry out the
Convention and the Halibut Act. In adopting regulations that may be
necessary to carry out the purposes and objectives of the Convention
and the Halibut Act, the Secretary of Commerce is directed to consult
with the Secretary of the department in which the U.S. Coast Guard is
operating.
The Halibut Act, at section 773c(c), also provides the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) with authority to develop
regulations, including limited access regulations, that are in addition
to, and not in conflict with, approved IPHC regulations. Regulations
developed by the Council may be implemented by NMFS only after approval
by the Secretary of Commerce. The Council has exercised this authority
in the development of subsistence halibut fishery management measures,
codified at 50 CFR 300.65, and the limited access program for charter
vessels in the guided sport fishery, codified at 50 CFR 300.67. The
Council also developed the Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program for
the commercial halibut and sablefish fisheries, codified at 50 CFR part
679, under the authority of section 773 of the Halibut Act and section
303(b) of the
[[Page 44157]]
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) (16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
The harvest of halibut in Alaska occurs in three basic fisheries--
the commercial, sport, and subsistence fisheries. The IPHC annually
determines the amount of halibut that may be removed from the resource
on an area-by-area basis in all areas of Convention waters without
causing biological conservation problems. The IPHC develops catch
limits for the commercial sector in waters in and off Alaska. The IPHC
estimates the exploitable biomass of halibut using a combination of
harvest data from the commercial, sport, and subsistence fisheries, and
information collected during scientific surveys and sampling of bycatch
in other fisheries. The IPHC calculates the amount of total allowable
harvest in a given area by multiplying a harvest rate by the estimate
of exploitable biomass. Referred to as the Total Constant Exploitation
Yield (CEY), this target level represents the total removals for that
area in the coming year. The Total CEY is expressed in net pounds,
which is defined as the weight of halibut from which the gills,
entrails, head, and ice and slime have been removed. The IPHC subtracts
estimates of halibut removals and mortality from sources other than the
directed commercial halibut fishery, including sport, subsistence,
bycatch in non-halibut commercial fisheries, and halibut wastage, or
discarded halibut that are smaller than the minimum legal commercial
size limit of 32 inches, or 81.3 centimeters (cm), and halibut killed
or lost on abandoned commercial halibut fishing gear, from the Total
CEY. The remaining CEY is called the Fishery CEY. The Fishery CEY
provides the basis for the IPHC's determination of catch limits for the
directed commercial fixed gear halibut fishery. The IPHC considers
staff recommendations, harvest policy, and stakeholder input when it
determines commercial catch limits.
Pursuant to Article III of the Convention, the IPHC must develop
and maintain halibut stocks to levels that will permit the optimum
yield for the halibut fisheries. The IPHC meets this objective by
including all sources of fishing mortality within the Total CEY and by
establishing the commercial fixed gear catch limits only after
subtracting halibut removals from other non-halibut commercial
fisheries and non-commercial uses. Although most of the non-commercial
uses of halibut have been relatively stable, growth in the guided sport
fishery in recent years has resulted in this fishery harvesting a
larger amount of halibut than it did in earlier years. Because the IPHC
subtracts this increased non-commercial halibut fishery removal from
the Total CEY, the amount of halibut available for the commercial
halibut fishery decreased.
II. History of Management in the Guided Sport Halibut Fisheries
Until 2007, only regulations developed by the IPHC governed guided
sport fisheries for halibut. The IPHC first adopted halibut sport
fishing rules in 1973 to provide consistency and uniformity in halibut
sport fishing regulations in all regulatory areas. At that time, the
IPHC established that the sport fishing season for halibut would occur
from March 1 through October 31. From 1984 through 1997, the IPHC
required guided sport vessels to have IPHC licenses. Finally, the IPHC
limited the number of halibut that charter vessel anglers could retain
by imposing a daily bag limit. Since the initial limit of a three fish
bag limit in 1973, the IPHC has adjusted the bag limit two times. The
bag limit has varied between a limit of one, two, and three fish per
angler per day. The bag limit under IPHC regulations for the 2011
guided sport fishery in Area 3A is two fish of any size per day unless
more restrictive bag limits apply in Federal regulations. Currently,
Federal regulations at 50 CFR 300.65 impose a more restrictive bag
limit on the guided sport fishery of one halibut with a maximum length
of 37 inches in Area 2C.
In 1997, the Council adopted separate guideline harvest levels
(GHL) for Area 2C and Area 3A. Although the Council had a policy that
guided sport halibut fisheries should not exceed the GHL, the Council
did not recommend measures to constrain this fishery should it exceed
the GHL. The proposed and final rules implementing the current GHLs
were published in the Federal Register in 2002 and 2003 respectively
(67 FR 3867, January 2, 2002; 68 FR 47256, August 8, 2003). These
regulations are codified at 50 CFR 300.65.
