Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 88, 52148-52207 [2011-20454]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
52148
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 110314196–1432–01]
RIN 0648–BA97
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 88
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS proposes regulations to
implement Amendment 88 to the
Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP),
which regulates the Central Gulf of
Alaska Rockfish Program. This proposed
Rockfish Program would allocate
exclusive harvest privileges to a specific
group of license limitation program
license holders who used trawl gear to
target Pacific ocean perch, pelagic shelf
rockfish, and northern rockfish during
particular qualifying years. It would
retain the conservation, management,
safety, and economic gains realized
under the Rockfish Pilot Program and
resolve identified issues in the
management and viability of the
rockfish fisheries. This action is
necessary to replace particular Rockfish
Pilot Program regulations that are
scheduled to expire at the end of 2011.
This action is intended to promote the
goals and objectives of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the FMP, and other
applicable law.
DATES: Comments must be received no
later than September 19, 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 RIN 0648–
BA97, 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.
• Fax: 907–586–7557.
• Hand delivery to the Federal
Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room
420A, Juneau, AK.
All comments received are a part of
the public record and will generally be
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
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.
Electronic copies of Amendment 88 to
the FMP, and the Environmental
Assessment (EA), the Regulatory Impact
Review (RIR), and the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) (collectively,
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.
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, e-mailed to OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov, or faxed to
202–395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gwen Herrewig, 907–586–7091.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone of the Gulf of
Alaska (GOA) under the FMP. The
North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council) prepared this FMP
under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801
et seq. Regulations implementing the
FMP appear at 50 CFR part 679. General
regulations governing U.S. fisheries also
appear at 50 CFR part 600.
This proposed rule would implement
Amendment 88, the Central GOA
Rockfish Program (Rockfish Program), to
manage the rockfish fisheries in the
Central GOA, which covers an area from
147° W. long. to 159° W. long. Rockfish
in Federal waters of the Central GOA are
harvested primarily by trawl vessels,
and to a lesser extent by longline
vessels.
The Council has submitted
Amendment 88 for review by the
Secretary of Commerce, and a Notice of
Availability of this amendment was
published in the Federal Register on
July 28, 2011 (76 FR 45217) with
comments invited through September
26, 2011. All relevant written comments
received by the end of the applicable
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
comment period, whether specifically
directed to the FMP amendment, this
proposed rule, or both, will be
considered in the approval/disapproval
decision for Amendment 88 and
addressed in the response to comments
in the final decision.
The Council recommended the
Rockfish Program to replace the existing
Rockfish Pilot Program (Pilot Program)
that is scheduled to expire December 31,
2011. The proposed Rockfish Program
would retain the net national
conservation, management, safety, and
economic benefits realized under the
Pilot Program as well as resolve
identified issues in the management and
viability of the rockfish fisheries under
the Pilot Program.
The Pilot Program and the proposed
Rockfish Program are a type of a limited
access privilege program (LAPP)
developed to enhance resource
conservation and improve economic
efficiency in the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries. LAPPs, also called catch share
programs, are limited access systems in
which Federal permits are issued to
harvest a quantity of fish representing a
portion of the total allowable catch
(TAC). Under the Pilot Program, and as
proposed under the Rockfish Program,
participants exercise their exclusive
harvest privileges when they join a
rockfish cooperative. The Rockfish
Program, like the Pilot Program, would
benefit Central GOA fishermen,
shoreside processors, catcher/
processors, and communities by (1)
providing greater security to harvesters
in rockfish cooperatives, (2) allowing a
slower-paced fishery to provide
harvesters the ability to choose when to
fish, (3) providing greater stability for
processors by spreading production over
a longer period of time, (4) allowing for
a more stable workforce, (5) increasing
product quality and diversity, and (6)
allowing catcher/processors greater
spatial and temporal flexibility to
reduce bycatch and develop more stable
markets.
Rockfish Pilot Program Overview
The following section provides a brief
overview of the current Pilot Program. A
detailed description of the Pilot Program
is provided in the preamble to the Pilot
Program’s proposed rule (71 FR 33040;
June 7, 2006).
The Pilot Program was enacted by
Congress. Section 802 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2004 (Section 802, Pub. L. 108–199)
required that the Secretary of
Commerce, in consultation with the
Council, establish a program that
recognized the historical participation
of fishing vessels and fish processors in
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the Central GOA rockfish fishery.
Section 802 states that the program shall
(1) include the Central GOA rockfish
species of Pacific ocean perch, northern
rockfish, and pelagic shelf rockfish; (2)
recognize historical participation of
fishing vessels in the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries from 1996 to 2002; (3)
recognize historical participation of
processors in the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries from 1996 to 2000; (4) establish
catch limits for non-rockfish species and
non-target rockfish species harvested
with the Central GOA rockfish species
and base such allocations on historical
harvesting of these incidentally caught
species; (5) set aside up to 5 percent of
the TAC of the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries for catcher vessels that are not
eligible to participate in the program;
and (6) have a 2-year duration.
The Council developed the Pilot
Program to meet the requirements of
Section 802. The Pilot Program was
designed to enhance resource
conservation and improve economic
efficiency in the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries by establishing cooperatives
that receive exclusive harvest privileges.
Following extensive public comment,
the Council recommended the Pilot
Program to the Secretary on June 6,
2005. NMFS published regulations
implementing the Pilot Program on
November 20, 2006 (71 FR 67210).
Fishing began under the Pilot Program
on May 1, 2007.
Section 802 authorized the Pilot
Program for 2 years, from January 1,
2007, until December 31, 2008. The
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2006, which
became public law on January 12, 2007
(Pub. L. 109–479), extended the Pilot
Program for an additional 3 years, until
December 31, 2011. NMFS implemented
that regulatory extension on November
17, 2008 (73 FR 67809).
Prior to 2007, the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries were managed under
the License Limitation Program (LLP).
The LLP required harvesters to hold an
LLP license to participate in GOA
fisheries, but did not provide specific
exclusive harvest privileges to LLP
license holders. Harvesters with LLP
licenses competed with each other to
harvest the TAC assigned to the fishery.
Processors also competed with each
other. The competition created
economic inefficiencies and incentives
to increase harvesting and processing
capacity. Harvesters increased the
fishing capacity of their vessels and
accelerated their rate of fishing to
outcompete other vessels. Similarly,
processors increased their processing
capacity to outcompete other
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
processors. The rapid pace of fishing
reduced the ability of harvesters and
processors to improve product quality
and extract more value from the fishery
by producing high-value products that
require additional processing time.
As anticipated, the Pilot Program
provided greater security to harvesters
through the formation of rockfish
cooperatives. The program and
cooperatives resulted in a slower-paced
fishery that provided the ability for the
harvester to choose when to fish. The
Pilot Program also provided greater
stability for processors by spreading out
production over a broader period of
time. Overall, the Pilot Program
provided greater benefits to shoreside
processors, catcher/processors, Central
GOA fishermen, and communities than
were realized under the LLP
management scheme. For example,
during the Pilot Program, fishermen
made more rockfish and non-rockfish
shoreside deliveries over a more
extended period of time than under the
LLP. This allowed for a more stable
workforce and slower processing pace
than the previous short periods of high
volume rockfish processing. With a
slower processing pace, product quality
and diversity increased. Central GOA
fishermen and processors noted fewer
conflicts with other fisheries, especially
the salmon fishery which traditionally
overlapped with rockfish efforts.
Catcher/processors noted greater
flexibility in preparation and execution
of the fishery which resulted in lower
bycatch numbers, more stable markets,
and a more efficient distribution of
fishery effort.
The Pilot Program created a structure
for fishery participants to form
cooperatives to efficiently manage
harvesting activities. Under the Pilot
Program, exclusive harvesting and
processing privileges were allocated for
a specific set of rockfish species and for
associated species harvested
incidentally to those rockfish in the
Central GOA. The primary features of
the Pilot Program are described below.
Rockfish Quota Share. NMFS
assigned Rockfish Quota Share (QS) for
rockfish primary species to an LLP
license with a trawl gear designation
endorsed for the Central GOA. The
rockfish primary species are northern
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and
pelagic shelf rockfish. A person holding
an LLP license received rockfish QS if
the LLP license had a history of rockfish
primary species landings during a
specific time period and the person
holding the LLP license met other
eligibility requirements. The amount of
rockfish QS assigned to each license
was based on the legal landings of these
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52149
rockfish species associated with that
LLP license. Rockfish QS assigned to a
specific LLP license could not be
divided or transferred separately from
that LLP license.
On an annual basis for the duration of
the Pilot Program, the LLP license
holder assigns the LLP license, and
rockfish QS assigned to that LLP
license, for use in a rockfish
cooperative, limited access fishery, or
opt-out fishery.
Entry level fishery. Harvesters and
processors not eligible to receive
rockfish QS under the Pilot Program,
but that hold an LLP license, may
participate in a small entry level fishery
for Central GOA rockfish. Section 802
specifically provided for ‘‘a set-aside of
up to 5 percent for the total allowable
catch of such fisheries for catcher
vessels not eligible to participate in the
pilot program’’ during the 1996 through
2002 eligibility time period. The Pilot
Program implemented this provision by
establishing an entry level fishery that
was allocated 5 percent of the TAC for
each of the three rockfish primary
species. This 5 percent set-aside was
further apportioned between trawl and
longline vessels.
Rockfish cooperatives. A person
holding an LLP license with rockfish QS
may form a rockfish cooperative with
other persons (i.e., harvesters) on an
annual basis. Each rockfish cooperative
receives an annual cooperative quota
(CQ), which is an amount of rockfish
primary species and secondary species
dedicated to that rockfish cooperative
for harvest in a given year. Secondary
species are those species incidentally
caught during the harvest of rockfish
primary species fisheries in the Central
GOA. The secondary species for which
annual CQ are allocated include Pacific
cod, rougheye rockfish, shortraker
rockfish, sablefish, and thornyhead
rockfish. The amount of CQ assigned to
a cooperative is a portion of the annual
TAC based on the sum of the rockfish
QS held by all the harvesters
participating in the rockfish
cooperative.
Each rockfish cooperative also
receives an annual CQ that limits the
amount of halibut prohibited species
catch (PSC) the cooperative may use
while harvesting its rockfish primary
species and secondary species CQ.
Cooperatives are allocated a portion of
the total GOA halibut PSC limit, as
annually specified under § 679.21,
based on historic halibut mortality rates
in the rockfish primary species fisheries.
Halibut is incidentally caught and killed
in a number of the rockfish primary
species and secondary species fisheries.
However, halibut caught as bycatch may
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52150
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
not be retained or sold commercially
under regulations established under the
authority of the Northern Pacific Halibut
Act of 1982, or under regulations
implementing the FMP at § 679.21.
Therefore, the Pilot Program provides
participants a fixed amount of
incidental halibut mortality through a
halibut CQ allocation.
A rockfish cooperative can transfer all
or part of their CQ to other rockfish
cooperatives, with some restrictions.
A rockfish cooperative may form only
under specific conditions. A person
holding an LLP license that allows them
to catch and process their catch at sea
(catcher/processor vessel LLP license)
may form a rockfish cooperative with
other persons holding catcher/processor
LLP licenses. A person holding an LLP
license that allows them only to deliver
their catch onshore (catcher vessel LLP
license) may only form a rockfish
cooperative with other persons holding
catcher vessel LLP licenses and only in
association with the processor to whom
those persons have historically
delivered most of their catch.
Cooperatives may associate with
processors that NMFS determined met
eligibility criteria and were allocated an
exclusive privilege to receive and
process the rockfish primary species
and secondary species allocated to
harvesters. Processors cannot process
catch outside the communities in which
they have traditionally processed
rockfish primary species and associated
secondary species.
Limited access fishery. A person not
in a rockfish cooperative, but holding an
LLP license with rockfish QS, can
decide annually to fish in a limited
access fishery. NMFS does not allocate
a specific amount of fish to a specific
harvester in the limited access fishery.
All harvesters in the limited access
fishery compete with all other such
harvesters to catch the TAC assigned to
the limited access fishery. The TAC
assigned to the limited access fishery
represents the sum of QS assigned to all
the LLP licenses designated for the
limited access fishery. No exclusive
harvest privilege exists in the limited
access fishery.
Opt-out fishery. Each year, holders of
catcher/processor LLP licenses with
rockfish QS can decide to opt-out of the
Pilot Program for that year, with certain
limitations.
Sideboards. Limitations on the ability
of harvesters under the Pilot Program to
harvest fish in fisheries other than the
Central GOA rockfish fisheries are
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
commonly called ‘‘sideboards.’’ The
Pilot Program provides certain
economic efficiencies to harvesters.
Harvesters could use their improved
economic efficiency to increase their
participation in other fisheries,
adversely affecting the harvesters in
other fisheries. Sideboards limit the
total amount of catch in other
groundfish fisheries that can be taken by
eligible harvesters to historic levels,
including harvests made in the State of
Alaska (State) parallel groundfish
fisheries. Parallel fisheries are fisheries
authorized by the State in its waters
concurrent with the Federal fisheries in
which harvest amounts are deducted
from the Federal TAC. Sideboards limit
harvest in specific rockfish fisheries and
the amount of halibut bycatch that can
be used in certain flatfish fisheries.
General sideboards apply to all vessels
and LLP licenses with associated legal
landings that can be used to generate
rockfish QS. Additionally, specific
sideboards apply to certain catcher/
processor and catcher vessels and LLP
licenses.
Enforcement and monitoring. NMFS
implemented provisions to ensure that
harvesters maintain catches within
annual allocations and do not exceed
sideboard limits.
Proposed Central GOA Rockfish
Program
The Council designed the proposed
Rockfish Program to meet the
requirements for limited access
privileges in section 303A of the MSA.
The Rockfish Program would include
similar implementation, management,
monitoring, and enforcement measures
to those developed under the Pilot
Program. The Rockfish Program would
(1) continue to assign QS and CQ to
participants for primary and secondary
species, (2) allow a participant holding
an LLP license with rockfish QS to form
a rockfish cooperative with other
persons, (3) allow holders of catcher/
processor LLP licenses to opt-out of
rockfish cooperatives for a given year,
(4) include an entry level longline
fishery, (5) establish sideboard limits,
and (6) include monitoring and
enforcement provisions. However, the
Council also recommended changes to
improve the functionality of the
Rockfish Program relative to the Pilot
Program.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Key Differences Between the Pilot
Program and the Proposed Rockfish
Program
After considering program
requirements and issues identified
under the Pilot Program, in order to
ensure that the Rockfish Program
complies with section 303A of the MSA,
the Council decided to modify some
aspects of the Pilot Program under the
proposed Rockfish Program. The
Council recommended the Rockfish
Program based on the analysis of
rockfish management under the LLP, the
Pilot Program, and anticipated changes
under the proposed Rockfish Program.
The rationale underlying the Council’s
decision and details of this analysis are
briefly discussed in this preamble and
are contained in the Analysis prepared
for this proposed action (see
ADDRESSES).
Some key differences between the
Pilot Program and Rockfish Program are
outlined in Table 1. In summary, the
proposed Rockfish Program would:
• Change the qualifying years for
eligibility for QS;
• Use a different suite of years to
determine the allocation of QS and
sideboard limits;
• Assign to rockfish cooperatives a
specific portion of the Central GOA TAC
of species historically harvested in the
rockfish fisheries;
• Assign a specific amount of halibut
PSC to cooperatives and conserve a
portion of the halibut that will remain
unallocated;
• Restrict the entry level fishery to
longline gear only;
• Relax the requirements to form a
cooperative;
• Specify the location where
harvesters in cooperatives may deliver
rockfish;
• Remove the requirement that
harvesters in a catcher vessel
cooperatives deliver to a specific
processor;
• Discontinue the limited access
fishery;
• Simplify sideboards, and slightly
modify sideboards for catcher/
processors;
• Implement a cost recovery program,
except for the entry level longline
fishery;
• Establish a catch monitoring and
control plan (CMCP) specialist; and
• Be authorized for 10 years, from
January 1, 2012, until December 31,
2021.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52151
EP19AU11.062</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
EP19AU11.063</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52152
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52153
EP19AU11.064</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
52154
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
Rockfish Quota Share
This proposed rule uses the term
‘‘quota share’’ to describe the Rockfish
Program’s multi-year exclusive harvest
privileges based on historic harvest
activities, consistent with similar North
Pacific programs. The Council did not
use this term in recommending the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Rockfish Program. Instead the Council
used the terms ‘‘qualifying catch,’’ and
‘‘catch history’’ to describe the harvest
privilege that is linked to historic
harvests attributed to an LLP license.
However, in implementing this
program, NMFS has determined that the
use of the term ‘‘quota share’’ does not
alter the original intent of the Council.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Rockfish QS would be an attribute of
the LLP license. Once NMFS calculates
the amount of QS to allocate to an LLP
license, NMFS would modify that LLP
license and designate that amount on
the license. QS assigned to an LLP
license could not be transferred
independent from that LLP license,
except to comply with the use caps as
described below under Transfer of
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
EP19AU11.065</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Rockfish QS. QS assigned to an LLP
license would provide a harvest
privilege, not a right, to its holder and
would not confer a guaranteed harvest
to the holder of that QS.
QS would be the basis for the annual
calculation of the amount of fish that
could be harvested or used if the QS
were assigned to a rockfish cooperative.
Once QS was assigned to an LLP
license, it would authorize that LLP
license holder to participate in the
Rockfish Program. If an LLP license
holder assigned that LLP license, and its
associated QS, to a cooperative with
other LLP license holders, the sum of
the QS of all of the eligible harvesters
would yield CQ—an exclusive annual
catch limit of rockfish primary species,
secondary species, and halibut PSC that
could be harvested by the members of
the rockfish cooperative. Cooperatives
would be formed by eligible harvesters
holding LLP licenses in the same sector,
either the catcher/processor sector or
the catcher vessel sector.
NMFS would not issue separate QS
for the rockfish secondary species or
halibut PSC. Instead, NMFS would use
the amount of rockfish primary species
QS to determine the specific annual
catch amount for the rockfish secondary
species or halibut PSC. The Council
recommended that NMFS base the
annual catch limit of rockfish secondary
species and halibut PSC on the total
historic harvests of rockfish primary
species attributed to LLP licenses in that
sector. NMFS would incorporate this
recommendation in the annual
determination of the catch limit. The
methods for calculating the annual
catch limit for rockfish primary species,
secondary species, and halibut PSC are
discussed below under ‘‘TAC
Apportionment to an Incidental Catch
Allowance (ICA), Rockfish Cooperative,
and Entry Level Fishery.’’
Anticipated Changes in the Pelagic
Shelf Rockfish Complex
NMFS notes that the Council’s
Science and Statistical Committee has
been amenable to a recent
recommendation by the GOA
Groundfish Plan Team to dissolve the
pelagic shelf rockfish complex. The
proposed Rockfish Program would
allocate QS based on harvests of all
three species in the Pelagic shelf
complex—dusky, widow, and yellowtail
rockfish. Widow and yellowtail rockfish
are currently managed with dusky
rockfish in the pelagic shelf rockfish
complex, but do not commonly coexist
in the same geographic area and habitat.
The GOA Groundfish Plan Team is
considering a plan to rearrange some
species in the GOA rockfish stock
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
assessments for more precise
management of yellowtail and widow
rockfish. The Council derived the 2011
pelagic shelf rockfish TAC from NMFS
projection models of acceptable
biological catch that estimated 91 metric
tons (mt) for widow and yellowtail
rockfish, and 4,663 mt for dusky
rockfish. These estimates yield the 2011
pelagic shelf rockfish TAC (4,754 mt).
Observer data shows that 99.7 percent of
pelagic shelf rockfish landed in 2010
were dusky rockfish, and the remaining
0.3 percent were widow and yellowtail
rockfish. It is possible that the relatively
large acceptable biological catch for
pelagic shelf rockfish could be used to
overharvest the small number of
yellowtail and widow rockfish in this
complex.
This action would not affect, or
change, QS eligibility for primary
species in the Rockfish Program. The
GOA Groundfish Plan Team
recommendation would remove dusky
rockfish from the pelagic shelf rockfish
complex and place the species into its
own category. Dusky rockfish would
then be a single species target, similar
to northern rockfish or Pacific ocean
perch. The GOA Groundfish Plan Team
would combine the remaining rockfish
species in the pelagic shelf rockfish
complex (yellowtail and widow) with
the Other Slope Rockfish complex and
rename the complex ‘‘Gulf of Alaska
Other Rockfish.’’ If the Council moves
forward with this action, the three
primary species of the Rockfish Program
would then be Pacific ocean perch,
northern rockfish, and dusky rockfish. If
approved by the Secretary, NMFS
would change every occurrence of
‘‘pelagic shelf rockfish’’ that appears in
the Rockfish Program regulations and
tables to ‘‘dusky rockfish.’’
NMFS anticipates this new
arrangement would not have an impact
on the Rockfish Program. If this
recommendation would have been
established in the 2011 season,
removing yellowtail and widow rockfish
from the complex and adopting a TAC
based only on dusky rockfish would
have resulted in a reduction of 91 mt to
the pelagic shelf rockfish. This
reduction is minimal relative to the
overall 2011 pelagic shelf rockfish TAC
of 4,754 mt.
Eligibility for Harvesters
Eligibility to receive QS would be
based on the history of legal landings of
rockfish primary species in the Central
GOA associated with an LLP license. A
person would be eligible to receive QS
under the Rockfish Program if (1) that
person held a permanent, fully
transferable LLP license endorsed for
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52155
Central GOA groundfish with a trawl
designation at the time of application;
(2) a vessel made legal landings of
rockfish primary species under the
authority of that LLP license during a
specific time period; and (3) that person
submitted a timely application that is
subsequently approved by NMFS. A
timely application would include a
complete application for rockfish QS
that is received by NMFS not later than
5 p.m. on January 3, 2012, or
postmarked by that date. The
application process and specific
components required in the application
are detailed under Application and
Appeal Process below.
The amount of QS allocated to an LLP
license would be based on the catch
history associated with the LLP licenses
held by that person at the time of
application.
In addition, LLP license holders who
would be eligible for rockfish QS could
choose to be excluded from the Rockfish
Program and not receive rockfish QS.
These LLP license holders would be
exempted from specific sideboard
limitations applicable to LLP licenses
that participate in the program. See
‘‘Exclusion from the Rockfish Program’’
for more information.
Legal Landings
NMFS would assign QS to an LLP
license if legal landings of rockfish were
made under the authority of an LLP
license for any of the rockfish primary
species during the directed fishing
seasons described in Tables 2 and 3 of
this preamble. A legal landing would
include fish caught, retained, and
reported in compliance with State and
Federal regulations in effect at the time
of landing. For catcher vessels, a legal
landing would include the harvest of
rockfish primary species from the
Central GOA regulatory area that was
offloaded and recorded on a State fish
ticket during the directed fishing season
for that rockfish primary fishery. For
catcher/processors, a legal landing
would include the harvest of groundfish
from the Central GOA regulatory area
that is recorded on NMFS weekly
production reports (WPRs) during the
directed fishing season for the
applicable rockfish primary fisheries.
The LLP was effective on January 1,
2000 (63 FR 52642); however, NMFS
did not track the use of an LLP license
on a specific vessel during the 2000 and
2001 calendar years, which are two of
the qualifying years for the Rockfish
Program. Therefore, NMFS would create
a presumption that legal landings for
2000 to 2001 were made under authority
of the LLP license that was used aboard
the same vessel whose history was the
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52156
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
basis for the LLP issuance in 2000 at the
start of the program (the ‘‘original
qualifying vessel’’). In order to refute
that presumption an applicant for QS
would be required to submit written
documentation to NMFS for review
during the application process to
establish otherwise.
Under the LLP program, multiple LLP
licenses can be used on a vessel.
Therefore, landings made by a vessel
could have been assigned to more than
one LLP license. If the same LLP holder
or the holders of more than one LLP
claims the same landing and would like
the resulting QS to be assigned to more
than one LLP license, then NMFS would
credit each LLP license with that
landing. NMFS would credit landings
assigned to more than one LLP license
in another manner only if the applicants
could provide written documentation of
an agreement among the LLP license
holders establishing an alternative
means for distributing the landing
credit. This written documentation
would have to be provided to NMFS for
review during the application process.
Based on experience with the Pilot
Program, NMFS anticipates very few
landings would be claimed for more
than one LLP license.
Qualifying Years
The Council recommended two
different methodologies for determining
the amount of rockfish QS assigned to
an LLP license, depending on the
specific fisheries in which an LLP
license holder participated. For most
LLP license holders, QS would be
assigned based on rockfish legal
landings made during the rockfish
primary fisheries during 2000 through
2006. LLP license holders eligible to
receive rockfish QS based on legal
landings from 2000 through 2006
represent those participants active in
the Central GOA rockfish fisheries from
the implementation of the LLP through
2006, the last year before the Pilot
Program was implemented. The Council
recommended these years as best
representative of historic and recent
fishery participation, after analysis of a
range of qualifying years from 1996
through 2006.
A smaller set of LLP license holders
would qualify to receive QS based on
participation in the entry level trawl
fishery during 2007, 2008, or 2009. LLP
license holders would be eligible to
receive rockfish QS if they demonstrate
participation in the Central GOA entry
level trawl fishery during the first 3
years of the Pilot Program (1996, 1997,
1998) and prior to the Council’s final
action (2007, 2008, or 2009). This
eligibility would be based on landings
data that are retained by NMFS. After
reviewing a range of options to either
maintain the existing entry level trawl
fishery, or choose alternative methods to
assign rockfish QS, the Council
recommended assigning rockfish QS to
LLPs held by entry level trawl fishery
participants to ensure that those
participants benefit from catch share
management. Assigning QS would also
reduce the need to establish and manage
a separate ‘‘race for fish’’ fishery that
could be exceeded, or remain closed if
the potential fishing effort in the fishery
would likely exceed the limited
allocation available to the fishery.
The following sections describe these
two methods for determining the
amount of rockfish QS assigned to an
LLP license and the rationale supporting
those allocation methods.
Assigning QS to LLP Licenses Used
During 2000 Through 2006
NMFS would assign rockfish QS
based on legal landings made under the
authority of an LLP license for the
directed fishing season dates for each of
the rockfish primary species presented
in Table 2.
TABLE 2—SEASON DATES IN EACH YEAR FOR LEGAL LANDINGS OF ROCKFISH PRIMARY SPECIES FISHERIES UNDER THE
ROCKFISH PROGRAM
A rockfish legal landing includes
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
July 1–July
23 and Oct.
1–Oct. 21.
July 30 and
Oct. 28, respectively.
July 1–July
23 and Oct.
1–Oct. 21.
June 30–July
21.
June 29–July
29.
July 4–July
25.
July 5–July
24.
July 1–July
21.
July 28 ..........
Aug. 5 ...........
Aug. 1 ...........
July 31 ..........
July 28.
June 30–July
21.
June 29–July
31.
July 4–July
25.
July 4–July
26.
Pelagic shelf rockfish that
were harvested in the
Central GOA between.
July 4–July
26.
and landed by ......................
Aug. 2 ...........
July 30 and
Oct. 28, respectively.
July 28 ..........
Aug. 7 ...........
Aug. 1 ...........
Pacific ocean perch that
were harvested in the
Central GOA between.
July 4–July
15.
July 1–July
12.
June 30–July
8.
June 29–July
8.
July 4–July
12.
July 5–July
July 1–July
24, Sept. 1,
21 and Oct.
Sept 4, and
2–Oct. 8.
Sept. 8–
Sept. 10.
July 31, Sept. July 28 and
11, and
Oct. 15, reSept. 17,
spectively.
respectively.
July 5–July
July 1–July 6.
14.
and landed by ......................
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Northern rockfish that were
harvested in the Central
GOA between.
and landed by ......................
July 22 ..........
July 19 ..........
July 15 ..........
July 15 ..........
July 19 ..........
July 21 ..........
Aug. 2 ...........
As shown in Table 2, NMFS would
consider legal landings for QS if the
harvests were made when the directed
fishing season was open and the
landings were reported within 7 days
after the end of the season. This 7-day
extension would accommodate
harvesters that caught rockfish during
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:20 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
the directed fishing season but were not
able to deliver that catch until after the
season ended. Several days may be
required for a harvesting vessel to reach
processing facilities after the end of a
season, and the 7-day extension would
accommodate those harvesters.
Additionally, this 7-day period would
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
July 13.
accommodate catcher/processors that
submitted WPRs in a timely manner.
Because the WPR is required on a
weekly basis, the season could have
ended before the WPR submission
deadline had been reached. A 7-day
period after the end of the directed
fishing season to report landings would
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
accommodate catcher/processors
submitting WPRs.
For each fully transferable LLP license
under which a rockfish legal landing
was made for one or more rockfish
primary species during the season dates
described in Table 2, NMFS would
calculate the QS for each of the three
rockfish primary species using the
following procedures.
First, NMFS would sum the legal
landings of each rockfish primary
species for each year from 2000 through
2006, including years with zero pounds,
during the fishery seasons listed in
Table 2.
Second, NMFS would sum the 5 years
with highest poundage of legal landings
for that LLP license for that rockfish
primary species (referred to as the
highest 5 years for that LLP license).
The highest 5 years could vary for each
of the three rockfish primary species.
This amount would yield the QS that
would be issued for that LLP license in
QS units. As with other catch share
programs (e.g., Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands (BSAI) Crab Rationalization
Program), NMFS would assign rockfish
QS using a subset of qualifying years to
accommodate the variability in fishing
patterns that may occur annually due to
a range of factors. Using a subset of
years would accommodate conditions
that could adversely affect overall
harvests, such as illness, mechanical
problems, poor market conditions, or
other factors. Using a subset of the years
would allow NMFS to consider these
factors without undertaking the
administratively complicated task of
reviewing specific landing records for
each vessel and LLP license holder and
determining if specific landings should
or should not be included based on
specific criteria.
Third, NMFS would sum the highest
5 years for each rockfish primary
species for each LLP license qualified to
receive rockfish QS based on rockfish
legal landings for all LLP licenses
receiving rockfish QS based on landings
from 2000 through 2006. The result is
the sum of all highest 5 years for each
rockfish primary species.
Catcher/Processor QS. An LLP license
endorsed for Central GOA groundfish
fisheries with a catcher/processor trawl
designation would be assigned rockfish
QS to participate in the catcher/
processor sector based on any rockfish
legal landings of primary species that
were harvested by and processed aboard
the vessel designated on the LLP license
during the qualifying periods.
NMFS would determine the amount
of QS units for a rockfish primary
species that would be assigned to the
catcher/processor sector. NMFS would
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
determine the percentage of legal
landings in the highest 5 years for the
LLP license used to calculate the QS
assigned to the catcher/processor sector
and would multiply the QS units for
that license by this percentage. This
yields the QS units that would be
assigned to the catcher/processor sector
for that LLP license. The total amount
of QS assigned to the catcher/processor
sector would be equal to the sum of all
QS units assigned to all eligible rockfish
harvesters in the catcher/processor
sector.
The Council recommended that
NMFS assign rockfish QS to the catcher/
processor sector based on legal landings
that were harvested at sea and processed
onboard a vessel. The Council wanted to
ensure that rockfish QS could be
processed at sea only if the underlying
legal landings that gave rise to that QS
were harvested and processed at sea.
Allocation of rockfish QS to the catcher/
processor sector based on the
designation on the LLP license alone
would create the potential for
allocations of rockfish QS based on
landings that were not harvested and
processed at sea.
Each year, the holder of a catcher/
processor designated LLP license with
QS could decide to opt-out of
participating in a rockfish cooperative.
Participants that choose to ‘‘opt-out’’
forgo the opportunity to fish rockfish
primary species. CQ derived from the
QS of LLP license holders that decide to
‘‘opt-out’’ would be reallocated to
cooperatives within the catcher
processor sector.
Catcher vessel QS. An LLP license
endorsed for Central GOA groundfish
fisheries with a trawl designation with
rockfish legal landings that were not
processed at sea would be assigned
rockfish QS for the catcher vessel sector.
The allocation would be based on any
legal landings of primary species that
were harvested aboard the vessel from
which that LLP license was derived or
used during the qualifying periods. The
total amount of QS units assigned to the
catcher vessel sector would be equal to
the sum of all QS units assigned to all
eligible rockfish harvesters in the
catcher vessel sector.
If landings were made on a vessel
assigned an LLP license with a catcher/
processor designation, but the rockfish
primary species legally landed by that
vessel were not caught and processed
onboard that vessel, NMFS would
assign any QS resulting from those legal
landings to the catcher vessel sector.
Based on an initial review of rockfish
legal landings data, NMFS does not
anticipate any such allocations of
rockfish QS.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52157
Allocation of Rockfish QS from an
interim LLP license. NMFS would assign
rockfish legal landings and any resulting
rockfish QS only to permanent and fully
transferable LLP licenses, with one
exception. NMFS would assign rockfish
legal landings that were made under the
authority of an interim LLP license
endorsed for Central GOA groundfish
with a trawl gear designation during the
season dates for the rockfish primary
species, as described in Table 2 of this
preamble, provided that (1) NMFS has
determined that the interim LLP license
is ineligible to receive a designation as
a permanent LLP license endorsed for
Central GOA groundfish with a trawl
gear designation; and (2) a permanent
fully transferable LLP license endorsed
for Central GOA groundfish with a trawl
gear designation was assigned to the
vessel that made legal rockfish landings
under the authority of an interim LLP
license endorsed for Central GOA
groundfish prior to December 31, 2003,
and was continuously assigned to that
vessel through June 14, 2010.
The Council recommended this
specific exemption to provide an
opportunity for persons who were active
in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries
but who did not receive a permanent
fully transferable LLP license to be
eligible to receive rockfish QS provided
they demonstrate a clear intent to
remain active in the fishery. This
particular exemption would apply only
to a person who: (1) Held an interim
LLP license that was determined to be
invalid by NMFS prior to December 31,
2003; and (2) assigned a different
permanent LLP license to the same
vessel that made the rockfish legal
landings prior to December 31, 2003;
and (3) maintained the permanent LLP
license on that vessel until at least June
14, 2010. The Council recommended
this provision and the December 31,
2003, deadline based on data that
demonstrated that at least two LLP
license holders had been active in the
Central GOA rockfish fisheries with an
interim LLP license prior to December
31, 2003, but subsequently purchased a
fully transferable LLP license before
December 31, 2003. This provision
would ensure that LLP license holders
who demonstrated participation in the
Central GOA rockfish fisheries during
the qualifying period would continue to
be eligible to receive rockfish QS from
rockfish legal landings made under the
authority of the interim LLP licenses.
The Council also wanted to ensure that
any permanent LLP license was
continuously maintained on that vessel
from the time it replaced the interim
LLP license until the date of final
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52158
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Council action (June 14, 2010) on the
Rockfish Program. The Council
recommended this requirement to
ensure that an LLP license holder was
continuously active in the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries with the permanent
LLP license and did not reassign that
LLP license to another vessel while the
Rockfish Program was being developed
by the Council.
This proposed rule would, assign
rockfish legal landings made under the
authority of an interim LLP license to
the permanent fully transferable LLP
license assigned to that vessel. NMFS
would not assign any rockfish legal
landings to the permanent fully
transferable LLP license based on
fishing conducted under the authority of
the permanent fully transferable LLP
license before it was assigned to the
vessel. This method would ensure that
the Council’s intent that rockfish legal
landings made during the same time
period from more than one LLP license
would not be assigned rockfish QS.
Effectively, a person holding the
permanent fully transferable LLP license
could receive rockfish QS for rockfish
legal landings made prior to the
assignment of a permanent LLP license
to the vessel that made those landings,
and rockfish QS based on rockfish legal
landings that were made under the
authority of the permanent LLP license
after it was transferred to the vessel.
Rationale for assigning Rockfish QS
based on rockfish legal landings from
2000 through 2006. During the
development of the Rockfish Program,
the Council considered a range of years
that could be used to determine the
appropriate allocation of rockfish QS to
the eligible LLP license holders.
Originally, the Pilot Program assigned
rockfish legal landings and rockfish QS
based on the specific guidance provided
in Section 802:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
SEC. 802. GULF OF ALASKA ROCKFISH
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM. The
Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with
the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council, shall establish a pilot program that
recognizes the historic participation of
fishing vessels (1996 to 2002, best 5 of 7
years) and historic participation of fish
processors (1996 to 2000, best 4 of 5 years)
for Pacific ocean perch, northern rockfish,
and pelagic shelf rockfish harvested in
Central Gulf of Alaska. * * *
The specific guidance that Congress
provided limited the suite of years that
the Council could consider in the
development of the Pilot Program.
Section 802, however, did not preclude
the Council from considering additional
qualifying periods once the Pilot
Program expired. Moreover, nothing in
Section 802 or the regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
implementing the Pilot Program
indicates that the Council or NMFS
should or must consider or adopt the
qualifying years of 1996 through 2002
when developing the Rockfish Program.
Therefore, the Council examined a
broad range of years from the first year
identified in section 802 (1996) through
the last year prior to the implementation
of the Pilot Program (2006). The Council
looked at but rejected harvest during the
Pilot Program (2007 through 2011)
because the analysis showed harvests
under the Pilot Program cooperatives
and limited access fishery were made
under a combination of CQ and limited
access fishing that were based on a
combination of cooperative contract
provisions and a race for fish in the
limited access fishery that are not
reflective of the harvest patterns the
analysis shows likely would have
occurred in the absence of the Pilot
Program.
The Council considered both historic
and recent participation in the rockfish
fisheries when recommending the
appropriate qualifying years for
assigning rockfish legal landings. In
balancing the interests of historic and
recent participants, the Council
considered fishing patterns over the
11-year period from 1996 through 2006.
Several general patterns emerged in the
Council’s review that is described in
detail in section 2.3.1 of the Analysis
(see ADDRESSES). Participation in the
rockfish fisheries by catcher/processor
vessels has decreased substantially
since 1999. From 1996 through 1999, 8
to 15 catcher/processor vessels
harvested fish in the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries annually, and from
2000 through 2006, 5 to 7 catcher/
processor vessels were active in the
fishery annually. The stable
participation of catcher/processor
vessels since 2000 indicates that more
recent fishing patterns may better reflect
dependence and consistent
participation in the fishery. A more
stable pattern is evident in the catcher
vessel fleet. From 1996 through 1999, 26
to 32 catcher vessels retained catch in
the Central GOA rockfish fisheries
annually, and from 2000 through 2006,
25 to 33 catcher vessels were active in
the fisheries annually. Section 2.3.1 of
the Analysis also notes that the
proportion of catch retained by catcher
vessels generally increased after 2000.
The Council also considered the
effects of allocating rockfish QS based
on legal landings prior to the
implementation of the LLP in 2000.
Rockfish legal landings prior to 2000
were made under a different
management regime than management
under the LLP. The LLP limited
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
potential increased effort in the Central
GOA. Catch patterns prior to the
implementation of the LLP are not
indicative of more recent catch patterns.
The Council also considered whether
catch in 1996 through 1999
characterizes historic and recent
participation given the observed
changes in fishing patterns and
management since 2000. The Council
noted that using rockfish legal landings
from 2000 through 2006 would include
3 of the 7 years used in the allocation
of rockfish QS under the Pilot Program,
yet would also consider more recent
fishery participation patterns from 2003
through 2006.
The Council also considered the
potential effects of modifying the
qualifying years from 1996 through 2002
on current rockfish Pilot Program QS
holders. The Council noted that the
Pilot Program was a 5-year program.
Congress initially established the Pilot
Program as a 2-year program under
section 802 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2004, and
subsequently extended the duration of
the Pilot Program to 5 years under
section 218 of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2007. Given the
clear expiration dates for the Pilot
Program established by Congress, LLP
license holders should have reasonably
assumed that the Council could set
rockfish QS allocations under the
Rockfish Program that could differ from
those Congress established for the Pilot
Program. In fact, the Council
consistently considered a range of
reasonable alternative qualifying years
other than 1996 through 2002 while
developing the Rockfish Program. The
Council noted throughout the
development of the Rockfish Program
that, given the limited duration of the
Pilot Program established by Congress,
the qualifying years used to allocate
rockfish QS were subject to change. The
Council received public testimony
through extensive hearings for
consideration in determining the
qualifying years during the deliberation
process.
Given the observed changes in fishing
patterns by catcher/processor vessels
beginning in 2000, the changes in
management of the fishery with the
implementation of the LLP in 2000, and
the consideration of both historic and
more recent fishing patterns, the
Council selected the qualifying years of
2000 through 2006.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52159
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Assigning QS to LLP Licenses Used
During the Rockfish Entry Level Trawl
Fishery During 2007, 2008, or 2009
The second method proposed for
assigning rockfish QS to LLP licenses is
based on the use of an LLP license in
the entry level trawl fishery during any
of the first 3 years of the Pilot Program;
2007, 2008, or 2009. The Council
recommended a specific method to
assign rockfish QS based on the number
of years that the LLP license was
assigned to a vessel that made a rockfish
legal landing in the entry level trawl
fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 during
directed fishing season dates for each of
the rockfish primary species presented
in Table 3. NMFS notes that because
only catcher vessels were eligible to
participate in the entry level trawl
fishery, the rockfish QS assigned to an
eligible LLP license is designated as
catcher vessel QS.
TABLE 3—SEASON DATES IN EACH YEAR FOR LEGAL LANDINGS OF ROCKFISH PRIMARY SPECIES FISHERIES UNDER THE
ENTRY LEVEL TRAWL FISHERY
A rockfish legal landing includes . . .
2007
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Northern rockfish that were harvested by vessels authorized to fish in the rockfish entry level trawl fishery between . . .
and landed by . . .
Pelagic shelf rockfish that were harvested by vessels authorized to fish in the
rockfish entry level trawl fishery between . . .
and landed by . . .
Pacific ocean perch that were harvested by vessels authorized to fish in the
rockfish entry level trawl fishery between . . .
and landed by . . .
As shown in Table 3, NMFS would
consider legal landings for QS if the
harvests were made when the directed
fishing season was open and the
landings were reported within 7 days
after the end of the season. For each LLP
license that made a rockfish legal
landing for one or more rockfish
primary species during the season dates
established in Table 3, NMFS would
calculate the QS for each of the three
rockfish primary species for each fully
transferable LLP license held by an
eligible rockfish harvester using the
following procedures.
First, NMFS would assign one
Rockfish Landing Unit to an LLP license
for each year a legal landing of any
rockfish primary species was made
under the authority of an LLP license
during the season dates for the entry
level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or
2009 as established in Table 3 of this
preamble. This would yield the
Rockfish Landing Units for that LLP
license.
Second, NMFS would sum the
Rockfish Landing Units of all eligible
LLP licenses.
Third, NMFS would divide the
Rockfish Landing Units for an LLP
license by the sum of all Rockfish
Landing Units of all LLP licenses. This
calculation would result in the
Percentage of the Total Entry Level
Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS
pool that would be assigned to that LLP
license.
Fourth, NMFS would determine the
Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pool for each
rockfish primary species. NMFS would
divide the sum of all highest 5 years for
each rockfish primary species that was
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:13 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
2008
Sept.1–Nov. 8 .......
Sept.1–Nov. 15 .....
Sept.1–Nov. 15.
Nov. 15 .................
July 4–July 25 .......
Nov. 22 .................
July 5–July 24 .......
Nov. 22.
July 1–July 21.
Aug 1 ....................
July 4–July 12 .......
July 31 ..................
July 5–July 14 .......
July 28.
July 1–July 6.
July 19 ..................
July 21 ..................
July 13.
calculated for the LLP licenses receiving
rockfish QS based on rockfish legal
landings from 2000 through 2006,
divide that amount by 97.5 percent, and
then subtract the sum of the highest 5
years for that rockfish primary species.
This calculation would yield the Total
Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition
Rockfish QS pool for that rockfish
primary species. This calculation is
summarized in the calculation below. In
this equation ‘‘s’’ represents the rockfish
primary species.
(è All Highest Five Yearss/0.975) ¥ è
All Highest Five Yearss = Total
Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pools
This calculation ensures that 2.5
percent of the total rockfish QS pool for
each rockfish primary species is
established as a QS pool that would
then be apportioned to each LLP license
holder based on the number of years
that the LLP license holder made a
rockfish legal landing during the
directed fishery season as defined in
Table 3 of this preamble. This is
consistent with the 2.5 percent of the
combined TAC for the three rockfish
fisheries assigned to trawl catcher
vessels in the entry level fishery.
Fifth, NMFS would assign a portion of
the Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pool to each
LLP license holder by multiplying the
Percentage of the Total Entry Level
Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS
pool for each LLP license, by the Total
Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition
Rockfish QS pool for each rockfish
primary species. This would yield the
number of rockfish QS units for that
LLP license for that rockfish primary
species.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
2009
Rationale for assigning Rockfish QS
based on rockfish legal landings in
2007, 2008, or 2009. NMFS noted
throughout the development of the Pilot
Program that the small allocations of
TAC that were likely to be available to
trawl catcher vessels could preclude the
ability for NMFS to open the fishery if
fishery effort was likely to exceed the
allocation available. This concern was
noted in the response to public
comment section of the final rule
implementing the Pilot Program.