The GHLs represent a pre-season specification of acceptable annual
halibut harvests in the guided sport fisheries in Areas 2C and 3A. To
accommodate some growth in the guided sport sector, while approximating
historical levels, the Council recommended the GHLs based on 125
percent of the average 1995 through 1999 guided sport halibut harvest
in each area. For Area 2C the maximum was set at 1,432,000 pounds
(lbs), or 649.5 metric tons (mt) net weight, and in Area 3A the maximum
GHL was set at 3,650,000 lbs (1,655.6 mt) net weight. The Council
recommended a system of step-wise adjustments to accommodate decreases
and subsequent increases in abundance. The Council recommended this
system of GHL adjustments to provide a relatively predictable and
stable harvest target for guided halibut sport sector notwithstanding a
lack of measures to constrain the guided sport halibut fishery. A more
detailed description of GHL management and the Council's rationale
behind such management can be found in the proposed and final rules
implementing that action (67 FR 3867, January 2, 2002; 68 FR 47256,
August 8, 2003).
To ensure that the halibut stocks would continue to develop to a
level that would permit optimum yield in the halibut fisheries, the
IPHC and Council have recommended, and the Secretary of Commerce has
adopted, a number of regulatory measures in Area 2C to limit guided
sport halibut harvest to within the GHL. The primary regulatory
measures included: (1) Effective in 2007 and 2008, maintaining a two-
fish daily bag limit provided that at least one of the harvested
halibut had a head-on length of no more than 32 inches (81.3 cm) (72 FR
30714, June 4, 2007); and (2) effective in 2009, a one-fish daily bag
limit that superseded the June 4, 2007, two-fish with maximum size
rule, a prohibition on harvest by the charter vessel guide and crew,
and a line limit equal to the number of charter vessel anglers onboard,
not to exceed six lines (74 FR 21194, May 6, 2009).
Members of the charter halibut sector challenged the May 6, 2009,
final rule in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Van
Valin v. Locke, 671 F. Supp 2d 1 D.D.C 2009). Plaintiffs argued that
the rule violated the Halibut Act and the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA). The court granted summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of
Commerce and upheld the May 6, 2009, final rule. The one halibut per
day bag limit for charter vessel anglers remains in effect for Area 2C.
In addition, as a response to concerns that that growth in the
charter vessel sector was overcrowding productive halibut grounds, the
Council recommended, and the Secretary of Commerce adopted, a limited
access program to provide stability for the guided sport halibut
fishery and decrease the need for regulatory adjustments affecting
charter vessel anglers. NMFS published a final rule implementing the
charter halibut limited access program on January 5, 2010 (75 FR 554).
Under the program, NMFS initially issued permits to those businesses
that historically and recently participated in the guided sport
fishery.
[[Page 44158]]
The Area 2C guided sport harvest has exceeded its GHL every year
since 2004 notwithstanding the foregoing management measures designed
to control sport halibut harvest in this area. During 2004 through
2007, the GHL was 1,432,000 lbs (649.5 mt). During that time period,
guided sport harvests were approximately 1,750,000 lbs (793.8 mt) in
2004, 1,952,000 lbs (885.4 mt) in 2005, 1,804,000 lbs (818.3 mt) in
2006, and 1,918,000 lbs (870.0 mt) in 2007. In 2008, the GHL was
931,000 lbs (422.3 mt) and guided sport harvests was approximately
1,999,000 lbs (906.7 mt). In 2009 the GHL was 788,000 lbs (357.4 mt)
and the guided sport harvest was approximately 1,245,000 lbs (564.7
mt). In 2010, the GHL was 788,000 lbs (357.4 mt). The Alaska Department
of Fish and Game (ADF&G) provided the IPHC with a preliminary estimate
of the guided sport harvest in 2010 of 46,816 fish yielding 1,279,000
lbs (580.1 mt) (November 1, 2010, letter from ADF&G to the IPHC).
The Total CEY for 2011 is 5,390,000 lbs (2,445.0 mt) in Area 2C.
The corresponding GHL is 788,000 lbs (357.4 mt) in Area 2C. Because
NMFS imposed no additional charter restrictions in 2011, the IPHC
believed that charter harvest was likely to exceed the GHL and result
in total harvest exceeding the total CEY. As such, the IPHC recommended
and the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Secretary of
Commerce, accepted a daily bag limit for charter vessel anglers in Area
2C of one halibut with a maximum length of 37 inches (94.0 cm) per day
(76 FR 14300, March 16, 2011). The IPHC recommended this additional
management measure in the Area 2C charter fishery to limit guided sport
halibut harvest to the GHL and achieve the IPHC's overall conservation
objective for Area 2C.
III. Proposed Catch Sharing Plan (CSP) for Area 2C and Area 3A
In October 2008, the Council adopted a motion to recommend the CSP
to the Secretary of Commerce. The motion is available at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/current_issues/halibut_issues/HalibutCSPmotion1008.pdf. The Council intended the CSP to be a
comprehensive management program for the guided sport halibut fisheries
in Area 2C and Area 3A. If approved, the proposed regulations would (1)
establish sector allocations of a combined catch limit to the
commercial and guided sport halibut fisheries in Area 2C and in Area
3A, (2) implement harvest restrictions (CSP restrictions) for charter
vessel anglers in each area that would be intended to limit guided
sport harvest to within the target harvest range around that sector's
catch limit for that area, and (3) authorize transfers of commercial
halibut IFQ as guided angler fish (GAF) to charter halibut permit
holders for harvest by charter vessel anglers in the guided sport
halibut fishery. GAF would offer charter vessel anglers in Area 2C or
Area 3A an opportunity to harvest halibut in addition to, or instead
of, the halibut harvested under the CSP restriction, up to the harvest
limits in place for unguided sport anglers in that area. Because GAF
would be a use of halibut IFQ, GAF harvested by charter vessel anglers
would not be included in estimates of guided sport harvest under the
CSP.
The CSP allocations would replace the GHL with a percentage
allocation of the combined catch limit to the guided sport fishery. The
combined catch limit would be determined by the IPHC each year prior to
the fishing season. The CSP also would establish non-discretionary CSP
restrictions for charter vessel anglers prior to the fishing season
based on projected harvests and guided sport catch limits for that
year. Under the GHL, restrictions for charter vessel anglers in Area 2C
were implemented by separate NMFS rulemaking after the GHL was
exceeded. The pre-season specification of the CSP restrictions is
intended to limit guided sport harvest to the target before an overage
occurs, as opposed to the retroactive GHL approach that implements
corrective action after the overages have occurred.
The pre-season specification of CSP restrictions is consistent with
the Council's objective to maintain the guided sport season length in
effect in recent years (February 1 through December 31) with no
inseason changes to harvest restrictions. The Council developed this
objective based on public testimony from charter vessel operators
indicating that inseason changes to harvest restrictions would be
disruptive to guided sport operators and anglers. Many charter vessel
anglers typically book fishing trips with operators well in advance of
the trip date with an expectation that the harvest restrictions that
are effective at the beginning of the fishing season will be in place
throughout that season. Management changes to bag or size limits for
charter vessel anglers within a fishing season may cause considerable
inconvenience for guided sport anglers and operators if anglers decide
to postpone or cancel their guided sport fishing trip due to the bag or
size limit change. The potential for inseason management changes also
could result in fewer anglers planning guided sport fishing trips in
Alaska, which could have a significant adverse economic impact on
charter vessel operators by reducing revenue.
The Council recommended, and NMFS agrees, that the annual CSP catch
limits for the commercial and charter sectors and the CSP restrictions
for charter vessel anglers should be determined and implemented by a
predictable and standardized methodology as part of the IPHC's annual
recommendations for halibut fishery conservation and management. This
proposed rule would establish procedures for determining the sector
catch limits and CSP restrictions for each area in order to provide a
systematic method for limiting projected charter harvest to the target
harvest range determined by the CSP. NMFS proposes that the annual CSP
catch limits for the commercial and charter sectors and the CSP
restrictions for charter vessel anglers be implemented as IPHC annual
management measures. If the proposed CSP is approved, NMFS would
include the CSP sector catch limits and CSP restrictions in the IPHC
annual management measures published in the Federal Register each year,
as specified by regulations at 50 CFR 300.62.
These annual management measures are effective until superseded by
regulations, which typically result when the Secretary of State and the
Secretary of Commerce accept the regulatory recommendations made by the
IPHC at its next January annual meeting. In recent years, this schedule
for implementing IPHC regulations has affected the February 1 season
opening date for halibut sport fisheries in Alaska. The effective date
of the annual management measures has typically been around March 1.
Thus, the February 1 opening of the sport season was regulated by the
previous year's annual management measures, which had not yet been
superseded by the most recent IPHC-recommended regulations. This
situation likely would continue under the CSP unless the IPHC
recommends a change to the February 1 opening for the sport fishing
season. However, implementation of the annual management measures in
March likely does not impact the guided sport fishery because there has
historically been little or no halibut harvest in this fishery in
February.
Except for authorizing commercial halibut quota share (QS) holders
to transfer IFQ as GAF to charter halibut permit holders, the Council
did not intend for the CSP to change the management of the commercial
longline
[[Page 44159]]
halibut fisheries in Area 2C and Area 3A. The directed commercial
halibut fisheries in Area 2C and Area 3A are managed under the IFQ
program pursuant to regulations at 50 CFR 679 subparts A through E. The
proposed rule would amend these regulations to authorize transfers
between IFQ and GAF and establish the requirements for using GAF.
IV. CSP Allocation Between the Commercial and Guided Sport Halibut
Fisheries
A. Annual Combined Catch Limit
The CSP would (1) change the current process for specifying annual
commercial catch limits for the commercial halibut fisheries in Area 2C
and Area 3A, and (2) establish a process for specifying annual guided
sport catch limits in Area 2C and Area 3A. The process for specifying
annual guided sport catch limits under the CSP would replace the GHL
for the guided sport fisheries in Area 2C and Area 3A. The IPHC
currently specifies annual catch limits only for the directed
commercial halibut fisheries, and Federal regulations determine the GHL
for the guided sport halibut fisheries based on the Total CEY in Area
2C and Area 3A determined by the IPHC. Under the proposed CSP, the IPHC
would specify an annual combined catch limit for Area 2C and for Area
3A at its annual meeting, which has typically taken place in January.
Each area's annual combined catch limit in net pounds would be the
total allowable halibut harvest for the directed commercial halibut
fishery plus the total allowable halibut harvest for the guided sport
halibut fishery under the CSP.