NMFS’ ability to open an entry level
fishery would only be curtailed if large
numbers of participants with sufficient
harvest capacity register to fish for the
fishery. Under alternative methods of
management (i.e., IFQ fishing), small
allocations may be more manageable,
however, the entry level fishery was designed
to provide an opportunity to persons not
otherwise eligible for the Program, and not to
institute complex quota-based management
for a small amount of TAC for a two-year
Program. NMFS does not anticipate that large
numbers of participants will choose to
participate in the entry level fishery due to
the small amount of TAC available for
harvest. (71 FR 67228; November 20, 2006).
Under the Pilot Program, NMFS
assigned TAC of northern rockfish,
pelagic shelf rockfish, and Pacific ocean
perch to the entry level fishery so that
50 percent (or 2.5 percent of the
combined TAC for the three rockfish
fisheries) was assigned to trawl catcher
vessels and 50 percent (2.5 percent of
the combined TAC for the three rockfish
fisheries) was assigned for longline
catcher vessels. Historically, Pacific
ocean perch has been harvested almost
exclusively with trawl gear. Northern
rockfish and pelagic shelf rockfish have
been harvested by longline vessels to a
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52160
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
limited degree. Rather than allocate
Pacific ocean perch equally between the
trawl and longline vessels, resulting in
Pacific ocean perch remaining
unharvested by longline vessels, NMFS
allocated Pacific ocean perch to entry
level trawl vessels first. NMFS allocated
any remaining pounds up to the
combined 2.5 percent TAC for the three
rockfish species from the TAC that
would be assigned to northern rockfish
and pelagic shelf rockfish. NMFS made
unharvested northern rockfish, pelagic
shelf rockfish, or Pacific ocean perch
available for harvest by trawl and
longline on September 1. Any
unharvested rockfish in either the
longline or trawl gear allocations could
be harvested by trawl and longline
vessels beginning September 1.
During the Pilot Program, NMFS staff
and entry level trawl fishery
participants continued to express
concerns about the potential for more
than a limited number of participants to
register for, and participate in, the entry
level trawl fishery. Given the small
amount of TAC assigned to the entry
level trawl fishery (e.g., approximately
400 mt in 2010), if more than two or
three vessels participated in the fishery,
NMFS may need to close the fishery as
a precautionary measure to avoid
exceeding the entry level trawl
allocation. Given these concerns, the
Council recommended eliminating the
entry level trawl fishery, yet providing
an opportunity for those LLP license
holders to receive rockfish QS for their
participation in the years prior to the
Council’s final action in June 2010 (e.g.,
2007, 2008, or 2009). Allocating rockfish
QS to participants in the entry level
trawl fishery would recognize the
participation of entry level trawl
participants and ensure that those
participants received the benefits of
catch share management (e.g., avoid a
competitive and potentially wasteful
race for fish, tailor fishing operations to
specific catch limits to improve
economic efficiency, and have the
ability and incentive to adopt fishing
practices with reduced bycatch).
The Council considered a variety of
alternative methods to assign rockfish
QS to entry level trawl participants.
Through public testimony, the Council
was made aware of some specific
concerns and complexities that could
arise if rockfish QS were allocated based
on the amount of rockfish legal landings
during 2007, 2008, and 2009. In all
these years, the entry level fishery
received an allocation of 5 percent of
the Pacific ocean perch available to the
Pilot Program or 346 mt per year in 2007
and 2008, and 339 mt in 2009. No
allocation of northern rockfish or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
pelagic shelf rockfish was made to the
trawl entry level fishery. Perhaps most
problematic is a pending enforcement
investigation concerning all catches
from the fishery in 2008. At the extreme,
the investigation could result in most
catches from the 2008 entry level trawl
fishery being determined to have been
illegal, which would prevent their
consideration for determining rockfish
QS allocations under the Rockfish
Program.
Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis (see
ADDRESSES) notes that assigning rockfish
QS to the trawl sector based on rockfish
legal landings during 2007, 2008, or
2009, could result in some LLP licenses
receiving a relatively large amount of
rockfish QS compared to the total
amount of rockfish QS issued to the
catcher vessel sector. Under one
allocation scenario considered, one LLP
license could have received an
allocation of Pacific ocean perch QS
equal to roughly 10 percent of the
available catcher vessel Pacific ocean
perch QS. On the other hand, it is
possible that an entry level participant
could receive a very small allocation of
northern rockfish or pelagic shelf
rockfish QS, if that entry level
participant recorded little or no
landings of those species.
The Council considered an alternative
approach to allocating rockfish QS to
ensure that the initial allocation of
rockfish QS more closely aligned with
the years of participation in the entry
level fishery rather than total catches,
and to address concerns raised about the
potential uncertainty about the legality
of including catches from 2008 to
allocate rockfish QS. Under the
alternative approach, the Council
considered assigning from 1.5 to 5
percent of the total rockfish QS to entry
level trawl participants. This rockfish
QS would be assigned to LLP licenses
based on the proportion of the total
number of years that rockfish legal
landings were made under authority of
the LLP licenses during 2007, 2008, or
2009. The Council ultimately chose to
allocate 2.5 percent of the total rockfish
QS to entry level trawl participants that
apply for QS. This allocation is
consistent with the proportion of the
TAC that was initially assigned to entry
level trawl vessels during the Pilot
Program.
The Official Rockfish Program Record
NMFS would determine the amount
of an eligible applicant’s QS, or a
person’s eligibility as a processor, based
on a review of the Official Rockfish
Program Record (Official Record).
NMFS would produce the Official
Record from the best available data
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
including State fish tickets, NMFS
WPRs, and other relevant information.
NMFS would presume the Official
Record is correct and an applicant
would have the burden of establishing
otherwise through an evidentiary
appeals process.
Exclusion From the Rockfish Program
The Council recommended a specific
provision to allow an eligible LLP
license holder to choose to be excluded
permanently from the Rockfish Program
and not receive rockfish QS. An LLP
license holder eligible for this exclusion
would be one who would qualify for
rockfish legal landings made under the
authority of an LLP license both during
2000 through 2006 and in the entry
level trawl fishery during 2007, 2008, or
2009. If the LLP license were excluded
from receiving rockfish QS, it would be
exempted from specific sideboard limits
that would otherwise apply to that LLP
license.
The Council recommended this
specific provision to recognize a
situation in which a limited number of
LLP licenses, possibly no more than one
LLP license based on a review of the
available information, had limited
participation in Central GOA rockfish
fisheries during 2000 through 2006, and
during the entry level trawl fishery in
2007, 2008, or 2009. This license had
also participated in rockfish fisheries in
the West Yakutat District or the Western
GOA in recent years. The one LLP
license holder who had participated in
the Central GOA rockfish fisheries
during this time period testified that
given the limited allocation of rockfish
QS that would likely result from the
Rockfish legal landings associated with
that LLP license, the LLP license holder
would prefer to have the option to
forego an allocation of rockfish QS in
order to continue to participate in the
West Yakutat District and Western GOA
rockfish fisheries consistent with recent
participation patterns. NMFS would
require that an LLP license holder
submit an application for rockfish QS
affirming their exclusion from the
Rockfish Program and permanently
forgo their rockfish QS. This
requirement would ensure that an LLP
license holder would have a one-time
limited opportunity to be excluded from
the Rockfish Program consistent with
the Council’s clear intent to provide a
limited timeframe in which to seek an
exclusion.
Application and Appeal Process
To receive rockfish QS, a potentially
eligible LLP license holder must submit
an application to participate in the
Rockfish Program that is received by
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
NMFS by 5 p.m. on January 3, 2012, or
postmarked by that date. The
application form would be available on
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Interested persons could contact NMFS
to request an application package.
Further and based on the official record,
NMFS would mail an application
package to all potentially eligible LLP
license holders based on the address on
record at the time the application period
opens. An application could be
submitted by mail, fax, or hand
delivery. The proposed regulatory text
(see § 679.81(f)) provides addresses and
delivery locations. NMFS would
determine if an application received by
hand delivery or carrier is timely based
on the receiving date of signature by
NMFS staff. If the application is
submitted by facsimile, the receiving
date of the application is the date
stamped received by NMFS. NMFS
would not consider an application to
have been received by the deadline if
the applicant cannot provide objective
written evidence that NMFS Alaska
Region received it. Objective written
evidence of timely application (e.g., fax
confirmation sheet, registered mail
receipt) would be considered as proof of
a timely application. This proposed
regulation would serve to stress for
participants that proof of filing should
be maintained. Applicants who keep
records of filing would effectively
resolve any dispute prior to an
administrative finding that an
application was not filed. Adopting a
practice of maintaining records of filings
would aid applicants should NMFS
dispute the timely filing of an
application. Any application that is
submitted by mail and postmarked, or
submitted by hand delivery or fax, after
the last day of the application period
will be denied.
NMFS would require an application
to participate in the Rockfish Program,
or to be excluded, for potentially
eligible processors and harvesters.
Briefly, the application would contain
the following elements:
• Identification and contact
information for the applicant;
• Harvester information, including
vessel identification and LLP licenses
used on a vessel;
• Whether the applicant wishes to
receive rockfish QS based on rockfish
legal landings from 2000 through 2006,
or during the entry level trawl fishery in
2007, 2008, or 2009, if eligible for both;
• If an applicant is choosing to
exclude an LLP license from the
Rockfish Program;
• Any other information deemed
necessary by NMFS. NMFS may request
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
additional information to clarify the
application and determine if an
applicant’s LLP license is qualified to
receive QS, or if an applicant is an
eligible rockfish processor; and
• The applicant’s signature and
certification.
NMFS would evaluate applications
submitted during the specified
application period and compare all
claims in an application with the
information in the Official Record.
NMFS would accept claims in an
application it determines to be
consistent with information in the
Official Record. NMFS would not accept
inconsistent claims in the applications,
unless verified by documentation. An
applicant who submits inconsistent
claims, or an applicant who fails to
submit information supporting his or
her claims with their application, would
be provided a single 30-day evidentiary
period to submit the specified
information, submit evidence to verify
his or her inconsistent claims, or submit
a revised application with claims
consistent with information in the
Official Record. An applicant who
submits claims that are inconsistent
with information in the Official Record
would have the burden of proving that
the submitted claims are correct.
NMFS would evaluate additional
information or evidence to support an
applicant’s inconsistent claims
submitted prior to or within the 30-day
evidentiary period. If NMFS were to
determine that the additional
information or evidence met the
applicant’s burden of proving that the
inconsistent claims in his or her
application were correct, NMFS would
amend the Official Record with that
information or evidence. NMFS would
use this information or evidence to
determine the applicant’s eligibility.
However, if NMFS were to determine
that the additional information or
evidence did not meet the applicant’s
burden of proof that the inconsistent
claims in his or her application were
correct, NMFS would deny the
inconsistent claims. NMFS would notify
the applicant that the additional
information or evidence did not meet
the burden of proof to change the
information in the Official Record
through an initial administrative
determination (IAD).
NMFS would prepare and send an
IAD to the applicant following the
expiration of the 30-day evidentiary
period if NMFS were to determine that
the information or evidence provided by
the applicant failed to support the
applicant’s claims and was insufficient
to rebut the presumption that the
Official Record is correct. NMFS’ IAD
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52161
would indicate the deficiencies and
discrepancies in the application, or
revised application, including any
deficiencies in the information, or the
evidence submitted in support of the
information. NMFS’ IAD would indicate
which claims could not be approved
based on the available information or
evidence. An applicant could appeal an
IAD. The appeals process is described
under 50 CFR 679.43. An applicant who
appeals an IAD would not receive
contested landing data until the appeal
was resolved in the applicant’s favor.
If an application is denied by final
agency action, then all rockfish QS that
would have been assigned to that
applicant based on that LLP license
would be redistributed among all other
eligible rockfish harvesters in
proportion to the amount of their
rockfish primary species QS. If an LLP
license holder applied to receive
rockfish QS based on rockfish legal
landings from 2000 through 2006 and
that application is subsequently denied,
NMFS would redistribute any rockfish
QS that would have been assigned to
that LLP license to all other eligible LLP
licenses that applied to receive rockfish
QS based on rockfish legal landings
from 2000 through 2006. Similarly, if an
LLP license holder applied to receive
rockfish QS based on rockfish legal
landings during the entry level trawl
fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009, NMFS
would redistribute any rockfish QS that
would have been assigned to that LLP
license to all other eligible LLP licenses
held by persons who applied to receive
rockfish QS based on rockfish legal
landings during the entry level trawl
fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009. This
redistribution of rockfish QS would
ensure that the total amount of rockfish
QS assigned to LLP licenses eligible to
receive rockfish QS from 2000 through
2006, and during the entry level trawl
fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 is
maintained at a constant proportion of
97.5 percent and 2.5 percent,
respectively. The initial rockfish QS
pool is the sum of the rockfish QS
issued to all eligible LLP licenses.
Transfer of Rockfish QS and Excessive
Share Caps
With one exception, rockfish QS
would not be severable from an LLP
license. The rockfish QS and LLP
license would be subject to the LLP
license transfer under 50 CFR
679.4(k)(7).
The exception recommended by the
Council and proposed in this rule is
intended to ensure that use caps apply
to all persons except initial QS
recipients. The Council recommended
that an LLP license that is initially
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52162
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
assigned an amount of rockfish QS that
exceeds the use caps can be transferred
only if the amount of rockfish QS that
exceeds the rockfish QS use cap is
transferred to another LLP license so the
LLP license would be transferred with a
total amount of QS that is under the use
cap. The excess QS could be transferred
only to an LLP that has already been
assigned rockfish QS of the same sector.
For example, catcher/processor
designated rockfish QS could only be
transferred to an LLP license that is
already assigned catcher/processor
designated rockfish QS. Once the total
amount of rockfish QS assigned to an
LLP license is under the applicable use
cap, it could be transferred under the
LLP license transfer provisions. NMFS
would require that, when transferring
rockfish QS from one LLP license to
another LLP license, the transferor and
transferee submit an application to
NMFS.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Rockfish Cooperatives
Holders of Rockfish QS may annually
choose to be a member of a rockfish
cooperative. The Rockfish Program
would regulate the formation of rockfish
cooperatives and the use of CQ. NMFS
would issue a CQ permit to each
rockfish cooperative that specified how
much CQ it could harvest. This amount
would be based on the sum of the QS
of the cooperative members and any CQ
that the rockfish cooperative
subsequently receives by transfer from
another rockfish cooperative.
The Council provided numerous
recommendations on the specific
requirements to form a rockfish
cooperative under the Rockfish
Program. The Council recommended
carrying over from the Pilot Program
many of the basic administrative
requirements to form a harvesting
cooperative. Provisions for cooperatives
include requiring registration as a U.S.
corporation, meeting the applicable
monitoring and requirements, and
adhering to applicable antitrust
restrictions when undertaking price and
delivery negotiations. These provisions
have been consistently applied in other
North Pacific cooperative programs. The
Council recommended their application
in the proposed Rockfish Program.
The Council did recommend several
key changes in the proposed Rockfish
Program from the Pilot Program. These
include recommendations concerning
(1) the requirements to form a
cooperative, (2) the interests of
traditional shorebased rockfish
processing companies, (3) CQ transfer
requirements, and (4) reporting
requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:20 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
The Council relaxed the requirements
to form a rockfish cooperative. The
Council sought to balance the desire to
encourage cooperative formation and
the flexibility for LLP license holders to
coordinate with whomever they wished.
Ultimately, the Council recommended
there would be no minimum number of
LLP licenses with affixed rockfish QS
required to form a cooperative. The
Council did recommend, however, that
if a cooperative wished to receive CQ by
transfer the CQ would need to be
assigned to a minimum of two LLP
licenses. This limitation would
encourage cooperative formation among
LLP license holders by providing them
greater flexibility to transfer CQ to meet
operational demands.
The Council also recommended
modifying the requirement of the Pilot
Program that LLP license holders with
rockfish QS designated for the catcher
vessel sector form a cooperative only
with the processor to whom a majority
of their catch was delivered during 1996
through 2000. The Council modified
this requirement because the specific
requirement and authority provided in
section 802 will expire with the Pilot
Program, and this specific provision was
not necessary to meet the goals of the
Rockfish Program.
Eligibility for Processors
Unlike the Pilot Program, processors
would not be required to meet historical
eligibility requirements to receive
primary or secondary species fish
harvested by rockfish cooperatives. For
the Rockfish Program, the Council
recommended that a catcher vessel
cooperative can only form if a ‘‘rockfish
processor’’ is an ‘‘associate’’ of the
rockfish cooperative and is designated
on the application for CQ. A rockfish
processor would be any shoreside
processor with a Federal processor
permit that receives groundfish
harvested under the authority of a
rockfish CQ permit. In order to receive
rockfish CQ, that shorebased processor
would also need to be located within
the boundaries of the City of Kodiak and
have an approved CMCP as described in
the ‘‘Monitoring and Enforcement’’
section of this preamble. This
requirement would not limit a catcher
vessel cooperative to only one
processor, and it would not obligate the
cooperative to deliver catch to that
specific processor. The association
requirement only indicates that a
processor may be willing to receive the
catch. A catcher vessel cooperative
could form an association with any
qualified processor, whether old or new,
that meets the requirements to receive
rockfish CQ. The processor is not
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
required to be in business at the
effective date of this rule to qualify to
receive rockfish CQ. The association
between a catcher vessel cooperative
and processor is a requirement and must
be submitted to NMFS by the
cooperative in the application for CQ. A
catcher vessel rockfish cooperative may
not receive rockfish CQ unless a
shoreside processor eligible to receive
rockfish CQ has indicated in the annual
application for CQ that it may be willing
to receive rockfish CQ from that
cooperative. The proposed requirement
would encourage harvesters and
processors to discuss and possibly
coordinate fishing plans as part of the
application process to form a rockfish
cooperative, but without the specific
mandate established under the Pilot
Program. Membership agreements must
specify that processor affiliated
cooperative members cannot participate
in price setting negotiations except as
permitted by antitrust laws.
The Council also sought to address
concerns raised by processors that
allocation of exclusive harvest
privileges would provide an undue
competitive advantage for harvesters
and could reduce the incentive for
harvesters to continue to deliver to the
traditional port of Kodiak. The Council
recommended a requirement that all
primary and rockfish secondary species
CQ in the catcher vessel sector be
delivered to a shorebased processor
operating within the geographic
boundaries of the City of Kodiak. The
port delivery requirement is intended to
protect the fishing community of Kodiak
and the traditional shorebased
processors from changes in the location
of shorebased processing activities that
could occur under the Rockfish
Program. This provision would ensure
that Kodiak processors and the
community continue to benefit from the
fishery. During the 2000 through 2006
period, all catch was delivered within
Kodiak to shorebased processors;
therefore, this provision does not
represent a change from traditional
harvest patterns. This proposed rule
would define the boundaries of the City
of Kodiak using the boundary specified
by the State of Alaska on the date that
a final rule, if approved, were
published. This method for determining
the boundary would ensure that the
specific geographic limits are based on
the official source of municipal
boundaries and that those boundaries
would be established on a specific date
and would not vary over time. Changes
in municipal boundaries could
complicate enforcement of processing
provisions.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
During the development of the
Rockfish Program, the Council reviewed
and considered a range of options to
address concerns raised by shorebased
processors about potential consolidation
of processing capacity under catch share
management and the effects of catch
share allocations on processing
operations. The Council considered
management measures that included the
linkage between shorebased processors
and catcher vessel cooperatives required
under the Pilot Program, regional
landing requirements, allocations of
harvest shares to processors, annual
cooperative/processor linkages (which
may be changed, without penalty or
forfeiture), and caps on the amount of
landings that may be processed by any
single processor. Ultimately, the
Council chose to recommend a specific
landing requirement within the City of
Kodiak and processing caps to preserve
flexibility for harvesters to deliver to
multiple markets. The Council’s
recommendation sought to maintain the
traditional shorebased processing
activity within Kodiak and limit the
consolidation of processing effort among
rockfish processors that could be
detrimental to existing processors and
harvesters.
Overall, the Council’s
recommendations were intended to
meet goals of the Rockfish Program,
which include stabilization of the
processing work force, increasing
shoreside deliveries of rockfish, and
removing of processing conflicts with
GOA salmon production. The Council
did not consider linkages, or allocation
of harvesting quota to processors as
52163
necessary or appropriate to meet the
overall goals the Council established for
the Rockfish Program. The
demonstrated ability of cooperatives to
coordinate with processors under the
Pilot Program would be expected to
continue under the Rockfish Program.
These relationships have reduced
processing capacity conflicts with the
salmon fishery that is active during
summer months, and have provided a
stable processing workforce by ensuring
rockfish deliveries during months when
other fisheries are less active. Section
2.4.6 of the Analysis describes the likely
benefits to processing operations under
the Rockfish Program.
Requirements for Rockfish Cooperatives
Table 4 details the key requirements
of a rockfish cooperative.
TABLE 4—REQUIREMENTS FOR A ROCKFISH COOPERATIVE AND THE LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF CQ BY THE ROCKFISH
COOPERATIVE
Requirement
Catcher/processor
vessel sector
Catcher vessel sector
Only persons who hold rockfish QS may join a rockfish cooperative.
(ii) What is the minimum number of LLP licenses that must be assigned to form a rockfish cooperative?
No minimum requirement.
(iii) Is an association with a rockfish processor
required?
Yes. By a cooperative. A rockfish QS holder
may only be a member of a rockfish cooperative formed in association with a rockfish
processor.
No.
(iv) Is a Rockfish cooperative member required
to deliver catch to the rockfish processor with
whom the rockfish cooperative is formed?
No.
N/A.
(v) Is there a minimum amount of rockfish QS
that must be assigned to a rockfish cooperative for it to be allowed to form?
No.
(vi) What is allocated to the rockfish cooperative?
CQ for rockfish primary species, rockfish secondary species, and rockfish halibut PSC, based
on the rockfish QS assigned to all of the LLP licenses that are assigned to the cooperative.
(vii) Is this CQ an exclusive harvest privilege?
Yes, the members of the rockfish cooperative have an exclusive harvest privilege to collectively catch this CQ, or a cooperative can transfer all or a portion of this CQ to another rockfish
cooperative.
(viii) Is there a season during which designated
vessels may catch CQ?
Yes, any vessel designated to catch CQ for a rockfish cooperative is limited to catching CQ
during the season beginning at 1200 hours, A.l.t. on May 1 through 1200 hours A.l.t. on November 15.
(ix) Can any vessel catch a rockfish cooperative’s CQ?
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
(i) Who may join a rockfish cooperative?
No, only vessels that are named on the application for CQ for that rockfish cooperative can
catch the CQ assigned to that rockfish cooperative. A vessel may be assigned to only one
rockfish cooperative in a calendar year.
(x) Can the member of a rockfish cooperative
transfer CQ individually to another rockfish
cooperative without the approval of the other
members of the rockfish cooperative?
No, only the rockfish cooperative’s designated representative, and not individual members,
may transfer its CQ to another rockfish cooperative. Any such transfer must be approved by
NMFS.
(xi) Can a rockfish cooperative in the catcher/
processor sector transfer its sideboard limit?
N/A.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:20 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
No, sideboard limits assigned to a rockfish cooperative in the catcher/processor sector is
a limit applicable to a specific rockfish cooperative, and may not be transferred between rockfish cooperatives.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52164
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—REQUIREMENTS FOR A ROCKFISH COOPERATIVE AND THE LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF CQ BY THE ROCKFISH
COOPERATIVE—Continued
Requirement
Catcher/processor
vessel sector
Catcher vessel sector
No, there is no hired master requirement.
(xiii) Can an LLP license be assigned to more
than one rockfish cooperative in a calendar
year?
No. An LLP license can only be assigned to one rockfish cooperative in a calendar year. A
person holding multiple LLP licenses with associated rockfish QS may assign different LLP licenses to different rockfish cooperatives subject to any other restrictions that may apply.
(xiv) Can a rockfish processor be associated
with more than one rockfish cooperative?
Yes.
(xv) Can an opt-out vessel harvest a rockfish
cooperative’s CQ?
No. An opt-out vessel is any vessel named on
an LLP license with QS that is not assigned
to a rockfish cooperative. Opt-out vessels
cannot harvest rockfish primary species or
rockfish secondary species CQ.
(xvi) Which members may harvest the rock-fish
cooperative’s CQ?
That is determined by the rockfish cooperative
contract signed by its members. Any violations of this contract by one cooperative
member may be subject to private civil
claims by other members of the rockfish cooperative. NMFS will not enforce the cooperative contracts among its members.
(xvii) Does a rockfish cooperative need a contract?
Yes, a rockfish cooperative must have a
membership agreement, or contract, that
specifies how the rockfish cooperative intends to harvest its CQ. A copy of this
agreement or contract must be submitted to
NMFS with the cooperative’s application for
CQ.
(xviii) What happens if the rockfish cooperative
exceeds its CQ amount?
A rockfish cooperative is not authorized to
catch fish in excess of its CQ. Exceeding a
CQ is a violation of the Rockfish Program
regulations. Each member of the rockfish
cooperative is jointly and severally liable for
any violations of the Rockfish Program regulations while fishing under authority of a
CQ permit. This liability extends to any persons who are hired to catch or receive CQ
assigned to a rockfish cooperative. Each
member of a rockfish cooperative is responsible for ensuring that all members of the
rockfish cooperative comply with all regulations applicable to fishing under the Rockfish Program.
(xix) It there a limit on how much CQ a rockfish
cooperative may hold or use?
Yes, see the Use Cap section of the preamble and the proposed regulations for the
provisions that apply.
(xx) Is there a limit on how much CQ a vessel
may harvest?
Yes, see the Use Cap section of the preamble and the proposed regulations for the
provisions that apply.
(xxi) Is there a requirement that a rockfish cooperative pay rockfish cost recovery fees?
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
(xii) Is there a hired master requirement?
Yes, see the Cost Recovery section of the
preamble for the provisions that apply.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
N/A.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
52165
TABLE 4—REQUIREMENTS FOR A ROCKFISH COOPERATIVE AND THE LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF CQ BY THE ROCKFISH
COOPERATIVE—Continued
Catcher/processor
vessel sector
Requirement
Catcher vessel sector
(xxii) If my vessel is fishing in a directed flatfish
fishery in the Central GOA and I catch
groundfish and halibut PSC, does that count
against the rock-fish cooperative’s CQ?
(A) Any vessel fishing under the authority of a
rockfish CQ permit must count any catch of
rockfish primary species, rockfish secondary species, or rockfish halibut PSC
against that rockfish cooperative’s CQ from
May 1 until November 15, or until the effective date of a rockfish cooperative termination of fishing declaration that has been
approved by NMFS.
(B) Groundfish harvests would not be debited
against the rockfish cooperative’s CQ if the
vessel is not fishing under the authority of a
rockfish CQ permit. In this case, any catch
of halibut would be attributed to the halibut
PSC limit for that directed target fishery and
gear type.
(xxiii) Can my rockfish cooperative negotiate
prices for me?
The rockfish cooperatives formed under the
Rockfish Program are intended to conduct
and coordinate harvest activities for their
members. Rockfish cooperatives formed
under the Rockfish Program are subject to
antitrust laws. Collective price negotiation
by a rockfish cooperative must be conducted in accordance with existing antitrust
laws.
(xxiv) Are there any special reporting requirements?
Yes. A rockfish cooperative must submit an
annual rockfish cooperative report to NMFS
by December 15 of each year.
(xxv) What is required in the annual rockfish
cooperative report?
The annual rockfish cooperative report must
include at a minimum:
(A) The rockfish cooperative’s CQ, sideboard
limit (if applicable), and any rockfish
sideboard fishery harvests made by the
vessels in the rockfish cooperative on a
vessel-by- vessel basis;
(B) The rockfish cooperative’s actual retained
and discarded catch of CQ, and sideboard
limit on an area-by-area and vessel-by-vessel basis;
(C) A description of the method used by the
rockfish cooperative to monitor fisheries in
which rockfish cooperative vessels participated;
(D) A description of any private civil actions
taken by the rockfish cooperative in response to any members that exceeded their
allowed catch.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Transfer of CQ
A rockfish cooperative could transfer
rockfish QS to another rockfish
cooperative in the same sector. For
example, a catcher vessel rockfish
cooperative could not transfer CQ to a
rockfish cooperative in the catcher/
processor sector. The Council
recommended this restriction during the
development of the Pilot Program to
addresses concerns about the potential
losses of shorebased processing, as well
as potential employment and tax
revenue if catcher/processor rockfish
cooperatives could receive rockfish
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
harvested with CQ from catcher vessel
rockfish cooperatives that historically
delivered to shoreside processors. The
Council also recommended that a
catcher/processor rockfish cooperative
could not transfer rougheye or
shortraker rockfish CQ to a catcher
vessel rockfish cooperative. Rougheye
and shortraker are managed under a
maximum retainable amount (MRA) for
catcher vessels.
Transfer of CQ would be valid only
during the calendar year of the transfer.
There would be no restrictions on the
number or size of post delivery
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
transfers. All post delivery transfers
would need to be completed by
December 31. Vessels in a cooperative
could not begin a new fishing trip for
that cooperative unless the cooperative
holds unused CQ for all rockfish
primary species and secondary species.
At the end of the calendar year a
cooperative could not have a negative
balance of CQ for any species for which
CQ is assigned.
To standardize the reporting of
information, transfers would have to be
completed using an electronic online
transfer application available on the
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52166
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
NMFS Alaska Region Web site at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. A
rockfish cooperative could only transfer
CQ if:
• The rockfish cooperative identified
the amount and type of CQ transferred
and the rockfish cooperative and
rockfish cooperative member to which
that CQ was transferred. CQ received by
a rockfish cooperative would have to be
attributed to a member of that rockfish
cooperative to apply the use caps. See
Use Caps section for more detail;
• The transfer would not cause the
receiving rockfish cooperative to exceed
its use cap limitations. The rockfish
cooperative would be responsible for
ensuring that any transfer does not
exceed rockfish cooperative use cap
provisions; and
• All information was certified by the
transferor and transferee as true, correct,
and complete.
Participation in a Rockfish Cooperative
or Opt-Out
Each year, an LLP license holder with
rockfish QS would be required to assign
all the QS associated with that LLP
license to a specific rockfish cooperative
to fish for rockfish primary species. A
holder of a designated catcher/processor
LLP license assigned rockfish QS could
decide to opt-out of participating in a
rockfish cooperative on an annual basis.
An LLP license holder could not
assign portions of rockfish QS to
different rockfish cooperatives within
the same sector. Once an LLP license
and its associated QS are assigned for a
year, the LLP license holder could not
reassign the LLP license or QS to a
different cooperative during that year.
The Council limited the LLP license
holder to participating in only one
cooperative per year to ensure that the
catch derived from a specific LLP
license could be reliably tracked and
that the applicable cooperative
management measures related to
monitoring and enforcement, any
voluntary codes of conduct, and the cost
recovery requirements would be met.
Each year, an LLP license holder
would be required to apply to use the
LLP license and its associated QS to
participate in a rockfish cooperative, or
opt-out of participating in rockfish
cooperative. Applications would be
available on the NMFS Web site
https://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov, or
NMFS would mail applications to the
applicant upon request. Applications
would have to be submitted to NMFS by
mail, fax, or hand delivery
(see ADDRESSES). Applications would
have to be submitted by a designated
representative of the cooperative by
March 1 each year. An eligible rockfish
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
harvester could apply to participate in
only one cooperative per year with an
LLP license and its associated QS. The
CQ issued under a NMFS approved
application would be valid for 1 year.
The contents of the specific applications
are described below.
Application for Rockfish CQ
A designated representative of a
rockfish cooperative that submits an
application that is approved by NMFS
would receive a CQ permit. The CQ
permit would contain the rockfish
cooperative’s CQ of rockfish primary
and secondary species and halibut PSC,
based on the collective QS of the LLP
licenses held by the cooperative
members. The CQ permit also would
identify the members of the rockfish
cooperative and the vessels authorized
to harvest the CQ. NMFS would
consider a vessel named on a CQ permit
as actively engaged in fishing the CQ for
that rockfish cooperative and would be
subject to all observers, permitting, and
reporting requirements applicable to
vessels when fishing under the
cooperative’s CQ permit. A rockfish
cooperative would be required to submit
an amended application for CQ to add
or remove a vessel eligible to harvest the
CQ assigned to that cooperative. NMFS
would approve any amendments to the
list of eligible vessels to the application
for CQ unless otherwise prohibited.
NMFS’ issuance of a CQ permit to a
rockfish cooperative, however, would
not be a determination that the rockfish
cooperative was formed or was
operating in compliance with antitrust
laws.
A complete application would be
required to contain the following
information:
• Identification and contact
information of the rockfish cooperative;
• Names of the rockfish cooperative
members, including information on the
LLP licenses assigned to the rockfish
cooperative;
• A copy of the business license and
articles of incorporation or partnership
agreement signed by the rockfish
cooperative members;
• Processor associates of the
cooperative (if a cooperative formed
with catcher vessel designated rockfish
QS), and a requirement that LLP license
holders affiliated with a processor could
not participate in price setting
negotiations except as permitted by
general antitrust law;
• The proposed fishing plan to be
used by members of the cooperative,
including any proposed cooperative
specific monitoring procedures and any
voluntary codes of conduct that would
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
apply to the members of the
cooperative, if applicable; and
• Signature and certification of
applicant(s).
Application to Opt-Out of Rockfish
Cooperatives
An LLP license holder with catcher/
processor designated rockfish QS would
be required to submit an application to
opt-out of participating in a rockfish
cooperative for a fishing year. An
application would include the following
information:
• Identification and contact
information of the eligible rockfish
harvester;
• Information on the LLP license(s)
and vessels that would opt-out; and
• Applicant’s signature and
certification.
Removal of the Limited Access Fishery
The Council recommended
eliminating the limited access fishery
for the catcher vessel sector in the
Rockfish Program because almost all QS
holders joined cooperatives. The very
few QS holders that did not join catcher
vessel cooperatives received very
limited amounts of QS. The amount of
TAC available to the catcher vessel
limited access fishery was very small in
relation to potential harvest capacity
during the Pilot Program and NMFS has
never opened the limited access fishery.
The Council recommended
eliminating the limited access fishery
for the catcher/processor sector in the
Rockfish Program because the Analysis
showed the limited access fishery
created incentives for the catcher/
processor sector to avoid joining a
cooperative. The Central GOA limited
access fishery under the Pilot Program
opened in the beginning of July, and
then closed when participants were
estimated to have fully harvested the
target rockfish allocations in that
fishery. The differences in sideboard
limitations between catcher/processor
cooperatives and the limited access
fishery as well as the management of
shortraker rockfish, and the halibut PSC
mortality allowance may have affected a
participant’s decision to either join a
catcher/processor cooperative or take
part in the limited access fishery. The
Council discussed an alternative that
would keep the limited access fishery in
the Rockfish Program but ease the
management burden with a downward
adjustment of the MRAs to limit the
incentive for participants to target
secondary species and maintain catch at
a level below the allocation. But the
Council also noted that participants
with small allocations of QS could
choose to fish in the limited access
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
fishery and attempt to take a share of the
catch greater than their individual
historical allocation.
Based on the analysis, the Council
recognized that under the Pilot Program
the limited access fishery functioned
more like a cooperative than the way it
was intended to function as a limited
access fishery for individual catcher/
processor participants. A review of the
data showed that many participants
registered for the limited access fishery,
but then consolidated onto a few vessels
in a cooperative-like system. This
system of fishing would not be required
to follow the constraining management
provisions (e.g., sideboard limitations
and secondary species management)
that are intended to apply to
cooperatives. Furthermore, participation
in the limited access fishery could not
be predicted from year to year and the
possibility of a ‘‘race for the fish’’ was
recognized along with concern that the
fishery would exceed the TAC before
the season could be closed. Ultimately
the Council opted to discontinue the
limited access fishery and require
catcher/processors to either join a
cooperative or opt-out.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
TAC Apportionment to an Incidental
Catch Allowance (ICA), Rockfish
Cooperatives, and Entry Level Fishery
Annually, NMFS would determine
the amount of primary species,
secondary species, and halibut PSC that
would be allocated to each fishery based
on the total amount of QS assigned to
each fishery.
Rockfish Primary Species Allocation
NMFS would calculate the amount of
rockfish primary species TAC that
would be assigned to the Rockfish
Program on an annual basis. Before
NMFS would calculate annual
cooperatives allocations for primary
species within the sectors, NMFS would
first deduct the incidental catch
allowance (ICA). The ICA subtracts from
the TAC for that fishery an incidental
catch of rockfish primary species
harvested in fisheries other than the
Rockfish Program. The ICA accounts for
rockfish primary species that are
incidentally harvested in other fisheries
(e.g., trawl flatfish fisheries) and NMFS
must set aside some bycatch amount for
those fisheries. On an annual basis, the
Regional Administrator determines how
much ICA is required in other nontarget fisheries.
After deducting the ICA, NMFS
would set aside a percentage of the TAC
for the entry level longline fishery,
which allows catcher vessels who are
not eligible to participate in the
Rockfish Program an opportunity to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
harvest rockfish. The amount set aside
would be equal to the amounts
described in Table 10 in the ‘‘Entry
Level Longline Fishery’’ section of this
preamble, depending on the year and
whether 90 percent or more of the
species was harvested by entry level
fishery participants the year before.
Then, for each rockfish primary
species, the TAC would be apportioned
between the catcher/processor sector
and the catcher vessel sector. The
amount of TAC assigned to the catcher/
processor sector would be determined
by multiplying the TAC by the ratio of
QS units assigned to all LLP licenses
that receive QS in the catcher/processor
sector divided by the QS pool for that
primary rockfish fishery. The amount of
TAC assigned to the catcher vessel
sector would be determined by
multiplying the TAC by the ratio of QS
units assigned to all LLP licenses that
receive QS in the catcher vessel sector
divided by the QS pool for that primary
rockfish fishery.
LLP licenses assigned to a rockfish
cooperative would yield CQ that would
be based on the sum of all QS units
associated with all LLP licenses
assigned to the rockfish cooperative for
a specific rockfish primary species. The
annual CQ issued to a cooperative
would be equal to the TAC assigned to
that rockfish primary fishery in that
sector multiplied by the QS units
assigned to that cooperative divided by
the QS pool for that sector in that
fishery.
Opt-out: In the catcher/processor
sector, an adjustment to the CQ assigned
to rockfish cooperatives would be made
to account for LLP licenses with QS that
are not assigned to a rockfish
cooperative. The QS assigned to LLP
licenses that are opting-out in the
catcher/processor sector would not
yield any CQ for that LLP holder.
Instead, the TAC would be assigned to
rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/
processor sector. See Table 4 for more
information on the use of the CQ by a
rockfish cooperative.
Rockfish Secondary Species Allocation
The proposed rule would define
rockfish secondary species by listing the
species that were historically harvested
during the Central GOA directed
rockfish fisheries. Secondary species
would be allocated as an exclusive
harvest privilege only to rockfish
cooperatives. Rockfish cooperatives
would receive CQ for specific secondary
species. Secondary species allocated as
CQ to rockfish cooperatives would be
allocated differently between
cooperatives in the catcher vessel and
catcher/processor sectors. For
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52167
participants in a rockfish cooperative,
NMFS would issue secondary species
CQ in relation to the amount of QS
allocated to an LLP license.
The secondary species would be
treated differently in the catcher/
processor and catcher vessel sectors
based on the previous harvest patterns
in those sectors. Historically, harvesters
in both sectors tended to retain all
sablefish harvested with trawl gear and
thornyhead rockfish caught in
conjunction with rockfish harvests
because they were high value species.
Traditionally, catcher vessels retained
Pacific cod during the course of their
rockfish harvests; however, this was less
common among catcher/processors.
Consequently, the Council
recommended managing Pacific cod in
the catcher/processor sector using an
MRA that would reflect historic harvest
rates but provide more flexibility for the
fleet than a fixed ‘‘hard cap’’ allocation
of CQ might provide. Similarly, catcher/
processors typically had markets for
rougheye and shortraker rockfish and
tended to retain these species in greater
proportion than catcher vessels, and the
Council recommended an allocation of
these species to catcher/processors.
However, the Council recommended an
MRA for shortraker and rougheye
rockfish for the catcher vessel fleet that
would require the discarding of all
shortraker or rougheye rockfish if the
aggregate shortraker/rougheye MRA
limit was exceeded. The MRA
percentages recommended for the
catcher vessel sector for shortraker and
rougheye rockfish would provide some
flexibility for the harvesters in these
sectors yet maintain harvests within
historic levels.
Rockfish cooperative allocations: The
Council recommended specifying the
percentage of the Central GOA TAC for
each rockfish secondary species in
regulation to provide clear allocations.
For most species, these allocations are
based on the average proportion of the
Central GOA TAC harvested by vessels
that were assigned LLP licenses during
2000 through 2006 that would be
eligible to receive rockfish QS in each
sector. For catcher/processors, 43.2
percent of the Central GOA TAC of
shortraker rockfish was harvested using
2000 through 2006 qualifying years. The
Council recommended slightly reducing
the percentage of the TAC to 40 percent
of the Central GOA TAC to provide
slightly more harvest opportunities for
vessels in the catcher vessel sector and
non-Rockfish Program participants. The
Council expressed concern that under
an average percentage allocation, if all
catcher/processors joined cooperatives,
catches by Rockfish Program catcher
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52168
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
vessels and non-Rockfish Program
fisheries could need to be constrained to
prevent overharvest of the shortraker
rockfish TAC.
The Council also recommended
retaining the Pilot Program allocation of
58.87 percent of Central GOA TAC for
rougheye rockfish. Although 34.3
percent of the rougheye rockfish catch
was retained by vessels assigned an
eligible catcher/processor LLP license
from 2000 through 2006, the Council
sought to ensure that rougheye rockfish
catch would not unduly constrain
catcher/processor cooperatives if a
vessel were to unintentionally catch
relatively large amounts of rougheye
rockfish while targeting rockfish
primary species. The Council
determined that the allocation
percentage available under the Pilot
Program had not unduly constrained
catcher/processor cooperatives and had
not resulted in overharvest of the stock.
These percentages and the details of this
analysis are contained in section 2.4.1 of
the Analysis (see ADDRESSES). Table 5
shows the specific secondary species
that would be allocated as CQ to
rockfish cooperatives in the catcher
vessel sector and catcher/processor
sector.
TABLE 5—SECONDARY SPECIES ALLOCATED TO ROCKFISH COOPERATIVES IN THE CENTRAL GOA BY FISHERY SECTOR
Secondary species
Rockfish cooperatives in the catcher vessel
sector
Rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/
processor sector
Pacific cod ..........................................................
3.81% of the Central GOA TAC ......................
Rougheye rockfish ..............................................
Not allocated. Managed under an MRA of
combined rougheye/shortraker rockfish up
to 2.0% per trip.
6.78% of the Central GOA TAC ......................
Not allocated. Managed under an MRA of
combined rougheye/shortraker rockfish up
to 2.0% per trip. A maximum of 9.72% of
the shortraker TAC on an annual basis may
be retained.
7.84% of the Central GOA TAC ......................
Not allocated. Managed under an MRA of
4.0% per trip.
58.87% of the Central GOA TAC.
Sablefish allocated to trawl gear ........................
Shortraker rockfish .............................................
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Thornyhead rockfish ...........................................
‘‘Hard cap’’ management of shortraker
and rougheye rockfish: The Council
directed that allocations of shortraker
and rougheye rockfish should be
managed as a ‘‘hard cap’’ for the
catcher/processor sector. NMFS has
interpreted this provision to mean that
NMFS should manage to limit the
maximum amount of harvests to this
amount for all participants in that
sector. If the catcher/processor sector as
a whole exceeded either 40.0 percent of
the TAC for shortraker rockfish, or 58.87
percent of the TAC for rougheye
rockfish, then NMFS would prohibit
retention of that species for all catcher/
processor vessels in the Rockfish
Program. This prohibition would
include any vessels operating in a
rockfish cooperative even if that
cooperative still had unused CQ. The
Council also recommended that if the
harvest of shortraker by the catcher
vessel sector exceeded 9.72 percent of
the TAC (the historic proportion of the
shortraker TAC harvested by catcher
vessels), then NMFS would prohibit
further retention for the catcher vessel
sector. These provisions are intended to
ensure that the relatively small TACs
assigned to these stocks are not subject
to overharvest. Shortraker and rougheye
rockfish would not be allocated to the
entry level longline fishery, but would
be limited to an MRA to minimize
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:20 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
harvests and the incentive to ‘‘top off’’
on these species.