NMFS anticipates that the IPHC process for determining the annual
combined catch limit would be similar to its current process for
determining annual commercial catch limits. The IPHC would continue to
estimate the exploitable biomass of halibut using a combination of
harvest data from the commercial, sport, and subsistence fisheries, and
information collected during scientific surveys and sampling of bycatch
in other fisheries. The IPHC would calculate the Total CEY, or the
target level for total removals (in net pounds) for that area in the
coming year, by multiplying the target harvest rate by the estimate of
exploitable biomass. With the exception of guided sport removals, the
IPHC would subtract estimates of all non-commercial removals from the
Total CEY. The remaining CEY, after the removals are subtracted, would
be the combined commercial and guided sport fishery CEY and would
provide the basis for the IPHC's determination of the annual combined
catch limit for Areas 2C and 3A. The IPHC would continue to consider
the combined commercial and guided sport fishery CEY, staff
recommendations, harvest policy, and stakeholder input, when it
specifies the Area 2C and Area 3A annual combined catch limits in net
pounds. The IPHC process for determining annual combined catch limits
under the proposed CSP is presented in Figure 5.
Figure 5. IPHC Process for Setting Annual Combined Catch Limits for
Area 2C and Area 3A Under the Proposed CSP
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 44160]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22JY11.000
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Under the CSP, the IPHC would divide the annual combined catch
limits into separate annual catch limits for the commercial and guided
sport fisheries. The CSP allocates a fixed percentage of the annual
combined catch limit to the guided sport and commercial fisheries. The
fixed percentage allocation to each sector varies with halibut
abundance. The IPHC would multiply the CSP allocation percentages for
each area by the annual combined catch limit to calculate the
commercial and guided sport catch limits in net pounds. At moderate to
low levels of halibut abundance, the CSP could provide the guided sport
sector with a smaller poundage catch limit than it would have received
under the GHL program. Conversely, at higher levels of abundance, the
CSP could provide the guided sport sector with a larger poundage catch
limit than it would have received under the GHL program. The Council
intended the CSP sector allocations to balance the needs of the guided
sport and commercial sectors at all levels of halibut abundance.
Although the CSP allocation method is a significant change from the
current allocation method under the GHL, NMFS believes that the
allocation under the CSP provides a more equitable management response
to changes in Total CEY. For example, the Area 2C GHL was 788,000 lbs
in 2009. The Area 2C Total CEY declined by approximately 16 percent
from 2009 to 2010, but this decline did not trigger a change in the
GHL, which remained at 788,000 lbs in 2010. The burden of a lower
exploitable biomass in Area 2C was borne entirely by the commercial
sector in 2010. Conversely, when halibut exploitable biomass increases,
the GHL does not allow the guided sport sector to fully benefit from
this increase. For example, the Area 3A Total CEY increased by
approximately 11 percent from 2006 to 2007, but this increase did not
trigger a change in the GHL, which was at the maximum level of
3,650,000 lbs in 2006 and 2007.
The Council considered establishing fixed poundage allocations to
the guided sport sector as implemented under the GHL program. However,
the Council determined that use of a combined catch limit under the CSP
would allow the IPHC to establish a clear allocation between the guided
sport and commercial halibut sectors. Allocating each sector a
percentage of the combined catch limit would be a simple calculation
and would be transparent and comprehensible to each user group. This
approach is equitable for halibut fishery management because both the
commercial and guided sport sector allocations adjust directly with
changes in halibut exploitable biomass. Thus, both the guided sport and
commercial sectors would share in the benefits and costs of managing
the resource for long-term sustainability under a combined catch limit.
[[Page 44161]]
B. Annual Commercial Fishery and Guided Sport Fishery Catch Limits
The Council considered historical catch information when
determining the recommended CSP allocation percentages for the
commercial and guided sport sectors. The Council reviewed average
guided sport harvest estimates for individual years and for different
combinations of years ranging from 1999 through 2005. The Council
recommended two sets of CSP allocation percentages for the commercial
and guided sport sectors in Area 2C and in Area 3A. At catch limit
levels of 5,000,000 lbs (2,267.9 mt) and less in Area 2C and 10,000,000
lbs (4,535.9 mt) and less in Area 3A, the CSP would allocate a higher
percentage of the combined catch limit to the guided sport sector than
it would receive under combined catch limits above these levels. The
Council recommended, and NMFS proposes, higher guided sport allocation
percentages at relatively low abundance levels of halibut to ameliorate
the effects of replacing the GHL stair-step benchmark in pounds with a
CSP allocation percentage that varies directly with the annual combined
catch limit.
When the IPHC sets an annual combined catch limit of less than
5,000,000 lbs (2,267.9 mt) in Area 2C, the commercial fishery
allocation would be 82.7 percent and the guided sport fishery
allocation would be 17.3 percent of the annual combined catch limit.
This proposed guided sport fishery allocation percentage was calculated
as 125 percent of average guided sport harvest in Area 2C from 2001
through 2005 divided by combined guided sport and commercial halibut
harvests from 2001 through 2005. The proposed allocation of 17.3
percent was the largest percentage allocation considered by the Council
for Area 2C.