Entry level longline fishery: QS
assigned to the entry level longline
fishery would not result in an annual
exclusive allocation. Instead, secondary
species would be managed according to
an MRA in the entry level fishery. A
person directed fishing in the rockfish
entry level longline fishery may harvest
secondary species up to the amounts of
the MRAs for those species.
Opt-out: LLP license holders that optout of participating in a rockfish
cooperative would not receive exclusive
harvest privileges for secondary species
but vessels fishing under an opt-out
license would be able to retain
secondary species in non-Rockfish
Program fisheries, subject to an MRA
limit. The MRA for the opt-out vessels
would be the same as MRAs currently
applicable in the GOA directed
fisheries. Opt-out vessels could not
target Central GOA rockfish; therefore, a
lowered MRA in the Central GOA is not
necessary. Opt-out vessels would not be
able to use Central GOA rockfish as a
source for basis species against which to
‘‘top-off’’ secondary species.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
3.51% of the Central GOA TAC.
40.0% of the Central GOA TAC.
26.50% of the Central GOA TAC.
Maximum Retainable Amounts and
Fishing Non-Allocated Groundfish
Species
Some other non-allocated species of
groundfish would be encountered while
fishing under the Rockfish Program and
caught as incidental catch. All nonallocated secondary species harvested
by rockfish cooperative vessels would
be managed by an MRA. These nonallocated species include arrowtooth
flounder, deep-water flatfish, shallowwater flatfish, flathead sole, rex sole,
pollock, the other species category, Atka
mackerel, other rockfish, aggregated
forage fish, and skates. Pacific cod
would also be managed by an MRA for
the catcher/processor sector, as well as
shortraker and rougheye rockfish for the
catcher vessel sector. See the section
Rockfish Secondary Species Allocation
for a discussion of Pacific cod,
shortraker rockfish, and rougheye
rockfish MRA management.
The MRA of an incidental catch
species would be calculated as a
proportion of the basis species, or
allocated primary and secondary
species, retained onboard the vessel by
using the percentages described in Table
6. The MRA would be a percentage of
the total retained rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
onboard the vessel.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52169
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—NON-ALLOCATED SECONDARY SPECIES FOR ROCKFISH COOPERATIVE VESSELS IN THE CATCHER VESSEL AND
CATCHER/PROCESSOR SECTORS FISHING UNDER A ROCKFISH CQ PERMIT
Incidental catch species
MRA as a percentage of
total retained rockfish primary species and rockfish
secondary species (%)
Pollock .............................................................................................................................................................................
Deep-Water flatfish ..........................................................................................................................................................
Rex Sole ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Flathead Sole ...................................................................................................................................................................
Shallow-water flatfish .......................................................................................................................................................
Arrowtooth ........................................................................................................................................................................
Other Rockfish .................................................................................................................................................................
Atka Mackerel ..................................................................................................................................................................
Aggregated forage fish ....................................................................................................................................................
Skates ..............................................................................................................................................................................
Other Species ..................................................................................................................................................................
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
35.0
15.0
20.0
2.0
20.0
20.0
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
The MRA for groundfish harvested in
the Central GOA by a catcher/processor
vessel fishing under a rockfish CQ
permit would be calculated at the end
of each weekly reporting period and is
based on the basis species harvested
since the previous weekly reporting
period. If a vessel was taking part in
another fishery and checked-out of the
rockfish fishery for some time by a
cooperative representative, the MRA
would be based on the basis species
harvested for any portion of a weekly
reporting period that a vessel fished
under a rockfish cooperative’s CQ
permit. The MRA would apply to
catcher/processors fishing in an area
closed to directed fishing for a species
or species group for the duration of the
fishing trip.
The MRA for catcher vessels fishing
in areas closed to directed fishing is the
lowest MRA applicable in any area, and
this MRA would be applied at all times
and to all areas for the duration of the
fishing trip.
To calculate an individual retainable
amount, one would multiply the
retainable percentage for the incidental
catch species (Table 6) by the basis
species onboard the vessel. The MRA
for that specific incidental catch species
would be the sum of the individual
retainable amount.
Halibut PSC Apportionment to Rockfish
Cooperatives
Under the Rockfish Program, rockfish
cooperatives would be allocated CQ for
halibut PSC that could be used while
fishing for rockfish primary species or
secondary species. Halibut PSC CQ
would represent the amount of halibut,
in metric tons, that could be
incidentally caught and killed by a
rockfish cooperative. Under current
regulations, halibut can only be
harvested and retained commercially
under the Halibut Individual Fishing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Quota (IFQ) and the Western Alaska
Community Development Quota
Program; in all other fisheries halibut is
considered a prohibited species and
must be discarded at sea with a
minimum of injury.
NMFS uses the halibut mortality rates
established by the International Pacific
Halibut Commission (IPHC) and
observer data to estimate the amount of
mortality of discarded halibut. The
IPHC determines the halibut mortality
rate for various gears and target fisheries
based on data from prior years. These
halibut mortality rates are published in
the annual harvest specifications and
the justification for these rates is
published in Appendix A of the annual
Stock Assessment and Fishery
Evaluation Reports. NMFS estimates the
amount of halibut that is killed in the
various groundfish fisheries based on
data from onboard observers and applies
the mortality rate to the unobserved
portion of the fleet. NMFS then
apportions the available halibut
mortality among fisheries. As halibut is
caught, NMFS multiplies the estimated
halibut caught by the mortality rates to
produce a halibut bycatch mortality
amount.
NMFS would allocate halibut PSC CQ
to rockfish cooperatives within a sector
based on the QS of LLP licenses
assigned to the rockfish cooperatives.
Halibut PSC CQ would be allocated only
to participants in rockfish cooperatives.
Opt-out vessels would continue to be
subject to the aggregate halibut PSC
limits that NMFS establishes for that
gear type and target fishery.
Assigning sector Halibut PSC CQ. The
Council recommended allocating
halibut PSC to each sector based on the
average total halibut PSC used from
2000 through 2006, with a slight
reduction in that amount. The Analysis
(section 2.4.1, see ADDRESSES) shows
that participants in rockfish
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
cooperatives modified their fishing
patterns and reduced halibut mortality
during the Pilot Program. The Council
sought to balance the need to provide
adequate halibut PSC for use by rockfish
cooperatives, recognize patterns of
reduced halibut PSC use once exclusive
harvest privileges are established, and
meet broader goals to reduce halibut
mortality. From 2000 through 2006,
average halibut PSC mortality averaged
84.7 mt in the catcher vessel sector, and
134.1 mt in the catcher/processor sector.
The Council considered a range of
alternative approaches that would have
reduced total halibut PSC CQ assigned
to each sector. Ultimately, the Council
recommended reducing the amount of
halibut PSC assigned to each sector to
87.5 percent of the 2000 through 2006
average annual usage. A total of 117.3
mt would be assigned as CQ to the
catcher/processor sector, and 74.1 mt
would be assigned to catcher vessel
sector. The remaining 27.4 mt (16.8 mt
from the catcher vessel sector and 10.6
mt from the catcher/processor sector)
that would otherwise have been
allocated using the 2000 through 2006
average use of halibut PSC would not be
assigned as CQ or as halibut PSC for use
by any other non-Rockfish Program
fishery, and would not be made
available for use by the halibut IFQ
fishery. This 27.4 mt would remain ‘‘in
the water’’ and contribute to the halibut
biomass. The Council combined this
reduction in the amount of halibut CQ
initially available to rockfish
cooperatives with other measures
detailed later in this preamble to reduce
the amount of halibut PSC that can be
reassigned to non-Rockfish Program
fisheries. Combined, these measures
effectively reduce total halibut mortality
in the Rockfish Program.
NMFS would assign each sector’s
portion of the halibut PSC among the
rockfish cooperatives within that sector.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52170
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
To determine the CQ assigned to a
rockfish cooperative, NMFS would
multiply the sector’s assignment of
halibut PSC TAC by the percentage of
the aggregate rockfish primary species
QS held by that cooperative in that
sector.
Reassignment of Halibut PSC to NonRockfish Program Fisheries
The Rockfish Program would modify
a provision from the Pilot Program to
allow a rockfish cooperative to submit a
Cooperative Termination of Fishing
Declaration prior to the end of the
fishing season. Once submitted, the
primary and secondary rockfish CQ
assigned to that cooperative would be
set to zero, and the cooperative could
not receive any CQ by transfer after
NMFS has approved the termination of
fishing declaration. NMFS would allow
a portion of the halibut PSC CQ that was
assigned to that rockfish cooperative to
become available to trawl and non-trawl
vessels during the last halibut PSC
apportionment period of the year
(currently November 1 through
December 31). Under the Rockfish
Program, up to 55 percent of any halibut
PSC CQ remaining in a cooperative’s
account once a Termination of Fishing
Declaration has been submitted, or after
November 15, whichever occurs first,
could be reassigned for any vessel to use
while fishing during the last PSC
apportionment period of the year.
The Council recommended reducing
the amount of halibut PSC that could be
reassigned to the last apportionment
period to meet its overall goals of
reducing halibut mortality, yet provide
an incentive for participants in rockfish
cooperatives to continue to operate in
ways that minimized halibut mortality.
Some of the participants eligible for the
Rockfish Program are also active in a
number of flatfish trawl fisheries that
occur after November 1. Vessel
operators that are active in rockfish
cooperatives and these flatfish fisheries
have consistently undertaken efforts to
conserve their halibut PSC CQ while
fishing in a rockfish cooperative to
provide additional halibut PSC during
the latter portion of the year. The
Council recognized the importance of
the reassigned halibut PSC to provide
additional harvest opportunities in
these flatfish fisheries. Typically, most
flatfish fisheries are not fully harvested
relative to their TAC. The Council
reviewed a range of restrictions on the
reassignment of halibut PSC and
ultimately chose to recommend that no
more than 55 percent of any unused
halibut PSC be reassigned. The Council
assessed the amount of halibut PSC that
is typically used after November 1 and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
concluded that even with a limitation
on the maximum amount of halibut PSC
that could be reassigned, the fleet would
continue to have an incentive to
conserve halibut PSC CQ and have
additional harvest opportunities in
flatfish fisheries. The 45 percent of the
unused halibut PSC CQ that is not
reassigned is not made available as
halibut PSC or to the commercial
halibut IFQ fishery. This amount of
halibut is conserved and contributes to
the halibut biomass. The Rockfish
Program would limit halibut mortality
both by limiting the amount of halibut
PSC that is initially allocated as halibut
PSC CQ and by limiting the amount of
halibut PSC that may be reassigned.
NMFS cannot precisely predict the
amount of halibut PSC that would be
conserved because the amount of
halibut PSC CQ reassigned would
depend on fishing operations during a
year, and those operations could vary
from year-to-year.
Joint and Several Liability
A rockfish cooperative would not be
authorized to harvest fish in excess of
its CQ. Exceeding a CQ would be a
violation. Each member of the rockfish
cooperative would be jointly and
severally liable for any violations of the
Rockfish Program regulations while
fishing under authority of a CQ permit.
This liability extends to any persons
who are hired to harvest or receive CQ
assigned to a rockfish cooperative. Each
member of a rockfish cooperative would
be responsible for ensuring that all
members of the rockfish cooperative
comply with all regulations applicable
to fishing under the Rockfish Program.
Use Caps
The Rockfish Program would apply
use caps to limit the amount of rockfish
QS and CQ that may be harvested by
harvesters and processors. As with other
rationalization programs, the intent of
the use caps under the Rockfish
Program is to limit the degree of
consolidation that could occur in the
Central GOA rockfish fisheries. These
use caps would balance the goals of
improving economic efficiency,
maintaining employment opportunities
for vessel crew, and providing
financially affordable access
opportunities for new participants.
NMFS would require eligible rockfish
harvesters, cooperatives, processors, and
catcher/processor vessel operators to
submit information through the annual
applications, cooperative transfers, and
annual catch reports. NMFS would use
the information to enforce the use cap
provisions, to track rockfish primary
species QS use, and dissuade eligible
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
rockfish harvesters from forming
corporate arrangements that would
frustrate the goal of the use caps. The
use caps under the Rockfish Program
would apply to the rockfish primary
species. Use caps would not apply to
the use of secondary species or halibut
PSC.
There would be four types of use
caps: (1) A cap on the amount of QS an
eligible rockfish harvester could hold;
(2) a cap on the amount of rockfish
primary species CQ that a rockfish
cooperative could hold; (3) a cap on the
amount of rockfish primary species CQ
that a vessel could harvest; and (4) a
limit on the amount of rockfish primary
species an eligible rockfish processor
could receive and process. Different use
caps would apply depending on
whether the QS or CQ are for use in the
catcher vessel sector or the catcher/
processor sector. For example, if an
eligible rockfish harvester holds an LLP
license with QS in the catcher vessel
sector, then that harvester would be
subject to a use cap that applies to the
holding of QS in that sector. If that same
eligible rockfish harvester holds a
different LLP license with QS in the
catcher/processor sector, then that
holder would have a different use cap
that would apply to the holding of QS
in that sector.
QS Use Caps
QS use caps would limit the amount
of aggregate primary species rockfish QS
that could be held by an eligible
rockfish harvester. These QS use caps
would be based on the aggregate initial
QS pool assigned to each sector. An
eligible rockfish harvester could not
hold more than 4 percent of the
aggregate rockfish primary species QS
assigned to the catcher vessel sector, or
more than 40 percent of the aggregate
rockfish primary species QS assigned to
the catcher/processor sector. The
Council acknowledged that allowing the
fleet to consolidate may enable the
remaining companies to operate more
efficiently. The Council also recognized
that harvests may be liberally
redistributed among vessels in
cooperatives, and it is likely that gains
in efficiency may be achieved without
further ownership concentration of
share in the fishery. Consolidation by
license transfers may also be limited by
the caps that apply to the Amendment
80 Program.
The Council considered that LLP
license holders who want to leave the
fishery would presumably prefer more
liberal use caps, which would allow
them to sell their holdings to the buyer
willing to pay the most for the harvest
privileges. Restrictive caps would
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
exclude some buyers from the market,
which may reduce sale prices relative to
the prices that might be possible under
more liberal use caps. In the catcher
vessel sector, up to 7 of the 32 eligible
rockfish harvesters would exceed the 4
percent use cap based on the 2000 to
2006 qualifying years. These license
holders would not be allowed to
purchase additional harvest privileges,
as long as their holdings exceed the cap.
In the catcher/processor sector, seven
companies hold licenses qualifying
them for the sector. Depending on the
initial distribution of QS, it is possible
that half of the companies might be able
to consolidate their QS holdings under
a 40 percent cap, before the cap would
be binding.
The Official Record would indicate
the relative percentage of the legal
landings in the catcher vessel sector and
the catcher/processor sector. NMFS
would not be able to determine the
exact amount of the initial QS pool that
would be assigned to each sector until
the applications to participate in the
Rockfish Program were processed.
Therefore, NMFS would determine the
number of QS units for the catcher
vessel sector and catcher/processor
sector QS use caps once the applications
are processed. The QS use cap would be
based on a percentage of the initial QS
pool. NMFS would establish a QS use
cap that would not fluctuate with the
changes in the QS pool that could occur
due to the resolution of appeals or other
operations of law that would modify the
QS pool. This would provide stability to
QS holders.
NMFS would calculate the amount of
QS held by an eligible rockfish harvester
using the ‘‘individual and collective
rule.’’ This method is similar to one
used in the Halibut and Sablefish IFQ
Program. NMFS would include the sum
of all QS held individually by an
eligible rockfish harvester and the
percentage of any holdings used
collectively by that eligible rockfish
harvester through a corporation,
partnership, or other entity.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
CQ Use Caps
NMFS would apply CQ use caps to
eligible rockfish harvesters, rockfish
cooperatives, and processors. NMFS
would apply CQ use caps to limit the
amount of CQ derived from the QS held
by an eligible rockfish harvester. For
example, an eligible rockfish harvester
could not harvest an amount of CQ
greater than the amount derived from 4
percent of the aggregate initial QS pool
in the catcher vessel sector, or 40
percent of the aggregate initial QS pool
in the catcher/processor sector. An
eligible rockfish harvester would be
considered to use CQ if he or she
assigns QS to a rockfish cooperative that
results in CQ for use by that rockfish
cooperative. The amount of CQ that is
used by an eligible rockfish harvester
also would include any CQ a rockfish
cooperative receives by transfer that is
attributed to an eligible rockfish
harvester. All CQ received by transfer
would have to be assigned to an eligible
rockfish harvester who is a member of
that cooperative for purposes of
calculating use caps. This would limit
cooperatives to use no more CQ than the
maximum amount of CQ that could be
derived from the maximum amount of
QS that could be held by all of its
members. Therefore, the total CQ usage
by an eligible rockfish harvester would
be the sum of the CQ derived from QS
held by that eligible rockfish harvester
and all CQ attributed to that eligible
rockfish harvester as a result of a CQ
transfer.
CQ use caps would limit the
maximum amount of CQ that could be
assigned to any one cooperative. NMFS
would apply CQ use caps only to
rockfish cooperatives in the catcher
vessel sector. NMFS would apply the
catcher vessel cooperative use cap as a
percentage of the aggregate initial QS
pool assigned to the catcher vessel
sector. Catcher vessel rockfish
cooperatives would each be limited to
harvesting not more than 30 percent of
the CQ allocated to the catcher vessel
sector.
The amount of CQ used by an eligible
rockfish harvester would be calculated
using the ‘‘individual and collective
rule.’’ An eligible rockfish harvester’s
holding of CQ would include all CQ
attributed to that individual and the
percentage of any CQ attributed to that
individual through a corporation,
partnership, or other entity. Therefore,
CQ use would include all CQ derived
from an eligible rockfish harvester’s QS
holdings, either individually or through
corporate ownership, and all CQ
attributed to an individual as a result of
an inter-cooperative transfer of CQ.
NMFS would not apply CQ use caps
to cooperatives in the catcher/processor
52171
sector. Although NMFS would not
apply a CQ use cap to catcher/processor
cooperatives, NMFS would limit the
maximum amount of CQ that could be
used on any one catcher/processor
vessel.
Vessel Use Caps
NMFS would limit a vessel
participating in the catch vessel sector
from harvesting more than 8 percent of
the CQ of rockfish primary species
during a calendar year. This cap would
ensure that harvest activity would not
exceed the specified threshold and that
a certain number of vessels remain
active in the fishery. Historically, only
a few vessels have exceeded the 8
percent cap. As with the Pilot Program,
NMFS would also limit a vessel
participating in the catcher/processor
sector from harvesting more than 60
percent of the CQ of rockfish primary
species during a calendar year.
Processing Use Caps
Processors would be subject to CQ use
caps, similar to the Pilot Program.
NMFS would limit an eligible rockfish
processor from receiving or processing
more than 30 percent of the aggregate
rockfish primary species harvested with
CQ that would be allocated to the
catcher vessel sector during a calendar
year. NMFS would also limit an eligible
rockfish processor from receiving or
processing more than 30 percent of
Pacific cod and 30 percent of sablefish
harvested with CQ assigned to the
catcher vessel sector during a calendar
year. NMFS would apply the use cap
calculation to all rockfish primary
species, Pacific cod, and sablefish
received by an eligible processor and all
fish received by any other eligible
rockfish processor in which that eligible
rockfish processor has a 10 percent or
greater direct or indirect ownership
interest. NMFS would apply this more
stringent provision to dissuade eligible
rockfish processors from forming
corporate arrangements that would
further consolidate the already limited
number of distinct processors and
counteract the goal of the use cap,
which is to limit the degree of
consolidation in the fishery.
Table 7 describes the use cap amounts
and limits that would apply to eligible
rockfish harvesters, rockfish
cooperatives, and eligible rockfish
processors.
TABLE 7—USE CAPS IN THE ROCKFISH PROGRAM
Entity ........................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Primary species aggregate QS and CQ use cap based on the initial QS
pool assigned to each sector
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52172
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 7—USE CAPS IN THE ROCKFISH PROGRAM—Continued
Catcher vessel sector
Eligible rockfish harvester .......................................................................
Catcher/processor sector
4.0%
40.0%
Primary species aggregate CQ use cap based on the initial QS pool assigned to each sector
Catcher vessel sector
Catcher/processor sector
Rockfish cooperative ...............................................................................
30.0%
N/A
Processor ...............................................................................................
Primary
species
Pacific cod
Sablefish
30.0%
30.0%
30.0%
Vessel .....................................................................................................
Use Cap Exemptions, Grandfather
Provisions
As with other catch share programs in
the North Pacific, the Rockfish Program
would allow those persons whose initial
allocation of QS and resulting CQ is in
excess of the use caps to retain that
amount. Commonly called ‘‘grandfather
provisions,’’ these provisions would
accommodate participants who
historically had greater participation in
8%
the fishery than the use caps would
allow. Any person eligible for the
grandfather provisions would be limited
to their initial holdings. If a
grandfathered eligible rockfish harvester
or processor, or owner of a catcher/
processor vessel transferred an LLP
license and its associated QS, then the
transferee would be limited to the use
cap. The grandfather provisions would
apply only to persons that held QS in
excess of the use caps prior to the date
N/A
60.0%
of final Council action, June 14, 2010.
This provision would reduce the
incentive for QS holders to further
consolidate their holdings after Council
action and before the implementation of
a final rule, if approved. This provision
has been applied in other North Pacific
catch share programs to reduce
consolidation and ensure adherence to
specific use caps. Table 8 defines the
requirements that would apply for
qualifying for a grandfather provision.
TABLE 8—ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR A GRANDFATHER PROVISION
This entity . . .
meets the grandfather eligibility requirements if . . .
Eligible rockfish harvester ...................................
(1) he or she held LLP license(s) at the time of application to participate in the Rockfish Program that would result in QS or CQ in excess of the use caps; and (2) the LLP license(s)
were held by that eligible rockfish harvester prior to June 14, 2010 (the time of final Council
action on the Rockfish Program).
it is comprised of members who include eligible rockfish harvesters that meet the grandfather
eligibility requirements.
it receives and processes CQ derived from a rockfish cooperative that meets the grandfather
eligibility requirements.
an LLP license used on that vessel prior to June 14, 2010, is assigned QS that results in CQ
in excess of the use cap, and the CQ derived from that LLP license is used on that vessel.
Catcher vessel rockfish cooperative ...................
Processor ............................................................
Catcher/processor vessel ...................................
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Information Collection and Review
Process
Section 303A(c)(1)(J) of the MSA
notes that LAPPs should provide for the
establishment of an information
collection and review process to collect
the information necessary to determine
if any illegal acts of anticompetitive
practice, antitrust, or related conduct,
have occurred among persons receiving
limited access program privileges.
NMFS would establish a catch
accounting system in the Rockfish
Program that would allow for the
collection of ownership, use caps, and
landings information. These data can
then be used to track and ensure that
excessive consolidation among the fleet
has not occurred and participants
continue to deliver to different
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:22 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
processors. In other LAPPs, NMFS has
consulted with other federal agencies,
including the Department of Justice
Antitrust Division and the Federal
Trade Commission, in identifying
information that would be helpful in
detecting antitrust and anticompetitive
conduct among privilege holders, and
would do so here, as well.
Sideboard Provisions
NMFS expects the Rockfish Program
to improve the economic efficiency of
eligible rockfish harvesters, primarily by
encouraging a degree of consolidation
through the use of rockfish cooperatives.
NMFS anticipates that rockfish
cooperatives would be likely to use
fewer vessels to harvest the same
amount of fish with less cost, resulting
in greater net profits for rockfish
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
cooperative members. NMFS also
anticipates that some harvesters could
use their vessels and LLP licenses to
participate in other groundfish fisheries,
particularly cod, flatfish, and rockfish
fisheries in the West Yakutat District
and Western GOA. With the added
economic efficiency likely to be created
by the Rockfish Program, harvesters
could use this economic efficiency to
offset operational costs in other
fisheries, or expand into new fisheries.
This could economically disadvantage
harvesters in these other fisheries.
The Council recommended Rockfish
Program elements that would limit the
ability of rockfish harvesters to expand
into other fisheries. These types of
limitations are included in many of the
North Pacific rationalization programs
and are commonly called ‘‘sideboards.’’
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Sideboards would limit the total amount
of harvest by eligible rockfish harvesters
in other fisheries. Sideboards would
limit the amount of halibut PSC that
may be used in certain directed
groundfish fisheries. Some of the
specific sideboard measures in the
Rockfish Program would prohibit
directed fishing for certain groundfish
fisheries. Sideboard measures would be
in effect only during the month of July.
Traditionally, the Central GOA rockfish
fishery was open in July, and therefore
the sideboards would restrict fishing in
other groundfish fisheries during the
historic timing of the rockfish fishery,
but allow eligible rockfish harvesters to
participate in fisheries before or after
the historic rockfish season.
A sideboard would limit both the LLP
license with QS assigned to it and the
vessel on which legal landings were
made that could generate QS. This
provision would restrict an LLP license
holder from assigning an LLP license to
a rockfish cooperative, and using the
vessel that generated the QS to target
other fisheries. Sideboards would apply
to Federally permitted vessels fishing in
Federal waters and waters adjacent to
the Central GOA when the harvest of
rockfish primary species by that vessel
is deducted from the Federal TAC. The
opening of a State water fishery in
concurrence with the Federal fishing
season is commonly known as a parallel
fishery. The State opens a parallel
fishery to accommodate harvesters as
they target fish stocks that freely move
between State and Federal jurisdictions.
The State opens the parallel fisheries
through emergency order by adopting
the groundfish seasons, bycatch limits,
and allowable gear types that apply in
the adjacent Federal fisheries.
Specific sideboards would apply to
specific fishery components in the
Rockfish Program. The Council
recommended a suite of sideboard
measures to meet two broad, potentially
competing, goals: To constrain eligible
rockfish harvesters from expanding their
harvesting capacity in other nonRockfish Program fisheries; and to
provide an opportunity for harvesters,
particularly in the catcher/processor
sector, to continue to participate in
other fisheries they have historically
fished. Sideboards would fall into two
broad categories: Sideboard limits that
constrain the amount of harvest in
specific regions and fisheries during
July; and directed fishery closures that
prohibit fishing in specific fisheries and
regions during July. The Rockfish
Program would include three types of
sideboards: (1) Catcher vessel
sideboards, (2) catcher/processor
rockfish cooperative sideboards, and (3)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
catcher/processor opt-out sideboards. In
addition, if an LLP license holder
chooses to be exempted from the
Rockfish Program, that LLP license on
which the legal landings were made that
could generate QS would be exempted
from sideboard restrictions.
The Council reviewed the suite of
sideboard measures that were applied
during the Pilot Program and modified
the sideboards that would apply under
this proposed rule to address changes in
fishery management measures that have
occurred since the implementation of
the Pilot Program. Specifically, the
Council recommended that sideboard
measures applicable to the catcher
vessel sector in this Rockfish Program
should be simplified to prohibit fishing
in specific rockfish fisheries in the West
Yakutat District and Western GOA, and
certain fisheries in the deep-water
complex. The Council recommended
that sideboard measures applicable to
the catcher/processor cooperative sector
in the Rockfish Program should be
slightly modified from those applicable
in the Pilot Program.
Catcher Vessel Sideboards
The Rockfish Program recommended
by the Council provides for specific
sideboard measures for catcher vessels.
These sideboard measures include
prohibitions on catcher vessels engaging
in directed fishing in specific
groundfish fisheries in the GOA. The
prohibition on directed fishing in the
West Yakutat District and the Western
GOA Pacific ocean perch, northern
rockfish, and pelagic shelf rockfish
during July is based on a review of past
participation by the catcher vessel fleet.
Catcher vessels would be prohibited
from directed fishing on these rockfish
species in these areas because they have
not historically harvested these species.
The Council also recommended that
catcher vessels would be prohibited
from directed fishing in any target
fishery in the deep-water complex in the
month of July (except for Central GOA
Rockfish). This limitation would
prohibit catcher vessels from directed
fishing in the Arrowtooth flounder,
deep water flatfish, and rex sole
fisheries from July 1 through 31. The
Council recommended these restrictions
to limit the ability of catcher vessels in
these fisheries because they have not
historically harvested these species in
July.
The Council also recommended two
exemptions from sideboards. The first
would apply to catcher vessels and LLP
licenses that (1) generated rockfish legal
landings during 2000 through 2006 and
in the entry level trawl fishery in the
Pilot Program during 2007, 2008, or
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52173
2009; and (2) applied to be permanently
exempted from the Rockfish Program
and forego the ability to receive rockfish
QS. This limited exemption would
allow LLP license holders and catcher
vessel operators who permanently
forego their ability to participate in the
Rockfish Program to be exempted from
sideboard restrictions. The Council
identified at least one vessel operator
and LLP license holder who had limited
participation during the qualifying years
for the Rockfish Program but who were
active in the West Yakutat District and
Western GOA Rockfish fisheries and, to
a limited extent, other flatfish fisheries.
This exemption would allow the vessel
operator and LLP license holder to
choose either to participate in the
Rockfish Program, receive rockfish QS,
and be subject to sideboard limitations,
or to forego participation in the Rockfish
Program and participate in other GOA
fisheries without sideboard restrictions.
The Council recommended a specific
exemption from catcher vessels that
would be otherwise subject to sideboard
restrictions in the GOA under the
American Fisheries Act (AFA). Based on
a review of AFA sideboard limitations
applicable to AFA vessels in the GOA,
the Council believed the catcher vessels
did not need further limits under this
proposed rule. The Council reviewed
AFA sideboard limits during the
development of the Pilot Program and
the proposed Rockfish Program and
determined that those sideboard
limitations effectively constrained AFA
catcher vessels from expanding their
ability to harvest in other fisheries. The
Council considered that additional
sideboard limitations under the Pilot
Program and this proposed Rockfish
Program were duplicative. This
exemption to sideboard limits is the
same as that currently applicable under
the Pilot Program.
Catcher/Processor Cooperative
Sideboards
The Council recommended sideboard
limitations on cooperatives that are
similar to those in place under the Pilot
Program. The Council considered public
testimony and catch data from the Pilot
Program in its recommendation. The
Council recommended these sideboard
limitations to minimize potential
adverse competition on non-Rockfish
Program participants and potential
conflicts among rockfish cooperatives in
the Western GOA and West Yakutat
District rockfish fisheries, as well as
specific GOA flatfish fishermen.
Catcher/processor cooperatives would
be subject to a sideboard limit in the
Western GOA and West Yakutat District
rockfish fisheries, and a limit on the
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52174
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
maximum amount of halibut PSC that
could be used by that cooperative
during the month of July.
The sideboard limit on participants in
the Western GOA and West Yakutat
District rockfish fisheries would be
based on the historic share of catch for
a specific rockfish fishery by catcher/
processor vessels that generated legal
landings that could generate QS under
the Rockfish Program. The sideboard
would be determined by measuring
catch by these vessels during July from
2000 through 2006, as compared to the
total harvests by all vessels during this
period in the particular directed
groundfish fishery. This would yield a
percentage of the total harvests in that
directed groundfish fishery. On an
annual basis, this percentage would be
multiplied by the TAC for that directed
groundfish fishery. This amount would
be the sideboard limit. This sideboard
provision would apply only to Pacific
ocean perch, pelagic shelf rockfish, and
northern rockfish (see ADDRESSES).
Other groundfish species would not be
subject to specific sideboard limits, but
would be subject to existing
management measures such as MRAs.
Sideboards are intended to limit
rockfish participants from exceeding
their historic levels of participation in a
fishery. The Council did not apply
sideboard limits for other rockfish
species because those species were not
traditionally harvested in July so
additional management measures were
not needed.
NMFS would establish the sideboard
limit for Pacific ocean perch, pelagic
shelf rockfish, and northern rockfish
using the percentage of historic harvests
of that rockfish species for that sector
based on calculations in the Analysis
prepared for this action. Table 9
displays the percentage of the annual
TAC assigned as a sideboard limit in the
Western GOA and West Yakutat District
based on the information provided in
section 2.5 of the Analysis. NMFS
would not establish a sideboard limit for
northern rockfish in the West Yakutat
District because the fishery was not
open for directed fishing during 2000
through 2006.
TABLE 9—CATCHER/PROCESSOR SIDEBOARD LIMITS BY SECTOR FOR WEST YAKUTAT DISTRICT AND WESTERN GOA
ROCKFISH
Management area
Fishery
Catcher/processor sector (percent of the TAC)
West Yakutat District ................................
Pelagic shelf rockfish ............................
(Not released due to confidentiality requirements on fish
ticket data established by the State of Alaska.)
(Not released due to confidentiality requirements on fish
ticket data established by the State of Alaska.)
72.3 percent of the TAC.
50.6 percent of the TAC.
74.3 percent of the TAC.
Pacific ocean perch ...............................
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Western GOA ...........................................
Pelagic shelf rockfish ............................
Pacific ocean perch ...............................
Northern rockfish ...................................
The sideboard limits would limit the
maximum amount of fish that the
catcher/processor sector could harvest.
A specific subset of this fixed
percentage would be assigned to
rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/
processor sector only. Cooperatives in
the catcher/processor sector would
receive a sideboard limit equal to the
percentage of rockfish sideboard limit
assigned to that cooperative multiplied
by the total sideboard limit assigned to
the catcher/processor sector for a
species in a specific management area.
For example, if 72.3 percent of the
Western GOA TAC for pelagic shelf
rockfish were assigned to the catcher/
processor sector, and a rockfish
cooperative was assigned 10 percent of
the total Pelagic shelf rockfish sideboard
limit in the Western GOA, NMFS would
assign that cooperative 10 percent of
72.3 percent, or 7.23 percent of the
Western GOA TAC for pelagic shelf
rockfish as a sideboard limit.
A sideboard limit specified for a
catcher/processor cooperative would
limit only that cooperative. This
sideboard limit could not be transferred
to another cooperative. Table 9 indicates
that rockfish in the West Yakutat
District have been harvested by a
limited number of vessels, and data on
the specific TAC percentage cannot be
released due to the confidential nature
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
of the catch. Cooperative-specific
sideboards for the catcher/processor
sector would reduce the incentive for
cooperatives within the catcher/
processor sector to race to catch the
maximum amount allowed under a
sideboard limit and potentially exceed
the TAC established for these species.
NMFS would also establish a
sideboard limit on the amount of halibut
PSC that could be used in the month of
July. The halibut PSC sideboard would
indirectly limit the harvests of specific
groundfish flatfish species, primarily
flatfish species, that historically have
been limited not by their TAC, but by
halibut PSC.
NMFS would base the specific halibut
PSC sideboard limit, the limit on the
pounds of halibut PSC allocated to
vessels fishing subject to a sideboard, on
the historic use of halibut PSC in July
by vessels in each sector. NMFS would
establish distinct halibut PSC
sideboards for a shallow-water species
complex and a deep-water complex.
Because halibut PSC limits in the GOA
are established based on fishery
complexes based on the depth of the
targeted groundfish species, the halibut
PSC sideboard limit for the shallow
water complex would be based on
average halibut PSC by vessels subject
to sideboards in the shallow-water
flatfish and flathead sole fisheries. The
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
halibut PSC sideboard limit for the
deep-waters species complex would be
based on average halibut PSC by vessels
subject to sideboards in the arrowtooth
flounder, deep-water flatfish, rex sole,
and rockfish fisheries.
NMFS proposes to establish the
sideboard limits for the shallow-water
fishery complex and the deep-water
fishery complex for the catcher/
processor sector based on the historic
halibut PSC usage calculated in the
Analysis prepared for this proposed
action. The percentage assigned as a
sideboard limit would be equal to the
annual average halibut PSC by vessels
and LLP licenses subject to the
sideboard limit during July from 2000
through 2006 in that sector divided by
the total average halibut mortality
assigned to the GOA trawl sector during
2000 through 2006. During this time
period, the average annual halibut PSC
was equal to 2,000 mt. Based on these
data, the deep-water halibut PSC limit
assigned to the catcher/processor sector
is equal to 2.5 percent of the GOA trawl
PSC limit established in the harvest
specifications. The shallow-water
halibut PSC limit assigned to the
catcher/processor sector is equal to
0.1 percent of the GOA trawl PSC limit
established in the harvest specifications.
A discussion of the data and analytic
process used in the development of the
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
sideboard amounts is provided in
section 2.5 of the Analysis.
As with the rockfish sideboard limits,
NMFS would establish a specific subset
of the halibut PSC limit to rockfish
cooperatives in the catcher/processor
sector only. Cooperatives in the catcher/
processor sector would receive a portion
of the catcher/processor sideboard limit
equal to the percentage of QS assigned
to that cooperative in the catcher/
processor sector multiplied by the
halibut PSC limit. For example, if 2.5
percent of the annual GOA Halibut PSC
trawl limit is assigned to the catcher/
processor sector, and a rockfish
cooperative is assigned 10 percent of the
total rockfish QS in the catcher/
processor sector (i.e., 10 percent of the
aggregate rockfish QS for Pacific ocean
perch, pelagic shelf rockfish, and
northern rockfish), NMFS would assign
that cooperative 10 percent of 2.5
percent, or 0.25 percent of the GOA
halibut PSC trawl limit. A sideboard
limit specified for a catcher/processor
cooperative would limit that
cooperative. This sideboard limit could
not be transferred to another
cooperative. NMFS would not establish
similar sideboard limits for cooperatives
in the catcher vessel sector.
Catcher/Processor Opt-Out Sideboards
In addition to the catcher/processor
cooperative sideboards, NMFS would
prohibit any vessel fishing under a
catcher/processor LLP license with QS
that decided to opt-out of participating
in a rockfish cooperative from (1)
directed fishing in any of the primary
rockfish fisheries in the Central GOA
during the calendar year; and (2)
directed fishing in any GOA groundfish
fishery from July 1 through July 14, in
which that vessel or LLP license does
not have prior participation, except
fixed gear sablefish. Fishing in the first
two weeks of July would be prohibited
because participants would have
historically participated in the rockfish
fisheries during that time.
The Rockfish Program would define
prior participation as having at least one
landing in a directed GOA groundfish
fishery during any 2 years from 2000
through 2006 during specific time
periods in early July. This provision is
intended to prevent participants with
multiple licenses and substantial history
from opting out of the program with one
license and entering other fisheries in
which the license holder has no history.
This specific time period during the
qualifying years corresponds with the
weeks in which participants were
historically active. The specific time
periods for each year during which a
landing could be made are (1) July 9,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
2000, through July 15, 2000, (2) July 1,
2001, through July 7, 2001, (3) June 30,
2002, through July 6, 2002, (4) June 29,
2003, through July 5, 2003, (5) July 4,
2004, through July 10, 2004, (6) July 3,
2005, through July 9, 2005, and (7) July
2, 2006, through July 8, 2006.
For species other than flatfish in a
management area (e.g., Western GOA or
West Yakutat District rockfish), the
target fisheries are defined based on the
specific species that is being targeted.
For flatfish, the Council recommended a
broader definition of a flatfish target to
accommodate the common practice of
catcher/processor vessels switching
between specific species within the
deep-water or shallow water complexes
within the same weekly reporting
period. For example, it is common for
catcher/processors to target both rex
sole and arrowtooth flounder, which are
species in the deep-water complex,
during the same weekly reporting
period. The Council recommended that
participation in flatfish fisheries should
be based on meeting a minimum of 2
years of participation in either the deepwater complex or the shallow-water
complex fisheries during the 2000
through 2006 weekly reporting periods.
Specifically, a vessel and its associated
LLP license would be considered to
have participated in the arrowtooth
flounder, deep water flatfish, and rex
sole fisheries if that vessel participated
in a directed groundfish fishery for any
of these three fisheries during any 2
years during the 2000 through 2006
qualifying periods. Similarly, a vessel
and its associated LLP license would be
considered to have participated in the
flathead sole and shallow-water flatfish
fishery if that vessel participated in a
directed groundfish fishery for any of
these two fisheries during any two years
during the 2000 through 2006 qualifying
periods.
If a sideboarded LLP license or vessel
made a landing in a directed fishery in
any 2 years during these time periods,
it could continue to directed fish in that
groundfish fishery during July 1 through
July 14. If the vessel or LLP license did
not meet these criteria, it could not
directed fish in that groundfish fishery
during July 1 through July 14—except
the fixed-gear sablefish fishery that is
managed under the existing IFQ
program.
Catcher/Processor Sideboards for NonAmendment 80 Vessels
General sideboard restrictions under
the Pilot Program prohibit directed
fishing for rockfish primary species in
Western GOA, West Yakutat District,
and adjacent waters to the Central GOA
during the month of July. The Council
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52175
motion for the Rockfish Program
removes sideboard limits for Western
GOA and West Yakutat District rockfish
primary species for all catcher/processor
vessels, except for non-Amendment 80
vessels. The Council initially included
this option for consideration because of
nearly identical sideboard restrictions
on most eligible license holders from
the Amendment 80 program.
Implemented in 2008, the Amendment
80 program allows eligible members of
the trawl catcher/processor sector to
form cooperatives in the BSAI. To limit
Amendment 80 vessels to their
historical catch in the GOA from
January 1 through December 31, the
Amendment 80 program included
sideboards for GOA pollock, Pacific cod,
Pacific ocean perch, northern rockfish,
pelagic shelf rockfish, and halibut PSC
for Amendment 80 catcher/processor
vessels. Amendment 80 sideboards are
based on the retained catch of the
rockfish species during the entire
calendar year, while the sideboards for
the Pilot Program are based on retained
catch during the month of July.
The Council noted that if the Western
GOA and West Yakutat rockfish
sideboards were to be included in the
proposed Rockfish Program, rockfish
eligible license holders that were also
Amendment 80 qualified would be
limited in their catch of Western GOA
and West Yakutat District rockfish
during the month of July by both
Rockfish Program sideboards and
Amendment 80 sideboards. This
duplication of Western GOA and West
Yakutat District rockfish sideboards
from the two programs would increase
the management cost for NMFS and the
industry and the complexity of these
sideboarded fisheries. If the Western
GOA and West Yakutat rockfish
sideboards for the catcher/processor
sector in the Rockfish Program were
removed, most, but not all, of the
eligible license holders would be
limited to their historical catch of
rockfish primary species during the
month of July from Amendment 80
sideboard limits. However, two eligible
catcher/processor participants in the
Pilot Program do not qualify for the
Amendment 80 program, and therefore
would not be restricted by Amendment
80 sideboard limits, if the Council
removed these sideboards in the
proposed Rockfish Program. So, they
would have no sideboards. Historically,
the two eligible license holders have
had very limited catch history in West
Yakutat rockfish fisheries and no catch
history in Western GOA rockfish
fisheries during the month of July. The
licenses do not have Western GOA
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52176
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
endorsements and the limited history in
West Yakutat rockfish fisheries by these
licenses was likely due to the small
TACs, which corresponds with small
sideboard limits of rockfish species in
this area.
NMFS cannot predict whether these
two eligible license holders would fish
in West Yakutat District in the future.
Despite the lack of history in the West
Yakutat and Western GOA rockfish
fisheries, these eligible licenses could be
used to target West Yakutat and Western
GOA rockfish during the month of July.
To limit these participants from
increasing their effort in Western GOA
and West Yakutat rockfish fisheries, the
Council included a sideboard limit for
non-Amendment 80 licenses. Given
these eligible licenses have little or no
catch history in West Yakutat rockfish
fisheries and no history in the Western
GOA rockfish fisheries, the Council
decided the simplest approach was to
prohibit non-Amendment 80 catcher/
processors from participating in the
West Yakutat and Western GOA
fisheries during the month of July. This
would simplify management by
eliminating the need to publish the
annual sideboard limits for these
fisheries and then a closure notice for
these sideboard fisheries given there
would not be a sufficient amount of
catch available to conduct a directed
fishery.
Assigning Sideboards
If NMFS determines that a specific
sideboard limit for a directed fishery is
small and insufficient to support any
retained catch, then NMFS may set the
directed fishing allowance for that
sideboard fishery to zero for a particular
sector, fishery, or area. This
determination would be made based on
the estimated harvest rates in the
fishery, the size of the sideboard limit,
and whether that limit can support a
directed fishery. The notification of the
directed fishing allowance would be
established in the harvest specifications
that define the allocations to the various
fishery components.
After NMFS determines which vessels
and LLP licenses would be subject to
sideboards, NMFS would inform each
vessel owner and LLP license holder in
writing of the type of sideboard
limitation, provide an opportunity to
challenge these findings, and issue a
revised Federal fisheries permit and/or
LLP license that displays the limitation
on the face of the permit or license.
A vessel owner or LLP license holder
who believes that NMFS has incorrectly
identified his or her vessel or LLP
license as meeting the criteria for a
sideboard limitation could request
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
reconsideration. All requests for
reconsideration would have to be
submitted in writing to NMFS, together
with any documentation or evidence
supporting the request. If the request for
reconsideration were denied, NMFS
would notify the vessel owner or LLP
license holder through an IAD. NMFS’
IAD would indicate discrepancies or
deficiencies in the information
submitted with the evidence or
supporting documentation. Affected
persons could appeal that decision
using existing appeals procedures (see
§ 679.43 for additional details). Until
final agency action on the appeal, NMFS
would not reissue that person an LLP
license with associated QS. This would
limit a person from assigning that LLP
license to a rockfish cooperative.
Management of the Sideboards
NMFS would manage the sideboards
to meet the intent of the Council, which
is to limit rockfish harvests and halibut
PSC during the month of July. NMFS
would review the sideboard limits for
specific fisheries, sectors, and regions in
the Rockfish Program and would not
open a fishery if a sideboard limit was
not adequate to support harvests. NMFS
would close fisheries for vessels subject
to a sideboard if harvests in those
fisheries result in the harvest of
sideboard species in excess of the
sideboard limit. NMFS would use the
following standards and require the
necessary monitoring to ensure
adequate accounting:
First, NMFS would require any
Rockfish Program vessel subject to
sideboard limitations operating in the
Central GOA, Western GOA, and West
Yakutat District from July 1 until July 31
to adhere to all catch monitoring
requirements. This would allow NMFS
to assess harvest rates, and monitor
harvests in that fishery (see the
Monitoring and Enforcement section of
the preamble for more information).
Second, NMFS would require all
vessels subject to a sideboard limit to
retain all rockfish caught during July 1
through July 31 in the Western GOA and
the West Yakutat District. NMFS would
require vessels to retain rockfish
regardless of the specific target fishery.
The goal of the sideboard limit would be
to ensure historic harvest levels are not
exceeded. NMFS would require
retention of rockfish harvested
incidental to other directed fisheries
(e.g., Western GOA arrowtooth flounder)
with Rockfish Program vessel
participation, and debit them against the
sideboard limit applicable to that
cooperative. NMFS would prohibit
vessels from directed fishing in a
specific rockfish fishery in a specific
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
area for a specific sector, if that
sideboard limit is reached.
Third, NMFS would debit all halibut
PSC in a sector attributed to the
shallow-water species complex or deepwater species complex in the GOA in
July against the shallow-water halibut
PSC sideboard or deep-water halibut
PSC sideboard limit, as appropriate, for
a cooperative. This would ensure that
all halibut PSC caught in July is debited
against the sideboard limit established
for the appropriate complex and
cooperative.
NMFS would close directed fishing by
cooperatives for non-rockfish fisheries
in specific species complexes once the
halibut PSC sideboard limit is reached.
Specifically, if the halibut PSC limit for
the deep-water complex in a
management area is reached, NMFS
would close directed fishing for
arrowtooth flounder, deep-water
flatfish, and rex sole in that
management area. If the halibut PSC
sideboard limit for the shallow-water
complex in a management area is
reached, NMFS would close directed
fishing for flathead sole and shallow
water flatfish in that management area.
Fourth, the sideboard limits
recommended by the Council that are
proposed by this action are intended to
limit harvests by vessels that are
harvesting fish allocated under a TAC.
NMFS would account for all catch by
federally licensed vessels in Federal
waters and the State parallel fishery
against the sideboard limit.
Additionally, federally permitted
vessels would be precluded from fishing
in the parallel fishery during July if the
sideboard limit for that fishery is
reached or the sideboarded fishery is
not open. NMFS would not manage the
activities of non-federally permitted
vessels in the parallel fishery or in other
state-managed fisheries.
Example of Annual Allocations
The following example details the
allocation of TAC and halibut PSC
within the catcher/processor sector. The
calculation method would be similar for
the catcher vessel sector except that
catcher vessels would not be able to optout of participating in rockfish
cooperatives.
First, an ICA amount would be
deducted for bycatch needs in other
fisheries.
Second, a percentage of the TAC
would be set aside for the entry level
fishery. This percent may change
annually up to the capped amount
depending on whether 90 percent or
more of the entry level TAC was caught
for each species the previous year. See
Table 10.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Third, the remaining TAC of each of
the three allocated rockfish species,
Pacific ocean perch, pelagic shelf
rockfish, and northern rockfish would
be allocated to rockfish cooperatives. To
simplify the example, assume that half
the aggregate QS of the three allocated
rockfish species would be allocated to
the catcher/processor sector, and half to
the catcher vessel sector. Fifty (50)
percent of the remaining TAC of each of
the three allocated rockfish species
would be allocated to the catcher/
processor sector and the other 50
percent of the remaining TAC for each
of the three species would be allocated
to the catcher vessel sector.
Fourth, assume that there are 10 LLP
licenses, each with 10 percent of the QS
assigned to the catcher/processor sector
for the three allocated rockfish species.
Two eligible rockfish harvesters holding
three LLP licenses would assign those
licenses to two different rockfish
cooperatives. Based on these LLP
licenses, each cooperative would be
assigned 30 percent of the total rockfish
primary species QS in the catcher/
processor sector based on these LLP
licenses. Other eligible rockfish
harvesters holding four LLP licenses
would decide to opt-out. This represents
40 percent of the total rockfish primary
species QS in the catcher/processor
sector.
Fifth, NMFS would reassign 100
percent of the TAC assigned to the
catcher/processor sector to the rockfish
cooperatives. This means that because
each cooperative would be assigned an
equal amount of QS, the TAC assigned
to the catcher/processor sector would be
assigned equally to each cooperative.
The vessels that have opted-out would
not be assigned any TAC for the rockfish
primary species and would be
prohibited from directed fishing for
those species in the Central GOA.
Sixth, NMFS would determine the
amount of CQ for secondary species and
halibut PSC that would be allocated to
the rockfish cooperatives. The allocation
of CQ for secondary species and halibut
PSC would be based on the percentage
of the primary species QS allocation
that would be assigned to the rockfish
cooperatives in a sector—in the
example, 50 percent of the total QS in
the sector. NMFS would allocate each
rockfish cooperative 50 percent of the
total CQ of secondary species and
halibut PSC that could be allocated to
the catcher/processor sector.
Entry Level Longline Fishery
The entry level fishery would
continue for harvesters who would be
directed fishing for rockfish primary
species using longline gear only. The
industry and the Council commonly
uses the term ‘‘fixed gear’’ to describe
this fishery. However, NMFS notes that
the regulatory text under Pilot Program
as well as the proposed regulatory text
for the Rockfish Program refer to the
entry level ‘‘longline’’ fishery, not fixed
gear, but is meant to be the same nontrawl fishery. Longline gear includes
hook-and-line, jig, troll, and handline.
Any vessel or gear type exempt from
Central GOA LLP requirements (vessels
that do not exceed 26 feet in length
overall in the GOA or vessels that are
using jig gear with less than 5 jigging
machines, no more than 30 hooks per
line and 150 hooks in total), or any
holder of a Central GOA longline LLP
license may enter a vessel in the entry
level longline fishery. The start date for
the entry level longline fishery would be
January 1 of each year, and participants
would not be required to apply
annually. The Council discussed
whether to require an annual
application as was previously required
under the Pilot Program when the entry
level fishery included trawl and
longline gear, but determined that the
lack of registration may actually
improve entry into these fisheries by
removing an application deadline that
would prevent a vessel from entering
the fishery mid-season. Therefore,
participants in the entry level longline
fishery would not be required to submit
an annual application in order to take
part in the fishery. If a longline gear
participant targets rockfish primary
52177
species in the Central GOA, then the
catch would be deducted from the entry
level longline TAC. If the longline
participant is not directed fishing for
rockfish primary species, and instead
targets a different species such as Pacific
cod, then the catch would be deducted
from the ICA.
The entry level longline fishery would
have a smaller initial TAC than was
initially allocated in the Pilot Program.
The smaller TAC allocation would be
more in line with historical catch rates
among the longline sector in the entry
level fishery, since the sector has had
minimal participation in the fisheries.
Under the Pilot Program, longline
harvests never exceeded one percent of
the TAC for any of the target species
during the qualifying years. Some
longline fishermen who have small
vessels and do not qualify for the
Rockfish Program continue to express
an interest in prosecuting the entry level
fishery. Most have testified to the
Council that they would participate
primarily in the summer months when
the weather is the best, allowing the
fleet to more safely target these offshore
rockfish. If some participants are
successful in the fishery, additional
entry can be expected, but NMFS cannot
predict the potential success of these
efforts.
The TAC for the entry level longline
fishery would increase in a following
year if most or all of the apportioned
TAC in the fishery is caught. The set
aside allocation for the entry level
longline fishery would allow for a
predetermined amount of rockfish
primary species for the 2012 season that
would increase incrementally each
season if the sector harvests 90 percent
or more of the allocation of a species.
The incremental increase would
continue each year until it reaches the
cap set for the maximum percent of the
TAC for that species. Table 10 shows
the 2012 initial allocations for each
rockfish primary species, the
incremental increase for future seasons,
and the cap for the entry level longline
fishery.
TABLE 10—ENTRY LEVEL LONGLINE FISHERY ALLOCATION
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Rockfish primary species
2012 Initial allocation
Incremental increase per season if
≥ 90% of allocation is harvested
Pacific ocean perch .................................
Northern rockfish .....................................
Pelagic shelf rockfish ..............................
5 metric tons ...........................................
5 metric tons ...........................................
30 metric tons .........................................
5 metric tons ...........................................
5 metric tons ...........................................
20 metric tons .........................................
The mechanism expressed in Table 10
increases the annual allocations as the
sector grows. If the sector does not catch
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:30 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
90 percent or more of the TAC, then the
allocation for the next year would be the
same as the previous year. This process
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Up to maximum
% of TAC
1%
2%
5%
could help prevent unharvested
portions of the TAC, which would occur
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52178
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
if the allocation to the longline sector
was disproportionate to their catches.
Catcher vessels fishing under a CQ
permit would be allowed to participate
in the entry level longline fishery as
long as the catcher vessel cooperative’s
designated representative submits a
check-out report for the vessel. (see
Application of Monitoring
Requirements for Vessels for
information on check-out procedures).
Unlike catcher vessels fishing in
cooperatives, participants in the entry
level longline fishery may deliver their
harvest to any shorebased processing
facility in any community and are not
restricted to delivery to a Kodiak
processor. The Council noted that a
requirement to deliver within the
boundaries of Kodiak might discourage
potential participants from attempting
to develop the entry level longline
fishery. The longline sector consists of
relatively small vessels and the Central
GOA extends to areas that are distant
from Kodiak, but close to other ports
such as Homer and Seward. Requiring
entry level participants to comply with
a landing requirement within the
boundaries of Kodiak might present too
great of an expense for the participants
and expose participants to unacceptable
safety risks.
Monitoring and Enforcement
Monitoring provisions would be
necessary for accurate catch accounting
and to monitor compliance with the
Rockfish Program to ensure that rockfish
QS holders maintain catches with
annual rockfish CQ allocations, rockfish
sideboard limits, and use caps.
Monitoring and enforcement in the
proposed Rockfish Program would be
similar to monitoring and enforcement
under the Pilot Program. The primary
tools for monitoring would include (1)
requiring observers aboard vessels
operating in a rockfish cooperative or a
rockfish sideboard fishery, (2) requiring
that vessels participating in a rockfish
cooperative or a rockfish sideboard
fishery carry and use a NMFS-approved
vessel monitoring system (VMS)
transmitter, (3) requiring that catcher/
processors in a rockfish cooperative or
rockfish sideboard fishery follow
specified catch handling procedures
prior to processing, (4) requiring the
weighing of all catch from rockfish
cooperatives on NMFS or State
approved scales, and (5) requiring that
shoreside processors receiving rockfish
CQ operate under NMFS approved
CMCPs. Vessels participating in the
entry level longline fishery would not
be subject to specific Rockfish Program
monitoring requirements, but would be
subject to any applicable requirements
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
as a result of participation in other
fisheries. NMFS welcomes comment on
any of the monitoring aspects of the
Rockfish Program.
Application of Monitoring Requirements
for Vessels
NMFS would require that owners and
operators of all catcher vessels and
catcher/processors harvesting under a
cooperative CQ permit comply with the
applicable observer and VMS
requirements while fishing. In addition,
NMFS would require that all vessels
harvesting under a CQ permit or
operating under a catcher/processor
rockfish sideboard while fishing in July
meet catch handling and catch weighing
procedures to ensure proper accounting
of catch.
Similar to the current Pilot Program,
NMFS is proposing to establish a checkin designation procedure for a vessel
that will fish under the authority of a
CQ permit. This procedure would be
necessary because vessels fish in the
Rockfish Program fisheries, and nonRockfish Program fisheries (e.g.,
pollock, Pacific cod, and various flatfish
fisheries) that do not require the same
catch monitoring provisions. The
designated representative of a rockfish
cooperative would be required to
designate any vessel that intends to fish
under the rockfish cooperative’s CQ
permit through a check-in procedure
before that vessel may fish under that
CQ permit. The designated
representative for a rockfish cooperative
must submit a check-in form for a vessel
to NMFS at least 48 hours prior to the
time the vessel would begin a fishing
trip under a CQ permit. This check-in
would provide adequate time for NMFS
to properly track and account for catch
against a cooperative CQ permit. A
check-in designation for a vessel is
effective at the beginning of the first
fishing trip after the designation has
been submitted.
NMFS would require that the
designated representative of a rockfish
cooperative specify any vessel that is no
longer fishing under a CQ permit for
that rockfish cooperative through a
check-out procedure. A check-out report
would need to be submitted within 6
hours after the effective date and time
the rockfish cooperative ends the
vessel’s authority to fish under the CQ
permit. A check-out designation would
be effective at the end of a complete
offload. If the vessel were fishing under
a CQ permit for a catcher/processor
cooperative, a check-out designation
would be effective on the date at the end
of the week as reported in a production
report, or the end of a complete offload,
whichever occurs first.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
The proposed Rockfish Program
includes several changes to the check-in
and check-out procedures of the current
Pilot Program. First, NMFS would
require that the designated
representative of the rockfish
cooperative submit a vessel check-in or
check-out report electronically, rather
than by fax or email. The designated
representative would need to certify that
all information is true, correct, and
complete. This procedure would ensure
more timely collection of information.
Second, NMFS would no longer limit or
cap the number of check-in or check-out
procedures for a vessel allowed in a
season. NMFS would not need to limit
check-in or check-out status to track
vessels because the proposed electronic
submission of the check-in and checkout report would efficiently facilitate
tracking of vessel status.
NMFS would not require vessel
operators to meet the monitoring
provisions applicable to rockfish
cooperatives once NMFS approves a
Declaration of Termination of Fishing.
Once this declaration is made, the CQ
issued to that rockfish cooperative
would be set to zero for all rockfish
primary species, secondary species, and
halibut PSC, and that cooperative could
no longer receive CQ by transfer. This
declaration procedure could occur after
the cooperative has transferred its CQ to
another cooperative, thereby limiting
the loss of any unused CQ. A portion of
any unused halibut CQ could be
reassigned for use in other non-Rockfish
groundfish fisheries as described under
the Transfer of CQ section of this
preamble.
Observer Coverage for Rockfish
Cooperatives
Observers would be required aboard
vessels participating in the Rockfish
Program to adequately account for catch
and bycatch in the fishery. NMFS must
maintain timely and accurate records of
harvest in fisheries with small
allocations that are harvested by a fleet
with a potentially high harvest rate.
Ensuring adequate observer coverage
would be particularly important for
monitoring the complex suite of NMFSmanaged quota allocations. Observer
coverage would be essential to monitor
halibut mortality rates in the fishery and
ensure that a rockfish cooperative does
not exceed its halibut PSC allocation.
Observer coverage issues were
outlined in the Analysis prepared to
support this action (see ADDRESSES for
more information). NMFS would require
100-percent observer coverage for
vessels fishing under a catcher vessel
CQ permit. For catcher/processors, the
level and type of observer coverage
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
proposed under the Rockfish Program
follows models that have been
developed for monitoring catcher/
processor vessels under the Amendment
80, American Fisheries Act (AFA), and
Community Development Quota
programs. Catcher/processors fishing
under the authority of a rockfish CQ
permit would be required to carry two
observers, and at least one of these
observers must be lead level 2 certified.
This proposed rule would mirror the
observer coverage requirements
established under the Pilot Program.
The specific level of observer coverage
required for catcher/processor vessels
and catcher vessels is detailed in Table
11. Generally, observer coverage is
greater for catcher/processors than
catcher vessels due to the nature of
shipboard operations and the difficulty
for one observer to adequately monitor
catch. Unless noted, the Rockfish
Program would not affect existing
observer coverage requirements that
may apply to a vessel or processor when
they are engaged in non-Rockfish
Program fisheries.
Observer coverage under the Rockfish
Program would maintain existing
standards for observer workload
restrictions for catcher/processors (see
§ 679.50 for more details on workload
regulations). Additionally, regulations
would clarify that observer coverage for
catcher vessels required to monitor
harvests would be separate from
observer requirements in other fisheries.
This provision would ensure that
observer coverage necessary to meet the
catch accounting and monitoring for the
Rockfish Program would not affect
observer coverage applicable for other
non-Rockfish Program fisheries.
Observer Coverage for Sideboard
Fisheries
NMFS would require observers on all
catcher/processors subject to sideboard
limits during July. This would help to
ensure that vessels do not exceed the
sideboard limits. Cather/processors
assigned to a rockfish cooperative
would receive a rockfish cooperative
specific sideboard limit that could not
be exceeded. NMFS proposes observer
coverage that would ensure that these
vessels do not exceed their specific
limit. The sideboard limits established
for a rockfish cooperative for the
Western GOA and West Yakutat District
rockfish fisheries are likely to be small
relative to potential harvest rates and
would need to be intensively managed
to ensure adequate catch accounting and
avoid exceeding sideboard limits.
Additionally, the sideboard limits that
would be established for halibut PSC in
the deep-water and shallow-water
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
fishery complex would need to be
managed based on data gathered by
observers. These halibut PSC limits are
small relative to potential halibut PSC
rates. NMFS would not require
additional observer coverage for
managing sideboard limits in the West
Yakutat District, Central GOA, or
Western GOA after July 31. Vessels
fishing under a CQ permit in the Central
GOA after July 31 would still be subject
to any applicable additional observer
requirements established under the
Rockfish Program.
Catcher/processor opt-out vessels
would be subject to less restrictive
sideboard limits. Opt-out vessels would
be assigned a Western Yakutat District,
and Western GOA rockfish and GOA
halibut PSC sideboard limit that would
be managed by NMFS. This would
allow NMFS to close a sideboard limit
to these vessels if it appeared that the
sideboard limit would not support
directed fishing, therefore catch may be
monitored with less observer coverage
than applicable to catcher/processors
assigned a cooperative-specific
sideboard limit.
Observer Communication System
To ensure timely collection of data,
NMFS would require that catcher
vessels less than 125 feet (metric equiv.)
length overall install and maintain a
computer for use by an observer when
the vessel is required to meet observer
coverage requirements for the Rockfish
Program. This would include all catcher
vessels fishing under a rockfish CQ
permit. Alternatively, vessels that
already have computers meeting NMFS
specifications could provide the
observer access to that computer. NMFS
would install custom software on each
of these computers. This software would
allow the vessel’s observer to enter and
edit data that could be transferred to a
disk and sent electronically to NMFS
from a shore based computer. These
requirements mirror regulations already
in place for catcher vessels in the Pilot
Program.
Currently, all vessels that carry an
observer 100 percent of the time as well
as all shoreside and stationary floating
processors required to have an observer
present are required to maintain a
computer for use by an observer as part
of the Observer Communication System
(OCS). The OCS was implemented in
1995 and is comprised of (1) electronic
hardware that meets NMFS
specifications and is supplied by the
vessel, shoreside, or stationary floating
processor, and (2) dedicated software
provided by NMFS. This hardware and
software allow observers to
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52179
communicate with, and transmit data to,
NMFS.
Although a component of the OCS
allows observers to communicate with
and transmit data directly to NMFS, all
participating catcher vessels that are not
currently required to carry an observer
100 percent of the time (those less than
125 feet length overall) would only be
required to provide the computer
component of the OCS. This is because
these vessels make short duration trips
and, at this time, the costs of requiring
communications equipment outweigh
the benefits of increased timeliness of
data transmission.
NMFS anticipates that enabling
observers to enter and send their data
electronically would result in
significant reductions in the time
required to provide data to NMFS and
rockfish cooperative managers. Under
the Rockfish Program, vessels and
rockfish cooperatives would be required
to monitor their catch and stop fishing
when target and PSC allocations are
reached. For catcher vessels, target
species would be required to be retained
and delivered to a shore based processor
where they can be weighed and
accounted for on a trip by trip basis.
Information on these species would be
available within 2 to 3 days of delivery.
However, halibut would be required to
be returned to the sea with minimal
injury and catch accounting would be
based on expanded observer samples.
Observer data from vessels are faxed to
NMFS, keypunched by NMFS staff, and
typically made available within a few
days of receipt. However, observers are
often not able to fax their data from the
current trip. Rather, NMFS staff
typically receives data from the
previous trip. Altogether, delays with
faxing data could result in up to 2
weeks’ delay in making data available to
rockfish cooperative and NMFS
managers. When seasonal catch
amounts are near allocation limits,
vessels’ departures could be delayed
until halibut PSC data become available.
Data entered electronically by
observers also result in significant
improvements to overall data quality.
Custom software provided by NMFS has
several built-in data checking functions
that will not allow some erroneous
information to be entered and
automatically checks for likely
keypunch errors. Additionally, NMFS
staff that identifies data errors may be
able to resolve these errors quickly by
working with the observer. This could
result in improved management
decisions by rockfish cooperatives and
NMFS managers. The computer
hardware and software requirements are
specified in § 679.50.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52180
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Table 11 summarizes the observer
requirements for the Rockfish Program.
Unless noted, the Rockfish Program
would not affect existing observer
coverage that may apply to a vessel or
processor that is engaged in non-
Rockfish Program fisheries, for example,
directed Pollock fishery.
TABLE 11—PROPOSED OBSERVER REQUIREMENTS IN THE ROCKFISH PROGRAM
Component
Requirement
When applicable
A catcher/processor fishing in a rockfish cooperative . . .
Must have aboard at least two observers for
each day that the vessel is used to harvest,
process, or take deliveries from a catcher
vessel under a CQ permit. At least one of
these observers must be endorsed as a
lead level 2 observer. More than two observers are required if observer workload
restrictions would preclude adequate sampling.
Must have aboard at least two observers for
each day that the vessel is used to harvest,
process, or take deliveries from a catcher
vessel. At least one of these observers
must be endorsed as a lead level 2 observer. More than two observers would be
required if observer workload restrictions
would preclude adequate sampling.
Must have aboard at least one observer for
each day that the vessel is used to harvest,
process, or take deliveries from a catcher
vessel.
This coverage requirement would begin on
May 1 for all vessels harvesting CQ for a
rockfish cooperative and end on November
15, or upon NMFS approval of a Declaration of Termination of Fishing by the rockfish cooperative.
A catcher/processor assigned to a rockfish cooperative and subject to sideboard limits during the month of July.
A catcher/processor opt-out vessel that is subject to sideboard limits during the month of
July . . .
A catcher vessel fishing in a rockfish cooperative . . .
Must have an observer aboard at all times the
vessel is used to harvest fish under a CQ
permit. The vessel must provide a computer
for use by the observer for electronic data
entry.
A catcher vessel fishing in the entry level
longline fishery.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Vessel Monitoring System (VMS)
As is required for many other
rationalization programs in the North
Pacific, most vessels participating in the
Rockfish Program would be required to
install, maintain, and operate a VMS
while fishing. A VMS allows NMFS to
track a vessel’s location, providing
useful enforcement information and
safety benefits by providing additional
information during search and rescue
operations. Currently, a VMS is required
for any vessel with a Federal fisheries
permit endorsed for Pacific cod,
pollock, or Atka mackerel that is
operating in any reporting area off
Alaska when the fishery for which the
vessel is endorsed is open. VMS is also
required for vessels operating in the
AFA fishery and BSAI Crab
Rationalization Program. The Rockfish
Program would extend existing VMS
coverage to any vessel with a Federal
fisheries permit endorsed for a Rockfish
Program fishery and would require that
those vessels have a transmitting VMS
on board at all times when operating off
Alaska when the Rockfish Program
fishery for which they are endorsed is
open. Non-trawl vessels participating
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
This coverage requirement would begin on
July 1 for all vessels participating in groundfish fisheries except fixed gear sablefish in
the West Yakutat District, Central GOA, and
Western GOA and end on July 31.
This coverage requirement would begin on
July 1 for all vessels participating in groundfish fisheries except fixed gear sablefish in
the West Yakutat District, Central GOA, and
Western GOA and end on July 31.
This coverage requirement would begin on
May 1 for all vessels harvesting CQ for a
rockfish cooperative and end on November
15, or upon NMFS approval of a Declaration of Termination of Fishing by the rockfish cooperative.
No additional requirements established by the Rockfish Program. Subject to observer provisions at 50 CFR 679.50.
only in the entry level longline fishery,
for example longline vessels targeting
Pacific ocean perch, would be exempted
from the new VMS requirements but
would still be required to use a VMS if
endorsed for other species/gear
combinations for which VMS is
required. For example, vessels that
participate in cooperatives and the
entry-level longline fishery would still
be required to use VMS because VMS is
required for vessels participating in a
cooperative. The existing VMS
requirements are detailed in § 679.28(f).
The Rockfish Program would require
that all vessels operating in a rockfish
catcher vessel or catcher/processor
cooperative use a VMS. The Analysis
prepared for this action (see ADDRESSES)
indicated that all the vessels that have
legal landings in the Central GOA
rockfish fishery are currently required to
use a VMS. A VMS would not be
required for vessels fishing in the
longline portion of the entry level
fishery. The Analysis prepared for the
Rockfish Program indicates that there is
likely to be relatively little participation
by longline vessels in the entry level
fishery. The Council recommended that
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
longline entry level vessels would be
exempt from the VMS requirements that
apply to other vessels in the Rockfish
Program. This exemption is applicable
only to the Rockfish Program. If entry
level vessels are required to use VMS for
other fisheries in the GOA, then those
VMS requirements would continue to
apply.
Special Catch Handling Requirements
for Catcher/Processors
NMFS recognizes that there would be
a strong incentive for Rockfish Program
participants to under report the amount
of halibut caught as bycatch. Halibut
PSC may not be retained by the vessel
and thus has no economic value.
However, it is quite possible that the
lack of sufficient halibut PSC could
limit the amount of rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
harvested by Rockfish Program
participants and under reported halibut
PSC could potentially allow the under
reporting vessel or rockfish cooperative
to harvest a larger amount of target
species. Lack of sufficient halibut PSC
CQ could limit the ability of rockfish
cooperatives to fully harvest their CQ
for rockfish primary species and
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
secondary species. The special catch
handling requirements proposed under
the Rockfish Program mirror those
implemented under the Pilot Program
and those already established for
catcher/processors operating under the
Amendment 80 Program.
Both catcher vessels and catcher/
processor vessels would be monitored to
ensure proper compliance with all
reporting requirements. However, the
opportunity to under report halibut PSC
would be greater on catcher/processor
vessels than catcher vessels due to the
placement of observer sampling stations
and construction of the vessels. These
factors reduce the ability for observers
to adequately monitor the passage of
fish, particularly halibut PSC, from the
net through the processing facilities. In
order to ensure proper catch accounting
on catcher/processors, NMFS has
developed a set of special catch
handling requirements for catcher/
processors assigned to a rockfish
cooperative. The procedures proposed
for the Rockfish Program are similar to
those currently required for the Pilot
Program with some modifications to
accommodate a CMCP specialist at
shorebased facilities. In brief, these
special catch handling requirements
would require the vessel owner or
operator to ensure:
• No fish remain on deck unless an
observer is present, except for fish that
spilled outside the codend;
• The vessel has no more than one
operational line or other conveyance for
the mechanized movement of catch
between the scale used to weigh the
catch bins and the area where the
observer collects species composition
samples; and
• All crew activities within any bin or
tank are observed and monitored prior
to the observer sampling unsorted catch.
A vessel owner or operator of a
catcher/processor may facilitate
observation and monitoring of crew
activities within a bin or tank by one of
three options:
1. Prohibit crew members from
entering bins unless the observer is able
to monitor all crew activities within the
bin;
2. Install viewing ports in the bins; or
3. Install video monitoring system in
the bins.
Each vessel participating in a Program
fishery must choose one of these
options.
Vessel owners or operators who
choose the first option would need to
ensure that crew members do not enter
a bin when fish are moving out of the
bin, unless the observer has been given
a chance to observe the activities of the
crew inside the bin. However, NMFS
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
acknowledges that a crew member may
be required to be inside the bin to
facilitate the movement of fish from the
bin. For that reason, crew members
would be allowed inside bins if the flow
of fish has been stopped between the
tank and the location where the
observer collects unsorted catch, all
catch has been cleared from all locations
between the tank and the location where
the observer collects unsorted catch,
and the observer has been given notice
that the vessel crew must enter the tank.
When informed by an observer that all
sampling has been completed for a
given haul, crew would be able to enter
a tank containing fish from that haul
without stopping the flow of fish or
clearing catch between the tank and the
observer sampling station. Vessel
operators may be able to use water to
facilitate the movement of fish in some
fisheries. However, industry members
have indicated that water may degrade
the quality of fish, which could decrease
the value of these fish. Therefore, NMFS
has developed the proposed options to
allow a person to see inside the bin
while fish are exiting the bin, and
ensure that presorting activities are not
occurring.
Vessel owners or operators who
choose the second option would be
required to provide a view into the bin.
The observer must be able to see all
actions of the crew member inside the
bin from the same position where they
are conducting their normal sampling
duties. For example, while the observer
is sorting catch at the observer sample
station table, crew member activities
inside the bin must be viewable by the
observer from the sample station table.
This option would be acceptable for
vessels that may not need a crew
member in the bin frequently or have
uniformly shaped bins and an observer
sampling station in proximity to the bin
area.
Vessels owners or operators who
choose the third option would be
required to develop and install a digital
video monitoring system. The system
would include a sufficient number of
cameras to view all activities of anyone
inside the bin. Video cameras would be
required to record images in color and
in low light conditions. To ensure that
an observer can monitor crew member
activities in the bin while sampling, a
color monitor would be required to be
located in the observer sampling station.
An observer would be given the
opportunity to review any video data at
any time during a trip. Each video
system would be required to provide
enough storage capacity to store all
video data for an entire trip. Because
NMFS may not be aware of potential
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52181
presorting violations until after an
observer disembarks the vessel and is
debriefed, the vessel must retain all data
for a minimum of 120 days from the
beginning of each trip unless notified by
NMFS that the data may be removed.
Specific requirements for cameras,
resolution, recording formats, and other
technical information is detailed in 50
CFR 679.28(i).
If at any time during a trip, the line
of sight or video options do not allow
an observer to monitor crew activities
within the fish bin or do not meet the
required specifications, the vessel must
revert to the first option and prohibit
crew from entering the bin. The use of
any of these three options would be
approved by NMFS during the vessel’s
annual observer sampling station
inspection as described at § 679.28(d).
Weighing of Catch
Catcher/processor vessels catching
fish under the authority of a rockfish CQ
permit or in sideboard fishery would be
required to weigh all groundfish on a
NMFS-approved scale in compliance
with the scale requirements at 50 CFR
679.28(b). Each haul would need to be
weighed separately, and all catch would
need to be made available for sampling
by an observer. This requirement would
apply to any vessel assigned to a
rockfish cooperative and fishing in a
rockfish sideboard fishery, but not to
opt-out vessels or vessels fishing in the
entry level longline fishery. This
requirement would ensure that all catch
is properly accounted for and debited
from either the cooperative’s CQ
account or sideboard fishery limit, as
applicable. Vessels fishing under an LLP
license that has opted-out of
participating in a rockfish cooperative
would not need to weigh catch from the
opt-out sideboard fisheries in July given
the reduced need for precision in catch
accounting necessary for NMFS to
manage the opt-out sideboard limits.
Shoreside processors receiving catch
from vessels fishing under the authority
of a rockfish CQ permit would need to
weigh all catch as specified in the
CMCP described below.
Catch Monitoring and Control Plan
(CMCP)
The owner and manager of a
shoreside processor receiving
groundfish harvested under the
authority of a rockfish CQ permit would
have to ensure that the facility is
operating under an approved CMCP
whenever receiving CQ allocated under
the Rockfish Program. An acceptable
CMCP describes how landings can be
monitored effectively by a single
individual authorized by NMFS, how
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52182
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
scales will be tested and used, and
ensures that adequate facilities are made
available for individuals authorized by
NMFS (see § 679.28(g) for more details).
CMCP requirements apply to the AFA
and the Pilot Program. NMFS would not
modify these requirements but merely
extend their applicability to processing
facilities participating in this proposed
Rockfish Program.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
CMCP Specialist
NMFS would use a portion of the cost
recovery fees collected under the
Rockfish Program to hire personnel to
monitor rockfish landings to provide
impartial verification of a processor’s
adherence to its CMCP. NMFS would
distinguish the duties between the
rockfish CMCP specialist and a fishery
observer so their respective functions or
duties do not overlap. The rockfish
CMCP specialist would only monitor
program deliveries and would not be
trained as an observer or requested to
complete any observer duties such as
verifying non-rockfish fish tickets,
assisting vessel observers, or collecting
biological or scientific data. The duties
of the rockfish CMCP specialist would
be to monitor rockfish deliveries to
ensure compliance with the CMCP of
any processor receiving program
landings, to assist processors with
rockfish species identification to ensure
accurate catch sorting and quota
accounting, and to report the findings to
NMFS. A shoreside processor would be
required to include a description in the
CMCP of how the CMCP specialist
would be notified of rockfish CQ
deliveries. The CMCP specialist would
establish a monitoring schedule so most
(if not all) deliveries would be
monitored. In the event of conflicting
deliveries, the CMCP specialist would
determine which program deliveries
will be monitored. Because cost
recovery fees would not be available at
the start of the Rockfish Program, NMFS
would be required to fund the CMCP
specialist position(s) until cost recovery
fees are available.
Cost Recovery
The MSA requires that NMFS collect
fees for the limited access programs
established under section 303A of the
MSA. The Rockfish Program would be
established under the provisions of
section 303A of the MSA. Section
304(d)(2) of the MSA requires that
NMFS collect fees for the Rockfish
Program equal to the actual costs
directly related to the management,
enforcement and data collection
(management costs). Section 304(d)(2) of
the MSA also limits the cost recovery
fee so that it may not exceed 3 percent
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
of the ex-vessel value of the fish
harvested under the Rockfish Program.
NMFS would assess a fee on the exvessel value of rockfish primary species
and rockfish secondary species CQ
harvested by rockfish cooperatives in
the Central GOA and waters adjacent to
the Central GOA when rockfish primary
species caught by that vessel is
deducted from the Federal TAC. Halibut
PSC CQ would not be subject to a cost
recovery fee because that halibut cannot
be retained for sale and, therefore, does
not have an ex-vessel value. The entry
level longline fishery and opt-out
vessels are not subject to cost recovery
fees.
An effective fee collection program
would require collecting data on
rockfish primary species and rockfish
secondary species CQ ex-vessel value,
assessing management costs, assigning
the appropriate fee to each rockfish
cooperative, and ensuring that rockfish
cooperatives comply with the fee
collection requirements. The primary
components of the fee collection
program that would require submissions
from Rockfish Program participants are
(1) a requirement that shoreside
processors receiving rockfish CQ submit
an annual Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume
and Value Report that details the exvessel value of harvests; and (2) a cost
recovery fee liability statement from
each rockfish CQ holder—effectively
each rockfish cooperative.
NMFS would rely on the Rockfish Exvessel Volume and Value Report to
provide information on the ex-vessel
value and the price paid of rockfish
primary and secondary species. Each
shoreside processor receiving fish
harvested under a rockfish CQ permit
would be required to submit this report
to NMFS for receipt by NMFS no later
than December 1 of each year. This
would allow NMFS to collect price data
from the rockfish cooperative season
which extends from May 1 through
November 15 of each year. Shoreside
processors would need to provide
landing and price data for each primary
and rockfish secondary species by
month. These data would allow NMFS
to generate a standard ex-vessel price for
each rockfish primary and secondary
species on a monthly basis and
determine the average price paid per
pound for all shoreside processors
receiving rockfish primary and
secondary species CQ. NMFS would
scale the average price in proportion to
the amount of landings receiving that
price during the month. This method is
the same used to calculate a standard
price in the BSAI crab rationalization
and halibut and sablefish IFQ cost
recovery programs. NMFS would
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
publish the standard ex-vessel price per
month for each rockfish primary and
secondary species in the Federal
Register in the first quarter of the year
following the year the landings were
made to provide rockfish cooperatives
with information necessary to assess
their fee liability. For example, in 2012,
each shoreside processor receiving
rockfish primary and secondary species
CQ would need to submit a Rockfish Exvessel Volume and Value Report so it
was received by NMFS by December 1,
2012, and then NMFS would publish
the standard ex-vessel price per species
and per month in early 2013.
This standard ex-vessel price would
apply to all rockfish primary and
secondary CQ landings made in 2012.
NMFS would use a standard ex-vessel
price rather than specific actual price
data provided by each rockfish CQ
holder. Use of a standard ex-vessel price
is allowed under sections 303A and
304(d)(2) of the MSA. The use of an
actual ex-vessel price would require that
the rockfish CQ holder document all
landings and prices. Based on
experience with the halibut and
sablefish IFQ program, where IFQ
holders may use either standard exvessel prices generated by NMFS or
actual ex-vessel prices, very few IFQ
holders subject to fee collection have
used actual prices. The BSAI crab fee
collection program does not provide for
the use of actual ex-vessel price and
NMFS applies a standard price to crab
landings on a monthly basis. NMFS
proposes to extend the use of standard
ex-vessel price in the Rockfish Program.
Standard ex-vessel prices would need to
be applied to the catcher/processor
rockfish cooperatives because catcher/
processor vessels process catch at sea
and do not use ex-vessel pricing to
establish the value of catch because
there is no processor receiving the catch
and paying the harvester. NMFS has
used the standard ex-vessel prices
estimated from shorebased deliveries to
assign an ex-vessel value to catcher/
processor vessels in its cost recovery
programs and would continue to do the
same under this proposed action. Each
year, NMFS would determine the total
value of the rockfish fisheries subject to
fee collection by summing the total
value for all rockfish primary and
rockfish secondary species harvest by
all rockfish cooperatives during the
previous year using the standard exvessel prices.
NMFS would also publish the
rockfish fee percentage in the Federal
Register that would determine the total
fee, up to 3 percent of the total ex-vessel
value of the fishery, required from all
rockfish cooperatives based on landings
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
of rockfish primary and secondary
species CQ made in the previous year.
The fee percentage is the total
percentage of ex-vessel value due for
each pound of rockfish primary and
secondary species CQ made by a
cooperative during the previous year.
With the halibut and sablefish IFQ cost
recovery program, NMFS has published
the standard ex-vessel prices and the
rockfish fee percentage in the same
Federal Register notice in the first
quarter of the year, and NMFS
anticipates using the same process for
the Rockfish Program. The fee
percentage is the amount of the exvessel value that is due to NMFS based
on the standard ex-vessel value of the
rockfish primary and secondary species
CQ debited from all rockfish CQ
accounts relative to the actual costs
directly related to the management,
enforcement and data collection of the
Rockfish Program.
NMFS would determine the fee
percentage that applies to landings
made in the previous year by dividing
the total value of the rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
for all rockfish cooperatives made
during the previous year by the total
actual costs during the previous year.
NMFS tracks expenditures and reports
the actual costs of managing cost
recovery program(s) applicable to the
crab rationalization program and the
halibut and sablefish IFQ program.
NMFS would perform a similar function
for the Rockfish Program fee collection
as well. NMFS would capture the actual
cost of managing the fishery through an
established accounting system that
allows staff to track labor, travel and
procurement. Once the actual costs for
the previous year are identified, a
portion of that amount is recovered from
all rockfish CQ holders in the fishery.
NMFS would adjust the total
management costs, annually, to account
for any adjustments or payments
received during the previous year. For
example, if payments received by
rockfish cooperatives in 2013 were
slightly greater than the actual costs
accrued during the previous year (2012),
then NMFS would adjust the total
management costs, which would then
slightly lower the fee percentage in
2013. Some slight adjustment in the
total management costs to account for
rounding, slight overpayment, or
corrections to actual costs after the fee
liability is due, or for other reasons, is
anticipated and NMFS would
accommodate these factors on an annual
basis. If applying a 3-percent fee would
recover revenues in excess of those
needed, the percentage will be set at less
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
than 3 percent. The fee percentage could
not be set at an amount higher than 3
percent of ex-vessel value even if the
actual costs for the previous year
exceeded 3 percent of the standard exvessel value for the rockfish primary
and secondary CQ landings.
NMFS would inform each rockfish
cooperative of the fee percentage
applied to the previous year’s landings
and the total amount due (fee liability)
through a letter sent to the address of
record for each rockfish cooperative.
NMFS advises rockfish cooperatives to
inform NMFS if their contact
information has changed. This fee
liability letter would be sent to rockfish
cooperative designated representatives
during the first quarter of the year after
the fee was incurred. The fee liability
letter would be provided before fees are
due on February 15 of each year. The
letter would include a summary
explaining the fee liability
determination including the current fee
percentage, details of rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
CQ pounds debited from rockfish CQ
allocations by permit, species, date, and
prices.
Because fees are assessed based on
landings made during the previous year,
NMFS advises rockfish cooperatives to
ensure that adequate funds are retained
on an annual basis to ensure that the fee
liability can be paid. For example,
during 2012, it may be advisable for
rockfish cooperatives to retain up to 3
percent of the value of ex-vessel prices
paid to the rockfish cooperative
members for rockfish primary and
secondary species CQ throughout the
year. This would ensure that the
rockfish cooperative could pay the
required fees for fishing during 2012
when the fee for rockfish primary and
secondary species CQ is due on
February 15, 2013.
NMFS would require that all
payments be submitted electronically in
U.S. dollars by automated clearing
house, credit card, or electronic check
drawn on a U.S. bank account.
Electronic payment and submission of
the fee collection would reduce
administrative costs that would have to
be borne by industry. All the rockfish
cooperatives operating under the Pilot
Program are familiar with, and regularly
use, electronic submissions of various
forms under the Pilot Program, and
NMFS would extend this common
practice to fee submission for the
Rockfish Program. Instructions for
electronic payment would be made
available on the payment Web site and
through a fee liability summary letter
NMFS would mail to the rockfish CQ
permit holder.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52183
Failure to pay on time would result in
the permit holder’s QS becoming nontransferable and the person would be
ineligible to receive any additional QS
by transfer. In addition, cooperative
members would not receive any rockfish
CQ the following year until full
payment of the fee liability is received
by NMFS. This is because CQ may not
be issued until NMFS receives a
complete application, which includes
the full payment of an applicant’s
complete rockfish cost recovery fee
liability. Communication with NMFS by
using the contact information provided
in the fee liability letter would provide
ample opportunity for rockfish CQ
permit holders to reconcile accounts.
However, if the account is not
reconciled and the individual does not
pay, NMFS would send an IAD to the
rockfish CQ permit holder. The IAD
would state that the rockfish CQ permit
holder’s estimated fee liability due from
the rockfish CQ permit holder had not
been paid. Any such formal
determination may be appealed. The
appeals process is described under 50
CFR 679.43. An applicant who appeals
an IAD would not receive any rockfish
CQ derived from their rockfish QS until
the appeal was resolved in the
applicant’s favor.
After 30 days, the agency may pursue
collection of the unpaid fees if the
formal determination is not appealed
and the account remains unpaid or
under-paid. The Regional Administrator
may continue to prohibit issuance of a
rockfish CQ permit for any subsequent
calendar years until NMFS receives the
unpaid fees. Upon issuance of final
agency action, any overpayment of fees
would be returned to the rockfish CQ
permit holder unless the permit holder
requests that the agency put the credit
toward future cost recovery fees. NMFS
notes that some payment processing fees
may be deducted from any fees returned
to the rockfish CQ permit holder.
Currently for the 2011 fishing season,
the processing fee is set at $30, but the
fee may change from year to year.
Rockfish Program Duration and Review
The Rockfish Program would be
authorized for 10 years, from January 1,
2012, until December 31, 2021. In
making its recommendation, the
Council considered the various
consequences that a sunset date could
have on the Rockfish Program. The
Council discussed administrative and
analytical burdens that would be caused
by an in-depth review of the Rockfish
Program prior to its expiration.