When the IPHC sets the annual combined catch limit at 5,000,000 lbs
(2,267.9 mt) or more in Area 2C, the commercial fishery allocation
would be 84.9 percent and the guided sport fishery allocation would be
15.1 percent of the Area 2C annual combined catch limit. This proposed
guided sport CSP allocation percentage was calculated as the 2005
guided sport harvest estimates divided by the combined 2005 guided
sport and commercial harvests in Area 2C. The Council considered
smaller percentage allocations to the guided sport sector, including
the current GHL formula, which is 125 percent of the average 1995
through 1999 guided sport harvest divided by the 1995 through 1999
combined guided sport and commercial harvests in Area 2C. However,
because guided sport harvests in Area 2C have exceeded the GHL since it
was implemented in 2004, the Council determined, and NMFS agrees, that
2005 guided sport harvest would be a more appropriate basis for
determining the guided sport allocation percentages under the CSP. The
guided sport harvest in 2005 was the second highest halibut harvest
estimated since 1999. Table 1 presents the Area 2C commercial and
guided sport fishery percentage allocations under the proposed CSP.
Table 1--Area 2C CSP Allocations to the Commercial and Guided Sport Fisheries as a Percentage of the Annual
Combined Catch Limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
then the CSP then the CSP
allocation to the allocation to the
If the Area 2C annual combined catch commercial fishery as guided sport fishery
limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) and . . . a percentage of the as a percentage of
is: annual combined catch the annual combined
limit is: catch limit is:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
between 0 lbs........................ 4,999,999 lbs 82.7% 17.3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5,000,000 lbs or greater.......................................... 84.9% 15.1%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Area 3A annual combined catch limits of less than 10,000,000
lbs (4,535.9 mt), the commercial fishery allocation would be 84.6
percent and the guided sport fishery allocation would be 15.4 percent
of the Area 3A annual combined catch limit. The Council's recommended
CSP guided sport percentage allocations for annual combined catch
limits of less than 10,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt) in Area 3A is based on
a calculation of 125 percent of the average guided sport harvest from
2001 through 2005, which is the same formula the Council recommended
for the Area 2C percentage allocation at low abundance levels.
When the IPHC sets Area 3A annual combined catch limit at
10,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt) or more, the commercial fishery allocation
would be 86 percent and the guided sport fishery allocation would be 14
percent of the Area 3A annual combined catch limit. The proposed guided
sport CSP percentage allocation for Area 3A at annual combined catch
limits of 10,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt) and greater was calculated using
the GHL formula of 125 percent of the 1995 through 1999 average guided
sport harvest estimates in Area 3A. The Council determined that the GHL
formula was appropriate for the Area 3A CSP percentage allocation
because the annual average guided sport harvest from 2004 through 2007
exceeded the GHL by less than three percent. NMFS agrees that the GHL
formula likely continues to be an appropriate allocation target because
the Area 3A guided sport fishery harvest did not exceed the GHL in 2008
and 2009. Table 2 presents the Area 3A commercial and guided sport
fishery percentage allocations under the proposed CSP.
[[Page 44162]]
Table 2--Area 3A CSP Allocations to the Commercial and Guided Sport Fisheries as a Percentage of the Annual
Combined Catch Limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
then the CSP then the CSP
allocation to the allocation to the
If the Area 3A annual combined catch commercial fishery as guided sport fishery
limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) and . . . a percentage of the as a percentage of
is: annual combined the annual combined
catch limit is: catch limit is:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
between 0 lbs........................ 9,999,999 lbs 84.6% 15.4%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10,000,000 lbs or greater......................................... 86.0% 14.0%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CSP would apportion the annual combined catch limits for Area
2C and Area 3A between the commercial fishery and the guided sport
fishery. For example, if the IPHC were to recommend an annual combined
catch limit of 6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) for Area 2C, the annual
commercial catch limit for Area 2C would be calculated by multiplying
6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) by 84.9 percent, which equals 5,518,000 lbs
(2,502.9 mt). The guided sport catch limit for Area 2C would be
calculated by multiplying 6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) by 15.1 percent,
which equals 981,500 lbs (445.2 mt).
NMFS would publish the catch limits for the guided sport and
commercial fisheries in the Federal Register as part of the IPHC annual
management measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62.
C. Guided Sport Target Harvest Range
The Council recognized, and NMFS agrees, that managing guided sport
harvest is imprecise and, therefore, guided sport harvest in Area 2C
and 3A under the CSP can be expected to vary above and below the guided
sport catch limit. To account for this imprecision, NMFS proposes that
the CSP should restrict guided sport harvest to within a guided sport
target harvest range corresponding with plus or minus 3.5 percentage
points of the guided sport allocation percentage for that year. Tables
3 and 4 present the method for calculating the guided sport target
harvest ranges for Area 2C and Area 3A under the proposed CSP.