Mandating a Council recommendation
to extend the Rockfish Program would
substantially increase Council and staff
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52184
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
workloads, as a formal extension of the
program would be required if the
Council follows the normal process for
amending its FMPs. In addition, the
Council recognized that uncertainty
over the future management of the
fishery would affect the rockfish
industry and how it operates within the
Rockfish Program. The sunset date
would likely affect the value of LLP
licenses that qualify for the Rockfish
Program because the timeframe of the
fishing privilege associated with the
licenses would be uncertain. This
limited duration may also affect
planning by both sectors as well as
future investments by the sectors that
may be beneficial under the Rockfish
Program management, but less useful
under LLP management. Ultimately, the
Council recommended an extension of
the duration of the Rockfish Program to
10 years, which is 5 years longer than
the duration of the Pilot Program, to
allow for the opportunity to reevaluate
the program’s effectiveness in the
future. The Council reviewed and
considered the duration of the permits
under Section 303A. All permits would
expire after 10 years but be renewed
unless the Council takes action to
discontinue the Rockfish Program.
Section 303A(f)(1) of the MSA states
that permits are renewable unless
revoked, limited, or modified. NMFS
notes that the entire Rockfish Program,
and not specifically the permits, would
be subject to the ten year expiration
date.
A formal review of the proposed
Rockfish Program by the Council would
take place 3 years after the
implementation of the program. An
early review of the Rockfish Program
would help the Council determine if the
program is functioning as intended. The
review process would allow for a full
evaluation of the program’s successes or
challenges, and provide the Council
with details on unanticipated
consequences. The Council determined
that a formal review process was
essential to the Rockfish Program as a
key tool to assess whether the Rockfish
Program was achieving the goals of the
MSA and the problem statement as
identified in the Analysis (ADDRESSES).
This review and evaluation by the
Council would include an assessment of
the program objectives. Specifically, the
Council would review whether the
allocation of rockfish and associated
incidental harvests were fair and
equitable given participation in the
fishery, historical investments in and
dependence upon the fishery, and
employment in the harvesting and
processing sectors. The Council would
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
also assess changes in annual
cooperative formation, changes in
product value, the number and
distribution of processing facilities, and
stability or use of annual processor
associations among catcher vessels. The
Council would focus on the impact of
this action on the harvesting and
processing sectors, as well as on fishery
dependent communities. The Council
would also assess whether the needs for
management and enforcement, as well
as data collection and analysis, were
adequately met. Because the Council
would undertake this review, and not
NMFS, regulatory language requiring
this review is not required or included
in this proposed rule.
If the Council recommends an
extension of the Rockfish Program
beyond the 10-year duration, permits
would be renewed before the expiration
date unless they have been revoked,
limited, or modified. NMFS would have
full discretion in determining which
permits would be subject to revocation,
limitation, or modification. If the
Council would not recommend a
continuation of the Rockfish Program,
then rockfish management would revert
back to management under the LLP. If
this should happen, all Rockfish
Program permits would expire 10 years
after the implementation of the Rockfish
Program and not be renewed.
Classification
Pursuant to sections 304(b)(1)(A) of
the MSA, the NMFS Assistant
Administrator has determined that this
proposed rule is consistent with the
FMP, other provisions of the MSA, and
other applicable law, subject to further
consideration after public comment.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
A Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)
and Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) were prepared for this
action. The RIR assesses all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives. The RIR considers all
quantitative and qualitative measures.
The Rockfish Program was chosen based
on those measures that maximize net
benefits to affected participants in the
Central GOA rockfish fisheries. The
IRFA was prepared, as required by
section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the
economic impact this proposed rule, if
adopted, would have on small entities.
A description of the action, why it is
being considered, and the legal basis for
this action are contained in the
preamble. Copies of the RIR and IRFA
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
prepared for this proposed rule are
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
A summary of these analyses follows.
Description of Significant Alternatives
Considered
The Council considered an extensive
and elaborate series of alternatives,
options, and suboptions as it designed
and evaluated the potential for the
continued rationalization of the Central
GOA rockfish fisheries, including the
‘‘no action’’ alternative. The RIR
presents the complete set of alternatives,
in various combinations with the
complex suite of options. Status Quo/No
Action (Alternative 1); current entry
level management under the Pilot
Program (Alternative 2); and an entry
level fishery for longline gear only
(Alternative 3). The third alternative
was selected. Three alternatives for
catcher/processors also were
considered: Status Quo/No Action
(Alternative 1); a rockfish cooperative
program where allocations are based on
harvest history of sector members
(Alternative 2); and the existing Pilot
Program management (Alternative 3).
Alternative 2 was selected. Four
alternatives for the catcher vessel sector
were considered: Status Quo/No Action
(Alternative 1); a rockfish cooperative
program where allocations are based on
harvest history of sector members
(Alternative 2); a rockfish cooperative
program where allocations are divided
between historical harvesters and
processing participants (Alternative 3);
and a cooperative program where a
harvester must join in association with
a processor where associations are
severable (Alternative 4). Alternative 4
was selected.
These alternatives constitute the suite
of ‘‘significant alternatives,’’ under this
proposed action, for purposes of the
RFA. Based upon the best available
scientific data, and consideration of the
objectives of this action, it appears that
there are no alternatives to the proposed
action that have the potential to
accomplish the stated objectives of the
MSA and any other applicable statutes
and that have the potential to minimize
any significant adverse economic
impact of the proposed rule on small
entities. After public process, the
Council concluded that the proposed
Rockfish Program would best
accomplish the stated objectives
articulated in the problem statement
and applicable statutes, and minimize to
the extent practicable adverse economic
impacts on the universe of directly
regulated small entities.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Reasons Action Is Being Considered
and the Objectives of, and Legal Basis
for, the Proposed Rule
The IRFA describes in detail the
reasons why this action is being
proposed, describes the objectives and
legal basis for the proposed rule, and
discusses both small and large regulated
entities to adequately characterize the
fishery participants. Section 303A and
other authorities from the MSA provide
the legal basis for the proposed rule.
This rule is meant to retain the
conservation, management, safety, and
economic gains realized under the Pilot
Program.
Number and Description of Small
Entities Regulated by the Proposed
Action
The IRFA contains a description and
estimate of the number of small entities
to which the proposed rule would
apply. The IRFA estimates that none of
the 12 catcher/processors eligible for the
Rockfish Program and regulated by this
action are small entities, as defined by
the RFA. Thirty-two catcher vessels
eligible for the Rockfish Program were
either members of cooperatives and, as
such, are not considered small entities
for the purpose of the RFA, or had
annual gross revenues of at least $4
million. The remaining 14 eligible
catcher vessels are all considered small
entities. It is likely that some of the
eligible 14 catcher vessels are affiliated
through partnerships with other entities,
and would be considered large entities
for the purpose of this action, but in the
absence of complete ownership
information, these affiliations cannot be
definitively determined.
In addition to the main program, this
action also creates an ‘‘entry level’’
fishery for the longline sector. Since
participation in that fishery is
voluntary, the number of small entities
participating cannot be predicted. It is
likely that a substantial portion of the
entry level longline fishery participants
will be small entities. These impacts are
analyzed in the RIR prepared for this
action (see ADDRESSES).
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping
and Other Compliance Requirements
Implementation of the Rockfish
Program would continue the overall
reporting structure and recordkeeping
requirements of the Pilot Program for
participants in the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries. The regulations proposed are
not expected to increase the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for any small entities in
the fishery.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Federal Rules Which May Duplicate,
Overlap or Conflict With the Proposed
Rule
No Federal rules that may duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with this proposed
action have been identified.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
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. 0206
The Federal Fisheries Permit and
Federal Processor Permit are mentioned
in this proposed rule; however, the
public reporting burden for this
collection-of-information is not directly
affected by this proposed rule.
OMB Control No. 0213
Public reporting burden per response
is estimated to average 30 minutes for
Catcher/processor Trawl Gear Daily
Cumulative Production Logbook; 35
minutes for Catcher/processor trawl gear
ELB.
OMB Control No. 0330
Scale, catch weighing, and monitoring
requirements are mentioned in this rule;
however, the public reporting burden
for this collection-of-information is not
directly affected by this proposed rule.
OMB Control No. 0334
LLP requirements are mentioned in
this proposed rule; however, the public
reporting burden for this collection-ofinformation is not directly affected by
this proposed rule.
OMB Control No. 0445
The VMS requirements are mentioned
in this proposed rule; however, the
public reporting burden for this
collection-of-information is not directly
affected by this proposed rule.
OMB Control No. 0515
Elandings is mentioned in this
proposed rule; however, the public
reporting burden for this collection-ofinformation is not directly affected by
this proposed rule.
OMB Control No. 0545
Public reporting burden per response
is estimated to average 2 hours for
Application for Rockfish Cooperative
Quota; 15 minutes for Cooperative
Termination of Fishing Declaration; 2
hours for Application for Rockfish
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52185
Limited Access Fishery (this application
is removed with this action); 30 minutes
for Rockfish Cooperative Vessel Checkin and Check-out Report; 2 hours for
Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value
Report; 4 hours for appeal of a NMFS
decision; 2 hours for Application for
Rockfish Quota Share; 2 hours for
Application to Transfer Rockfish Quota
Share; 2 hours for Application to Optout of Rockfish Cooperatives; 2 hours
for Application for Inter-cooperative
Transfer of Rockfish Cooperative Quota;
2 hours for Application for Rockfish
Entry Level Longline Fishery; and 4
hours for the annual Rockfish
Cooperative Report.
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. Send comments
on these or any other aspects of the
collection of information to NMFS at the
ADDRESSES above, and 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, and no person shall be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 8, 2011.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
1. The authority citation for part 679
continues to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52186
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et
seq., 3631 et seq.; and Pub. L. 108–447.
2. In § 679.2,
a. Remove the definitions for
‘‘Affiliation for the purpose of defining
AFA entities’’, ‘‘Eligible rockfish
harvester’’, ‘‘Eligible rockfish
processor’’, ‘‘Halibut PSC sideboard
limit’’, ‘‘Initial rockfish QS pool’’,
‘‘Legal rockfish landing for purpose of
qualifying for the Rockfish Program’’,
‘‘Official Rockfish Program record’’,
‘‘Opt-out fishery’’, ‘‘Primary rockfish
species’’, ‘‘Rockfish entry level fishery’’,
‘‘Rockfish entry level processor’’,
‘‘Rockfish limited access fishery’’,
‘‘Secondary species’’, ‘‘Sector for
purposes of the Rockfish Program’’,
‘‘Sideboard limit for purposes of the
Rockfish Program’’, and ‘‘Ten percent or
greater direct or indirect ownership
interest for purposes of the Amendment
80 Program and the Rockfish Program’’;
b. Revise the definitions of
‘‘Affiliates’’, ‘‘Basis species’’,
‘‘Cooperative quota (CQ)’’, ‘‘Rockfish
cooperative’’, ‘‘Rockfish entry level
harvester’’, ‘‘Rockfish Program’’,
‘‘Rockfish Program fisheries’’, ‘‘Rockfish
Program species’’, ‘‘Rockfish Quota
Share (QS)’’, ‘‘Rockfish QS pool’’,
‘‘Rockfish QS unit’’, and ‘‘Rockfish
sideboard fisheries’’; and
c. Add definitions for ‘‘Affiliation for
the purpose of defining AFA and the
Rockfish Program’’, ‘‘Rockfish (Catch
Monitoring Control Plan) CMCP
specialist’’, ‘‘Rockfish CQ (See CQ)’’,
‘‘Rockfish CQ equivalent pound(s)’’,
‘‘Rockfish eligible harvester’’, ‘‘Rockfish
entry level longline fishery’’, ‘‘Rockfish
entry level trawl fishery’’, ‘‘Rockfish fee
liability’’, ‘‘Rockfish fee percentage’’,
‘‘Rockfish legal landings’’, ‘‘Rockfish
processor’’, ‘‘Rockfish Program official
record’’, ‘‘Rockfish sector’’, ‘‘Rockfish
sideboard limit’’, ‘‘Rockfish sideboard
ratio’’, ‘‘Rockfish standard ex-vessel
value’’, ‘‘Rockfish standard price’’, and
‘‘Ten percent or greater direct or
indirect ownership interest for purposes
of the Amendment 80 Program’’ in
alphabetical order to read as follows:
§ 679.2.
Definitions.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
Affiliates, for purposes of subparts E
and H to this part, means business
concerns, organizations, or individuals
are affiliates of each other if, directly or
indirectly, either one controls or has the
power to control the other, or a third
party controls or has the power to
control both. Indicators of control
include, but are not limited to:
Interlocking management or ownership;
identity of interests among family
members; shared facilities and
equipment; common use of employees;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
or a business entity organized following
the decertification, suspension, or
proposed decertification of an observer
provider that has the same or similar
management, ownership, or principal
employees as the observer provider that
was decertified, suspended, or proposed
for decertification.
Affiliation for the purpose of defining
AFA and the Rockfish Program means a
relationship between two or more
individuals, corporations, or other
business concerns in which one concern
directly or indirectly owns a 10 percent
or greater interest in another, exerts
control over another, or has the power
to exert control over another; or a third
individual, corporation, or other
business concern directly or indirectly
owns a 10 percent or greater interest in
both, exerts control over both, or has the
power to exert control over both.
(1) What is 10 percent or greater
ownership? For the purpose of
determining affiliation, 10 percent or
greater ownership is deemed to exist if
an individual, corporation, or other
business concern directly or indirectly
owns 10 percent or greater interest in a
second corporation or other business
concern.
(2) What is an indirect interest? An
indirect interest is one that passes
through one or more intermediate
entities. An entity’s percentage of
indirect interest in a second entity is
equal to the entity’s percentage of direct
interest in an intermediate entity
multiplied by the intermediate entity’s
direct or indirect interest in the second
entity.
(3) What is control? For the purpose
of determining affiliation, control is
deemed to exist if an individual,
corporation, or other business concern
has any of the following relationships or
forms of control over another
individual, corporation, or other
business concern:
(i) Controls 10 percent or more of the
voting stock of another corporation or
business concern;
(ii) Has the authority to direct the
business of the entity that owns the
fishing vessel or processor. The
authority to direct the business of the
entity does not include the right to
simply participate in the direction of the
business activities of an entity that owns
a fishing vessel or processor;
(iii) Has the authority in the ordinary
course of business to limit the actions of
or to replace the chief executive officer,
a majority of the board of directors, any
general partner or any person serving in
a management capacity of an entity that
holds 10 percent or greater interest in a
fishing vessel or processor. Standard
rights of minority shareholders to
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
restrict the actions of the entity are not
included in this definition of control
provided they are unrelated to day-today business activities. These rights
include provisions to require the
consent of the minority shareholder to
sell all or substantially all the assets, to
enter into a different business, to
contract with the major investors or
their affiliates, or to guarantee the
obligations of majority investors or their
affiliates;
(iv) Has the authority to direct the
transfer, operation, or manning of a
fishing vessel or processor. The
authority to direct the transfer,
operation, or manning of a vessel or
processor does not include the right to
simply participate in such activities;
(v) Has the authority to control the
management of or to be a controlling
factor in the entity that holds 10 percent
or greater interest in a fishing vessel or
processor;
(vi) Absorbs all the costs and normal
business risks associated with
ownership and operation of a fishing
vessel or processor;
(vii) Has the responsibility to procure
insurance on the fishing vessel or
processor, or assumes any liability in
excess of insurance coverage;
(viii) Has the authority to control a
fishery cooperative through 10 percent
or greater ownership or control over a
majority of the vessels in the
cooperative, has the authority to
appoint, remove, or limit the actions of
or replace the chief executive officer of
the cooperative, or has the authority to
appoint, remove, or limit the actions of
a majority of the board of directors of
the cooperative. In such instance, all
members of the cooperative are
considered affiliates of the individual,
corporation, or other business concern
that exerts control over the cooperative;
or
(ix) Has the ability through any other
means whatsoever to control the entity
that holds 10 percent or greater interest
in a fishing vessel or processor.
*
*
*
*
*
Basis species means any species or
species group that is open to directed
fishing that the vessel is authorized to
harvest (see Tables 10, 11, and 30 to this
part).
*
*
*
*
*
Cooperative quota (CQ) means:
(1) For purposes of the Amendment
80 Program means:
(i) The annual catch limit of an
Amendment 80 species that may be
caught by an Amendment 80
cooperative while fishing under a CQ
permit;
(ii) The amount of annual halibut and
crab PSC that may be used by an
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Amendment 80 cooperative while
fishing under a CQ permit.
(2) For purposes of the Rockfish
Program means:
(i) The annual catch limit of a rockfish
primary species or rockfish secondary
species that may be harvested by a
rockfish cooperative while fishing under
a CQ permit;
(ii) The amount of annual halibut PSC
that may be used by a rockfish
cooperative in the Central GOA while
fishing under a CQ permit (see rockfish
halibut PSC in this section).
*
*
*
*
*
Rockfish (Catch Monitoring Control
Plan) CMCP specialist, for purposes of
subpart H to this part, means a designee
authorized by the Regional
Administrator to monitor compliance
with catch monitoring and control plans
or for other purposes of conservation
and management of marine resources as
specified by the Regional Administrator.
Rockfish cooperative means a group
of rockfish eligible harvesters who have
chosen to form a rockfish cooperative
under the requirements in § 679.81 in
order to combine and harvest fish
collectively under a CQ permit issued
by NMFS.
Rockfish CQ (See CQ)
Rockfish CQ equivalent pound(s)
means the weight recorded in pounds,
for a rockfish CQ landing and calculated
as round weight.
Rockfish eligible harvester means a
person who is permitted by NMFS to
hold rockfish QS.
Rockfish entry level harvester means a
person who is harvesting fish in the
rockfish entry level longline fishery.
Rockfish entry level longline fishery
means the longline gear fisheries in the
Central GOA conducted under the
Rockfish Program by rockfish entry level
harvesters.
Rockfish entry level trawl fishery
means the trawl gear fisheries in the
Central GOA conducted under the
Rockfish Program by rockfish entry level
harvesters during 2007 through 2011
only.
Rockfish fee liability means that
amount of money for Rockfish Program
cost recovery, in U.S. dollars, owed to
NMFS by a CQ permit holder as
determined by multiplying the
appropriate standard ex-vessel value of
his or her rockfish landing(s) by the
appropriate rockfish fee percentage.
Rockfish fee percentage means that
positive number no greater than 3
percent (0.03) determined by the
Regional Administrator and established
for use in calculating the rockfish fee
liability for a CQ permit holder.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Rockfish legal landings means
groundfish caught and retained in
compliance with state and Federal
regulations in effect at that time unless
harvested and then processed as meal,
and—
(1) For catcher vessels: The harvest of
groundfish from the Central GOA
regulatory area that is offloaded and
recorded on a State of Alaska fish ticket
during the directed fishing season for
that rockfish primary species as
established in Tables 28a and 28b to this
part.
(2) For catcher/processors: The
harvest of groundfish from the Central
GOA regulatory area that is recorded on
a weekly production report based on
harvests during the directed fishing
season for that rockfish primary species
as established in Table 28a to this part.
Rockfish processor means a shoreside
processor with a Federal processor
permit that receives groundfish
harvested under the authority of a CQ
permit.
Rockfish Program means the program
implemented under subpart G to this
part to manage Rockfish Program
fisheries.
Rockfish Program fisheries means one
of following fisheries under the
Rockfish Program:
(1) A rockfish cooperative in the
catcher/processor sector;
(2) A rockfish cooperative in the
catcher vessel sector; and
(3) The rockfish entry level longline
fishery.
Rockfish Program official record
means information used by NMFS
necessary to determine eligibility to
participate in the Rockfish Program and
assign specific harvest privileges or
limits to Rockfish Program participants.
Rockfish Program species means the
following species that are managed
under the authority of the Rockfish
Program:
(1) Rockfish primary species means
northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch,
and pelagic shelf rockfish in the Central
GOA regulatory area.
(2) Rockfish secondary species means
the following species in the Central
GOA regulatory area:
(i) Sablefish not allocated to the IFQ
Program;
(ii) Thornyhead rockfish;
(iii) Pacific cod for the catcher vessel
sector;
(iv) Rougheye rockfish for the catcher/
processor sector; and
(v) Shortraker rockfish for the catcher/
processor sector.
(3) Rockfish non-allocated species
means all groundfish species other than
Rockfish Program species.
Rockfish quota share (QS) means a
permit expressed in numerical units, the
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52187
amount of which is based on rockfish
legal landings for purposes of qualifying
for the Rockfish Program and that are
assigned to an LLP license.
Rockfish QS pool means the sum of
rockfish QS units established for the
Rockfish Program fishery based on the
Rockfish Program official record.
Rockfish QS unit means a measure of
QS based on rockfish legal landings.
Rockfish sector means:
(1) Catcher/processor sector: Those
rockfish eligible harvesters who hold an
LLP license with a catcher/processor
designation that is assigned at least one
rockfish legal landing that could, or
does, generate rockfish QS.
(2) Catcher vessel sector: Those
rockfish eligible harvesters who hold an
LLP license without a catcher/processor
designation with at least one rockfish
legal landing that could, or does,
generate rockfish QS.
Rockfish sideboard fisheries means
fisheries that are assigned a rockfish
sideboard limit that may be harvested
by participants in the Rockfish Program.
Rockfish sideboard limit means:
(1) The maximum amount of northern
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and
pelagic shelf rockfish that may be
harvested in the Rockfish Program as
specified in the sideboard provisions
under § 679.82(e), as applicable; and
(2) The maximum amount of halibut
PSC that may be used in the Rockfish
Program as specified in the sideboard
provisions under § 679.82(e), as
applicable.
Rockfish sideboard ratio means a
portion of a rockfish sideboard limit for
a groundfish fishery that is assigned as
specified under § 679.82(e).
Rockfish standard ex-vessel value
means the total U.S. dollar amount of
rockfish CQ groundfish landings as
calculated by multiplying the number of
landed rockfish CQ equivalent pounds
by the appropriate rockfish standard
price determined by the Regional
Administrator.
Rockfish standard price means a
price, expressed in U.S. dollars per
rockfish CQ equivalent pound, for
landed rockfish CQ groundfish
determined annually by the Regional
Administrator.
*
*
*
*
*
Ten percent or greater direct or
indirect ownership interest for purposes
of the Amendment 80 Program means a
relationship between two or more
persons in which one directly or
indirectly owns or controls a 10 percent
or greater interest in, or otherwise
controls, another person; or a third
person which directly or indirectly
owns or controls, or otherwise controls
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52188
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
a 10 percent or greater interest in both.
For the purpose of this definition, the
following terms are further defined:
(1) Person. A person is a person as
defined in this section.
(2) Indirect interest. An indirect
interest is one that passes through one
or more intermediate persons. A
person’s percentage of indirect interest
in a second person is equal to the
person’s percentage of direct interest in
an intermediate person multiplied by
the intermediate person’s direct or
indirect interest in the second person.
(3) Controls a 10 percent or greater
interest. A person controls a 10 percent
or greater interest in a second person if
the first person:
(i) Controls a 10 percent ownership
share of the second person; or
(ii) Controls 10 percent or more of the
voting or controlling stock of the second
person.
(4) Otherwise controls. A person
otherwise controls another person, if the
first person has:
(i) The right to direct, or does direct,
the business of the other person;
(ii) The right in the ordinary course of
business to limit the actions of, or
replace, or does limit or replace, the
chief executive officer, a majority of the
board of directors, any general partner,
or any person serving in a management
capacity of the other person;
(iii) The right to direct, or does direct,
the Rockfish Program fishery processing
activities of the other person;
(iv) The right to restrict, or does
restrict, the day-to-day business
activities and management policies of
the other person through loan
covenants;
(v) The right to derive, or does derive,
either directly, or through a minority
shareholder or partner, and in favor of
the other person, a significantly
disproportionate amount of the
economic benefit from the processing of
fish by that other person;
(vi) The right to control, or does
control, the management of, or to be a
controlling factor in, the other person;
If program permit or card type is:
*
*
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(6) * * *
(iii) NMFS will reissue a Federal
fisheries permit to any person who
holds a Federal fisheries permit issued
for a vessel if that vessel was used to
make any rockfish legal landings and is
subject to sideboard provisions as
described under § 679.82(d) through (f).
*
*
*
*
*
(k) * * *
(12) * * *
(i) General. In addition to other
requirements of this part, a license
holder must have rockfish QS assigned
to his or her groundfish LLP license to
conduct directed fishing for rockfish
primary species and rockfish secondary
species with trawl gear.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) A CQ permit is issued annually to
a rockfish cooperative if the members of
that rockfish cooperative have
submitted a complete and timely
application for CQ as described in
§ 679.81(f) that is approved by the
Regional Administrator. A CQ permit
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
§ 679.4
*
Permits.
*
*
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
*
*
Permit is in effect from issue date through the end of:
*
*
*
(xii) * * *
(A) Rockfish QS .......................................................................
(B) CQ ......................................................................................
*
(vii) The right to cause, or does cause,
the purchase or sale of fish processed by
the other person;
(viii) Absorbs all of the costs and
normal business risks associated with
ownership and operation of the other
person; or
(ix) Has the ability through any other
means whatsoever to control the other
person.
*
*
*
*
*
3. In § 679.4,
a. Remove paragraphs (a)(1)(xii)(C)
and (D), and (n)(2)(v), (n)(3);
b. Revise paragraphs (a)(1)(xii)(A) and
(B), (b)(6)(iii), (k)(12)(i), (n)(1)(i),
(n)(1)(ii), and (n)(2)(i) through (iii); and
c. Add paragraph (n)(1)(iv) to read as
follows:
Jkt 223001
*
*
Indefinite ..................................................................................
Until expiration date shown on permit ....................................
*
*
authorizes a rockfish cooperative to
participate in the Rockfish Program. The
CQ permit will indicate the amount of
rockfish primary species and rockfish
secondary species that may be harvested
by the rockfish cooperative, and the
amount of rockfish halibut PSC that may
be used by the rockfish cooperative. The
CQ permit will list the members of the
rockfish cooperative, the vessels that are
authorized to fish under the CQ permit
for that rockfish cooperative, and the
rockfish processor with whom that
rockfish cooperative is associated, if
applicable.
(ii) A CQ permit is valid only until the
end of the calendar year for which the
CQ permit is issued;
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) After November 15 of the year for
which the CQ permit is issued, or upon
approval of a rockfish cooperative
termination of fishing declaration
described in paragraph (n)(2) of this
section:
(A) A cooperative may only use
rockfish primary species and rockfish
secondary species CQ for transfer;
(B) A cooperative may not transfer
halibut PSC CQ;
PO 00000
Frm 00042
*
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
*
For more information, see . . .
*
§ 679.80(a)
§ 679.81(e)(4)
*
(C) An amount of halibut PSC equal
to 55 percent of the unused rockfish
halibut PSC CQ assigned to all rockfish
cooperatives will be reapportioned
under the provisions described in
§ 679.21(d)(5)(iii)(B); and
(D) The amount of unused halibut
PSC not reapportioned under the
provisions described in
§ 679.21(d)(5)(iii)(B) will not be
available for use as halibut PSC by any
person for the remainder of that
calendar year.
(2) * * *
(i) A rockfish cooperative may choose
to terminate its CQ permit through a
declaration submitted to NMFS.
(ii) This declaration may only be
submitted to NMFS electronically. The
rockfish cooperative’s designated
representative must log into the online
system and create a request for
termination of fishing declaration as
indicated on the computer screen. By
using the rockfish cooperative’s NMFS
ID and password, and submitting the
termination of fishing declaration
request, the designated representative
certifies that all information is true,
correct, and complete.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(iii) A rockfish cooperative
termination of fishing declaration must
include the following information:
*
*
*
*
*
4. In § 679.5,
a. Remove paragraphs (r)(4), (r)(7),
and (r)(8)(iv);
b. Redesignate paragraphs (r)(5), (r)(6)
and (r)(8) through (r)(10) as (r)(4), (r)(5)
and (r)(6) through (r)(8), respectively;
c. Revise newly redesignated
paragraphs (r)(4), (r)(5), (r)(6)(i),
(r)(8)(i)(A) and (B), and (r)(8)(ii);
d. Revise paragraphs (r)(1) through
(3); and
e. Add paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(F), (r)(9),
and (r)(10) to read as follows:
§ 679.5
(R&R).
Recordkeeping and reporting
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) * * *
If harvest
made under
. . . program
Record the
. . .
For more information,
see . . .
*
*
(F) Rockfish
Program.
*
Cooperative
number.
*
*
subpart H to
this part.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(r) * * *
(1) General. The owners and operators
of catcher vessels, catcher/processors,
and shoreside processors authorized as
participants in the Rockfish Program
must comply with the applicable
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements of this section and must
assign all catch to a rockfish cooperative
or rockfish sideboard fishery, as
applicable at the time of catch or receipt
of groundfish. All owners of catcher
vessels, catcher/processors, and
shoreside processors authorized as
participants in the Rockfish Program
must ensure that their designated
representatives or employees comply
with all applicable recordkeeping and
reporting requirements.
(2) Logbook—(i) DFL. Operators of
catcher vessels equal to or greater than
60 ft (18.3 m) LOA participating in a
Rockfish Program fishery and using
trawl gear must maintain a daily fishing
logbook for trawl gear as described in
paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section.
(ii) ELB. Operators of catcher/
processors permitted in the Rockfish
Program must use a combination of
NMFS-approved catcher/processor trawl
gear ELB and eLandings to record and
report groundfish and PSC information
as described in paragraph (f) of this
section to record Rockfish Program
landings and production.
(3) eLandings. Managers of shoreside
processors that receive rockfish primary
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
species or rockfish secondary species in
the Rockfish Program must use
eLandings or NMFS-approved software
as described in paragraphs (e) and (f) of
this section, instead of a logbook and
WPR, to record Rockfish Program
landings and production.
(4) Production reports. Operators of
catcher/processors that are authorized
as processors in the Rockfish Program
must submit a production report as
described in paragraphs (e)(9) and (10)
of this section.
(5) Product transfer report (PTR),
processors. Operators of catcher/
processors and managers of shoreside
processors that are authorized as
processors in the Rockfish Program
must submit a PTR as described in
paragraph (g) of this section.
(6) Annual rockfish cooperative
report—(i) Applicability. A rockfish
cooperative permitted in the Rockfish
Program (see § 679.4(n)(1)) annually
must submit to the Regional
Administrator an annual rockfish
cooperative report detailing the use of
the cooperative’s CQ.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Vessel check-in. The designated
representative of a rockfish cooperative
must designate any vessel that is
authorized to fish under the rockfish
cooperative’s CQ permit before that
vessel may fish under that CQ permit
through a check-in procedure. The
designated representative for a rockfish
cooperative must submit to NMFS, in
accordance with (8)(ii), a check-in
designation for a vessel:
(1) At least 48 hours prior to the time
the vessel begins a fishing trip to fish
under a CQ permit; and
(2) A check-in designation is effective
at the beginning of the first fishing trip
after the designation has been
submitted.
(B) Vessel check-out. The designated
representative of a rockfish cooperative
must designate any vessel that is no
longer fishing under a CQ permit for
that rockfish cooperative through a
check-out procedure. A check-out report
must be submitted to NMFS, in
accordance with (8)(ii), within 6 hours
after the effective date and time the
rockfish cooperative ends the vessel’s
authority to fish under the CQ permit.
(1) If the vessel is fishing under a CQ
permit for a catcher vessel cooperative,
a check-out designation is effective at
the end of a complete offload;
(2) If the vessel is fishing under a CQ
permit for a catcher/processor
cooperative, a check-out designation is
effective at the end of the week-ending
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52189
date as reported in a production report,
or the end of a complete offload,
whichever occurs first.
(ii) Submittal. The designated
representative of the rockfish
cooperative must submit a vessel checkin or check-out report electronically.
The rockfish cooperative’s designated
representative must log into the online
system and create a vessel check-in or
vessel check-out request as indicated on
the computer screen. By using the
NMFS ID password and submitting the
transfer request, the designated
representative certifies that all
information is true, correct, and
complete.
*
*
*
*
*
(9) Rockfish CQ cost recovery fee
submission (See § 679.85).
(10) Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and
Value Report—(i) Applicability. A
rockfish processor that receives and
purchases landings of rockfish CQ
groundfish must submit annually to
NMFS a complete Rockfish Ex-vessel
Volume and Value Report, as described
in this paragraph (r)(10), for each
reporting period for which the rockfish
processor receives rockfish CQ
groundfish.
(ii) Reporting period. The reporting
period of the Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume
and Value Report shall extend from May
1 through November 15 of each year.
(iii) Due date. A complete Rockfish
Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report
must be received by the Regional
Administrator not later than December 1
of the year in which the rockfish
processor received the rockfish CQ
groundfish.
(iv) Information required. (A) The
rockfish processor must log in using the
rockfish processor’s password and
NMFS person ID to submit a Rockfish
Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report.
The NMFS software autofills the
rockfish processor’s name. The User
must review the autofilled cells to
ensure that they are accurate. A
completed application must contain the
information specified on the Rockfish
Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report
with all applicable fields accurately
filled-in.
(B) Certification. By using the rockfish
processor NMFS ID and password and
submitting the report, the rockfish
processor certifies that all information is
true, correct, and complete to the best of
his or her knowledge and belief.
(v) Submittal. The rockfish processor
must complete and submit online by
electronic submission to NMFS the
Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value
Report available at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52190
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
5. In § 679.7,
a. Remove paragraphs (n)(1)(iv)
through (viii), (n)(2)(iv), (n)(3)(ii) and
(iv), and (n)(7);
b. Redesignate paragraphs (n)(3)(iii)
and (n)(8) as (n)(3)(ii) and (n)(7)
respectively
c. Revise newly redesignated
paragraph (n)(3)(ii);
d. Revise paragraphs (n)(1)(i) through
(iii), (n)(2)(i) through (iii), (n)(4) through
(n)(6); and
e. Add paragraph (n)(8) to read as
follows:
§ 679.7
Prohibitions.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(n) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Use an LLP license assigned to a
rockfish cooperative in any other
rockfish cooperative other than the
rockfish cooperative to which that LLP
license was initially assigned for that
fishing year.
(ii) Use an LLP license that was
excluded from the Rockfish Program or
that opted out of the Rockfish Program
in any rockfish cooperative for that
calendar year.
(iii) Operate a vessel assigned to a
rockfish cooperative in any other
rockfish cooperative other than the
rockfish cooperative to which that
vessel was initially assigned for that
fishing year.
(2) Vessel operators participating in
the Rockfish Program—(i) Operate a
vessel that is assigned to a rockfish
cooperative and fishing under a CQ
permit and fail to follow the catch
monitoring requirements detailed in
§ 679.84(c) through (e).
(ii) Operate a vessel that is subject to
a sideboard limit detailed in § 679.82(e),
as applicable, and fail to follow the
catch monitoring requirements detailed
in § 679.84(c) from July 1 until July 31,
if that vessel is harvesting fish in the
West Yakutat District, Central GOA, or
Western GOA management areas.
(iii) Operate a catcher/processor optout vessel, under § 679.81(f)(5), that is
subject to sideboard provisions detailed
in § 679.82(e) and (f), as applicable, and
fail to follow the catch monitoring
requirements detailed in § 679.84(d)
from July 1 until July 31, if that vessel
is harvesting fish in the West Yakutat
District, Central GOA, or Western GOA
management areas.
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(ii) Operate a vessel that is subject to
a sideboard limit detailed in § 679.82(e)
and fail to use functioning VMS
equipment as described in § 679.28(f) at
all times when operating in a reporting
area off Alaska from July 1 until July 31.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:22 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
(4) Catcher/processor vessels that optout. Operate a vessel that has opted-out
of participating in a rockfish cooperative
to directed fish for northern rockfish,
Pacific ocean perch, or pelagic shelf
rockfish in the Central GOA.
(5) Rockfish processors. (i) Take
deliveries of, or process, groundfish
harvested by a catcher vessel fishing
under the authority of a rockfish CQ
permit unless operating as a shoreside
processor.
(ii) Process any groundfish delivered
by a catcher vessel fishing under the
authority of a CQ permit not weighed on
a scale approved by the State of Alaska.
The scale must meet the requirements
specified in § 679.28(c).
(iii) Take deliveries of, or process,
groundfish caught by a vessel fishing
under the authority of a rockfish CQ
permit without following an approved
CMCP as described in § 679.28(g). A
copy of the CMCP must be maintained
at the facility and made available to
authorized officers or NMFS-authorized
personnel upon request.
(iv) Take deliveries of, or process,
groundfish harvested by a catcher vessel
fishing under the authority of a rockfish
CQ permit outside of the geographic
boundaries of the City of Kodiak as
those boundaries are established by the
State of Alaska on [INSERT THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS FINAL
RULE].
(v) Fail to submit a timely and
complete Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume
and Value Report as required under
§ 679.5(r)(10)
(6) Rockfish cooperatives—(i) Fail to
retain any rockfish primary species or
rockfish secondary species caught by a
vessel when that vessel is fishing under
the authority of a CQ permit.
(ii) Harvest rockfish primary species,
rockfish secondary species, or use
halibut PSC assigned to a rockfish
cooperative in the Central GOA without
a valid CQ permit.
(iii) Begin a fishing trip for any
Rockfish Program species with any
vessel assigned to a rockfish cooperative
if the total amount of unharvested CQ
that is currently held by that rockfish
cooperative is zero or less for any
species for which CQ is assigned.
(iv) Exceed any sideboard limit
assigned to a rockfish cooperative in the
catcher/processor sector.
(v) Operate a vessel assigned to a
rockfish cooperative to fish under a CQ
permit unless the rockfish cooperative
has notified NMFS that the vessel is
fishing under a CQ permit as described
under § 679.5(r)(8).
(vi) Operate a vessel fishing under the
authority of a CQ permit in the catcher
vessel sector and to have any Pacific
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
ocean perch, pelagic shelf rockfish,
northern rockfish, sablefish, Pacific cod,
or thornyhead rockfish aboard the vessel
unless those fish were harvested under
the authority of a CQ permit.
(vii) Catch and process onboard a
vessel any rockfish primary species or
rockfish secondary species harvested
under the authority of a CQ permit
issued to the catcher vessel sector.
(viii) Have a negative balance in a CQ
account for any species for which CQ is
assigned after the end of the calendar
year for which a CQ permit was issued.
(ix) Deliver rockfish primary species
and rockfish secondary species
harvested under the authority of a CQ
permit to any processor other than a
shoreside processor located within the
geographic boundaries of the City of
Kodiak as those boundaries are
established by the State of Alaska on
[INSERT THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THIS FINAL RULE].
(x) Fail to submit a timely and
complete rockfish CQ cost recovery fee
submission form as required under
§ 679.5(r)(9).
(7) Use caps. Exceed the use caps that
apply under § 679.82(a).
(8) Rockfish entry level longline
fishery—(i) Take deliveries of, or
process, groundfish caught by a catcher
vessel directed fishing in the rockfish
entry level longline fishery unless
operating as a shoreside processor.
(ii) Deliver groundfish caught by a
catcher vessel directed fishing in the
rockfish entry level longline fishery to
any processor other than a shoreside
processor.
(iii) Use any gear other than longline
gear to directed fish for a rockfish
primary species in the rockfish entry
level longline fishery.
(iv) Catch and process onboard a
vessel any rockfish primary species
harvested while directed fishing in the
rockfish entry level longline fishery.
(v) Deliver groundfish caught by a
catcher vessel directed fishing in the
rockfish entry level longline fishery
fishing after NMFS has closed directed
fishing to the he rockfish entry level
longline fishery or November 15 of each
calendar year, whichever occurs first.
*
*
*
*
*
6. In § 679.20,
a. Add paragraph (e)(3)(iv) to read as
follows:
§ 679.20
General limitations.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) The maximum retainable amount
for groundfish harvested in the Central
GOA by a catcher/processor vessel
fishing under a rockfish 4CQ permit is
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52191
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
calculated at the end of each weekly
reporting period, and is based on the
basis species defined in Table 30
harvested since the previous weekly
reporting period, or for any portion of a
weekly reporting period that vessel was
designated under a vessel check-in as
specified in § 679.5(r)(8).
*
*
*
*
*
7. In § 679.21,
a. Revise paragraphs (d)(5)(iii)(B) and
(d)(5)(iii)(B)(2) to read as follows:
§ 679.21 Prohibited species bycatch
management.
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) An amount not greater than 55
percent of the halibut PSC that had been
allocated as CQ and that has not been
used by a rockfish cooperative will be
added to the last seasonal
*
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Catcher vessels
*
*
(c)(7)(i) ..................
(c)(7)(ii) .................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(7) * * *
(i) Catcher/processor—(A) Rockfish
cooperative. A catcher/processor that is
named on an LLP license that is
assigned to a rockfish cooperative and is
fishing under the authority of a CQ
permit must have at least two NMFScertified observers onboard for each day
that the vessel is used to harvest or
process in the Central GOA from May 1
through the earlier of:
*
*
*
*
*
(B) Rockfish sideboard fishery for
catcher/processors in a rockfish
cooperative. A catcher/processor that is
subject to a sideboard limit as described
under § 679.82(e) must have at least two
NMFS-certified observers onboard for
each day that the vessel is used to
harvest or process fish in the West
Yakutat District, Central GOA, or
Western GOA management areas from
July 1 through July 31.
*
*
*
*
*
(E) Sideboard fishery for catcher/
processors not in a rockfish cooperative.
A catcher/processor vessel that is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) Rockfish Program, unless those
fish are harvested under the rockfish
entry level longline fishery as described
under § 679.83.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) * * *
(xi) CMCP specialist notification. For
shoreside processors receiving
Catcher/processor
(4) Rockfish Program ............................
*
§ 679.28 Equipment and operational
requirements.
*
*
Program
apportionment for trawl gear during the
current fishing year:
(1) * * *
(2) After the effective date of a
termination of fishing declaration
according to the provisions set out in
§ 679.4(n)(2), whichever occurs first.
*
*
*
*
*
8. In § 679.28,
a. Revise paragraph (g)(2)(iii) and
b. Add paragraph (g)(7)(xi) to read as
follows:
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
§ 679.50
Groundfish Observer Program.
(a) * * *
Motherships
Shoreside and stationary floating
processors
*
*
N/A .......................
Sfmt 4702
*
(d)(1) through (4).
*
subject to a sideboard limit as described
under § 679.82(e) and (f), must have at
least one NMFS-certified observer
onboard for each day that the vessel is
used to harvest or process in the West
Yakutat District, Central GOA, or
Western GOA management areas from
July 1 through July 31.
(ii) Catcher vessels—rockfish
cooperative. A catcher vessel that is
named on an LLP license that is
assigned to a rockfish cooperative and
fishing under the authority of a CQ
permit must have a NMFS-certified
observer onboard at all times the vessel
is used to harvest fish in the Central
GOA from May 1 through the earlier of:
(A) November 15; or
(B) The effective date and time of an
approved rockfish cooperative
termination of fishing declaration.
(iii) Observer coverage limitations.
Observer coverage requirements under
paragraph (c)(7) of this section are in
addition to observer coverage
requirements in other fisheries.
Observer coverage of groundfish
harvested by vessels described under
paragraph (c)(7) of this section are not
PO 00000
deliveries of groundfish harvested under
the authority of a Rockfish CQ permit,
describe how the CMCP specialist will
be notified of deliveries of groundfish
harvested under the authority of a
Rockfish CQ permit.
*
*
*
*
*
9. In § 679.50,
a. Remove paragraphs (c)(7)(i)(B) and
(d)(7);
b. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(7)(i)(C)
through (F) as (c)(7)(i)(B) through (E),
respectively;
c. Revise paragraphs (a)(4), (c)(7)(i)
heading, (c)(7)(i)(A) introductory text,
and (c)(7)(ii);
d. Revise newly redesignated
paragraphs (c)(7)(i)(B) and (c)(7)(i)(E);
and
e. Add paragraph (c)(7)(iii) to read as
follows:
*
*
counted for purposes of meeting
minimum observer coverage
requirements applicable to any
groundfish fishery described under
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
10. Subpart G is revised, to read as
follows:
Subpart G—Rockfish Program
Sec.
679.80 Initial allocation of rockfish QS.
679.81 Rockfish Program annual harvester
and processor privileges.
679.82 Rockfish Program use caps and
sideboard limits.
679.83 Rockfish Program entry level
fishery.
679.84 Rockfish Program recordkeeping,
permits, monitoring, and catch
accounting.
679.85 Cost recovery.
Subpart G—Rockfish Program
§ 679.80 Allocation and transfer of
rockfish QS.
Additional regulations that
implement specific portions of the
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52192
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Rockfish Program are set out under:
§ 679.2 Definitions, § 679.4 Permits,
§ 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting,
§ 679.7 Prohibitions, § 679.20 General
limitations, § 679.21 Prohibited species
bycatch management, § 679.28
Equipment and operational
requirements, and § 679.50 Groundfish
Observer Program.
(a) Applicable areas and duration—
(1) Applicable areas. The Rockfish
Program applies to Rockfish Program
fisheries in the Central GOA Regulatory
Area.
(2) Duration. The Rockfish Program
authorized under this part 679 expires
on December 31, 2021.
(3) Seasons. The following fishing
seasons apply to fishing under this
subpart subject to other provisions of
this part:
(i) Rockfish entry level longline
fishery. Fishing by vessels participating
in the rockfish entry level longline
fishery is authorized from 0001 hours,
A.l.t., January 1 through 1200 hours,
A.l.t., November 15.
(ii) Rockfish cooperative. Fishing by
vessels participating in a rockfish
cooperative is authorized from 1200
hours, A.l.t., May 1 through 1200 hours,
A.l.t., November 15.
(b) Rockfish legal landings—(1)
Eligible LLP licenses. NMFS will assign
rockfish legal landings to an LLP license
only if a vessel made those landings:
(i) Under the authority of a permanent
fully transferable LLP license endorsed
for Central GOA groundfish with a trawl
gear designation during the season dates
for a rockfish primary species as
established in Table 28a to this part;
(ii) Under the authority of an interim
LLP license endorsed for Central GOA
groundfish with a trawl gear designation
during the season dates for that rockfish
primary species as established in Table
28a to this part; provided that:
(A) NMFS has determined that
interim LLP license is ineligible to
receive a designation as a permanent
LLP license endorsed for Central GOA
groundfish with a trawl gear
designation; and
(B) A permanent fully transferable
LLP license endorsed for Central GOA
groundfish with a trawl gear designation
was assigned to the vessel that made
legal rockfish landings under the
authority of an interim LLP license
endorsed for Central GOA groundfish
prior to December 31, 2003, and was
continuously assigned to that vessel
through June 14, 2010; or
(iii) Under the authority of a
permanent fully transferable LLP license
endorsed for Central GOA groundfish
with a trawl gear designation during the
season dates for the entry level trawl
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 for a
rockfish primary species as established
in Table 28b to this part.
(2) Assigning rockfish legal landings
to an LLP license—(i) NMFS will assign
rockfish legal landings to an LLP license
only if the holder of the LLP license
with those landings submits a timely
application for Rockfish QS, in
paragraph (d) of this section, that is
approved by NMFS.
(ii) NMFS will assign rockfish legal
landings made under the authority of an
interim LLP license that meets the
requirements in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of
this section, to the permanent fully
transferable LLP license specified in
paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B) of this section.
NMFS will not assign any legal rockfish
landings made under the authority of
the permanent fully transferable LLP
license specified in paragraph
(b)(1)(ii)(B) of this section prior to the
date that permanent fully transferable
LLP license was assigned to the vessel
that made legal rockfish landings under
the authority of an interim LLP license
specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this
section.
(3) Rockfish landings assigned to the
catcher/processor sector. A rockfish
legal landing for a rockfish primary
species is assigned to the catcher/
processor sector if:
(i) The rockfish legal landings of that
rockfish primary species was harvested
and processed onboard a vessel during
the season dates for that rockfish
primary species as established in Table
28a to this part; and
(ii) The rockfish legal landings were
made under the authority of an eligible
LLP license that is endorsed for Central
GOA groundfish fisheries with trawl
gear with a catcher/processor
designation.
(4) Rockfish legal landings assigned to
the catcher vessel sector. A rockfish
legal landing for a rockfish primary
species is assigned to the catcher vessel
sector if:
(i) The rockfish legal landings of that
rockfish primary species were harvested
and not processed onboard a vessel
during the season dates for that rockfish
primary species as established under
Table 28a or 28b to this part; and
(ii) The rockfish legal landings were
made under the authority of an eligible
LLP license that is endorsed for Central
GOA groundfish fisheries with trawl
gear.
(c) Rockfish Program official record—
(1) Use of the Rockfish Program official
record. The Rockfish Program official
record will contain information used by
the Regional Administrator to
determine:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(i) The amount of rockfish legal
landings assigned to an LLP license;
(ii) The amount of rockfish QS
resulting from rockfish legal landings
assigned to an LLP license held by a
rockfish eligible harvester;
(iii) Rockfish sideboard ratios
assigned to an LLP license;
(iv) Eligibility to participate in the
Rockfish Program and assign specific
harvest privileges to Rockfish Program
participants.
(2) Presumption of correctness. The
Rockfish Program official record is
presumed to be correct. An applicant to
participate in the Rockfish Program has
the burden to prove otherwise. For the
purposes of creating the Rockfish
Program official record, the Regional
Administrator will presume the
following:
(i) An LLP license has been used
onboard the same vessel from which
that LLP license was derived during the
calendar years 2000 and 2001, unless
clear and unambiguous written
documentation is provided that
establishes otherwise.
(ii) If more than one person is
claiming the same rockfish legal
landing, then each LLP license for
which the rockfish legal landing is being
claimed will receive an equal division
of credit for the landing unless the
applicants can provide written
documentation that establishes an
alternative means for distributing the
catch history to the LLP licenses.
(3) Documentation. Only rockfish
legal landings, as defined in § 679.2,
shall be used to establish an allocation
of rockfish QS.
(4) Non-severability of rockfish legal
landings. Rockfish legal landings are
non-severable from the LLP license to
which those rockfish legal landings are
assigned according to the Rockfish
Program official record.
(d) Application for rockfish QS—(1)
Submission of application for rockfish
QS. A person who wishes to receive
rockfish QS to participate in the
Rockfish Program as a rockfish eligible
harvester must submit a timely and
complete Application for Rockfish
Quota Share. This application may only
be submitted to NMFS using the
methods described on the application.
(2) Forms. Forms are available
through the internet on the NMFS
Alaska Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov, or by
contacting NMFS at 800–304–4846,
Option 2.
(3) Deadline—(i) A completed
Application for Rockfish Quota Share
must be received by NMFS no later than
1700 hours, A.l.t., on January 3, 2012, or
if sent by U.S. mail, postmarked by that
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
time. For applications delivered by
hand delivery or carrier only, the
receiving date of signature by NMFS
staff is the date the application was
received. If the application is submitted
by facsimile, the receiving date of the
application is the date stamped received
by NMFS.
(ii) Objective written evidence of
timely application will be considered
proof of a timely application.
(4) Contents of application. A
completed application must contain the
information specified on the
Application for Rockfish Quota Share
identifying the applicant and LLP
license numbers, with all applicable
fields accurately filled-in and all
required documentation attached.
(i) Additional documentation—(A)
Vessel names, ADF&G vessel
registration numbers, and USCG
documentation numbers of all vessels
that fished under the authority of each
LLP license, including dates when
landings were made under the authority
of an LLP license for 2000 and 2001;
(B) Indicate (YES or NO) if the
applicant is applying to participate in
the Rockfish Program based on rockfish
legal landings made during the rockfish
entry level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008,
or 2009; and,
(C) For an applicant who holds an
LLP license that made rockfish legal
landings during the fishery seasons
established in Table 28a to this part and
during the entry level trawl fishery
during 2007, 2008, or 2009 established
in Table 28b to this part, indicate
whether you wish to receive rockfish QS
based on rockfish legal landings during
the fishery seasons established in Table
28a or Table 28b to this part.
(ii) Exclusion from Rockfish Program
for LLP licenses with rockfish legal
landings. A person who holds an LLP
license that made rockfish legal
landings during the fishery seasons
established in Table 28a to this part and
during the entry level trawl fishery
during 2007, 2008, or 2009 established
in Table 28b to this part may choose to
be excluded from the Rockfish Program
and not receive rockfish QS. A person
must submit an application for rockfish
QS affirming exclusion from the
Rockfish Program and forgo all rockfish
QS.
(iii) Applicant signature and
certification. The applicant must sign
and date the application certifying that
all information is true, correct, and
complete to the best of his or her
knowledge and belief. If the application
is completed by a designated
representative, then explicit
authorization signed by the applicant
must accompany the application.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:22 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
(5) Application evaluation. The
Regional Administrator will evaluate
applications received as specified in
paragraph (d)(4) of this section and
compare all claims in an application
with the information in the Rockfish
Program official record. Application
claims that are consistent with
information in the Rockfish Program
official record will be approved by the
Regional Administrator. Application
claims that are inconsistent with
Rockfish Program official record, unless
verified by sufficient documentation,
will not be approved. An applicant who
submits inconsistent claims, or an
applicant who fails to submit the
information specified in paragraph
(d)(4) of this section, will be provided
a single 30-day evidentiary period to
submit the specified information,
submit evidence to verify his or her
inconsistent claims, or submit a revised
application with claims consistent with
information in the Rockfish Program
official record. An applicant who
submits claims that are inconsistent
with information in the Rockfish
Program official record has the burden
of proving that the submitted claims are
correct. Any claims that remain
inconsistent or that are not accepted
after the 30-day evidentiary period will
be denied, and the applicant will be
notified by an initial administrative
determination (IAD) of his or her appeal
rights under § 679.43.
(6) Appeals. If an applicant is notified
by an IAD that claims made by the
applicant have been denied, that
applicant may appeal that IAD under
the provisions in § 679.43.
(e) Assigning rockfish QS—(1)
General. The Regional Administrator
will assign rockfish QS only to a person
who submits a timely application for
rockfish QS that is approved by NMFS
based on:
(i) The amount of rockfish legal
landings assigned to an LLP license as
established in paragraph (e)(2) of this
section; or
(ii) The number of years during which
a person made a rockfish legal landing
under the authority of an LLP license in
the entry level trawl fishery during
2007, 2008, or 2009 as established in
paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
(2) Calculation of rockfish QS
allocation for LLP licenses. Based on the
Rockfish Program official record, the
Regional Administrator shall determine
the initial allocation of rockfish QS for
each rockfish primary species assigned
to each LLP license indicated on a
timely and complete Application for
Rockfish QS that is approved by NMFS,
and that qualifies for an allocation of QS
based on rockfish legal landings from
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52193
2000 to 2006 (and that is not assigned
rockfish QS under the entry level trawl
fishery transition allocation under the
provisions in paragraph (e)(3) of this
section), according to the following
procedure:
(i) Sum the rockfish legal landings for
each rockfish primary species ‘‘s’’ for
each eligible LLP license ‘‘l’’ for each
year during the fishery seasons
established in Table 28a to this part. For
purposes of this calculation, the
Regional Administrator will not assign
any amount of rockfish legal landings to
an LLP license that is assigned rockfish
QS under the provisions in paragraph
(e)(3) of this section. This yields the
Rockfish Total Catch for each rockfish
primary species for each year.
(ii) For each rockfish primary species,
sum the highest 5 years of Rockfish
Total Catch for each eligible LLP license
described under paragraph (e)(2)(i) of
this section. This yields the Highest 5
Yearsls. This amount is equal to the
number of rockfish QS units for that
LLP license for that rockfish primary
species.
(iii) Sum the Highest 5 Yearsls in
paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section of all
eligible LLP licenses for each rockfish
primary species. The result is the è
Highest 5 Yearsls. (or All Highest 5
Yearss).
(3) Calculation of rockfish QS
allocation for LLP licenses that receive
rockfish QS under the entry level trawl
fishery transition allocation. Based on
the Rockfish Program official record, the
Regional Administrator shall determine
the initial allocation of rockfish QS for
each rockfish primary species assigned
to each LLP license indicated on a
timely and complete application for
rockfish QS that is approved by NMFS,
that qualifies for an allocation of QS
based on rockfish legal landings from
2007, 2008, or 2009 under the entry
level trawl fishery transition allocation
(and that is not assigned rockfish QS
under the provisions in paragraph (e)(2)
of this section), according to the
following procedure:
(i) Assign one Rockfish Landing Unit
to an LLP license for each year a
rockfish legal landing of any rockfish
primary species was made under the
authority of an LLP license during the
season dates for the entry level trawl
fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 as
established in Table 28b to this part.
This yields the Rockfish Landing Unitsl.
For purposes of this calculation, the
Regional Administrator will not assign
any Rockfish Landing Units to an LLP
license that is assigned rockfish QS
under the provisions in paragraph (e)(2)
of this section.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52194
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(ii) Sum the Rockfish Landing Units
of all eligible LLP licenses.
(iii) Divide the Rockfish Landing
Unitsl in paragraph (e)(3)(i) of this
section for an LLP license by the sum of
all Rockfish Landing Unitsl of all
eligible LLP licenses in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii) of this section. The result is the
Percentage of the Total Entry Level
Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS
Pooll as presented in the following
equation:
Rockfish Landing Unitsl/è Rockfish
Landing Unitsl = Percentage of the
Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pooll.
(iv) Determine the Total Entry Level
Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS
pool for each rockfish primary species
‘‘s’’ as presented in the following
equation:
(è All Highest 5 Yearss/0.975) ¥è All
Highest 5 Yearss (as calculated in
paragraph (e)(2)(iii) of this section)
= Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pools
(v) Multiply the Percentage of the
Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pool for each
LLP license, as calculated in paragraph
(e)(3)(iii) of this section, by the Total
Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition
Rockfish QS pool for each rockfish
primary species, as calculated in
paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of this section. This
yields the number of rockfish QS units
for that LLP license for that rockfish
primary species.
(vi) All rockfish QS units calculated
in paragraph (e)(3)(v) of this section are
assigned to the catcher vessel sector.
(4) Rockfish initial QS pool. The
rockfish initial QS pool for each
rockfish primary species, and for each
sector, is equal to the sum of all QS
units assigned to LLP licenses, and in
each sector, as calculated under
paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) of this
section as of January 31, 2012.
(5) Non-severability of rockfish QS
from an LLP license. Rockfish QS
assigned to an LLP license is nonseverable from that LLP license, except
as provided for under § 679.80(f)(2).
(f) Transfer of rockfish QS—(1)
Transfer of rockfish QS. A person may
transfer an LLP license, and any
rockfish QS assigned to that LLP license
under the provisions in § 679.4(k)(7),
provided that the LLP license is not
assigned rockfish QS in excess of the
use cap specified in § 679.82(a)(2) at the
time of transfer.
(2) Transfer of rockfish QS assigned to
LLP licenses that exceeds rockfish QS
use caps.
(i) If an LLP license is assigned an
initial allocation of aggregate rockfish
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:06 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
QS that exceeds a use cap specified in
§ 679.82(a)(2), the LLP license holder
may transfer rockfish QS in excess of
the use cap specified in § 679.82(a)(2)
separate from that LLP license and
assign it to one or more LLP licenses.
On completion of the transfer, any LLP
license assigned rockfish QS from the
LLP license that was initially allocated
an amount of aggregate rockfish QS in
excess of the use cap may not exceed
the use cap specified in § 679.82(a)(2).
(ii) Prior to the transfer of an LLP
license that is assigned an initial
allocation of aggregate rockfish QS that
exceeds a use cap specified in
§ 679.82(a)(2), the LLP license holder
must transfer the rockfish QS that is in
excess of the use cap specified in
§ 679.82(a)(2), separate from that LLP
license, and assign it to one or more LLP
licenses under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this
section. On completion of the transfer of
QS, the LLP license that was initially
allocated an amount of aggregate
rockfish QS in excess of the use cap may
not exceed the use cap specified in
§ 679.82(a)(2).
(iii) Any rockfish QS associated with
the LLP license that is in excess of the
use cap may be transferred only if Block
C of the Application for Transfer
License Limitation Program Groundfish/
Crab License is filled out entirely.
(iv) Rockfish QS may only be
transferred to an LLP license that has
been assigned rockfish QS with the
same sector designation as the rockfish
QS to be transferred.
(v) Rockfish QS that is transferred
from an LLP license that was initially
allocated an amount of aggregate
rockfish QS in excess of the use cap
specified in § 679.82(a)(2) and assigned
to another LLP license may not be
severed from the receiving LLP license.
§ 679.81 Rockfish Program annual
harvester privileges.
(a) Sector and LLP license allocations
of rockfish primary species—(1)
General. Each calendar year, the
Regional Administrator will determine
the tonnage of rockfish primary species
that will be assigned to participants in
a rockfish cooperative. This amount will
be assigned to rockfish cooperatives in
the catcher/processor sector or the
catcher vessel sector.
(2) Calculation—(i) The amount of
rockfish primary species ‘‘s’’ allocated
to the Rockfish Program is calculated by
deducting the incidental catch
allowance the Regional Administrator
determines is required on an annual
basis in other non-target fisheries from
the TAC. The remaining TAC for that
rockfish primary species (TACs) is
assigned for use by the rockfish entry
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
level longline fishery and rockfish
cooperatives.
(ii) The allocation of TACs for each
rockfish primary species to the rockfish
entry level longline fishery is
established in Table 28e to this part.
(iii) The allocation of TACs to rockfish
cooperatives is equal to the amount
remaining after allocation to the
rockfish entry level longline fishery
(cooperative TACs).
(b) Allocations of rockfish primary
species CQ to rockfish cooperatives—(1)
Rockfish primary species TACs assigned
to the catcher/processor and catcher
vessel sector. Cooperative TACs
assigned for a rockfish primary species
will be divided between the catcher/
processor sector and the catcher vessel
sector. Each sector will receive a
percentage of cooperative TACs for each
rockfish primary species equal to the
sum of the rockfish QS units assigned to
all LLP licenses that receive rockfish QS
in that sector divided by the rockfish QS
pool for that rockfish primary species.
Expressed algebraically for each
rockfish primary species ‘‘s’’ in
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this
section:
(i) Catcher/Processor Sector TACs =
[(Cooperative TACs) × (Rockfish QS
Units in the Catcher/Processor Sectors/
Rockfish QS Pools)].
(ii) Catcher Vessel Sector TACs =
[(Cooperative TACs) × (Rockfish QS
Units in the Catcher Vessel Sectors/
Rockfish QS Pools)].
(2) Allocations of rockfish primary
species to rockfish cooperatives. TAC is
assigned to each rockfish cooperative
based on the rockfish QS assigned to
that fishery in each sector according to
the following procedures:
(i) Catcher vessel sector rockfish
cooperatives. The amount of TACs for
each rockfish primary species assigned
to a catcher vessel rockfish cooperative
is equal to the amount of rockfish QS
units assigned to that rockfish
cooperative divided by the total rockfish
QS assigned to rockfish cooperatives in
the catcher vessel sector multiplied by
the catcher vessel TACs. Once TACs for
a rockfish primary species is assigned to
a catcher vessel rockfish cooperative, it
is issued as CQ specific to that rockfish
cooperative. The amount of CQ for each
rockfish primary species that is assigned
to a rockfish cooperative is expressed
algebraically as follows:
CQs = [(Catcher Vessel Sector TACs) ×
(Rockfish QS assigned to that
rockfish cooperatives/Rockfish QS
Units assigned to all rockfish
cooperatives in the Catcher Vessel
Sectors)].
(ii) Catcher/processor sector rockfish
cooperatives. The amount of TACs for
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
each rockfish primary species assigned
to a catcher/processor rockfish
cooperative is equal to the amount of
rockfish QS units assigned to that
rockfish cooperative divided by the sum
of the rockfish QS units assigned to
rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/
processor sector multiplied by the
catcher/processor TACs. Once TAC for a
rockfish primary species is assigned to
a catcher/processor rockfish
cooperative, it is issued as CQ specific
to that rockfish cooperative. The amount
of CQ for each rockfish primary species
that is assigned to a rockfish cooperative
is expressed algebraically as follows:
CQ = [(Catcher/Processor Sector TACs) ×
(Rockfish QS Units assigned to that
rockfish cooperative/Rockfish QS
Units assigned to all rockfish
cooperatives in the Catcher/
Processor Sector)].
(c) Allocations of rockfish secondary
species CQ to rockfish cooperatives—
(1) General. Each calendar year, the
Regional Administrator will determine
the tonnage of rockfish secondary
species that may be assigned to the
rockfish cooperatives as rockfish CQ.
This amount will be assigned to the
rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/
processor sector and the catcher vessel
sector.
(2) Amount of rockfish secondary
species tonnage assigned. The amount
of rockfish secondary species tonnage
that may be assigned to the catcher/
processor sector and the catcher vessel
sector is specified in Table 28c to this
part.
(3) Assignment of rockfish secondary
species. Rockfish secondary species will
be assigned only to rockfish
cooperatives.
(4) Determining the amount of
rockfish secondary species CQ assigned
to a rockfish cooperative. The amount of
CQ for each rockfish secondary species
that is assigned to each rockfish
cooperative is determined according to
the following procedures:
(i) CQ assigned to rockfish
cooperatives in the catcher/processor
sector. The CQ for a rockfish secondary
species that is assigned to a catcher/
processor rockfish cooperative is equal
to the amount of that rockfish secondary
species allocated to the catcher/
processor sector in the Rockfish
Program as specified in Table 28c to this
part, multiplied by the sum of the
rockfish QS units for all rockfish
primary species assigned to that
catcher/processor rockfish cooperative
divided by the sum of the rockfish QS
units assigned to rockfish cooperatives
for all rockfish primary species in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:25 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
catcher/processor sector. Expressed
algebraically in the following equation:
CQ for that Secondary Species =
Amount of that rockfish secondary
species allocated to the catcher/
processor sector in the Rockfish
Program × (è Rockfish QS units for all
rockfish primary species assigned to
that rockfish cooperative/è Rockfish QS
units for all rockfish primary species
assigned to all rockfish cooperatives in
the catcher/processor sector).
(ii) CQ assigned to rockfish
cooperatives in the catcher vessel sector.
The CQ for a rockfish secondary species
that is assigned to a catcher vessel
rockfish cooperative is equal to the
amount of that rockfish secondary
species allocated to the catcher vessel
sector in the Rockfish Program as
specified in Table 28c to this part,
multiplied by the sum of the rockfish
QS units for all rockfish primary species
assigned to that catcher vessel rockfish
cooperative divided by the sum of the
rockfish QS units assigned to rockfish
cooperatives for all rockfish primary
species in the catcher vessel sector.
Expressed algebraically in the following
equation:
CQ for that Secondary Species =
Amount of that rockfish secondary
species allocated to the catcher
vessel sector in the Rockfish
Program × (è Rockfish QS units for
all rockfish primary species
assigned to that rockfish
cooperative/è Rockfish QS units
assigned to all rockfish cooperatives
for all rockfish primary species in
the catcher vessel sector).
(d) Allocations of rockfish halibut
PSC CQ to rockfish cooperatives—(1)
General. Each calendar year, the
Regional Administrator will determine
the tonnage of rockfish halibut PSC that
will be assigned to the Rockfish
Program. This amount will be allocated
appropriately to the catcher/processor
sector and the catcher vessel sector. The
tonnage of rockfish halibut PSC
assigned to a sector will be further
assigned as CQ only to rockfish
cooperative(s) within that sector.
(2) Amount of halibut PSC that may
be assigned—(i) The amount of halibut
PSC that may be assigned to the catcher
vessel and catcher/processor sectors is
specified in Table 28d to this part.
(ii) The amount of halibut PSC that is
not assigned to the catcher vessel and
catcher/processor sectors as specified in
Table 28d to this part will not be
assigned for use as halibut PSC or as
halibut IFQ.
(3) Use of rockfish halibut PSC by a
rockfish eligible harvester—(i) Rockfish
halibut PSC assigned to a sector will be
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52195
assigned only to rockfish cooperatives
within that sector.
(ii) Rockfish halibut PSC specified in
Table 28d is not assigned to rockfish
opt-out vessels.
(iii) Rockfish halibut PSC specified in
Table 28d is not assigned to the rockfish
entry level longline fishery.
(4) Determining the amount of
rockfish halibut PSC CQ assigned to a
rockfish cooperative. The amount of
rockfish halibut PSC CQ that is assigned
to each rockfish cooperative is
determined according to the following
procedures:
(i) CQ assigned to rockfish
cooperatives in the catcher/processor
sector. The CQ for halibut PSC that is
assigned to a catcher/processor rockfish
cooperative is equal to the amount of
halibut PSC allocated to the catcher/
processor sector in the Rockfish
Program as specified in Table 28d to
this part, multiplied by the sum of the
rockfish QS units for all rockfish
primary species assigned to that
catcher/processor rockfish cooperative
divided by the sum of the rockfish QS
units assigned to rockfish cooperatives
for all rockfish primary species in the
catcher/processor sector. This is
expressed algebraically in the following
equation:
CQ for rockfish halibut PSC = Amount
halibut PSC allocated to the
catcher/processor sector in the
Rockfish Program × (è Rockfish QS
units assigned to that rockfish
cooperative/è Rockfish QS units
assigned to all rockfish cooperatives
in the catcher/processor sector).
(ii) CQ assigned to rockfish
cooperatives in the catcher vessel sector.
The CQ for halibut PSC that is assigned
to a catcher vessel rockfish cooperative
is equal to the amount of halibut PSC
allocated to the catcher vessel sector in
the Rockfish Program as specified in
Table 28d to this part, multiplied by the
sum of the rockfish QS units for all
rockfish primary species assigned to
that catcher vessel rockfish cooperative
divided by the sum of the rockfish QS
units assigned to rockfish cooperatives
for all rockfish primary species in the
catcher vessel sector. This is expressed
algebraically in the following equation:
CQ for rockfish halibut PSC = Amount
halibut PSC allocated to the catcher
vessel sector in the Rockfish
Program × (è Rockfish QS units
assigned to that rockfish
cooperative/è Rockfish QS units
assigned to all rockfish cooperatives
in the catcher vessel sector).
(e) Assigning rockfish QS to a rockfish
cooperative—(1) General. Each calendar
year, a person that is participating in the
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52196
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Rockfish Program may assign an LLP
license and the rockfish QS assigned to
that LLP license to a Rockfish
cooperative. A rockfish eligible
harvester assigns rockfish QS to a
rockfish cooperative on a complete
application for CQ that is approved by
NMFS and that meets the requirements
of paragraph (f) of this section.
(i) An LLP license and rockfish QS
may be assigned to a catcher vessel
cooperative if that rockfish QS is
derived from legal rockfish landings
assigned to the catcher vessel sector.
(ii) An LLP license and rockfish QS
may be assigned to a catcher/processor
cooperative if that rockfish QS is
derived from rockfish legal landings
assigned to the catcher/processor sector.
(2) Catcher/Processor opt-out. Each
calendar year, a person holding an LLP
license assigned rockfish QS in the
catcher/processor sector may opt-out of
participating in a rockfish cooperative
by completing a timely Application to
Opt-out of Rockfish Cooperative that is
approved by NMFS. A person may not
assign an LLP license assigned rockfish
QS in the catcher/processor sector to
both a rockfish cooperative and opt-out
of participating in a rockfish
cooperative.
(f) Annual Applications for the
Rockfish Program—(1) General.
Applications to participate in the
Rockfish Program are required to be
submitted each calendar year. To
receive rockfish CQ, a designated
rockfish cooperative representative must
submit a complete application for
rockfish CQ. A person who wishes to
opt-out of participating in a rockfish
cooperative for a calendar year with an
LLP license assigned rockfish QS must
submit an Application to Opt-out of
Rockfish Cooperative. These
applications may only be submitted to
NMFS using the methods described on
the application.
(2) Application forms. Application
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.
(3) Deadline—(i) A completed
application must be received by NMFS
no later than 1700 hours, A.l.t., on
March 1 of each year, or if sent by U.S.
mail, the application must be
postmarked by that time. For
applications delivered by hand delivery
or carrier only, the receiving date of
signature by NMFS staff is the date the
application was received. If the
application is submitted by facsimile,
the receiving date of the application is
the date stamped received by NMFS.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
(ii) Objective written evidence of
timely application will be considered as
proof of a timely application.
(4) Application for Rockfish
Cooperative Fishing Quota (CQ). If a
designated rockfish cooperative
representative submits a complete
application that is approved by NMFS,
the cooperative will receive a CQ
permit. The CQ permit will list the
amount of CQ, by rockfish primary
species, rockfish secondary species, and
halibut PSC held by the rockfish
cooperative, the members of the rockfish
cooperative, LLP licenses assigned to
that rockfish cooperative, and the
vessels that are authorized to harvest
fish under that CQ permit.
(i) Contents of the Application—(A)
General information. A completed
application must contain the
information specified on the
Application for Rockfish Cooperative
Fishing Quota identifying the rockfish
cooperative, members of the
cooperative, and processor associate of
a catcher vessel rockfish cooperative,
with all applicable fields accurately
filled-in and all required documentation
attached.
(B) Additional documentation. For the
cooperative application to be considered
complete, the following documents
must be attached to the application:
(1) A copy of the business license
issued by the state in which the rockfish
cooperative is registered as a business
entity;
(2) A copy of the articles of
incorporation or partnership agreement
of the rockfish cooperative;
(3) Provide the names of all persons,
to the individual level, holding an
ownership interest in the LLP license
and the percentage ownership each
person and individual holds in the LLP
license;
(4) A copy of the rockfish cooperative
agreement signed by the members of the
rockfish cooperative (if different from
the articles of incorporation or
partnership agreement of the rockfish
cooperative) that includes terms that
specify that:
(i) Rockfish QS holders affiliated with
rockfish processors cannot participate in
price setting negotiations except as
permitted by general antitrust law;
(ii) The rockfish cooperative must
establish a monitoring program
sufficient to ensure compliance with the
Rockfish Program;
(iii) The proposed fishing plan to be
used by members of the cooperative,
including any proposed cooperative
specific monitoring procedures and any
voluntary codes of conduct that apply to
the members of the cooperative, if
applicable; and
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(iv) Terms and conditions to specify
the obligations of rockfish QS holders
who are members of the rockfish
cooperative to ensure the full payment
of rockfish cost recovery fees that may
be due.
(C) Applicant signature and
certification. The applicant, including
the processor associate of the rockfish
cooperative, must sign and date the
application certifying that all
information is true, correct, and
complete to the best of his or her
knowledge and belief. If the application
is completed by a designated
representative, then explicit
authorization signed by the applicant
must accompany the application.
(ii) Issuance of CQ. NMFS will not
issue a CQ permit if an application is
not complete and approved by NMFS.
Issuance by NMFS of a CQ permit is not
a determination that the rockfish
cooperative is formed or is operating in
compliance with antitrust law.
(5) Application to Opt-out of Rockfish
Cooperative. An LLP license holder
with a catcher/processor operation type
and rockfish QS assigned to that LLP
license who wishes to opt-out of
participating in a rockfish cooperative
for a calendar year must submit an
application.
(i) General information. A completed
application must contain the
information specified on the application
identifying the applicant, vessel, and
LLP licenses, with all applicable fields
accurately filled-in and all required
additional documentation attached. A
completed application must contain the
following additional documentation:
(ii) Additional documentation—(A)
LLP holdership documentation. Provide
the names of all persons, to the
individual level, holding an ownership
interest in the LLP license and the
percentage ownership each person and
individual holds in the LLP license; and
(B) Signature and certification. The
applicant must sign and date the
application certifying that all
information is true, correct, and
complete to the best of his or her
knowledge and belief. If the application
is completed by a designated
representative, then explicit
authorization signed by the applicant
must accompany the application.
(6) LLP licenses and rockfish QS not
designated on a timely and complete
application for rockfish CQ. NMFS will
prohibit any LLP licenses with rockfish
QS assigned to that LLP license from
fishing in the directed rockfish primary
fisheries in the Central GOA for a
calendar year if that LLP license is not
designated on a timely and complete
application for CQ for that calendar year
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
that is approved by NMFS. Rockfish
sideboard provisions described in
§ 679.82 shall apply to that LLP license,
as applicable.
(g) Application for inter-cooperative
transfer of cooperative quota (CQ)—(1)
Completed application. NMFS will
process an application for intercooperative transfer of CQ provided that
an electronic online transfer application
is completed by the transferor and
transferee, with all applicable fields
accurately filled-in.
(2) Certification of transferor—(i) The
transferor’s designated representative
must log into the online system and
create a transfer request as indicated on
the computer screen. By using the
transferor’s NMFS ID, password, and
Transfer Key and submitting the transfer
request, the designated representative
certifies that all information is true,
correct, and complete.
(ii) The transferee’s designated
representative must log into the online
system and accept the transfer request.
By using the transferee’s NMFS ID,
password, and Transfer Key, the
designated representative certifies that
all information is true, correct, and
complete.
(h) Maximum retainable amount
(MRA) limits—(1) Rockfish cooperative.
A vessel assigned to a rockfish
cooperative and fishing under a CQ
permit may harvest groundfish species
not allocated as CQ up to the amounts
of the MRAs for those species as
established in Table 30 to this part.
(2) Opt-out vessels. A rockfish eligible
harvester who opted-out of participating
in a rockfish cooperative is subject to
MRAs for rockfish primary species and
rockfish secondary species as
established in Table 10 to this part.
(3) Rockfish entry level longline
fishery. A person directed fishing in the
rockfish entry level longline fishery may
harvest groundfish species other than
rockfish primary species up to amounts
of the MRAs for those species as
established in Table 10 to this part.
(4) Maximum retainable amount
(MRA) calculation and limits—catcher
vessels—(i) The MRA for an incidental
catch species for vessels fishing under
the authority of a CQ permit is
calculated as a proportion of the total
allocated rockfish primary species and
rockfish secondary species on board the
vessel in round weight equivalents
using the retainable percentage in Table
30 to this part; except that—
(ii) Once the amount of shortraker
rockfish harvested in the catcher vessel
sector is equal to 9.72 percent of the
shortraker rockfish TAC in the Central
GOA regulatory area, then shortraker
rockfish may not be retained by any
participant in the catcher vessel sector
while fishing under the authority of a
CQ permit.
(5) Maximum retainable amount
(MRA) calculation and limits—catcher/
processor vessels. The MRA for an
incidental catch species for vessels
fishing under the authority of a CQ
permit is calculated as a proportion of
the total allocated rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
on board the vessel in round weight
equivalents using the retainable
percentage in Table 30 to this part as
determined under § 679.20(e)(3)(iv).
(i) Rockfish cooperative —(1) General.
This section governs the formation and
operation of rockfish cooperatives. The
regulations in this section apply only to
rockfish cooperatives that have formed
for the purpose of fishing with CQ
issued annually by NMFS.
(i) Members of rockfish cooperatives
should consult legal counsel before
commencing any activity if the members
are uncertain about the legality under
the antitrust laws of the rockfish
cooperative’s proposed conduct.
(ii) Membership in a rockfish
cooperative is voluntary. No person may
be required to join a rockfish
cooperative.
Requirement
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
(iii) Is an association with a rockfish processor
required?
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Catcher/Processor sector
Only persons who hold rockfish QS may join a rockfish cooperative.
(ii) What is the minimum number of LLP licenses that must be assigned to form a rockfish cooperative?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
(iii) Members may leave a rockfish
cooperative, but any CQ contributed by
the rockfish QS held by that member
remains assigned to that rockfish
cooperative for the remainder of the
calendar year.
(iv) An LLP license, or vessel that has
been assigned to a rockfish cooperative
that leaves a rockfish cooperative
continues to be subject to the sideboard
provisions established for that rockfish
cooperative under § 679.82(d) and (e), as
applicable, for that calendar year.
(v) If a person becomes the holder of
an LLP license that had been previously
assigned to a rockfish cooperative, then
that person may join that rockfish
cooperative upon receipt of that LLP
license, but may not assign that LLP
license to another rockfish cooperative
during that calendar year.
(2) Legal and organizational
requirements. A rockfish cooperative
must meet the following legal and
organizational requirements before it is
eligible to receive CQ:
(i) Each rockfish cooperative must be
formed as a partnership, corporation, or
other legal business entity that is
registered under the laws of one of the
50 states or the District of Columbia;
(ii) Each rockfish cooperative must
appoint an individual as designated
representative to act on the rockfish
cooperative’s behalf and serve as contact
point for NMFS for questions regarding
the operation of the rockfish
cooperative. The designated
representative must be an individual,
and may be a member of the rockfish
cooperative, or some other individual
designated by the rockfish cooperative;
(iii) Each rockfish cooperative must
submit a complete and timely
application for CQ.
(3) General requirements. The
following table describes the
requirements to form a rockfish
cooperative in the catcher vessel or
catcher/processor sector.
Catcher vessel sector
(i) Who may join a rockfish cooperative?
No minimum requirement.
Yes, a rockfish QS holder may only be a
member of a rockfish cooperative formed in
association with a rockfish processor. The
rockfish cooperative may not receive rockfish CQ unless a shoreside processor eligible to receive rockfish CQ has indicated
that it may be willing to receive rockfish CQ
from that cooperative in the application for
CQ, as described under § 679.81, that is
submitted by that cooperative.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52197
No.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52198
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Requirement
Catcher vessel sector
Catcher/Processor sector
No.
N/A.
No.
No.
(vi) What is allocated to the rockfish cooperative?
CQ for rockfish primary species, rockfish secondary species, and rockfish halibut PSC, based
on the rockfish QS assigned to all of the LLP licenses that are assigned to the cooperative.
(vii) Is this CQ an exclusive harvest privilege?
Yes, the members of the rockfish cooperative have an exclusive harvest privilege to collectively catch this CQ, or a cooperative may transfer all or a portion of this CQ to another rockfish cooperative.
(viii) Is there a season during which designated
vessels may catch CQ?
Yes, any vessel designated to catch CQ for a rockfish cooperative is limited to catching CQ
during the season beginning on 1200 hours, A.l.t., on May 1 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., on November 15.
(ix) Can any vessel catch a rockfish cooperative’s CQ?
No, only vessels that are named on the application for CQ for that rockfish cooperative may
catch the CQ assigned to that rockfish cooperative. A vessel may be assigned to only one
rockfish cooperative in a calendar year.
(x) Can a member of a rockfish cooperative
transfer CQ individually to another rockfish
cooperative without the approval of the other
members of the rockfish cooperative?
No, only the rockfish cooperative’s designated representative, and not individual members,
may transfer its CQ to another rockfish cooperative. Any such transfer must be approved by
NMFS as established under paragraph (i)(4)(ii) of this section.
(xi) Can a rockfish cooperative in the catcher/
processor sector transfer its sideboard limit?
N/A.
(xii) Is there a hired master requirement?
No, there is no hired master requirement.
(xiii) Can an LLP license be assigned to more
than one rockfish cooperative in a calendar
year?
No, an LLP license may only be assigned to one rockfish cooperative in a calendar year. A
person holding multiple LLP licenses with associated rockfish QS may assign different LLP licenses to different rockfish cooperatives subject to any other restrictions that may apply.
(xiv) Can a rockfish processor be associated
with more than one rockfish cooperative?
Yes.
N/A.
(xv) Can an LLP license be assigned to a rockfish cooperative and opt-out of participating in
a rockfish cooperative?
N/A.
No, each calendar year an LLP license must
either be assigned to a rockfish cooperative
or opt-out.
(xvi) Which members may harvest the rockfish
cooperative’s CQ?
That is determined by the rockfish cooperative contract signed by its members. Any violations
of this contract by one cooperative member may be subject to civil claims by other members of
the rockfish cooperative.
(xvii) Does a rockfish cooperative need a contract?
Yes, a rockfish cooperative must have a membership agreement or contract that specifies how
the rockfish cooperative intends to harvest its CQ. A copy of this agreement or contract must
be submitted to NMFS with the cooperative’s application for CQ.
(xviii) What happens if the rockfish cooperative
exceeds its CQ amount?
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
(iv) Is a rockfish cooperative member required
to deliver catch to the rockfish processor with
whom the rockfish cooperative is associated?
(v) Is there a minimum amount of rockfish QS
that must be assigned to a rockfish cooperative for it to be allowed to form?
A rockfish cooperative is not authorized to catch fish in excess of its CQ and must not exceed
its CQ amount at the end of the calendar year. Exceeding a CQ is a violation of the Rockfish
Program regulations. Each member of the rockfish cooperative is jointly and severally liable for
any violations of the Rockfish Program regulations while fishing under authority of a CQ permit. This liability extends to any persons who are hired to catch or receive CQ assigned to a
rockfish cooperative. Each member of a rockfish cooperative is responsible for ensuring that all
members of the rockfish cooperative comply with all regulations applicable to fishing under the
Rockfish Program.
(xix) Is there a limit on how much CQ a rockfish
cooperative may hold or use?
Yes, see § 679.82(a) for the provisions that apply.
(xx) Is there a limit on how much CQ a vessel
may harvest?
Yes, see § 679.82(a) for the provisions that apply.
(xxi) Is there a requirement that a rockfish cooperative pay rockfish cost recovery fees?
Yes, see § 679.85 for the provisions that apply.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:31 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
No, a sideboard limit assigned to a rockfish
cooperative in the catcher/processor sector
is a limit applicable to a specific rockfish cooperative, and may not be transferred between rockfish cooperatives.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Requirement
Catcher vessel sector
52199
Catcher/Processor sector
(xxii) When does catch count against my CQ
permit?
Any vessel fishing checked-in (and therefore fishing under the authority of a CQ permit must
count any catch of rockfish primary species, rockfish secondary species, or rockfish halibut
PSC against that rockfish cooperative’s CQ from May 1 until November 15, or until the effective date of a rockfish cooperative termination of fishing declaration that has been approved by
NMFS.)
(xxiii) If my vessel is checked-out and fishing in
a directed flatfish fishery in the Central GOA
and I catch groundfish and halibut PSC, does
that count against the rockfish cooperative’s
CQ?
No. If you are fishing in a directed flatfish fishery and checked-out of the Rockfish Program
fisheries, you are not fishing under the authority of a CQ permit. Groundfish harvests would
not be debited against the rockfish cooperative’s CQ permit. In this case, any catch of halibut
would be attributed to the halibut PSC limit for that directed target fishery and gear type and
any applicable sideboard limit.
(xxiv) Can my rockfish cooperative negotiate
prices for me?
The rockfish cooperatives formed under the Rockfish Program are intended to conduct and coordinate harvest activities for their members. Rockfish cooperatives formed under the Rockfish
Program are subject to existing antitrust laws. Collective price negotiation by a rockfish cooperative must be conducted in accordance with existing antitrust laws.
(xxv) Are there any special reporting requirements?
Yes, each year a rockfish cooperative must submit an annual rockfish cooperative report to
NMFS by December 15 of that year. See § 679.5(r)(6) for the reporting requirements.
(xxvi) What is required in the annual rockfish
cooperative report?
The annual rockfish cooperative report must include at a minimum:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
(A) The rockfish cooperative’s CQ, sideboard limit (if applicable), and any rockfish sideboard
fishery harvests made by the vessels in the rockfish cooperative on a vessel-by-vessel basis;
(B) The rockfish cooperative’s actual retained and discarded catch of CQ, and sideboard limit
on an area-by-area and vessel-by-vessel basis;
(C) A description of the method used by the rockfish cooperative to monitor fisheries in which
rockfish cooperative vessels participated; and
(D) A description of any civil actions taken by the rockfish cooperative in response to any
members that exceeded their allowed catch.
(4) Additional requirements—(i)
Restrictions on fishing CQ assigned to a
rockfish cooperative. A person fishing
CQ assigned to a rockfish cooperative
must maintain a copy of the CQ permit
onboard any vessel that is being used to
harvest any rockfish primary species, or
rockfish secondary species, or that uses
any rockfish halibut PSC CQ.
(ii) Transfer of CQ between rockfish
cooperatives. Rockfish cooperatives may
transfer CQ during a calendar year with
the following restrictions:
(A) A rockfish cooperative may only
transfer CQ to another rockfish
cooperative;
(B) A rockfish cooperative may only
receive CQ from another rockfish
cooperative;
(C) A rockfish cooperative may
transfer or receive rockfish CQ only if
that cooperative has been assigned at
least two LLP licenses with rockfish QS
assigned to those LLP licenses;
(D) A rockfish cooperative in the
catcher vessel sector may not transfer
any CQ to a rockfish cooperative in the
catcher/processor sector;
(E) A rockfish cooperative in the
catcher/processor sector may not
transfer any rougheye rockfish CQ or
shortraker rockfish CQ to a rockfish
cooperative in the catcher vessel sector.
(F) A rockfish cooperative receiving
rockfish primary species CQ by transfer
must assign that rockfish primary
species CQ to a member(s) of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:41 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
rockfish cooperative for the purposes of
applying the use caps established under
§ 679.82(a). NMFS will not approve a
transfer if that member would exceed
the use cap as a result of the transfer.
Rockfish secondary species or halibut
PSC CQ is not assigned to a specific
member of a rockfish cooperative;
(G) A rockfish cooperative in the
catcher/processor sector may not
transfer any sideboard limit assigned to
it; and
(H) A rockfish cooperative may not
receive any CQ by transfer after NMFS
has approved a rockfish cooperative
termination of fishing declaration that
was submitted by that rockfish
cooperative.
(5) Use of CQ—(i) A rockfish
cooperative in the catcher vessel sector
may not use a rockfish primary species
CQ in excess of the amounts specified
in § 679.82(a).
(ii) For purposes of CQ use cap
calculation, the total amount of CQ held
or used by a person is equal to all tons
of CQ derived from the rockfish QS held
by that person and assigned to the
rockfish cooperative and all tons of CQ
assigned to that person by the rockfish
cooperative from approved transfers.