Table 3--Guided Sport Target Harvest Range for Area 2C
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and the highest value
and the lowest value of the target harvest
then the CSP of the target harvest range is calculated
If the Area 2C annual combined catch limit for and . . . percentage allocation range is calculated by multiplying the
halibut in net pounds (lbs) is: to the guided sport by multiplying the annual combined catch
fishery is: annual combined catch limit by
limit by
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
between 0 lbs................................. 4,999,999 lbs 17.3% 13.8% 20.8%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5,000,000 lbs or greater........................................................... 15.1% 11.6% 18.6%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--Guided Sport Target Harvest Range for Area 3A
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and the highest value
and the lowest value of the target harvest
then the CSP of the target harvest range is calculated
If the Area 3A annual combined catch limit for and . . . percentage allocation range is calculated by multiplying the
halibut in net pounds (lbs) is: to the guided sport by multiplying the annual combined catch
fishery is: annual combined catch limit by
limit by
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
between 0 lbs................................. 9,999,999 lbs 15.4% 11.9% 18.9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10,000,000 lbs or greater.......................................................... 14.0% 10.5% 17.5%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using the previous example of an annual combined catch limit of
6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) for Area 2C, the guided sport allocation of
15.1 percent, and the guided sport catch limit of 981,500 lbs (445.2
mt), NMFS intends the proposed CSP restrictions to limit guided sport
harvest to between 15.1 percent minus 3.5 percentage points, or 11.6
percent, and 15.1 percent plus 3.5 percentage points, or 18.6 percent,
of the annual combined catch limit. Thus, the CSP restrictions for Area
2C under this example would be intended to limit guided sport fishery
harvest to between 754,000 lbs (342.0 mt) and 1,209,000 lbs (548.4 mt).
The lowest value of the target harvest range would be calculated by
multiplying the annual combined catch limit by 11.6 percent (6,500,000
lbs (2,948.4 mt) x 11.6 percent = 754,000 lbs (342.0 mt)). The highest
value of the target harvest range would be calculated by multiplying
the annual combined catch limit by 18.6 percent (6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4
mt) x 18.6 percent = 1,209,000 lbs (548.4 mt)). The annual guided sport
catch limit, 981,500 lbs (445.2 mt) in this example, is the midpoint of
the guided sport target harvest range specified by the CSP. The CSP
restriction applied each year could vary, based on the annual combined
catch limit as established by the IPHC and projected guided sport
harvest estimates.
NMFS recognizes that guided sport halibut removals may exceed the
guided sport catch limit in some years, and removals may be under the
catch limit in other years, similar to variations in
[[Page 44163]]
guided sport harvest under the GHL program. However, the Council
anticipated, and NMFS agrees, that over time, halibut harvests in the
guided sport sector under the CSP would balance out around the guided
sport catch limits to ensure that conservation and management
objectives are achieved. Conservation of the halibut resource would be
ensured because the IPHC would continue to account for all removals
when determining the annual combined catch limit under the CSP. IPHC
stock assessments would continue to account for guided sport harvests
that exceed the sector's catch limit. Operationally, overages would
result in a corresponding decrease in the combined guided sport and
commercial catch limit in the following year. Underages would accrue to
the benefit of the halibut biomass and all user groups and could result
in a corresponding increase in the combined catch limit in the
following year. The Council determined, and NMFS agrees, that halibut
fishery management under the CSP would more likely limit the guided
sport halibut fishery to its catch limit over time than the GHL program
because the annual, non-discretionary CSP restrictions on guided sport
harvest would restrict projected harvest at varying levels of annual
combined catch limits. This annual implementation of the CSP also would
be more timely and responsive to changes in halibut abundance because
the restrictions on guided sport harvest are determined prior to the
season. The GHL program relies on the implementation of harvest
restrictions after a GHL overage takes place. Additionally, the
Council, IPHC, and NMFS would continue to assess effectiveness of the
CSP in halibut fisheries management. The Council and NMFS anticipate
that as the CSP is implemented over time, the Council and its SSC would
review the CSP. The SSC is the Council's primary scientific advisory
body. As such, it provides the Council, NMFS, and the public with
scientific and technical reviews of regulatory amendment analyses,
stock assessments, and research and data needs for fisheries management
in Alaska.
V. CSP Restrictions
Under the CSP, the annual combined catch limit and projected guided
sport harvest for Area 2C and Area 3A would trigger the CSP
restrictions, or the harvest limit regulations governing anglers in the
guided sport fishery in each area. The CSP restrictions are designed to
limit guided sport fishery harvests in Area 2C and Area 3A within the
guided sport target harvest range. The CSP restrictions for charter
vessel anglers are daily bag limits of one or two halibut, which may be
implemented with or without restrictions on the maximum size of halibut
retained under the daily bag limit. The CSP would require default CSP
restrictions when the guided sport sector is projected to harvest
within its allocated range, more stringent restrictions when the guided
sport sector is projected to exceed its target harvest range, and in
some circumstances, less stringent restrictions when the guided sport
sector is projected to be below its target harvest range.
At its annual meeting in January, the IPHC would specify the Area
2C and Area 3A annual combined catch limits and divide the combined
catch limits into separate annual commercial and guided sport catch
limits. The IPHC would use guided sport harvest projections and the
appropriate CSP management tier to determine the CSP restrictions that
would be in place for the guided sport fishery in Area 2C and Area 3A
for the upcoming year. If the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Commerce accept the IPHC recommendations, NMFS will publish the Area 2C
and Area 3A annual commercial and guided sport catch limits and the CSP
restrictions in the Federal Register as annual management measures
pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62.