(iii) The amount of rockfish QS held
by a person, and CQ derived from that
rockfish QS is calculated using the
individual and collective use cap rule
established in § 679.82(a).
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(6) Successors-in-interest. If a member
of a rockfish cooperative dies (in the
case of an individual) or dissolves (in
the case of a business entity), the LLP
license(s) and associated rockfish QS
held by that person will be transferred
to the legal successor-in-interest under
the procedures described in
§ 679.4(k)(6)(iv)(A). However, the CQ
derived from that rockfish QS and
assigned to the rockfish cooperative for
that year from that person remains
under the control of the rockfish
cooperative for the duration of that
calendar year. Each rockfish cooperative
is free to establish its own internal
procedures for admitting a successor-ininterest during the fishing season to
reflect the transfer of an LLP license and
associated rockfish QS.
§ 679.82 Rockfish Program use caps and
sideboard limits.
(a) Use caps—(1) General. (i) Use caps
limit the amount of rockfish QS that
may be held or used by a rockfish
eligible harvester and the amount of CQ
that may be held or used by a rockfish
cooperative, harvested by a vessel, or
received or processed by a rockfish
processor.
(ii) Use caps do not apply to halibut
PSC CQ.
(iii) Use caps may not be exceeded
unless the entity subject to the use cap
is specifically allowed to exceed a cap
according to the criteria established
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52200
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
under this paragraph (a), or by an
operation of law.
(iv) All rockfish QS use caps are based
on the aggregate rockfish primary
species initial rockfish QS pool
established by NMFS in Table 29 to this
part.
(v) Sablefish and Pacific cod CQ
processing use caps are based on the
amount of CQ assigned to the catcher
vessel sector during a calendar year.
(2) Rockfish QS use cap. A person
may not individually or collectively
hold or use more than:
(i) Four (4.0) percent of the aggregate
rockfish primary species QS initially
assigned to the catcher vessel sector and
resulting CQ unless that rockfish
eligible harvester qualifies for an
exemption to this use cap under
paragraph (a)(6) of this section;
(ii) Forty (40.0) percent of the
aggregate rockfish primary species QS
initially assigned to the catcher/
processor sector and resulting CQ unless
that rockfish eligible harvester qualifies
for an exemption to this use cap under
paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
(3) Catcher vessel cooperative rockfish
CQ use cap. A catcher vessel rockfish
cooperative may not hold or use an
amount of rockfish primary species CQ
during a calendar year that is greater
than an amount resulting from 30.0
percent of the aggregate rockfish
primary species QS initially assigned to
the catcher vessel sector.
(4) Vessel use cap—(i) A catcher
vessel may not harvest an amount of
rockfish primary species CQ greater
than 8.0 percent of the aggregate
rockfish primary species CQ issued to
the catcher vessel sector during a
calendar year.
(ii) A catcher/processor vessel may
not harvest an amount of rockfish
primary species CQ greater than 60.0
percent of the aggregate rockfish
primary species CQ issued to the
catcher/processor sector during a
calendar year.
(5) Use cap for rockfish processors—
(i) A rockfish processor may not receive
or process an amount of rockfish
primary species harvested with CQ
assigned to the catcher vessel sector
greater than 30.0 percent of the
aggregate rockfish primary species CQ
assigned to the catcher vessel sector
during a calendar year.
(ii) A rockfish processor may not
receive or process an amount of Pacific
cod harvested with CQ assigned to the
catcher vessel sector greater than 30.0
percent of Pacific cod CQ issued to the
catcher vessel sector during a calendar
year.
(iii) A rockfish processor may not
receive or process an amount of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
sablefish harvested with CQ assigned to
the catcher vessel sector greater than
30.0 percent of sablefish CQ issued to
the catcher vessel sector during a
calendar year.
(iv) The amount of aggregate rockfish
primary species, Pacific cod, or
sablefish CQ assigned to the catcher
vessel sector that is received by a
rockfish processor is calculated based
on the sum of all landings made with
CQ received or processed by that
rockfish processor and the CQ received
or processed by any person affiliated
with that rockfish processor as that term
is defined in § 679.2.
(6) Use cap exemptions—(i) Rockfish
QS. A rockfish QS holder may receive
an initial allocation of aggregate rockfish
QS in excess of the use cap in that sector
only if that rockfish QS is assigned to
LLP license(s) held by that rockfish
eligible harvester prior to June 14, 2010,
and continuously through the time of
application for Rockfish QS.
(ii) Transfer limitations. A rockfish
eligible harvester that receives an initial
allocation of aggregate rockfish QS that
exceeds the use cap listed in paragraph
(a)(2) of this section shall not receive
any rockfish QS by transfer (except by
operation of law) unless and until that
harvester’s holdings of aggregate
rockfish QS in that sector are reduced to
an amount below the use cap specified
in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(b) Opt-out. An LLP license holder
who submits an Application to Opt-out
of Rockfish Cooperative that is
subsequently approved by NMFS, may
not fish with any vessel named on the
opted-out LLP license during that
fishing year in any directed fishery for
any rockfish primary species in the
Central GOA and waters adjacent to the
Central GOA when the rockfish primary
species caught by that vessel is
deducted from the Federal TAC
specified under § 679.20.
(c) Sideboard limitations—General.
The regulations in this section restrict
the vessels and holders of LLP licenses
with rockfish legal landings that could
generate rockfish QS from using the
increased flexibility provided by the
Rockfish Program to expand their level
of participation in other GOA
groundfish fisheries. These limitations
are commonly known as ‘‘sideboards.’’
(1) Classes of sideboard restrictions.
Three types of sideboard restrictions
apply under the Rockfish Program:
(i) Catcher vessel sideboard
restrictions as described under
paragraph (d) of this section;
(ii) Catcher/processor rockfish
sideboard restrictions as described
under paragraph (e) of this section; and,
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(iii) Opt-out sideboard restrictions as
described under paragraphs (e) and (f) of
this section.
(2) Notification of affected vessel
owners and LLP license holders. After
NMFS determines which vessels and
LLP licenses may be subject to
sideboard limitations as described in
paragraphs (d) through (f) of this
section, NMFS will inform each vessel
owner and LLP license holder in writing
of the type of rockfish sideboard
limitation and issue a revised Federal
Fisheries Permit and/or LLP license that
displays the sideboard limitation(s) that
may apply to that FFP or LLP on its
face.
(3) Appeals. A vessel owner or LLP
license holder who believes that NMFS
has incorrectly identified his or her
vessel or LLP license as meeting the
criteria for a sideboard limitation, or
who disagrees with the specific
sideboard ratio assigned to that LLP
license, may make a contrary claim and
provide evidence to NMFS. All claims
must be submitted in writing with any
documentation or evidence supporting
the request within 30 days of being
notified by NMFS of the sideboard
limitation. NMFS will provide
instructions for submitting such claims
with the sideboard notification. An
applicant must submit any
documentation or evidence supporting a
claim within 30 days of being notified
by NMFS of the sideboard limitation. If
NMFS finds the claim is unsupported,
the claim will be denied in an Initial
Administrative Determination (IAD).
The affected persons may appeal this
IAD using the procedures described in
§ 679.43.
(4) Duration of sideboard limits.
Unless otherwise specified, all
sideboard limitations established under
paragraphs (e) of this section only apply
from July 1 through July 31 of each year.
(d) Sideboard provisions for catcher
vessels—(1) Vessels subject to catcher
vessel sideboard limits. Any vessel not
specified in paragraph (d)(2) of this
section that NMFS has determined
meets any of the following criteria is
subject to the provisions under this
paragraph (d):
(i) Any vessel whose rockfish legal
landings could be used to generate
rockfish QS for the catcher vessel sector;
and,
(ii) Any vessel named on an LLP
license under whose authority rockfish
legal landings were made that could be
used to generate rockfish QS for the
catcher vessel sector.
(2) Applicability of sideboard
provisions for specific catcher vessels.
The following vessels are exempt from
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
52201
arrowtooth flounder, deep-water
flatfish, and rex sole in the GOA (or in
waters adjacent to the GOA when
arrowtooth flounder, deep-water
flatfish, and rex sole caught by that
vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC
as specified under § 679.20) from July 1
through July 31.
(e) Rockfish and halibut PSC
sideboard provisions for catcher/
processor vessels—(1) Vessels subject to
catcher/processor sideboard limits. Any
vessel that NMFS has determined meets
any of the following criteria is subject to
the provisions under this paragraph (e):
(i) Any vessel whose rockfish legal
landings could be used to generate
rockfish QS for the catcher/processor
sector in the Rockfish Program; or
(ii) Any vessel named on an LLP
license under whose authority rockfish
legal landings were made that could be
used to generate rockfish QS for the
catcher/processor sector in the Rockfish
Program.
(2) Prohibition for directed rockfish
fishing in the Western GOA and West
Yakutat District by non-Amendment 80
vessels assigned to the catcher/
processor sector. Any vessel that meets
the criteria established in paragraph
(e)(1) of this section and that is not an
Amendment 80 vessel is prohibited
from directed fishing for northern
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and
pelagic shelf rockfish in the Western
GOA and West Yakutat District (or in
waters adjacent to the Western GOA and
West Yakutat District when northern
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and
pelagic shelf rockfish by that vessel is
deducted from the Federal TAC as
specified under § 679.20) from July 1
through July 31.
(3) Calculation of rockfish and halibut
PSC sideboard limits assigned to each
LLP license in the catcher/processor
sector. NMFS will determine specific
rockfish sideboard ratios for each LLP
license assigned to the catcher/
processor sector that could generate
rockfish QS. These rockfish sideboard
ratios will be noted on the face of an
LLP license and will be calculated as
follows:
(i) For each rockfish sideboard
fishery, divide the retained catch of that
rockfish sideboard fishery from July 1
through July 31 in each year from 2000
through 2006 made under the authority
of that LLP license, by the total retained
catch of that rockfish sideboard fishery
from July 1 through July 31 in each year
from 2000 through 2006 by vessels
operating under the authority of all
eligible LLP licenses in the catcher/
processor sector.
(ii) For the deep-water halibut PSC
sideboard limit, divide the halibut PSC
used in the deep-water complex, except
in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries,
from July 1 through July 31 in each year
from 2000 through 2006 under the
authority of that LLP license, by the
total deep-water halibut PSC used from
July 1 through July 31 in each year from
2000 through 2006 by vessels operating
under the authority of all LLP licenses
in the catcher/processor sector.
(iii) For the shallow-water halibut
PSC sideboard limit, divide the halibut
PSC used in the shallow-water complex
from July 1 through July 31 in each year
from 2000 through 2006 under the
authority of that LLP license, by the
total shallow-water halibut PSC used
from July 1 through July 31 in each year
from 2000 through 2006 by vessels
operating under the authority of all LLP
licenses in the catcher/processor sector.
(4) Western GOA and West Yakutat
District rockfish sideboard ratios.
The rockfish sideboard ratio for each
rockfish fishery in the Western GOA
and West Yakutat District is established
in the following table:
For the management area of the. . .
In the directed fishery for . . .
The sideboard limit for the catcher/processor
sector is . . .
West Yakutat District .........................................
Western GOA ....................................................
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
the sideboard limits in paragraph (d) of
this section:
(i) Any AFA catcher vessel that is not
exempt from GOA groundfish
sideboards under the AFA as specified
under § 679.64(b)(2)(ii);
(ii) Any vessel that made rockfish
legal landings during the fishery seasons
established in Table 28a to this part and
during the entry level trawl fishery
during 2007, 2008, or 2009 established
in Table 28b to this part and that is
designated on an approved application
for rockfish QS as being excluded from
the Rockfish Program as specified under
§ 679.80(d)(4)(ii); and
(iii) Any vessel named on an LLP
license under whose authority rockfish
legal landings were made during the
fishery seasons established in Table 28a
to this part and during the entry level
trawl fishery during 2007, 2008, or 2009
established in Table 28b to this part if
that LLP license is designated on an
approved application for rockfish QS as
being excluded from the Rockfish
Program as specified under
§ 679.80(d)(4)(ii).
(3) Prohibition for directed fishing in
the Western GOA and West Yakutat
District rockfish fishery during July.
Vessels subject to the provisions in this
paragraph (d) may not participate in
directed fishing in the Western GOA
and West Yakutat District for northern
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and
pelagic shelf rockfish (or in waters
adjacent to the Western GOA and West
Yakutat District when northern rockfish,
Pacific ocean perch, and pelagic shelf
rockfish by that vessel is deducted from
the Federal TAC as specified under
§ 679.20) from July 1 through July 31.
(4) Prohibition for directed fishing in
the specific GOA flatfish fisheries
during July. Vessels subject to the
provisions in this paragraph (d) may not
participate in directed fishing for
Pelagic shelf rockfish .......................................
Pacific ocean perch ..........................................
Pelagic shelf rockfish .......................................
Pacific ocean perch ..........................................
Northern rockfish ..............................................
** percent of
** percent of
72.3 percent
50.6 percent
74.3 percent
(5) GOA halibut PSC sideboard
ratios—(i) The annual deep-water
complex halibut PSC sideboard limit in
the GOA is 2.5 percent of the annual
halibut mortality limit.
(ii) The annual shallow-water
complex halibut PSC sideboard limit in
the GOA is 0.1 percent of the annual
halibut mortality limit.
(6) Assigning a rockfish sideboard
limit to a rockfish cooperative. Each
rockfish cooperative in the catcher/
processor sector will be assigned a
portion of the rockfish sideboard limit
for each rockfish species established in
paragraph (e)(5) of this section
according to the following formula.
(i) For each rockfish sideboard fishery
specified in paragraph (e)(4) of this
section, sum the rockfish sideboard
ratios of all LLP licenses as calculated
under paragraph (e)(5) of this section
assigned to that rockfish cooperative
and multiply this result by the amount
of TAC (in metric tons) assigned to that
rockfish sideboard fishery.
(ii) Once assigned, a catcher/processor
rockfish cooperative may not exceed
any rockfish sideboard limit assigned to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:42 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
the TAC.
the TAC.
of the TAC.
of the TAC.
of the TAC.
19AUP2
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
52202
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
that cooperative from July 1 through
July 31.
(7) Assigning a rockfish sideboard
limit to catcher/processors that opt-out
of participating in rockfish cooperatives.
Holders of catcher/processor designated
LLPs that opt-out of participating in a
rockfish cooperative will receive the
portion of each rockfish sideboard limit
established in paragraph (e)(3) of this
section not assigned to rockfish
cooperatives.
(8) Management of a rockfish opt-out
sideboard limit—(i) If the Regional
Administrator determines that an
annual rockfish sideboard limit for optout vessels is sufficient to support
directed fishing for that rockfish
sideboard fishery, the Regional
Administrator may establish a directed
fishing allowance applicable to holders
of catcher/processor designated LLPs
that have opted-out of participating in a
rockfish cooperative.
(ii) If the Regional Administrator
determines that a sideboard limit is
insufficient to support a directed fishing
allowance for that rockfish sideboard
fishery, then the Regional Administrator
may not allow directed fishing and set
the allowance to zero for catcher/
processor opt-out vessels from July 1
through July 31.
(iii) Upon determining that a halibut
PSC sideboard limit is or will be
reached, the Regional Administrator
will publish notification in the Federal
Register prohibiting directed fishing for
the rockfish sideboard fishery in the
regulatory area or district for catcher/
processor opt-out vessels that will be
effective from July 1 through July 31.
(9) Assigning deep-water and shallowwater halibut PSC sideboard limits to a
rockfish cooperative. Each rockfish
cooperative in the catcher/processor
sector will be assigned a percentage of
the deep-water and shallow-water
halibut PSC sideboard limits based on
the following calculation:
(i) Sum the deep-water ratios of all
LLP licenses assigned to that rockfish
cooperative and multiply this result by
the amount set out in paragraph (e)(5)(i)
of this section; and
(ii) Sum the shallow-water ratios of all
LLP licenses assigned to that rockfish
cooperative and multiply this result by
the amount set out in paragraph (e)(5)(ii)
of this section; and
(iii) A rockfish cooperative may not
exceed any deep-water or shallow-water
halibut PSC sideboard limit assigned to
that cooperative.
(10) Assigning a halibut PSC limit to
catcher/processor opt-out vessels.
Catcher/processor opt-out vessels will
receive the portion of the deep-water
and shallow-water halibut PSC
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:42 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
sideboard limit not assigned to catcher/
processor rockfish cooperatives.
(11) Management of halibut PSC
limits assigned to catcher/processor optout vessels—(i) If the Regional
Administrator determines that a halibut
PSC sideboard limit for opt-out vessels
is sufficient to support a directed fishing
allowance for groundfish in the deepwater or shallow-water halibut PSC
complex, then the Regional
Administrator may establish a directed
fishing allowance for that species or
species group applicable to catcher/
processor opt-out vessels.
(ii) If the Regional Administrator
determines that a sideboard limit is
insufficient to support a directed fishing
allowance for groundfish in the deepwater or shallow-water halibut PSC
complex, then the Regional
Administrator may not allow directed
fishing and set the allowance to zero for
the deep-water or shallow-water halibut
PSC complex for catcher/processor optout vessels from July 1 through July 31.
(iii) Upon determining that a halibut
PSC sideboard limit is or will be
reached, the Regional Administrator
will publish notification in the Federal
Register prohibiting directed fishing for
the species or species in that complex
for catcher/processors opt-out vessels
that will be effective from July 1 through
July 31. The following specific directed
fishing closures will be implemented if
a halibut PSC sideboard limit is
reached:
(A) If the shallow-water halibut PSC
sideboard limit for catcher/processor
opt-out vessels is or will be reached,
then NMFS will close directed fishing
in the GOA for:
(1) Flathead sole; and
(2) Shallow-water flatfish.
(B) If the deep-water halibut PSC
sideboard limit is or will be reached for
catcher/processor opt-out vessels, then
NMFS will close directed fishing in the
GOA for:
(1) Rex sole;
(2) Deep-water flatfish; and
(3) Arrowtooth flounder.
(iv) Halibut PSC accounting. Any
halibut mortality occurring under a CQ
permit from July 1 through July 31 will
not apply against the halibut PSC
sideboard limits established paragraph
(e)(5) of this section.
(f) Sideboard provisions—catcher/
processor opt-out provisions—(1)
Vessels subject to opt-out sideboard
provisions. In addition to the sideboards
for opt-out vessels in paragraph (e)(7)
and (e)(10) of this section, any catcher/
processor opt-out vessel that NMFS has
determined meets any of the following
criteria is subject to the provisions
under this paragraph (f):
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(i) Any vessel whose legal rockfish
landings could be used to generate
rockfish QS for the catcher/processor
sector that is not assigned to a rockfish
cooperative; or,
(ii) Any vessel named on an LLP
license under whose authority legal
rockfish landings were made that could
be used to generate rockfish QS for the
catcher/processor sector and that is not
assigned to a rockfish cooperative.
(2) Prohibitions on directed fishing in
GOA groundfish fisheries without
previous participation—(i) Any vessel
that is subject to the opt-out sideboard
restriction under paragraph (f) of this
section is prohibited from directed
fishing in any groundfish fishery in the
GOA and waters adjacent to the GOA
when groundfish caught by that vessel
is deducted from the Federal TAC
specified under § 679.20 (except
sablefish harvested under the IFQ
Program) from July 1 through July 14 of
each year if that vessel has not
participated in that directed groundfish
fishery in any 2 years from 2000 through
2006 during the following time periods:
(A) July 9, 2000, through July 15,
2000;
(B) July 1, 2001, through July 7, 2001;
(C) June 30, 2002, through July 6,
2002;
(D) June 29, 2003, through July 5,
2003;
(E) July 4, 2004, through July 10,
2004;
(F) July 3, 2005, through July 9, 2005;
and
(G) July 2, 2006, through July 8, 2006.
(ii) For purposes of determining
participation in a directed groundfish
fishery for paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this
section, a vessel may participate:
(A) In the flathead sole and shallowwater flatfish fisheries if that vessel
participated in a directed groundfish
fishery for either of these two fisheries
during any 2 years during the 2000
through 2006 qualifying period defined
in paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this section; and
(B) In the arrowtooth flounder, deepwater flatfish, and rex sole fisheries if
that vessel participated in a directed
groundfish fishery for any of these three
fisheries during any 2 years during the
2000 through 2006 qualifying period
defined in paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this
section.
§ 679.83 Rockfish Program entry level
longline fishery.
(a) Rockfish entry level longline
fishery—(1) Rockfish primary species
allocations. Vessels participating in the
rockfish entry level longline fishery may
collectively harvest an amount not
greater than the total allocation to the
rockfish entry level longline fishery as
described in Table 28e to this part.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(2) Participation. Catcher vessels
fishing under a CQ permit must first be
checked-out of the Rockfish Program by
the catcher vessel cooperative’s
designated representative to participate
in the entry level longline fishery (see
§ 679.5(r)(8)(i)(B) for check-out
procedures).
(3) Rockfish secondary species
allocations. Rockfish secondary species
shall not be allocated to the rockfish
entry level longline fishery. Rockfish
secondary species shall be managed
based on an MRA for the target species
as described in Table 10 to this part.
(4) Opening of the rockfish entry level
longline fishery. The Regional
Administrator maintains the authority
to not open the rockfish entry level
longline fishery if he or she deems it
appropriate for conservation or other
management measures. Factors such as
the total allocation, anticipated harvest
rates, and number of participants will be
considered in making any such
decision.
(b) [Reserved].
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 679.84 Rockfish Program recordkeeping,
permits, monitoring, and catch accounting.
(a) Recordkeeping and reporting. See
§ 679.5(r).
(b) Permits. See § 679.4(n).
(c) Catch monitoring requirements for
catcher/processors assigned to a
rockfish cooperative. The requirements
under paragraphs (c)(1) through (10) of
this section apply to any catcher/
processor vessel assigned to a rockfish
cooperative at all times when that vessel
has groundfish onboard that were
harvested under a CQ permit, or that
were harvested by a vessel subject to a
rockfish sideboard limit as described
under § 679.82(c) through (f), as
applicable. The vessel owner or operator
must ensure that:
(1) Catch weighing. All catch is
weighed on a NMFS-approved scale in
compliance with the scale requirements
at § 679.28(b). Each haul must be
weighed separately and all catch must
be made available for sampling by a
NMFS-certified observer.
(2) Observer sampling station. An
observer sampling station meeting the
requirements at § 679.28(d) is available
at all times.
(3) Observer coverage requirements.
The vessel is in compliance with the
observer coverage requirements
described at § 679.50(c)(7)(i).
(4) Operational line. The vessel has
no more than one operational line or
other conveyance for the mechanized
movement of catch between the scale
used to weigh total catch and the
location where the observer collects
species composition samples.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
(5) Fish on deck. No fish are allowed
to remain on deck unless an observer is
present, except for fish inside the
codend and fish spilled from the codend
during hauling and dumping. Fish
spilled from the codend must be moved
to the fish bin.
(6) Sample storage. The vessel owner
or operator provides sufficient space to
accommodate a minimum of 10 observer
sampling baskets. This space must be
within or adjacent to the observer
sample station.
(7) Pre-cruise meeting. The Observer
Program Office is notified by phone at
1–907–271–1702 at least 24 hours prior
to departure when the vessel will be
carrying an observer who had not
previously been deployed on that vessel
within the last 12 months. Subsequent
to the vessel’s departure notification,
but prior to departure, NMFS may
contact the vessel to arrange for a precruise meeting. The pre-cruise meeting
must minimally include the vessel
operator or manager and any observers
assigned to the vessel.
(8) Belt and flow operations. The
vessel operator stops the flow of fish
and clears all belts between the bin
doors and the area where the observer
collects samples of unsorted catch when
requested to do so by the observer.
(9) Vessel crew in tanks or bins. The
vessel owner or operator must comply
with the bin monitoring standards
specified in § 679.28(i).
(10) Mixing of hauls. Catch from an
individual haul is not mixed with catch
from another haul prior to sampling by
a NMFS-certified observer.
(d) Catch monitoring requirements for
catcher/processors opt-out vessels. The
requirements under paragraphs (c)(1)
through (9) of this section apply to any
catcher/processor opt-out vessels at all
times when that vessel has groundfish
onboard that were harvested by a vessel
subject to a sideboard limit as described
under § 679.82(f), as applicable. The
vessel owner or operator must ensure
that:
(1) Catch from an individual haul is
not mixed with catch from another haul
prior to sampling by a NMFS-certified
observer;
(2) All catch be made available for
sampling by a NMFS-certified observer;
and
(3) The requirements in paragraphs
(c)(3), (c)(4), (c)(5), (c)(8), and (c)(9) of
this section are met.
(e) Catch monitoring requirements for
catcher vessels. The owner or operator
of a catcher vessel must ensure the
vessel complies with the observer
coverage requirements described in
§ 679.50(c)(7)(ii) at all times the vessel
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
52203
is participating in a rockfish
cooperative.
(f) Catch monitoring requirements for
shoreside processors—(1) Catch
monitoring and control plan (CMCP).
The owner or operator of a shoreside
processor receiving deliveries from a
catcher vessel described in
§ 679.50(c)(7)(ii) must ensure the
shoreside processor complies with the
CMCP requirements described in
§ 679.28(g).
(2) Catch weighing. All groundfish
landed by catcher vessels described in
§ 679.50(c)(7)(ii) must be sorted,
weighed on a scale approved by the
State of Alaska as described in
§ 679.28(c), and be made available for
sampling by an observer, NMFS staff, or
any individual authorized by NMFS.
Any of these persons must be allowed
to test any scale used to weigh
groundfish to determine its accuracy.
(g) Catch accounting—(1) Rockfish
primary species and rockfish secondary
species. All rockfish primary species
and rockfish secondary species harvests
(including harvests of those species in
waters adjacent to the Central GOA that
are deducted from the Federal TAC as
specified under § 679.20) of a vessel,
that is named on an LLP license that is
assigned to a rockfish cooperative and
fishing under a CQ permit, will be
debited against the CQ for that rockfish
cooperative from May 1:
(i) Until November 15; or
(ii) Until that rockfish cooperative has
submitted a rockfish cooperative
termination of fishing declaration that
has been approved by NMFS.
(2) Rockfish halibut PSC. All halibut
PSC in the Central GOA (including
halibut PSC in the waters adjacent to the
Central GOA when rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
caught by that vessel is deducted from
the Federal TAC specified under
§ 679.20) used by a vessel, that is named
on an LLP license that is assigned to a
rockfish cooperative and fishing under a
CQ permit, will be debited against the
CQ for that rockfish cooperative from
May 1,
(i) Until November 15; or
(ii) Until the designated
representative of that rockfish
cooperative has submitted a rockfish
cooperative termination of fishing
declaration that has been approved by
NMFS.
(3) Groundfish sideboard limits. All
groundfish harvests (including harvests
of those species in waters adjacent to
the Central GOA that are deducted from
the Federal TAC a specified under
§ 679.20) of a catcher/processor vessel
that is subject to a sideboard limit for
that groundfish species as described
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52204
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
under § 679.82(e), except groundfish
harvested by a vessel fishing under a CQ
permit in the Central GOA, will be
debited against the sideboard limit
established for that sector or rockfish
cooperative, as applicable.
(4) Halibut sideboard limits. All
halibut PSC in the GOA (including
halibut PSC in the waters adjacent to the
GOA when rockfish primary species and
rockfish secondary species caught by
that vessel is deducted from the Federal
TAC specified under § 679.20) used by
a catcher/processor vessel, except
halibut PSC used by a vessel fishing
under a CQ permit will be debited
against the sideboard limit established
for the rockfish cooperative or catcher/
processor opt-out vessel, as applicable
from July 1 until July 31.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 679.85
Cost recovery.
(a) Cost recovery fees—(1)
Responsibility. The person documented
on the rockfish CQ permit as the permit
holder at the time of a rockfish CQ
landing must comply with the
requirements of this section.
(i) Subsequent transfer of rockfish CQ
or rockfish QS held by rockfish
cooperative members does not affect the
rockfish CQ permit holder’s liability for
noncompliance with this section.
(ii) Non-renewal of a rockfish CQ
permit does not affect the CQ permit
holder’s liability for noncompliance
with this section.
(iii) Changes in the membership in a
rockfish cooperative, such as members
joining or departing during the relevant
year, or changes in the amount of
rockfish QS holdings of those members
does not affect the rockfish CQ permit
holder’s liability for noncompliance
with this section.
(2) Fee collection. All rockfish CQ
holders who receive rockfish CQ are
responsible for submitting the cost
recovery payment for all rockfish CQ
landings made under the authority of
their rockfish CQ permit.
(3) Payment—(i) Payment due date. A
rockfish CQ permit holder must submit
any rockfish cost recovery fee liability
payment(s) to NMFS at the address
provided in paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of this
section no later than February 15 of the
year following the calendar year in
which the rockfish CQ landings were
made.
(ii) Payment recipient. Make
electronic payment payable to NMFS.
(iii) Payment address. Submit
payment and related documents as
instructed on the fee submission form.
Payments must be made electronically
through the NMFS Alaska Region Web
site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Instructions for electronic payment will
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
be made available on both the payment
Web site and a fee liability summary
letter mailed to the CQ permit holder.
(iv) Payment method. Payment must
be made electronically in U.S. dollars by
automated clearing house, credit card,
or electronic check drawn on a U.S.
bank account.
(b) Rockfish standard ex-vessel value
determination and use—(1) General. A
CQ permit holder must use the rockfish
standard ex-vessel value determined by
NMFS under paragraph (b)(2) of this
section.
(2) Rockfish standard ex-vessel
value—(i) General. Each year the
Regional Administrator will publish
rockfish standard ex-vessel values in the
Federal Register during the first quarter
of each calendar year. The standard
prices will be described in U.S. dollars
per equivalent pound, for rockfish
primary species and rockfish secondary
species landings made by rockfish CQ
holders during the previous calendar
year.
(ii) Effective duration. The rockfish
standard ex-vessel value published by
NMFS shall apply to all rockfish
primary species and rockfish secondary
species landings made by a rockfish CQ
holder during the previous calendar
year.
(iii) Determination. NMFS will
calculate the rockfish standard ex-vessel
value to reflect, as closely as possible by
month, the variations in the actual exvessel values of landings based on
information provided in the Rockfish
Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report as
described in § 679.5(r)(10). The Regional
Administrator will base rockfish
standard ex-vessel values on the
following types of information:
(A) Landed pounds by rockfish
primary species and rockfish secondary
species landings and month;
(B) Total ex-vessel value by rockfish
primary species and rockfish secondary
species landings and month; and
(C) Price adjustments, including
retroactive payments.
(c) Rockfish fee percentage—(1)
Established percentage. The rockfish fee
percentage is the amount as determined
by the factors and methodology
described in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section. This amount will be announced
by publication in the Federal Register
in accordance with paragraph (c)(3) of
this section. This amount must not
exceed 3.0 percent pursuant to 16 U.S.C.
1854(d)(2)(B).
(2) Calculating fee percentage value.
Each year NMFS shall calculate and
publish the fee percentage according to
the following factors and methodology:
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(i) Factors. NMFS must use the
following factors to determine the fee
percentage:
(A) The catch to which the rockfish
cost recovery fee will apply;
(B) The ex-vessel value of that catch;
and
(C) The costs directly related to the
management, data collection, and
enforcement of the Rockfish Program.
(ii) Methodology. NMFS must use the
following equations to determine the fee
percentage:
100 × DPC/V
where:
DPC = the direct program costs for the
Rockfish Program for the previous
calendar year with any adjustments to
the account from payments received in
the previous year.
V = total of the standard ex-vessel value of
the catch subject to the rockfish cost
recovery fee liability for the current year.
(3) Publication—(i) General. During
the first quarter of the year following the
calendar year in which the rockfish CQ
landings were made, NMFS shall
calculate the rockfish fee percentage
based on the calculations described in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(ii) Effective period. The calculated
rockfish fee percentage is applied to
rockfish CQ landings made in the
previous calendar year.
(4) Applicable percentage. The CQ
permit holder must use the rockfish fee
percentage applicable at the time a
rockfish primary species and rockfish
secondary species landing is debited
from a rockfish CQ allocation to
calculate the rockfish cost recovery fee
liability for any retroactive payments for
that rockfish primary species and
rockfish secondary species.
(5) Fee liability determination for a
rockfish CQ holder. (i) All rockfish CQ
holders will be subject to a fee liability
for any rockfish primary species and
rockfish secondary species CQ debited
from a rockfish CQ allocation during a
calendar year.
(ii) The rockfish fee liability assessed
to a rockfish CQ holder will be based on
the proportion of the standard ex-vessel
value of rockfish primary species and
rockfish secondary species debited from
a rockfish CQ holder relative to all
rockfish CQ holders during a calendar
year as determined by NMFS.
(iii) NMFS will provide a fee liability
summary letter to all CQ permit holders
during the first quarter of the year
following the calendar year in which the
rockfish CQ landings were made. The
summary will explain the fee liability
determination including the current fee
percentage, details of rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
52205
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
CQ pounds debited from rockfish CQ
allocations by permit, species, date, and
prices.
(d) Underpayment of fee liability—(1)
Pursuant to § 679.81(f), no rockfish CQ
holder will receive any rockfish CQ
until the rockfish CQ holder submits a
complete application. A complete
application shall include full payment
of an applicant’s complete rockfish cost
recovery fee liability.
(2) If a rockfish CQ holder fails to
submit full payment for rockfish cost
recovery fee liability by the date
described in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section, the Regional Administrator
may:
(i) At any time thereafter send an IAD
to the CQ permit holder stating that the
CQ permit holder’s estimated fee
liability, as indicated by his or her own
submitted information, is the rockfish
cost recovery fee liability due from the
CQ permit holder.
(ii) Disapprove any application to
transfer rockfish CQ to or from the CQ
permit holder in accordance with
§ 679.81(g).
(3) If a rockfish CQ holder fails to
submit full payment by the rockfish cost
recovery fee liability payment deadline
described at paragraph (a)(3) of this
section:
(i) No CQ permit will be issued to that
rockfish CQ holder for that calendar
year; and
(ii) No rockfish CQ will be issued
based on the rockfish QS held by the
members of that rockfish cooperative to
any other CQ permit for that calendar
year.
(4) Upon final agency action
determining that a CQ permit holder has
not paid his or her rockfish cost
recovery fee liability, the Regional
Administrator may continue to prohibit
issuance of a CQ permit for any
subsequent calendar years until NMFS
receives the unpaid fees. If payment is
not received by the 30th day after the
final agency action, the agency may
pursue collection of the unpaid fees.
(e) Over payment. Upon issuance of
final agency action, payment submitted
to NMFS in excess of the rockfish cost
recovery fee liability determined to be
due by the final agency action will be
returned to the CQ permit holder unless
the permit holder requests the agency to
credit the excess amount against the
permit holder’s future rockfish cost
recovery fee liability. Payment
processing fees may be deducted from
any fees returned to the CQ permit
holder.
(f) Appeals. A CQ permit holder who
receives an IAD for incomplete payment
of a rockfish fee liability may appeal the
IAD pursuant to 50 CFR 679.43.
11. Remove Table 28 to part 679 and
add Tables 28a through 28e to part 679
to read as follows:
TABLE 28a TO PART 679—QUALIFYING SEASON DATES FOR CENTRAL GOA ROCKFISH PRIMARY SPECIES
Year
A Legal Rockfish Landing includes
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
July 1–July
23 and
Oct. 1–
Oct. 21.
July 30 and
Oct. 28,
respectively.
July 1–July
23 and
Oct. 1–
Oct. 21.
June 30–July
21.
June 29–July
29.
July 4–July
25.
July 5–July
24.
July 1–July
21.
July 28 ........
Aug. 5 ..........
Aug. 1 ..........
July 31 ........
July 28.
June 30–July
21.
June 29–July
31.
July 4–July
25.
Northern rockfish that were harvested in the Central GOA between. . .
July 4–July
26.
and landed by ...............................
Aug. 2 .........
Pelagic shelf rockfish that were
harvested in the Central GOA
between. . .
July 4–July
26.
and landed by ...............................
Aug. 2 .........
July 30 and
Oct. 28,
respectively.
July 28 ........
Aug. 7 ..........
Aug. 1 ..........
Pacific ocean perch that were harvested in the Central GOA between. . .
and landed by ...............................
July 4–July
15.
July 1–July
12.
June 30–July
8.
June 29–July
8.
July 4–July
12.
July 5–July
July 1–July
24, Sept.
21 and
1–Sept. 4,
Oct. 2–
and Sept.
Oct. 8.
8–Sept. 10.
July 31,
July 28 and
Sept. 11,
Oct. 15,
and Sept.
respec17, respectively.
tively.
July 5–July
July 1–July
14.
6.
July 22 ........
July 19 .........
July 15 .........
July 15 .........
July 19 .........
July 21 ........
July 13.
TABLE 28b TO PART 679—QUALIFYING SEASON DATES FOR CENTRAL GOA ROCKFISH PRIMARY SPECIES
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
A Rockfish Legal Landing includes . . .
2007
Northern rockfish that were harvested by vessels authorized to fish in the
rockfish entry level trawl fishery between. . .
and landed by ....................................................................................................
Pelagic shelf rockfish that were harvested by vessels authorized to fish in
the rockfish entry level trawl fishery between. . .
and landed by ....................................................................................................
Pacific ocean perch that were harvested by vessels authorized to fish in the
rockfish entry level trawl fishery between. . .
and landed by ....................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:42 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
2008
Sept.1–Nov. 8 ........
Sept.1–Nov. 15 ......
Sept.1–Nov. 15.
Nov. 15 ...................
July 4–July 25 ........
Nov. 22 ...................
July 5–July 24 ........
Nov. 22.
July 1–July 21.
Aug 1 ......................
July 4–July 12 ........
July 31 ....................
July 5–July 14 ........
July 28.
July 1–July 6.
July 19 ....................
July 21 ....................
July 13.
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
2009
52206
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 28c TO PART 679—ALLOCATION OF ROCKFISH SECONDARY SPECIES
The following percentage of the Central
GOA TAC is allocated to rockfish
cooperatives as CQ . . .
For the following rockfish secondary species . . .
For the catcher/
processor
sector . . .
For the catcher
vessel sector . . .
Pacific cod ...............................................................................................................................................
Sablefish ..................................................................................................................................................
Rougheye rockfish ...................................................................................................................................
Shortraker rockfish ...................................................................................................................................
Thornyhead rockfish ................................................................................................................................
3.81%
6.78%
N/A
N/A
7.84%
N/A
3.51%
58.87%
40.00%
26.50%
TABLE 28d TO PART 679—ALLOCATION OF HALIBUT PSC UNDER THE CENTRAL GOA ROCKFISH PROGRAM
For the following rockfish sectors . . .
The following
amount of halibut
. . .
Catcher vessel sector .............................
134.1 mt .................
0.875
Catcher/processor sector .......................
84.7 mt ...................
........................
Is multiplied by
. . .
To yield the following amount of
halibut PSC assigned as rockfish
CQ . . .
The following amount of halibut is not
assigned as rockfish CQ, halibut PSC,
or halibut IFQ for use by any person
. . .
117.3 mt .................
27.4 mt (16.8 mt from the catcher vessel sector and 10.6 mt from the
catcher/processor sector).
74.1 mt.
TABLE 28e TO PART 679—ROCKFISH ENTRY LEVEL LONGLINE FISHERY ALLOCATIONS
The allocation to the rockfish entry level
longline fishery for the following rockfish
primary species . . .
For 2012 will
be . . .
If the catch of a rockfish primary species during a calendar year exceeds 90
percent of the allocation for that rockfish
primary species then the allocation of
that rockfish primary species in the following calendar year will increase by
. . .
Northern rockfish ......................................
Pacific ocean perch ..................................
Pelagic shelf rockfish ...............................
5 mt .................
5 mt .................
30 mt ...............
5 mt ........................................................
5 mt ........................................................
20 mt ......................................................
Except that the maximum amount of the
TAC assigned to the Rockfish Program
(after deducting the incidental catch allowance) that may be allocated to the
rockfish entry level non-trawl fishery for
each rockfish primary species is . . .
2 percent.
1 percent.
5 percent.
17. Revise Tables 29 and 30 to part
679 to read as follows:
TABLE 29 TO PART 679—INITIAL ROCKFISH QS POOLS
Initial Rockfish QS Pool.
Northern Rockfish
Initial Rockfish QS Pool
Initial Rockfish QS Pool for the
Catcher/Processor Sector
Initial Rockfish QS Pool for the
Catcher Vessel Sector
Pelagic Shelf Rockfish
Pacific Ocean Perch
Aggregate Primary
Species Initial Rockfish
QS Pool
Based on the Rockfish Program official record on January 31, 2012.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
TABLE 30 TO PART 679—ROCKFISH PROGRAM RETAINABLE PERCENTAGES (IN ROUND WT. EQUIVALENT)
Fishery
Incidental Catch Species
Sector
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels fishing
under a Rockfish CQ permit.
Pacific cod .............................................
Shortraker/Rougheye aggregate catch
Catcher/Processor .................................
Catcher Vessel ......................................
See rockfish non-allocated species for ‘‘other species’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:42 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
MRA as a percentage of total
retained rockfish
primary species
and rockfish secondary species
4.0
2.0
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 / Proposed Rules
52207
TABLE 30 TO PART 679—ROCKFISH PROGRAM RETAINABLE PERCENTAGES (IN ROUND WT. EQUIVALENT)—Continued
Fishery
Incidental Catch Species
Rockfish non-allocated species for
Rockfish Cooperative vessels fishing
under a Rockfish CQ permit.
Pollock ...................................................
Deep-water flatfish ................................
Rex sole ................................................
Flathead sole .........................................
Shallow-water flatfish ............................
Arrowtooth Flounder ..............................
Other rockfish ........................................
Atka mackerel .......................................
Aggregated forage fish ..........................
Skates ...................................................
Other species ........................................
MRA as a percentage of total
retained rockfish
primary species
and rockfish secondary species
Sector
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
Longline gear Rockfish Entry Level
Fishery.
See Table 10 to this part.
Opt-outvessels .......................................
See Table 10 to this part.
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels not fishing under a CQ permit.
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
See Table 10 to this part.
[FR Doc. 2011–20454 Filed 8–18–11; 8:45 am]
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:42 Aug 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\19AUP2.SGM
19AUP2
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
35.0
15.0
20.0
2.0
20.0
20.0
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 161 (Friday, August 19, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52148-52207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20454]
[[Page 52147]]
Vol. 76
Friday,
No. 161
August 19, 2011
Part IV
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 679
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 88; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2011 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 52148]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 110314196-1432-01]
RIN 0648-BA97
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Groundfish
of the Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 88
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 88 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP),
which regulates the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program. This
proposed Rockfish Program would allocate exclusive harvest privileges
to a specific group of license limitation program license holders who
used trawl gear to target Pacific ocean perch, pelagic shelf rockfish,
and northern rockfish during particular qualifying years. It would
retain the conservation, management, safety, and economic gains
realized under the Rockfish Pilot Program and resolve identified issues
in the management and viability of the rockfish fisheries. This action
is necessary to replace particular Rockfish Pilot Program regulations
that are scheduled to expire at the end of 2011. This action is
intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the FMP, and other applicable
law.
DATES: Comments must be received no later than September 19, 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 RIN 0648-
BA97, 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.
Fax: 907-586-7557.
Hand delivery to the Federal Building: 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.
Electronic copies of Amendment 88 to the FMP, and the Environmental
Assessment (EA), the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) (collectively, 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.
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, e-mailed
to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or faxed to 202-395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gwen Herrewig, 907-586-7091.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) under the FMP. The
North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared this FMP
under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations implementing
the FMP appear at 50 CFR part 679. General regulations governing U.S.
fisheries also appear at 50 CFR part 600.
This proposed rule would implement Amendment 88, the Central GOA
Rockfish Program (Rockfish Program), to manage the rockfish fisheries
in the Central GOA, which covers an area from 147[deg] W. long. to
159[deg] W. long. Rockfish in Federal waters of the Central GOA are
harvested primarily by trawl vessels, and to a lesser extent by
longline vessels.
The Council has submitted Amendment 88 for review by the Secretary
of Commerce, and a Notice of Availability of this amendment was
published in the Federal Register on July 28, 2011 (76 FR 45217) with
comments invited through September 26, 2011. All relevant written
comments received by the end of the applicable comment period, whether
specifically directed to the FMP amendment, this proposed rule, or
both, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision for
Amendment 88 and addressed in the response to comments in the final
decision.
The Council recommended the Rockfish Program to replace the
existing Rockfish Pilot Program (Pilot Program) that is scheduled to
expire December 31, 2011. The proposed Rockfish Program would retain
the net national conservation, management, safety, and economic
benefits realized under the Pilot Program as well as resolve identified
issues in the management and viability of the rockfish fisheries under
the Pilot Program.
The Pilot Program and the proposed Rockfish Program are a type of a
limited access privilege program (LAPP) developed to enhance resource
conservation and improve economic efficiency in the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries. LAPPs, also called catch share programs, are
limited access systems in which Federal permits are issued to harvest a
quantity of fish representing a portion of the total allowable catch
(TAC). Under the Pilot Program, and as proposed under the Rockfish
Program, participants exercise their exclusive harvest privileges when
they join a rockfish cooperative. The Rockfish Program, like the Pilot
Program, would benefit Central GOA fishermen, shoreside processors,
catcher/processors, and communities by (1) providing greater security
to harvesters in rockfish cooperatives, (2) allowing a slower-paced
fishery to provide harvesters the ability to choose when to fish, (3)
providing greater stability for processors by spreading production over
a longer period of time, (4) allowing for a more stable workforce, (5)
increasing product quality and diversity, and (6) allowing catcher/
processors greater spatial and temporal flexibility to reduce bycatch
and develop more stable markets.
Rockfish Pilot Program Overview
The following section provides a brief overview of the current
Pilot Program. A detailed description of the Pilot Program is provided
in the preamble to the Pilot Program's proposed rule (71 FR 33040; June
7, 2006).
The Pilot Program was enacted by Congress. Section 802 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 (Section 802, Pub. L. 108-199)
required that the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the
Council, establish a program that recognized the historical
participation of fishing vessels and fish processors in
[[Page 52149]]
the Central GOA rockfish fishery. Section 802 states that the program
shall (1) include the Central GOA rockfish species of Pacific ocean
perch, northern rockfish, and pelagic shelf rockfish; (2) recognize
historical participation of fishing vessels in the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries from 1996 to 2002; (3) recognize historical participation of
processors in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries from 1996 to 2000; (4)
establish catch limits for non-rockfish species and non-target rockfish
species harvested with the Central GOA rockfish species and base such
allocations on historical harvesting of these incidentally caught
species; (5) set aside up to 5 percent of the TAC of the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries for catcher vessels that are not eligible to
participate in the program; and (6) have a 2-year duration.
The Council developed the Pilot Program to meet the requirements of
Section 802. The Pilot Program was designed to enhance resource
conservation and improve economic efficiency in the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries by establishing cooperatives that receive exclusive
harvest privileges. Following extensive public comment, the Council
recommended the Pilot Program to the Secretary on June 6, 2005. NMFS
published regulations implementing the Pilot Program on November 20,
2006 (71 FR 67210). Fishing began under the Pilot Program on May 1,
2007.
Section 802 authorized the Pilot Program for 2 years, from January
1, 2007, until December 31, 2008. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006, which became
public law on January 12, 2007 (Pub. L. 109-479), extended the Pilot
Program for an additional 3 years, until December 31, 2011. NMFS
implemented that regulatory extension on November 17, 2008 (73 FR
67809).
Prior to 2007, the Central GOA rockfish fisheries were managed
under the License Limitation Program (LLP). The LLP required harvesters
to hold an LLP license to participate in GOA fisheries, but did not
provide specific exclusive harvest privileges to LLP license holders.
Harvesters with LLP licenses competed with each other to harvest the
TAC assigned to the fishery. Processors also competed with each other.
The competition created economic inefficiencies and incentives to
increase harvesting and processing capacity. Harvesters increased the
fishing capacity of their vessels and accelerated their rate of fishing
to outcompete other vessels. Similarly, processors increased their
processing capacity to outcompete other processors. The rapid pace of
fishing reduced the ability of harvesters and processors to improve
product quality and extract more value from the fishery by producing
high-value products that require additional processing time.
As anticipated, the Pilot Program provided greater security to
harvesters through the formation of rockfish cooperatives. The program
and cooperatives resulted in a slower-paced fishery that provided the
ability for the harvester to choose when to fish. The Pilot Program
also provided greater stability for processors by spreading out
production over a broader period of time. Overall, the Pilot Program
provided greater benefits to shoreside processors, catcher/processors,
Central GOA fishermen, and communities than were realized under the LLP
management scheme. For example, during the Pilot Program, fishermen
made more rockfish and non-rockfish shoreside deliveries over a more
extended period of time than under the LLP. This allowed for a more
stable workforce and slower processing pace than the previous short
periods of high volume rockfish processing. With a slower processing
pace, product quality and diversity increased. Central GOA fishermen
and processors noted fewer conflicts with other fisheries, especially
the salmon fishery which traditionally overlapped with rockfish
efforts. Catcher/processors noted greater flexibility in preparation
and execution of the fishery which resulted in lower bycatch numbers,
more stable markets, and a more efficient distribution of fishery
effort.
The Pilot Program created a structure for fishery participants to
form cooperatives to efficiently manage harvesting activities. Under
the Pilot Program, exclusive harvesting and processing privileges were
allocated for a specific set of rockfish species and for associated
species harvested incidentally to those rockfish in the Central GOA.
The primary features of the Pilot Program are described below.
Rockfish Quota Share. NMFS assigned Rockfish Quota Share (QS) for
rockfish primary species to an LLP license with a trawl gear
designation endorsed for the Central GOA. The rockfish primary species
are northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish.
A person holding an LLP license received rockfish QS if the LLP license
had a history of rockfish primary species landings during a specific
time period and the person holding the LLP license met other
eligibility requirements. The amount of rockfish QS assigned to each
license was based on the legal landings of these rockfish species
associated with that LLP license. Rockfish QS assigned to a specific
LLP license could not be divided or transferred separately from that
LLP license.
On an annual basis for the duration of the Pilot Program, the LLP
license holder assigns the LLP license, and rockfish QS assigned to
that LLP license, for use in a rockfish cooperative, limited access
fishery, or opt-out fishery.
Entry level fishery. Harvesters and processors not eligible to
receive rockfish QS under the Pilot Program, but that hold an LLP
license, may participate in a small entry level fishery for Central GOA
rockfish. Section 802 specifically provided for ``a set-aside of up to
5 percent for the total allowable catch of such fisheries for catcher
vessels not eligible to participate in the pilot program'' during the
1996 through 2002 eligibility time period. The Pilot Program
implemented this provision by establishing an entry level fishery that
was allocated 5 percent of the TAC for each of the three rockfish
primary species. This 5 percent set-aside was further apportioned
between trawl and longline vessels.
Rockfish cooperatives. A person holding an LLP license with
rockfish QS may form a rockfish cooperative with other persons (i.e.,
harvesters) on an annual basis. Each rockfish cooperative receives an
annual cooperative quota (CQ), which is an amount of rockfish primary
species and secondary species dedicated to that rockfish cooperative
for harvest in a given year. Secondary species are those species
incidentally caught during the harvest of rockfish primary species
fisheries in the Central GOA. The secondary species for which annual CQ
are allocated include Pacific cod, rougheye rockfish, shortraker
rockfish, sablefish, and thornyhead rockfish. The amount of CQ assigned
to a cooperative is a portion of the annual TAC based on the sum of the
rockfish QS held by all the harvesters participating in the rockfish
cooperative.
Each rockfish cooperative also receives an annual CQ that limits
the amount of halibut prohibited species catch (PSC) the cooperative
may use while harvesting its rockfish primary species and secondary
species CQ. Cooperatives are allocated a portion of the total GOA
halibut PSC limit, as annually specified under Sec. 679.21, based on
historic halibut mortality rates in the rockfish primary species
fisheries. Halibut is incidentally caught and killed in a number of the
rockfish primary species and secondary species fisheries. However,
halibut caught as bycatch may
[[Page 52150]]
not be retained or sold commercially under regulations established
under the authority of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982, or
under regulations implementing the FMP at Sec. 679.21. Therefore, the
Pilot Program provides participants a fixed amount of incidental
halibut mortality through a halibut CQ allocation.
A rockfish cooperative can transfer all or part of their CQ to
other rockfish cooperatives, with some restrictions.
A rockfish cooperative may form only under specific conditions. A
person holding an LLP license that allows them to catch and process
their catch at sea (catcher/processor vessel LLP license) may form a
rockfish cooperative with other persons holding catcher/processor LLP
licenses. A person holding an LLP license that allows them only to
deliver their catch onshore (catcher vessel LLP license) may only form
a rockfish cooperative with other persons holding catcher vessel LLP
licenses and only in association with the processor to whom those
persons have historically delivered most of their catch.
Cooperatives may associate with processors that NMFS determined met
eligibility criteria and were allocated an exclusive privilege to
receive and process the rockfish primary species and secondary species
allocated to harvesters. Processors cannot process catch outside the
communities in which they have traditionally processed rockfish primary
species and associated secondary species.
Limited access fishery. A person not in a rockfish cooperative, but
holding an LLP license with rockfish QS, can decide annually to fish in
a limited access fishery. NMFS does not allocate a specific amount of
fish to a specific harvester in the limited access fishery. All
harvesters in the limited access fishery compete with all other such
harvesters to catch the TAC assigned to the limited access fishery. The
TAC assigned to the limited access fishery represents the sum of QS
assigned to all the LLP licenses designated for the limited access
fishery. No exclusive harvest privilege exists in the limited access
fishery.
Opt-out fishery. Each year, holders of catcher/processor LLP
licenses with rockfish QS can decide to opt-out of the Pilot Program
for that year, with certain limitations.
Sideboards. Limitations on the ability of harvesters under the
Pilot Program to harvest fish in fisheries other than the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries are commonly called ``sideboards.'' The Pilot
Program provides certain economic efficiencies to harvesters.
Harvesters could use their improved economic efficiency to increase
their participation in other fisheries, adversely affecting the
harvesters in other fisheries. Sideboards limit the total amount of
catch in other groundfish fisheries that can be taken by eligible
harvesters to historic levels, including harvests made in the State of
Alaska (State) parallel groundfish fisheries. Parallel fisheries are
fisheries authorized by the State in its waters concurrent with the
Federal fisheries in which harvest amounts are deducted from the
Federal TAC. Sideboards limit harvest in specific rockfish fisheries
and the amount of halibut bycatch that can be used in certain flatfish
fisheries. General sideboards apply to all vessels and LLP licenses
with associated legal landings that can be used to generate rockfish
QS. Additionally, specific sideboards apply to certain catcher/
processor and catcher vessels and LLP licenses.
Enforcement and monitoring. NMFS implemented provisions to ensure
that harvesters maintain catches within annual allocations and do not
exceed sideboard limits.
Proposed Central GOA Rockfish Program
The Council designed the proposed Rockfish Program to meet the
requirements for limited access privileges in section 303A of the MSA.
The Rockfish Program would include similar implementation, management,
monitoring, and enforcement measures to those developed under the Pilot
Program. The Rockfish Program would (1) continue to assign QS and CQ to
participants for primary and secondary species, (2) allow a participant
holding an LLP license with rockfish QS to form a rockfish cooperative
with other persons, (3) allow holders of catcher/processor LLP licenses
to opt-out of rockfish cooperatives for a given year, (4) include an
entry level longline fishery, (5) establish sideboard limits, and (6)
include monitoring and enforcement provisions. However, the Council
also recommended changes to improve the functionality of the Rockfish
Program relative to the Pilot Program.
Key Differences Between the Pilot Program and the Proposed Rockfish
Program
After considering program requirements and issues identified under
the Pilot Program, in order to ensure that the Rockfish Program
complies with section 303A of the MSA, the Council decided to modify
some aspects of the Pilot Program under the proposed Rockfish Program.
The Council recommended the Rockfish Program based on the analysis of
rockfish management under the LLP, the Pilot Program, and anticipated
changes under the proposed Rockfish Program. The rationale underlying
the Council's decision and details of this analysis are briefly
discussed in this preamble and are contained in the Analysis prepared
for this proposed action (see ADDRESSES).
Some key differences between the Pilot Program and Rockfish Program
are outlined in Table 1. In summary, the proposed Rockfish Program
would:
Change the qualifying years for eligibility for QS;
Use a different suite of years to determine the allocation
of QS and sideboard limits;
Assign to rockfish cooperatives a specific portion of the
Central GOA TAC of species historically harvested in the rockfish
fisheries;
Assign a specific amount of halibut PSC to cooperatives
and conserve a portion of the halibut that will remain unallocated;
Restrict the entry level fishery to longline gear only;
Relax the requirements to form a cooperative;
Specify the location where harvesters in cooperatives may
deliver rockfish;
Remove the requirement that harvesters in a catcher vessel
cooperatives deliver to a specific processor;
Discontinue the limited access fishery;
Simplify sideboards, and slightly modify sideboards for
catcher/processors;
Implement a cost recovery program, except for the entry
level longline fishery;
Establish a catch monitoring and control plan (CMCP)
specialist; and
Be authorized for 10 years, from January 1, 2012, until
December 31, 2021.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 52151]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19AU11.062
[[Page 52152]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19AU11.063
[[Page 52153]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19AU11.064
[[Page 52154]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19AU11.065
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Rockfish Quota Share
This proposed rule uses the term ``quota share'' to describe the
Rockfish Program's multi-year exclusive harvest privileges based on
historic harvest activities, consistent with similar North Pacific
programs. The Council did not use this term in recommending the
Rockfish Program. Instead the Council used the terms ``qualifying
catch,'' and ``catch history'' to describe the harvest privilege that
is linked to historic harvests attributed to an LLP license. However,
in implementing this program, NMFS has determined that the use of the
term ``quota share'' does not alter the original intent of the Council.
Rockfish QS would be an attribute of the LLP license. Once NMFS
calculates the amount of QS to allocate to an LLP license, NMFS would
modify that LLP license and designate that amount on the license. QS
assigned to an LLP license could not be transferred independent from
that LLP license, except to comply with the use caps as described below
under Transfer of
[[Page 52155]]
Rockfish QS. QS assigned to an LLP license would provide a harvest
privilege, not a right, to its holder and would not confer a guaranteed
harvest to the holder of that QS.
QS would be the basis for the annual calculation of the amount of
fish that could be harvested or used if the QS were assigned to a
rockfish cooperative. Once QS was assigned to an LLP license, it would
authorize that LLP license holder to participate in the Rockfish
Program. If an LLP license holder assigned that LLP license, and its
associated QS, to a cooperative with other LLP license holders, the sum
of the QS of all of the eligible harvesters would yield CQ--an
exclusive annual catch limit of rockfish primary species, secondary
species, and halibut PSC that could be harvested by the members of the
rockfish cooperative. Cooperatives would be formed by eligible
harvesters holding LLP licenses in the same sector, either the catcher/
processor sector or the catcher vessel sector.
NMFS would not issue separate QS for the rockfish secondary species
or halibut PSC. Instead, NMFS would use the amount of rockfish primary
species QS to determine the specific annual catch amount for the
rockfish secondary species or halibut PSC. The Council recommended that
NMFS base the annual catch limit of rockfish secondary species and
halibut PSC on the total historic harvests of rockfish primary species
attributed to LLP licenses in that sector. NMFS would incorporate this
recommendation in the annual determination of the catch limit. The
methods for calculating the annual catch limit for rockfish primary
species, secondary species, and halibut PSC are discussed below under
``TAC Apportionment to an Incidental Catch Allowance (ICA), Rockfish
Cooperative, and Entry Level Fishery.''
Anticipated Changes in the Pelagic Shelf Rockfish Complex
NMFS notes that the Council's Science and Statistical Committee has
been amenable to a recent recommendation by the GOA Groundfish Plan
Team to dissolve the pelagic shelf rockfish complex. The proposed
Rockfish Program would allocate QS based on harvests of all three
species in the Pelagic shelf complex--dusky, widow, and yellowtail
rockfish. Widow and yellowtail rockfish are currently managed with
dusky rockfish in the pelagic shelf rockfish complex, but do not
commonly coexist in the same geographic area and habitat. The GOA
Groundfish Plan Team is considering a plan to rearrange some species in
the GOA rockfish stock assessments for more precise management of
yellowtail and widow rockfish. The Council derived the 2011 pelagic
shelf rockfish TAC from NMFS projection models of acceptable biological
catch that estimated 91 metric tons (mt) for widow and yellowtail
rockfish, and 4,663 mt for dusky rockfish. These estimates yield the
2011 pelagic shelf rockfish TAC (4,754 mt). Observer data shows that
99.7 percent of pelagic shelf rockfish landed in 2010 were dusky
rockfish, and the remaining 0.3 percent were widow and yellowtail
rockfish. It is possible that the relatively large acceptable
biological catch for pelagic shelf rockfish could be used to
overharvest the small number of yellowtail and widow rockfish in this
complex.
This action would not affect, or change, QS eligibility for primary
species in the Rockfish Program. The GOA Groundfish Plan Team
recommendation would remove dusky rockfish from the pelagic shelf
rockfish complex and place the species into its own category. Dusky
rockfish would then be a single species target, similar to northern
rockfish or Pacific ocean perch. The GOA Groundfish Plan Team would
combine the remaining rockfish species in the pelagic shelf rockfish
complex (yellowtail and widow) with the Other Slope Rockfish complex
and rename the complex ``Gulf of Alaska Other Rockfish.'' If the
Council moves forward with this action, the three primary species of
the Rockfish Program would then be Pacific ocean perch, northern
rockfish, and dusky rockfish. If approved by the Secretary, NMFS would
change every occurrence of ``pelagic shelf rockfish'' that appears in
the Rockfish Program regulations and tables to ``dusky rockfish.''
NMFS anticipates this new arrangement would not have an impact on
the Rockfish Program. If this recommendation would have been
established in the 2011 season, removing yellowtail and widow rockfish
from the complex and adopting a TAC based only on dusky rockfish would
have resulted in a reduction of 91 mt to the pelagic shelf rockfish.
This reduction is minimal relative to the overall 2011 pelagic shelf
rockfish TAC of 4,754 mt.
Eligibility for Harvesters
Eligibility to receive QS would be based on the history of legal
landings of rockfish primary species in the Central GOA associated with
an LLP license. A person would be eligible to receive QS under the
Rockfish Program if (1) that person held a permanent, fully
transferable LLP license endorsed for Central GOA groundfish with a
trawl designation at the time of application; (2) a vessel made legal
landings of rockfish primary species under the authority of that LLP
license during a specific time period; and (3) that person submitted a
timely application that is subsequently approved by NMFS. A timely
application would include a complete application for rockfish QS that
is received by NMFS not later than 5 p.m. on January 3, 2012, or
postmarked by that date. The application process and specific
components required in the application are detailed under Application
and Appeal Process below.
The amount of QS allocated to an LLP license would be based on the
catch history associated with the LLP licenses held by that person at
the time of application.
In addition, LLP license holders who would be eligible for rockfish
QS could choose to be excluded from the Rockfish Program and not
receive rockfish QS. These LLP license holders would be exempted from
specific sideboard limitations applicable to LLP licenses that
participate in the program. See ``Exclusion from the Rockfish Program''
for more information.
Legal Landings
NMFS would assign QS to an LLP license if legal landings of
rockfish were made under the authority of an LLP license for any of the
rockfish primary species during the directed fishing seasons described
in Tables 2 and 3 of this preamble. A legal landing would include fish
caught, retained, and reported in compliance with State and Federal
regulations in effect at the time of landing. For catcher vessels, a
legal landing would include the harvest of rockfish primary species
from the Central GOA regulatory area that was offloaded and recorded on
a State fish ticket during the directed fishing season for that
rockfish primary fishery. For catcher/processors, a legal landing would
include the harvest of groundfish from the Central GOA regulatory area
that is recorded on NMFS weekly production reports (WPRs) during the
directed fishing season for the applicable rockfish primary fisheries.
The LLP was effective on January 1, 2000 (63 FR 52642); however,
NMFS did not track the use of an LLP license on a specific vessel
during the 2000 and 2001 calendar years, which are two of the
qualifying years for the Rockfish Program. Therefore, NMFS would create
a presumption that legal landings for 2000 to 2001 were made under
authority of the LLP license that was used aboard the same vessel whose
history was the
[[Page 52156]]
basis for the LLP issuance in 2000 at the start of the program (the
``original qualifying vessel''). In order to refute that presumption an
applicant for QS would be required to submit written documentation to
NMFS for review during the application process to establish otherwise.
Under the LLP program, multiple LLP licenses can be used on a
vessel. Therefore, landings made by a vessel could have been assigned
to more than one LLP license. If the same LLP holder or the holders of
more than one LLP claims the same landing and would like the resulting
QS to be assigned to more than one LLP license, then NMFS would credit
each LLP license with that landing. NMFS would credit landings assigned
to more than one LLP license in another manner only if the applicants
could provide written documentation of an agreement among the LLP
license holders establishing an alternative means for distributing the
landing credit. This written documentation would have to be provided to
NMFS for review during the application process. Based on experience
with the Pilot Program, NMFS anticipates very few landings would be
claimed for more than one LLP license.
Qualifying Years
The Council recommended two different methodologies for determining
the amount of rockfish QS assigned to an LLP license, depending on the
specific fisheries in which an LLP license holder participated. For
most LLP license holders, QS would be assigned based on rockfish legal
landings made during the rockfish primary fisheries during 2000 through
2006. LLP license holders eligible to receive rockfish QS based on
legal landings from 2000 through 2006 represent those participants
active in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries from the implementation of
the LLP through 2006, the last year before the Pilot Program was
implemented. The Council recommended these years as best representative
of historic and recent fishery participation, after analysis of a range
of qualifying years from 1996 through 2006.
A smaller set of LLP license holders would qualify to receive QS
based on participation in the entry level trawl fishery during 2007,
2008, or 2009. LLP license holders would be eligible to receive
rockfish QS if they demonstrate participation in the Central GOA entry
level trawl fishery during the first 3 years of the Pilot Program
(1996, 1997, 1998) and prior to the Council's final action (2007, 2008,
or 2009). This eligibility would be based on landings data that are
retained by NMFS. After reviewing a range of options to either maintain
the existing entry level trawl fishery, or choose alternative methods
to assign rockfish QS, the Council recommended assigning rockfish QS to
LLPs held by entry level trawl fishery participants to ensure that
those participants benefit from catch share management. Assigning QS
would also reduce the need to establish and manage a separate ``race
for fish'' fishery that could be exceeded, or remain closed if the
potential fishing effort in the fishery would likely exceed the limited
allocation available to the fishery.
The following sections describe these two methods for determining
the amount of rockfish QS assigned to an LLP license and the rationale
supporting those allocation methods.
Assigning QS to LLP Licenses Used During 2000 Through 2006
NMFS would assign rockfish QS based on legal landings made under
the authority of an LLP license for the directed fishing season dates
for each of the rockfish primary species presented in Table 2.
Table 2--Season Dates in Each Year for Legal Landings of Rockfish Primary Species Fisheries Under the Rockfish Program
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year
A rockfish legal landing --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
includes 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern rockfish that were July 4-July 26.. July 1-July 23 June 30-July 21. June 29-July 29. July 4-July 25. July 5-July 24. July 1-July 21.
harvested in the Central GOA and Oct. 1-Oct.
between. 21.
and landed by................ Aug. 2.......... July 30 and Oct. July 28......... Aug. 5.......... Aug. 1......... July 31........ July 28.
28,
respectively.
Pelagic shelf rockfish that July 4-July 26.. July 1-July 23 June 30-July 21. June 29-July 31. July 4-July 25. July 5-July 24, July 1-July 21
were harvested in the and Oct. 1-Oct. Sept. 1, Sept and Oct. 2-
Central GOA between. 21. 4, and Sept. 8- Oct. 8.
Sept. 10.
and landed by................ Aug. 2.......... July 30 and Oct. July 28......... Aug. 7.......... Aug. 1......... July 31, Sept. July 28 and
28, 11, and Sept. Oct. 15,
respectively. 17, respectively.
respectively.
Pacific ocean perch that were July 4-July 15.. July 1-July 12.. June 30-July 8.. June 29-July 8.. July 4-July 12. July 5-July 14. July 1-July 6.
harvested in the Central GOA
between.
and landed by................ July 22......... July 19......... July 15......... July 15......... July 19........ July 21........ July 13.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 2, NMFS would consider legal landings for QS if
the harvests were made when the directed fishing season was open and
the landings were reported within 7 days after the end of the season.
This 7-day extension would accommodate harvesters that caught rockfish
during the directed fishing season but were not able to deliver that
catch until after the season ended. Several days may be required for a
harvesting vessel to reach processing facilities after the end of a
season, and the 7-day extension would accommodate those harvesters.
Additionally, this 7-day period would accommodate catcher/processors
that submitted WPRs in a timely manner. Because the WPR is required on
a weekly basis, the season could have ended before the WPR submission
deadline had been reached. A 7-day period after the end of the directed
fishing season to report landings would
[[Page 52157]]
accommodate catcher/processors submitting WPRs.
For each fully transferable LLP license under which a rockfish
legal landing was made for one or more rockfish primary species during
the season dates described in Table 2, NMFS would calculate the QS for
each of the three rockfish primary species using the following
procedures.
First, NMFS would sum the legal landings of each rockfish primary
species for each year from 2000 through 2006, including years with zero
pounds, during the fishery seasons listed in Table 2.
Second, NMFS would sum the 5 years with highest poundage of legal
landings for that LLP license for that rockfish primary species
(referred to as the highest 5 years for that LLP license). The highest
5 years could vary for each of the three rockfish primary species. This
amount would yield the QS that would be issued for that LLP license in
QS units. As with other catch share programs (e.g., Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands (BSAI) Crab Rationalization Program), NMFS would
assign rockfish QS using a subset of qualifying years to accommodate
the variability in fishing patterns that may occur annually due to a
range of factors. Using a subset of years would accommodate conditions
that could adversely affect overall harvests, such as illness,
mechanical problems, poor market conditions, or other factors. Using a
subset of the years would allow NMFS to consider these factors without
undertaking the administratively complicated task of reviewing specific
landing records for each vessel and LLP license holder and determining
if specific landings should or should not be included based on specific
criteria.
Third, NMFS would sum the highest 5 years for each rockfish primary
species for each LLP license qualified to receive rockfish QS based on
rockfish legal landings for all LLP licenses receiving rockfish QS
based on landings from 2000 through 2006. The result is the sum of all
highest 5 years for each rockfish primary species.
Catcher/Processor QS. An LLP license endorsed for Central GOA
groundfish fisheries with a catcher/processor trawl designation would
be assigned rockfish QS to participate in the catcher/processor sector
based on any rockfish legal landings of primary species that were
harvested by and processed aboard the vessel designated on the LLP
license during the qualifying periods.
NMFS would determine the amount of QS units for a rockfish primary
species that would be assigned to the catcher/processor sector. NMFS
would determine the percentage of legal landings in the highest 5 years
for the LLP license used to calculate the QS assigned to the catcher/
processor sector and would multiply the QS units for that license by
this percentage. This yields the QS units that would be assigned to the
catcher/processor sector for that LLP license. The total amount of QS
assigned to the catcher/processor sector would be equal to the sum of
all QS units assigned to all eligible rockfish harvesters in the
catcher/processor sector.
The Council recommended that NMFS assign rockfish QS to the
catcher/processor sector based on legal landings that were harvested at
sea and processed onboard a vessel. The Council wanted to ensure that
rockfish QS could be processed at sea only if the underlying legal
landings that gave rise to that QS were harvested and processed at sea.
Allocation of rockfish QS to the catcher/processor sector based on the
designation on the LLP license alone would create the potential for
allocations of rockfish QS based on landings that were not harvested
and processed at sea.
Each year, the holder of a catcher/processor designated LLP license
with QS could decide to opt-out of participating in a rockfish
cooperative. Participants that choose to ``opt-out'' forgo the
opportunity to fish rockfish primary species. CQ derived from the QS of
LLP license holders that decide to ``opt-out'' would be reallocated to
cooperatives within the catcher processor sector.
Catcher vessel QS. An LLP license endorsed for Central GOA
groundfish fisheries with a trawl designation with rockfish legal
landings that were not processed at sea would be assigned rockfish QS
for the catcher vessel sector. The allocation would be based on any
legal landings of primary species that were harvested aboard the vessel
from which that LLP license was derived or used during the qualifying
periods. The total amount of QS units assigned to the catcher vessel
sector would be equal to the sum of all QS units assigned to all
eligible rockfish harvesters in the catcher vessel sector.
If landings were made on a vessel assigned an LLP license with a
catcher/processor designation, but the rockfish primary species legally
landed by that vessel were not caught and processed onboard that
vessel, NMFS would assign any QS resulting from those legal landings to
the catcher vessel sector. Based on an initial review of rockfish legal
landings data, NMFS does not anticipate any such allocations of
rockfish QS.
Allocation of Rockfish QS from an interim LLP license. NMFS would
assign rockfish legal landings and any resulting rockfish QS only to
permanent and fully transferable LLP licenses, with one exception. NMFS
would assign rockfish legal landings that were made under the authority
of an interim LLP license endorsed for Central GOA groundfish with a
trawl gear designation during the season dates for the rockfish primary
species, as described in Table 2 of this preamble, provided that (1)
NMFS has determined that the interim LLP license is ineligible to
receive a designation as a permanent LLP license endorsed for Central
GOA groundfish with a trawl gear designation; and (2) a permanent fully
transferable LLP license endorsed for Central GOA groundfish with a
trawl gear designation was assigned to the vessel that made legal
rockfish landings under the authority of an interim LLP license
endorsed for Central GOA groundfish prior to December 31, 2003, and was
continuously assigned to that vessel through June 14, 2010.
The Council recommended this specific exemption to provide an
opportunity for persons who were active in the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries but who did not receive a permanent fully transferable LLP
license to be eligible to receive rockfish QS provided they demonstrate
a clear intent to remain active in the fishery. This particular
exemption would apply only to a person who: (1) Held an interim LLP
license that was determined to be invalid by NMFS prior to December 31,
2003; and (2) assigned a different permanent LLP license to the same
vessel that made the rockfish legal landings prior to December 31,
2003; and (3) maintained the permanent LLP license on that vessel until
at least June 14, 2010. The Council recommended this provision and the
December 31, 2003, deadline based on data that demonstrated that at
least two LLP license holders had been active in the Central GOA
rockfish fisheries with an interim LLP license prior to December 31,
2003, but subsequently purchased a fully transferable LLP license
before December 31, 2003. This provision would ensure that LLP license
holders who demonstrated participation in the Central GOA rockfish
fisheries during the qualifying period would continue to be eligible to
receive rockfish QS from rockfish legal landings made under the
authority of the interim LLP licenses. The Council also wanted to
ensure that any permanent LLP license was continuously maintained on
that vessel from the time it replaced the interim LLP license until the
date of final
[[Page 52158]]
Council action (June 14, 2010) on the Rockfish Program. The Council
recommended this requirement to ensure that an LLP license holder was
continuously active in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries with the
permanent LLP license and did not reassign that LLP license to another
vessel while the Rockfish Program was being developed by the Council.
This proposed rule would, assign rockfish legal landings made under
the authority of an interim LLP license to the permanent fully
transferable LLP license assigned to that vessel. NMFS would not assign
any rockfish legal landings to the permanent fully transferable LLP
license based on fishing conducted under the authority of the permanent
fully transferable LLP license before it was assigned to the vessel.
This method would ensure that the Council's intent that rockfish legal
landings made during the same time period from more than one LLP
license would not be assigned rockfish QS. Effectively, a person
holding the permanent fully transferable LLP license could receive
rockfish QS for rockfish legal landings made prior to the assignment of
a permanent LLP license to the vessel that made those landings, and
rockfish QS based on rockfish legal landings that were made under the
authority of the permanent LLP license after it was transferred to the
vessel.
Rationale for assigning Rockfish QS based on rockfish legal
landings from 2000 through 2006. During the development of the Rockfish
Program, the Council considered a range of years that could be used to
determine the appropriate allocation of rockfish QS to the eligible LLP
license holders. Originally, the Pilot Program assigned rockfish legal
landings and rockfish QS based on the specific guidance provided in
Section 802:
SEC. 802. GULF OF ALASKA ROCKFISH DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM. The
Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the North Pacific
Fishery Management Council, shall establish a pilot program that
recognizes the historic participation of fishing vessels (1996 to
2002, best 5 of 7 years) and historic participation of fish
processors (1996 to 2000, best 4 of 5 years) for Pacific ocean
perch, northern rockfish, and pelagic shelf rockfish harvested in
Central Gulf of Alaska. * * *
The specific guidance that Congress provided limited the suite of
years that the Council could consider in the development of the Pilot
Program. Section 802, however, did not preclude the Council from
considering additional qualifying periods once the Pilot Program
expired. Moreover, nothing in Section 802 or the regulations
implementing the Pilot Program indicates that the Council or NMFS
should or must consider or adopt the qualifying years of 1996 through
2002 when developing the Rockfish Program.
Therefore, the Council examined a broad range of years from the
first year identified in section 802 (1996) through the last year prior
to the implementation of the Pilot Program (2006). The Council looked
at but rejected harvest during the Pilot Program (2007 through 2011)
because the analysis showed harvests under the Pilot Program
cooperatives and limited access fishery were made under a combination
of CQ and limited access fishing that were based on a combination of
cooperative contract provisions and a race for fish in the limited
access fishery that are not reflective of the harvest patterns the
analysis shows likely would have occurred in the absence of the Pilot
Program.
The Council considered both historic and recent participation in
the rockfish fisheries when recommending the appropriate qualifying
years for assigning rockfish legal landings. In balancing the interests
of historic and recent participants, the Council considered fishing
patterns over the 11-year period from 1996 through 2006. Several
general patterns emerged in the Council's review that is described in
detail in section 2.3.1 of the Analysis (see ADDRESSES). Participation
in the rockfish fisheries by catcher/processor vessels has decreased
substantially since 1999. From 1996 through 1999, 8 to 15 catcher/
processor vessels harvested fish in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries
annually, and from 2000 through 2006, 5 to 7 catcher/processor vessels
were active in the fishery annually. The stable participation of
catcher/processor vessels since 2000 indicates that more recent fishing
patterns may better reflect dependence and consistent participation in
the fishery. A more stable pattern is evident in the catcher vessel
fleet. From 1996 through 1999, 26 to 32 catcher vessels retained catch
in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries annually, and from 2000 through
2006, 25 to 33 catcher vessels were active in the fisheries annually.
Section 2.3.1 of the Analysis also notes that the proportion of catch
retained by catcher vessels generally increased after 2000.
The Council also considered the effects of allocating rockfish QS
based on legal landings prior to the implementation of the LLP in 2000.
Rockfish legal landings prior to 2000 were made under a different
management regime than management under the LLP. The LLP limited
potential increased effort in the Central GOA. Catch patterns prior to
the implementation of the LLP are not indicative of more recent catch
patterns. The Council also considered whether catch in 1996 through
1999 characterizes historic and recent participation given the observed
changes in fishing patterns and management since 2000. The Council
noted that using rockfish legal landings from 2000 through 2006 would
include 3 of the 7 years used in the allocation of rockfish QS under
the Pilot Program, yet would also consider more recent fishery
participation patterns from 2003 through 2006.
The Council also considered the potential effects of modifying the
qualifying years from 1996 through 2002 on current rockfish Pilot
Program QS holders. The Council noted that the Pilot Program was a 5-
year program. Congress initially established the Pilot Program as a 2-
year program under section 802 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act
of 2004, and subsequently extended the duration of the Pilot Program to
5 years under section 218 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Reauthorization Act of 2007. Given the clear expiration
dates for the Pilot Program established by Congress, LLP license
holders should have reasonably assumed that the Council could set
rockfish QS allocations under the Rockfish Program that could differ
from those Congress established for the Pilot Program. In fact, the
Council consistently considered a range of reasonable alternative
qualifying years other than 1996 through 2002 while developing the
Rockfish Program. The Council noted throughout the development of the
Rockfish Program that, given the limited duration of the Pilot Program
established by Congress, the qualifying years used to allocate rockfish
QS were subject to change. The Council received public testimony
through extensive hearings for consideration in determining the
qualifying years during the deliberation process.
Given the observed changes in fishing patterns by catcher/processor
vessels beginning in 2000, the changes in management of the fishery
with the implementation of the LLP in 2000, and the consideration of
both historic and more recent fishing patterns, the Council selected
the qualifying years of 2000 through 2006.
[[Page 52159]]
Assigning QS to LLP Licenses Used During the Rockfish Entry Level Trawl
Fishery During 2007, 2008, or 2009
The second method proposed for assigning rockfish QS to LLP
licenses is based on the use of an LLP license in the entry level trawl
fishery during any of the first 3 years of the Pilot Program; 2007,
2008, or 2009. The Council recommended a specific method to assign
rockfish QS based on the number of years that the LLP license was
assigned to a vessel that made a rockfish legal landing in the entry
level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 during directed fishing
season dates for each of the rockfish primary species presented in
Table 3. NMFS notes that because only catcher vessels were eligible to
participate in the entry level trawl fishery, the rockfish QS assigned
to an eligible LLP license is designated as catcher vessel QS.
Table 3--Season Dates in Each Year for Legal Landings of Rockfish Primary Species Fisheries Under the Entry
Level Trawl Fishery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A rockfish legal landing
includes . . . 2007 2008 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern rockfish that were Sept.1-Nov. 8............ Sept.1-Nov. 15........... Sept.1-Nov. 15.
harvested by vessels
authorized to fish in the
rockfish entry level trawl
fishery between . . .
and landed by . . . Nov. 15.................. Nov. 22.................. Nov. 22.
Pelagic shelf rockfish that July 4-July 25........... July 5-July 24........... July 1-July 21.
were harvested by vessels
authorized to fish in the
rockfish entry level trawl
fishery between . . .
and landed by . . . Aug 1.................... July 31.................. July 28.
Pacific ocean perch that were July 4-July 12........... July 5-July 14........... July 1-July 6.
harvested by vessels
authorized to fish in the
rockfish entry level trawl
fishery between . . .
and landed by . . . July 19.................. July 21.................. July 13.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 3, NMFS would consider legal landings for QS if
the harvests were made when the directed fishing season was open and
the landings were reported within 7 days after the end of the season.
For each LLP license that made a rockfish legal landing for one or more
rockfish primary species during the season dates established in Table
3, NMFS would calculate the QS for each of the three rockfish primary
species for each fully transferable LLP license held by an eligible
rockfish harvester using the following procedures.
First, NMFS would assign one Rockfish Landing Unit to an LLP
license for each year a legal landing of any rockfish primary species
was made under the authority of an LLP license during the season dates
for the entry level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 as established
in Table 3 of this preamble. This would yield the Rockfish Landing
Units for that LLP license.
Second, NMFS would sum the Rockfish Landing Units of all eligible
LLP licenses.
Third, NMFS would divide the Rockfish Landing Units for an LLP
license by the sum of all Rockfish Landing Units of all LLP licenses.
This calculation would result in the Percentage of the Total Entry
Level Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS pool that would be assigned
to that LLP license.
Fourth, NMFS would determine the Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pool for each rockfish primary species. NMFS
would divide the sum of all highest 5 years for each rockfish primary
species that was calculated for the LLP licenses receiving rockfish QS
based on rockfish legal landings from 2000 through 2006, divide that
amount by 97.5 percent, and then subtract the sum of the highest 5
years for that rockfish primary species. This calculation would yield
the Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS pool for
that rockfish primary species. This calculation is summarized in the
calculation below. In this equation ``s'' represents the rockfish
primary species.
([sum] All Highest Five Yearss/0.975) - [sum] All Highest
Five Yearss = Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition
Rockfish QS pools
This calculation ensures that 2.5 percent of the total rockfish QS
pool for each rockfish primary species is established as a QS pool that
would then be apportioned to each LLP license holder based on the
number of years that the LLP license holder made a rockfish legal
landing during the directed fishery season as defined in Table 3 of
this preamble. This is consistent with the 2.5 percent of the combined
TAC for the three rockfish fisheries assigned to trawl catcher vessels
in the entry level fishery.
Fifth, NMFS would assign a portion of the Total Entry Level Trawl
Fishery Transition Rockfish QS pool to each LLP license holder by
multiplying the Percentage of the Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery
Transition Rockfish QS pool for each LLP license, by the Total Entry
Level Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS pool for each rockfish
primary species. This would yield the number of rockfish QS units for
that LLP license for that rockfish primary species.
Rationale for assigning Rockfish QS based on rockfish legal
landings in 2007, 2008, or 2009. NMFS noted throughout the development
of the Pilot Program that the small allocations of TAC that were likely
to be available to trawl catcher vessels could preclude the ability for
NMFS to open the fishery if fishery effort was likely to exceed the
allocation available. This concern was noted in the response to public
comment section of the final rule implementing the Pilot Program.
NMFS' ability to open an entry level fishery would only be
curtailed if large numbers of participants with sufficient harvest
capacity register to fish for the fishery. Under alternative methods
of management (i.e., IFQ fishing), small allocations may be more
manageable, however, the entry level fishery was designed to provide
an opportunity to persons not otherwise eligible for the Program,
and not to institute complex quota-based management for a small
amount of TAC for a two-year Program. NMFS does not anticipate that
large numbers of participants will choose to participate in the
entry level fishery due to the small amount of TAC available for
harvest. (71 FR 67228; November 20, 2006).
Under the Pilot Program, NMFS assigned TAC of northern rockfish,
pelagic shelf rockfish, and Pacific ocean perch to the entry level
fishery so that 50 percent (or 2.5 percent of the combined TAC for the
three rockfish fisheries) was assigned to trawl catcher vessels and 50
percent (2.5 percent of the combined TAC for the three rockfish
fisheries) was assigned for longline catcher vessels. Historically,
Pacific ocean perch has been harvested almost exclusively with trawl
gear. Northern rockfish and pelagic shelf rockfish have been harvested
by longline vessels to a
[[Page 52160]]
limited degree. Rather than allocate Pacific ocean perch equally
between the trawl and longline vessels, resulting in Pacific ocean
perch remaining unharvested by longline vessels, NMFS allocated Pacific
ocean perch to entry level trawl vessels first. NMFS allocated any
remaining pounds up to the combined 2.5 percent TAC for the three
rockfish species from the TAC that would be assigned to northern
rockfish and pelagic shelf rockfish. NMFS made unharvested northern
rockfish, pelagic shelf rockfish, or Pacific ocean perch available for
harvest by trawl and longline on September 1. Any unharvested rockfish
in either the longline or trawl gear allocations could be harvested by
trawl and longline vessels beginning September 1.
During the Pilot Program, NMFS staff and entry level trawl fishery
participants continued to express concerns about the potential for more
than a limited number of participants to register for, and participate
in, the entry level trawl fishery. Given the small amount of TAC
assigned to the entry level trawl fishery (e.g., approximately 400 mt
in 2010), if more than two or three vessels participated in the
fishery, NMFS may need to close the fishery as a precautionary measure
to avoid exceeding the entry level trawl allocation. Given these
concerns, the Council recommended eliminating the entry level trawl
fishery, yet providing an opportunity for those LLP license holders to
receive rockfish QS for their participation in the years prior to the
Council's final action in June 2010 (e.g., 2007, 2008, or 2009).
Allocating rockfish QS to participants in the entry level trawl fishery
would recognize the participation of entry level trawl participants and
ensure that those participants received the benefits of catch share
management (e.g., avoid a competitive and potentially wasteful race for
fish, tailor fishing operations to specific catch limits to improve
economic efficiency, and have the ability and incentive to adopt
fishing practices with reduced bycatch).
The Council considered a variety of alternative methods to assign
rockfish QS to entry level trawl participants. Through public
testimony, the Council was made aware of some specific concerns and
complexities that could arise if rockfish QS were allocated based on
the amount of rockfish legal landings during 2007, 2008, and 2009. In
all these years, the entry level fishery received an allocation of 5
percent of the Pacific ocean perch available to the Pilot Program or
346 mt per year in 2007 and 2008, and 339 mt in 2009. No allocation of
northern rockfish or pelagic shelf rockfish was made to the trawl entry
level fishery. Perhaps most problematic is a pending enforcement
investigation concerning all catches from the fishery in 2008. At the
extreme, the investigation could result in most catches from the 2008
entry level trawl fishery being determined to have been illegal, which
would prevent their consideration for determining rockfish QS
allocations under the Rockfish Program.
Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis (see ADDRESSES) notes that assigning
rockfish QS to the trawl sector based on rockfish legal landings during
2007, 2008, or 2009, could result in some LLP licenses receiving a
relatively large amount of rockfish QS compared to the total amount of
rockfish QS issued to the catcher vessel sector. Under one allocation
scenario considered, one LLP license could have received an allocation
of Pacific ocean perch QS equal to roughly 10 percent of the available
catcher vessel Pacific ocean perch QS. On the other hand, it is
possible that an entry level participant could receive a very small
allocation of northern rockfish or pelagic shelf rockfish QS, if that
entry level participant recorded little or no landings of those
species.
The Council considered an alternative approach to allocating
rockfish QS to ensure that the initial allocation of rockfish QS more
closely aligned with the years of participation in the entry level