A. Default CSP Restrictions
The Council recommended, and NMFS agrees, that CSP restrictions for
each area be based on an area's annual combined catch limit for that
year. CSP restrictions contain four levels, or tiers, based on annual
combined catch limits for each Area 2C and Area 3A. Each tier contains
associated CSP restrictions. For Area 2C, the tiers of annual combined
catch limits are: (1) Between 0 lbs (0 mt) and 4,999,999 lbs (2,267.9
mt); (2) between 5,000,000 lbs (2,267.9 mt) and 8,999,999 lbs (4,082.3
mt); (3) between 9,000,000 lbs (4,082.3 mt) and 13,999,999 lbs (6,350.3
mt); and (4) 14,000,000 lbs (6,350.3 mt) and greater. For Area 3A, the
tiers of annual combined catch limits are: (1) between 0 lbs (0 mt) and
9,999,999 lbs (4,535.9 mt); (2) between 10,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt) and
19,999,999 lbs (4,535.9 mt); (3) between 20,000,000 lbs (4,535.9 mt)
and 26,999,999 lbs (12,246.9 mt); and (4) 27,000,000 lbs (12,246.9 mt)
and greater. Following the IPHC's specification of the annual combined
catch limit for each area, NMFS would implement the default CSP
restrictions for charter vessel anglers in Area 2C and Area 3A unless
the projected guided sport harvest was estimated to be outside of the
guided sport target harvest range.
The Council recommended, and NMFS agrees, that daily bag limits
alone, or in combination with a maximum size limit, are appropriate CSP
restrictions to limit guided sport harvest. The Council recommended a
default CSP restriction limiting charter vessel anglers to two fish of
any size each day at relatively high levels of halibut abundance, which
the Council specified as 14,000,000 lbs (6,350.3 mt) or greater in Area
2C, and 27,000,000 lbs (12,246.9 mt) or greater in Area 3A (tier 4). At
these levels of abundance, annual combined catch limits would be
relatively higher and guided sport anglers would not require more
stringent CSP restrictions to maintain harvest within the guided sport
target harvest range. As halibut abundance levels and annual combined
catch limits decrease, CSP restrictions would be more stringent,
further limiting guided sport harvest at those lower tiers. The Council
recommended that at the next lower tier, tier 3, the default CSP
restriction should be a daily limit of two halibut, but at least one
halibut must have a head-on length of no more than 32 inches (81.3 cm).
If, however, a charter vessel angler retains only one halibut in a
calendar day, that halibut could be of any length. The Council
recommended the most restrictive default CSP restriction, a daily limit
of one halibut, apply to tiers 1 and 2 for each area. The Council
determined, and NMFS agrees, that this conservative default CSP
restriction should be in place at the relatively low levels of
abundance reflected in tiers 1 and 2 to promote the development of
halibut stocks levels supporting optimum yield. Table 5 presents the
default CSP restrictions for Area 2C tiers and Table 6 presents the
default CSP restrictions for Area 3A tiers.
[[Page 44164]]
Table 5--Default CSP restrictions for Area 2C
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
then the default CSP
restriction is that the
If the Area 2C annual combined catch number of halibut caught and
Tier limit for halibut in net pounds (lbs) is: and . . . retained per calendar day by
each charter vessel angler
is limited to no more than:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1............................... between 0 lbs 4,999,999 lbs one halibut of any size.
��������������������������������������
Tier 2............................... between 5,000,000 lbs 8,999,999 lbs one halibut of any size.
��������������������������������������
Tier 3............................... between 9,000,000 lbs 13,999,999 lbs two halibut, but at least
one halibut must have a
head-on length of no more
than 32 inches (81.3 cm).
If a charter vessel angler
retains only one halibut in
a calendar day, that
halibut may be of any
length.
��������������������������������������
Tier 4............................... 14,000,000 lbs and greater two halibut of any size.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Default CSP restrictions for Area 3A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
then the default CSP
If the Area 3A annual restriction is that the number
combined catch limit for of halibut caught and retained
Tier halibut in net pounds (lbs) and . . . per calendar day by each
is: charter vessel angler is
limited to no more than:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1....................... between 0 lbs 9,999,999 lbs one halibut of any size.
������������������������������
Tier 2....................... between 10,000,000 lbs 19,999,999 lbs one halibut of any size.
������������������������������
Tier 3....................... between 20,000,000 lbs 26,999,999 lbs two halibut, but at least one
halibut must have a head-on
length of no more than 32
inches (81.3 cm). If a
charter vessel angler retains
only one halibut in a
calendar day, that halibut
may be of any length.
������������������������������
Tier 4....................... 27,000,000 lbs and greater two halibut of any size.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMFS provides the following example to illustrate the CSP tiered
system of harvest restrictions. An IPHC annual combined catch limit of
6,500,000 lbs (2,948.4 mt) in Area 2C would correspond with tier 2. The
tier 2 default CSP restriction would limit each charter vessel angler
to retaining no more than one halibut of any size per calendar day. An
IPHC annual combined catch limit of 25,000,000 lbs (11,339.8 mt) in
Area 3A would correspond with tier 3. The tier 3 default CSP
restriction would limit each charter vessel angler to retaining no more
than two halibut per calendar day, but at least one halibut must have a
head-on length of no more than 32 inches (81.3 cm). Note that although
the default CSP restrictions are the same for Area 2C and Area 3A
tiers, the IPHC annual combined catch limits may differ between Area 2C
and Area 3A. Therefore, it is possible that charter vessel anglers in
Area 2C would be subject to a different CSP restriction than charter
vessel anglers in Area 3A in any particular year.
B. Projections of Guided Sport Harvest
Projections of guided sport harvest in Area 2C and Area 3A are an
integral component of the CSP. Each year, the IPHC would use annual
projections of total guided sport halibut harvest in net pounds for
Area 2C and Area 3A for the upcoming year to determine whether anglers
in the guided sport fishery are likely to harvest an amount of halibut
outside of the management tier default target harvest range.
In January 2009, ADF&G staff prepared an analysis to assess the
feasibility of projecting guided sport halibut harvest under the CSP.
The Council's SSC reviewed the reports and provided its recommendations
to the Council in February 2009. The ADF&G analysis can be found at:
https://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/current_issues/halibut_issues/HarvestProjectionsDisc709.pdf. As detailed in that analysis, at
least one, and possibly two, projections of guided sport halibut
harvest for the upcoming year would be required for the CSP for both
Area 2C and Area 3A.
Each year, the IPHC would specify the annual combined catch limit
and, based on ADF&G harvest estimates, project guided sport harvest in
net pounds for the upcoming year. The harvest projection would assume
that charter vessel anglers would be subject to the default CSP
restriction for the appropriate management tier. For example, to
determine the total guided sport halibut harvest projection in net
pounds under the management tier default CSP restriction, the IPHC
would forecast the number of fish that would be harvested by charter
vessel anglers and an average net weight of halibut harvested by
charter vessel anglers. The product of the number of fish and the
average net weight is the projection of guided sport halibut harvest in
net pounds. If the projection under the default CSP restriction is
below the guided sport target harvest range, the IPHC would prepare a
second projection assuming a less stringent CSP restriction. If the
projection under the default CSP restriction is above the guided sport
target harvest range, the IPHC would implement a more stringent CSP
restriction.
The IPHC will base its projections in large part on ADF&G analyses
of guided sport harvest. ADF&G has used a variety of methods to project
guided sport harvest in the past. For the CSP projections of guided
sport halibut harvest, the IPHC will build on ADF&G's previous
experience estimating guided sport halibut harvest prior to and under
the CSP. The IPHC will use the best information available to develop
harvest projections, including data from the ADF&G statewide harvest
survey of sport anglers, ADF&G statewide saltwater charter logbooks,
ADF&G dockside surveys, IPHC longline survey data, and any other
information that improves the
[[Page 44165]]
accuracy of the projections. The IPHC will develop the projections to
account for year-to-year changes to the CSP restrictions in effect for
charter vessel anglers as well as normal year-to-year variability in
harvest due to changes in fishing effort or catchability of halibut.
C. Determination of Annual CSP Restrictions
The annual CSP restrictions in effect in each area will be
determined by using (1) the appropriate management tier associated with
the IPHC's recommended annual combined catch limit, and (2) the
projected guided sport harvest of halibut for each area under the
default CSP restriction, expressed as a percentage of the annual
combined catch limit for each area. The Council and NMFS anticipate
that the default CSP restrictions would limit projected guided sport
harvest to within the guided sport target harvest range for each area.
However, in the event that projected guided sport harvest is above the
management tier target harvest range, the CSP triggers more stringent
CSP restrictions. In the event that the projected guided sport harvest
is below the management tier target harvest range, the CSP may trigger
relaxed CSP restrictions. Thus, there are up to three possible CSP
restrictions for each tier, depending on whether projected guided sport
harvest under the default CSP restriction is less than, within, or
above the guided sport target harvest range.
Determination of Annual CSP Restrictions if Projected Guided Sport
Harvest Is Within the Target Harvest Range
If the projected guided sport fishery harvest under the default CSP
restriction is within the guided sport target harvest range, charter
vessel anglers would be subject to the default CSP restriction for the
year. For example, if the IPHC recommended an Area 2C annual combined
catch limit of 9,500,000 lbs (4,309.1 mt), the IPHC would implement the
default CSP restriction, which limits charter vessel anglers to
retaining two halibut per day and one halibut must be less than 32
inches (81.3 cm). The target range around the 15.1 percent guided sport
allocation would have a low value of 11.6 percent and a high value of
18.6 percent (see Table 3). This allocation range would correspond to a
target harvest range from 1,102,000 lbs (499.9 mt) to 1,767,000 lbs
(801.5 mt). If projected guided sport harvest under the default CSP
restriction were greater than or equal to 1,102,000 lbs (499.9 mt) and
less than or equal to 1,767,000 lbs (801.5 mt), the CSP would limit
charter vessel anglers to the default CSP restriction, which is
retaining no more than two halibut per day and one halibut must be less
than 32 inches (81.3 cm). Table 7 provides NMFS' proposed process for
determining Area 2C annual CSP restrictions if projected guided sport
harvest under the default CSP restriction is within the guided sport
target harvest range.
Table 7--Determination of Area 2C Annual CSP Restrictions if Projected Guided Sport Harvest Is Within the Target
Harvest Range Under the Default CSP Restriction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
then the annual
